LeFiell Mast
problems on a Pacific Seacraft Dana 24
From the day I
first commisioned Doolittle in May 2005, I’ve had problems setting
up the mast and rigging. The
mast appeared to be bent! Whenever I tried to put some tension on the rigging, the mast took up an S shape
(when viewed up the track). PSC were going through some serious difficulties, and had just lost most of their
competent staff, so I didn’t make much of a fuss about it at the time, figuring I’d deal with it once I was back in
Europe. Looking back, I realise that my biggest mistake was that I had been taken in by the hype. After all,
LeFiell guarantee their masts for straightness and I had sailed on a few Pacific Seacraft’s so knew the level of
quality I should expect. I had even set up the rigging on a Flicka that had a LeFiell mast and I had been
impressed with it. Setting up the mast was simple and getting it straight was no problem. My friend’s Flicka is over
ten years old but the mast is still shiny.
So when I dressed my new mast, I never thought to check that it was straight. Why would I? Once I realised I had
a problem, I started to investigate. Even without dropping the mast I could see that there were a few things not
right. I wrote to LeFiell but they said that the mast was perfect when it left their factory and that PSC had
inspected and approved it, so it must be something I had done. Before I accepted that, I wanted to know how and
when they checked the mast. For example, do they use a laser tool to check straightness? At what stage/s of the
process do they check this? What experience does the operator have? When was the machine last checked for
accuracy? What is the experience of the welder? Questions such as these they would not answer, but if they are
so confident in their product, they should not have minded answering my questions.
The first thing I noticed was that the mast has no shoe where it sits on the tabernackle. This was odd, I thought,
putting alloy and stainless in contact in a place where salt water is sure to get to. I asked LeFiell and PSC about
this but this is the way it has always been done. Most other mast makers use a shoe that is inserted into the
bottom of the mast. Often the shoe is convex in shape to keep the force even on the mast when it is raked or
bent.
To confuse the issue, there is a lot of conflicting information. In my Dana Manual, it says that no rake should be
put into the mast, but the dana drawings clearly show a 2 degree rake, the fore and aft stay lengths confirm this.
It would be impossible to put the mast up using the supplied stays without a rake. So far so good. Yet LeFiell cut
the mast foot off at 90 degrees so all the force of the mast compression is in one spot at the back of the mast.
This point loading may help to account for some of the mast step failures on earlier Danas.
Then I noticed that the mast didn’t sit evenly in the tabernackle, it seemed that the mast step was not level when
measured across the boat. PSC later admitted to me that they knew about this, it’s a moulding fault. This on it’s
own might not have been enough to cause a problem but the fact that LeFiell did not cut the foot square
athwartships simply compounded the problem.
I tried all sorts of things including allowing for the moulding fault and the badly cut off mast base, but the mast
retained it’s S shape. I even called in the ‘experts’ to take a look. No one could get the mast straight no matter
what they did. Meanwhile I was in battle with PSC trying to get a new mast. I must have written over 100 emails
and called them as many times. They finally accepted liability and even ordered LeFiell to make a new mast for
me. It is there at LeFiell’s factory to this day, but since I have expressed doubt at the quality of their product they
are being difficult, and say that PSC ordered the mast, not me, so I can’t have it. Now that PSC no longer exist
one might think that I could deal with them direct, but they do not reply to my communications.
Once it became clear that I would not be able to get a new mast from LeFiell I decided to buy a new mast from a
European manufacturer, but then I had the idea to try and straighten my mast before I gave up on it completely.
After all, there is much to be said for a straight LeFiell mast. I lowered it and took it to a friend who works metal.
Once the mast was off and laying down, one could clearly see that it was bent in an S shape. Above the
spreaders it bent to starboard and under the spreaders it bent to port. LeFiell are convinced that I have done
this damage but having seen the force we had to put on the mast to bend it straight, the conclusion we came to
is that it would have been impossible for me under any conditions to damage the mast. Perhaps it was bent
during the trucking from California to Florida? But even that was ruled out. It is a very strong mast and even if it
had been poorly stowed and was bent like an banana, it still seems extremely unlikely that that was the cause.
