Running Backstays on my 1983 Beneteau First 35 removed if not sailing in high winds?

[bartpkelly]

Question: Does it make practical sense to remove them?

I want to remove the Running backstays on my 1983 Beneteau First 35. I have looked on the WWW and it seems that running backstays were not standard for this model.

It is a masthead rig with a babystay (Allows tensioning) but not an inner forestay. She is a racer/cruiser but I will not be doing any racing. Backstay allows adjustments.

I will not be taking her into blue water ocean crossings and will only be sailing her in coastal cruising in the Pacific Northwest (Puget Sound up and through the San Juan Islands). 30 knot winds? No thank you, I'll be in a port or anchored with a cup of java. At least for a few years, unless I suddenly become a crazed salt ready for the high seas.

I will get a rigging inspection done and point out that I have no place to attach the Running Backstays except the toerail, so I am fairly confident they were added later. That and I can not see any photos of any 1983 Beneteau First35 with them.

Question: Does it make practical sense to remove them?

 

[jssailem]

Your mast image does not show the attachment at / near the mast head. This makes it difficult to identify the rigging lines on the boat.

Your sailing limitations, as identified, suggest you will not be on the waters during conditions that would create mast pumping, mast inversion, need for mast balancing, use large headsails or flattening of the main during strong winds to weather.

The conclusion you reach is consistent. The running backstays are extra rigging that may not be useful.

For your consideration, crossing the Juan de Fuca strait to reach the San Juan Islands can place you in conditions that running backstays to control mast pumping may become helpful. While this is not open ocean the same type of water conditions can and do occur.

 

[FastOlson]

From the pix, it almost looks like your rig may have parrallel shrouds (i.e. with single lowers). Can you verify? Also, is the mast keel stepped?

 

[bartpkelly]

From the pix, it almost looks like your rig may have parrallel shrouds (i.e. with single lowers). Can you verify? Also, is the mast keel stepped?

Thank you for responding! Yes, the shrouds are in line, parallel (Not slanted backwards aft). The mast is Keel-stepped (I believe because, although I'm not a knowledgeable sailor, the mast does extend through the salon, so I assume it is). Picture attached. Also, old reliable AI says that most 1983 Beneteau First 35s were Keel-stepped. The picture shows the mast going through the deck into the salon.

 

[FastOlson]

Looks kinda similar to the stock Kenyon rig on our Olson 34. We have a tall double-spreader rig with parallel shrouds. No baby stay, but our boat does have runners that are rigged as a safety measure when/if out in the ocean with big seas to potentially run into and -potentially- flex the mast forward.
I would guess that the builder spec'd out the spar section to be stiff enough that it does not regularly require runners, if there was no provision for them when new. It might be good to rig them, however, if planning for much time at sea. I would have a rigger evaluate he rig, tho, rather than depend solely on strangers on the internet...