traditional spritsail

[ChuckG]

Would anybody like to recommend a sailmaker for a spritsail of about 80 sq feet? I'm building Rich Kolin's Catherine, and would like to try a spritsail on her.

And would anybody like to comment on the following specifications? What am I leaving out, or what doesn't make sense?

Vertical cut 4 oz dacron in tanbark or cream; luff 7'8"; head 7'; leach 12'; foot 10'6"; and diagonal 11'10". Laced to the mast, but loose footed, and clewed out on a boom. Roped at the foot, luff, and head, with eyes/grommets at the clew, tack, and throat and a becket for the sprit at the peak. One line of reefs, approx 18"-24" above the foot.

What is the value in having the sail roped, other than looking traditional?

With a boom, does it make any sense to specify a brailing eye? I really like Pete Culler's suggestions about brailing, but I'm not sure how it would work with a boom.

I have read thru most of what I find on the forum on the subject; any other sources of information to recommend?

As always, thanks for the help!!

[ 10-19-2003, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: ChuckG ]

[ChuckG]

Would anybody like to recommend a sailmaker for a spritsail of about 80 sq feet? I'm building Rich Kolin's Catherine, and would like to try a spritsail on her.

And would anybody like to comment on the following specifications? What am I leaving out, or what doesn't make sense?

Vertical cut 4 oz dacron in tanbark or cream; luff 7'8"; head 7'; leach 12'; foot 10'6"; and diagonal 11'10". Laced to the mast, but loose footed, and clewed out on a boom. Roped at the foot, luff, and head, with eyes/grommets at the clew, tack, and throat and a becket for the sprit at the peak. One line of reefs, approx 18"-24" above the foot.

What is the value in having the sail roped, other than looking traditional?

With a boom, does it make any sense to specify a brailing eye? I really like Pete Culler's suggestions about brailing, but I'm not sure how it would work with a boom.

I have read thru most of what I find on the forum on the subject; any other sources of information to recommend?

As always, thanks for the help!!

[ 10-19-2003, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: ChuckG ]

[ChuckG]

Would anybody like to recommend a sailmaker for a spritsail of about 80 sq feet? I'm building Rich Kolin's Catherine, and would like to try a spritsail on her.

And would anybody like to comment on the following specifications? What am I leaving out, or what doesn't make sense?

Vertical cut 4 oz dacron in tanbark or cream; luff 7'8"; head 7'; leach 12'; foot 10'6"; and diagonal 11'10". Laced to the mast, but loose footed, and clewed out on a boom. Roped at the foot, luff, and head, with eyes/grommets at the clew, tack, and throat and a becket for the sprit at the peak. One line of reefs, approx 18"-24" above the foot.

What is the value in having the sail roped, other than looking traditional?

With a boom, does it make any sense to specify a brailing eye? I really like Pete Culler's suggestions about brailing, but I'm not sure how it would work with a boom.

I have read thru most of what I find on the forum on the subject; any other sources of information to recommend?

As always, thanks for the help!!

[ 10-19-2003, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: ChuckG ]

[J. Dillon]

Chuck,

Put in a call for Todd Bradshaw another resident sail maker I can recomend as I had him cut a jib for me.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid82/p7776edb6f22527c3930873f8e0007449/fae94051.jpg
{Jib cut by Todd}

I have a 100'sq sprit sail boom less and I like that way. Nothing to knock the noggin. It is only disadvantage for me is down wind but I try to avoid that point of sail as much as possible.

I like my brail and use it all the time. I don't know how it would do with a boom.

JD

[J. Dillon]

Chuck,

Put in a call for Todd Bradshaw another resident sail maker I can recomend as I had him cut a jib for me.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid82/p7776edb6f22527c3930873f8e0007449/fae94051.jpg
{Jib cut by Todd}

I have a 100'sq sprit sail boom less and I like that way. Nothing to knock the noggin. It is only disadvantage for me is down wind but I try to avoid that point of sail as much as possible.

I like my brail and use it all the time. I don't know how it would do with a boom.

JD

[J. Dillon]

Chuck,

Put in a call for Todd Bradshaw another resident sail maker I can recomend as I had him cut a jib for me.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid82/p7776edb6f22527c3930873f8e0007449/fae94051.jpg
{Jib cut by Todd}

I have a 100'sq sprit sail boom less and I like that way. Nothing to knock the noggin. It is only disadvantage for me is down wind but I try to avoid that point of sail as much as possible.

