# In-mast furling thoughts?



## msmith132 (May 18, 2008)

I'm looking at buying a 2001 Hunter 306 or 320 as my first sailboat, to be used for local coastal cruising (Nova Scotia). I see in-mast furling on some models. Can somebody enlighten me on the pros and cons? Recommended or not? Thanks.

Michael Smith
Chester, N.S.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Well, you'll get the full range of responses on this one!!

I'm in the anti furling main court.. If things go wrong with the mechanics you've got real problems, (but reliability is much improved of late, I suppose) Barring problems, the convenience of setting and dousing sail is the only "pro" that I can see.

Mostly I don't like the sacrifice in sail area, the loss of the roach that adds to power, control and pointing ability. Or the look for that matter. Added weight aloft, more complicated (and expensive) rig etc etc.

On the other hand I can see the sense of a boom-furled main - here at least you can still carry battens, have a properly roachy sail and get the convenience of the roller furling.. all at a price, of course.

With many models lately it seems like in-mast furling is not even an option anymore... it's the way they come these days.


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

I remember a nice saturday at Kingmans Marina on Cape Cod two summers ago. As I enjoyed a morning cup of coffee on the patio of the Chart House, overlooking the mooring field, I noticed a fellow on one boat, standing on the boom and wrestling wih his mainsail. His furling main was jammed part way in the mast. Looked like he had a mess on his hands.

So I took my boat out for a wonderful afternoon on Buzzards Bay, bright and sunny and 15 knots SW, it doesn't get better than that. 

After returning my mooring, I stopped again at the Chart House for an early evening cocktail. As I settled into the patio chair to watch the sun set over my boat, I noticed several fellows on one boat, clustered around the mast, wrestling with the mainsail jammed in the mast. Recognizing it was the same boat from the morning, I said to myself that I was glad I didn't have a furling main, just another un-necessary convenience that will most likely find a way to inconvenience you.


----------



## msmith132 (May 18, 2008)

Thanks Faster, great info to a newbie.

Michael


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

msmith132 said:


> I'm looking at buying a 2001 Hunter 306 or 320 as my first sailboat, to be used for local coastal cruising (Nova Scotia). I see in-mast furling on some models. Can somebody enlighten me on the pros and cons? Recommended or not? Thanks.
> 
> Michael Smith
> Chester, N.S.


There are pros and cons to in mast furling and your satisfation with it will depend on how you plan to use your boat.

A couple of the pro's: 
No hauling up the main so less work, messing with a sail cover, sail ties etc.
Quick furling with the ability to adjust your main to the conditions(so long as everything works)

Some of the cons:
Requires a relatively flat cut sail usually with no battens (though some now have vertical battens) and less roach compared to a traditional sail. . (You'll give up some performance)
Potential to jam (probably at the worst time)
More weight aloft.
May be difficult to furl except on a particular tack.

Lots of crusing sailors have in mast furling and are happy with it, but if you have any racer in you, you might be unhappy with the reduced performance.

If the physical effort is a consideration, there are other options to simplify handling the mainsail like a batt car system coupled with a stack-pack type sail cover.


----------



## Plumper (Nov 21, 2007)

I'm also in the "anti" camp.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

In mast furling. WHY?


----------



## donhallmon (Nov 25, 2007)

*SAiling is sailing*

My view is simply if you like to sail, buy a boat with sails. If you don't, buy a Trawler.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Never thought I would own one till I bought a boat that had it.
You get used to the convieniences real quick.
Jammed coming out once in three years. Not a problem, rolled it back in and she freed herself. Most problems of jamming are caused by operator error........ ie rolling too much sail into the mast.

We now love ours.... Not a racer, we are cruisers.
If your cruising I think you will be a good fit.

Pro's...... you only raise the main once a season. Easily reefed to any size you might need. less effort required set sail and reef.

Next question, all those that are on the negative side, have you ever sailed on a cruising boat with one?


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

bubb2 said:


> In mast furling. WHY?


Depending on the size of the sail, the weight of the sail is a real issue as you get older or if you have shoulder or arm issues. So size does matter. 
Certainly ease of furling if your short handed is very helpful. I can furl, shake out and furl again as needed very quickly. Regarding reliability, sure they can jam but the technology is pretty good these days.

