🚀 go-pugleaf

Skip Gundlach wrote:
> I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last
> few weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks -
> about the same hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the
> cabin roof and the end of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the
> main.
> 
> The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the
> serious racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape.
> Indeed, the boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me,
> with him trimming, than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else,
> though, seems to prefer the traveler.
> 
> Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the
> change, and what did you think of it?
> 
> Any strong opinions formed out of OPB (other people's boats') experience
> any of you can share?
> 
> (We're considering purchasing a boat which has a minimal - perhaps 3
> feet - traveler mounted inside the boom gallows and are pondering either
> a full-length cabin-top traveler or three-point system to replace it.
> It also has a preventer which, I suppose, could act as a 3-point when
> downhauled over the genny traveler rail...)
> 

The size of the boat and it's use might influence your choise.  In 
smaller boats concerned with racing, the great enemies ares weight 
and clutter. In larger boats, even a few hundred pounds may not 
matter, or, if she is moveable and willing, might be outstanding 
when the wind becomes tippy.

A traveller might enable weight savings in the boom and does not 
make quite so big a demand on the gooseneck as would a vang.

Sail shape and trim is probably about equally adjustable with either 
choise, with the possible arguement that during the kind of 
conditions usually blamed for losing a race, a missing traveller 
might have saved the day.  In my experience, pulling the boom to one 
side or another, possible without a traveller but not quite so 
convenient, invariably produces lower boat speed, except on a run 
with a preventer.  A preventer, in case you don't know, pulls the 
boom down and towards the rail, so unexpected gybes do not 
demonstrate the reason for the boom's name, causing instead only a 
minor embarrassment for the innatentive tillerman.

One part of a vang tackle can be run, barber hauler style, 
athwartships on a bridle to enable setting the preventer from the 
cockpit, and this arrangement provides all the utility of a 
traveller without the additional weight, clutter and expense.

I feel a vang is better than a traveller for one other reason.  If 
you are gusted, a vang spills wind a little better. A traveller does 
not offer this automatic depowering benefit, which is adjustable to 
a degree with a vang.

In a cruising boat, convenience is more important than obtaining, or 
trying to obtain, the absolute best possible boat speed, using the 
fanciest and most complicated gear, and devouring all of our 
concentration, not to mention the economic aspect.

Climbing over or under a traveller track is a definite pain.

To argue from the expense-wise, a preventer is a neccessity on a 
run, anyway.  A preventer is about 3/4 or more of a boom vang. 
Having a good boom vang that works as a preventer too means you 
don't need a traveller, but you may want your boom to be a little on 
the sturdy side, depending on where you attach the main sheet, and 
wether you want to be able to use the boom as a crane for removing 
engines, loading cargo like dingies, or recovering a MOB, if you 
have a sturdy, adjustable topping lift. You could rig without a 
topping lift, especially if you have a boom gallows in mind. I would 
never.

Boom end sheeting, the best for those other uses, means your 
traveller would be at the rear of the cockpit, which may be good for 
you, or not. Putting a traveller over the companionway is the 
quickest way to learn to hate it, and may cost you a part of your 
scalp. Nobody enjoys climbing over a traveller in the middle of the 
cockpit.

Besides, travellers seem to have nasty tempers and sharp edges, 
sometimes. Even if I had another traveller, I would still want a 
vang / preventer. I have had both, but never exclusively on the same 
model boat.

Yes, Laddie, I'm a cheap one, if it comes to that. Travellers are 
traditionally considered gold plate, and are so priced. They provide 
little of any value, unless like most you are so unsure of yourself 
that you need status symbols. They're just another monkey, on a 
sailboat.  Some folks love monkeys, and some don't.

