[C320-list] Sail Covers
Henry LeSieur
hankles at sbcglobal.net
Sun Sep 13 14:06:43 PDT 2009
I purchased a replacement sail cover from Catalina. Great quality.
Hank LeSieur
#331
________________________________
From: "c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com" <c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com>
To: c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 2:00:48 PM
Subject: C320-list Digest, Vol 564, Issue 1
Send C320-list mailing list submissions to
c320-list at lists.catalina320.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.catalina320.com/listinfo.cgi/c320-list-catalina320.com
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
c320-list-request at lists.catalina320.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
c320-list-owner at lists.catalina320.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of C320-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. In-mast Furling (Julian Elliott)
2. Re: In-mast Furling (Len)
3. Re: In-mast Furling (Robert Seastream)
4. Re: In-mast Furling (Jack McDonough)
5. Re: Entry Stantion Replacement (Warren Updike)
6. Re: In-mast Furling (Bruce Stanley)
7. Re: In-mast Furling (Robert Seastream)
8. Re: In-mast Furling (John Frost)
9. Re: Entry Stantion Replacement (pat reynolds)
10. Sail Covers (Warren Updike)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:04:30 -0700
From: "Julian Elliott" <jelliott at landspring.net>
To: <C320-List at catalina320.com>
Subject: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID: <D02C5FAD72C54AF5A574130B27AC8077 at ORCA>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
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
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:47:47 -0700
From: Len <aqua5len at gmail.com>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID:
<58d28d6d0909111247k752a4079j4805869e62d289d1 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
At the risk of being biased, I must strongly recommend in-boom furling.
Will tell you all the decision factors---which have been reviewed
before---if you would like.
Len Krane
AQUA5 #1070
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM, 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
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 15:53:37 -0400
From: Robert Seastream <robert.seastream at comcast.net>
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID: <AD87B1C7-404B-460D-87FA-7B77E543C1D9 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
I agree with Len. In boom over in mast. For the ultimate in
simplicity though, I still think a standard flaking system rules.
Bob Seastream
Intuition # 906
On Sep 11, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Len wrote:
> At the risk of being biased, I must strongly recommend in-boom
> furling.
> Will tell you all the decision factors---which have been reviewed
> before---if you would like.
> Len Krane
> AQUA5 #1070
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM, 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
>>
>>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:46:07 -0700
From: "Jack McDonough" <mcdonough5 at verizon.net>
To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID: <E19010B265F94632BFADBA4543088822 at johnf12eb04ca6>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1;
reply-type=response
Bob:
What do you mean by "standard flaking system?" Dutchman? Lazy jacks? Stack
pack? What?
jack
#947
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Seastream" <robert.seastream at comcast.net>
To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
>I agree with Len. In boom over in mast. For the ultimate in simplicity
>though, I still think a standard flaking system rules.
>
> Bob Seastream
> Intuition # 906
>
> On Sep 11, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Len wrote:
>
>> At the risk of being biased, I must strongly recommend in-boom furling.
>> Will tell you all the decision factors---which have been reviewed
>> before---if you would like.
>> Len Krane
>> AQUA5 #1070
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM, 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
>>>
>>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:48:39 -0400
From: "Warren Updike" <wupdike at hotmail.com>
To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Entry Stantion Replacement
Message-ID: <BAY114-DS98E098BE3FD16F6C06CECBEE70 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I had some damage as a result of a tow that broke one of the studs that
fasten the double stanchion to the deck. These studs are part of the
stanchion and are bolted from inside. Each stud needs to be properly bedded
in the process. My advice: get a yard to do this. I did. Access may be very
difficult as space is quite limited. You may need a rather good set of tools
to get at the stud from inside as well as a second pair of hands.
Warren & Pattie Updike
Catalina 320, #62, "Warr De Mar"
Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Ruddy [mailto:maxruddy at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:08 PM
To: C320-list at catalina320.com
Subject: [C320-list] Entry Stantion Replacement
I just purchased a 1995 320 Hull #270 and need to replace the
starboard entry stantion. I am ordering a new one from
Catalina. As all of you probably already know this is a unique double
base stantion. Does anyone any installation recommendations
as I am new to this type of repair. Also, this has two screws in the
base and I can't tell if their is a pin that goes into the deck or if
that was the part
that was broken off.