I couldn't agree more that if your performance sailing or long distance cruising A furling main is the wrong choice but for coastal stuff, I think it's fine.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

One other problem with in-mast furling that hasn't been mentioned...some of them howl quite loudly. This is caused by the wind blowing across the slot in the mast...  Can't do much about the noise when you have the problem.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the in-mast furling systems for the most part... I've seen problems like SF describes... and that makes me glad I have slab reefing, which is pretty foolproof.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

What TJK fails to mention is that he recently shredded his in-mast furling mainsail...  and didn't want us to mention that in this thread...  Was the sail damage due to the fact that it was a in-mast furling mainsail... not enough info to say...but he's keeping mum on it... so draw your own conclusions. 



sailortjk1 said:


> Never thought I would own one till I bought a boat that had it.
> You get used to the convieniences real quick.
> Jammed coming out once in three years. Not a problem, rolled it back in and she freed herself. Most problems of jamming are caused by operator error........ ie rolling too much sail into the mast.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bryan53 (Feb 19, 2007)

The 2005 Hunter 33 I sail has in-mast furling (Selden). Overall I enjoy it since furling and reefing is so easy. A couple of important considerations to avoid jams - halyard tension is critical and furling is smoother on starboard tack (headed almost but not quite into the wind) because of the slot shape and the fact that the sail winds up counterclockwise looking down from the top - relevant only if the Hunter you're considering has the same type of Selden furler.


----------



## senatorcongressman (Jun 20, 2007)

midlifesailor said:


> ...Lots of crusing sailors have in mast furling and are happy with it, but if you have any racer in you, you might be unhappy with the reduced performance...


While we're on the subject... I kinda assumed that about the in-mast furled main, and wondered the same, about forestay furled head sails. They seem to be much more common and very convenient, but I've never been on a boat with one. Do you take a performance hit in that case as well? In looking around it seems most furled heads are of modest size (~110-120%), is this because you don't want to fly a bigger genny, which would probably spend most if its time partially furled?


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Senatorcongressman-

You don't take the same kind of performance hit with a roller furling headsail that you do with a in-mast furling main. 

The main has to be modified in fairly negative ways to work with in-mast furling—less roach, no battens, flatter cut, etc. These changes effect the main sail's effectiveness at all times, not just when reefed. That isn't the case with a roller-furled headsail, which works as well as a non-roller furled headsail of the same size, if properly cut and made. Also, reefing an in-mast furling mainsail leaves the sail with a less than desirable shape, when compared to slab reefing. 

A roller furling headsail will have some performance issues once it is reefed more than about 25-30%, since it will start to lose shape and have more problems pointing well, etc. A 150% RF Genny will reef down to a 110% size fairly well, but be less efficient if reefed down any further.


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

As dog pointed out, there is a performance hit with a RF headsail, but its primarily due to the disturbance of the airflow along the foil of the furler rather than any compromises made in the way the sail is constructed. Also, there is a safety benefit, because you don't have to leave the cockpit to deploy, reef or douse a RF headsail. As for sizes, RF headsails of around 150% are very common and I wouldn't want any more than that.

Also as Sailingdog mentioned, there is only so far you can reef a RF headsail and maintain any kind of shape. There are padded luff options (probably a bit more performance loss there as well) to help keep a good shape in a reefed headsail and increase the amount of reef before the sail looses shape. Still a RF genoa offers options between being fully out and reefed to the point it no longer works. You don't get that with a hank on. You probably have a choice of perhaps a couple of other sails that likely leave you with a little too much or a little too little. Also you'll have to go forward on deck to make the switch.

If there are big seasonal variations where you sail or you'll be cruising to distant areas, a couple of different sized RF headsails will provide you with the ability to adjust for a wide range of wind conditions only having to change sails on rare occasions. Most cruisers, and increasingly racing sailors, are accepting the slight performance penalty for the added convenience and safety of the RF headsail.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

sailingdog said:


> What TJK fails to mention is that he recently shredded his in-mast furling mainsail...  and didn't want us to mention that in this thread...  Was the sail damage due to the fact that it was a in-mast furling mainsail... not enough info to say...but he's keeping mum on it... so draw your own conclusions.


