View Full Version : Race sails

9th July 2007, 12:48 AM
hallo guys, hope youre up for some inputs on race sails..i wanna "upgrade" my np rs slalom
quiver to some more "real race" sails. And im pretty fresh on something else than NP,
so i was thinking Maui Salis TR3´s or North Warp..Does anyone knows if np X9 masts works
on Warps? by the way...Or does anybody has better suggestions?..
Boards are 101 + 122 isonics...I dont race competions etc, just for "kicks"....

thanx in advance....


9th July 2007, 06:25 PM

I have better suggestions. TR-3 and SRS masts. They are plenty fast AND are designed to work nicely even with "normal" body frames, not just the hulks like AA or BD. They look weird, and work great.

10th July 2007, 07:30 AM
I think that North & Pryde masts/sails won't work well interchanged, tried some combinations a few years ago.

10th July 2007, 01:38 PM
Severne Code Red is a option too.
Super easy rigging, 4 roller pulley, best and smoothest cam rotation I have ever tryed. Same performance level than North, NP, MS.
Sailed 6,1 and 7,7 for a month now. Feels light and stabel and fast. Downhaul without tool and you find no better cam rotation.

X9 and Code Red should be OK, was Jesper Orths anwer in a threat on the Team forum.


10th July 2007, 04:07 PM
I recently changed from RS slalom to TR3. The RS is a great sail, does everything np says but it aint a race sail and I missed the extra top end stability of my old race sails. I would highly recommend the TR3 but only with the recommended SRS mast.

11th July 2007, 11:19 AM
Yea. Severne is good. If you like looking at painted monofilm. They are a load of crap.

11th July 2007, 01:22 PM
Mr. Crap

Yea sure, you prefere nonpaintet sails which fall apart cause to much tension, they hold for 3 month, and thats longer than the mast, or the mast extension.:p

My car is painted too, not made of colored steel. :D


11th July 2007, 02:02 PM
In plain non painted film, all of the material thickness and weight are used for strength and stability.
In painted/coloured/laminated films, part of what you carry around is just for fancy colours.
One may like one way or the other, but it is not the same thing.

TR-3s rigged on the correct masts (MS SRS 100, Gaastra Ignition) deserve a try. They are different. You don't need to trust my words, so I do not use many; but you can trust the signature under the sails.

11th July 2007, 06:30 PM

there is a big difference between laminated monofilm vs painting.

EVERY sail that I can think of uses laminate monofilm at least in some areas - such as X-ply. But I only see one sail covered in a layer of paint.

For the 'glue' laminates that you talk about, I own 8 of those sails and at least based on my experience, they do not seem to crease and seem more stable. One thick single layer of monofilm seems more brittle and hence more susceptible to creasing. I don't think the benefits of laminated films are fully and widely understood.

11th July 2007, 06:33 PM
The reason that your car is painted is because it would rust otherwise.

11th July 2007, 07:05 PM
He thats good news , so my Severne sails dont rust either !!


11th July 2007, 07:37 PM

I do suspect glue - provided its density is lower than that of film - may add something to rigidity and creasing resistance. Rigidity might (not sure) contribute to stability, but it would be very hard to tell what is materials and what is design. As an instance, the hyper stable race sails I own and use are made of simple film, do need extra low downhaul tension and their stability is unquestioned. If I get you right you own Norths, they are extra stable too, but you might break your back in order to apply correct downhaul. And I don't think glue can add anything to resistance.

11th July 2007, 08:13 PM
1.Painted, coloured and laminated films are 3 different things.
When adding colour (pigments), fillers, additives to polymers, you normally affect things like Tensile strength, Elasticity, Elongation, Elongation of Break ... to the worth. Ageing, mostly UV resistance to the better.
So a painted monofilm is protected better against UV (which is the bad guy here), than none painted, without compromising the technical specifications.
A coloured film has better UV protection than non coloured, but the pigments can (does) affect the quality.
Pigments are normally the most effective UV protectants, and work in relative small concentrations.
Chemical UV protectants are very expensive and are less effective than pigments.
So from the sight of quality, the painted film could be the best choice. 
Weight is no issue here; just ask Barry, he gets criticism cause the weight of his sails.
Quality of laminated films depends on raw film qualities, glue and process a.m.
Laminated films are the future IMHO, it’s about price/performance calculations.
With laminates, you can play with a lot more parameters at the same time.

2. But ! Sail quality depends only partially on film quality, the rest is design, distribution of forces, quality of sewing, other materials and more.
3. Choosing a sail because of painted or coloured is as stupid as choosing cause the signature.

I start my first posting: Severne Code Red IS A OPTION TOO .
This means, I agree that Warps and TR3 are good recommendations too.
The only thing that works for you is Maui Sails, because of the signature?

