in mast reefing.- is it a problem

[Roberto]

, but generally speaking once people have owned in mast (often after years of slab) they would not go back.

Sorry, this appears to be your own personal certainty about certainties of people you know absolutely nothing about.
I am not speaking on behalf of others, just counting mast equipments.

 

[Tranona]

Sorry, this appears to be your own personal certainty about certainties of people you know absolutely nothing about.
I am not speaking on behalf of others, just counting mast equipments.

No, not my "certainty" but a reflection of the many people I have spoken to pesonally and the many who have posted here over the years saying much the same.

As for counting masts, what you see is also what you don't see and in an anchorage for example in the Greek islands you might see much the opposite to what you see where you are.

 

[Dockhead]

No, not my "certainty" but a reflection of the many people I have spoken to pesonally and the many who have posted here over the years saying much the same.

As for counting masts, what you see is also what you don't see and in an anchorage for example in the Greek islands you might see much the opposite to what you see where you are.

My experience lines up with what Tranona says.

When I was shopping for my present boat, a 2001 Moody 54 which I bought in 2009, I was looking also at Oysters and Contests. I had never used in-mast reefing and was prejudiced against it, but I couldn't find a single used boat of this type with anything but.

I consulted with a lot of people who had boats with in-mast furling and every single one of them told me that once they got used to it, they loved it, and would never go back.

17 years and tens of thousands of miles later, with in-mast furling, I am quite happy with that choice, made reluctantly at the time.

But it's also really important to specify how you will be using the boat. Like every system, it has good points and bad points. I would not want in-mast furling for (a) a smaller boat, say, anything under 40'; (b) a boat of whatever size used much for racing; (c) a boat of whatever size used mostly coastwise and in good weather.

Because -- I really like to sail, and sailing performance is important to me. Optimum performance in lighter conditions comes from a roachy full-batten main, which you can have only with conventional reefing. In heavier conditions, in-mast furling (with a good sail) will give better performance, however, because of better regulation of sail area. That is why I would take in-mast for offshore and high latitude sailing, and full-batten for coastal sailing when you have more choice of weather.

One last point -- the differences are not important at all, if you don't use good sails. A good laminate in-mast furling main will walk all over a similar boat with a full batten dacron sail, especially if that sail lacks the roach which you can have with conventional reefing. The performance advantages of conventional reefing don't really matter if you don't take advantage of it like that. And all that is why in the real world of average sails and average sailors, the advantages of conventional reefing are not usually worth that much.

Whatever the reefing system, my choice will ALWAYS be to use a good laminate mainsail with as much roach as is possible with whatever setup you have. The quality of the sail is much more important than the reefing type. And good sails are absolutely THE BEST MONEY you can spend, on a sailboat.