Not due to inmast furling.
It was operator error. We would have been fine if I had not been distracted at the helm by trying to put on a PFD.

Accidental Jibe in extreme condition. The sail blew out when she swung over to the other side. I belive my sail must have had some previous damage or wear. I don't think it had anything to do with the furler. If all the conditions were all the same a conventional main would have gone as well.

What I was not entierly truthful about, was the fact that I have a bit of a project coming up to remove the shreds of the torn sail from inside the mast, I guess that would be a con.

On the pro side, when the sail did fail, All I simply had to do was roll the torn sail into the mast. It would have been a whole hell of a lot worse to try and drop and secure a flogging, shredded sail.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

If the wear that caused the saile to blow out as due to chafe from the in-mast furling system, then that would be a con of the in-mast furling.... 

I would be curious to hear what the cause of the sail blowing out is, just for future reference. Also, I agree that removing it is going to be a pain, but that dealing with it by rolling it up was easier at the time...but you'll be paying for that ease now...


----------



## DrB (Mar 29, 2007)

*Caveat....Never had or used one*

I would not want one because of the cons mentioned so far. Also, I really don't get the convenience factor that some are mentioning as a plus. Folks have said that it makes "raising"/"lower" and reefing a big sail easier. If your like me and hump the main up and down with a standard manual winch and find this event too hard, why not invest in a electric winch to help with this chore? The mechanical complexities of a mast furler are just another thing to break on a boat that has about 10,000 things already that can break. If this breaks, you're often SOL with a sail partially unfurled or you need to unstep/restep to fix.

I don't think reefing on my sail is too complicated, so that wouldn't be a selling point for me. I have marked my halyard to the reef points, so the process is head into the wind, autopilot, roll in headsail, lower the main to the reef point, secure that tack, back to the cockpit, pull leech side reefing line and secure, bear off slightly with auto, unroll headsail, full off auto, correct heading. That's with me. If I have a helper, things go about three times as fast.

Flaking a sail by myself is a little more challenging, especially in strong winds, but I can get it done, albeit not as pretty as with two people.

Because you lose a lot of performance with in-mast furler, I don't understand why anyone really likes them. Suppose you lose a half to full knot of speed because the in-furler sail shape. If you average 4 kts on a 20 nm trip as opposed to 5 kts, you it takes you 1 hr longer to get to your destination. Over the course of a few days, that's a lot of time. You're already going slow enough, why go even slower?

Put me into the "NO" camp.

DrB


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

sailingdog said:


> If the wear that caused the saile to blow out as due to chafe from the in-mast furling system, then that would be a con of the in-mast furling....


Dog, Honestly, I have been wondering the same thing.
Friction from rolling and unrolling in the mast may have caused premature wear. It is possible.


----------



## vsailor (Jun 5, 2007)

I'm in my second summer with a Catalina 310 with in-mast furling. I wasn't looking for it, it was one of the features that came with the boat!

I do approx 75% of my sailing single handed and find it convenient furling and reefing from the cockpit. I actually really like being able to reef the mainsail on the fly!

I'm sure I loose performance, but I just want to go sailing on Lake Ontario and leave my worries behind for a little while!

Would I take it on an extended ocean cruise? Hmmmm, good question.

Val


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Just something to consider. The stitching on the sail could be chafed by where it enters the mast, when sailing with the sail partially furled... and if the stitching damage contributed to the sail blowing out...it would be a serious strike against in-mast furling IMHO.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

DrB said:


> Because you lose a lot of performance with in-mast furler, Suppose you lose a half to full knot


I agree with a lot of what you say, but that statement I don't believe is accurate. A couple of tenths of a knot or perhaps a half, but not a full knot.

And, now they are making Furling Mains that do have some roach in them with vertical battens.

I am no way saying that they are for everybody,but for general cruising, they are a nice convienience.

