Cruisers Forum
 


Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on Cruisers Forums. Advertise Here
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 21-06-2019, 05:58   #16
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pangaea
Posts: 10,856
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by dkenny64 View Post
there is a 3rd option.
external main furler. stand behind the mast. not inside. works just

a jib furler but stand vertical.


just something to think about


-dkenny64
Really old school from the 1970’s/1980’s, technology have moved on and improved.
Kenomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:00   #17
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Deale, MD
Boat: 1988 Catalina C34 TR/WK
Posts: 96
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Thank you for the insight. Money is important, but safety is not something to "save" on. That said, I have been looking at a production boat like a Jeanneau as a first sailboat and it seems while there are compromises with in-mast, if operated properly should give me ability to single hand.
Medved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:03   #18
Registered User
 
daletournier's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Australia
Boat: Catalina 470
Posts: 4,578
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by a64pilot View Post
I believe it’s because for whatever the reason (I believe it’s cost and Social pressure, meaning it’s what is most often done) that almost all of the boats that come new with internal furling do so with in mast.
Very few boats are retrofitted after they are bought, the cost isn’t minimal, and in truth I doubt it’s worth the cost to retrofit.

My boat was retrofitted by an older couple, that were trying to make it easier to sail as they were getting old and needed it to be easier. The Genoa showed as new where the Staysail had wear, I’m sure they sailed with the main and Staysail as the Genoa was likely too much for them.

I believe you lose performance with either system, inmast due to sail shape and no horizontal battens, in boom due to the lack of being able to adjust sail shape.
So if you were to convert a boat, you would spend a small fortune, and lose performance but gain ease of use.
So unless money isn’t important to you in your boat shopping shop for whatever system you want, but understand that in boom is not very common so that’s going to cut way down on number of boats to shop.
Here's an example of the success and reliability of inmast fueling.

Last year I was at Buzaruto Mozambique. There was 21 boats waiting out weather before heading down the South African coast. Each boat had crossed at least 2 oceans, all boats were circumnavigating.

Out of the 21 boats 14 had inmast furlers and 1 had a in boom furler. If they were so troublesome do you really think so many would be travelling around the world with them?

I was terrified of mine when I first purchased the boat, I already had approx 40,000nm under my belt prior to this boat and had been a fulltime cruiser for 8 years. Due to posts on this forum by people with no inmast furling experience, and opinions from people that had never used or owned one I was seriously nervous initially, genuinely scared I was going to jam my sail and loose my rig. It was actually effecting my sailing.

All I can say is "what a load of crap some speak". Inmast furlers are very reliable, I live and use one,I sail constantly with others that use them full time, companies like Amel has been using them for ever. There are very few problems, it's up there with keels falling off and catamarans flipping. I see uneducated prejudice.

My suggestion is to talk to people that own them and use them,not people that haven't but have an opinion anyway. Go talk to an Amel owner, a owner that is sailing the world.

The downside, a inmast furling mainsail is a triangular rag, they aren't a nice sail and you will lose some performance down low until the wind picks up. That really is about the only downside.

How big is the lack of performance? I just did a 1,900nm passage in company with a tayana 52 and a beneteau 473. We all anchored at devils island French Guyana with in an hour of each other, therefore in the real world of cruising there's little difference.

Actually inmast furlers are faster......because you use your mainsail more often.

I'm yet to find a owner of one that doesn't like his inmast furler.
daletournier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:04   #19
Registered User

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Lake Ont
Posts: 8,570
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

I was out for a few days this spring on a 36' boat with in-boom furling (and yes, an electric winch), in 20 to 25 kt conditions. The boat owner has had it for several years and it's been pretty reliable, but he's also a pretty careful and experienced skipper.

I was impressed, and because of the battens and "proper" reefing, and that you can still lower the main in a blow if the furling goes hayware, in-boom furling would be my choice (if I ever, ever have the choice to make )
Lake-Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:05   #20
Registered User
 
Uncle Bob's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney Australia
Boat: Fisher pilothouse sloop 32'
Posts: 3,467
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Medved View Post
It is precisely the ability to just lower the sail if the furler jams is what made me ask the question in the first place. Even if it is more expensive, this seems like a good safety trade off. This is why I was surprised to find that most are in mast. There has to be something else going on here
Hi, Leisure furl in boom system on my 32 footer, I can manage good sail shape most of the time, all lines lead aft and I sail single handed most of the time.
It is true that boom angle is important for furling, infinite reefing is a definite bonus and the full batten sail with decent shape are good as well. You really do have to head to wind to properly furl but you will find that most of those that bemoan the system have never really used one, being out once on a boat so fitted is not really experienced evaluation.
Anecdotal experience is usually spouted by those ignorant of how to properly use either system.
I am happy with mine.
__________________
Rob aka Uncle Bob Sydney Australia.

Life is 10% the cards you are dealt, 90% how you play em
Uncle Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:22   #21
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pangaea
Posts: 10,856
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Electric Hood in-mast furling on an Oyster 53. Quick, reliable and easy.

Kenomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:27   #22
Registered User
 
daletournier's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Australia
Boat: Catalina 470
Posts: 4,578
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Medved View Post
Thank you for the insight. Money is important, but safety is not something to "save" on. That said, I have been looking at a production boat like a Jeanneau as a first sailboat and it seems while there are compromises with in-mast, if operated properly should give me ability to single hand.
You don't even have to be that careful,truly.

Here's another upside, I reef more often because it's easy. You aren't always lake sailing, you don't always have the right conditions to furl exactly right, sometimes you just have to get it in ,and you can.

If it's going to jam it will happen coming out ,not going in. I'm a little careful pulling it out, but I was also careful on my last boat when raising the main I didn't catch the battens.

I could have a normal batterned main, I have and I'm not prejudice, I'd buy the boat I want regardless which type of system it had, I've owned and sailed both, both systems are fine.
daletournier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 06:50   #23
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 281
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

No doubt a conventional will offer the best sail shape. That however does not mean it gives a short handed crew the best performance, as work is involved to adjusting the sail area in order to sail fast.

Have seen to many boats sailing with a reef just because they are to tired or lazy to adjust the sail to existing conditions.


In boom system offers marginally better sail shape than in-mast furling. The achilles heel is reefing in hard wind when going downwind.

Succesful in-boom reefing requires 100% control of the mast-boom angle. That is more or less impossible going downwind.

I guess that is why ”Sogin” wrote ”i could partially furl at any point”


I have done lot of offshore sailing. As they tend to be downwind by nature. The ability to reef downwind is extreamly important.

A system that forces me to take down preventer and than change course in to a 10-15 foot swell if I have to reef is not my cup of tea.

Have in mast furlin for the last 30 years. It has never failed me. The sail shape is not optimal. But with the new materials and vertical battens the difference is marginal. The easy handling makes up for the difference.

Good (expensive) sail cloth and a sailmaker that understands designing sail for in-mast fuling is essential. You do not want a sail that stretches when wind increases. A baggy sail is the number one reason why people have problem with in-mast furling.
Oceansailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:28   #24
Moderator
 
Dockhead's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denmark (Winter), Cruising North Sea and Baltic (Summer)
Boat: Cutter-Rigged Moody 54
Posts: 35,007
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oceansailor View Post
No doubt a conventional will offer the best sail shape. That however does not mean it gives a short handed crew the best performance, as work is involved to adjusting the sail area in order to sail fast.

Have seen to many boats sailing with a reef just because they are to tired or lazy to adjust the sail to existing conditions.

In boom system offers marginally better sail shape than in-mast furling. The achilles heel is reefing in hard wind when going downwind.

Succesful in-boom reefing requires 100% control of the mast-boom angle. That is more or less impossible going downwind.

I guess that is why ”Sogin” wrote ”i could partially furl at any point”

I have done lot of offshore sailing. As they tend to be downwind by nature. The ability to reef downwind is extreamly important.

A system that forces me to take down preventer and than change course in to a 10-15 foot swell if I have to reef is not my cup of tea.

Have in mast furlin for the last 30 years. It has never failed me. The sail shape is not optimal. But with the new materials and vertical battens the difference is marginal. The easy handling makes up for the difference.

Good (expensive) sail cloth and a sailmaker that understands designing sail for in-mast fuling is essential. You do not want a sail that stretches when wind increases. A baggy sail is the number one reason why people have problem with in-mast furling.



That's right.


With in-mast furling, you'll miss the roach of a full batten main in light wind or when you're racing, but once you are reefed, there isn't any real disadvantage in shape, and the ability to easily and quickly change sail area is a huge advantage -- I mean PERFORMANCE advantage -- over a full batten main, particularly with a small crew. A short handed boat with a conventional main in stronger conditions will typically sail with less mainsail area, perhaps much less than optimal, because they can't easily change the area of the mainsail -- that's a performance hit.


Or they will control overall sail area by leaving the main alone and reefing the headsail, which is terrible -- headsails drastically lose performance when reefed.


So on my boat, I don't reef the jib at all -- I play the area of the mainsail. So my jib is always working optimally, and a reefed in-mast furling main -- because they are cut flatter than normal mains -- does not suffer when reefed, unlike headsails. So talking just about PERFORMANCE, in real life conditions with small crews, in-mast furling does not necessarily involve a performance hit, unless you're in very light winds, and may even be a performance advantage.



It is certainly more FUN, sailing actively, and adjusting sail area frequently to keep just the right amount of sail up, and in-mast furling really facilitates this.




+1 000 000 on baggy sails. In-mast furling is no good with baggy sails, and if you are planning a circumnavigation with one set of cheap dacron sails, just don't do that with in-mast furling.


Laminate sails are a huge advantage with in-mast furling, as not only are they non-stretch and non-bag, but they are thinner and more flexible. Laminate sails and in-mast furling go together like cookies and cream. You can use vertical battens and get a straight leech that way, which gives vastly better shape than the standard hollow leech battenless in-mast furling sails.
__________________
"You sea! I resign myself to you also . . . . I guess what you mean,
I behold from the beach your crooked inviting fingers,
I believe you refuse to go back without feeling of me;
We must have a turn together . . . . I undress . . . . hurry me out of sight of the land,
Cushion me soft . . . . rock me in billowy drowse,
Dash me with amorous wet . . . . I can repay you."
Walt Whitman
Dockhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:39   #25
Registered User
 
malbert73's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Boat: Tartan 40
Posts: 2,490
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenomac View Post
Having owned and used all three systems..

