Low-Stretch Halyards actually worth it for cruising?

[Davidasailor26]

You are likely putting up and taking down your sails every day or maybe every two or three days.

Unless you have roller furling and touch the halyards once per season. In that case the lower stretch might be valuable for keeping the draft in the same place on windy and calm days. A racer would probably still adjust the halyard tension to match the day, but for a cruiser at least having the same tension would probably be a little better than having more stretch on the windy days.

 

[colemj]

There does seem to be a better selection of colors in the blended lines but the least cost method is to buy an entire spool for all halyards even though you end up with all halyards being the same color. When I re-rigged my boat it was less than half the cost going to spool size rather than individual lines of different colors. Even though I really prefer a different color for every line, the cost difference won....

The color argument is strange. Looking at NER's offerings in Sta-Set polyester double braid, Endurabraid dyneema, and Viper blended dyneema, they offer Sta-Set in 8 colors/flecks, Viper in 8 colors/flecks, and Endurabraid in 11 colors/flecks. However, Samson does offer more colors in their XLS polyester double braid than they do in their dyneema and dyneema blend products. In the latter, there are only 4 color choices, while the XLS offers 11 colors.

Spools are always a much better deal if you can use it or split it. So are end/odd cuts if they fit your size/length need. The best deals overall are found looking outside the marine market for the identical rope sold into arborist and industrial applications, sometimes under a different name. For example, I just bought 200' of 3/8" Amsteel II Plus for $1.32/ft from an industrial rigging and lifting company. This saved me at least 60% compared to the same line sold through marine sources. Cheaper than Sta-Set polyester double braid (and half the weight).

Mark

 

[Joe]

It seems like low stretch halyard is an expensive solution to a niche problem.

You can save a bundle by building "tapered" halyards yourself. You'll save because you can use a smaller diameter line. Racers will strip the cover off their expensive hi tech double braid such as Warpspeed. But that's throwing money away. Where you save most is buying the single braid dyneema core and covering the back half of the line that's cleated, winched and handled with a less expensive polyester sheath. I have built a number of tapered halyards and have found it quite satisfying to know I've saved so much money and also made something really cool for my boat and for my friends also.

For instance, on my 27 footer, instead of 3/8" polyester I was able to go down to a halyard with 3/16" dyneema core, which I covered with the outside sheath of a 5/16" dacron double braid. 5/16 was as small as I wanted anyway. So I used 80 ft of 3/16 amsteel, found on sale for around $1.00/ft, and 43 ft of 5/16 Samson Xls for about .70 ct/ft... note... any double braid dacron will work... let your wallet be your guide. So total for core and cover came to about $110.

The splice you need to use is in the Samson splicing guide online. I think they call it a "bury" splice... anyway no special tools except something sharp to cut he dacron strands, a big needle and some whipping twine. (you should have all this in your ditty bag, heh, heh) You can buy "cover only" line, which I did once.... it was supposed to have a messenger line to help with fishing the dyneema core into place... it didn't... but I was able to fashion a tool with a wire coat hangar to get the job done (another vanishing item). So.. just get the inexpensive double braid and use its core as the messenger.

I have posted the complete process of making these very cool halyards a few times over the years, so I won't repeat that.

 

[Foswick]

You must be invested in Dyneema, @colemj. I get that you are a fan, but I think you have taken an extreme view on the subject. I detect a little confirmation bias. I get that you think you are objectively correct on this. Just understand that not everyone sees sailing and the choices about equipment and materials the same as you. And, they are not wrong.

I have nothing against your choice to prefer Dyneema-like materials. But, your arguments are reductionist. I do not wish to argue with you. I simply want to point out that there is not one blanket correct answer to this question. I hope you can make room for that position.

As for me, many of my polyester rigging lines are up for replacement. I will replace them with polyester - not because I am inadequately informed, but because the pros of Dyneema simply don't outweigh the cons to me. My enjoyment of sailing will be unaffected.

As to the original question, I just don't think it matters one way or the other in this case, except to say there is no reason to spend more money, unless one really prefers the handling characteristics of Dyneema (for some reason). Any performance benefit is highly situational and probably more about perception bias than physics.

 

[colemj]

You must be invested in Dyneema, @colemj. I get that you are a fan, but I think you have taken an extreme view on the subject. I detect a little confirmation bias. I get that you think you are objectively correct on this. Just understand that not everyone sees sailing and the choices about equipment and materials the same as you. And, they are not wrong.

I have nothing against your choice to prefer Dyneema-like materials. But, your arguments are reductionist. I do not wish to argue with you. I simply want to point out that there is not one blanket correct answer to this question. I hope you can make room for that position.

As for me, many of my polyester rigging lines are up for replacement. I will replace them with polyester - not because I am inadequately informed, but because the pros of Dyneema simply don't outweigh the cons to me. My enjoyment of sailing will be unaffected.

As to the original question, I just don't think it matters one way or the other in this case, except to say there is no reason to spend more money, unless one really prefers the handling characteristics of Dyneema (for some reason). Any performance benefit is highly situational and probably more about perception bias than physics.

If there is something I'm incorrect about, please correct it. There is objectively little reason for using polyester double braid for running rigging anymore. The only reason is price if one cannot downsize even a little bit because of clutches, or one finds a smoking deal on polyester (but same goes for dyneema there).

This is less of me arguing, and more about presenting current information to those considering replacing running rigging. Until the past few years, the price of higher modulus lines has been substantially above polyDB. This is no longer the case up front, and definitely not the case over the line's lifespan. Unless one has been keeping up in these markets, this is information that escapes them. I know it did me until it was time to replace our running rigging.

