In mast furling vs slab reefing

[Baggywrinkle]

Whether it is anchors, reefing systems, hull shapes, boat type, or any other purchase decision, many people display choice-supportive bias (or post-purchase rationalisation). It is our tendency to defend our own decisions or later perceive our choices as better than they are. Simply because we made them.
This is why it is usually counterproductive to engage in discussion with people who exhibit strong choice-supportive bias. It makes them defensive and they will seek to justify their decision whatever evidence is provided. Post-purchase rationalisation can be seen quite clearly in posts #116, #118, and #120 above.

A refusal to accept that others have different experiences and therefore different opinions, or even different needs, is one of the obvious results, but the response is also tied to ego - we are not defined by the decisions we make, and the ability to change your mind with changing technology, materials, and new ideas is essential to progress. Even simply accepting that due to different circumstances, other people make a different choice is difficult for someone with choice-supportive bias - but if nobody changed their mind from the accepted "wisdom" we'd still be living in caves.

Things like modern anchors, reliable furling systems, electric winches, electric windlasses, bow thrusters, GPS plotters, solar, water makers, lithium batteries, sugar scoop sterns, light and bright interiors, modern hull designs - the list is endless - these are very attractive features, they make life easier and more pleasant if they fit an individuals needs and desires. We are individuals and one size does not fit all.

Very few people manage the mental gymnastics required to remain totally entrenched in the past, but another feature of someone exhibiting choice-supportive bias is that when they do adopt something new, they become an evangelist, telling people how wonderful it is and then the process starts again, accumulating the anecdotes and "evidence" that support this new choice while ignoring any drawbacks.

If I want an unbiased opinion to make a rational decision I listen to people who list both the pros and cons of alternatives without bias, and who also understand my usage pattern, preferences, and restrictions.

 

[geem]

Whether it is anchors, reefing systems, hull shapes, boat type, or any other purchase decision, many people display choice-supportive bias (or post-purchase rationalisation). It is our tendency to defend our own decisions or later perceive our choices as better than they are. Simply because we made them.
This is why it is usually counterproductive to engage in discussion with people who exhibit strong choice-supportive bias. It makes them defensive and they will seek to justify their decision whatever evidence is provided. Post-purchase rationalisation can be seen quite clearly in posts #116, #118, and #120 above.

A refusal to accept that others have different experiences and therefore different opinions, or even different needs, is one of the obvious results, but the response is also tied to ego - we are not defined by the decisions we make, and the ability to change your mind with changing technology, materials, and new ideas is essential to progress. Even simply accepting that due to different circumstances, other people make a different choice is difficult for someone with choice-supportive bias - but if nobody changed their mind from the accepted "wisdom" we'd still be living in caves.

Things like modern anchors, reliable furling systems, electric winches, electric windlasses, bow thrusters, GPS plotters, solar, water makers, lithium batteries, sugar scoop sterns, light and bright interiors, modern hull designs - the list is endless - these are very attractive features, they make life easier and more pleasant if they fit an individuals needs and desires. We are individuals and one size does not fit all.

Very few people manage the mental gymnastics required to remain totally entrenched in the past, but another feature of someone exhibiting choice-supportive bias is that when they do adopt something new, they become an evangelist, telling people how wonderful it is and then the process starts again, accumulating the anecdotes and "evidence" that support this new choice while ignoring any drawbacks.

If I want an unbiased opinion to make a rational decision I listen to people who list both the pros and cons of alternatives without bias, and who also understand my usage pattern, preferences, and restrictions.

You night want to reconsider that. See bottom of post #120
'Its horses for courses and we all have different needs and priorities. Nobody is wrong in their choices if it's suits their needs '

 

[Baggywrinkle]

You night want to reconsider that. See bottom of post #120
'Its horses for courses and we all have different needs and priorities. Nobody is wrong in their choices if it's suits their needs '

You mean your token get-out clause after telling someone their elderly wife needs a gym rather than an electric winch? .....

 

[Supertramp]

I have some experience of both systems. Indeed, our present boat, a 36ft ketch has in-mast main, and "conventional" mizzen.
We are an elderly couple, and much prefer the in-mast. OK, we lose a bit of sail area, and therefore in light weather, some speed, but the ease of sail handling is a huge benefit. For starters, we hoist the mainsail once a year. We don't have to go forward to do anything to do with sails or sailing. Those who say that in order to furl, the boat has to be precisely head to wind, seem to forget that it's the boom that will be head to wind, not necessarily the boat. In fact ours behaves better when the wind is coming slightly from starboard. We can so easily adjust the sail area to suit the conditions, simply by easing the sheet and pulling on the endless furling line.
The mizzen, even though it is a much smaller sail, is much more bother to handle. It has to be hoisted every time, taking care that the battens don't get caught up in the lazyjacks. Stowing it involves prancing about up on the aft seating, zipping it in to its stackpack, and fiddling about with the halyard shackle.
The Genoa, of greater area than the main, and with its clew much higher than that of the main, when furled, will have its centre of gravity considerably higher, and its weight considerably greater, than that of the mainsail. It's strange that folk go on about the weight of a furled in-mast mainsail, but quite happily have a furled headsail.
Just my considered opinion.

