Would I regret buying an old boat with in mast furling?

ip485 said:
My thoughts (with a 50 foot boat).

1. Changing to fully vertical battened main made a huge difference. The sail sets much better and therefore performs better,
2. A main made of the "right" sail cloth that isnt tired makes a huge difference. The cloth is slippery and furls much better,
3. Make sure it is properly rigged (plenty of threads on that). Again a huge difference,
4. Always keep a little tension on the outhaul when you furl - all but eliminates jams,I
5. Take as much pressure off the sail when you furl.
Wouldn't fancy dropping mine with battens in but I guess it is possible, I have had inmast for 25 years the last 10 years I have had Maxi roach which was second hand, which was great never a Jam I have just bought a Crusader battened main it certainly furls well and comes out equally as well it has much thinner battens but would be difficult to remove at sea.
I will know more about the new sail when I have had it longer, my boat is a Westerly Corsair 36 had her since 1992.


Mine is brilliant. No problems having taken these points on board. From a safety point of view it has huge benefits. Keeps crew in the cockpit and off the deck.

Finally if it does jam or breaks have a plan. If it breaks partially furled it could be a problem but inevitably if you can get the thing unwound its not too much of a problem dropping it to the deck - well as much as any sail the size of mine at any rate. :-)
Click to expand...
 
ip485 said:
My thoughts (with a 50 foot boat).

1. Changing to fully vertical battened main made a huge difference. The sail sets much better and therefore performs better,
2. A main made of the "right" sail cloth that isnt tired makes a huge difference. The cloth is slippery and furls much better,
3. Make sure it is properly rigged (plenty of threads on that). Again a huge difference,
4. Always keep a little tension on the outhaul when you furl - all but eliminates jams,
5. Take as much pressure off the sail when you furl.

Mine is brilliant. No problems having taken these points on board. From a safety point of view it has huge benefits. Keeps crew in the cockpit and off the deck.

Finally if it does jam or breaks have a plan. If it breaks partially furled it could be a problem but inevitably if you can get the thing unwound its not too much of a problem dropping it to the deck - well as much as any sail the size of mine at any rate. :-)[/ouldn't fancy dropping mine with battens in but I guess it is possible, I have had inmast for 25 years the last 10 years I have had Maxi roach which was second hand, which was great never a Jam I have just bought a Crusader battened main it certainly furls well and comes out equally as well it has much thinner battens but would be difficult to remove at sea.
I will know more about the new sail when I have had it longer, my boat is a Westerly Corsair 36 had her since 1992.
Click to expand...
 
We have a Hood in mast furling system on a 44 footer; from the late 80s or early 90s. It was installed about two owners ago so we are not sure of the exact age.

Yes you will loose performance.
We have jammed it a couple of times; mainly due to not letting the back stay off before trying to furl, this creates a nice bag in the sail about half way up, just right for jamming.
No problems with sail wear. We have had a Dacron main for about 6-7 years and it's still in great shape.
Unless the yacht has been design for inmast from the outset, you will loose some stability performance, and increase windage. Nothing dramatic, but the windage can be noticeable.

The system you are looking at, does it have a continuos line coming out under the goose neck with a manual plunger to lock it off? This is what we have. Not a great system in my view. We had to have the bottom bearing race re-designed with some decent bearings put in. Bearing at the top of the mast are a bit light as well. Also had to replace the traveller car in the boom which took some investigation to figure out which current model would fit, this is an age thing.

I also do not like having a clew flying around with a block in it. Whilst you keep this under control with the outhaul, it's a big lump of metal flying around at the wrong end of the boat, ie above the cockpit.

Having had the boat for almost 10 years; in mast furling is not my favourite; as at this size and the hood configuration we have doesn't really reduce the work load of getting a main up. At that size I would prefer a traditional main with a stack pack on a track. The hood furler is not the best design I've seen, at least the one we have.

I would suggest you take it out for a sail and try furling the sail yourself and see what it's like and what you think. If you buy the boat and decide you don't like inmast furling replacing the mast will be prohibitively expensive.

Don't get me wrong, nothing wrong with inmast furling as such, however I would prefer a traditional system.

Good luck and enjoy the search!
 
