anxiety in buying a boat

[mdougan]

I respect JeffH''s technical knowledge tremendously, but I often disagree with him Jeff has a strong bias towards maximal performance in boats and tends to evaluate boats based on the kind of sailing he does most, which may not apply to everybody.

No question that mast roller furling reduces performance, wears the sail, and could be dangerous if the sail jams in mid furl, however you could come up with equal arguments about broken halyards, batten''s that tear the sail of a traditionally hoisted main...etc.

One advantage for you in having a mast furled main is that they are very easy for a single person to furl and unfurl and steer the boat too. If your mate and children are not yet experienced sailors, then this would be a huge advantage for you.

If you are just beginning to gain experience yourself, it might help to have a sail that is less efficient, so that you don''t get caught in cases where you''re overpowered as easily.

I''ve sailed a mast furling main around the BVI on several occassions and found it to be very easy to work with (though the boat wouldn''t point for crap). My girlfriend rarely got up from the deck and it was easy enough for me to manage all the sails myself (on a 40 foot boat). The only time I had trouble furling it was when I forgot to release the cam cleat before cranking on the winch.

I think if you are conservative and reef early, you shouldn''t have a problem, provided that you''ve done your homework and have read everything you can about this particular furling system.

As far as the other anxiety, I went through the same thing early this year when I bought my first boat. For me it was the difference between the boat being someone else''s maintenance responsibility and it being mine... did I bite off more than I could chew?

Now that I''ve had it for several months, I''m really begining to enjoy the maintenance and it''s all becoming part of the joy of owning a boat!

Good Luck!

[Magic_Moments]

I think for casual sailing, especially in an area with light winds that come and go, you will enjoy having the furling main. If you are going offshore or racing then you could switch, but I would try what you have for a year before deciding.

For me the promising breeze always dies as soon as I have the sail up, so I leave it up and motor until it reappears. I was so happy to get roller furling on my head sail as I was so tired of changing sails up there that sometimes I wasn''t even tempted to put one up. I have thought about getting a furler for my main, but if I do it will be on the boom.

Catalina 36''s are nice boats, I have one parked next to me and some friends at work have one. I think you will enjoy it a lot.

Ken

[Jeff_H]

The problem with a roller furling mainsail in an area with predominantly lighter winds is that the reduced sail area and poorer sail shapes means that there will be a lot of days when you might have been able to sail with a conventional mainsail but can''t with a roller furling mainsail.

Jeff

[tsenator]

Jeff, I think the original poster will be sailing in San Francisco so I don''t think lighter winds will as much of a worry.

But I have one question. On a masthead boat with a relatively large Genny and a "smaller" high aspect main (like the C36) does the reduction in mainsail area from a roller furling main make that much of a difference? The total sail area lost is not as large a percentage as other boats. Yes in very light wind you''ll lose some performance and the C36 is not really a light wind boat to start with .

I could see on boats that have full mains with large roaches and relatively smaller jibs then the roller furling main will make a much bigger difference and I am sure I wouldn''t want it on my boat then.

I''m sure it would be noticed in a round the buoys race, but I''m just feeling on the C36 its wouldn''t be as big a deal vis-a-vis performance.

[Jeff_H]

From talking to sail makers, and from my observations, (I have actually had quite a few chances to see sisterships underway one with and without a furling mainsail) the difference in performance is quite dramatic throughtout the entire wind range. The lighter air side of the equation is quite obvious but to explain the heavier air problem, the better in-mast furling sails will have a pretty good shape when first furled but over a pretty short period of time the leech creeps toward the foot resulting in a pretty poor heavy air sail shape and an increased likelihood of a jamb. If this boat is in lower San Francisco Bay then I would say that the in-mast furler is definitely out of the question. They will need to reef reliably and end up with a good heavier air flying shape. An in-mast furler just will not do that.

Jeff

[tsenator]

There is a good article in this months Sail Magazine on Sail Material and people''s choices. One section discuss''s someones desire (on a Hylas 46) to have a new inmast furling Main. They talk about some of the issues Jeff discuss''s and how today, some of those shortcomings are being overcome by newer sail making techniques.

They talk about using stiff vertical battens and bigger roaches capability. Doing these things allowed a 20% larger roller furling main than the old one.

I think older inmast systems were obviously less than ideal, but I think that more and more techniques are being incorporated to lessen the difference. With longevity of sailshape and inmast systems that keep the mainsail problems to a minumum.

As far as performance I think it really depends on the boat. Yachting World did a comparison sailing of the 3 43'' Jeanneaus - The Sun Odyssey 43DS, Sun Odyssey 43 and Sun Fast 43.

The 43DS had a inmast furler and the regular 43 had a tradional mainsail. The Deck Salon with inmast furler sailed just as well (or better) than the regular 43. It doesn''t make a lot of sense I know, and the reviewers felt the same. But I think on some boats with a mast head rig you don''t see as big a difference as pundits claim.

