I am posting this while sipping on a glass of warm bourbon. It is raining outside but the 'Piper is fully rigged in the backyard. I have been away from this forum since the start of the America's Cup. Also a number of spring projects kept me from connecting to this site. It is great to be caught up.

The S.S. backstay fittings that have been in the works for at least 2 years are finally mounted: both of them. And, the shrouds have been relocated aft about 12" from the original locations. The genoa sheets lead to the cabin top, inboard of the shrouds. The U-bolt shroud attachments have been replaced with S.S. chainplates stapped to the outside of the hull (the teak rub rails were removed a few seasons ago). The chainplates were specially designed to ensure that the turnbuckles could not fall over and then kink while stepping the mast(as discussed on this forum last year, thanks).

The genoa does not touch the shrouds in the new position (does anyone know what size/percentage is the Sandpiper genny?) The leech of the mainsail just kisses the backstays. With tension on the backstays and with a slight induced bend, I don't think that the mainsail will make contact. I had my heart set on a new full-battened, broad leech mainsail. However, the backstays just suit the standard mainsail perfectly. I suppose that I saved myself a few dollars!

I am glad to read that you sailors had a great winter. It's good to be back.

posted May 16, 2003 07:53 PM            

I'm trying to invision your rig.

1) Did you install a split backstay? How do you clear the leech in the mainsail (or just kisses it)? Did you fabricate a special fitting at the masthead? My topping lift "just kisses" the main, and I've always wondered how a backstay would fit.

2) If I've got it right, you've relocated the shrouds back where the existing genoa tracks are, but outboard. What was the reason for the shroud relocate? was it to facilitate the genoa being inboard?

3) Have you sailed her yet with the new mods?
What type of performance characteristics are you hoping to achieve?

Please give us an update.

Cheers, Eric

posted May 20, 2003 05:18 PM            

"The S.S. backstay fittings that have been in the works for at least 2 years are finally mounted: both of them."

Why did you make this particular modification? My boat came with a backstay which ended in a split "Y" over the cockpit, the bottom of the splits terminated at two stainless 18" outrigger brackets on either side of the transom. The brackets got in the way, were sure ugly, the split stay's got in the way and caught one's hair or shoulder etc when lowering the outboard motor. IMHO the whole backstay retro-fit was ungainly and only overcomplicated the simple original rigging.
There was also a masthead mounted forestay to balance this backstay. This extra forestay served only to tangle the roller reefed fractional jib and tear at my spinnaker.

"(the teak rub rails were removed a few seasons ago)."

Gee....I think that nice Cetol covered teak rub rails and other brightwork make our Sandpipers look lovely! What protects your boat's gunwales from the dock and other things?

Regards...Ken

Oh, oh! I hope that I am not going to learn what you may have already known!

I have been rigging the mast with the shrouds a little looser than spec. The reason is that I replaced the mast tabernacle with a pintle to allow the mast to rotate (like on a wing-masted catamaran). The theory was that by eliminating the mast turbulence, I would effectively increase the sail area by 6" x 18ft = +/-7%. Too much compression on the mast would resist rotation. However, without the shroud tension, there was no mast bend and the rig had a tendency to pump in heavy weather. There was too much forestay sag. I decided that I needed backstays.

Eric, I fabricated a sort of winged masthead crane. I am hoping that the windward backstay will encourage the mast to rotate to windward. Hence, 2 backstays with a 4:1 tackle at the transom. This is yet to be tested.

I sailed half a dozen times last fall with the genoa sheeted inboard. I was relatively pleased with the modification. However, the shrouds interfered with the clew of the sail, therefore, the shrouds were moved aft.

Ken, I was unaware that there was a backstay kit. You are making me nervous now about my installation.

With regards to bright work, you would choose to sail a Swan or a Tartan while I would prefer a CS or a J-1xx.

posted May 21, 2003 01:42 AM            

I'm of two minds on this backstay issue. I see Ken's point that a boat the size of a Sandpiper is more like a dinghy and you don't really need the backstay. He's also right about you hitting your head on them. Still, if it's fast, you might suffer with the occasional head tangle. Very few cats with rotating masts have backstays. They get their tension from the side stays alone.

If you keep the backstays you have the ability to depower the rig by increasing backstay tension in the gusts. They should be adjustable from either side of the boat so you can adjust them easily while sailing. When you increase tension you are causing the upper portion of the sail to fall off spilling more air in the gusts. As I recall though, most of the boats that I have sailed on with this system also had upper shrouds or diamonds to help achieve an even bend.

Be careful: I once sailed on a boat with very loose upper diamonds. Although it was very fast we lost the mast in a gust. I think it was because we had to much bend in the mast up high putting excess load on the mast at the top of the shrouds.

If you are going for the high tech racing look it's my opinion that the teak has got to go. "Less is More" (Old architectural saying) You'll have to be very careful when docking as you will now have precious little between your hull and the dock for protection.

It would be interesting to see a picture of your "Development Class" Sandpiper.

D'Arcy

posted May 22, 2003 11:21 PM            

First to the Spelling nazi, I realised invision is spelled envision!

My boats DPO tore the teak rub rails off!
I wish I had them. I like wood. Not that there's any thing wrong with that. I think the Sandpiper's "millwork" is simple , yet still pleasing. I find it easy to maintain.
Having said that, her DPO, went with a Kelt 760, ( woodless exterior) and I can see the advantages in it.

So Superpiper, whatever man, if wood's not you bag, well that's ok! ;D;D
If you still have the rails I'd like to make an offer.e-mail me.
And Darcy, is there no end to your wealth of triming knowledge? I was reading a book on sail trim today, and you basically repeated what I had previously read!!!!!!!
You make a fantastic contribution to this board!

And Ken, glad you're back on the board!! You really must like wood if you like Hinterhoellers. Fine choice!

Next weekend I'm sailing to Little Current.

See ya
Eric

posted May 23, 2003 02:33 PM            

Although I stated that I would remove the teak. Thats for a high tech racing boat only (Like what Superpiper is becoming).

Since I'm not planing to race a Sandpiper to that level, I personally will leave the wood on, oil it and love it. Truth be known, I've actually built 2 wooden canoes (one cedar strip and one lapstrake). I've also assisted in building a lapstrake row boat for a reproduction brigantine. Nothing finer than scarfing a joint or clenching a copper nail.

Messin about with tools whenever I'm not messin about in boats,
D'Arcy