# 3rd Reef in Main?



## mainemandean (Dec 21, 2006)

It seems to me that there is some disagreement out there regarding third reefs in the main. (I am on the verge of adding one to our main.)

Many offshore cruising boats have a third reef. I was reading a book by Hal Roth last night, and he believes in three reefs. As does Larry Pardey, Bill Seifert, and others. John Vigor mentions having two "deep reefs," so I am thinking that might be equivalent to three typical reefs.










Here is a photo of our boat. You can see both existing reefs. (The second one is just above the lowest batten.) I believe that the first reef takes away 15% of the sail, then the second takes another 20% of the total, so two reefs means a 35% reduction. Hal Roth talks of getting down to a 60% reduction through three reefs in the main, and my aim is get to a 50%-60% (reduction) range.

My sailmaker does not agree with the premise that at the point you would be using this, the sail would not be up to the task. But he does think that one would want to TIE in that reef directly to the boom through the new clew. He points out that running a reefing line down through a cheek block on the boom creates a weak point: the block. He thinks that that would be the first part to fail: the block would rip off of the boom. If, like my other cheek blocks (for the 1st and 2nd reefs), that block were screwed on, I think he is right. I am curious if anyone has cheek blocks on the boom which are thru-bolted. On the forward end, the third reef would be held by the reefing hook. (Actually a line running down TO the reefing hook, I never use the reefing hooks directly on the sail, and one would likely be unable to get that third tack down to there.)

I woud be interested in getting feedback on this, both pro and con. If you have three reefs, what is your experience regarding plusses and minuses?

At this point I think that I would just have a line secured to the boom, ready to tie down the third-reef clew. And forget the cheek block. I know that putting that tie in would be an adventure, but I still think that having the reef in the sail would be good insurance.

I think that if you want to have a storm trysail, that is great IF you have a separate track for it, and it's ready to go. I think that trying to remove all of the main's slugs, then hoist a trysail in the main's track is just too much work do do in lousy conditions. And I think that taking the main completely off would be virtually impossible, particularly if the main has full battens like mine.

I do not see this as a hurricane rig. I have been in 30-35 knots of wind with just the staysail up. I remember thinking that the boat would probably be happier with a deeply reefed main, and a reef in the staysail. More balance, no lee helm, lower center of effort.

I am looking to have something to go to in 30-40 knots. There is very little chance I would find myself in higher winds than that, with the type of sailing we do. We mostly sail the coast of Maine, but I am planning to sail to Nova Scotia in July. Directly, it is a 200 mile trip. I see my plan as just a (relatively) inexpensive insurance policy, something to have in my pocket.

Comments?

Dean


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

Talk with your sailmaker more. I believe that the 2 reefs you have aren't really that deep. A third wouldn't be a bad idea except I don't know what weight cloth your current main is. It might not be up to snuff, as your sailmaker claims. 

That being said, I think you'll do just fine in 30-35 with what you have, or a #4/blade/ staysail. Yes, a deep reef main and a storm jib would be better, and I agree, I don't like screws holding in hardware on a boom. But how oftern are you forced to sail in 40+ knots? Do you currently plan to do a lot of offshore work? If so, I'd opt for storm sails, and keep what you have.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Well, it depends... I have a third reef in my mainsail. To give you an idea of the depth of the third reef, it basically leaves the sail numbers at the boom. Please note, this is not a photo of my boat and this boat does not have a third reef...










This is a pretty deep third reef, but the sail loft that did the work put in very large reinforcing patches for the third reef.

However, I think the main sail would be fine for even storm conditions with this third reef. One thing to realize is that the reduced sail area from a reefed sail will often have far lower forces on it than the unreefed sail does at lower wind speeds.

As for the reefing setup on my boat, I use a two-line reefing system for all three reefs. The tack reefing points are equipped with blocks that are shackled to a ring on the other side of the sail. This allows the line to pull the tack reefing point down without much friction. The first reef uses the same setup for the clew reefing point. For the second and third reefs, I added a Goiot-made reefing block to the cringle to simplify matters.