I share NormanS's views which is not surprising since we have same type of boat. I see merits in both systems. Having a pilothouse makes slab reefing less appealling.

One advantage of inmast furling is the ability to set a really small main to balance with the foresail/mizzen. You can then achieve a comfortable, manageable and adjustable balance in strong winds on the wind or off it without the palaver of sail changes.

 

[Fr J Hackett]

I share NormanS's views which is not surprising since we have same type of boat. I see merits in both systems. Having a pilothouse makes slab reefing less appealling.

One advantage of inmast furling is the ability to set a really small main to balance with the foresail/mizzen. You can then achieve a comfortable, manageable and adjustable balance in strong winds on the wind or off it without the palaver of sail changes.

It depends on what you call strong winds.

 

[Supertramp]

It depends on what you call strong winds.

I call 30knts+ sustained wind strong. I have used the main reefed to a trysail size several times and it provides useful drive and balance to the helm. I always furl it well in advance as it can need rounding up to furl otherwise. But once it's reduced to a third or quarter it's original size it will furl away readily. Reefed mizzen, trysail size main and Solent jib is a comfortable and manageable sail pattern.

Im not an inmast furling fan. But if you've got it then it offers some benefits. If I was crossing oceans or in "proper" strong winds I would prefer 3 (or 4) slabs (and a different boat!).

 

[geem]

Whether it is anchors, reefing systems, hull shapes, boat type, or any other purchase decision, many people display choice-supportive bias (or post-purchase rationalisation). It is our tendency to defend our own decisions or later perceive our choices as better than they are. Simply because we made them.
This is why it is usually counterproductive to engage in discussion with people who exhibit strong choice-supportive bias. It makes them defensive and they will seek to justify their decision whatever evidence is provided. Post-purchase rationalisation can be seen quite clearly in posts #116, #118, and #120 above.

A refusal to accept that others have different experiences and therefore different opinions, or even different needs, is one of the obvious results, but the response is also tied to ego - we are not defined by the decisions we make, and the ability to change your mind with changing technology, materials, and new ideas is essential to progress. Even simply accepting that due to different circumstances, other people make a different choice is difficult for someone with choice-supportive bias - but if nobody changed their mind from the accepted "wisdom" we'd still be living in caves.

Things like modern anchors, reliable furling systems, electric winches, electric windlasses, bow thrusters, GPS plotters, solar, water makers, lithium batteries, sugar scoop sterns, light and bright interiors, modern hull designs - the list is endless - these are very attractive features, they make life easier and more pleasant if they fit an individuals needs and desires. We are individuals and one size does not fit all.

Very few people manage the mental gymnastics required to remain totally entrenched in the past, but another feature of someone exhibiting choice-supportive bias is that when they do adopt something new, they become an evangelist, telling people how wonderful it is and then the process starts again, accumulating the anecdotes and "evidence" that support this new choice while ignoring any drawbacks.

If I want an unbiased opinion to make a rational decision I listen to people who list both the pros and cons of alternatives without bias, and who also understand my usage pattern, preferences, and restrictions.

You mean your token get-out clause after telling someone their elderly wife needs a gym rather than an electric winch? .....
Oh dear. You need to get out more

 

[Fr J Hackett]

I call 30knts+ sustained wind strong. I have used the main reefed to a trysail size several times and it provides useful drive and balance to the helm. I always furl it well in advance as it can need rounding up to furl otherwise. But once it's reduced to a third or quarter it's original size it will furl away readily. Reefed mizzen, trysail size main and Solent jib is a comfortable and manageable sail pattern.

Im not an inmast furling fan. But if you've got it then it offers some benefits. If I was crossing oceans or in "proper" strong winds I would prefer 3 (or 4) slabs (and a different boat!).

Well 30 to 40 knots in my experience is not trisail weather and certainly nowhere near it down wind or off the wind.

I think you have it in saying a different boat and 3 or 4 reef main is the answer.

