# Behind the mast roller furling



## dsmylie (Feb 23, 2006)

Anybody have experience with behind the mast roller furling? Pros/cons?
Thanks. David


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Lots of cons...not any pros I can think of.

Cons:

Adds a lot of weight aloft.
Main sail can't use battens really, so limits amount of roach you can have on the main—yes, this has been fixed to a small degree with vertical battens... but still a problem IMHO
If the furler jams, can't drop the sails or furl them...
If the furler jams, can't always be fixed without going aloft...have to go aloft to get access to top swivel of the furler—if at all possible
Adds windage to the boat
Expensive
Some mast-furling systems will moan at anchor/in the slip in higher winds

Jiffy or slab reefing is so much better... cheaper, more reliable, etc.

In-boom reefing has some similar issues to the in-mast reefing regarding jams, but you can generally still slab reef the mainsail if you've equipped it with reefing points if the boom furler jams—not an option with in-mast/behind mast reefing.


----------



## PilotAlso (Nov 25, 2007)

*I do , I do*

The prior owner (an engineer with metals and fabrication expertise) designed and built a behind the mast roller/furler for our boat (a Hunter 34).

He used a Harken unit with custom brackets. The sail was purpose made by a local vendor to optimize sail shape and still be easy to roll up.

This thing has been on the boat for over a decade and works perfectly! Not one failure that wasn't operator error.

Yes you lose some sail shape but not that much on this boat. We still move pretty well.

The weight aloft is there but does a couple of pounds really make much difference? All we have is a windlass and antenna at the top of the mast.

It is fantastic at the end of the sailing day when we grab the furling line and put the sail away in less than 15 seconds. We find that we use the sail more often than our neighbors who have to go thru the gyrations required to unwrap and put away their regular sails.

I couldn't be happier with our behind the mast furling system.

FWIW: I have all the engineering drawings in case we need to have replacement parts fabricated.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

PilotAlso said:


> All we have is a windlass and antenna at the top of the mast.


Now that is something I have not seen before. at the top of the mast. LOL


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Bubb-

How much weight aloft do you think that adds... 



bubb2 said:


> Now that is something I have not seen before. at the top of the mast. LOL


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

sailingdog said:


> Bubb-
> 
> How much weight aloft do you think that adds...


It's hard to tell, Dog. I am thinking about the anchor and chain that go with it!!!!!!!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

He might only have those aloft when he's trying to careen the boat.. 


bubb2 said:


> It's hard to tell, Dog. I am thinking about the anchor and chain that go with it!!!!!!!


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

We like our EZ Furl Behind the Mast furler. 
Our main is getting bagged out and is starting to bind a bit when furling up so it will get recut this winter. But that is after a lot of miles.
Neighbor has a very nice Beneteau with Stack Pack. I was admiring his but he said he'd rather have mine as it is much easier to deal with.
They do add weight aloft so if you are into performance or if your boat is tender to begin with it wouldn't be a good idea.
I think they are especially good for center cockpit boats as most of the boom is over the bimini and flaking the main is more difficult with the bimini in the way.


----------



## knothead (Apr 9, 2003)

PilotAlso said:


> The prior owner (an engineer with metals and fabrication expertise) designed and built a behind the mast roller/furler for our boat (a Hunter 34).
> 
> He used a Harken unit with custom brackets. The sail was purpose made by a local vendor to optimize sail shape and still be easy to roll up.
> 
> ...


I have to hope that Pilot meant to write *windvane*. 

The behind the mast furler that Pilot describes does have some advantages. Cost being a primary one. The cost of the custom fabricated pieces, the new stay, some blocks and the furler has, in my experience, been a lot less than some of the other options. 
An in-boom furler would probably be at least twice as expensive.
This is another one of those issues that depend a lot on many different factors. The age and psychical condition of the owner being a big one. The type of boat being another.
I've installed these systems a number of times for people who were finding it increasingly difficult to handle a convention mainsail. None of these people were racers. 
If it can keep someone sailing for awhile longer who might otherwise have had to give it up, then it's a good thing in my book.
There is no reason that I can think of other than operator error that should make a BTM furler any more prone to failure than one on the headstay.
Granted, it would be a lot more difficult to wrap the sail up by hand if you had to but again. 
If it's installed correctly, maintained correctly and used correctly, roller furling, no matter where it's installed, is pretty darned reliable.


----------



## dsmylie (Feb 23, 2006)

Thanks for all your input. The boat is a Cheoy Lee, Richards 32 ketch. I'm going to have to replace the sails soon any way so that is one of the options I am looking at. Again thank you for your responses.
David


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

As a 32' ketch rig, I would think the main would be relatively small and easy to handle, obviating the need for furling.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

The sails on a 32' boat, no matter the rig, aren't all that big... why add the complexity if it isn't absolutely necessary??


----------



## PilotAlso (Nov 25, 2007)

LOL,

Yup my windlass up on the top of the mast.