Again, I ask the question, to all of the people here that are on the negative side who are knocking them, have you ever sailed on a cruising boat with one? Have you ever experienced sailing one or are you knocking them with out any first hand actual experience?


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

sailingdog said:


> Just something to consider. The stitching on the sail could be chafed by where it enters the mast, when sailing with the sail partially furled... and if the stitching damage contributed to the sail blowing out...it would be a serious strike against in-mast furling IMHO.


Well, I figure we got eight years out of her instead of maybe ten.
I don't know??


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I've sailed on boats with them and had to fix them... does that count???


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Of course it does, just seems that a lot of the negative comments are coming for people who have never actually tried using one.

All of the _cruisers,_ who sail with them on a regular basis, seem to like the convieniences and ease that they add to their experince.

Some might even say that it gets them more time on the water because of the ease in which it is to actually go sailing. Try flaking a main sail by yourself. It ain't gonna happen.

BTW, are we done yet?


----------



## senatorcongressman (Jun 20, 2007)

SD and midlife- Thanks for clearing that up. So a headsail properly designed for RF use would be, much or marginally better than a hank-on headsail adapted for RF use? I ask because I've looked at older boats that have been converted to RF and have had the sail modified. One of those was a 25' Catalina with 150% genoa converted to RF.

Extended apologies for veering off topic slightly.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Sencgman-

Yes, IMHO, a sail designed specifically for roller furling will generally be a bit better in terms of performance both reefed and unreefed than a hanked-on sail that was adapted to a roller furling unit.

TJK—

In terms of full disclosure, most of the in-mast furling units I've dealt with were older ones, and the newer ones may be somewhat better and more reliable, less finicky... don't know since I don't own one...nor normally do I sail on boats that have them.


----------



## Brezzin (Dec 4, 2006)

When you talk about wear and tear on a mainsail, I have often wondered if just the act of flaking the sail on the boom contributes to ware and to what degree. We always can't make the perfect flake and if we do were folding on the same spot and the sail ties can be often to tight. That has to breaking threads in the sail. I would venture that rolling furler may in fact be less abusive on the sail than flaking it on the boom. I don't know for sure and only time will tell.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

*mainsail furling*

While I haven't CRUISED w/ a boat so equipped... the Lippincott 30 my club sold last year had a behind the mast vertical furler. I found this beneficial only in that in strong winds (22,23 knots +) it made it easy to reef. I took out a lady friend one blustery day and felt comfortable knowing I could set whatever amount of sail area was appropriate for the conditions (which got worse!) and still maintain control of the boat. I would NOT have taken one of our other boats out on that particular day.

That said, I personally dislike the mast furling for all the reasons stated by previous posters. Weight, looks, efficiency, etc.

This same boat was NOT a fun boat to sail in light air and I'm convinced the reason is the inefficiency of the air flow and reduced sail area.

I don't mind furling headsails but I remain a bit of a traditionalist. Same w/ GPS and autopilot; they have their place but to rely on them 95% of the time means your HEAD and other senses aren't where they need to be.

And if I have to give up sailing one or two times a season b/c my seamanship skills tell me not to take a traditionally reefed boat out... so be it.

Dave, .02 poorer


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I have owned both. I currently have inmast.

I think it has been well written up all the pros and cons, but for your use it is probably a good buy. I think you will sail the boat more - esp if singlhanding. In times when you might not pull out the main if you had trad mainsail, you will now. 

I will point out one very big positive of in mast or in boom that has not been mentioned: You CAN do everything from the cockpit. You do not leave it to help flake the main, hook up the halyard, help pull up the halyard, pull out the reefing lines, feed the T's on the track, etc.

Thus, as it has been touted as "not safe" for long range cruising because if she hangs up you cannot get her down, I also might offset that with the fact you are always in the cockpit (when it does not foul). You can single MUCH easier with it, and safer too.

I will say that my wife loves it... I am not sure that I do. The jury is still out for me. Going back, I would opt for in boom or a batt car system on a traditional main. I have a nagging concern about it jamming offshore in a blow and what I would do. Our intention is long range cruising, though. But, I will say that ours has never jammed. I also think if you do it right, your chances of a jam seem to be pretty low. I think the jams happen when you keep the vang or mainsheet too tight when reefing her in. You should be able to do everything by hand with little or winching (AND NO ELECTRIC WINCHING!!). If you do, you probably won't have a hang-up.

