# Sta-Lok or ?



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

I have no experience with user-installed wire terminals like Sta-Lok, Noresman or others. I have to shorten my running backstays and thought that it would be a good opportunity to learn about these. Does anyone have recommendations about which ones are easiest to use, most reliable - are they basically the same or are there significant differences that I should know about?

Thanks


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I like the Hayn HiMods, since they're a bit simpler to use IMHO. They have a crown ring that the wire ends slip into, and it is easier to fit them properly than the StaLocks or Norseman fittings. None of the various brands is all that difficult to use though.


----------



## Paul_L (Sep 16, 2004)

killarney_sailor said:


> I have no experience with user-installed wire terminals like Sta-Lok, Noresman or others. I have to shorten my running backstays and thought that it would be a good opportunity to learn about these. Does anyone have recommendations about which ones are easiest to use, most reliable - are they basically the same or are there significant differences that I should know about?
> 
> Thanks


Sta-Loks are reasonably easy to install and last a long time. If this is running backs you are doing, why not switch to rope for them? Less chafe on the sails, long life, probably cheaper to install then wire. Look at lines like Amsteel.

Paul L


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

killarney_sailor said:


> I have no experience with user-installed wire terminals like Sta-Lok, Noresman or others. I have to shorten my running backstays and thought that it would be a good opportunity to learn about these. Does anyone have recommendations about which ones are easiest to use, most reliable - are they basically the same or are there significant differences that I should know about?
> 
> Thanks


Check out the Suncor quick attach fittings before you make your final decision. Probably the simplest to install and from what I understand, one of the strongest.


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

*I already have the wire*



Paul_L said:


> Sta-Loks are reasonably easy to install and last a long time. If this is running backs you are doing, why not switch to rope for them? Less chafe on the sails, long life, probably cheaper to install then wire. Look at lines like Amsteel.
> 
> Paul L


The wire stays are already there and in virtually new condition. For some reason, the POs of my boat (Bristol 45.5) led the runners through a turning block (not a particuarly good lead at that) and then to secondary cockpit winches. I am going to use tackles for the runners and need to make each about 18" shorter. I might consider Amsteel or something similar for a future update


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Hi-mods are very easy to install and unlike the other terminals they are completely reusable. I had to buy one Norseman fitting due to a backorder at Hayn... Compared to the hi-mods it was way more complicated to install and had a lesser finish quality to it. 

But for running backstays: go synthetic. I have had a set of amsteel stays that have aged quite well. They are easy to splice, very low stretch, and best of all easy to take down and stow bellow.


----------



## Valiente (Jun 16, 2006)

I have dacron running backstays and blocks, Bruce, as well as twin wire stays...probably overkill. I also have Sta-Loks all around that are really solid looking.

I think between Sta-Lok, Hayn, and Norseman, it's the rigger that makes the difference, not the terminal. I have rarely heard of one of these terminals failing unless, you know, the wire was falling to bits.

I have heard of Suncor in terms of chain and shackles, not terminals, so can't comment.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

If you're doing the installation yourself, the Hayn HiMod are far simpler to use... the crown ring makes getting the wire seated properly much simpler. 

If you're paying a rigger to do it... you're short-changing yourself, since you're not going to have a rigger if the rigging fails out on the water. Also, if you go with the Norseman or StaLoks....carry extra cones. 



Valiente said:


> I have dacron running backstays and blocks, Bruce, as well as twin wire stays...probably overkill. I also have Sta-Loks all around that are really solid looking.
> 
> I think between Sta-Lok, Hayn, and Norseman, it's the rigger that makes the difference, not the terminal. I have rarely heard of one of these terminals failing unless, you know, the wire was falling to bits.
> 
> I have heard of Suncor in terms of chain and shackles, not terminals, so can't comment.


----------



## RichP (Jul 20, 2008)

My local rigger recomends Sta-Lok over Norseman for the self fitting, i can't remember the exact reason, but it was something about Norseman having a slight flaw that would let them split in some circumstances or something. I would take that with a pinch of salt because Sta-Loks cost more here and i wouldn't put it past him!  

Properly installed both should be ok, and both are easy to fit.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

I also would recommend Staloc over Norseman if the choice were between the two. I've seen fewer failures with Staloc.
Some of the newer fittings like the Quick Attach are different in that you don't have to unlay the wire when assembling. 
As I mentioned in another thread, I haven't had any reason to start using the fittings in my business but if they work as advertized, I can see some real advantages for the do it yourselfer.

I haven't really used the product yet and therefore can't recommend it but if they want to send me a couple, I'll try them out.