My friend was impressed at the strength of the mast and astonished at the force we had to put on it to get it
straight. The good news is that we did manage to straighten it, more or less. In any case it’s a vast improvement
and there is a good chance that I will now be able to tension the rigging without the mast bending into an S
shape. My friend’s conclusion is that the section was bent early on in the manufacturing process probably when
the extrusion was first formed.
mast appeared to be bent! Whenever I tried to put some tension on the rigging, the mast took up an S shape
(when viewed up the track). PSC were going through some serious difficulties, and had just lost most of their
competent staff, so I didn’t make much of a fuss about it at the time, figuring I’d deal with it once I was back in
Europe. Looking back, I realise that my biggest mistake was that I had been taken in by the hype. After all,
LeFiell guarantee their masts for straightness and I had sailed on a few Pacific Seacraft’s so knew the level of
quality I should expect. I had even set up the rigging on a Flicka that had a LeFiell mast and I had been
impressed with it. Setting up the mast was simple and getting it straight was no problem. My friend’s Flicka is over
ten years old but the mast is still shiny.
So when I dressed my new mast, I never thought to check that it was straight. Why would I? Once I realised I had
a problem, I started to investigate. Even without dropping the mast I could see that there were a few things not
right. I wrote to LeFiell but they said that the mast was perfect when it left their factory and that PSC had
inspected and approved it, so it must be something I had done. Before I accepted that, I wanted to know how and
when they checked the mast. For example, do they use a laser tool to check straightness? At what stage/s of the
process do they check this? What experience does the operator have? When was the machine last checked for
accuracy? What is the experience of the welder? Questions such as these they would not answer, but if they are
so confident in their product, they should not have minded answering my questions.
The first thing I noticed was that the mast has no shoe where it sits on the tabernackle. This was odd, I thought,
putting alloy and stainless in contact in a place where salt water is sure to get to. I asked LeFiell and PSC about
this but this is the way it has always been done. Most other mast makers use a shoe that is inserted into the
bottom of the mast. Often the shoe is convex in shape to keep the force even on the mast when it is raked or
bent.
To confuse the issue, there is a lot of conflicting information. In my Dana Manual, it says that no rake should be
put into the mast, but the dana drawings clearly show a 2 degree rake, the fore and aft stay lengths confirm this.
It would be impossible to put the mast up using the supplied stays without a rake. So far so good. Yet LeFiell cut
the mast foot off at 90 degrees so all the force of the mast compression is in one spot at the back of the mast.
This point loading may help to account for some of the mast step failures on earlier Danas.
Then I noticed that the mast didn’t sit evenly in the tabernackle, it seemed that the mast step was not level when
measured across the boat. PSC later admitted to me that they knew about this, it’s a moulding fault. This on it’s
own might not have been enough to cause a problem but the fact that LeFiell did not cut the foot square
athwartships simply compounded the problem.
I tried all sorts of things including allowing for the moulding fault and the badly cut off mast base, but the mast
retained it’s S shape. I even called in the ‘experts’ to take a look. No one could get the mast straight no matter
what they did. Meanwhile I was in battle with PSC trying to get a new mast. I must have written over 100 emails
and called them as many times. They finally accepted liability and even ordered LeFiell to make a new mast for
me. It is there at LeFiell’s factory to this day, but since I have expressed doubt at the quality of their product they
are being difficult, and say that PSC ordered the mast, not me, so I can’t have it. Now that PSC no longer exist
one might think that I could deal with them direct, but they do not reply to my communications.
Once it became clear that I would not be able to get a new mast from LeFiell I decided to buy a new mast from a
European manufacturer, but then I had the idea to try and straighten my mast before I gave up on it completely.
After all, there is much to be said for a straight LeFiell mast. I lowered it and took it to a friend who works metal.
Once the mast was off and laying down, one could clearly see that it was bent in an S shape. Above the
spreaders it bent to starboard and under the spreaders it bent to port. LeFiell are convinced that I have done
this damage but having seen the force we had to put on the mast to bend it straight, the conclusion we came to
is that it would have been impossible for me under any conditions to damage the mast. Perhaps it was bent
during the trucking from California to Florida? But even that was ruled out. It is a very strong mast and even if it
had been poorly stowed and was bent like an banana, it still seems extremely unlikely that that was the cause.
My friend was impressed at the strength of the mast and astonished at the force we had to put on it to get it
straight. The good news is that we did manage to straighten it, more or less. In any case it’s a vast improvement
and there is a good chance that I will now be able to tension the rigging without the mast bending into an S
shape. My friend’s conclusion is that the section was bent early on in the manufacturing process probably when
the extrusion was first formed.
