That may be the question. But here's my problem. You see, I was reading a magazine review the other day of the new Catalina 445. Once the reviewer had given the overall design, concept and application his blessing he went on to say that "not everyone will want the in mast furling"
And so I wrote to a few friends to try to flesh out this idea that in-mast furling is perhaps not desirable. I told them that few years ago I entered a boatshow in Oakland, California that had been set up by my local dealer. I had no idea where our boat was within the show but quickly realized that there were only a couple of boats without furling masts making my search for our boat (without) far easier. That image has stuck with me and I continue to swing back and forth on the subject of in-mast furlers and their market acceptance. Should Sabre's be equipped as standard with in mast furlers?
On the (very) positive side the sail isso easy to deploy and refurl and without the sail cover there is no yelling associated (with this maneuver anyway). Nobody has to go out on deck. The purists, including me I will admit, don't like the sail shape, don't like the weight of the sail aloft when I am at anchor or under power and I am always afraid of a jam when the sail is half way in (or out).
But is my own view of the world the wrong one?
Great post. Don't think you've got the wrong view of the world. I always vote for simple over complicated!
Posted by: Mike | July 10, 2009 at 08:43 AM
I would never use an in mast furler for the same reasons you mention. However, I am considering an in boom furler, which can accept a full batten sail.
Sabre 452
Posted by: Michael McGinnis | July 17, 2009 at 07:47 PM