I wrote a thread on this a while back about the proper steps to get it in/out. Not sure where it is now, or if it is necessary to this conversation, but worth taking a look at if you do get the system.

If you enjoy easy sailing or have back problems or general strength issues, I would urge you to get a inmast. You might even find the wife enjoys taking out the main now too. It is INFINETLY easier to get out than a traditional main. I hauled dad's main up last weekend and remembered again how much I dreaded doing that. Inmast will spoil you that way. 

In summary, go ahead and get it. It will be great for your purpose and doubtful you would be dissapointed with its negatives anyways.

- CD


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

First of all, you will be sailing in a venue that is known for its sudden changes in weather from docile to vengeful. This is the worst kind of place to use an inmast furler because a HIHO jamb can be very dangerous. I suggest that you need a really reliable furling system and in-mast furlers while improved some over the years simply isn't fast and reliable enough, at least as compared to a two line reefing system, which allows quick on the fly reefing from the cockpit without having to carefully hold a course, a real issue with in-mast furlers which require careful course holding and line tension during heavy air reefing . 

As I have mentioned here before, I had a series of conversations with very experienced delivery skippers, who, having had life threatening experiences with jambed in-mast furlers refuse to take them offshore. 

As most have mentioned, there is a real loss in sailing ability, but what hasn't been said is that it is extremely difficult to get a proper furled sail shape for heavy air, and that over time, while reefed the head of the rolled up sail creeps toward the foot making sail shape worse. It si critical to maintain proper sail (flat) sail shape in heavy air, to reduce heeling, leeway and weather helm while maintaining control and the ability to stay out of trouble. The self-adjusting nature of a furled mainsail (or jib for that matter) that comes from the layers of rolled up sail creeping over the layers below, defeats that need for flat shape, and in the case of an in-mast furler is one of several prime causes of HIHO jambs. 

In talking to sailmakers, inmast furlers greatly shorten the life of the sail as compared to conventional battened sails.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Hey guys, a quick comment.
It was nice that we could all get together and discuss this in a cival manner. I believe that both sides have said what they wanted to say and that both sides were willing to listen to the other side.

That does not always happen around here!

I completely see both sides of the discussion.

One more thing that does puzzle me, one of the cons as stated is that they are not estetically pleasing. I don't understand this? Other than the slot in the back of my mast, my mast looks the same as any other. What is so unpleasing about the looks of a RF mast? Or are you talking about the sail with little or no or negative roach?

That is the one comment I don't understand.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

sailortjk1 said:


> ...One more thing that does puzzle me, one of the cons as stated is that they are not estetically pleasing. I don't understand this? Other than the slot in the back of my mast, my mast looks the same as any other. What is so unpleasing about the looks of a RF mast? Or are you talking about the sail with little or no or negative roach?
> 
> That is the one comment I don't understand.


For me, the triangular section at the clew that is UV covered (often dark blue sunbrella) takes away from the aesthetics of the sail. Obviously with in-mast furling the "rig" doesn't look any different. (External behind the mast furling is another thing altogether!)

But watching a boat with in mast furling approach from a distance it looks like they chopped off the last couple of feet of the main. To my eye, coupled with the hollow leech, that just looks wrong....


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

I have done numerous deliveries on boats equipped with in mast furlers. 
I don't know how much speed you lose on average but unless you are racing, I doubt that you would notice. 
Most of the problems people experience with these system are indeed operator error. But a stretched out sail will also lead to problems. 
The last boat I delivered was a Hunter 45' with a Selden rig. The owner was having problems and asked us to look into it. I had our local sailmaker take a look at the shape of the sail and he declared that it needed work. 
After the sailmaker fixed it, it performed flawlessly for the rather rough delivery. 
A couple of weeks after I returned home, the owner called and said one of his guests on the boat was having trouble again. My guess is O E.
As far as the threads chaffing, well of course. They rub on one side or the other of the slot every time it comes out or in. Restitch more often. 
The old Hood in mast systems used to howl like a banshee. They even came up with a device that you could haul up the slot to stop the noise. 
The newer systems do not seem to have the same problem. Probably because of the off center slot.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Faster said:


> For me, the triangular section at the clew that is UV covered (often dark blue sunbrella) takes away from the aesthetics of the sail. Obviously with in-mast furling the "rig" doesn't look any different. (External behind the mast furling is another thing altogether!)
> 
> But watching a boat with in mast furling approach from a distance it looks like they chopped off the last couple of feet of the main. To my eye, coupled with the hollow leech, that just looks wrong....


They make sunbrella in white for those that care.


----------



## cpa2 (May 31, 2007)

I delivered a boat with a selden furling spar. I found the r/f sail to be at least 2 times more difficult to unfurl, and reef than my conventional selden rig. I dont see the RF advantage. I can hoist my main with out a winch (S&S34) and only if their is a bit of breeze need a winch to get the desired luff tension. Then reefing and dropping is even easier(lazy jacks) and gravity. I used to do rigging work and always hated dealing with furling mains. Personally i would not buy a boat with a furling mast.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

I agree with everyone that said "NO". I sail mostly offshore and you never know what weather you're going to encounter. The last thing you need is one more gizmo to deal with, or a mast that's not as strong as what you hoped for, when the weather really gets bad.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

cpa2 said:


> I delivered a boat with a selden furling spar. I found the r/f sail to be at least 2 times more difficult to unfurl, and reef than my conventional selden rig. I dont see the RF advantage. I can hoist my main with out a winch (S&S34) and only if their is a bit of breeze need a winch to get the desired luff tension. Then reefing and dropping is even easier(lazy jacks) and gravity. I used to do rigging work and always hated dealing with furling mains. _*Personally i would not buy a boat with a furling mast*_.


That sentiment sound remarkably like the "I'll never buy one of those Roller Fouling things for my headsail" remarks that I used to hear so often not so many years ago.

They make advances in designs and material all the time. 
What you experienced in 1978 when you tried that new Stream-Stay doesn't equate to a brand new 2008 furling system.

Keep an open mind.

As far as the problems that you experienced on your delivery, you could have had, as was mentioned already, a variety of issues in play that prevented the system from performing flawlessly.
Without having been there, one could only guess. But as I said earlier, the majority of problems arise from operator error. 
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be nice if they weren't foolproof and that you would never birdcage the sail inside the enclosure. Or that you wouldn't have any problem with boom angle or outhaul tension. Unfortunately, thats where we are today with in mast furlers. You have to get to know how your system works. 
You have to be sensitive to it's idiosyncrasies.

Part of the job of a delivery crew is to be familiar with and comfortable with the gear and systems on the boat. If there is a problem with something as major as the mainsail, it should be addressed before the delivery takes place.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

johnshasteen said:


> I agree with everyone that said "NO". I sail mostly offshore and you never know what weather you're going to encounter. The last thing you need is *one more gizmo* to deal with, or a mast that's not as strong as what you hoped for, when the weather really gets bad.


Do you have a headsail furler?


----------



## christyleigh (Dec 17, 2001)

knothead said:


> But as I said earlier, the majority of problems arise from operator error.


Valid statement..... But.... When are the chances for Operator Error the highest ?? - When it hits the fan and you need it most.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

christyleigh said:


> Valid statement..... But.... When are the chances for Operator Error the highest ?? - When it hits the fan and you need it most.


Absolutely correct. But we were in the same place with headsail furling not too many years ago. And now they are standard equipment.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Yes, but I think the two devices are very different...and that headsail furling is pretty much here to stay, but that mainsail in-mast furling is a passing fad.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> Yes, but I think the two devices are very different...and that headsail furling is pretty much here to stay, but that mainsail in-mast furling is a passing fad.


I remember them saying the same thing about headsail furlers.


----------



## msmith132 (May 18, 2008)

Thanks to all, that's exactly the type of feedback I was looking for. There is a bit of racer in me (at least I race motorcycles), so I'm sure I'd prefer the best performance option. Thanks again folks.

