[C320-list] running rigging

[Dan Petticord via C320-list]

We are replacing most of the running rigging on Pearl. I have the lengths
as specified in drawing 320-34001-10 from Catalina. The issue is that I
already replaced the main sheet and the topping lift because both were in
what I considered an unsafe condition when we bought the boat this May.
Using the measurements from the drawing (100ft length for both) I was left
with a ridiculous amount of tail (maybe 20-25ft) for the main sheet. And
this was even after I screwed up the eye splice and had to start over.
The topping lift's tail was less, maybe 10 feet or so, which I can
certainly live with.

Since we are going with either Samson MLX3 or New England Viper for the
halyards at least, I'd like to avoid wasting 30-40 bucks per halyard if
possible.

My mast is down right now, and everything is wrapped up and stowed, so I
really don't want to go and pull a halyard to get the actual measurement of
what exists today. Plus it is really cold here on the shores of Lake Erie,
and I am generally lazy.

So my question is has anyone else found the lengths specified in the
Catalina drawings (particularly the 115ft for each halyard) to be
excessive?

Thanks in advance.

Has anyone else found the lengths specified by Catalina to be excessive?

Thanks.

--
Dan Petticord
Pearl, Hull #132

[Brian McLamb via C320-list]

Yes they are longer than needed initially. Advantage is that you can trim a
one or two feet from it each year. This way the wear spot on sheeves/
pulley wheel can be moved and fresh line will be on the “wear spot” next
season

Serenity
#2075. 2006 vintage
Brian McLamb

[John Kivel via C320-list]

Hello!

New to the forum, new to the site, new 320 owner as of June.



Yes, it seems to me the sheets and the halyards are way too long. I
keep thinking, “give him enough rope and he’ll hang himself.”

--------------------
From: "Brian McLamb via C320-list" <c320...@lists.catalina320.com>
Reply-To: <C320...@Catalina320.com>
To: <C320...@catalina320.com>
Cc: "Brian McLamb" <bjcnm...@gmail.com>
Sent: November 14, 2025 at 11:31 AM MST
Subject: Re: [C320-list] running rigging

Yes they are longer than needed initially. Advantage is that you can
trim a
one or two feet from it each year. This way the wear spot on sheeves/
pulley wheel can be moved and fresh line will be on the “wear spot”
next season Serenity #2075. 2006 vintage Brian McLamb On Fri, Nov 14,
2025 at 1:17 PM Dan Petticord via C320-list <
c320...@lists.catalina320.com> wrote: > We are replacing most of the
running rigging on Pearl. I have the lengths > as specified in drawing

[1]320-34001-10 from Catalina. The issue is that I > already replaced

the main sheet and the topping lift because both were in > what I
considered an unsafe condition when we bought the boat this May. >
Using the measurements from the drawing (100ft length for both) I was
left > with a ridiculous amount of tail (maybe 20-25ft) for the main
sheet. And > this was even after I screwed up the eye splice and had to
start over. > The topping lift's tail was less, maybe 10 feet or so,
which I can > certainly live with. > > Since we are going with either
Samson MLX3 or New England Viper for the > halyards at least, I'd like
to avoid wasting 30-40 bucks per halyard if > possible. > > My mast is
down right now, and everything is wrapped up and stowed, so I > really
don't want to go and pull a halyard to get the actual measurement of >
what exists today. Plus it is really cold here on the shores of Lake
Erie, > and I am generally lazy. > > So my question is has anyone else
found the lengths specified in the > Catalina drawings (particularly
the 115ft for each halyard) to be > excessive? > > Thanks in advance. >
> Has anyone else found the lengths specified by Catalina to be
excessive? > > Thanks. > > -- > Dan Petticord > Pearl, Hull #132 >

References

1. tel:320-34001-10