IMHO

Terry K

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:45:47 GMT, "Skip  Gundlach"
<skip.sezremovethispartformailingme@engr.uga.edu> wrote:

>I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last
>few weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks -
>about the same hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the
>cabin roof and the end of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the
>main.
>
>The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the
>serious racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape.
>Indeed, the boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me,
>with him trimming, than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else,
>though, seems to prefer the traveler.
>
>Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the
>change, and what did you think of it?
>
>Any strong opinions formed out of OPB (other people's boats') experience
>any of you can share?
>
>(We're considering purchasing a boat which has a minimal - perhaps 3
>feet - traveler mounted inside the boom gallows and are pondering either
>a full-length cabin-top traveler or three-point system to replace it.
>It also has a preventer which, I suppose, could act as a 3-point when
>downhauled over the genny traveler rail...)
======================================

I have raced on a lot of different keel boats and have never seen one
that did not have a traveler.

Skip,

First - Are you describing a single set of tackle that has attachments 
at the boom and both SIDES of the cabin trunk?  (i.e. There is only one 
mainsheet to pull.)  Or, a system with two sets of tackle that reverse 
function on each tack?

As with everything else to do with sailing, all three - to include the 
traveler - are compromises.

Single split mainsheet is reliable, inexpensive easy to handle and gives 
you very poor control of the boom, as that you can not pull it to 
weather without pulling down, any time it is between the fixed points on 
the hull.  This precludes putting twist in the sail to either unload the 
top or deal with a shear.

A twin mainsheet with enough separation between fixed points is still 
almost as reliable, costs more, and can provide all the boon control you 
can get. But, talk about spagetti in the cockpit - a gybe set from a 
weather leg can be an adventure. I don't mind this, but if your 
mainsheet guy isn't tuned in correctly and/or the sheets lack 
identification, there is little chance a normal human will ever get it 
right.

Travelers with a low friction car and position control tackle are the 
easiest and cleanest way to get the boom control required with modern 
sails.  Unfortunately, they are expensive, require maintenance and the 
traveler rail itself is often in a inconvenient location (like mine goes 
accross the middle of the cockpit).

It all really come down to what you are planning to do with the boat.

Matt Colie A.Sloop "Bonne Ide'e"
Lifelong Waterman, Licensed Mariner and Pathological Sailor



Skip Gundlach wrote:
> I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last
> few weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks -
> about the same hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the
> cabin roof and the end of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the
> main.
> 
> The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the
> serious racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape.
> Indeed, the boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me,
> with him trimming, than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else,
> though, seems to prefer the traveler.
> 
> Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the
> change, and what did you think of it?
> 
> Any strong opinions formed out of OPB (other people's boats') experience
> any of you can share?
> 
> (We're considering purchasing a boat which has a minimal - perhaps 3
> feet - traveler mounted inside the boom gallows and are pondering either
> a full-length cabin-top traveler or three-point system to replace it.
> It also has a preventer which, I suppose, could act as a 3-point when
> downhauled over the genny traveler rail...)
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> L8R
> 
> Skip and Lydia, inching closer to our purchase
> 
> "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you
> didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail
> away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore.
> Dream. Discover."   - Mark Twain
> 
> 

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:45:47 +0000, Skip  Gundlach wrote:

> I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last few
> weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks - about the same
> hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the cabin roof and the end
> of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the main.
> 
> The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the serious
> racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape. Indeed, the
> boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me, with him trimming,
> than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else, though, seems to prefer the
> traveler.
> 
> Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the change,
> and what did you think of it?
> 

  Years ago, I replaced the "three-point" system on my Cal 25 with a traveller,
thinking it gave me more control. I liked it better, but I'm not sure if it gave
better boat speed, etc. One downside of the three-point system is that unless
you're really in tight, you have to adjust it every time you tack.

  I have a traveller on Far Cove, but I haven't moved the car in years - it just
sits amidships. That way, I don't have to adjust the main at all when I tack.
And I can STILL beat the Vikings' brand-new Cat 34! I would like a boom-vang,
though, to hold the boom down on reaches and runs.

Lloyd Sumpter
"Far Cove" Catalina 36

Hi, and thanks for the response.

"Matt Colie" <m2colie@provide.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:4051C363.8050303@provide.nospam.net...
> Skip,
>
> First - Are you describing a single set of tackle that has attachments
> at the boom and both SIDES of the cabin trunk?  (i.e. There is only one
> mainsheet to pull.)  Or, a system with two sets of tackle that reverse
> function on each tack?