Michael


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

knothead said:


> Do you have a headsail furler?


Sure, but it's a StreamStay (the strongest furler ever built) with a choice of a 110 or 130, both Hood heavy-duty dacron, glued and double-stitched seams, heavy furling lines and slight padding for sail reduction in a blow. Paloma has weathered two Force 10 storms (one for 48 hours and the most recent, 36 hours) without a problem with the headsail. However, even my "non-furling" main (also a Hood heavy duty dacron sail with triple reef points) gave me problems in the March '08 storm - I won't try to imagine what problems I would have had with a furling main and a less-sturdy mast - especially since in that gale, both the port and starboard upper mainstays came loose.


----------



## cpa2 (May 31, 2007)

Knothead:

edit: When i was working as a rigger in st. pete, I remember my boss was really into headsail furlers, he kept trying to get me to install one on my boat. but i stood strong! 

hahaha whats up!


----------



## TejasSailer (Mar 21, 2004)

There seems to be concern about folks who have no experience with in-the-mast furling. My experience is limited - two weeks on a Beneteau 361. The result is that unless the technology improves significantly, I'll not consider in-the-mast-furling for not only performance but also the so-called safety reasons.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

We have Selden in mast furling on out Caliber 47LRC, and although we were a bit nervous when we first ordered it, it has performed flawlessly since 1999. As they say with in mast furling, you may not sail as well, but you sail a lot more! Actually, since our boat is in the caribbean, and the trades are almost never below 25 knots, we haven't suffered any sailing performance anyway.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

I am late to this discussion and will be brief. 
I think in mast furling is fine for protected waters and recreational sailing where a mal-function is unlikely to be catastrophic and the benefits accrue. 
I would never take in mast furling to sea...just too much risk for me. 
Not much has been said about in-boom which I have and which eliminates ALL the risks of in-mast, gives equal performance to standard sails and is easy to operate. The only downside is cost. 
As a cruiser or recreational sailor I would opt for a stack-pack or similar if I could not afford in boom.


----------



## ebs001 (May 8, 2006)

Cam, while this may not be your experience, 2 people I talked to regarding in-boom mainsails expressed problems with the boom/mast angle saying it had to be absolutely perfect or thay couldn't get the sail up or down. Have you heard of this problem occurring?


----------



## Vasco (Sep 24, 2006)

*In mast furling is great*

Before I bought my new boat in 2004 I was in the "traditional" camp. My only experience with in mast furling was watching frustrated sailors trying to un-jam them! My new boat came with in-mast furling. I was taught by the dealer on how to *properly* furl and unfurl the sail. I cruise on this boat six months a year so since 2004 I've put a lot of miles on her. I really love the the furling main! Don't know how I went twenty years without one. The performance of the unbattened, hollow roach sail is not the best in light airs but luckily my sailing grounds (Bahamas) usually has adequate wind, in fact, most of the time, more than you need so the infinite reefing comes in handy. The best part is watching my sailing buddies flake and cover their mains when we reach an anchorage. I'm sitting in the cockpit with a drink in my hand. Most of the cruisers I've met would prefer a furling main. Hope I'm not tempting fate but I've never had a jam, in strong conditions I head up to furl and unfurl, in lighter conditions it can be done on any point of sail.


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

camaraderie said:


> I am late to this discussion and will be brief.
> I think in mast furling is fine for protected waters and recreational sailing where a mal-function is unlikely to be catastrophic and the benefits accrue.
> I would never take in mast furling to sea...just too much risk for me.
> Not much has been said about in-boom which I have and which eliminates ALL the risks of in-mast, gives equal performance to standard sails and is easy to operate. The only downside is cost.
> As a cruiser or recreational sailor I would opt for a stack-pack or similar if I could not afford in boom.


Unfortunately, in boom mainsail furling isn't something you're likely to find on a used production boat. For that reason I haven't looked into it that much but it does seem to address most of the issues that inclined me to put in mast furling at the bottom of my priority list. Basically, if we had found a boat that met all our other wishes but that had in mast mainsail furling we probably would have gone for it, but it wasn't something we were looking for.