Here's a video that shows the fittings and how they are assembled.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

catchy music.... Very interesting, thanks for sharing that. A couple of things to notice:

-There appears to be no mechanism to grip the inner strands. I guess that is the same as a swage fitting. But can they really back up the claim strongest fitting? 

-What is that O-ring for? Keep the water out? For sure...

-I like the locknut, but I don't think it is necessary. If anything it would just increase the chances of thread galling and provide more hidden places for crevice corrosion to set in,

One of our Forest Service/Park Service/UNESCO parks up here has some very nice fencing using Suncor fittings. It looks real nice.
Looks like a great product for lifelines.. but standing rigging?


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailboy21 said:


> catchy music.... Very interesting, thanks for sharing that. A couple of things to notice:
> 
> -There appears to be no mechanism to grip the inner strands. I guess that is the same as a swage fitting. But can they really back up the claim strongest fitting?
> 
> ...


I can only go by what they say. I haven't used them yet. 
The fact that you don't have to unlay the wire to expose the core strands is evidently one of the selling points.
They claim to have done thorough testing.
I really don't know what the o-ring is for. But I know that it won't keep water out. I would always use goop in a mechanical fitting.

SuncorStainless








Junior Member

I talked to Ed Mayo after SailingDog chased him off for posting in the lifeline thread and I'm sure that he would answer anyone's questions about the fittings were he asked. 
As a rigger, I would be interested in hearing what people think about the fittings. I won't be able to start carrying or offering them until people start asking for them or are at least aware of them.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

How do the Suncor fittings compare in price with Hayn, StaLok and Norseman??


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

sailingdog said:


> How do the Suncor fittings compare in price with Hayn, StaLok and Norseman??


SD, why don't you PM Ed. SuncorStainless







I bet he would answer that. While you are at it, could you find out if the SailNet store carries their fittings or if they sell direct?
It might be a nice gesture to contact him anyway, you were kinda harsh with him.


----------



## SuncorStainless (Sep 25, 2008)

Suncor Quick Attach is a product that has been in Europe for over 20 years. We are beginning production of these parts here in the US. 
The facts are:
Quick Attach is Easier to install than all other mechanical fittings
Quick Attach is equal or greater in strength to every other swage and/or mechanical fitting available
Quick Attach is good for all Standing rigging, lifelines and architectural applications. 
Quick Attach is ABS and Lloyds approved for Standing Rigging and meets all ORC requirements for lifelines.
There is a good article from 2000 that Good Old Boat wrote (Google-"Suncor Quick Attach-Good Old Boat") that clears up a lot of questions about mechanical fittings


----------



## funsailthekeys (May 15, 2008)

I use StaLoc over Norse man. If you compare the two side by side as I did there is a big difference in gripping area (the cone on a StaLoc is much longer for the same size wire) and threaded compression area. Also I have found cracked Norseman's and never a cracked StaLoc.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

From my machine shop work i can say the collet style gripping action is very strong 


My BUT is i have not seen torque specs yet and i can see were people would go to tight or to lose without using a torque wrench as well calibrated elbows are rare  


Does the o-ring serve as a vibration lock ?


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

Ed, Thanks for the post. 
I know that I am running the risk of having people get the impression that I am trying to promote your product but I am going to attach the article anyway. 
I have also printed it to have handy to show my customers.
I believe in having informed customers. Takes the burden off me.

Still, glad to see that swages performed well since that's what pays the bills. 

One questions that I have. And I forgot to ask you when we spoke. Does the SailNet store carry your fittings?

*New Swageless Fitting Shows Promise *




 In my article "Do-It-Yourself Rigging," (Good Old Boat, September 1999), I said that after having rerigged my boat I was not sure it had been cost-effective to do it myself. I reasoned that, between the cost of the tools I bought and the cost of the swageless fitting I ruined (by getting a wire pinched between the upper and lower terminal and stripping the threads), I was close to the cost of having the job done by a professional rigger.
That opinion was based, to a large extent, on how time-consuming and difficult it was to assemble the swageless fittings I used.
Recently, I was contacted by Good Old Boat and asked to evaluate another fitting manufactured by a Danish company called Blue Wave. I wasn't aware of this fitting when I rerigged my boat. The new fitting promised to be much easier to use. So easy, in fact, that I had reservations about its ability to match the full strength of the wire.
Suncor Stainless is the sole importer of this part and collaborated on its engineering and development. They supplied a sample fitting and a length of 3/16-inch stainless-steel wire. The fitting looked first class. In fact, it appeared to be the most robust casting of all the swageless fittings on the market. It was easy to install because the wire does not have to be unlaid. There is no cone to be inserted, and there is no bending of the wire over the cone. Total assembly time was under one minute. Very impressive. But was it strong enough?