Presumably the owners of the boat for the last 30 odd years have been satisfied so guess there is little fundamentally wrong with the system. Provided it is set up properly and maintained it should work without any difficulties or jams. You are right that the sail needs to be flat and in good condition and it sounds like the current sail may be past its best so may be worth exploring the new sail options. Whatever sail you choose have the clew fitted with UV protection as the stitching there is the first thing to fail.

It is important to remember that such rigs are at their best for shorthanded cruising so if you are a tweaker who revels in trying to get sails exactly "right" it is perhaps not for your. However the loss in performance from a practical cruising point of view (that is passage making) any loss is hardly noticeable and more than made up by the ease and safety of handling.

Just out of interest when this subject came up recently I did a bit of research to counter a statement made by somebody else and discovered that over 90% of the HRs over 36' for sale on Yachtworld had in mast furling.

You find very few people who have owned boats with well designed and set up systems who would go back to other types of reefing which limit you to only 3 fixed mainsail areas rather than being infinitely variable.
 
I have had in mast furling for the last 9 years on my (now) 25 year old 42ft Moody. I sail predominantly with my wife and guests who often have little experience. My previous two boats had slab reefing and roller boom reefing. Below are my thoughts on in-mast reefing/furling FWIW

1. Mine was a deliberate choice of in-mast based on wanting to stay in the cockpit when it gets bumpy and influenced the choice of boat.

2. Almost certainly the lack of roach does compromise performance in light airs but the genoa is the main source of power on my rig. That said, with a tubby cruiser and a ton of liveaboard gear on board the impact is imperceptible

3. Because it's easy to reef and infinitely variable I am much more willing to reef/ trim or shake out reefs as conditions change, consequently I do reef early but am equally happy to increase sail area early without the need to feel defensive. Easy to keep it comfortable!

4, Up until last year the main was, I think, the original and very baggy it was too! Despite that I could reef without problems.

5. When I first sailed the boat I found that the previous owner had reefed the main clockwise rather than counter clockwise but despite going around some very acute angles it wasn't designed too - amazingly it still worked OK

6. I now have a new main. On sail-maker advice I avoided vertical battens as an unnecessary complication for cruising ( KISS v performance decision) and settled on a Vektron cloth which sets brilliantly and furls like a dream.

7. I have used slab, roller boom and traditional reefing over the years and am very happy to stay with in-mast ....until a better system for my needs comes along.

8. If main ever jammed what would I do? Well if it was completely unfurled I would drop it -same as any conventional sail; If it was completely furled I would managed without it; If it was partially furled and I had enough area out to be of concern I would wrap the spare halyard round it and the mast which would take care of most of the sail area which would be below the lower spreaders. I just don't understand the jamming concerns of the nightmare scenario so loved by the nay-sayers.

9. At the beginning and end of the season when I have to handle the sails I am reminded very forcibly of how lucky I am not to have to manage so much sail cloth on a regular basis.
 
Although with in-mast there is a loss of area, because of lack of roach, there is a corresponding advantage. The sail is loose-footed, and as a result the lower portion of the sail develops a better shape than one fastened along the boom. I am not a great tweeker, but do admit to adjusting the furling line / outhaul to suit the conditions.

As others have said, it is so simple to increase or decrease area, and the sail only requires to be hoisted once a year.
Consider it very similar to furling systems for foresails, except that as the sail is furled away under the cover of the mast, it doesn't require a sacrificial strip on the leach, just a little at the clew.
 
I think it boils down to how much you value not having to go to the mast to reef. I have a Tab retrofitted system that mostly works ok and has never given me serious problems although it can stick a little coming out but the more I use it the better it gets?. Mine is probably not one of the best systems but I still prefer to reef from the cockpit and would not be without it (elderly small cat and even more elderly sailor). I bought the system from a chap who had a Commanche catamaran who missed the loss of area with the inmast sail and went back to a bigger sail and slab reefing-I always wondered whether he regretted the change!
 
P
NormanS said:
Although with in-mast there is a loss of area, because of lack of roach, there is a corresponding advantage. The sail is loose-footed, and as a result the lower portion of the sail develops a better shape than one fastened along the boom. I am not a great tweeker, but do admit to adjusting the furling line / outhaul to suit the conditions.

As others have said, it is so simple to increase or decrease area, and the sail only requires to be hoisted once a year.
Consider it very similar to furling systems for foresails, except that as the sail is furled away under the cover of the mast, it doesn't require a sacrificial strip on the leach, just a little at the clew.
Click to expand...

