Stainless vs Dyneema for my boat

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

I dont understand how you can just jack up the mast 5ft without all sorts of unintended consequences especially if you have too many jobs already.

I suggest not extended the mast (for now)

The mast extension is a done deal. Now the shrouds and forestay have to be lengthened.

The composite chain plates are also being built to the new angles created, which are well within the appropriate safety range. A 2 degree difference in the shroud angle is the result of a 5’6” extension to the used mast I picked up. Off the top of my head, I think the angle is 7°.

That brings the mast length from 59ft to 65ft. The appropriate length for this boat. Conveniently, it also allows the boom to miss the deck house. That’s a nice feature.

There are other threads discussing this topic. It’s not to be talked about in this thread. This thread is about dyneema or stainless.

[Chotu]

Wow. This is a lot to digest. I’m going to have to take some time tonight and work through it. Thank you for all of the very informative responses. I am really going to have to play catch-up on learning here.

But, that’s why I asked. Because I didn’t know which was better in this situation.

And you are all right. The new headstay and Furler set up will have to be figured out. No matter what.

[EmeraldCoastSailor]

I know it isn't the same thing but I truly enjoyed replacing my old lifelines with Dyneema. I just want to chime in to say that it isn't hard to work with Dyneema. I am not sure if I'd go Dyneema for your situation.

[kryg]

I have a 15-meter mast head cutter monohull mast 18 meters, I changed the all the rigging excluding the forestay as it has a roller furler to Dyneema. Also, I replaced the safety lines from wire to Dyneema. Weight savings 250 kilos for 30 kilos of Dyneema.

You will need to change some end fittings, including your spreaders the tips need to be modified to suit dyneema. I had to have welded on new tips on my spreaders.

From my experience - Strong Suggestion, don't use a wire rigger to do your re-rig in Dyneema. It's not a good idea to do the re-rigging yourself, on a big boat. I recommend it is best to find an experienced Dyneema rigger. I will never go back to wire rigging EVER. Life of Dyneema 10 years for insurance coverage, but realistically my rigger tells me to expect at least 17 years.

Good luck with it.

Originally Posted by Chotu

Please think of my boat and my situation rather than your boat when making your recommendation.

Current situation:

I have a mast that is getting extended at its base by 5ft. I’m leaving all the attachment points where they are open n the mast itself, so I need to lengthen the forestay and shrouds. I ONLY have a forestay and shrouds. 3 point fractional rig. I have all the old standing rigging for this mast and it’s in great shape.

The current idea is to add some length to the bottom of the existing standing rigging to make up for the increased height.

Questions:

1) What is the service life of dyneema compared with stainless steel?

2) I don’t know how to install dyneema or do all of those fancy little knots and loops that are used. This boat has about 1 million other projects that need to be done. Is it faster to do steel or dyneema given I know zero about the dyneema rigging methods? Note: I’m not an expert on steel either.

3) Is it more expensive to do steel or dyneema? Currently I have most of the steel. Everything to a point a few feet above the deck. I need to bridge the gap from where the current steel ends to where it needs to end with the extended mast. Otherwise, it’s $0 to do stainless. But those few feet of extensions and fittings might be expensive. I don’t know.

4) What is the difference in weight between stainless and dyneema on a 65ft stick on a 50ft cat?

For my boat and my situation (not if you prefer Dyneema or love it on your boat), which should I go with?

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by kryg

From my experience - Strong Suggestion, don't use a wire rigger to do your re-rig in Dyneema. It's not a good idea to do the re-rigging yourself, on a big boat. I recommend it is best to find an experienced Dyneema rigger. I will never go back to wire rigging EVER. Life of Dyneema 10 years for insurance coverage, but realistically my rigger tells me to expect at least 17 years.

Good luck with it.

Agreed. I had dyneema for 10 years on my last boat and putting dyneema on this one. I am using heat set dyneema and lashings instead of turnbuckles.

After 10 years dyneema was fine which is more than I would say of stainless. No problem to use bronze hanks on dyneema (I didn't have roller furling) and there was no visible wear on the dyneema, but I used smooth hanks only, not ones that were sharp from wear on a wire.

I think if dyneema is covered from UV the life extends indefinitely?? I am looking at painting mine at least.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by Breaking Waves

let me point you here: https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ps-262009.html

As discussed above, unless there is something about your furler we don't know about, or you are not planning on using a fuller at all, then this discussion is mostly moot for the headstay and you need to get a continuous wire for it.