 

[Wansworth]

There was an ocean sailing couple back in the 1970s who had the trisail permanently ready in its own track ,saved wear on the main

 

[Fr J Hackett]

There was an ocean sailing couple back in the 1970s who had the trisail permanently ready in its own track ,saved wear on the main

It's or was the norm if you had a trisail track that extended below the gooseneck close to the deck, you rigged the trisail so all that was needed was to drop the main, square away the boom and hoist the trisail. Some put the boom on a gallows, some lashed it to the side deck or coachroof some used it with the clew of the trisail fasted to the end or outhaul on the boom.
I have sailed a few times with the trisail set in its bag at the foot of the mast with its slides in the track but despite being in winds above 40 knots found that my 3rd reef was OK. So despite having owned two trisails on two different boats and having set them ready I have never had reason to deploy one.

 

[Wansworth]

It's or was the norm if you had a trisail track that extended below the gooseneck close to the deck, you rigged the trisail so all that was needed was to drop the main, square away the boom and hoist the trisail. Some put the boom on a gallows, some lashed it to the side deck or coachroof some used it with the clew of the trisail fasted to the end or outhaul on the boom.
I have sailed a few times with the trisail set in its bag at the foot of the mast with its slides in the track but despite being in winds above 40 knots found that my 3rd reef was OK. So despite having owned two trisails on two different boats and having set them ready I have never had reason to deploy one.

Never been out in such winds under sail but wouldn’t it be better to save the main if you do have a trisail easily set.I recall their trisail was the same always as their thirdreef

 

[Fr J Hackett]

Never been out in such winds under sail but wouldn’t it be better to save the main if you do have a trisail easily set.I recall their trisail was the same always as their thirdreef

The third reef always set far better than a trisail ( which I had hoisted once in 30 odd knots outside Plymouth just to see how it set and where was the best place for the boom and how to sheet it) Also having a rigid and sprung boom made it a bit of a faff.

 

[capnsensible]

In my experience, it's not winds at 30 to 40 knots that are the bad thing. It's the sea state that comes with it out in the wild blue yonder...

 

[doug748]

Whether it is anchors, reefing systems, hull shapes, boat type, or any other purchase decision, many people display choice-supportive bias (or post-purchase rationalisation). It is our tendency to defend our own decisions or later perceive our choices as better than they are. Simply because we made them.
This is why it is usually counterproductive to engage in discussion with people who exhibit strong choice-supportive bias. It makes them defensive and they will seek to justify their decision whatever evidence is provided. Post-purchase rationalisation can be seen quite clearly in posts #116, #118, and #120 above.

A refusal to accept that others have different experiences and therefore different opinions, or even different needs, is one of the obvious results, but the response is also tied to ego - we are not defined by the decisions we make, and the ability to change your mind with changing technology, materials, and new ideas is essential to progress. Even simply accepting that due to different circumstances, other people make a different choice is difficult for someone with choice-supportive bias - but if nobody changed their mind from the accepted "wisdom" we'd still be living in caves.

Things like modern anchors, reliable furling systems, electric winches, electric windlasses, bow thrusters, GPS plotters, solar, water makers, lithium batteries, sugar scoop sterns, light and bright interiors, modern hull designs - the list is endless - these are very attractive features, they make life easier and more pleasant if they fit an individuals needs and desires. We are individuals and one size does not fit all.

Very few people manage the mental gymnastics required to remain totally entrenched in the past, but another feature of someone exhibiting choice-supportive bias is that when they do adopt something new, they become an evangelist, telling people how wonderful it is and then the process starts again, accumulating the anecdotes and "evidence" that support this new choice while ignoring any drawbacks.

If I want an unbiased opinion to make a rational decision I listen to people who list both the pros and cons of alternatives without bias, and who also understand my usage pattern, preferences, and restrictions.

Wonderful.

You appear to be a little, icle bit lacking in the self awareness department.


.

 

[Kelpie]

There was an ocean sailing couple back in the 1970s who had the trisail permanently ready in its own track ,saved wear on the main

Where were they sailing?
I've never even used the third reef...

 

[Wansworth]

Where were they sailing?
I've never even used the third reef...

Cap horn cruising

 

[Supertramp]

The third reef always set far better than a trisail ( which I had hoisted once in 30 odd knots outside Plymouth just to see how it set and where was the best place for the boom and how to sheet it) Also having a rigid and sprung boom made it a bit of a faff.

I agree about slab reefed main being the preferred option offshore. The point was that in considering the benefits and drawbacks of a furling main, I rate the ability to reduce the sail size dramatically. When small, it is easily managed, provides some drive and most importantly balances the sail plan to keep the helm light.

30 knts is plenty wind for me, especially with the accompanying open sea state, even more so against tide. Good to know how to sail to windward comfortably in it though. Every boat is different.