T-Terminal Plugs and Check Stays

[Kenneth K]

One of the benefits of DIY boat projects is discovering new things about your boat. I've made several trips up the mast the last few months as I'm changing out the masthead sheaves and standing rigging.

A while back, I discovered these, and didn't know what they were.



Turns out they're T-Terminal plugs, designed to plug the remaining opening in the T-Terminal after the rigging has been installed.

(shroud T-fittings)

This set of T-Terminals (first photo) sits about 2' above the upper spreaders, is angled backwards slightly, and is a smaller diameter than those used to hold the shrouds. I asked a guy at the rigging shop about them, and he had no doubt at all that they're for a check stay, to be used with a fitting like this:



I guess the thought is that since the check stay isn't always tensioned, the rubber plug is needed to keep the T-fitting from slipping out of the T-terminal.

Though none of my shroud T-Terminals had these plugs (shrouds are always under tension, so there's no way the shroud fitting will turn itself sideways and come loose from the terminal) I decided to plug all the shroud terminals anyway, with the thought that it might reduce the amount of water that enters the mast. With 10 T-terminals (2ea for uppers, mids, fwd lowers, aft lowers, and check stays), that's about 2.5 sq inches of open holes on the sides of the mast (though, many of these are "hidden" somewhat under the shadow of the spreaders.



The plugs are made by Hayn, with part number HAY SHRPM07 (6-7mm plug, for the shroud terminals), and HAY SHRPM04 (4mm plug, for the check stay terminals). Apparently, these also go by the name "Gibb Plugs." You can see the name "Gibb" stamped on the side of the check-stay plug in the first photo above. The plugs run about $7.50 ea at Fisheries Supply.

Hayn Marine "T" Terminal Backing Plate Rubber Plugs - The Rigging Company

T termainal plub gibb plug

theriggingco.com

While we're at it at, anyone here use a check-stay on their Bruce King E32/35/38? From what I've read, they reduce mast pumping when sailing upwind. Seems I sometimes read about the E36RH guys using running backstays. Is this a similar concept?

 

[Loren Beach]

While we're at it at, anyone here use a check-stay on their Bruce King E32/35/38? From what I've read, they reduce mast pumping when sailing upwind. Seems I sometimes read about the E36RH guys using running backstays. Is this a similar concept?

Thanks so much for updating the info on the "T" fittings and the plugs. The O-34 has these fittings also. I have converted the factory wires to fabric line many years ago. Ours end at eyes, several feet above the deck, and line tails are shackled onto them to bring the tail back toward the stern side deck and thence back forwards a ways to the secondary winches. We do not use them when not in the ocean.

 

[Nick J]

I've started and stopped a rerigging project multiple times. I'm determined this year is the year I finally get it done. I have a meeting with a local rigger tomorrow and a request for a quote in to Colligo. Who did you end up using to make the new rigging? Any words of advice so far?

 

[Kenneth K]

I've started and stopped a rerigging project multiple times. I'm determined this year is the year I finally get it done. I have a meeting with a local rigger tomorrow and a request for a quote in to Colligo. Who did you end up using to make the new rigging? Any words of advice so far?

I've been replacing mine slowly (along with other projects) over a multi-year period. In summary--replacing the standing rigging is easy, except for the forestay, which involves many more decisions, and more work, due to the roller furler.

I decided to replace with all stainless steel. When I first started, the Seattle West Marine Rigging Shop had some experienced folks that had been there for many years. I sent them my old sets of aft-lower shrouds, intermediate shrouds, and the headstay to have them duplicated. Though I was pleased with their work, every time I call the shop now they seem to have new employees that have replaced the experience folks. Not to say they're not capable, but I just don't get the same feeling of assurance I had with the old heads.

For my next batch, I plan on sending my fwd lowers and upper shrouds to Rigging Only, in Fairhaven, MA. Others on this site have spoken well of them, and I used them to make new SS lifelines for me last fall. Unlike West Marine, rigging is all they do, and the guy I spoke with seemed to have lots of experience.

Note that if you're replacing the lower toggles that fit around the U-bolt chainplates, most standard size (7/16", 1/2") toggles won't fit without modification. See more in this post: https://ericsonyachts.org/ie/threads/replaced-your-ss-standing-rigging-what-did-you-do.19750/
In the end, I re-worked the 7/16" Hayn toggles I got from West Marine to fit on the fwd and aft lower shrouds. I had custom toggles made at Garhauer for the intermediate and upper shrouds.

My decision to replace all the masthead sheaves is what has been slowing my project down. The sheaves can be hard to remove. Then, when you replace them with new, tight-tolerance axles and sheaves, it can be difficult to get the new ones to fit. It seems the original Kenyon sheave box relied on a bit of a "sloppy fit" to make things work.

 

[Loren Beach]

If you are asking me, I used a local rigger in Portland, recently retired. That was Butch Bogan, who did two full re-rigs on our double-spreader rig. Once in the late 90's, and recently in 2021. We chose to have it done the more secure way, pretty much "pin to pin". Although some pins were reused after close inspection (far less corrosion threat here in fresh water).
Our local rigger apprenticed, IIRC, at the highly-regarded Brion Toss rigging shop in Port Townsend.

IMHO, it is false economy to look for excuses to re-use most parts, like turn buckles. The riggers hate the added liability, and if filing a claim after the rig is lost, the insurance company can (properly) ask more detailed/embarrassing questions before paying out.

I am aware that some will disagree with my conservative outlook, but I am a "member" of an exclusive little teeny club: mariners who have been on a sailboat dismasted at sea. I did not volunteer for such an 'honor', but really did learn a LOT from the experience.

One note about the recent re-rig. Since the spar was down, I had all the masthead sheaves replaced with new ones from https://www.zephyrwerks.com/
This guy does absolute first rate work.

 

[Kenneth K]

Thanks so much for updating the info on the "T" fittings and the plugs. The O-34 has these fittings also. I have converted the factory wires to fabric line many years ago. Ours end at eyes, several feet above the deck, and line tails are shackled onto them to bring the tail back toward the stern side deck and thence back forwards a ways to the secondary winches. We do not use them when not in the ocean.

Ok, thanks. So they are tensioned for upwind sailing only? Seems like they would limit the full-forward deployment of the main when sailing directly downwind. No?

 

[Loren Beach]

Ok, thanks. So they are tensioned for upwind sailing only? Seems like they would limit the full-forward deployment of the main when sailing directly downwind. No?

Pretty much yes. If we were tacking into steep seas, we would have to tension one and slack the other when tacking. But since we sail on inland waters we have never rigged them for local sailing -- only used to brace the spar from wanting to pump forward when crossing the Columbia Bar, heading out. It was kinda gnarly for an hour or so.
We were under power, and when socked up tight they add more hand holds for us, as well.

To put some perspective on this, I had dinner with an O-34 skipper about 15 years ago. He talked about doing 18 SoCal Ensenada races in his boat including surfing at double digits, and never using the runners at all. His boat did have the standard rig, which is approximately two feet shorter than ours (if I remember it correctly).

My takeaway is that the EY/Olson Kenyon rig is well engineered, in general.

Shorter answer might be that when off the wind I would not want them rigged unless really needed, because an uncontrolled jibe might harm the boom.

 

[Kenneth K]

Thanks Loren.