Not sure I would agree with some of these points.
- the loose footed sail is not an advantage over most conventional mainsails - most modern ones have been loose footed for years - and, unless using a sophisticated sail with vertical battens, few would say that you can get a better shape with a furling main than a conventional
- the furling main is not quite the same as a furling jib - any decent furling jib will have a foam luff (100% essential for decent shape reefed), which does not work in the confines of a mast, and most jibs have no roach to lose (and indeed some furling jibs do have roach with vertical battens, which can't jamb on a jib)

So a furling mainsail is always going to be more inefficient, particularly upwind (we have now reached 10 seasons and still never been overtaken to windward by a furling mainsail boat of any size). Boats like XC seem to be increasingly using furling boom mainsails for this reason.

That being said, for many this loss of sailing efficiciency is acceptable for the other benefits, particularly above 40 foot LOA and / or less agile skippers & crew.
 
grumpy_o_g said:
Why not? Surely it's his choice whether or not his boats have in-mast furling?
Click to expand...
He chose in mast for his boats for exactly the same reason as I did for my charter boat. simplicity for inexperienced users. Most charter customers, particularly in the Ionian where Barry's boats are based are less interested in sailing performance as boat is primarily a platform for an enjoyable holiday. Most do not have a sailing background let alone one that majors on performance, so they don't have the hang ups that many here have.

Having it on my boat quickly converted me to the benefits so of course the new replacement boat also has in mast. Like many who have posted here I would not go back unless downsizing significantly as the benefits are less with a smaller boat and smaller sail areas.
 
Got any number of no-nos when it comes to boat buying but two strong ones are no to teak decks and no to in mast furling. Both based on experience.
 
birdseye said:
Got any number of no-nos when it comes to boat buying but two strong ones are no to teak decks and no to in mast furling. Both based on experience.
Click to expand...

Possibly you could expand on your experience re in-mast furling? If it's because of the loss of area, fair enough, but it's strange how many complain of jams etc, when it is specified to give simplicity for charter boats.
 
birdseye said:
Got any number of no-nos when it comes to boat buying but two strong ones are no to teak decks and no to in mast furling. Both based on experience.
Click to expand...

Agree with the teak decks but we would not buy a yacht now unless it had in-mast furling. To be strictly accurate I might at the right price, but my wife would not. Having experienced conventional sails and in-mast we will never go back, again based on experience,
 
NealB said:
I've seen a 1987 built boat that we both really like.

The only downside, to me, is that she has a Hood in mast furling system in a Boyce mast.

I have very little experience of in-mast furlers, just two, one week, charters (one a Bavaria 42, the other a Sun Odyssey 42).

My main concerns are:

- loss of performance due to lack of roach and lack of shape (I assume the sail needs to be cut pretty well flat).

- risk of the system jamming, with the sail unfurled, in a rising wind and sea.

- increased wear and tear on the sail, where it enters/ exits the mast. Do such sails have a shorter life expectancy?

- the mainsail is of 2006 vintage. It was too windy to unfurl it when we saw her ashore a few days ago, but the part of the clew that was visible looks weathered. Presumably, an old, baggy, sail is more likely to give jams?

I realise I'm likely to get a number of strong opinions either way .... please be civil!
Click to expand...


Only you will know but given that you are asking the question it is not a good sign.

As the others have observed, it is a great option for the aging sailor who wants to prolong sailing with a bigger boat. Like many aids to easy sailing, they all tend to hack away at the performance of a boat and in the end you find you have re-invented the Motor Sailor. Fine if that is what you require.

Ask yourself truthfully if you found another indentical boat with conventional arrangements which one would you buy? That may give you a steer.
 
I am not totally convinced in mast automatically means a significant loss in performance, especially for a cruiser.

I appreciate it may mean new sails, but with full vertical battens, and a modern cut, the sail can in fact be shaped very well (as I do coming form a racing background).

Then there is the practical aspect of how a cruiser sails.

With in mast you may well leave a little more main out as the wind increases and anyway it is infinitly adjustable in terms of sail area - so you sail with more, rather than being limited by the reef points and the feel to over reef to save yet more effort.

and with luck more of your sailing will be off wind and down wind when the shape of the sail will in any event be no where near as important. After all ideally cruising is not about going around the world the wrong way, but the right way :-).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top