The TR3 is an interesting design, because Barry chooses (a couple of years too late IMO) to work with fare less downhaul forces to achieve a stable, fast wide sleeve race sail, the opposite way of NP. The Code Reds use less DH forces too.
I wanted to test, and take a TR3 10 or 11 with me home from Maui, but they had not arrived before I left Maui.
I never buy a sail again without testing it. You can’t trust what you read in advertisings.

I believe that Warp, Vapour, TR3 and Code Red are very close in quality and performance.
Downhaul tension NP -> Warp -> Vapour -> Code Red -> TR3.

In Cam rotation, the Code Red 07 is the nr.1, take my word, not the sign of the sail.

Had Warp, NP RX1/RX2/RS1, Nitro 3, 4, so I am not married with one brand.

The rest is rigging, availability of sail/mast, pricing and colour 
And don’t forget there can be big differences between sizes in the same line.
But sure it’s always easier to “believe” in Jesus or Barry or Robert or Dan or Kai or Nils, Ben Jesper.

Have fun

11th July 2007, 09:38 PM
Interesting post LK.

And I liked your statement "Laminated films are the future IMHO".

My knowledge is not as good as yours, but I agree with that comment above. The people who just say 'two layers and glue is crap' are jumping to the wrong conclusion.

All sorts of high-tech products are laminates. Even low-tech products such as plywood. Ok with plywood there are some issues with grains which benefit from the laminate construction, but I think there is real potential for windsurfing sail technological progress with laminate monfilms.

11th July 2007, 10:41 PM
LK wrote:

Laminated films are the future IMHO, it’s about price/performance calculations.
With laminates, you can play with a lot more parameters at the same time.

Interesting conclusion. Maybe I'm not getting this, but AFAIK, laminates are advantageous in situations where you need structural stiffness - you have different layers of stuff, and that stuff resists elongation, and so you get stiffness, preferably at lower weight. The ultimate example of that is sandwich construction - layers with extreme elongation resistance sandwiched around a very light core, creating a structure that optimizes stiffness to weight. If you just took the outer stuff (carbon/epoxy matrix, for example) at twice the thickness with no foam in between, it would be super-noodly - sandwich it, and because you have these two layers paralleling each other at a distance and being glued into the overall structure, the whole thing resists bending as you would have to elongate the outer layer. Same principle applies to just about any sandwich, and it's why we have light, stiff boards that survive high-speed on chop and are even jumpable.

Sail, however, are different - the structural integrity come from the spars, supported by the elongation resistance of the skin. Unless you build the whole wing as a unibody (as opposed to on the 'frame' of the spars), I have a hard time seeing how any of the properties you might optimize with laminates as opposed to straight film would really improve the whole package as elongation resistance (relative to weight) is inferior (resulting in either less elongation resistance or more weight for the whole package).

That said - there are other properties than elongation resistance that are of some consequence for the skin of the rig; puncture resistance, resistance to UV-induced decay, visibility through the skin (for the sailor) vs. visibility of the skin (to make for good visual impact and thus increase safety, as well as provide pretty pictures for the mfg. website and magazines...), etc.

The balance of the trade-offs is a bit different between race and freeride sails. Race sails tend to be performance focused, and they tend to be used a lot on the water, but babied on shore. So pure film, with its better elongation resistance (which holds up pretty well into old age until the film fails - compared to say xply, which seems to get spongy with time long before actual failure) gives a performance edge and good longevity (meaning that if you treat the sail well and don't abuse it on shore and don't leave it sitting rigged in the sun for ever, you'll get lots of use on the water at full performance).

Freeride sails tend to not place that much importance on all-out performance, and need to be a little sturdier on shore (where less OCD users might scuff them more, and won't be so concerned about avoiding wrinkling and such). There, the balance of tradeoffs seems to favor grids and laminates (more wrinkle and scuff and puncture resistant, but performance won't be as crisp and will deteriorate faster).

So why do you think laminated films are the future? It sounds like you imply that, with a bit of investment, laminates can be made that will improve upon pure film for the balance of tradeoffs of desirable properties in race sail applications. Are there laminates out there that, while having competitive weight, improve on pure film in the elongation resistance department? Or is it a matter of the weight and performance penalty having been reduced while still providing other benefits (visibility/visual appeal, scuff and puncture resistance, etc.)?

Of course, the key phrase in your statement is that it's "only" a question of $$$$$. In software engineering, it's simplified as "fast, cheap, good - choose any two." With race sails, there are lots of trade offs. In the end, cost is a huge part of the equation, so making a statement like "IT'S ONLY A QUESTION OF $$$$$$$$$$$" is a bit like simply assuming away a big part of the issue.



