But it does add weight down
low, and it's relatively cheap... if it gives the boat enough life span
to last out your likely tenure of ownership, why not?

Peter Wiley wrote:
Yeah, if you want to look at it like that, fair enough. It makes me
uncomfortable tho.


It would me, too. But as a practical matter of boat-keeping, you cannot
make everything perfect.



Doug, there's nothing wrong with the junk rig on that hull and I don't
understand why you think there is. It was designed for the rig.


I just don't like junks. They have a lot of windage,


True.


proportionately
more weight aloft,


But why is this bad? Taken to a logical conclusion, you're saying the
less weight aloft the better.

From a standpoint of stability & speed, that's true. But I agree with
you that there are other factors.

... In practice this has been shown to be a
bad assumption. Weight aloft damps out roll, extends roll period and
provides more inertia to resist rolling over. I agree that too much
weight aloft isn't going to be good either, but the implication that
more is bad doesn't hold up.


Depends on what you want the boat to do. Roll damping is good, but
weight aloft also hurts LPOS.


I don't really have any feelings pro/con about the looks. They're
different is all. As to pointing, true but so what? It's not designed
as any sort of racing vessel. That hull form won't point as high as a
fin keeled sloop no matter what rig it has. It's not designed for it.


Dunno about pointing, it's true that it's not going to climb to windward
like a 12-Meter no matter what rig you put on that hull. But I'm
uncomfortable with a boat, no matter how "cruisy," that does not go to
windward pretty well, or (as many cruising boats) will only make ground
to weather at all in ideal conditions. Too easy to get trapped, and too
dependent on the engine (odd as it may sound for a tug boat owner to say
that).

What's worse, many boats that have difficulty getting to windward are
ulso unhandy on the helm & reluctant in stays. It's a vicious circle.

But it's
dependent on the cutting edge of 17th century technology. With just a
teensy bit more budget,


Like somewhere in the vicinity of 10X, I'd venture to say......


Not at all. Part of what I'm trying to say is that all the stuff to
build a rig like that can be picked up 2nd hand or free, if you don't
mind spending the time hunting around. Around any recreational sailing
area, it's easier to find parts for than a junk rig.


you could have a full batten Marconi rig with
lazyjacks & a solid vang... easier to control


Pardon? I think your experience with junk rigs is about the same as
mine ie zero.

I have never sailed one myself, I have sailed in company with a fair
number, and in a variety of conditions.

... So where do you get this from? Everything I've read
indicates that there is no rig easier to control than the junk rig, on
a vessel of this size.

Well, the solid vang & lazy jack full batten marconi may not be easier
than the junk rig, but it's simpler. And it's the easiest rig I have
experience with, it's almost no work at all.

I think the people who extol the junk rig are very full of descriptives
like "no rig easier to control" when that's not really quantifiable...
and the rig they are extolling is also "easier to control" because
there's less of it. I also wonder how many of them have much experience
with modern rigs... the same crowd seems very down on roller furling &
self tailing winches.

Another point is that "easy to control" and "inexpensive" are the junk
rigs *only* two virtues.


.... I remember reading Annie Hill's account of
sailing around the Falklands in a junk rig schooner, in pretty dirty
conditions, on a 34' Benford dory.

Yep, 'Badger' IIRC, cool boat & a good story too.

... She also said that they used to own
a 6 metre sloop that went to windward like a witch, and hated it for
passagemaking. It either sailed at 2 knots to windward sans jib, or 6+
with even a small jib, with spray and a nasty motion making life
unpleasant. That's fine if you're racing I suppose but not cruising.
Their dory apparently jogs along to windward at 4 knots with a
comfortable ride and not much spray flying.


heh heh as a former owner of a 6-Meter, I can see where she's coming
from. OTOH I don't think they invested much time & effort in optimizing
their 6's rig, or learning how to get the most out of it. A fractional
Marconi rig is pretty easy to depower, and given a solid vang &
lazyjacks, simplicity itself to reef down.

But the 6-Meter is a wet & cramped boat, uncomfortable for any sort of
cruising. And it would be, regardless of what sort of rig one had on it.
I did some brief cruises on mine (owned in partnership, really) and just
anchoring the damn thing was a total PITA.

