Discussion in 'Sunfish Talk' started by ylojelo, Feb 22, 2010.
Tynwald, how about this:
Here's the delema, as Tynwald pointed out, too low a line and the mainsheet doesn't engage properly, however, too high a line and whenever you hike out, the mainsheet engages in the cleat whether you want it to or not. Not only that, but if you are hiked out flat it's extremely difficult for most people to disengage the sheet by simply raising the angle they are holding the line at.
With the mainsheet captured and you hiked out unable to uncleat and unable to move body weight inboard, you have one of two alternatives if a gust of wind hits..., quickly turn the boat into the wind or go for a swim.
If the block to cleat line angle is too low they make risers to fine tune this situation. If the cleat is too high, about all you can do is bend the arm.
I use these modified Harken set up for the main-sheet and it works great. I turned the cleat right side up and removed the fair lead I posted the Harken model # in an earlier thread.
crap, I thought this was a tried & true set-up. I purchased these back in March for two boats
This is what I was thinking in my post above. In my mind, the cleat bracket would have been flipped putting the cleat upsidedown and at a higher angle.
In your experience, does the mainsheet usually wrap around the block so much that the cleat is out of the way? (My guess is yes, but just thought I'd ask.) Also, how much clearance is there between the cleat and the deck once it's swivelled around? Does the block ever tilt enough that the cleat contacts the deck?
Your set-up looks the most logical to me (albeit coming from someone that has never used a block or cleat).
A couple of things. I have always used three zip ties on the spring when mounting it. This really works great and is easy. On the fly i have tried to go without the zipties. Forget about that.
As far as covering the blocks for travel...Use a koozie. Keeps your block clean when you're driving, keeps your drink cold when you're not driving
Dave after sailing with the hook for a year I knew that I wanted something better. I bought a swivel base unit but didn't mount it as I was wanting a set up that would allow turning hull upside down without removing the and also wanted the smallest deck foot print for sailing with two people. This Harken 2627 with 57mm ratcgamatic with cam looked to be the setup that I wanted but I never saw another Sunfish with it. Bought it new on eBay for $15 ,a steal, and this is my second season with it with no problems. I have the cam angle set so cleating off is an intentional act and the cam does not hit the deck but is always on the high side when the main sheet is pulling. Cleat angle is fully adjustable to suit the skipper. Works with light air 1/4 and heavy air 3/8 sheets. Fasten Harken eye strap, only two bolts, to deck and use Harken Heavy spring to keep block upright. I use polyethylene cutting boards for the backing all hardware. 57mm adjustable Carbo ratchet makes sheeting in a breeze even in a howl.
><> Don <><
I liked that picture and then realized why. It is my boat! Was that from my SCUD thread?
These are some great ideas. As often as I’d cleat, I probably should have used the KISS approach that tag did (Harken 150 cam cleat mounted on the forward cockpit lip). I have to admit that option also appeals to the OCD in me (gotta cover up those holes left in the lip where the hook was!). The other way to go is to use a block with integrated cam cleats or a swivel base that brings the cams up into the right position (Harken 205 or 144), like raubvogel and NightSailor did. Is this the thread you are referring to?
[FONT="]The bottom line is that the H241 DOES NOT work for this application.[/FONT] [FONT="]What I've decided to do for the time being is to remove the strap on the cam cleats from the H241. This allows the sheet to play normally and gain traction on the block. To cleat, one can loop the sheet around the base and bring it up through the cleats. Takes a few milliseconds longer, but I’m not a racer, so who cares?
[FONT="]To uncleat, just pull up on the sheet and you’re free. I don’t see that the sheet binds on the base.
[FONT="]An inelegant solution, but it’s probably better for me than scrapping the whole thing and going back to the eyestrap on the deck (and have to fill 3 new holes on the deck… it’s that OCD thing again) or investing in another set-up. [/FONT]
Try the Harken H293 Cam riser (~$3.50) to put the cleat more in line.
The angled cam riser might even do better ... H294 (~$5.50)
In combination with your removal of the fairlead, this would give a setup more like Tag showes with the additional follow of swivel base. You get wrap on the block and cam when you want it with a lower risk of accidental cleating than you'd have with the H205 base.
Yes it was! Nice restoration you did there! Makes me feel like a lazy ass for not taking care of mine.
Well, Wayne, I don't think that would work. The base for the cams is so low on the H241 that you'd have to raise them about 2" to be able to securely cleat. I suppose one could add several of these to raise the cams up enough, but it probably wouldn't be very stable.
