Genoa performance

A forum for discussion of how to rig and tune your boat or kicker to achieve the best sailing performance.
User avatar
Rob S
Deckhand
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:04 pm
Sailboat: Venture 25
Location: Ohio River, Kentucky

Genoa performance

Post by Rob S »

I just got my :macx: back in the water last weekend, but today was the first day of challenging winds..... about 15 kts gusting to 24.

Last year was my first season learning with the boat and also the excellent resources in this forum. I had a standard main and jib and she's well balanced and sails fairly well in moderate winds, lacking power in light winds and easily overpowered in strong winds unless reefed. Since the winds here are more usually light, I decide to buy a Genoa and got a factory standard 150%.

So today was the first day to experiment with the jenny and stronger winds. I was already pleased with the light wind performance from earlier in the week.... HUGE difference, but I was expecting to have problems coping with so much sail area. I started downwind. The jenny is a lot easier to maintain in wing on wing configuration, the jib does ok but tends to snap around much more without a whisker pole. Anyway I was getting a consistent 5 knots which was pleasing. Turning into wind, life got busy. I was doing OK but the gusts were getting a little hard to handle, plus sailing on a river can be busy. Whenever the wind is strong it always seems to be coming smack down the river so there's a lot of tacking involved and there's the barge traffic to contend with. She was tacking ok but it was a lot of work single handed.... seemed like I'd only just got her trimmed and on course before it was time to tack again. Reefing would probably have helped but I was really interested in experimenting with the jenny so I opted to pull the main down and sail on jenny alone.

From last year, I had found that she never sailed well with only the main.... just not balanced enough, and fairly hopeless on just the jib on anything more upwind than a beam reach and fairly impossible to tack. So my expectations for sailing on the jenny alone were not good. Boy, was I wrong!

Started on a broad reach and she picked up speed rapidly, well balanced on the rudder. So I started to see how close I could get to the wind. I winched the sheet as tight as I could, with the leech touching the shrouds and spreader (sheeted outside the shrouds, not between, that's for another day!), and then adjusted heading to get the telltales streaming optimally. It was quite sensitive to get in the groove and stay there but we were maintaining 5.5kts (max recorded was 6.8 ) easily, and again well balanced on the rudder, although it was easy to get pushed off heading and fall out of the groove. Tacking was no problem, I'd head off the wind to accelerate, as much as anything because sheeting and steering by myself was all too quick for me, but once accelerated and close hauled on heading my GPS was showing 90 degrees between tacks. I was blown away by this (no pun intended)! I expect that the river current probably contributed to this but I tried to measure it later and couldn't get it to register, probably less than a knot.

I was truly amazed by the performance. I expected it to be slow, unbalanced, and with lousy pointing, but found that it was a rewarding way to sail in these conditions, especially single handed. And yes, I understand it's probably not a good idea in an :macm: but the :macx: has a backstay.
User avatar
pokerrick1
Admiral
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:20 pm
Sailboat: Venture 23
Location: Las Vegas, NV (Henderson, near Lake Mead)

X not M

Post by pokerrick1 »

What Rob S said in his last sentence :)

Rick :) :macm:
User avatar
Loefflerh
Engineer
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:27 am
Location: Naples, Fl 26M "Bemine2"

Post by Loefflerh »

This is how I did most of my sailing with my X when single handed, and thats most of te time: just the 150% genoa on a roller furling. Its mostly because I am lazy - I have to pass undeneath a bridge on the way out and in, and hate to do all the rigging wit the boom and mainsail. Plus after the bridge a have to clear the next 4 miles are like a big river before I hit Gordons Pass leading out into the Gulf, and in my opinion handling of the boat with just the headsail (single handed) in a heavy traffic enviroment is much easier. Sailing performance is really good, better than just the main only.
Now I have the M since 4 weeks, and found it behaves exactly the same, I love it this way. I compensate for the lacking backstay by using either or both sheets on the mast (the sheet to rise the main or the sheet for the headsail I am not using because of the roller furling) as a substitute.
Hans
User avatar
nemo
Engineer
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Aloha, Oregon, '05 M, Suz70, "Nemo"

Post by nemo »

Can you guys explain yourselves a bit better on on the M vs. X for using a genoa 150? I'm not sure I'm catching why having a backstay matters. What's the connection?

Please explain how this genny is rigged on both the X and M. I'm potentially interested in getting one for an M.

thanks
User avatar
pokerrick1
Admiral
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:20 pm
Sailboat: Venture 23
Location: Las Vegas, NV (Henderson, near Lake Mead)

M

Post by pokerrick1 »

Nemo;

An M has no backstay and the Genny is attached about five feet from the top of the mast (mainsail almost to the top). Therefore, just sailing with the Genny in an M (WITH STRONG WINDS not light) might well cause the mast to topple with all that forward pressure and torque.

One of the Admirals will explain it better. I am not sure how an X is rigged.

Rick :) :macm:
User avatar
nemo
Engineer
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Aloha, Oregon, '05 M, Suz70, "Nemo"

Post by nemo »

Ah, I just saw on another thread a comment about high torque on the mast with Genny alone (without mailsail), on an M with no backstay.

Do we have any real bad experiences on an M with Genny documented (ie dismasting)? Or is this FUD?
User avatar
pokerrick1
Admiral
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 7:20 pm
Sailboat: Venture 23
Location: Las Vegas, NV (Henderson, near Lake Mead)

PM Mike

Post by pokerrick1 »

nemo wrote:.