1. In mast furling with vertical battens is the easiest, quickest and most trouble free. Especially if hydraulic or electric.

2. In boom is nice and much better than standard stack pack, but you will need to raise the main each time it’s used, so make sure you have an electric winch.

3. Standard stack pack. Really Sucks, unless you’re a racer, masochist, purist or just plain ignorant of the two more superior methods and how to use them.


For the newbies-
I am sure that the opinion on #3 is valid for Ken with a large center cockpit boat in which the boom is not usually accessible.
For my boat which is an aft cockpit 40 footer, with a boom that sits at chest height when I stand on the cabin top, basic stack pack or cradle cover is amazing and easy. Literally 1 to 2 minutes to drop the sail and have perfectly flaked and zipped up. Quicker if I just want to stuff it in the cover and zip it up. And I retain full control of sail shape. Also makes reefing really easy as the extra sail just sits inside the cover

I have chartered with in mast furling and in fact chose a boat specifically to have that feature. But that was in a tradewind location with excess breeze so I wasn’t really worried about performance. In a place with lighter air like the Chesapeake, an in mast system will likely be the difference between having to motor and being able to make tracks under sail
malbert73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:39   #26
Registered User
 
S/V Illusion's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lakewood Ranch, FLORIDA
Boat: Alden 50, Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 3,608
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Bottom line:

In mast furling - poor sail shape. Anyone claiming it never got stuck should add “yet” to their comment.

In boom furling - proper sail shape and virtually problem free. With an electric winch, it’s the epitome of sail handling systems. Not as popular because it is more expensive.
S/V Illusion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:45   #27
Registered User
 
Sand crab's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Gig Harbor, WA
Boat: 34' Crowther tri sold 16' Kayak now
Posts: 5,067
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

I was out kayaking yesterday in Gig Harbor which probably has 1000 boats mol. We noticed a half a dozen in-mast units with most on very nice boats. I saw one boom furler. It's just my observation without any conclusion to be made.
__________________
Slowly going senile but enjoying the ride.
Sand crab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:48   #28
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Deale, MD
Boat: 1988 Catalina C34 TR/WK
Posts: 96
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by S/V Illusion View Post
Bottom line:

In mast furling - poor sail shape. Anyone claiming it never got stuck should add “yet” to their comment.

In boom furling - proper sail shape and virtually problem free. With an electric winch, it’s the epitome of sail handling systems. Not as popular because it is more expensive.
So the only thing that does not make sense is how come expensive ocean sailing yachts like Discovery, Amel, Oyster use in-mast. At those prices I am sure they can afford to provide an in-boom, and yet that is not what they choose to do. This is what is not connecting for me.
Medved is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:54   #29
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pangaea
Posts: 10,856
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by malbert73 View Post
For the newbies-
I am sure that the opinion on #3 is valid for Ken with a large center cockpit boat in which the boom is not usually accessible.
For my boat which is an aft cockpit 40 footer, with a boom that sits at chest height when I stand on the cabin top, basic stack pack or cradle cover is amazing and easy. Literally 1 to 2 minutes to drop the sail and have perfectly flaked and zipped up. Quicker if I just want to stuff it in the cover and zip it up. And I retain full control of sail shape. Also makes reefing really easy as the extra sail just sits inside the cover

I have chartered with in mast furling and in fact chose a boat specifically to have that feature. But that was in a tradewind location with excess breeze so I wasn’t really worried about performance. In a place with lighter air like the Chesapeake, an in mast system will likely be the difference between having to motor and being able to make tracks under sail
I used the traditional stackpack on our O’Day 20, Hunter 450 and an Oyster 53. It was terrible on all of them except for the O’Day.
Kenomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2019, 07:57   #30
cruiser

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pangaea
Posts: 10,856
Re: In-mast vs in-boom furling

Quote:
Originally Posted by S/V Illusion View Post
Bottom line:

In mast furling - poor sail shape. Anyone claiming it never got stuck should add “yet” to their comment.

In boom furling - proper sail shape and virtually problem free. With an electric winch, it’s the epitome of sail handling systems. Not as popular because it is more expensive.
Correction:

In mast furling - Anyone having gotten the sail stuck... didn’t know what they were doing, or more politely... hadn’t “yet” been shown how to do it properly by a competent, experienced teacher. Please see post #21.
Kenomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
furling, mast

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Endless Furling Line for In-Mast Furling Dockhead Deck hardware: Rigging, Sails & Hoisting 12 17-06-2022 23:54
Mainsail in boom furling vs. in mast furling PAlter Seamanship & Boat Handling 55 21-06-2019 09:25
For Sale: 52 kenyon inmast furling mast, shrouds, boom and sail, plus roller furling head sail vuilbaard Classifieds Archive 0 05-06-2016 17:26

Advertise Here


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:14.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.