'Prout' rig

[Moby Dick]

Anybody here have any real practical experience with using the 'Prout/Broadblue' rig with a a large foresail and small main? Any comments or real (not theoretical) pros and cons?

[Jeannius]

I had a day test sailing a Prout 38 (same hull and min-sail rig as Broadblue 385) about 6 years ago. It worked very well on that day but, I have to say, conditions were close to perfect... 15-20 knots, flat sea so I think whatever the rig was would have worked well.

I intended to buy one but then they went bust and I bought a Privilege instead.

Have to say I've never regretted getting the Priv but I think I'd also be happy with a Broadblue.

[Lodesman]

I was talking with the rep on board the Broadblue 385 at the boat show">Miami boat show and he said they sold ten "Prout rigs" for every "Sport rig"; of course the "Prout" (aft) set-up is standard, so costs less, but he said there was no perceptable difference in performance. Sorry this is just hearsay, and I would like to hear a first-hand opinion too.

Kevin

[Sunspot Baby]

I have an older (not Broadblue) Prout 38, virtually the same boat as the 39' Escale. She is cutter rigged with the mast is stepped pretty far back with a large cruising jenny.

We have sailed from North Carolina to Bahamas and back 3 times. She does not go to weather as well as some other cats in the same size range, but Broadblue drivers I have talked to don't have that complaint.

It is easier to furl the jenny than reef the main, so the small main is kind of nice because you can leave fully deployed in all but the most sever conditions.

George

[Moby Dick]

I have now sailed the BB with the 'Prout Rig' and it worked just fine.

Note the BB385 has about 100sq ft more sail area than the Prout 38 and the rig is much stiffer. Although it looks similar, and has the same 'heritage' of course, the rig is different in detail (spreaders, babystay and so forth)

It pointed to better than 35degrees (apparent) and seemed to have plenty of power.

In my opinion, it is not ideal for short tacking (there is no stay in front of the mast, as there was on the Prout, to hinder the foresail going across, but there is a lot of canvas) but would seem ideal for longer passages. As the chap with the Privilege 39 said elsewhere on this forum, downwind he packs the mainsail away, and uses just foresail. The BB rig allows this par excellence, especially with the optional furling 'screecher' on the other side. You can use two telescopic whisker poles if you want, for a LOT of downwind canvas. And just role away if the wind picks up.

Theoretical bit: BB claim that the the foresail rig also gives some lift to the bows to help prevent them burying, when the wind is behind the beam. This sort of makes sense, but I dont know if it does in real life

[muskoka]

Wife and I were seriously considering the BB 385 but I didn't like the rig as I thought the boat was under-canvassed. The 'sport rig' as they call it, is a more conventionally placed mast ahead of the saloon. But, they wanted an extra $16K !!!! for that setup. Really, it just sounded like an absolute rip-off because what is the real cost of an extra 100sf of sail?

Thank you very much BB, but no thanks.

[Moby Dick]

Well, the normal rig is directly over the rear bulkhead which takes the strain (and hence is a really strong set up). the Sport rig has to have additional strengthening added at the front of the saloon to take the mast (and it is not just a compression post - it is clad in a rather nice piece of woodwork) so it is not 'just 100sqf of sail'.

(Anyhow, I hear the Easy sail rig performs as well if not better than the Sport...)

[muskoka]

Yeah but....... $16K??? You can buy a car for that.

And I'll bet the compression post alternatives are built into every hull as part of the basic engineering. Why would you make bespoke engineering changes on the basis of a few dollars worth of GRP.

And the easy rig has 100sf less sail so by definition it won't perform as well as the sport rig. And any analysis of SA/D will support that - it isn't just my idle opinion.

I have sailed the BB 38.

[Eleven]

The Prout rig is for serious cruiseers. No wet work on the for deck. Remove the roller foresail before the weather worsens. Reef the main to keep speed reasonable (from the cockpit). Drop it and stow as the gale begins (from the cockpit). Eventully roll the stay sail to control speed, rarely necessary. The safest rig by a long long way.
Why would anyone want go on deck when a fluke wave can sweep the decks.
Ron Underwood told me at Southampton 2007 boat show that there is no performance difference between the two rigs but mono men prefer the style of the sport rig. Ron was MD of Prouts and fully understood the aft mounted mast and why it worked. He is now involved with Broad Blue and understands boats must be built to the market as well as his preferences. Prout were unlucky to expand into new premises as the market collapsed for a couple of years. Nothing much wrong with the product, just bad timing.

