Stus-List Baby stay vs Cunningham?

Jake Brodersen captain_jake at
Wed May 17 22:16:52 EDT 2017


The controls are not really redundant.  The cunningham does a much better
job of flattening the main.  The cunningham tightens the luff in the bottom
third of the sail very effectively.

The babystay can shape the main a little, but it mainly used to prevent the
mast from pumping.  The thick mast section on most C&Cs is really difficult
to bend.  Preventing the mast from pumping (or inverting) is much more
important.  That said, we only use ours in heavy air or when the waves are
large.  The #3 tacks around it pretty easy, the #1... not so much.


Jake Brodersen
C&C 35 Mk-III "Midnight Mistress"
Hampton VA

-----Original Message-----
From: CnC-List [mailto:cnc-list-bounces at] On Behalf Of Dave S
via CnC-List
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 21:43
To: C&c Stus List <cnc-list at>
Cc: Dave S <syerdave at>
Subject: Stus-List Baby stay vs Cunningham?

Both depower the main....  Does the adjustable baby stay (mast bend) make
the Cunningham (luff tension) redundant?
I have an adjustable baby stay, is adding a Cunningham a waste of time?

Thanks , Dave

Sent from my iPhone

This list is supported by the generous donations of our members. If you wish
to make a contribution to offset our costs, please go to:

All Contributions are greatly appreciated!

More information about the CnC-List mailing list