I like my brail and use it all the time. I don't know how it would do with a boom.

JD

[Hans Lassen]

Chuck,

I go along with JD - I don't miss a boom at all. Don't know though why it shouldn't work with a brailing line as long as the boom would be made fast at the mast like a lugsail boom (without this fork thing at the front end - again, I'm at a loss without the dictionary... the boom extends to forward of the mast, know what I mean?). As for the cloth: you may want to think about oceanus sailcloth as an alternative to dacron, since you want it to look traditional. It feels much better than dacron, folds better, and is much quieter. Give Jody Hulsebosch at north sails a call. They'll send you samples.
Greetings
Hans

[Hans Lassen]

Chuck,

I go along with JD - I don't miss a boom at all. Don't know though why it shouldn't work with a brailing line as long as the boom would be made fast at the mast like a lugsail boom (without this fork thing at the front end - again, I'm at a loss without the dictionary... the boom extends to forward of the mast, know what I mean?). As for the cloth: you may want to think about oceanus sailcloth as an alternative to dacron, since you want it to look traditional. It feels much better than dacron, folds better, and is much quieter. Give Jody Hulsebosch at north sails a call. They'll send you samples.
Greetings
Hans

[Hans Lassen]

Chuck,

I go along with JD - I don't miss a boom at all. Don't know though why it shouldn't work with a brailing line as long as the boom would be made fast at the mast like a lugsail boom (without this fork thing at the front end - again, I'm at a loss without the dictionary... the boom extends to forward of the mast, know what I mean?). As for the cloth: you may want to think about oceanus sailcloth as an alternative to dacron, since you want it to look traditional. It feels much better than dacron, folds better, and is much quieter. Give Jody Hulsebosch at north sails a call. They'll send you samples.
Greetings
Hans

[Todd Bradshaw]

Oceanus would be awfully heavy and lifeless for this sail, especially in light air and especially if used boomless. Four ounce Dacron would be a much better choice. Oceanus is great stuff, but only when used on sails of proper size. Richard Hayward 4 oz. Dacrons in Egyptian Cream or Tanbark have the nicest finish (less cheap and shiny looking) of any 4 oz. brands that I know of and have built in U.V. absorbers. Their Tanbark color is also far better than most of the others.

The main problem I see here are the dimensions. The proportions generated by the stated dimensions seemed strange, so I drew them out to see why. What I found was not a spritsail, but a lugsail - possibly a standing lug with the clew corner kicked-up very high, but much more likely a balanced lug. I'm not familiar with the boat or it's plans, but where did the sail dimensions come from? I suppose you could rig it as a spritsail, but I don't think you'll like it much and with that long foot you're probably going to need a fairly substantial boom.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p96425e3d163e13c2572e19c6825be1ca/fac8632f.jpg

Roping adds strength to the edges but it also adds weight and is usually put in under a little bit of tension. I would not rope the foot of a small loose-footed sail, especially one which might be used boomless as it will probably pucker in use. On the luff and head it could be done, but it's a luxury and adequate edge strength on a sail that size can be generated where needed by other means, like double-taping the luff or hiding a small piece of webbing inside the luff tape. Nothing looks as nice as roping, but it can be pretty pricy.

[ 10-19-2003, 06:24 PM: Message edited by: Todd Bradshaw ]

[Todd Bradshaw]

Oceanus would be awfully heavy and lifeless for this sail, especially in light air and especially if used boomless. Four ounce Dacron would be a much better choice. Oceanus is great stuff, but only when used on sails of proper size. Richard Hayward 4 oz. Dacrons in Egyptian Cream or Tanbark have the nicest finish (less cheap and shiny looking) of any 4 oz. brands that I know of and have built in U.V. absorbers. Their Tanbark color is also far better than most of the others.

The main problem I see here are the dimensions. The proportions generated by the stated dimensions seemed strange, so I drew them out to see why. What I found was not a spritsail, but a lugsail - possibly a standing lug with the clew corner kicked-up very high, but much more likely a balanced lug. I'm not familiar with the boat or it's plans, but where did the sail dimensions come from? I suppose you could rig it as a spritsail, but I don't think you'll like it much and with that long foot you're probably going to need a fairly substantial boom.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p96425e3d163e13c2572e19c6825be1ca/fac8632f.jpg

Roping adds strength to the edges but it also adds weight and is usually put in under a little bit of tension. I would not rope the foot of a small loose-footed sail, especially one which might be used boomless as it will probably pucker in use. On the luff and head it could be done, but it's a luxury and adequate edge strength on a sail that size can be generated where needed by other means, like double-taping the luff or hiding a small piece of webbing inside the luff tape. Nothing looks as nice as roping, but it can be pretty pricy.