The incredible force required to bend the mast straight can be clearly seen here. Can you imagine how I might
have put a similar force on the mast whilst it was standing on the boat? Since I do not have any winches on it
and do not fly a spinnaker, I wondered how I could generate the forces enough to bend the mast. I never over
tightened the rig (not that this would be enough to damage the mast in any case). The mast has never been
dropped, (there would be visible paint damage) so I just couldn’t imagine how I might have been responsible
for the damage. My Friend in his Flicka was recently hit by a 50 ton tripper boat travelling at 5 knots! The
impact practically lifted the boat out of the water, bending cleats and cracking fibreglass. The rigging wires
were snapped with the force and a chainplate twisted badly. Yet despite this incredible impact to the rig, his
mast is still straight and easy to set up.
Personally I would be amazed if I am the first customer with problems. I think PSC have known for a long time
that something was not right. I went sailing on a customer’s boat at Dana point. The rigging was really slack, so
slack that I asked the then CEO of PSC, about this but he seemed unconcerned and said that one didn’t need
more tension on a rig than that. I disagree with this as I fail to see how, if the rigging is slack one is supposed
to keep the luff of the foresails snug and not sagging off to leeward. At the time I didn’t understand, but if by
tensioning the rig, problems were likely to come to light, then that might explain it.
In any case, I kept inspecting my mast, the next thing I found was that the mast head assembly has not been
welded on in the right place. It is easy to see that it does not line up with the track and this would tend to try
and twist the mast when the stays are tensioned. This piece of shoddy work is there for all to see as it is
impossible for me to do anything about it. There is NO WAY that I could be responsible for that! This is a clear
manufacturing fault. If LeFiell’s work is as great as they say, then how did this happen?
I kept looking. The next problem I found was that the tang for the inner forestay was welded on crooked! Yet
another example of careless workmanship and once more, not something that I could have done. Yet LeFiell
blame me for the mast being bent. I do not know how they could have got the mast so wrong but they did. I have
the proof. Take a look at the pictures and see for yourself. There’s no doubt that LeFiell make a strong mast
but a good one? Is this just a one off? And if so why did LeFiell treat me so poorly. It is not the kind of after
sales service I had expected from an American company.
This picture
clearly shows how badly
the mast head assembly has been
fitted. If they did this to my mast, it
sheds doubt on the quality of the rest
of it. If the mast was perfect when it left
the factory, how did this happen?!!!
the mast head assembly has been
fitted. If they did this to my mast, it
sheds doubt on the quality of the rest
of it. If the mast was perfect when it left
the factory, how did this happen?!!!
Here’s another
picture showing the
poorly fitted mast head assembly. The
pictures speak for themselves.
poorly fitted mast head assembly. The
pictures speak for themselves.
So what’s right
with my mast? Well the paint is pretty good and I will overlook the
many runs. The quality of the
alluminium seems excellent but that’s about all I can say. The welding is ugly on my mast, certainly not as good as
on my friend’s Flicka. Where the spreader lugs have been welded on, the heat from the weld has distorted the
track and the metal around it. It is possible to see a dent in both sides caused by the welding. The spreaders are
nicely made but one of them is a loose fit moving fore and aft as much as an inch and a half at the spreader end.
Also, the spreader end caps are badly corroded after just a couple of years. LeFiell also fit a ‘mouse’ so one can
feed more cables into the conduit but the string they used rotted in the sun after just a couple of years rendering it
useless. Why did they use such cheap polypropylene string?
The way I have been treated by LeFiell is disgusting and the work they have done on my mast is awful. With all the
problems the mast had it’s no wonder no one could set it up correctly.
One last issue, that has been discussed on the group before is the running back stays. Personally, I cannot
imagine how anyone thought that the cutter rig would work without runners. To place the inner forestay tang right in
the middle, between the head of the mast and the spreaders is asking for trouble. As soon as one tensions the
staysail halyard, the stay goes slack as the mast bends forwards. Since I have never been able to tension my rig
correctly I do not know if this set up might work if it was properly adjusted, but I doubt it.
What I would like to know is have other PSC owners noticed any problems or am I truly alone? I would be frankly
amazed if having made my mast so badly, that they hadn’t made others in the same fashion. Can it really be that of
the 2000 masts they made for PSC, they are all perfect except for mine?