The reason I chose to use the Goiot Reefing Blocks for the second and third reefs is to prevent the reefing lines from hanging up on the backstay. When I originally setup the reefing blocks, using the conventional setup I am using for the tack and first reef clew reefing cringles, I found the blocks for the second and third reefing clew cringles would hang on the backstay due to the extended roach of the mainsail. Another advantage of the Goiot blocks is less weight aloft, and the reefing lines for the second and third reefing clews now goes around the sail and helps secure the bunt of the reefed sail to the boom. All six reefing lines are all lead back to a third cabintop winch and are secured using line clutches.

One major reason I opted for the deep third reef instead of a dedicated storm sail is the issue of having to change out the storm sail. Setting a third reef made more sense and can be done very quickly without the need to leave the cockpit in the heavier seas and winds that would necessitate the use of a storm trysail or third reef. The mainsail on a trimaran is generally heavier cloth than that of a similarly sized monohull sail, since a trimaran can't bleed off the excess wind forces by heeling the way a monohull does, and was another consideration for going with a deep third reef instead of a storm trysail.


----------



## Nitro (Feb 4, 2009)

+1 on three reefs. Sailmakers shy away from them but I know plenty of people in the Storm Trysail club that have never flown a trysail. Three reefs is inherently easier.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

IMHP about the time you need a third reef a strorm trisail may be a better path as that kind of wind realy puts a beating on the sail


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

I have three reefs in my main and have been glad to have them all offshore.

No cheek blocks anywhere. I have rings and hooks at the luff and reefing lines at the leech. Careful rigging at the leech means the reefing lines pull the bunt down AND acts as an outhaul.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

SVAuspicious said:


> I have three reefs in my main and have been glad to have them all offshore.
> 
> No cheek blocks anywhere. I have rings and hooks at the luff and reefing lines at the leech. Careful rigging at the leech means the reefing lines pull the bunt down AND acts as an outhaul.


Do the reefing lines go to a block in the end of the boom instead of a cheek block?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

sailingdog said:


> ...
> ...
> .. For the second and third reefs, I added a Goiot-made reefing block to the cringle to simplify matters.
> 
> ...


That makes sense In my previous boat I used also the Goiot reefing blocks. With one of those that problem mentioned by the sailmaiker regarding the possibility of a failing block is not an issue because the Goiot block is inside the clew "ring".

Regards

Paulo


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

That's another reason I used the Goiot blocks for the SECOND and THIRD reefs... The loads are probably low enough on the first reef that it isn't an issue, but on the second and third reefs, that may not be the case. However, the blocks I am using for the other reefing cringles have an SWL of 1760 lbs., so I feel fairly confident they'll manage anything I put them through.



PCP said:


> That makes sense In my previous boat I used also the Goiot reefing blocks. With one of those that problem mentioned by the sailmaiker regarding the possibility of a failing block is not an issue because the Goiot block is inside the clew "ring".
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


----------



## HDChopper (Oct 17, 2010)

LOL Dog ...60% of the time I go to look something up there you are , You my friend are on the ball !

Goiot Reefing Blocks


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

Dean,

The likelihood that you would really need to take a third reef on a Maine to Nova Scotia trip in July is pretty small.

The way I would interpret what your sailmaker (Hallett? Looks like his logo on the sails in your picture; nice Cape Dory, btw) is saying is as follows:

Go ahead and use a cheek block to pull the third clew reefing line in, but once you've got the sail down to the boom, do not rely on that reefing line to hold the sail -- rather take a strong piece of webbing or line and tie it thru the reef cringle and around the boom, then ease the reef line so that this new lashing carries the load. 

That said, if you can gain access to the inside of your boom (is the end open, or can you remove an end cap? Is it big enough that you can reach your arm down inside it?), then why not go ahead and try through-bolting the cheek block, with large fender washers if not a more solid backing plate.


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

PCP said:


> That makes sense In my previous boat I used also the Goiot reefing blocks. With one of those that problem mentioned by the sailmaiker regarding the possibility of a failing block is not an issue because the Goiot block is inside the clew "ring".