[ 10-19-2003, 06:24 PM: Message edited by: Todd Bradshaw ]

[Todd Bradshaw]

Oceanus would be awfully heavy and lifeless for this sail, especially in light air and especially if used boomless. Four ounce Dacron would be a much better choice. Oceanus is great stuff, but only when used on sails of proper size. Richard Hayward 4 oz. Dacrons in Egyptian Cream or Tanbark have the nicest finish (less cheap and shiny looking) of any 4 oz. brands that I know of and have built in U.V. absorbers. Their Tanbark color is also far better than most of the others.

The main problem I see here are the dimensions. The proportions generated by the stated dimensions seemed strange, so I drew them out to see why. What I found was not a spritsail, but a lugsail - possibly a standing lug with the clew corner kicked-up very high, but much more likely a balanced lug. I'm not familiar with the boat or it's plans, but where did the sail dimensions come from? I suppose you could rig it as a spritsail, but I don't think you'll like it much and with that long foot you're probably going to need a fairly substantial boom.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p96425e3d163e13c2572e19c6825be1ca/fac8632f.jpg

Roping adds strength to the edges but it also adds weight and is usually put in under a little bit of tension. I would not rope the foot of a small loose-footed sail, especially one which might be used boomless as it will probably pucker in use. On the luff and head it could be done, but it's a luxury and adequate edge strength on a sail that size can be generated where needed by other means, like double-taping the luff or hiding a small piece of webbing inside the luff tape. Nothing looks as nice as roping, but it can be pretty pricy.

[ 10-19-2003, 06:24 PM: Message edited by: Todd Bradshaw ]

[Mike Field]

.
And my comments about the boom, based on experiences with my boat Aioleen Louisa, are the same as Jack's and Hans'. A boom's unnecessary.

I understand that indeed a boomed sail can be brailed up, but I can't believe it's as simple an operation as brailing a boomless one. Further, at some point you'd ned to be standing up to deal with it, which is not always a good idea in a dinghy in a blow. Without the boom, brailing is a simple operation that can be carried out, sitting down, from the helm.

Yes, the sail bellies in when you're running, but if that's a problem you can always boom it out with a boathook or an oar.
.

http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed1.jpg

.
http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed2.jpg
.

[Mike Field]

.
And my comments about the boom, based on experiences with my boat Aioleen Louisa, are the same as Jack's and Hans'. A boom's unnecessary.

I understand that indeed a boomed sail can be brailed up, but I can't believe it's as simple an operation as brailing a boomless one. Further, at some point you'd ned to be standing up to deal with it, which is not always a good idea in a dinghy in a blow. Without the boom, brailing is a simple operation that can be carried out, sitting down, from the helm.

Yes, the sail bellies in when you're running, but if that's a problem you can always boom it out with a boathook or an oar.
.

http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed1.jpg

.
http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed2.jpg
.

[Mike Field]

.
And my comments about the boom, based on experiences with my boat Aioleen Louisa, are the same as Jack's and Hans'. A boom's unnecessary.

I understand that indeed a boomed sail can be brailed up, but I can't believe it's as simple an operation as brailing a boomless one. Further, at some point you'd ned to be standing up to deal with it, which is not always a good idea in a dinghy in a blow. Without the boom, brailing is a simple operation that can be carried out, sitting down, from the helm.

Yes, the sail bellies in when you're running, but if that's a problem you can always boom it out with a boathook or an oar.
.

http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed1.jpg

.
http://www.woodenboatfittings.com.au/public/al-brailed2.jpg
.

[Todd Bradshaw]

Normally, I would agree on the boom question. If you can't boom out a typical spritsail with a simple pole or other makeshift device when needed downwind, you should probably be looking at a different sail type. In this case though, my suggestion of a sturdy boom goes back to the proportions of the sail. If this is actually the shape of the sail and it's rigged as a boomless spritsail, the proper lead for the mainsheet is going to be way aft of the mast (in the neighborhood of 15' aft of the partners) which is going to be quite impractical unless this is a very long boat. With that long foot the sail will also lose it's foot shape sooner, rather than later as the boat turns away from the wind. I wouldn't be surprised if the sailshape was already marginal or worse by the time it got down to a broad reach. A boom would help these things.

