Thread: Carbon Isonics
View Single Post
Old 20th August 2008, 02:21 PM   #35
geo
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
... any small slalom board in the range +/- 6Kg is light, in the winds of intended use, whether it’s 5.8kg or 6.2kg, it matters not.
...
Any one who really thinks that in 20 knots a board that weighs 5.8kg will be faster than the same board that weighs 6.2kg had better stop smoking the happy stuff.

...
Hi unregistered,
just in case you are referring to my posts: I hope it is clear I do agree with you 100%! My point is about the fact that a small/middle sized iSonic bought in shop can be expected to weight up to 6.3 + 6% = just short of 6.7 kg. Usually you can't sort your board out of the production run, but rather you (not a pro rider, I assume) will order in advance and get what will come. Now, you see it's not just 5.8 instead of 6.2. It's rather about handing out the about 1.3K+ € asked in shop for a nice medium wind slalom board, and getting something that may range from about 5 kg (with competition AND if you are lucky) to about 6.7 kg (iS101 at the +6% end). In my view, the latter is unacceptable; this is why I am surprised Starboard didn't introduce wood carbon iS's. Oh well, by the way, I don't think those would be still costing 1.3K+... and wood iSonics already bear a premium price tag compared to competitors... maybe this is the reason.

Still thinking about this (well, free forums are useful for this): in my view the REAL BIG problem is not the stated average weight (I think about 6.0 for an iS94/101 would be OK, if not optimal), but rather the +/- 6% tolerance. If I was Starboard, I would not search for new materials recipes (I think Davide and SteveC are spot on about materials and relative weights), but rather for more accurate manufacturing in order to get tighter tolerances.

Last edited by geo; 20th August 2008 at 02:31 PM.
geo is offline   Reply With Quote