If in boom furling was as common as in mast, it probably would have become at least a nice to have, if not a must.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Midlife...yep...it has really only been "perfected" in the last 5-8 years and is relatively expensive so pretty limited availability on the used market. If the new boat guys would start offering it on boats perhaps we'll see more of it down the road at decent prices. Right now it is really an add on for existing boats or custom jobs and best done when needing to replace a mainsail anyway.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*In Mast Furling*

We ahve Selden in mast furling on our Caliber 47LRC and are completely satisfied with it. Although we were nervous at first having heard the usual horror stories, we've had far less trouble with it than we had with a traditional mainsail on our previous boat. As they say, with a furling mainsail, you may not sail as well (although in the Caribbean where we are and the winds are always at least 15kts, and most folks have at least one reef as a matter of course, that's not an issue), you do sail much more often - it is so easy to put up the main, there is very little inclination to get lazy!


----------



## Melrna (Apr 6, 2004)

Just my crazy .02 worth. I will agree with what is said in both camps. I have sailed both and like both. Just depends on what type of sailing I am doing. 
For this person who started this thread, we forget it is a small-mid size boat. It is NOT a ocean cruising boat. I repeat it is NOT a ocean going boat. Is a coastal cruising boat at best. Second he said he is a newbie. Lastly, it is NOT a racing boat. With all of those put together the Hunter boat in question will work great for him. It will sail just like the manufacture set out the specs for. He will have many great days of sailing and impressing the ladies. I will go out on the limb and say the lady/ladies will love it and he might even get lucky. 
For the traditionalist, (for which I am one), I just test sailed a Caliber 38 with brand new batten car mainsail. I was extremely hard to get up and it took two of us to get it down. My point is all sails require maintenance and care. If they are not, whether RF or traditional you will have problems.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

> He will have many great days of sailing and impressing the ladies. I will go out on the limb and say the lady/ladies will love it and he might even get lucky.
> For the traditionalist, (for which I am one),


Mel.... I'm sooooo confused. Do I need to put a furling main on the boat to have a chance w/ you  or do I go buy a Concordia yawl or similar classic, traditional boat???

FWIW, I tend to be more traditional too, (at least when it comes to boats!). But I guess could let you be the captain as long as you let me tell you where to go. Oh wait, I do that every day at work!


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Fo what it's worth cos most of the points have been covered already but....

We'll probably be in the inmast camp some time this year so I'll be interested to report back this time next year.

My gut feeling is anti but otoh I resisted headsail furling until we bought a boat that already had it. Cannot see me ever going back to hanks.

I'm wondering if I'll feel the same after a few years with inmast main.

Can't say I like the look of the larger section mast but as for weight aloft there is so much crap attached to the modern cruiser's mast that I doubt the weight of the upper swivel is going to make a hell of a lot of difference. 

The chafe issue concerns me. Maybe my skill will improve with practice when furling and unfurling but for now it really upsets me to see that sail rubbing against the mast as it goes in/out. Brrr...not nice.

Have to say though that with a decent winch and good purchase I've never found raising/lowering a main to be much of a problem.

Then again I've never sailed a 50'er.


----------



## clet (Jun 24, 2008)

I have in mast furling main.
Is there an easy way to put numbers on the main for racing?


----------



## petmac (Feb 27, 2007)

*Inmast furling*

When I bought my current boat,it had Selden inmast furling which was a fairly new refit. After sailing the boat for one summer,I replaced the mast. The boats performance suffered with the furling main.No roach and terrible shape to the main. The rig was noisy at night when there was a bit of wind. There was too much weight aloft which made the boat a bit tender. 
I now have a new lighter (much lighter) mast with a decent set of sails and she's a different boat. Installed Dutchman flaking system which works very well and double single line reefing with lines leading to the cockpit. 
Michael,if you think you might want to race,then don't buy a boat with inmast furling.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

clet said:


> I have in mast furling main.
> Is there an easy way to put numbers on the main for racing?


Your sailmaker should be able to supply you with stick-on numbers. Someone will have to go aloft to apply them if you don't want to drop the sail.


----------