What I think would help more would be to change the proportions to something more sprit-typical and dump the boom. If you look at the drawing posted above and redraw the line of the leech, locating it's lower, clew end in the neighborhood of 1.5-2 panel-widths inboard of it's present location along the foot (shortening the foot) you start getting into a shape more typical of most spritsails. At that point you can also start to enjoy some of the reasons that spritsails are still popular and so efficient in terms of hanging up the most canvas with the least amount of structure. The sail area lost by cutting down the clew corner could easily be regained with a small proportional increase in size, though somewhere along the line the balance should be recalculated.

[Todd Bradshaw]

Normally, I would agree on the boom question. If you can't boom out a typical spritsail with a simple pole or other makeshift device when needed downwind, you should probably be looking at a different sail type. In this case though, my suggestion of a sturdy boom goes back to the proportions of the sail. If this is actually the shape of the sail and it's rigged as a boomless spritsail, the proper lead for the mainsheet is going to be way aft of the mast (in the neighborhood of 15' aft of the partners) which is going to be quite impractical unless this is a very long boat. With that long foot the sail will also lose it's foot shape sooner, rather than later as the boat turns away from the wind. I wouldn't be surprised if the sailshape was already marginal or worse by the time it got down to a broad reach. A boom would help these things.

What I think would help more would be to change the proportions to something more sprit-typical and dump the boom. If you look at the drawing posted above and redraw the line of the leech, locating it's lower, clew end in the neighborhood of 1.5-2 panel-widths inboard of it's present location along the foot (shortening the foot) you start getting into a shape more typical of most spritsails. At that point you can also start to enjoy some of the reasons that spritsails are still popular and so efficient in terms of hanging up the most canvas with the least amount of structure. The sail area lost by cutting down the clew corner could easily be regained with a small proportional increase in size, though somewhere along the line the balance should be recalculated.

[Todd Bradshaw]

Normally, I would agree on the boom question. If you can't boom out a typical spritsail with a simple pole or other makeshift device when needed downwind, you should probably be looking at a different sail type. In this case though, my suggestion of a sturdy boom goes back to the proportions of the sail. If this is actually the shape of the sail and it's rigged as a boomless spritsail, the proper lead for the mainsheet is going to be way aft of the mast (in the neighborhood of 15' aft of the partners) which is going to be quite impractical unless this is a very long boat. With that long foot the sail will also lose it's foot shape sooner, rather than later as the boat turns away from the wind. I wouldn't be surprised if the sailshape was already marginal or worse by the time it got down to a broad reach. A boom would help these things.

What I think would help more would be to change the proportions to something more sprit-typical and dump the boom. If you look at the drawing posted above and redraw the line of the leech, locating it's lower, clew end in the neighborhood of 1.5-2 panel-widths inboard of it's present location along the foot (shortening the foot) you start getting into a shape more typical of most spritsails. At that point you can also start to enjoy some of the reasons that spritsails are still popular and so efficient in terms of hanging up the most canvas with the least amount of structure. The sail area lost by cutting down the clew corner could easily be regained with a small proportional increase in size, though somewhere along the line the balance should be recalculated.

[ChuckG]

Folks,
Thanks for the responses!

not sure if this pix is going to show up:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0937822620/ref=lib_dp_TFCV/102-0540504-2201747?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader#reader-link

If it does, you'll see that that Catherine does indeed sport a standing lug. The sprit rig was an "also ran" in Rich's book, "Traditional Boatbuilding Made Easy; Building Catherine" It's a WoodenBoat Book, but there are some other glitches in it, so this may be yet another. The dimensions of the lug in the book are slightly different: 2" longer in the leech and 6'10" in the luff.

I like the idea of running a boomless spritsail, with a brailing eye.

The dimensions as given in the book for the spritsail actually seem to put the clew of the sail out over the transom, which if it were boomless, would probably not work at all - it would seem kind of hard to sheet. With the boom, the sheet is fairled along the boom back to a point well forward of the helm.

So Todd, the next question is, how would you suggest adjusting the given dimensions? (And I don't mean to be asking for professional services here, and would be happy to move the design consulting into a different arena smile.gif

Mike, is that your boat? I've seen very similar pictures as those somewhere else, something to do with Swallows and Amazons??