Ah, I see. I was thinking with the angled riser it would work like this...
Wayne , that looks like it would work to me. Anyone......why not ??????
Now that might work. The key is that the angle on the riser will need to be such that it is close to that of the sheet as it's comes off the bottom of the block. I'll have to check the Harken website to see if it has these specific dimensions.
The angle on the riser's 15 degrees. I'll take a look at this tomorrow and let you guys know...
The angle of the sheet as it hits the cams now is ~35 degrees, so with the 15 degree angle of the riser, the sheet will be coming out of the cleat at ~20 degrees. These cleats are designed to hold a line whose pulling force is pretty much perpendicular to the cams axes. With a little experimentation, I found that they loose their grip when the sheet is directed more than about 20-25 degrees. Pretty close. However, the thing that makes this more likely to work is that the height of the riser itself lowers the sheet angle to some extent, providing a little margin of error. Think I'll give it a try...
Thought I’d give everyone a little update on my progress with this project. Ran into another problem; the H294 angled cam riser that was suggested in an earlier post turned out to be the wrong size (should have double-checked the dimensions myself!)!!! It’s actually the H296 that has the correct screw hole spacings to fit the H241 base. After waiting to get the correct part from APS, I then discovered that H294 wasn’t designed to have the cam cleat reversed (angled away from the block). The screw holes aren’t centered in the riser and each of the straight sides has little ridges that help keep the cam secure. If you reverse the cleat, it won’t lie flat on the riser unless you remove one of the ridges.
It fit OK after rasping the ridge off, although as you can see in the pics, the cleat hangs over the edge a small amount. The next obstacle was to find machine screws with the right length to hold this on to the swivel base. Standard 2 or 2-1/2 inch screws won’t do it (the optimal length seems to be ~ 2-3/16”). Not wanting to order another 100 odd-length screws (see earlier postings about the “shorty” screws) I was able to cut a couple of regular (not stainless steel) screws to a length long enough to hold all this together but not so long as to prevent the base from rotating (the little rise around the cockpit lip gets in the way). Even still, this is pretty close.
You may notice some scrapes on the cockpit lip from the ends of the screws (had to file them down a bit still).
Took the ‘fish out to the lake yesterday to give this set-up a test and get some “action” shots. It works (sort of). The main problem is that the swivel base doesn’t swivel with the block now that the fairlead’s been removed. I can still cleat off, but it’s inconvenient to say the least (and pretty much impossible when hiking out).
Also, the short length of the swivel arm limits movement of the block to some degree, although it doesn’t interfere with the way I sail.
My final impression about this modification is that it’s not worth the effort. For my needs, mounting a cam cleat on the cockpit lip would have sufficed (which is pretty much the way this set-up works now). Sailing on a Midwestern lake with constantly changing wind speeds and directions, I can’t imagine cleating the main while hiked out, so this is just for short emergency situations when you need a third hand in light air. I think some of the other arrangements suggested in earlier posts would be better, although someone who already has the swivel base mounted and just wants to swap out the padeye for a block might consider it. Anyway, too much time futzing and not enough time sailing; I'm going to the lake....
Simple is always better: Harken H019, eye trap, spring, backing plate, screws, 15 minutes, done!
You never need the sheet clamped, just leave the old hook there and slip knot the sheet to it or wrap the sheet around the block spring when you need that third hand.
Whew..., Your efforts and feedback are very much appreciated !
Several years ago when I first suggested assembling the more popular Harken equipment to emmulate my Ronstan swivel I had no idea the subtle differences between designers would negate functionality the way you discovered it did.
Being from the school of not cleating when hiked out, I completely overlooked a couple of the aspects lost in the conversion process, primarily swivel follow for the uncleated lead. ... I only care if a cleated lead follows so it can be released as quickly as possible.
Next time I am in my local (65 mi away) sailing shop I will bench test today's equivalent of the Ronstan equipment I once had set up on an earlier boat, to see if it will function any better.
Ronstan RF58 Swivel & Cam, Ronstan RF4 Standup Spring, and Ronstan RF5402 Wedge Kit
Apparently the rise of the Ronstan base plate in combination with the lower profile of their standup spring & eyestrap make a more significant difference than I realized.
...and for the versatility, this Ronstan assemblage is nearly twice the cost of the Harken..., which probably explains gravitating toward Harken products in the first place.
Separate names with a comma.