|10th July 2008 04:33 AM|
|9th July 2008 02:47 AM|
|crazychemical||2 unregistered: i weigh as much as you do and tend to go for the margin of the boards capacety. I like to sail my GO (range - 9.0) with an 8.8 and 52 fin and its awesome! Upwind is a bit shloggisch but thats i think more to do with my technique then something else. My flow 284 i sailed with a 7.6 which is 0.1 above recommended and i never felt such upwind and downwind power before as when i sailed that combination (untill yesterday when i went in with my now retired soul 6.2 in 19-22 knots (i wrecked that beauty, it broke my heart when i fell through the window), but that was cuz i was super overpowered). I think i could go over, especially with the GO, i think it could handle a 9.5 without too much trouble.|
|8th July 2008 09:32 PM|
|Unregistered||Of course it's possible to rig up with almost anything and sail, but I (95kg) like to stay well within the range, at least 1m2 on both ends of the range. I tried to sail my Acid (88l) with a NP Diablo, 6.9. It was oke to get planning in marginal winds at sea, but that's all. Could do almost nothing like you are supposed to do with an Acid. I also sail an Isonic 101 (range - 8.5) with an NP RSslalom 8.4, and it is oke, but thats it. And I sailed a 7.2 RSslalom on my F-type 158, which gives a very odd feeling. So, my conclusion is to stay well in the range, otherwise it makes your sailing uncomfortable, slow and the sailor unhappy.|
|3rd June 2008 08:05 PM|
|RobSwift||Try it. I'ld be surprised if you like it, though. I didn't.|
|3rd June 2008 02:16 PM|
so there is one final way to figure this out: peer assesment!
Everyone with a new board should try to sail as big as possible on it, this way we can get a perhaps better estimate on the sailing range? So far i've only tried sailing the GO139 2008 with an aerotech VMG 8,8 2000 on the stock 48 fin: result: it got planning but i needed a good gust to get going and on the stock fin upwind sailing was nothing short from c**p so a 52 is a must but i'll asses that next time. Anyone up for bigger rigs? I'm very willing to give a 9,5 a go aswell as a 10 mē but my recon, that would be it's ultimate carry barrier. Unfortunatly i have no such rigs so if anyone out there wants to try the combo: GO FOR IT! and let us know.
ps: my weight = 95 Kilo's (weight + wetsuit + harness)
|3rd June 2008 09:45 AM|
|James||Crazychemical- I think Per's right. Width and tail width matter, but other nuances of shape affect sail range, too, and might explain the differences you are noticing. I reckon the published sail range also depends on subjective stuff, like what shaper or tester or marketer at Starboard wrote the recommended sail sizes for the board, what he had for breakfast that day, whether he likes to round up or down, etc etc.|
|3rd June 2008 04:10 AM|
It's a little surprising given that back in 2002 the GO140 had a max 10M SQ
ps if robots are reliably matching these text images then there doing better than me
Volume 140 liters
Length 270 cm
Width 80.7 cm
Tail 56.1 cm
Weight (DRAM) 9.4 kg
Fin box Tuttle box
Fin size Free 50 + opt. Side fins
Sail size 2.5-10.0 sqm
|3rd June 2008 02:11 AM|
Rocker, volume distribution, tail design (is it boxy or rounded, cut outs or not, a lot more factors than width influence), fin design (not only size) there are lots of factors. And finally sail design has changed a lot during the last couple of years. Probably any board wil be happier with a 2008 design than a 2000 design even if the former is a little too big.
Anyway James is right. Oversized sails just feel wrong no matter how you try to control them.. In my experience breaking the recommended limit with about 5-10% is ok, and that's about it. Going bigger will make you plane slower, sail slower and get tired faster.
|3rd June 2008 12:46 AM|
Ok but the numbers don't seem to add up then if the tail is the limiting factor:
GO139: 250x80 tail: 52.7 range: 5.0-9.0
I.S 135: 228-80-54.8 6.5-10
Carve 144: 256 -78 -52.1 5.8-9.5
So far: bigger tail, bigger range, no difference in width so the limiting factor seems lenght and tailwidth, we know it's not length 'cause thats mainly a factor for windrange upwards, speed and swiftness in turns. The only exception is the C144 which is longer, less wide and had a slightly smaller tail.
2008: two years of research, two years of numerous titles etc etc, here are the figures:
GO 144: 248-77.5-52.1 range: 5.5-10
GO 133: 245 -76.0-50.0 range: 5.0-9.5
Futura 144: 248-77.5-52.1 6.5-10
I.S 144: 225-85-58 7.0-11
What do we see? Tailwidth is reduced on the freeride boards, only the IS gets a much wider tail and by consequence a much bigger range but for the other 3 the idea bigger tail = bigger range doesn't quite ass up. What we do see overall for the freerides: less long, less wide, bigger volume, bigger range.
Have we our answer yet?
ps: James if you'll borrow your 10mē rig i'll gradly test it for you
|2nd June 2008 09:22 PM|
I think width and surface area, especially in the tail, is the limiting factor. Without it you can't get the lift and leverage from the board to balance out the extra downward and sideways forces of the sail, even if you have a big fin. What you'll notice when sailing is that the board won't "break free" onto a plane very early and won't go upwind well. Also because of the altered geometry of the oversized sail, you'll feel like your body is forced into an awkward position no matter where you put the boom, harness lines, footstraps, etc.
That said, you should still try it just to see if you can make it work. Only 1 m2 larger than the recommended size might not be too bad.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|