In-mast vs in-boom furling

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by 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

Really old school from the 1970’s/1980’s, technology have moved on and improved.

[Medved]

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.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[Lake-Effect]

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 )

[Uncle Bob]

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

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.

[Kenomac]

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

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P9mLsMfBzeg

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Medved

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.

[Oceansailor]

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.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Oceansailor

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.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

[S/V Illusion]

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.

[Sand crab]

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.

[Medved]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

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.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by malbert73

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]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

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.