Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum > Please quote real volume - To Starboard .

Thread: Please quote real volume - To Starboard . Reply to Thread
Your Username: Click here to log in
Image Verification
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
7th May 2008 10:27 PM
davide
Quote:
Originally Posted by Screamer View Post

I accept that isn't always possible to quote exact volume down to one litre, but it should be stated somewhere on the website/brochure (fine print).
Most likely all the designs of production boards are stored and tweaked in a CAD program. And a CAD program will give the volume down to the cubic millimeter. So, it is possible to quote the exact volume.
7th May 2008 10:12 PM
geo Old story.
No starboard won't name their boards after real volume; and no, they won't even quote "real" volume on tech charts. And yes, they are probably 100% aware of real volumes, since the real volumes we read on the ISAF charts are provided by the manufacturers.
Reason for this is that "real" volume is not an accurate indicator of how a board will SAIL, since as we know width has a big importance too. So some customers (intermediates, heavyweights...) will be misguided in their choice, because "real" volume still is THE indicator of how a board will FLOAT. What I don't see, at this point, is why they don't name boards after width instead.
As I said many times before, to me, to provide a "wrong" tech data is a total nonsense.
6th May 2008 03:06 PM
Screamer Well it wouldn't look very good if you saw TWO 96 lit iSonics in the brochure, would it? I know these two (96 and 101) sail/feel different, and the racers don't worry about it, they are interested in sail carrying capability at full speed. But for a recreational sailor, if it's his largest board, used not strictly for racing, it may be important. For example, I've ordered iSonic122 (which is 114 lit actually). I know from experience that i need 110-114 lit for me + 9.0 rig on top of it, to feel comfortable. I've used hyper105 in the past (real 102 lit), it was a good combo well powered, but when slogging in dying wind, it was a real pain, almost impossible.

I accept that isn't always possible to quote exact volume down to one litre, but it should be stated somewhere on the website/brochure (fine print).
6th May 2008 09:35 AM
qldsalty Also Stype 2006 93 litre, Real Volume 99. You can tell the difference the second you step onto it. 6 litres is very noticable on smaller boards. Put beside a Futura 93 it is way bigger.
5th May 2008 02:30 PM
PG I do BELIEVE that Starboard, and other manufacturers, nowdays do TRY to quote the correct volume. However, the board names are often locked before the final prototype has been made and the volume may sometimes be off by quite a number of liters.

Annoying? YES! But I do think that we can just ask for "best effort" also going forward.
4th May 2008 10:05 PM
Ronny
Real volume of board .

All the isonic board has a few litre less than the quoted volume .
3rd May 2008 10:03 AM
Del Carpenter I may be mistaken, but I believe Starboard's quoted volumes and real volumes are the same, except for a few boards in 2002 and maybe 2003. I have a 2002 X-186 which was openly marketed as "virtual volume". In my opinion its a great board.

Which board(s) do you think don't meet their stated volume?
2nd May 2008 08:14 PM
Ronny
Please quote real volume - To Starboard .

I would like to suggest Starboard quote the REAL volume of their board , not virtual volume . Because the virtual volume is subjective .That would help the buyer to choose the right board easier . Thanks .

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 12:56 AM.