Left: The Django team opted to eliminate the spinnaker pole and related gear. Above: Jolt 6 raced with a new mast from Hall Spars and ECsix rigging from Future Fibres. Right: In the Admiral’s Cup, performance in both inshore and offshore conditions was equally critical


Stronati’s new wallyrocket, Django WR51. Of the three, Django's rig package


had involved the most significant design evolution, most notably switching from a deck-stepped to a keel-stepped mast for enhanced stiffness and added structural integrity – important for the event’s offshore elements. This also required the Hall Spars team to design a custom deck collar, which brought the added advantage of flexibility and efficiency in positioning the halyard blocks. Driven by rating considerations, the


Django team opted to eliminate the spinnaker pole and related gear. The Hall Spars design team recommended incorporating a jib halyard lock to reduce mast compression, allowing for lighter weight laminate. Other refinements included a custom wind wand bracket, lighter and more aerodynamic than the standard version – a modification later adopted by Garm as well. With no backstay deflectors and


reduced spreader sweep, Django achieved the lowest IRC rating in the fleet at 1.109, creating an ideal balance of performance versus rating that was reflected in their consistency and which particularly paid offshore. Not only did they finish third in the Fastnet finale, they also scored a solid fourth in AC2 in the opening Channel Race. Garm’s approach was similarly


performance driven and resulted in a rating of 1.117, choosing to race without backstay deflectors and with a locked headsail to reduce mast compression. They sailed without symmetrical sails, opting instead for a more streamlined set-up, drawing on advantages of reduced weight and easier handling. This proved useful in tighter situations; most notable perhaps when they scooped first in AC2 under IRC in one of the inshore races. Sunrise, meanwhile, took a more individual approach for their rig package design, incorporating mid-mast backstay deflectors. The enhanced adjustment was seen as an advantage given that a wide range of sailing conditions was likely over


such a long regatta. While this added a layer of complexity in varying the design, Hall Spars was able to model effects accurately through simulations. Sunrise also included a spinnaker pole


track to increase their options for offwind sailing, despite carrying the added weight. With the highest IRC rating of the three boats at 1.120, Sunrise ultimately took longer to find their form over the course of the event but nonetheless showed promising performance, notching up a well-earned second in one of the later inshore races – a gratifying result for Kneen and his team. For the Hall Spars design team, the


key to unlocking performance is in the detail. Much like their customers, they are passionate about doing whatever it takes. As Matt Dalziel describes: ‘Typically it’s about considering how we can make multiple incremental gains rather than any one major change; that is an intensive process, involving Hall Spars, Future Fibres and the sailmaker working together. That integration is really important to ensure all three elements – the rig, rigging and sails – are designed as a unified package to ensure optimum performance, as well as to maximise time and cost efficiencies in the process.’ He adds: ‘we often say that the mast and sails are the engine of the boat – and the rigging is the gearbox that enables the boat’s performance to be fine-tuned.’ That three-way synergy was perhaps


best demonstrated in the Admiral’s Cup by Pierre Casiraghi’s winning Carkeek 40, Jolt 6, which raced a newmast fromHall Spars and ECsix rigging fromFuture Fibres, together with sails fromNorth Sails. This integrated package demanded a


highly collaborative approach to optimise design on every level. Teams began with an in-situ visit to Jolt 6 for measurements, followed by regular consultations on progress and visits by the Jolt 6 team to Hall Spars’ production facility. The resulting masthead rig was designed and built for minimal windage


and maximum weight savings, featuring a custom wand socket, titanium end fittings and bespoke headstay fittings. Headstay loads were pushed to reduce sag, boosting sail performance while maintaining structural integrity. Halyard lock loads were carefully designed to boost sail shape efficiency while minimising weight. The team added a custom deck chock which enabled precise lateral trimming of the mast, improving control in the varying conditions expected in the Admiral’s Cup. For the rigging, the Jolt 6 teamselected


ECsix, Future Fibres’ premiumcomposite carbon option. This offers up to 75 per cent weight saving over traditional rod rigging, significantly reducing pitch. Using patentedmulti-strand technology, the protruded carbon rods are arranged so they flex independently to absorb impact and better resist breakage, resulting in a highly durable product, providing the peace ofmind needed to push hard offshore. ‘Each individual cable is tailored with


specific stiffness characteristics,’ explains Future Fibres’ head of sales, Marco Sevilla. ‘That enables us to create a unique balance of weight saving and durability. Success in the Admiral’s Cup depends on balancing those two considerations so we worked closely with the Jolt 6 team to refine that balance.’ Jolt 6’s Admiral’s Cup winning credentials stand as testament to the rig’s performance. Opening the series with an impressive second in AC2 in the Channel Race, consistent performance in the inshore series placed them third going into the Fastnet, in which they then delivered a commanding performance to win AC2 on corrected time – a phenomenal result that was key to securing the prestigious overall team victory for the Yacht Club de Monaco. With dates now confirmed and


expressions of interest open for the 2027 Admiral’s Cup, Hall Spars invites prospective teams to get in touch to discuss a race-winning rig package. www.hallspars.com


❑ SEAHORSE 61


ATILA MADRONA


JAMES TOMLINSON/RORC


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104