Thanks in advance,
Max
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 08:01:33 +1000
From: Bruce Stanley <brucestanley36 at gmail.com>
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID:
<9d5459ff0909111501s3dcb3eb3sce7c0948c9ed634b at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:06:32 -0400
From: Robert Seastream <robert.seastream at comcast.net>
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID: <242A6F51-5913-4B1D-8F1B-72D36D04C8B0 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On my fathers 1984 Cape Dory 28, we raised the main (which had
horizontal battens) manually, later dropping it and 'hand flaking' it
ourselves over the boom.
My issues with furling (particularly in mast) systems is that they
don't have the battens that give the sail better shape. Also, if the
furler jams, you can't drop the main.
That could be a problem if the wind is kicking up.
Bob
Intuition # 906
On Sep 11, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Jack McDonough wrote:
> Bob:
>
> What do you mean by "standard flaking system?" Dutchman? Lazy jacks?
> Stack pack? What?
>
> jack
> #947
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Seastream" <robert.seastream at comcast.net
> >
> To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 12:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
>
>
>> I agree with Len. In boom over in mast. For the ultimate in
>> simplicity though, I still think a standard flaking system rules.
>>
>> Bob Seastream
>> Intuition # 906
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Len wrote:
>>
>>> At the risk of being biased, I must strongly recommend in-boom
>>> furling.
>>> Will tell you all the decision factors---which have been reviewed
>>> before---if you would like.
>>> Len Krane
>>> AQUA5 #1070
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM, 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
>>>>
>>>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 18:13:23 -0500
From: "John Frost" <john at frostnet.net>
To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: Re: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
Message-ID: <031d01ca3335$76cdc300$64694900$@net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We have had in-mast for two seasons and are very happy. Clearly it does not
point as high, but the ease of deployment and stowing makes us use it a lot
more frequently. The biggest change from my years with a normal setup is not
having to tie up and cover the main. In-boom might give you that advantage
without as much performance loss. I have no battens and pay a performance
price for that. The obvious advantage of in-mast is you don't fight gravity.
I pull a string and out she comes. The loose foot also seems to work well in
light air. As always in boat design, it is a tradeoff with no one right
answer. If you want to win races, forget it (or get a ratings adjustment).
If you want an easier day on the water, I say go for it.
Happy Sailing!
John
2007 C320MKII
Hull 1118
Guntersville, AL
-----Original Message-----
From: c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com
[mailto:c320-list-bounces at lists.catalina320.com] On Behalf Of Julian Elliott
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 2:05 PM
To: C320-List at catalina320.com
Subject: [C320-list] In-mast Furling
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
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 07:47:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: pat reynolds <lorasalum at yahoo.com>
To: C320-List at Catalina320.com
Subject: Re: [C320-list] Entry Stantion Replacement
Message-ID: <194674.19531.qm at web36508.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
You need to remove the section of trim and then use a hole saw to cut an opening into the liner behind to get easier access to the large and two small nuts on the stantion. Have someone with you to remove and replace the smaller screws and nuts. thin fingers or larger access holes help. Eventually you will need to do this with all the stantions.
--- On Thu, 9/10/09, Max Ruddy <maxruddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Max Ruddy <maxruddy at gmail.com>
> Subject: [C320-list] Entry Stantion Replacement
> To: C320-list at catalina320.com
> Date: Thursday, September 10, 2009, 10:07 PM
> I just purchased a 1995 320 Hull #270
> and need to replace the starboard entry stantion.? I am
> ordering a new one from
> Catalina.? As all of you probably already know this is
> a unique double base stantion.? Does anyone any
> installation recommendations
> as I am new to this type of repair.? Also, this has
> two screws in the base and I can't tell if their is a pin
> that goes into the deck or if that was the part
> that was broken off.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Max
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:56:29 -0400
From: "Warren Updike" <wupdike at hotmail.com>
To: <C320-List at Catalina320.com>
Subject: [C320-list] Sail Covers
Message-ID: <BAY114-DS3F08E82842619D427C6A1BEE60 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
CatalinaOwners.com is having a 20% off sail on canvas. I'm seriously
considering buying my sail cover replacement from them. Does anyone have
experience buying canvas and specifically sail covers from them?
I have local quotes for a custom sail cover with 2 Dutchman lines of $550
and $630 vs. $337 for the pre-patterned C320 cover from CatalinaOwners with
2 Dutchman, Tanara thread, and ss twist-lock closurers. Quite a deal if the
quality of workmanship is there.
Warren & Pattie Updike
Catalina 320, #62, "Warr De Mar"
Middle River, Chesapeake Bay
End of C320-list Digest, Vol 564, Issue 1
*****************************************
More information about the C320-list
mailing list