Read the review and make up your own mind - Yachting World May 2002 p104-110
Jeanneau 43-footers Tim Thomas

(Link is not working now but you used to be able to read the comparison review on-line)http://www.jeanneauamerica.com/43s_ontest/43s_ontest_intro.htm )

[Jeff_H]

I had a friend who decribed a nightmare charter in heavier winds with an inmast furling sails. It strated me to thinking about where this technology is going. At the last boat show I spent a bunch of time talking to sailmakers from a number of name brand lofts. Universally out of this group multiple sailmakers who make and develop in mast furling sails and this group includes who build some of the newer designed newer sails, the opinion was that while there has been a lot of effort made to improve the sails being used in in-mast furlers they have not been successful improving the performance or durability fo in mast furling sails. The big issue with in-mast furlers is the problem of creep. Creep occurs because the forces of the sail, especially on the luff, cause the leech of the sail to cause the layers of rolled up sail to slide over each other so that the upper portions of the leech creep down the rolled up sail toward the foot. This does two things, it powers up the center of the sail, and enormously increases leech loadings. These high leech loadings and powered up (and low stressed center of the sail)means that there is a lot greater stetch in the leech than in the core of the sail and so means a prematurely blown out sail. The high incidence of leech flutter in comparatively new in-mast furling mainsails is but one symptom of a prematurely blown out leech. Various techniques are used to minimize this problem such as using heavier warp oriented cloths along the leech of furling sails but this carries with it a whole range of other issues.

I did discuss some of the newer ideas being tried with sailmakers and designers. There is a lot being tried, from battens that can be furled with the sail, vertical battens and battens that can be rotated from vertical to horizontal once the sail is unrolled. One of the most revealing conversations that I had was with one of the designers for the one of the companies who pushes the vertical batten solution, he says that it is true that the vertical battens allow a nearly straight leech or even some minor roach, but the vertical battens do nothing for windward performance (except the one company whose design allows the batten rotates in its pocket.) Even with vertical battens, creep is still a problem meaning extremely poor sail shape when as a cruiser you really need good sail shape, and at least according to the sail designer, no improvement in sail longevity. In fact it was felt that in some ways battens agrevated the longevity issues by concentrating the loads. All of the makers of batten systems for in-mast furling said that adding battens to an sail intended for in-mast furling greatly adds to the likelihood of a jamb. Again it is a matter of creep. When the sail creeps, the batten is now wrapped at an angle and so is in a position to create a half-in/half-out jamb which is the worst of all world.

Unless someone invents a technology that is beyond anything that I can picture, I really think we will look back on in-mast (or behind the mast for that matter) furling systems in much the way that that we look back at roller reefing systems and reel winches of the 1960''s, as a potentially interesting idea that really could be made to work in a safe and reliable manner.

I don''t know about the Yachting World review of the Jeanneau''s but the guys who sell these boats, and make the sails for these boats are quite clear that there is a substantial performance penalty with in-mast furling. One of the PHRF regions did testing to determine if there should be a rating credit for in-mast furling. Based on testing of a fairly large number of sister-ships of various models in a variety of wind ranges the results of the testing suggested a 12 to 30 seconds difference between the conventional mainsail and the furling mainsail with the conventional main doing better in all windspeed but having its biggest gains in lighter winds and in heavier air. A 12 to over 30 seconds a mile difference is a big performance difference (nearly the difference between my prior 28 footer and my current 38 footer) especially when you don''t have crack crews tweeking the in-mast furling sails to get the most of them as was done during the PHRF evaluation.

Respectfully,
Jeff

[928frenzy]

Would an in-boom furler be better or worse than an in-mast furler? At first blush (to me), it seems that an in-boom furler may have some advantages over the in-mast furler. Among them are that full (horizontal) battens could be used, and the weight of the system is carried lower on the mast. Also, reefing the main could be done in the conventional manner. Lastly, if the system jams, one could cut the halyard and drop the sail in an emergency.

In your opinion, what are the pros/cons of in-boom furlers?

~ Happy sails to you ~ _/) ~

[Sailmc]

In a general nut shell inboom furlers allow a better sail shape but inmast furlers provide more trouble free operation.

[tsenator]

Sailmc. That might be true but I can''t say for sure on the amount of troubles for either.

As was mentioned before the thing about in boom furlers is that if they do jam, you can still drop the sail. A very nice feature (not sure if you need to cut the halyard. I bet if it jammed and you had reefing grommets built into the sail then you could still reef the old fashished way with reef lines at tack and clew.

To me the in boom is vastly superior other than the cost and the fact that the boom has to be a certain diameter, no matter what boat. I''m not sure how it would look with a big fat boom on a small boat. Thats why I think in-booms furlers are best for boats over 40''