I have inspected only two Maramus to date, one was a 1983 with the single spreader spar and then my own which is a 1987 with the double spreader Nirvana mast.   I don't think that the mast itself has any bearing on the problem.  The earlier model Maramu I noted had the tubular compression posts below the mizzen mast step angled  quite a bit, presumably to get them more out of the way.  On this boat, there was some cracking and damage around the mast step box.  On my own boat, the compression posts have very little angle to them, are a bit more in the way but  I did not find any damage at all.  An angle to the posts that is not cancelled out would generate a force in some direction fore/aft for example that would be proportional to the compression loading,  hence the tighter the rigging or the harder the boat is sailed, the more force generated.  I have heard that the angle of these posts were changed by Amel due to problems but do not know the history well so would prefer to not speculate further.  This might be a great question to pose to Oliver and  his vast knowledge base on Amels,  I for one would really enjoy hearing his input on this.

  With regards to the mast rake. As I recall from Olivers post on this, the check was to see if the mast was evenly fitted to the mast step.  In other words the proper rake with respect to the step is cut into the base of the spar so that any measurable gap aft should be the same forward with the spar is evenly fitting the mast step.   I was planning to use a feeler gauge to compare the fit fore/aft on my own boat.

Best,

James

SV Sueno,  1987 Maramu

Sardinia,  Italy