But it was a *gorgeous* boat, and lots of fun to sail.


On what point(s) of sailing? Upwind, maybe - if you care. IIRC Colvin
said the rig points as high as a Marconi rig but made more leeway.

That may have been true, given less effective underwater foils, back in
the 1960s.


... OTOH
it tended to run away downwind as the sails could be set wing & wing
easily, without the main blanketing the fore.

Sorry, I don't think that a heavy junk-rigged schooner is going to "run
away" from any but the pokiest marconi rigged boat, and that without any
flying sails set.

... You could also sail by
the lee without any dramas

A matter of skill on the part of the helmsman

... and a gybe was also pretty drama free as the
balanced lug damped out the motion when the sails swung across.

Now that much is true. Add that to the list of virtues... "easy to
control", cheap, and easy to gybe.


... Short
tacking up a channel was effortless.


So is a gaff cat, or cat ketch, or sloop with no jib or self-tacking
jib... and a sloop with a small jib is not difficult.

I think this assumes that the only possible comparison is to one of
those 1960s masthead rigs that need a huge genoa.


This type equipment has been off-the-shelf for twenty years
now and is quite scroungable.


I simply do not believe that you can build a fully battened Marconi rig
for anything like the price of a junk rig.

Why not? Go scrounge around a boat yard nowadays, you'll find lots of
2nd hand parts & components for such a rig... and darn few junk rig
parts. Of course, if you're shopping at the farm & truck supply place,
then maybe you can cobble together something, and it won't cost much...
but then neither will the boatyard cast-offs.


... Nothing I've ever read
indicates that you can even get close. Are you going to have the same
height mast(s)? If so, where's the gain in sail area?

In staysails & flying sails, and the Marconi sails are more efficient.
But with less weight and less windage aloft, there's no reason to not go
higher. In fact a higher rig of the same weight provides more
damping.... so there you go!



... If not, how much
higher are you going to go and how do you propose to brace the mast(s)?
Adding spreaders and more rigging wire costs money, increases the rig
loadings and requires either higher tensile strength materials or
thicker materials to gain the needed strength.

True enough, and those materials are very common & easy to find.

As I said, if one is determined to use 17th century technology, then the
junk rig makes a great choice.



....The batten cars cost a
hell of a lot more than the junk sail lacing. The sailcloth for a
battened Marconi sail needs to be of a lot higher standard than for a
junk sail. Etc.

In other words, you want to stitch burlap bags together and hang it on a
rig assembled from odds & ends out of a discount plumber's supply? Be my
guest... I won't even fuss when you brag about how easy it is to control!


... I point out that if you increase the rig height then
you're most likely going to have to start reefing in lighter air due to
the extra leverage aloft, unless you also increase ballast/draft as
well. There goes the shoal draft gunkholing ability.....


If the boat *sails* well in relatively light air, thent what's the issue
of having to reef? As long as the boat sails well when reefed, and the
reef can be taken in or shaken out without too much labor ...and with
the solid vang & lazy jacks, it's a matter of easing one line and
pulling another, while the sailing characterisitics remain pretty much
the same...

The funny thing is, a fully battened Marconi rig starts resembling a
junk rig sans the bit in front of the mast......


Yes it does.


One of Colvin's junk-rigged schooners entered the Chesapeake Bay Great
Schooner Race some years ago, and dropped out because she fell far far
behind the fleet.


Shrug. Bob in his dream Bendy would trail any field, too. Does it say
something about the vessel, the sailor, or maybe both?


Prob'ly a little of both. I bet the skipper was not very experienced
with his boat, and uncomfortable driving hard.


This particular vessel (Migrant) has been recorded as doing consistent
140+ mile days cruising over many passages & many years.

That's pretty good. OTOH it's also a big boat. 140 mile days on a 40' +
LWL is comparable to 90 mile days with a 32' LWL.



The junk rig doesn't do much for me, personally, and I wouldn't put one
on a boat myself, but they do work very well for short handed cruising
boats. There's been some 700+ Gazelle design boats built so far (not
all junk rigged). How many production boats have got to that number of
hulls in the water?


Only the ones that have been very successfully marketed... as have the
junk rigs!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King