PDA

View Full Version : Carbon Content


RobSwift
24th April 2008, 07:41 PM
Fiberspar states on their website >>Remember, it's not necessarily how much carbon percentage is in the mast, but how that carbon is used. For instance, two different masts can be engineered with 50% carbon- one makes your sail feel alive and the other makes you sail feel stiff and dead in the water.<< Might this be true for 30% branded masts?

Expander
25th April 2008, 02:38 AM
--

From an interview with Rossano BISIOLI, product manager at ITALICA S.p.A., one of world leader in carbon mast manufacturer (they made hi-end masts for North, Severne, Gaastra...)

(...)

Q: which is, from a technical point of view, best mast that ITALICA makes?

BISIOLI: now I want to say something that here (at ITALICA) marketing guys don't like; from my point of view, masts with a 80% percentage of carbon are the best in terms of performances, excluding masts longer than 4.90 mt.
Of course these masts have to be manufactured with pre-preg technique...

(...)

Hookipa18
25th April 2008, 02:48 PM
Interesting, so for shorter masts you are better off with a lower carbon perc. Guess for longer masts weight is more of an issue.

Somebody told me that a very new team rider of Severne prefered the blue line masts for slalom/racing..

Floyd
25th April 2008, 08:58 PM
There`s been lots of folk on here who have said sails feel nicer and perfom better on 75% C masts than 100%.(Generally under 8 metre ish)
I`ve sold all my 100% (standard diameter) masts.
Tried lots of masts in 100% (NP /amex etc) but always found sails felt "dead" or as if mast was simply too stiff.
Regardless of what all the figures say I still reckon 100% masts (in standard diameter) are always stiffer than lower %age counterparts.
I even found top end was better (on Tush Storm 6metre) on 75% than on 100% !!!

Different story on RDM though !

Anowan
30th April 2008, 04:19 AM
from my personal experience this is true if you sail in the upper wind range of the sail, but if you tend to sail slightly "underpowered" then 100% is often better. Plus 100% masts are usually lighter, that makes the rig easier to handle in the manoeuvers, which is an important factor.

Expander
30th April 2008, 07:41 PM
--

Above BISIOLI's citation is taken from article: "Mast, the backbone of sail" entirely readable (in italian) from

http://www.windsurf-roma.it/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=322&Itemid=59

geo
1st May 2008, 01:11 PM
AFAIK Italica makes NP masts, while Gaastra masts are made from TRIANA; not sure about Severne (think TRIANA).
From a technical point of view, all other things being equal 100% carbon leads to high stiffness, so that to achieve required IMCS specs it could be necessary to 1) reduce mast outer diameter, eventually resulting in mast not complying with geometrical requirements (think about camber inducers' size) and/or 2) reduce wall thickness, resulting in extremely light but fragile masts (older Gaastra Ignitions?). In both may cases, less carbon content could be an easy solution to achieve the required specs. Also, while there is no problem at all with extreme lightness, consequent reflex response could be too much.
I own two 460/25 100% carbon masts with the same bend: a late '05 Gaastra Ignition (already beefed up) and a '06 Maui Sails. Since Maui Sails preferred to stay on the safe side, their mast is slightly heavier and with a narrower outside diameter. The Gaastra's base broke after a few sessions, had it replaced and keep it for backup; and sailed the Maui Sails for two full seasons now with no problem.

Floyd
1st May 2008, 02:56 PM
Accepting previous posts nearer truth then why on earth do retailers (and some manufacturers) insist on peddling all the BS regarding 100%masts.
Profit rather than truth thats why !

davide
1st May 2008, 09:13 PM
Accepting previous posts nearer truth then why on earth do retailers (and some manufacturers) insist on peddling all the BS regarding 100%masts.
Profit rather than truth thats why !
There is also the RDM solution to consider. I use HotSails HotRod that are 92% carbon (the other 8% is a good amount of Kevlar in the boom area) and probably undestructible.

You can use them in wave, B&J and race sails. Yes, they are a bit heavier (say 100 grams for the longest) and people argue to no end that they might be a tiny bitsy bit slower then standard diameter.

But they make rigging a breeze, you have a lot of peace of mind, they last a looong time and cost about 1/3 to 1/2 less then a 90-100% standard diameter.

