- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
West Wight Potter Mailing List maintainer
dfarrell@ridgecrest.ca.us
List hosted by www.tscnet.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For what it's worth, I found the same to be true. I have had a number of
cockeyed misadventures during the mast raising sequence, but my mast has never
shown any wayward side to side movement. BTW I don't use the gin pole. Too much
extra work and little perceived value.
Nancy: I would check the tension on those baby stays.
The Costas wrote:
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> West Wight Potter Mailing List maintainer
> dfarrell@ridgecrest.ca.us
> List hosted by www.tscnet.com
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> All
>
> I don't know how the mast can fall with the baby stays in place. I had them
> on HC and raised the mast ,by myself, in all kinds of conditions including
> high cross wind and tilted parking lot. Based on my experience with the IM
> mast raising system, I don't think it is possible for the mast to swing far
> enough off center to damage the base if the baby are properly installed and
> adjusted (and the mast pin is in the right hole).
>
> One problem with adjusting the baby stays is that they can't be tight when
> the mast is down or up. They tighten up (to tight) as the mast reaches 45
> degrees, and loosen as the mast reaches full up or down. That is if the
> factory is still using the same 'mechanics' as they did on the 95 boats.
>
> Larry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 03:27:10 PDT