Thanks again!

[ChuckG]

Folks,
Thanks for the responses!

not sure if this pix is going to show up:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0937822620/ref=lib_dp_TFCV/102-0540504-2201747?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader#reader-link

If it does, you'll see that that Catherine does indeed sport a standing lug. The sprit rig was an "also ran" in Rich's book, "Traditional Boatbuilding Made Easy; Building Catherine" It's a WoodenBoat Book, but there are some other glitches in it, so this may be yet another. The dimensions of the lug in the book are slightly different: 2" longer in the leech and 6'10" in the luff.

I like the idea of running a boomless spritsail, with a brailing eye.

The dimensions as given in the book for the spritsail actually seem to put the clew of the sail out over the transom, which if it were boomless, would probably not work at all - it would seem kind of hard to sheet. With the boom, the sheet is fairled along the boom back to a point well forward of the helm.

So Todd, the next question is, how would you suggest adjusting the given dimensions? (And I don't mean to be asking for professional services here, and would be happy to move the design consulting into a different arena smile.gif

Mike, is that your boat? I've seen very similar pictures as those somewhere else, something to do with Swallows and Amazons??

Thanks again!

[ChuckG]

Folks,
Thanks for the responses!

not sure if this pix is going to show up:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0937822620/ref=lib_dp_TFCV/102-0540504-2201747?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader#reader-link

If it does, you'll see that that Catherine does indeed sport a standing lug. The sprit rig was an "also ran" in Rich's book, "Traditional Boatbuilding Made Easy; Building Catherine" It's a WoodenBoat Book, but there are some other glitches in it, so this may be yet another. The dimensions of the lug in the book are slightly different: 2" longer in the leech and 6'10" in the luff.

I like the idea of running a boomless spritsail, with a brailing eye.

The dimensions as given in the book for the spritsail actually seem to put the clew of the sail out over the transom, which if it were boomless, would probably not work at all - it would seem kind of hard to sheet. With the boom, the sheet is fairled along the boom back to a point well forward of the helm.

So Todd, the next question is, how would you suggest adjusting the given dimensions? (And I don't mean to be asking for professional services here, and would be happy to move the design consulting into a different arena smile.gif

Mike, is that your boat? I've seen very similar pictures as those somewhere else, something to do with Swallows and Amazons??

Thanks again!

[Mike Field]

.
Todd -- Good response. I missed the clew overhang. And your drawing makes clear that the sail shape is not the more usual nearly-rectangular shape a spritsail generally is.

Chuck -- Yes, you've maybe seen the second of those photos on the homepage of Stu Wier's website, The Boats of Swallows and Amazons (http://home.earthlink.net/~swier/sanda.html). (There are some other photos of her there too, but you have to poke about a bit to find them.)

Mike
.

[Mike Field]

.
Todd -- Good response. I missed the clew overhang. And your drawing makes clear that the sail shape is not the more usual nearly-rectangular shape a spritsail generally is.

Chuck -- Yes, you've maybe seen the second of those photos on the homepage of Stu Wier's website, The Boats of Swallows and Amazons (http://home.earthlink.net/~swier/sanda.html). (There are some other photos of her there too, but you have to poke about a bit to find them.)

Mike
.

[Mike Field]

.
Todd -- Good response. I missed the clew overhang. And your drawing makes clear that the sail shape is not the more usual nearly-rectangular shape a spritsail generally is.

Chuck -- Yes, you've maybe seen the second of those photos on the homepage of Stu Wier's website, The Boats of Swallows and Amazons (http://home.earthlink.net/~swier/sanda.html). (There are some other photos of her there too, but you have to poke about a bit to find them.)

Mike
.

[Todd Bradshaw]

After scoping-out the WB book list, I guess that means that it would be this boat, which is shown here sporting a balanced lug that looks suspiciously like the proportions mentioned above for the spritsail.
http://www.woodenboatstore.com/store/images/325118.JPG

I can't say I'm too keen on that drooping boom in the back of the boat. Combined with the raked mast it looks to me as if the entire rig is falling backwards. Then again, there is no wind in the photo and the sail and boom are just hanging there. Maybe they look better with some wind in the sail.