Floyd
2nd May 2008, 12:20 AM
Davide
From earlier post
"Different story on RDM though !"
Totally agree
On all my sails (3.7 to 8) I use either 75% SDM or 100% RDM

steveC
2nd May 2008, 02:08 AM
Hi davide,

So, I note that you bought the CA Slalom58. Looks like you're set for practically anything now.

davide
3rd May 2008, 02:46 AM
Hi davide,

So, I note that you bought the CA Slalom58. Looks like you're set for practically anything now.
Yep, the Kinetic Ultralight (2001) felt like a rodeo after sometime on the CA 52 (even when considering the difference in size and volume), so it was time to drop the poor monster. I tought about the Futura 101 but I just cannot trust such a width in Bay Area conditions. So CA 58 will be.

The only doubt is the Acid 74. I have been sailing a lot of Crissy recently and I still cannot really get to like the board. It is fine in its conditions, but in heavy chop something is wrong. It lifts (that might be great in waves), and it does not go well through the chop: it is quite stop and go. Who knows ... I will spend more time on it but it might get sold for Chango 82 (the Chango 65 is great in chop, but it needs steady power!) or something else, maybe a Real Wind if they update it a bit ...

Anyway, yep, I have more then I need but it is ok, at the end of the story I am probably entering my last 10-15 years of high-performance sailing, might as well do it in style.

steveC
3rd May 2008, 09:49 AM
Hi davide,

Thanks for the response. Sorry for upsetting the theme of this thread, but I wanted to note the change, as you noted earlier that you were in the choice stage. It will be interesting to learn how things on the CA58 play out, possibly on the MS forum.

For me, I'm still waiting for my Starboard Serenity. While its new territory for me, I've been interested in working a new perspective into my game. I already have a 6 board quiver right now, but it's all planing stuff. You might say with the Serenity that I'm targeting a long range future game in older age. Might as well get all that I need to know organized well before age truly sets in.

Overall, I have to agree that style says it all.

davide
3rd May 2008, 01:06 PM
Hi davide,

Thanks for the response. Sorry for upsetting the theme of this thread, but I wanted to note the change, as you noted earlier that you were in the choice stage. It will be interesting to learn how things on the CA58 play out, possibly on the MS forum.

For me, I'm still waiting for my Starboard Serenity. While its new territory for me, I've been interested in working a new perspective into my game. I already have a 6 board quiver right now, but it's all planing stuff. You might say with the Serenity that I'm targeting a long range future game in older age. Might as well get all that I need to know organized well before age truly sets in.

Overall, I have to agree that style says it all.
oh, I am sure it is ok (kidnapping the thread). My only doubt with the CA 58 is volume, I would not mind 5-6L more on paper. Otherwise ... the CA SL 52 is just quite incredible and I am pretty sure the 58 will be up there. But, yep I'll post something in a few months on the Maui Sails forum.

The serenity sounds great and it can open sailing to year around in the Bay Area ... uhm ... don't give me ideas now I need fall and winter to work on my music :)

Egor
4th May 2008, 03:48 PM
at the end of the story I am probably entering my last 10-15 years of high-performance sailing, might as well do it in style.

Im in a similar position and youve just inspired me with that comment. Sod the wife Im going out guns blazing

RobSwift
9th September 2008, 07:00 PM
Back to the original topic. --

From an interview with Rossano BISIOLI, product manager at ITALICA S.p.A., one of world leader in carbon mast manufacturer (they made hi-end masts for North, Severne, Gaastra...)

(...)

Q: which is, from a technical point of view, best mast that ITALICA makes?

BISIOLI: now I want to say something that here (at ITALICA) marketing guys don't like; from my point of view, masts with a 80% percentage of carbon are the best in terms of performances, excluding masts longer than 4.90 mt.
Of course these masts have to be manufactured with pre-preg technique...

(...) Does that statement include or exclude 4.9 meter masts? from my personal experience this is true if you sail in the upper wind range of the sail, but if you tend to sail slightly "underpowered" then 100% is often better. Plus 100% masts are usually lighter, that makes the rig easier to handle in the manoeuvers, which is an important factor. I'm not so sure that assumption i.e. lighter means easier to use is so true. There's an incremental difference between 75% and 100% although 30% are too heavy. I use anything from 55 to 100. The 100% can be somewhat unmanageable in strong, gusty winds. Being so light it can wip around like a matchstick when positioning for waterstarts.