*Oil rigs*
In a prior life, I was a construction superintendent overseeing the building of North Sea, semi-submersible, giant oil rigs. These are the brutes that work year-round in the harsh weather of one of the world's roughest bodies of water. As part of my responsibilities, I arranged for and witnessed stress-testing of "coupons" of steel cut from plate to be used in high stress area of the rigs. The purpose of the tests was to be certain that the material intended for use in the rig actually met the specifications called for on the drawings. I decided to test this new swageless fitting at a lab similar to the ones I used for the steel testing.​ To conduct a fair test, I purchased a length of 3/16-inch, 316 stainless-steel, 1 x 19 rigging wire sufficient for several tests. I could cut the wire into pieces for each sample test. Each section of wire, therefore, would be the same. I also obtained equivalent-sized fittings from two other manufacturers who supply swageless fittings. The variable would be the fittings.​ In a test of this type of assembly, it's expected that the wire will be the part that fails. It is also expected that the terminal will not weaken the wire where it's attached to the terminal. The wire used in the test has a breaking strength of 4,000 pounds, so that was the ultimate test goal.​ When I arranged for the tests for the oil rigs, the lab had to be approved by the American Bureau of Shipping, as the rigs were U.S. flag vessels and built to a class certifications to comply with the ABS rules. I located an ABS-approved lab in Baton Rough, LA, to run the tests.
*Overkill* 
Quality Testing Inc., run by Dale Delaville, has all the required equipment, fully certified, to pull a load of up to 120,000 pounds of force on a sample. A little overkill for my needs, perhaps, but they agreed to do the tests.​ One problem we discussed was how to secure the standing part of the wire so we did not pointload one small section of wire. The solution was to build a loop in the wire with two Nicopress compression fittings and a stainless-steel wire clamp backup. A three-inch, heavy-wall piece of pipe was slid through the loop and formed the top secure point of the standing part of the wire.​ To secure the fitting to the test stand, we machined a piece of steel plate with a hole in it to receive the pin of the fork from the fitting. I had Charley, a master rigger from Sintes Boat Works, in New Orleans, make up a swage fitting on another section of the same wire so we could test it, along with the other two fittings, as a part of the baseline. Charley has rigged many of the raceboats in the New Orleans area for the past 30 years..​ The fittings were ready, and the lab was all set. The first fitting to be tested was the "baseline" swage fitting. One of the functions of the test machine is to monitor and record the loads as they are applied to the test specimen. If you look at the first graph (Test 1), you will see that the swage fitting held onto the wire to a peak load of 4,112 pounds before slipping. The wire did not break; it pulled out of the fitting. This was a successful test as the wire breaking strength was rated at 4,000 pounds, and the fitting exceeded that load. The other two fittings were tested to verify the baseline. One test was satisfactory, and one tested well below the braking strength of the wire (This terminal brand was retested at a later time with an assembly made up by the supplier. It also failed the second test.)

*Held the Load*  
The new Suncor fitting was next in line. The graph (Test 4) for fitting number four shows that the Suncor fitting held the load all the way to 4,278 pounds, 166 pounds higher than the swage fitting. This assembly also successfully passed the test. Not only that, but the outer strands of the wire actually broke, leaving the inner core of the wire attached to the fitting. I do not think the inner core would support too much load, but it did stay together. This was true of one other type of swageless fitting we tested as part of establishing the baseline.​ 








 If a picture is worth a thousand words, the accompanying pictures tell a great story of a new fitting on the market that gives good old boaters an easy way to repair or replace the standing rigging on their pride and joy.​ 
 The Suncor fittings have some qualifiers that must be observed. They should be used only with the specific size of wire for which they are made - and they are not made for all sizes of wire. The 9/32-inch Dyform wire on my boat does not have a corresponding fitting from Suncor. The closest is 5/16-inch, so I could not have used these fitting with the wire I chose. It is imperative that the directions be followed carefully as to the length of wire to protrude above the inner wedge and pressure ring. Other than that, the fitting is easy to use and has proven itself under a verified load.​ _Suncor terminal parts, shown above. Serrated jaws are held together by the O-ring during assembly. Below are stress curves for the swaged fitting which served as the baseline (Test 1) and the Suncor fitting (Test 2). Both passed the test by exceeding the breaking strength of the wire (4,000 pounds)._​