[Southern Star]

The 'Prout' rig has actually been used by a number of builders of serious cruising cats over the years (including my own Solaris Sunstream 40) and has the following advantages:

1. The mast is stepped at the aft coachouse bulkhead, likely the strongest athwartship point in the hull.
2. All lines are essentially 'led aft', as the halyards etc. automatically terminate at the foreward end of the cockpit.
3. The substantially smaller mainsail permits easier hoisiting without the need for electric winches etc.
4. The larger foretriangle permits a 'solent' or cutter rig, with a dedicated staysail stay further inboard, as it should be. On my boat I have a pre-rigged staysail that is of much heavier and flatter design and construction than one would want on a furling genoa or working jib.
5. Furling foresails are easier to reef (and much cheaper to rig) than furling mainsails.
6. Less reliance on the main means that they are often cut with less roach - this permits my boat to have two backstays instead of none ( as well as four shrouds, the forestay and the staysail stay - decidedly stronger!). It eliminates one of the insurance industries concerns about catamarans - that they lose their rigs more readily than most monohulls.
7. Because it is not a fractional rig with a reduced foretriangle, and because of the ability to fly two foresails, the mast can be lower. This in turn lowers both the center of gravity and the center of effort, increasing stability.

Now for the negatives:

1. It is more difficult to tack a genoa through the gap between the forestay and staysail stay (although on my boat, there is a about a 7 foot gap at the foot of the sail).

2. Windward performance of the rig, as with any cutter or other lower profile rig, is less efficient.

3. Large, flat-top mains are fantastic sails in reaching conditions - and again, will typically outperform a cutter rig.

Brad

[muskoka]

Originally Posted by Eleven

Ron Underwood told me at Southampton 2007 boat show that there is no performance difference between the two rigs but mono men prefer the style of the sport rig.

Actually, the B385 sport rig carries about 825 sf of sail versus the standard rig at 740 sf.

The sport rig carries more sail and it plays to the strength of multi's in reaching and downwind performance. One look at the polars for any cat makes a very strong case for a big powerful mainsail to get the best out of the boat.

There may be a case to made for the Prout rig in terms of cruising safety but it does carry a performance disadvantage.

[catty]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Actually, the B385 sport rig carries about 825 sf of sail versus the standard rig at 740 sf.

The sport rig carries more sail and it plays to the strength of multi's in reaching and downwind performance. One look at the polars for any cat makes a very strong case for a big powerful mainsail to get the best out of the boat.

There may be a case to made for the Prout rig in terms of cruising safety but it does carry a performance disadvantage.

No, One look at the polars of any cat makes a very strong case for a small mainsail and large foresails. For reaching and downwind work you want the CE forward and that's exactly where the big head-sail rig takes it. Whats the point of a large powerful main casting a great big wind shadow over you head-sail just when you want it pulling at its hardest. Low aspect head-sails are less susceptible to apparent-wind changes than tall skinny ones. Just what one wants on a shorthanded cruising boat. Just because the prout rig seems like old technology doesn't mean its bad technology. Remember were cruising.

[Troutbridge]

Well, I own a Broadblue 385. It sails just fine to windward (if I really have to) and the sail plan is easy to manage. When I discussed the options with the agent (who I guess would have got a larger commission if I spent more on the boat) he reckoned that I wouldn't notice the performance difference between the two rigs but I would find the standard rig easier to handle. It's probably true to say the BB isn't the fastest 38 footer on the market, but then it wasn't designed to be.
The original BB 38 was basically the Prout 38, but the 385 has been reworked, slight differences under water but fairly major differences inside. The 'screecher' (gennaker) is impossible to tack, there isn't enough room between the fore-stay and the inner stay. On the other hand, the sail is not really much use at less than 60deg to the apparent wind so it's really an 'off-wind' sail, not a windward one. I haven't had much sailing in a cat with a more 'conventional' rig, but having owned monos with large mainsails I would say the BB rig is easier for short-handed cruising.

[Sunspot Baby]

Genakers aren't tacked as they are rigged forward of the forestay and the lines are led outside the life lines. They are a down wind sail and are properly jibed. You wouldn't tack a spinnaker either.

George

[Troutbridge]

Well, on the BB the screecher is on furling gear & personally to change tacks (tacking or gybing) I'd roll it away because if you gybed there would be a sheet wrapped around the outer forestay and it probably wouldn't be long enough.