In-mast vs in-boom furling

[Medved]

Hi all, I am a power boater who is converting to sailing. Passed ASA 101 few weeks ago and scheduled 103/104 for mid Sep. I am still in my research phase as to which boat to go after. I will be sailing single handed or short handed, and really liked in-mast furling on a Jeanneau 440 I got a chance to sail. That said, I am trying to understand pros and cons between in-mast and in-boom. I saw in and around Annapolis a number of ocean going sailboats with in-boom furling, but cannot find much info on those. Any insight from folks who have sailed with these are greatly appreciated.

[LittleWing77]

The reason you can't find much info is that both systems are known to be highly problematic (when they work, they seem great, but they rarely work well - or for long) and have essentially gone the way of the dodo.

Perhaps get yourself a Doyle stackpack...

Good luck - it's exciting at the beginning of your sailing journey.

Warmly,
LittleWing

[undercutter]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

The reason you can't find much info is that both systems are known to be highly problematic (when they work, they seem great, but they rarely work well - or for long) and have essentially gone the way of the dodo.

Perhaps get yourself a Doyle stackpack...

Good luck - it's exciting at the beginning of your sailing journey.

Warmly,
LittleWing

Absolutely ridiculous statement. I have owned this boat for over 10 years with inmast furling and as long as the sails are in good shape you never have a problem if furled correctly. Easiest single handed sailing you will ever do.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

The reason you can't find much info is that both systems are known to be highly problematic (when they work, they seem great, but they rarely work well - or for long) and have essentially gone the way of the dodo.

Perhaps get yourself a Doyle stackpack...

Good luck - it's exciting at the beginning of your sailing journey.

Warmly,
LittleWing

This is a very uneducated ignorant comment please prove this, substantiate this claim.

There are literally thousands of fueling masts produced each year. I no many circumnavigating the world with inmost furlers having no problems.

People come here for information, you shouldn't talk about stuff you know little about, this is exactly how false information becomes fact.

The best example of how wrong you are is just look at Amel.

[mikedefieslife]

Originally Posted by LittleWing77

The reason you can't find much info is that both systems are known to be highly problematic (when they work, they seem great, but they rarely work well - or for long) and have essentially gone the way of the dodo.

Perhaps get yourself a Doyle stackpack...

Good luck - it's exciting at the beginning of your sailing journey.

Warmly,
LittleWing

Obvious troll is obvious. Of course they work well and for long periods with less maintenance than a stack pack and lazy lines.

Just look at the sheer amount of production boats that come with in mast furling as standard.

Sure they don’t give the best sail shape but usually this is compensated for by a slightly larger sail (taller mast) on boats that have been designed for it.

[LittleWing77]

Well, I guess you're lucky, then. I work in the Marine Services side of things and just this past weekend one of our boats went out for a leisurely sail with friends and their in-mast furling stuck halfway. We spent Monday sorting it out for them.

This happens all the time, with a variety of boats in our area, and we're in a fresh water environment. Near the sea, and related salt water corrosion, I'd bet they're even more difficult to keep functioning.

Sorry, that's been my experience with these - my personal take is also with newer sailors, keeping it simple, is a good principle. Just trying to keep him out of trouble.

Kindly meant,
LittleWing

[HankOnthewater]

Ì have sailed with in-mast furling, lazy jacks, but never with in boom reefing except for an old gaff rigger where the sails was roiled onto the boom.
When singlehanded sailing, also consider Dutchman style reefing like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxOTlgx3AB4

As I sail mostly single handedly, at this stage of my life looking for comfort, easy of handling, I prefer now in-mast furling. Here are some links with more info:

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...re-217716.html
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ng-202714.html
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ng-196792.html
And then there are dozens more threads.

As far as in-mast furling to be a dodo-like dead-end, check the sales brochures of popular boats. Hehehe, dodos are still being sold, and served as a main course.

[a64pilot]

In boom is I believe slightly superior mostly due to sail shape possible and battens.
You don’t see it very often due I believe to cost. I’ve never jammed mine, but if it does I will just lower the sail like normal

[Medved]

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

[SailFastTri]

To the OP -- congrats on discovering sailing, and welcome. There is nothing that provides better sail shape and simpler (reliable) furling than a full-battened mainsail, low friction track cars and lazyjacks. NOTHING else comes close.

In-mast and in-boom systems can bind and be finicky, and can fail (often at the worst possible time). The fact that there is controversy shows the division between those people who have experienced failure (or finicky problems) and those who haven't experienced it yet. Expense and complication are not needed, and push-button sailing is a fallacy.

I can drop my 56-foot main in about 10 seconds in an emergency, reef while running downwind, and raise it with an electric winch. My sails are cut to have optimum shape. Best of all worlds.

[a64pilot]

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.

[Kenomac]

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.

[sogin]

Originally Posted by Medved

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

We have owned boats with both in-mast and in-boom furling. There is no comparison regarding sail shape - the in-boom furling with full batons provides much better performance. Regarding jams, we experienced one or two events in 10- years of ownership of the in-mast system on a Bene 411 and it was due to not maintaining proper outhaul tension when furling. We originally had more problems with a Leisure Furl in-boom system that traced back to the furling line binding against the shell surrounding the furling drum. This happened because the rig was taller than what Leisure Furl anticipated. The binding led to ripping the luff rope which is a >$1000 repair. The ultimate solution was to reduce the size of the furling line. Since that time we have had no problems as long as the boom is maintained at the proper angle when furling AND proper tension is maintained on the halyard or furling line when dropping or raising the sail. The ability to drop the sail it the furling drum were to fail is highly advantageous but the reality failures are more likely to related to sail track jams or halyard problems that can't be recovered by simply dropping the sail. The only advantage I see for the in-mast system is the ease of reducing sail when the wind velocity increases. I could partially furl at any point of sail but with the in-boom system furling is much easier when pointing into the wind. On balance I have no question that in-boom is the way to go.

[dkenny64]

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

[a64pilot]

Couple more.
First Ken is right about needing electric to raise the sail, I did it a couple of times manually, usually had to stop at 3/4 the way up and rest, then hit it again.
I bought a Milwaukee drill, actually two as I consider it necessary, cause without it, your going to get a real work out.

Then due to I guess to paranoia and laziness, I’ll only reef or raise and lower the main when going to windward. You can tell due to resistance that the system is under tension if you don’t.