These r mods that should not b taken lightly I studied rigging for 2 yrs so as I could learn how to do this & the cost was not cheap $$$$ even as I only had to pay for the material as I designed the cutter rig & done all my own labour I still had to purchase a second set of spreaders upper,s r 36" lower,s r 44" a 3rd set of masthead shrouds a second set of spreader mast brkt.s
two more mast hounds three more forestay,s & furlers plus two 7ft cabin roof top genny tracks numerous extra cheek & car blocks lot more running rigging think eight sets of running sheet lines 4 head sail halyards , original hank on forestay which came as a spare when the boat was bought new is now used as a floating back stay which is mounted on a traveler on a rear arch & the top is mounted on a swivel brkt on the masthead plus a 4ft bowsprit
U can go with a smaller cutter rig by just going with a 3/4 Jib on an inner stay or a smaller storm jib
Imho a set of running back stays will do a lot for the standard M rig. Set them up when you need them. I intend to outfit my boat with a set to Maybe help keep the headstay tight.
Ix
I think it will help support the mast in strong conditions either on or off the wind. I think the M rig is fine for the usual conditions we like to sail in. Not having a back stay is nice. But, on an 80 or 100 mile upwind stint, having one set up will make me feel a lot better and will probably help with headstay sag. Good trim is essential for going up wind with any serious intent. I think the double spreader idea will create more windage than its worth. While the cutter rig is attractive, it is not as good as a sloop for going up wind. Without the cutter rig there is no reason to have a 2nd set of spreaders. Upgrade the oem ones for sure. If you want to add a margin of safety to the rig for security when driving the boat hard in unpleasant conditions, I think running back stays are the simplest and cheapest method. I've gone back and forth on installing them however the last few days of operation in typical "Bahamian conditions" has convinced me.
No. That is an important feature of the M. Two fittings on the sides of the mast should do it. Or, two dyneema lines from the BWY spinnaker kit. With the weather runner set it will not interfere. Attach the bottom ends to perhaps the stauncion near the winch or install your own fitting there somewhere. I've wanted the spinnaker kit, and once that's installed the runners are just two lines. In fact now that I think about it, a small block on the stauncion base, going to the weather winch might do fine. It doesn't need to hold the mast up, just give extra support.
Ix
Backstay is a bad idea for the M if your using the stock mast - the mainsail on the M can't get under a backstay so it's not really a good idea.
Highlander runs a higher mast than the stock rig so he can fit a mainsail under a backstay. If you going to run a backstay you need to make the mast taller or get a smaller main.
No M boat has ever failed a mast from a forward break or a shroud failure - every M mast failure on record was because of a failed forestay.
The M rig is too strong - if enough force is applied to the mast the boat will come out of the water or the mast will BEND before the rigging will fail. The M is not heavy enough to break it's own rigging.
NiceAft wrote:Won’t backstay placement at the stantion nearest the mast be too accute of an angle to prevent forward movement of the mast?
Ray
Ray I think it would b sufficient if u r just using it for a jib or storm jib for heading up-wind the top of the running back stays would b attached to the mast at the same location as the forestay then run down to a block on the mid-ship stantion & then run to an aft cleat at ur desired location
Now if u wanted to use the running back stays for also running a spinnaker then mount them at the masthead & back to the aft stantions on both sides & cleats could b mounted on the genny tracks if u so desired & as u r only using one of the running back stays at any time it doe,s not interfere with the rotating mast & both running back stays could b applied running downwind with a spinnaker one being tight the other just being a bit snug
My system being on a traveler duplicates a running back stay system but converts it into a single back stay system with a single back stay control system so with my system also being a masthead system I have the best of all three worlds
J
BOAT wrote:Backstay is a bad idea for the M if your using the stock mast - the mainsail on the M can't get under a backstay so it's not really a good idea.
Highlander runs a higher mast than the stock rig so he can fit a mainsail under a backstay. If you going to run a backstay you need to make the mast taller or get a smaller main.
No M boat has ever failed a mast from a forward break or a shroud failure - every M mast failure on record was because of a failed forestay.
The M rig is too strong - if enough force is applied to the mast the boat will come out of the water or the mast will BEND before the rigging will fail. The M is not heavy enough to break it's own rigging.
Mark
U r wrong I still have the standard mac mast but my back stay is attached to a traveler that is mounted on an arch approx 5ft above the aft cockpit thus it doe,s not interfere with the mainsail
I think it would b sufficient if u r just using it for a jib or storm jib for heading up-wind
If that is the case, why install a backstay at all? ‘s sailing configuration works fine.
I’m having a difficult time understanding why anyone believes the mast needs a backstay for conventional sails (Main, Jib, Genoa, etc.). I am not aware of any reports of a mast coming down for other than a forestay failure.
spreaders upper,s r 36" lower,s 
r 44" a 3rd set of masthead shrouds a second set of spreader mast brkt.s 