For more information, contact Suncor Stainless, 7 Riverside Drive, Pembroke, MA 02359, 781-829-8899, <http: www.suncorstainless.com="">. </http:>​ _Bill Sandifer is a marine surveyor and small boatbuilder who's been living, eating, and sleeping boats since he first assisted at Pete Layton's Boat Shop building small wooden boats. He's worked for Charlie Morgan (Heritage), Don Arnow (Cigarette), and owned a commercial fiberglass boatbuilding company (Tugboats)._

*What does all this mean? - by Jerry Powlas* When we asked Bill Sandifer to evaluate the Suncor terminal we half expected him to say, "It's too easy to be true." He could simply have presumed that these things worked as claimed, but he's a cynic. He has had his share of surprises with rigging terminals. So he ran tests.
To provide a proper baseline for the test, he tested the two other swageless terminals he knew of, Norseman and Sta-Lok, as well as a C. Sherman Johnson Co. swaged terminal, with the swaged wire assembly professionally made.
The swaged terminal, as well as the Sta-Lok and the Suncor swageless terminals, passed the initial round of tests by breaking at a load slightly in excess of the wire's rated ultimate breaking strength.. The Norseman terminal failed at 69 percent of the wire's rated ultimate breaking strength. When the supplier was contacted concerning this, they offered to supply another terminal and wire assembly made up by their own staff. This terminal and wire assembly also failed the test, breaking at 80 percent of the rated breaking strength of the wire.
There are very narrow limits to what can be inferred from testing only one sample assembly of each terminal (or in the one case, two samples). Many samples of each terminal would need to be tested to make definitive statements about the performance of these parts. At nearly $100 a test sample, we were not inclined to do that, although we hope the manufacturers of these critical parts are no inclined.
*Not significant*
Respecting these narrow limits, it should be said that the differences in the ultimate breaking strength of these assemblies (the highest load before failure) are not significant in the case of the three assemblies that had ultimate strengths higher than the wire rating. If the terminal functions properly, the test becomes a test of the breaking strength of the wire, not the terminal. This is true even in cases where the wire deforms and pulls out of the terminal without breaking.
In the cases of the two Norseman terminal-and-wire assemblies that failed to reach the breaking strength of the wire, many explanations are possible. Without more evidence (more testing to achieve statistical significance and professional engineering evaluation of the failures), it is not fair to speculate.
One of the appeals of swageless terminals is that they do not require a (very expensive) swaging machine, so they allow the boatowner the opportunity to do this job personally. If spare wire and terminals are carried, it's even possible for the owner to make repairs in remote ports, or in a worst case, at sea.
There are many critical attributes to a swageless rigging terminal. It must be consistently strong, corrosion-resistant, and affordable. If it's to be offered for use by amateurs, it must also be easy to use, so that the liklihood of proper and satisfactory assembly is extremely high. We tested only a few samples, so our opinion must be tentative, but this evaluation certainly suggests that the Suncor terminal is extremely easy to use. Bill considered the Sta-Lok terminal easier to use than the Norseman terminal. In at least some instances, the Norseman terminals may not be able to allow the full strength of the wire to be utilized.
_Jerry is Good Old Boat technical editor._


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

One thing that I neglected to point out and which should be mentioned is that the article that I attached was dated March 2000.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

*I have used..*

I have used Sta-Loc, Norseman's and Hi-Mods. I find them all super easy to put together and once you install just one you'll do a head smack and wonder why you fretted over it.

One thing I have noticed is that the Sta-Loc fittings seem to have the most durable finish. Currently I have Norseman's on my uppers and Sta-Loc on my intermediates. They were installed at the same time but the Sta-Locs finish is holding up significantly better than teh Norseman's.

I have only one word of caution. NEVER thread any of these fittings together dry!! Always use Loc-Tite or a lube if dry fitting as they will likely gall together and never come apart!

This is a Norseman on my head stay:


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Knotty...looks like that article was copied in its' entirety from Good ol Boat...if you do not have their permission to copy the article...please simply copy a short excerpt and link to the rest. Thanks.


----------



## donradclife (May 19, 2007)

I just got rid of my wire runners with blocks, and now have amsteel line running to a dacron tail which goes on the secondaries. The main reason for the switch is that I used to have to take the runners forward every time I tacked to keep the leeward runner from chafing the sail.

Rerigged with mostly Hayn temrinals last year, and they were cheaper and easier to use. They also claim that you can reuse the inserts.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

camaraderie said:


> Knotty...looks like that article was copied in its' entirety from Good ol Boat...if you do not have their permission to copy the article...please simply copy a short excerpt and link to the rest. Thanks.


Sorry bout that Cam.


----------