October 2007
Update Feb 2008
I rang LeFiell again since they refused to answer my emails and I didn't see why they should be allowed to get away with treating a customer so badly. They are very angry with me. They cannot believe that I had the nerve to suggest that there was a problem with their mast. Perhaps they cannot accept liability under any circumstances as they also make parts for Boeing and other prestigious companies. In any case they are totally in denial. I spoke to Don Averill who finally admitted to me that the sections are supplied to them sometimes with as much as a 5 degree twist in them, yet they still make up the masts! As a boatbuilder, I accept that it is very difficult to make something by hand to a great accuracy but it helps if you start with something straight in the first place!
Despite our efforts at straightening the mast it is still not right. It is better but far from acceptable to me. The solution is a new mast. But who from? No other companies I could find weld up masts and despite the complete balls LeFiell made of my mast, I know that it can be done properly and I really liked the mast if only I could have tensioned it correctly. However after the way I have been treated and the complete lack of answers to my concerns I would never buy another LeFiell mast.
I have chosen to buy a carbon mast from CST in Australia. It's delivered in two 5 metre lengths and must be glued together. All the fittings must be made in stainless and although it is a lot of work, at least I will have complete control and should end up with something rather splendid, albeit a bit more costly than a new alloy mast but at least it will be straight this time.
Next time I fly it won't be on a Boeing, I'll go Airbus!
alluminium seems excellent but that’s about all I can say. The welding is ugly on my mast, certainly not as good as
on my friend’s Flicka. Where the spreader lugs have been welded on, the heat from the weld has distorted the
track and the metal around it. It is possible to see a dent in both sides caused by the welding. The spreaders are
nicely made but one of them is a loose fit moving fore and aft as much as an inch and a half at the spreader end.
Also, the spreader end caps are badly corroded after just a couple of years. LeFiell also fit a ‘mouse’ so one can
feed more cables into the conduit but the string they used rotted in the sun after just a couple of years rendering it
useless. Why did they use such cheap polypropylene string?
The way I have been treated by LeFiell is disgusting and the work they have done on my mast is awful. With all the
problems the mast had it’s no wonder no one could set it up correctly.
One last issue, that has been discussed on the group before is the running back stays. Personally, I cannot
imagine how anyone thought that the cutter rig would work without runners. To place the inner forestay tang right in
the middle, between the head of the mast and the spreaders is asking for trouble. As soon as one tensions the
staysail halyard, the stay goes slack as the mast bends forwards. Since I have never been able to tension my rig
correctly I do not know if this set up might work if it was properly adjusted, but I doubt it.
What I would like to know is have other PSC owners noticed any problems or am I truly alone? I would be frankly
amazed if having made my mast so badly, that they hadn’t made others in the same fashion. Can it really be that of
the 2000 masts they made for PSC, they are all perfect except for mine?
October 2007
Update Feb 2008
I rang LeFiell again since they refused to answer my emails and I didn't see why they should be allowed to get away with treating a customer so badly. They are very angry with me. They cannot believe that I had the nerve to suggest that there was a problem with their mast. Perhaps they cannot accept liability under any circumstances as they also make parts for Boeing and other prestigious companies. In any case they are totally in denial. I spoke to Don Averill who finally admitted to me that the sections are supplied to them sometimes with as much as a 5 degree twist in them, yet they still make up the masts! As a boatbuilder, I accept that it is very difficult to make something by hand to a great accuracy but it helps if you start with something straight in the first place!
Despite our efforts at straightening the mast it is still not right. It is better but far from acceptable to me. The solution is a new mast. But who from? No other companies I could find weld up masts and despite the complete balls LeFiell made of my mast, I know that it can be done properly and I really liked the mast if only I could have tensioned it correctly. However after the way I have been treated and the complete lack of answers to my concerns I would never buy another LeFiell mast.
I have chosen to buy a carbon mast from CST in Australia. It's delivered in two 5 metre lengths and must be glued together. All the fittings must be made in stainless and although it is a lot of work, at least I will have complete control and should end up with something rather splendid, albeit a bit more costly than a new alloy mast but at least it will be straight this time.
Next time I fly it won't be on a Boeing, I'll go Airbus!
This picture clearly shows the
crooked tang for the inner
forestay.