The latter - like two vang hardware setups, at the end of the boom, one each
to the opposite sides of the cabin roof - and, I suppose, you could go one
better and put them on the genny rail if it had a hook place, or a slotted
toe rail, if that's what you have (ours doesn't) for the widest dispersion
of downhaul capability.

We likely won't do *anything* for a year or so, just to see what's up about
how we like the boat.  It's an ex-Moorings 461, hull #2, and all of them
were set up with that dinky traveler - but I've not seen any without it
still there, so it must be at least acceptable.  However, we like to sail...

L8R

Skip and Lydia

-- 
"And then again, when you sit at the helm of your little ship on a clear
night, and gaze at the countless stars overhead, and realize that you are
quite alone on a great, wide sea, it is apt to occur to you that in the
general scheme of things you are merely an insignificant speck on the
surface of the ocean; and are not nearly so important or as self-sufficient
as you thought you were.  Which is an exceedingly wholesome thought, and one
that may effect a permanent change in your deportment that will be greatly
appreciated by your friends."- James S. Pitkin

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 15:42:16 GMT, "Skip  Gundlach"
<skip.sezremovethispartformailingme@engr.uga.edu> wrote:
>The latter - like two vang hardware setups, at the end of the boom, one each
>to the opposite sides of the cabin roof - and, I suppose, you could go one
>better and put them on the genny rail if it had a hook place, or a slotted
>toe rail, if that's what you have (ours doesn't) for the widest dispersion
>of downhaul capability.

======================

The best place for the vang in my opinion is from the boom (about 25%
out from the gooseneck) leading down to the mast, just above the cabin
top.  This requires some fairly rugged fittings on both boom and mast
but the vang tacks and jibes automatically with no intervention
needed.  

When a preventer is needed, the best bet is a snatch block at the rail
near the shrouds or a bit forward, leading a line back to a cockpit
winch where it can be released and adjusted quickly.

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:00:06 +0000, Lloyd Sumpter wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:45:47 +0000, Skip  Gundlach wrote:
> 
>> I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last few
>> weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks - about the
>> same hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the cabin roof and
>> the end of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the main.
>> 
>> The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the serious
>> racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape. Indeed, the
>> boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me, with him trimming,
>> than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else, though, seems to prefer the
>> traveler.
>> 
>> Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the change,
>> and what did you think of it?
>> 
>> 
>   Years ago, I replaced the "three-point" system on my Cal 25 with a traveller,
> thinking it gave me more control. I liked it better, but I'm not sure if it gave
> better boat speed, etc. One downside of the three-point system is that unless
> you're really in tight, you have to adjust it every time you tack.
> 

Oh: I didn't mention that for a preventer, I just moved the boom vang over to
the chainplate. 

Lloyd

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 06:54:08 -0800, "Lloyd Sumpter"
<lsumpter@dccnet.com> wrote:

>Oh: I didn't mention that for a preventer, I just moved the boom vang over to
>the chainplate. 

===============

That works but I prefer to have a separate line for the preventer,
lead aft to a winch, where it can be released quickly and safely.

"Lloyd Sumpter" <lsumpter@dccnet.com> wrote in message news:<10567sff11c43ae@corp.supernews.com>...
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:00:06 +0000, Lloyd Sumpter wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 21:45:47 +0000, Skip  Gundlach wrote:
> > 
> >> I had an opportunity to sail on two boats of the same hull in the last few
> >> weeks.  One had a three-point system (two multi-purchase blocks - about the
> >> same hardware as a vang - secured to the opposing ends of the cabin roof and
> >> the end of the boom), and the other a traveler, for the main.
> >> 
> >> The surveyor likes the three-point, saying that's all they use on the serious
> >> racers, as it gives a great deal more control to the sail shape. Indeed, the
> >> boat seemed to sail better, even in lighter winds, to me, with him trimming,
> >> than the one with the traveler.  Everyone else, though, seems to prefer the
> >> traveler.
> >> 
> >> Anyone here who has had one and changed to the other?  If so, why the change,
> >> and what did you think of it?
> >> 
> >> 
> >   Years ago, I replaced the "three-point" system on my Cal 25 with a traveller,
> > thinking it gave me more control. I liked it better, but I'm not sure if it gave
> > better boat speed, etc. One downside of the three-point system is that unless
> > you're really in tight, you have to adjust it every time you tack.
> > 
> 
> Oh: I didn't mention that for a preventer, I just moved the boom vang over to
> the chainplate. 
> 
> Lloyd

