|3rd December 2013 07:33 PM|
A good summary. It corresponds to my perception of the Isonics.
I cannot wait for your review of the IS110. May I ask how much you weigh ?
When I upgrade my IS122 (2008) to the IS110, I expect from the IS110:
- that it will feel looser on the water (needed to sail my IS122 with the mastfoot always far to the back)
- that it will feel lighter
- that i will feel faster
- that it will feel smaller and easier in heavy chop (with the 7.8 and onshore conditions)
So, I have a lot of expectations.
Normal of course, when I already know that it will be my most used board.
|2nd December 2013 11:24 PM|
Mikeb how did you manage to register on this site - every time I click register, it says closed for registration, I have tried on several PCs and with different security settings.
I am really looking forward to getting my Is110 - should be here for the weekend, and Sunday is looking good. It will be my first outing on my new Sails (well Ant Baker's 2013 sails), so far I have only managed to sail the 8.6 - which was good for over 30kts on my GPS, so I have high hopes for the Is110
When I thought about it, it was a pretty easy decision to get the Is110. I considered pretty much everything from the Is107, Is111, Is110, Is117 and Is122
Since I have an Is101 (which is actually 97L and shares dimensions with the Is97) I am sure that this is the board that I will be on if it is really windy and choppy. As the Is107 is only 5cm wider, I consider these boards to be too close. I spoke to a few of the BSA guys, and a board less than 95L is considered unnecessary unless you are lightweight. The 107 only makes sense if your change down board is an Is87 or Is90
The 117 doesn't seem to have that many fans (unlike the 117W which is really popular), from what I can understand, even though the 117 has a similar length and width to the 110, it is much wider in the tail, and does not have the wind range of the 110 (which is the most important aspect of the mid size board
The 2010 Is111 was harder to dismiss, half the price of an Is110. It seems to have been one of the "best" boards in the 2010 range. However, I believe that it is close in performance to the 107, but trickier to gybe and does not have as big a wind range as either the 107 or 110
The 2009 Is122 seems to have position as an extremely competent board in gusty conditions when the 85cm wide boards over power, however, most feedback was that it had a useful place in the range, but was never a favourite (I suspect rather like my Mistral AB 123). I felt that the gap between the 122 and 101 was too big and the 122 would be a handful before I would be happy on the 101
I am about to buy a very nice 2009 Is133 as my big board - I am hoping that with a good fin I will not lose out too much on the newer Is127's - Age and a lack of fitness will mean that I will never be super competetive in lighter winds. I looked really hard for a 2010 Carbon Is131 but couldn't find one.
I welcome feedback from the experts here - my analysis is from hours of searching different reviews (sometimes in different languages) and from feedback on this forum. I thought that I would add a comprehensive summary as I really hate it when there is a good thread, which ends without a good summary.
After I have tested these boards, I will post my thoughts and a comparision, from the perspective of an amateur racer, between Isonics and 2010/11 Mistral Anders Bringdal Slalom 123 and 2008 Fanatic Falcon 105
|2nd December 2013 08:41 PM|
Yes I have opted for the 110 as well but no chance to try it yet. Just looking over it however I am confident it will do everything the 122 did and more. Afer all my 122 was only 114 litres and the 110 is apparently exactly 110 litres. The 2 boards have the same max width and the volume difference is probably little more than the increased deck concave and probably a bit less in the tail.
I was interested in the following design elements
1. the tail is narrower than the 107 ( and of course the 122) but the volume seems to be more evenly distributed throughout the board rather than the more familiar Isonic bias of volume towards the back of the board
2. The rails look less full on compared to the 107 ( the whole board looks thinner) and the deck concave does not seem as extreme.
3. The hull bottom has the same shape as the 127....and I always find that board sails flatter than the 107.
4. One thing I did find curious was the difference in footstrap plug width ( i.e footstrap width) of the front plugs and back plugs.......and the back plug distance difference to my 127!
Overall based on all of that I would expect the 110 to be more exciting to gybe than the 122, able to cope with stronger winds and rougher water than the 122. Sailed like the 127 I would expect it to have the same early planning performance as the 122 ( i.e using the hull shape rather than pushing off the fin). Can't wait to try it!!
|2nd December 2013 03:33 PM|
|mattsurf||I have decided to go with the 110... still a little unsure about the concept of low volume wide board, however, most reviews have been outstanding|
|2nd December 2013 11:52 AM|
Yes, I agree. Everyone is struggling a bit with this.
Also for me @87kg is the IS122 already for several years my most used board.
Only 2 sails, I use on it 7.8 & 8.8.
As it is my most used board, I would like to replace it with something that has the same capacities and even better of course. Logically it has to be the IS110, I think.
|1st December 2013 06:36 PM|
|mikerb||selecting this middle size is a real problem!! I have the 107 and 127. For winds above the 107 comfort range I prefer to be on a FSW board! The 107 is a fantastic board......the 111 is also very good. I had a fairly old 122 for a time ( actual vol 114). During this last year I found myself using it more and more because so much of the wind we had was gusty/on and off. If it is big sail summer cruising the 127 is the ticket...if it is blowing well the 107 is the best pic, but inconsistent moderate wind the extra width of the 122 made for a better session every time. So if those are the conditions you are trying to be ready for I would seriously consider the 117...teamed with a 43 fin.|
|30th November 2013 11:44 PM|
|ThierryP||Phill104's advice is absolutely spot on. I will just add that while 9.0 is, like he said, right at the top end of the 107, it handles an 8.6 very well. I decided to pass on the 110 and stick with the 107 because my spot is often quite choppy, and the 107 handles choppy conditions superbly.|
|30th November 2013 05:27 PM|
|Phill104||I weigh about the same as you at 86kg and tend to sail my iS107 with a 9.0 often maxed. The combo is right at the top end sail size of the iS107's limit but works well especially in choppy conditions. I also tried the 117 in similar conditions and while it handles the 9m slightly better I found the 107 was much nicer in chop and definitely faster. When I use my 7.8 with the 107 it is absolutely wonderful, a true joy to sail. TBH though there is not much in it with the 117 probably being better in flat water with the bigger sail and the 107 better with the 7.8 or in chop with either sail.|
|29th November 2013 04:37 PM|
Is107 or Is117
Difficult decisions ahead
I have an Is133 (actually 127L) and an Is101
As my intermediate size, I was all set to buy an Is111...... then I found an Is117 (not wide) at a very reasonable price
Is133 - 8.6 and 9.6 with 47 and 52 fin
Is101 - 6.3, 7.0 and 7.8 with 40 and 37 fin
Is111 or Is117 or Is107 with 8.6 and 7.8 with 40 and 43 fin
Do I go with the Is111 or is it worth spending the extra on the 117 or 107
I weigh 85kgs and tend to sail very well powered up - I will hang onto an 8.6 until 20+ kts
I think that the board I would really like is the Is110, but can't find a good used on at a sensible price