For the shrouds, it is really 6 vs half a dozen either way. I personally think a mixed solution (wire with dyneema extensions) combines the worst characteristics of both and I personally would not do it**. It would be easier and better (but more expensive since you already have the wires) to do all dyneema. But, even for the mixed solution which I don't prefer, pretty much all these options will work ok and get you sailing. Given your situation, it seems like the deciding factor would be what would take the least time and effort for you to accomplish - but even for that factor there is relatively little difference - dyneema is easy but wire with terminals is (probably) even easier. So, given you want to minimize your effort, my suggestion is just pick a path and get it done and don't fuss about too much and it will be fine (perhaps not 'optimal' but just fine). You could just hire Benz here right now to make you some covered endless loops and be done with it - just he would just need to know the precise length and ballpark strength required and he could have it done no fuss no muss in a couple days (depending on his workload ofc).

** why I feel that way - double the number of connections and fittings means (ballpark we can quibble about it) double the failure rate. Combining two systems with very different weaknesses and failure modes means twice the failure modes. Failure of properly sized rigging is a relatively low probability, but it does happen and you probably quadruple your chances of said failure by combing the two systems.

I completely agree that the sort of hybrid I suggested is not ideal--I'm just thinking of Chotu's long journey and of an afforable expedient that will get him out on the water sooner. I'd love to see him ultimately with a set of Maffioli Ultrawire (heat-set SK99 Dyneema with dyneema cover) shrouds and lashings, but I'd like to see it done right, which means proper attachment points aloft and alow. However, if he's going to re-use the old shrouds, with some sort of extensions, it's gonna be pieced together anyway, and a temporary solution at best.

[fxykty]

You’ve put so much time, effort, health and money to build your beautiful boat. Don’t do bodgy-looking extensions - go new. It’s good peace of mind as you will be assured of your rig’s history, barring the mast of course.

Wire - cheapest option now as you can likely reuse the mast fittings. If you use hand-tool cone fittings you can DIY and avoid swages. Cost per foot of wire is cheaper than that of Dyneema.

Dyneema - lighter and easier to keep spare lengths. Durability is variable as it depends on UV and chafe. Braided covers (that are woven onto the line - not pulled over) can provide protection, but will double the cost of the line. As others have written, buy brand name Dyneema that is specifically made for standing rigging - this is not the place to be stingy.

[Jamme]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

I think if dyneema is covered from UV the life extends indefinitely?? I am looking at painting mine at least.

Hi Sean, any particular paint you were contemplating using? My concern is that paint could hide wear or damages in the line or that paint solvents may ruin the rope’s properties.

Thanks and fair winds.

[Nic Homan]

Firstly i don’t like the idea of extending a mast. Surely the join section is going to be a weak point.
Secondly,assuming your yacht centre of gravity calculations were based on the existing height mast for safe sailing then you are going to potentially over power the rig and possibly the hull too.

What you are proposing could be dangerous if you suffer a catastrophic failure.

I would get these two aspects checked out by someone knowledgable and competent before even considering the material used for the standing rigging

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by Nic Homan

Firstly i don’t like the idea of extending a mast. Surely the join section is going to be a weak point.
Secondly,assuming your yacht centre of gravity calculations were based on the existing height mast for safe sailing then you are going to potentially over power the rig and possibly the hull too.

What you are proposing could be dangerous if you suffer a catastrophic failure.

I would get these two aspects checked out by someone knowledgable and competent before even considering the material used for the standing rigging

He's already sorted those things out. The mast is being extended because it's originally from a different boat and was slightly too short for his design. An extension can be plenty strong if done properly. Plenty of masts are assembled as 2 pieces with a splice from the factory to keep length down for shipping purposes.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by fxykty

You’ve put so much time, effort, health and money to build your beautiful boat. Don’t do bodgy-looking extensions - go new. It’s good peace of mind as you will be assured of your rig’s history, barring the mast of course.

Wire - cheapest option now as you can likely reuse the mast fittings. If you use hand-tool cone fittings you can DIY and avoid swages. Cost per foot of wire is cheaper than that of Dyneema.

Dyneema - lighter and easier to keep spare lengths. Durability is variable as it depends on UV and chafe. Braided covers (that are woven onto the line - not pulled over) can provide protection, but will double the cost of the line. As others have written, buy brand name Dyneema that is specifically made for standing rigging - this is not the place to be stingy.

Tough call. You know I want the Dyneema. Ha ha.