Paulo, in the OP's case the sailmaker is not concerned with the block or cringle on the sail failing, rather he is concerned with the cheek block on the boom failing. On the OP's boat, I gather, the reefing line is tied to the boom, runs up through the cringle on the sail, down to a cheek block on the side of the boom, and then forward to a reefing winch near the forward end of the boom (at least that's the way it was rigged on my Dad's Cape Dory).


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

catamount said:


> Go ahead and use a cheek block to pull the third clew reefing line in, but once you've got the sail down to the boom, do not rely on that reefing line to hold the sail -- rather take a strong piece of webbing or line and tie it thru the reef cringle and around the boom, then ease the reef line so that this new lashing carries the load.


That's fine for holding the reef clew down, but not for keeping it back. If you're putting in a second or third reef you probably want to flatten the sail in addition to shortening it. A set of blocks in the aft end of the boom (outhaul, first reef, second reef, third reef) allow you to hold the clews down AND back to depower the sail. There is certainly value to a safety line through the clew and around the boom but I would never ease the reefing line.


----------



## f182 (Jul 18, 2010)

I run 3 reefs on Gallivant she is easy driven and off shore in 30 knots we run the third reef and the storm jib.
We swap the first reef line to the third reef for off shore work this makes the first reef an big step (to the second reef).
Your sail cloth has to be up to the task which yours may not.


----------



## capecodda (Oct 6, 2009)

Dog,

Thanks for the tip on the Goiot reefing blocks. I'll be checking them out.


I agree with Catamount that you are unlikely to need a third reef headed Maine to Nova Scotia, assuming your doing a summer trip. I've burned more diesel on that passage than anything else


----------



## labatt (Jul 31, 2006)

We have a third reef... North of Annapolis installed it for us and it was a regular thing for them. Ours gives us 45% of the main (approximately). We use two line reefing for all three of our reefs, led back to the cockpit. We have a heavy Schaefer cheek block on the boom with oversized screws, and we said "screw weight aloft" and went with a heavy running line for the third reef. We've actually never used it (when we were in 70kts of wind a couple of years ago we reefed to our second reef and ran in front - in retrospect, a third reef would have been a smart idea as we exceeded 9kts of boatspeed on a vessel with a theoretical maximum of 7kts - and that was with very little wave action i.e. we weren't surfing down a wave). Anyway, we do like to know it's there.


----------



## mainemandean (Dec 21, 2006)

Man! Thanks all. I really appreciate all of the input.
Dean


----------



## catamount (Sep 8, 2002)

SVAuspicious said:


> That's fine for holding the reef clew down, but not for keeping it back. If you're putting in a second or third reef you probably want to flatten the sail in addition to shortening it. A set of blocks in the aft end of the boom (outhaul, first reef, second reef, third reef) allow you to hold the clews down AND back to depower the sail. There is certainly value to a safety line through the clew and around the boom but I would never ease the reefing line.


I agree that you need some way to apply outhaul tension.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

*My .02*

Well, I am a fan of 3 reefs. At least on heavier boats. Seems like they are able to keep the main up w/ three reefs and have enough "heft" to not get tossed around as roughly. Been there done that on a 36000 # Swan.

AFA the reefs in the OP. my sailmaker tells me "traditionally" reefs are at 12.5%, 25%, 37.5% of luff length. I might go 15, 30, 45 if I were going in areas of significant tradewinds. Or at least have the 3rd reef a little deeper, like 40-45%. But that's just my gut instinct.

AFA the cheek block. Well, again, on the Swan 48 that's how it was rigged. Once you went to the second reef, you moved the first reefing line to the third reefing cringle. The reefing lines went through a cheek block on the boom and then fwd. They provided enough BACK tension to keep the sail taut, but also provided good DOWN pull so the sail was down on the boom. I have been on some boats that just lead the reefing lines to the sheaves on the end of the boom and they just don't pull DOWN enough. You can only get the sail down to the boom by luffing up and using a sail tie to tie the cringle down the rest of the way. (which, btw you should always do anyway in case the reefing line parts.) And they do sometimes! BTDT2!