That's what I get for trying to answer quick before heading out to the Badger game. (can't believe they actually won)

Anyway, I'm still waiting for the horrible failure mode that some on here say is inevitable.

You guys have to remember that not everyone cares if they squeeze every last ounce of performance out of their boats. 

Frankly I don't understand why anyone wishing to go fast would pick sailing a cruising boat as their means of doing so. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE!

When I want to go fast I take our race car to the track or I head out in the airplane. Certainly I don't think about heading out and making 6-7 knots in the boat while working my ass off to maybe get an extra knot or two. 

The boat is for relaxation and slow travel.


----------



## PilotAlso (Nov 25, 2007)

*why not add the convenience?*

My counter would be why not add the convenience if you want it.

It sure makes my life simpler on the water.

IMHO the claims of horrible failures and performance loss are way overstated.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

Ultimately, the OP can indeed do what they want...the question is whether it's worth it. On that small a boat it does seem to be overkill.

As for speed; in light air, I would like to make some headway. In heavy air, the performance issue becomes much less


----------



## dsmylie (Feb 23, 2006)

*Thanks*

Thanks everyone for your replies, lots of things to think about, My thoughts with going with something like this would be to make it easier to single hand. My current setup is almost 30 years old and to get it up to par is going to be a fairly big financial hit, so I was just thinking that maybe this would be the time to do it. I guess I need to do a cost analysis and see what will cost what. Again thanks for your replies.

David


----------



## captainwen (Nov 11, 2005)

*Famet - Behind the mast roller furling*

I recently installed a behind the mast Famet Roller furler on my 39 ft 1976 Pearson sloop. I've sailed this boat for 20 yrs , before this an ODay 28 for many years. I replaced my fully battened main with a new 8.8 oz vertically battened furling main. The installation took me over a week . I ordered the furling system from Famet and it was delivered COD to my garage. Famet guys were great on phone with a few questions I had as installation proceeded. It works perfectly. I cannot image it fouling or malfunctioning as the Famet is a simple , primitive and bullet proof furler , fool proof and bearingless. I've had one on the bow for twenty years of impeccable performance. 
The sail roach (5 inch ) is supported by three quarter length vertical battens slipped into pockets before loading sail. The sail is then hoisted with an internal steel wire halyard so mast halyard for fouling etc is not used , the Famet uses its own halyard inside a groove on extrusion. Genius! 
I have sailed the boat now several times in differing conditions and cannot say I have noticed any difference in sailing characteristics. My concern that I would not be able to flatten sail for close haul was allayed on my first sail when I put the out haul on my winch and flattened the sail while loaded until it looked flatter than my traditional main. My second fear was sail shape and feel but I was very surprised at how well the sail performed. The third major concern was the reefing and storage and distance between mast and furled stay? I was delighted to see the reefing was near instantaneous and the reefed sail did well at all reductions . The sail furler easily and very neatly and tight to the extrusion so the cloth was no where near the mast where it would chafe in a sea when furled. 
The sail was covered with a white UV sailcloth sacrificial so the roach would not be too heavy . If I had it to do over I would have gone with 9 + oz. cloth as the sail furls so close and neatly that my concern for the furled sail rubbing on mast was not reasonable. The gear was silent, made no noise under all points of sail .
The foot of my main is near 16 ft and the max hoist is about 40ft. If you read the follow at a moderate rate it will approximate the time needed to furl or deploy the main. 
One, Two , Three , Four, Five, Six. Done 
No lazy jacks a fouling, no battens a fouling, no sail covers a slapping, no sail a whacking , no hollering for the sail ties , no slipping and a sliding in the gale and spindrift . No main halyard a banging. 
How many times have you not put your main up because you didn't want to wrestle it up there and how many times after raising it did you have to dump it as the wind died ten minutes later... Only to return again five minutes after dumping it. I will sail my main now ten times more than my traditional simply because I will no longer be considering the amount of time and effort it takes to raise the traditional beast.


----------



## Mikep777 (Sep 17, 2017)

*Re: I do , I do*

I'm just researching the idea of a behind the mast set up and have read sooo much pro and con, but from guys with educated assumptions and that's all just assumptions. Could you email me a copy of how your guy did it and it's great to hear that it sails ok. I love the idea and want to cruise, so not having to go forward to put in another reef or drop a main is a REAL plus to my ears.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

*Re: I do , I do*



Mikep777 said:


> I'm just researching the idea of a behind the mast set up and have read sooo much pro and con, but from guys with educated assumptions and that's all just assumptions. Could you email me a copy of how your guy did it and it's great to hear that it sails ok. I love the idea and want to cruise, so not having to go forward to put in another reef or drop a main is a REAL plus to my ears.


Nothing wrong with adding on to an older thread, but if you want to contact one of the posters, click on their name and then see when they last posted here. If not recently, check for an option to message them directly.


----------