Anyway, it's difficult to be too specific having never seen the plans or drawings for the boat, but I pulled a more typical spritsail shape out of my big bag of cybersails and overlayed on top of an approximation of the original. I tried to keep the partners in about the same spot, but removed much of the rake for the sprit's mast. The tack is lower, but without a boom it wouldn't be a problem and there is room to do it in the photo. The step on the floor would need to come aft a bit. The sails are almost exactly the same area and the C.E's are level. The new sprit's C.E. came out about 3.5" forward of the original. With some tweaking and a slightly more square-ish sailshape, I could probably nail it right on the head. As is, the partners might need to be moved to compensate and since I haven't seen the construction plan I don't know how tough that would be.

The original is shown in black, the more typical spritsail shape in red.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p70f0cf81c7931d299396745d1c272849/fac75a99.jpg

[Todd Bradshaw]

After scoping-out the WB book list, I guess that means that it would be this boat, which is shown here sporting a balanced lug that looks suspiciously like the proportions mentioned above for the spritsail.
http://www.woodenboatstore.com/store/images/325118.JPG

I can't say I'm too keen on that drooping boom in the back of the boat. Combined with the raked mast it looks to me as if the entire rig is falling backwards. Then again, there is no wind in the photo and the sail and boom are just hanging there. Maybe they look better with some wind in the sail.

Anyway, it's difficult to be too specific having never seen the plans or drawings for the boat, but I pulled a more typical spritsail shape out of my big bag of cybersails and overlayed on top of an approximation of the original. I tried to keep the partners in about the same spot, but removed much of the rake for the sprit's mast. The tack is lower, but without a boom it wouldn't be a problem and there is room to do it in the photo. The step on the floor would need to come aft a bit. The sails are almost exactly the same area and the C.E's are level. The new sprit's C.E. came out about 3.5" forward of the original. With some tweaking and a slightly more square-ish sailshape, I could probably nail it right on the head. As is, the partners might need to be moved to compensate and since I haven't seen the construction plan I don't know how tough that would be.

The original is shown in black, the more typical spritsail shape in red.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p70f0cf81c7931d299396745d1c272849/fac75a99.jpg

[Todd Bradshaw]

After scoping-out the WB book list, I guess that means that it would be this boat, which is shown here sporting a balanced lug that looks suspiciously like the proportions mentioned above for the spritsail.
http://www.woodenboatstore.com/store/images/325118.JPG

I can't say I'm too keen on that drooping boom in the back of the boat. Combined with the raked mast it looks to me as if the entire rig is falling backwards. Then again, there is no wind in the photo and the sail and boom are just hanging there. Maybe they look better with some wind in the sail.

Anyway, it's difficult to be too specific having never seen the plans or drawings for the boat, but I pulled a more typical spritsail shape out of my big bag of cybersails and overlayed on top of an approximation of the original. I tried to keep the partners in about the same spot, but removed much of the rake for the sprit's mast. The tack is lower, but without a boom it wouldn't be a problem and there is room to do it in the photo. The step on the floor would need to come aft a bit. The sails are almost exactly the same area and the C.E's are level. The new sprit's C.E. came out about 3.5" forward of the original. With some tweaking and a slightly more square-ish sailshape, I could probably nail it right on the head. As is, the partners might need to be moved to compensate and since I haven't seen the construction plan I don't know how tough that would be.

The original is shown in black, the more typical spritsail shape in red.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid85/p70f0cf81c7931d299396745d1c272849/fac75a99.jpg

[ChuckG]

This is absolutely awesome, thanks! It seems an understatement to say, "I'm glad I asked."

In as much as the hull hasn't even been turned over yet, moving the mast partners a smidge aft should not be an issue. I've been mulling over how I might make the mast step slightly adjustable anyway.

Todd, I think you've given me a lot of material to contemplate; I sure appreciate your help.

Thanks to everybody!!

[ChuckG]

This is absolutely awesome, thanks! It seems an understatement to say, "I'm glad I asked."

In as much as the hull hasn't even been turned over yet, moving the mast partners a smidge aft should not be an issue. I've been mulling over how I might make the mast step slightly adjustable anyway.

Todd, I think you've given me a lot of material to contemplate; I sure appreciate your help.

Thanks to everybody!!

[ChuckG]

This is absolutely awesome, thanks! It seems an understatement to say, "I'm glad I asked."

In as much as the hull hasn't even been turned over yet, moving the mast partners a smidge aft should not be an issue. I've been mulling over how I might make the mast step slightly adjustable anyway.

Todd, I think you've given me a lot of material to contemplate; I sure appreciate your help.

Thanks to everybody!!