Would this really work?  Two mainsheets with appropriate blocks (like
the old style rope and block vangs) attached to either side of the
cabin top or to the toe rail?  I'd love to get rid of my traveler so I
could install a dodger but the traveller puts the mainsheet dead
center where the dodger would go.  I agree, it would be a spagetti
mess and I have enough of that already but still, maybe an attractive
idea.  Attaching he mainsheet with the blocks to the leewaard toe rail
would be just like an extra-long traveler and would serve to pull the
boom down toward the rail.  When cruising on one tack for many hours
maybe take down the windward mainsheet/vang assembly to prevent the
spagetti mess and re-rig it when you change tack.  I already have
everything to do this, maybe an experiment would be good.

"Parallax" <dbohara@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:792abaf9.0403132017.44ebb55f@posting.google.com...
> "Lloyd Sumpter" <lsumpter@dccnet.com> wrote in message
news:<10567sff11c43ae@corp.supernews.com>...
> > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:00:06 +0000, Lloyd Sumpter wrote:
> >
> > >   Years ago, I replaced the "three-point" system on my Cal 25 with a
traveller,
> > > thinking it gave me more control. I liked it better, but I'm not sure
if it gave
> > > better boat speed, etc. One downside of the three-point system is that
unless
> > > you're really in tight, you have to adjust it every time you tack.
> > >
> >
> > Oh: I didn't mention that for a preventer, I just moved the boom vang
over to
> > the chainplate.
> >
> > Lloyd
>
> Would this really work?  Two mainsheets with appropriate blocks (like
> the old style rope and block vangs) attached to either side of the
> cabin top or to the toe rail?  I'd love to get rid of my traveler so I
> could install a dodger but the traveller puts the mainsheet dead
> center where the dodger would go.  I agree, it would be a spagetti
> mess and I have enough of that already but still, maybe an attractive
> idea.  Attaching he mainsheet with the blocks to the leewaard toe rail
> would be just like an extra-long traveler and would serve to pull the
> boom down toward the rail.  When cruising on one tack for many hours
> maybe take down the windward mainsheet/vang assembly to prevent the
> spagetti mess and re-rig it when you change tack.  I already have
> everything to do this, maybe an experiment would be good.

In the one instance in which I've used this system, it works just fine.  If
you think about a traveler, it's not usually going to extend beyond the edge
of the cabin roof - so anything outbound of that would not be
traveler-equivalent, anyway.  In between, you have the ability, with
differing tension on the two block assemblies, to control *where* and *how*
the boom sits.

Think of it as a situation where you want the traveler all the way to
windward, but the boom somewhat outbound, so as to relieve the downhaul of
it were it directly under the boom.  The upwind pad eye is the outer edge of
the windward traveler in that case.

Want it amidships, with minimal downhaul tension on the traveler?  Just let
out the windward sheet, and take in a bit on the leeward.

Without getting into a vector discussion, it made sense to me.  As to the
spaghetti bit, if you are tacking all the time, it might be more
challenging, but if you aren't, since there's enough purchase that you
should rarely, if ever, have to engage the winch, there's no particular
reason to have lines all over the place - leave them on the deck, not in the
cockpit.  I've also sailed a boat with a traveler car with purchase
advantage - and that was *three* lines to keep up with (two car adjusters,
one main sheet)...

L8R

Skip

-- 
"And then again, when you sit at the helm of your little ship on a
clear night, and gaze at the countless stars overhead, and realize
that you  are quite alone on a great, wide sea, it is apt to occur to
you that in the general scheme of things you are merely an
insignificant speck on the surface of the ocean; and are not nearly
so important or as self-sufficient as you thought you were.  Which is
an exceedingly wholesome thought, and one that may effect a
permanent change in your deportment that will be greatly appreciated
by your friends."  - James S. Pitkin