12th July 2007, 03:03 AM
Laminated film may be the future: I do agree, better then talk about "composite sail materials" and one immediately gets the idea: like in board construction, ar airplanes, with composites you can do lots of things by mixing the qualities of different materials.
But for now, if "composite" or laminated film means just film + glue + film, well... personally I'll wait a bit.
As for sails: I admit I have little experience. What I can say is that I own and use TR-3s now. Recently I sailed a '06 Vapor and couldn't believe the difference. TR-3 are much different from other modern sails I sailed before and absolutely worth a try. Words really could not be believed. At least in the slalom sizes I use.
As for "believing" (actually I used the word "trust"): don't you think Barry Spanier proved his competence above all possible doubts? Think of Dunkerbeck in the past, and think of what his one only top slalom sailor is doing now against huge competing teams.

12th July 2007, 09:57 AM
I just tested a Point-7 AC-1,it's really fast, good construction, easy handle. A very good sail probably better than than any of the most amous ones.
You should try one.

12th July 2007, 06:57 PM
G-42 .... Andreas,

I think you answered your own question in the first paragraph when you pointed out the benefits of laminates in all sorts of materials and products. Whether it is related to structural strength, stiffness, creasability, elongability, puncturability ... or whatever ... but there are certain huge benefits with laminates ... so in due course ... when there is continued development, testing, refining, and identification of the properties that improve sail performance, then the laminates will be there to deliver.

13th July 2007, 02:14 AM
Guest wrote:
G-42 .... Andreas,

I think you answered your own question in the first paragraph when you pointed out the benefits of laminates in all sorts of materials and products. Whether it is related to structural strength, stiffness, creasability, elongability, puncturability ... or whatever ... but there are certain huge benefits with laminates ... so in due course ... when there is continued development, testing, refining, and identification of the properties that improve sail performance, then the laminates will be there to deliver.

Actually, my point was that laminates have all sorts of really cool benefits - I just don't see how any of them create a better all around package than straight film. Unless you change the model of spars and skin to something more akin to unibody construction, the structural properties you could achieve with laminates by creating more spatial separation between the layers don't come into play, so you're stuck with layers w/o separation doing the job of absorbing surface tension - only not as well at the same weight.

I think the laminates, b/c of durability concerns related to UV and impact resistance, have proven themselves in freeride sails. Race sails, though - I'm not sure they've arrived yet. Now if you come up with some laminate sail cloth that consists of a real light thin layer with enormous ability to absorb the surface tension, and you pair it with a couple protective layers to make it feasible to use in sailmaking, and the whole package weighs in at about the same as film with better elongation resistance - great. But I don't think that claim can be made yet for any of the materials that are used in the current 'laminate' race sails.



13th July 2007, 12:43 PM
Maybe laminate materials will be the way to make battenless sails one day. Nevertheless until then I agree with G-42. As for UV resistance, if that is a problem to the point to make any trade off with lightness acceptable, then I guess that painted film is the way to go, rather than laminated materials.
Let's call things with their name: laminated film is fancy, not superior.

16th July 2007, 03:02 PM
When you say the better cam rotation is the code red 07, have you think the new rs racing with ultra cam? Have yoy ever tested before say it for code red? I'm not sure, in many magazines they say the new rs racing have a revolution cam, an automatic cam and so better (i think) than the code red:)

16th July 2007, 03:23 PM
NP always have so much revolutionary things... revolutionary cams, that actually are needed to solve rotation troubles... revolutionary materials, that actually are coloured or printed film, to the detriment of mechanical properties... now even revolutionary 6 months warranties on masts, that actually are needed because they can't afford standard 2 years warranties... I am so tired with NP.
What I can say is that my own race sails have smooth rotation, with their standard cams; full thickness full strength transparent standard film; and go on light responsive full carbon masts with full warranty.

Of course NP will go on selling for premium prices as long as some people will go on believing that "revolutionary" "automatic" cams are needed to achieve cam rotation.

17th July 2007, 04:50 AM
You forgot the revolutionary Shear Tip, with a lifespan of a few dozen sessions ;)

17th July 2007, 03:29 PM
I think I am forgetting plenty...

19th July 2007, 06:35 AM
Mixing masts of brand A with sails of brand B often works adequately but not for your 'best' race sails. If on a budget a good strategy is to spend up on a race sail to cover your most critical area of operation, then buy lesser sails to cover the rest. There are no shortcuts with race sails - you get what you pay for as someone has to pay for the ongoing R&D -however due to the shorter design life of such sails I suspect that the profit margins may be lower than for freeride sails.

19th July 2007, 02:23 PM
Guest wrote:
There are no shortcuts with race sails - you get what you pay for ...
IMvvvHO there are quite a few exceptions.
I would say that it is a good idea to choose solid designs and avoid brands that ask for premium prices because mostly of market position and/or marketing costs; expecially if one is on a budget.
By sure I would suggest not to spare on masts; probably mast quality is even more important than sail design, expecially for sails requiring 100% masts. It's easier to sense mast quality differences than to sense sail model year design differences between good race sails.