However, I want to get this done really fast and get out there on the water. Later, I can upgrade. Basically, I want to do fast and cheap for this year. So I can try the boat out at least. Then I can upgrade next time I pull the mast down in a year or two.

There are definitely some psychological things going on here. I need to take this boat out and see what it can do. I need that motivation to complete it.

The interior is going to take forever. I’m not looking forward to that. And I’m having a hard time finding the will to complete that part. I figure if I can take it out and see how it works, get excited about it again, then it will be easier to finish.

[wingssail]

For the 5' extensions I'd use stainless. It's definitely a well established "do it yourself" system.

For two reasons:

1. Weight is not an issue on a catamaran especially with the extensions down low
2. Longevity and less risk of failure. I know many people will say dyneema is bullet proof for many many years of expected usage, but consider the consequences of a failure: mast falls down. Down low you have increased exposure to impacts or chafe. And as a "do it yourselfer" I know there is a possibility of sudden dyneema failure. I've broken two dyneema halyards and one dyneema lifeline due to, presumably, poor splicing technique.
3. Simplicity of tuning. Turnbuckles, not lashings.
4. I see no need to have a mixed technology standing rig.
5. If your focus is on saving money (so that means no professional to do it for you and no total rigging replacement), the quick and dirty is use stainless.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by wingssail

For the 5' extensions I'd use stainless. It's definitely a well established "do it yourself" system.

For two reasons:

1. Weight is not an issue on a catamaran especially with the extensions down low
2. Longevity and less risk of failure. I know many people will say dyneema is bullet proof for many many years of expected usage, but consider the consequences of a failure: mast falls down. Down low you have increased exposure to impacts or chafe. And as a "do it yourselfer" I know there is a possibility of sudden dyneema failure. I've broken two dyneema halyards and one dyneema lifeline due to, presumably, poor splicing technique.
3. Simplicity of tuning. Turnbuckles, not lashings.
4. I see no need to have a mixed technology standing rig.
5. If your focus is on saving money (so that means no professional to do it for you and no total rigging replacement), the quick and dirty is use stainless.

These are great points. Pretty hard to argue any of them. The fact that I don’t know anything about Dyneema lashings probably makes it The more time-consuming option. Probably also makes it the more risky option because I might make some mistakes. With the stainless, you either get it or you don’t. It seems a little bit more idiot proof.

[Hamish_ct]

I am currently replacing my Rod Rigging and was considering Dynema. IMO it is superior to steel. There are risks involved.

I race/cruise my boat and adjust the tension before every race. The fittings on Dynema, from what my rigger suggested, are theoretically more difficult to adjust than simple turnbuckles. I am still out on that one.
The other risk is that unlike Steel wire or Rod, Dynema ca be cut with a sharp implement.

I went with Rod, it was substantially cheaper and for what I was doing more efficient. If I was cruising, I would use Dynema. I like, for racing, the lighter weight of Dynema, maybe next boat.

Good luck. please tell this group what you decided and keep us updated on your experience.

[pbmaise]

Chotu,
I also had three point rigging on a multi. I was in the Philippines and had to work with materials locally available.

For me the basic problem was what to do about the forestay. I had no roller furler and a very limited budget so I made one. I also had no aluminum sections to go around the forestay and no track to slide the foresail.

I went with a galvanized forestay and Crosby poured in place fittings. This allowed me to install the forestay within a stainless steel pole that was welded together. The pole in turn rotated around the galvanized forestay within the stainless tube. The welding shop also attached pad eyes to the pole. The pole interlocked with the roller furler I made.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/YOUTHINK-...erId=101078552

To attach the sail to the pole I used short lengths of Dyneema line that went around the pole and then through the eyelets of the sail. That was the tricky part.

I made certain the galvanized wire rope I ordered was the type that didn't have a core to attract moisture. I then soaked the entire wire in synthetic linseed oil. This provided an extra barrier coat to salt.

https://www.thecrosbygroup.com/catal...elter-sockets/

For the back/side stays I used Dyneema. The problem I found was after every sail it stretched. Given the 40 foot width between the attachment points I learned the problem was the flexing of the hulls. I utilized redundant lashings around the Dyneema backstays. After every sail I had to retighten the lashings. It was a long involved process.

To solve this problem I learned to pluck the Dyneema lines with a intermediate line running to my rear docking cleat. This intermediate line contained a spring. Roughly 90% of the load from the mast passed down to the main chainplate and about 10% was carried by the line with the spring.

I utilized redundant lashings around the Dyneema backstays.