Do we have any real bad experiences on an M with Genny documented (ie dismasting)? Or is this FUD?
PM Mike Inmon and ask him :(

Rick :) :macm:
User avatar
nemo
Engineer
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Aloha, Oregon, '05 M, Suz70, "Nemo"

Post by nemo »

Is there a thread I can search for on this implied incident? I'm not finding anything.

Also, am wondering what, if any, strength the topping lift (with main sheets tightened down) adds that could help an M with genny alone.
User avatar
NiceAft
Admiral
Posts: 6749
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:28 pm
Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
Location: Upper Dublin,PA, USA: 2005M 50hp.Honda4strk.,1979 Phantom Sport Sailboat, 9'Achilles 6HP Merc 4strk

Post by NiceAft »

The theory is that because there isn't any backstay to support the mast, an M sailing with just a Genny, in a strong enough wind, could be demasted. I imagine that in really windy conditions, most sailors would be prudent enough to reduce the Genny to a Jib, and sail with a reefed main.

If someone believes otherwise, I'm all ears :) Just a figure of speech guys. :P

Ray
User avatar
nemo
Engineer
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Aloha, Oregon, '05 M, Suz70, "Nemo"

Post by nemo »

Yes, I understand the theory now - just wondering if anyone actually lost a mast due to this.
Hardcrab
Captain
Posts: 868
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:25 pm
Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
Location: "Cease-fire", White 05 M, 90hp, Boggy Bayou, Niceville, FL

Post by Hardcrab »

Another "M" idea is that the genny loads can transfer down a topping lift to the boom and the main sheet, which is centered and pulled in tight. A whole lot of stuff would have to fail for the mast to tumble forward, one would think.
If conditions are that bad, motor in.
That is sorta the load path that happens now when the mainsail/mainsheet becomes a phantom "backstay" in normal two sail operation.

I have not seen a failure like this reported on this board either.

As usual, IMHO.
User avatar
nemo
Engineer
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Aloha, Oregon, '05 M, Suz70, "Nemo"

Post by nemo »

Hardcrab, exactly my thoughts (as I asked earlier) about the utility of topping lift and tightened mainsheet.

My topping lift is not the strongest, it's the black (nylon?) stock line. I'm thinking though that in this case since I wouldn't be using the main, I could clip the main halyard to the back of the boom. It's dacron and much stronger than the topping lift, of course. Seems like this should be a reasonable substitution for a backstay, assuming the mainsheet is centered and tight.
User avatar
Trouts Dream
Captain
Posts: 663
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:10 pm
Sailboat: MacGregor 26X
Location: Calgary, Alberta--1997 26X--Yamaha 90HP 2 Stroke....grunt, grunt

Post by Trouts Dream »

On the M, the shroud bases are further back than on an X. These shrouds provide a pretty significant aft pull on the mast replacing the backstay force on the X. The X needs the extra support of the backstay due to the shrouds being closer (towards the pointy part of the boat) to the mast base.
Worst case scenario in a demast caused by too much load pulling forward, the mast goes forward and not back into the cockpit. Small concilation, but I wouldn't be too worried about this happening if your a prudent sailor.
Hardcrab
Captain
Posts: 868
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:25 pm
Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
Location: "Cease-fire", White 05 M, 90hp, Boggy Bayou, Niceville, FL

Post by Hardcrab »

Well Nemo, the two of us are on the same page.
The topping lift/main halyard to the centered boom will add reinforcement to the already strong back-swept spreaders and stays.
The mainsail/ mainsheet being the normal "backstay" is my logic path.
I'm reasonably sure that a decent topping lift can be stronger than a sewn dacron mainsail luff in dealing with the winds forces.

On a side note:
I've looked at some "X",s in our storage area. I was under the impression that the X upper stays/chain-plates
did not mount as far aft as the M, therefore a backstay was called for to add strength.
With my casual eye-balling, but not measuring, I don't believe this to be true. Has anyone measured the difference?
The chainplates look to be the same distance aft of the mast on both models. That should indicate equal strenght.
If that's true, I wonder why the M doesn't also need a "real" backstay?
Or, in the reverse, does the X really need a backstay?
Just wondering.
User avatar
NiceAft
Admiral
Posts: 6749
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:28 pm
Sailboat: MacGregor 26M
Location: Upper Dublin,PA, USA: 2005M 50hp.Honda4strk.,1979 Phantom Sport Sailboat, 9'Achilles 6HP Merc 4strk

Post by NiceAft »

My topping lift is not the strongest, it's the black (nylon?) stock line. I'm thinking though that in this case since I wouldn't be using the main, I could clip the main halyard to the back of the boom. It's dacron and much stronger than the topping lift, of course. Seems like this should be a reasonable substitution for a backstay, assuming the mainsheet is centered and tight.
Nemo, that's an awful lot of contemplation. Wouldn't it just be easier to reduce the Genny, and reef the main :?: Unless your testing boat limits for MacGregor Yachts, why do this? If you should inadvertently find the breaking point, "OOPS" won't help you.

By the way, the only mast misshape I remember reading is that of an M mast falling backwards when the "ring ding" which holds the Genny's roller furler to the bow broke loose.

Ray
Post Reply