[C320-list] In-mast Furling

[Bruce Stanley]

In-Mast is the easiest (I understand the vertical battens can have problems
fitting into the Mast and some prefer to take them out)
In-Mast does not point as high and I think carries a smaller Main.

In-Boom has a lower centre of gravity over In-Mast (a consideration for
heavy weather sailing)
In-Boom is (like the Standard Rig) still having to raise the Main.

Standard Rig with Boom Bag and Battens is better performance and not too
hard to manage.
Standard Rig with Dutchman ... others say the love-it / while others say
otherwise.

Bruce Stanley
C320 #1084 / In-Mast Rig
==============================
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 5:04 AM, Julian Elliott <jelliott at landspring.net>wrote:

> After having tricked out my beloved C320 for Northwest cruising, I'm
> regretfully considering moving to a newer vessel that is also a bit more
> friendly to limited flexibility.  After a soul searching debate with my
> wife
> about going over to the dark side (Nordic Tug), I realize I just can't
> compromise the feeling of the wind in my face, and the rush of having the
> elements move me along.
>
>
>
> Short of simply getting a later model C320, I am considering a late model
> C34 which has lower freeboard, forward stateroom, etc.  Which brings me to
> my question:  In-mast furling.
>
>
>
> I know the advantages/disadvantages, and everyone has his/her opinion.  I'd
> be interested in hearing opinions of anyone who has had experience with
> both, especially in an apples-apples comparison, say in the 320.
>
>
>
> This may have been covered ad nauseum in the past; however, I just
> resubscribed to the list a few months ago.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Julian
>
> Polaris #340
>
>