In no universe is stretch ever a good thing for running rigging, the things it is attached to, or the things it runs over/through, and people are beginning to understand this better now that they have realistic choices. Polyester was often times sized for minimum stretch in the past, and boats ended up with large line for little reason. Ours came with 14mm and 16mm double braid running rigging, and that has all been replaced with 10mm dyneema, since the large sized polyDB was only to keep stretch to a minimum, not because that breaking strength was necessary.

The multiple references to dyneema's handling characteristics are puzzling, because the construction of it (covered dyneema) and polyesterDB is the same in terms of lay and how the rope behaves, and I don't know anyone who can tell the difference. I sure can't. The one difference is as the rope ages, dyneema doesn't get all stiff and hard like polyDB.

There are no cons to dyneema running rigging compared to polyester double braid, even ignoring stretch or potential performance issues.

Many of your arguments can be used to support manila rope. But I accept that you for reasons that have nothing to do with price, performance, stretch, splicing ease, long life, hard to chafe, weight savings, weather resistance, and wet performance, want to stay with polyester double braid.

One related example: we just got new forward nets for our boat (catamaran). The manufacturer used to supply them with 3/16" polyDB lacing lines, but now has switched to 3/32" bare dyneema. I discussed this with them, because I've always thrown away the supplied rope in the past and laced with dyneema. Their answer for the switch was because dyneema is now the same price as the polyDB, it doesn't stretch and bag out the nets or tear out the fittings (stretch is as bad for nets and attachment hardware as it is for running rigging on a boat), it lasts the life of the nets (10-15yrs) in the elements and chafing and doesn't need to be replaced every 3-4yrs like polyDB. Sounds a lot like running rigging.

Mark

 

[dLj]

{Various edits}There is objectively little reason for using polyester double braid for running rigging anymore.

Until the past few years, the price of higher modulus lines has been substantially above polyDB. This is no longer the case up front.

Their answer for the switch was because dyneema is now the same price as the polyDB.

@colemj let me see if I am understanding correctly. You are saying the cost of dyneema, based on strength not diameter, is lower (or about the same) than poly double braid. That if you can downsize your line diameter that the cost of dyneema is the same (or less) as double braid?

I ask because I did a complete re-rigging just three years ago and for the same diameter line, the cost for dyneema based line was substantially more.

Now perhaps prices have dropped since then. I haven't looked.

Am I understanding correctly?

dj

 

[colemj]

@colemj let me see if I am understanding correctly. You are saying the cost of dyneema, based on strength not diameter, is lower (or about the same) than poly double braid. That if you can downsize your line diameter that the cost of dyneema is the same (or less) as double braid?

I ask because I did a complete re-rigging just three years ago and for the same diameter line, the cost for dyneema based line was substantially more.

Now perhaps prices have dropped since then. I haven't looked.

Am I understanding correctly?

dj

Yes, that is exactly it. I've tried to state several times that the price is dependent on whether the line will fit the clutch (or any hardware with tight specification to line size). Some clutches are precise to a particular size, while others take a range of sizes. For example, we have clutches that take 10mm-14mm. The boat came rigged with 14mm polyDB, and I replaced with 10mm dyneema. The cost for each was the same.

I also gave an example of being able to use slightly smaller line in a clutch. In the above case, if I wanted to use 8mm dyneema, I could have put a thickening core inside the areas that would see the clutch under use, effectively making it a 10-11mm line in these areas. This is very quick and easy to do.

To underscore the size/strength/stretch difference between dyneema and polyDB, our main halyard needed to be 14mm polyDB for these reasons. The 10mm covered dyneema has at least the same properties here, but that doesn't really tell the story. All of the strength and stretch is only in the core, and the core of 10mm covered dyneema is just 7mm. This is sufficient for a spectra/kevlar mainsail on a 46' catamaran.

On small boats, line needs to be sized for ability to handle comfortably, and is almost always larger than necessary wrt strength and stretch. Here polyDB is going to be less expensive. On larger boats, halyards are sized for strength and stretch. Particularly stretch, as most halyards are larger than they need to be for strength only. Here, dropping a couple of sizes in dyneema is likely to cost no more than staying at the same size polyDB, and have the benefits of running freer, less chafe, longer lifespan. Sheets are sized first for handling, then for strength and stretch. Most larger boats can downsize sheets also, and still retain handling characteristics (I find 8mm to be a minimum for this).

Where "small" transitions to "large" would be determined by that point where a line sized at minimum for handling (8mm?) becomes too small for strength and stretch reasons.

Mark

 

[dLj]

@colemj ah, just making sure prices hadn't taken a dip since I did my re-rigging, which could be possible.

I actually use a 6 mm dyneema line on my staysail furler. I was worried it would be hard on my hands but due to the very soft texture of that material, I find it quite easy to handle. It takes a handling technique. Instead of holding the line running from pinky to thumb and fore finger, run it the other way. With more abrasive line that will be quite uncomfortable, but with the soft dyneema, not an issue. I was also worried about it working in my winches but with a few more wraps it works great. Just my personal experience.

dj

 

[colemj]

just making sure prices hadn't taken a dip since I did my re-rigging, which could be possible.

Depends on which rope and where you buy it. For example, Defender sells 10mm Sta-Set for $1.09/ft, while West Marine sells it for $1.59/ft. You can get 10mm Amsteel II Plus covered dyneema for $1.35/ft here: AMSTEEL II PLUS ROPE | Tallman Equipment Company

Of course, that is just size for size. One would need 14mm Sta-Set to equal the strength and stretch of the 10mm dyneema.

Furling lines are really helped by dyneema because it can be downsized so that the drum doesn't become overloaded with line. I strip the cover off ours up to the clutch/winch, which halves the volume on the drum when wound in, but keeps the easy clutch and winch operation.

Haven't you heard that you aren't supposed to use a winch on a furling line ?

Mark