----------



## labatt (Jul 31, 2006)

Yes - the cheek block should be about a foot aft of where the third reef cringle is to provide for both "downhaul" and "outhaul" functions.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

labatt said:


> We have a third reef... North of Annapolis installed it for us and it was a regular thing for them. Ours gives us 45% of the main (approximately). We use two line reefing for all three of our reefs, led back to the cockpit. We have a heavy Schaefer cheek block on the boom with oversized screws, and we said "screw weight aloft" and went with a heavy running line for the third reef. We've actually never used it (when we were in 70kts of wind a couple of years ago we reefed to our second reef and ran in front - *in retrospect, a third reef would have been a smart idea as we exceeded 9kts of boatspeed on a vessel with a theoretical maximum of 7kts* - and that was with very little wave action i.e. we weren't surfing down a wave). Anyway, we do like to know it's there.


Ya think???


----------



## Yorksailor (Oct 11, 2009)

I have 4 reefs but only have 1, 2 and 3 rigged and when I was out in 45 knots gusting 55 knots I was wishing I had it rigged as the third reef that gets me down to 30% of the main's size was too much sail.

My 4th reefs substitutes for a storm trysail but my sail is 13 oz cloth and can take the load. Off-shore I will rig reefs 2,3 and 4.


Phil


----------



## mainemandean (Dec 21, 2006)

Now that I am up to speed on reefing for gale force winds, can someone answer a more perplexing question?

HOW do I get this forum to send me email notifications about new posts?

As far as I can deduce, I am set up to get them, but I don't get them.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

mainemandean said:


> HOW do I get this forum to send me email notifications about new posts?
> 
> As far as I can deduce, I am set up to get them, but I don't get them.


Looking into it!


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

Wind force is sail area x speed squared. So if you reef normally at 20 by 30 you need to reduce the sail area by half. If 25 by 35. I am not sure why Sailing dog says the reefed sail will often have less force on it than the unreefed sail would have normally.
Say you normally reef at 20 knots. At 30 you need have half the area or a bit less. Comparing both wind speeds at say 5 and 10 knots less you will have less force on the reefed sail than on an unreefed sail at 20 knots but quite a bit more than at 10-15 knots. At 35 however even with a 50% reef you will have a third more than at 30.
The traditional 37.5% less luff length gives a sail area reduction of about 60% if my arithmetic is right because the foot also reduces.
I estimate that the normal second reef only extends the wind range by 6 knots or so. The advantage of a dedicated sail if you need it is that it can be much stronger, because gusts will tend to quite high and the sea state would tend to reduce the ability to handle them in the usual ways.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Again, it all depends on how deep the reefs are and what wind speeds you put the different reefs in.



chris_gee said:


> Wind force is sail area x speed squared. So if you reef normally at 20 by 30 you need to reduce the sail area by half. If 25 by 35. I am not sure why Sailing dog says the reefed sail will often have less force on it than the unreefed sail would have normally.
> Say you normally reef at 20 knots. At 30 you need have half the area or a bit less. Comparing both wind speeds at say 5 and 10 knots less you will have less force on the reefed sail than on an unreefed sail at 20 knots but quite a bit more than at 10-15 knots. At 35 however even with a 50% reef you will have a third more than at 30.
> The traditional 37.5% less luff length gives a sail area reduction of about 60% if my arithmetic is right because the foot also reduces.
> I estimate that the normal second reef only extends the wind range by 6 knots or so. The advantage of a dedicated sail if you need it is that it can be much stronger, because gusts will tend to quite high and the sea state would tend to reduce the ability to handle them in the usual ways.


----------



## cormeum (Aug 17, 2009)

We have 3 reefs. Our set up is to have a seperate cheek block and bail for each line. we also have a seperate rope clutch for each line but a common winch on the boom to snug the reef up. the bail is (almost) under the corresponding cringle but the cheek block is set aft to provide tension.
We also have one reef for the mizzen. 

We do also have a trysail track for a really teeny trysail (equivalent of a 4th reef). I'd think that we'd only use it for over 60 kts. or very high wind heaving to. - haven't had to (fortunately)  

That said, I'd probably go with stays'l and reefed mizzen if I wanted to heave to in high winds.


----------

