Old 17th August 2006, 08:21 PM   #1
shawn
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Default 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Hi, I've just ordered a GO 185. I'm 90kg and have done a UK RYA level 2 so have all the basics, but not exactly a pro. I ordered the 185 as I would, at some point in the future, like to get invloved in amateur racing for a laugh. So I thought I could use it for that and for light winds and then get a smaller board for stronger winds.
My supplier in the uk has just called me to say that there is no 185 stock in the whole of the uk and if I wanted one there is a 4 week wait, so did I want a 170 instead?
I would like to know if there is a noticeable difference between the 185 and 170 for my weight and for what I would like to use it for. Should I wait or "go" for the 170?
shawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2006, 11:35 PM   #2
Roger
Dream Team - School Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,101
Default RE: 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Hi Shawn,
I think you might want to wait the 4 weeks.
At 90 Kg. /198 lbs. you can definitely use the extra 9 cm (3.5") of
width and if you intend to go try to race it the addtional sail size capacity
(10.5 m2 -12.5 m2) would make a significant difference if you also get a 70 cm fin to use with your largest rig.
The GO 170, at 90 cm wide, will work for you, very nicely, but not in < 10 - 11 knots of wind.
So, if you look at your conditions, how much < 10 knot sailing might you do? That&#39;s probably the most valid "decision point" here.
If you get 12 knots and higher, then the GO 170 with an =>8.5 m2 rig will be super.
Hope this helps,
Roger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2006, 03:42 AM   #3
shawn
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Default RE: 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Thanks for your advice Roger, much appreciated. I spoke to another supplier who actually said 4 weeks is very optimistic and it is more likely to be 5 or 6 weeks! Even if it is 4 weeks I think I need to take advantage of the weather while I can considering the uk does not really have all year round conditions unless you wear a thick wetsuit in winter. Also I have looked at the places I&#39;m likely to be sailing and the wind looks to be >=12 knots from now until November. Worse case scenario if I really don&#39;t get on with it, I&#39;ll sell it and get a 185 or if i really get into racing then maybe get a formula, but I don&#39;t think I&#39;ll be taking it that seriously. Hopefully it&#39;s not the wrong decision, but I&#39;m amped to get out there and don&#39;t fancy paying the extortionate hire rates in my area.
shawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2006, 11:45 AM   #4
Roger
Dream Team - School Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,101
Default RE: 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Hi Shawn,
I think you have a good plan.
Since it sounds like you will have enough windspeed to be planing on the GO 170 virtually all the time (with a least an 8.5 m2 rig) it&#39;s best to get the "time on the water" now.
The GO 170 will actually give you a better overall high wind range.
What you lose on the bottom end of the spectrum (in < 10 knots)
you will gain in the 18-22 knot range with smaller (5.5-6.5 m2 rigs).
Hope this helps,
Roger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2006, 07:32 PM   #5
shawn
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
Default RE: 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Hello,
Just an update...
Well I tried out my new GO 170 Tuffskin and it was not a great deal of fun. Not entirely due to the board though. The boom clamp was faulty so everytime I uphauled it came off the mast, no matter how much I tightened the rope clamp, something i will have to sort out. It was a force 4/5 with one foot chop and I kept falling whilst trying to re-attach the boom in a standing posistion, due to the chop. i thought the GO 170 would have been a lot more stable, but I suppose I haven&#39;t windsurfed for a while.
When I fell I tried to avoid falling on the board, but sometimes it just happened. Well when i came out of the water i looked and felt like I had just gone ten rounds with a belt-sander. it should be called GO 170 Ruffskin. I&#39;m going to have to invest in a full length wetsuit I think. Also when I climbed back on the board after falling in, the deck seemed to cave in or move and didn&#39;t feel too solid so I hope it doesn&#39;t break on me in the future. It&#39;s not all bad though, i did have some ok runs and as long as i don&#39;t fall on the deck I should be alright.
shawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st September 2006, 09:57 PM   #6
Roger
Dream Team - School Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,101
Default RE: 2006 GO 170 vs 185

Hi Shawn,
What boom did you get (manufacturer/brand)? Perhaps I can look at one online and offer some suggestions to solve the "opening up" issue.
Some of the boom head clamps are quite sensitive to how/where you attach the uphaul.
If you move the uphaul attachment to the other side (from the side where the boom clamp handle "closes"), there is a lot less likelyhood of the uphaul line catching on the handle and opening the boom clamp mechanism.
If the deck on your new GO Roughskin (yes, many &#39;06 GO customers have made this same complaint as it was never a problem on the older GO boards because they had all eva and no non-skid on the rails) feels "soft", I&#39;d take the board straight back to the dealer and have them evaluate the "softness". Other than a slight "resilience" from the EVA layer, there should be no softness at all to the deck of your board.
But, you seem to have discovered the performance of the GO, and I can assure you that very soon, when you get the boom clamp issue rectified, you are going to find the board feels alot more stable and once moving gets solid as a rock.
You will soon be zipping around fully planing all the time.
Hope this helps,
Roger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 03:11 AM.