Go Back   Starboard Forums > Ask Our Team

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 24th April 2010, 05:05 PM   #21
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

PG, from what you are saying we would then have to pay 200/300$ extra for an iS144 WC (on top of the 1.660 / 2200$ for the iS144 Wood), to plan 0,5 knot earlier??

Both in the Forum and website, SB folks are filling us with a lot of marketing about the "premium" WC construction. For example, in a thread less than a Y ago, IAN FOX mentioned: "The Futuras (and iSonics) can definitely be made lighter in Wood+Carbon tech, which offers an advantage in earlier planing in lighter winds and on flatter water."

I would NOT mind paying the difference if someone from SB could tell us what were their test results? I just brought up the example of iS144 WC<>Wood with a 10m2 - same sailor + location - would it be planning 2-3 knots earlier then it does make a difference...
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2010, 06:16 PM   #22
BelSkorpio
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 479
Default

Quite rightly questions, ChrisN.

At your weight, I think I know the answer.

But I leave it up to the SB staff for the official answer
BelSkorpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2010, 06:24 PM   #23
BelSkorpio
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 479
Default

I just love these discussions about early planing in light wind conditions

A long time I thought that with my weight (86kg) I always was going to be frustratingly standing on the beach looking at the "light weight" riders how they were planing and me not.

Then there came formula boards ! Thank God.
BelSkorpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 03:12 AM   #24
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

BelScorpio, I am sure Formula came to us as divine intervention, yet I am just still striving to have a bit of the slalom feeling in the 8-15 knots range. Therefore, many like MarkH and others clearly recommended the iS150 which will surely plan earlier that the iS144 and everyone agreed! Sounds to me that below 8 knots is Formula land. I think that discussion was completed! Noone recommended the Futura 155 (with 161 ltrs volume) in Wooud Carbon. As PG argued Weight is secondary to Width. Given the Formula arguments, WIDTH RULES, thus the WOOD iS150's ~94 cm will definitely plan quicker than WC iS144 and the WC Futura 155's (both 85 cm)!

In summary, and according to the discussion so far, it makes NO SENSE to buy a large volume Wood Carbon board at all (unless it is a Wave/Freestyle board). The WOOD version will be max. 0,5 knots slower, which for the skillset of most of us it's imperceptible!

In low winds you are not interested in fast response - rather you are planning based on large fins, sails and wide boards. As the Team has not intercepted I will transfer the question of the WC <> Wood in >120L boards in another thread...
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 03:17 AM   #25
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken View Post
Chris,

Just a guess from 26 years of windsurfing - .65 kg of weight difference between the WC and W boards will not make a noticeable difference in the planing threshold for the 144, especially for someone at your weight. I used the word "noticeable" since there probably is a very, very, very small difference, just not one that could be measured.

I still think the 150 is your best bet for your under 15 knots wind range. As for sail size, I can only speak to my experience with my largest sails - Maui Sails TR 9.2 and 11.0. There is a very noticeable difference in power and early planing between the two, especially between 8 -12 knots on my formula board. I weigh 78kg (170lbs).
Ken thanks for your recommendations on the iS150. About the sails, would you then recommend to go for a 11 m2 (e.g. Severne OverDrive) rather than a 10m2?
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 06:05 PM   #26
BelSkorpio
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 479
Default

Hi ChrisN,

Don't get me wrong. I don't want to push you to Formula.
I also think that your best bet is the IS150, especially if you want to obtain a more slalom feeling.
And I also think that you deserve a correct answer of SB on the question about the difference between W and WC. My insinuation about knowing the answer referred exactly to this topic. I see that you opened a new thread for this. Very clever. I'm very curious about the answer. Let's hope SB gives an honest answer, which is often in contradiction with the commercial answer
BelSkorpio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 10:14 PM   #27
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Thumbs up

Apologies, if my answer deemed negative; Rather, I visualized you standing there by the beach in no wind, watching the feather-weight young-guns riding away, then suddenly overtaking them planning on a Formula board

Given the testimony, iS150 is "nearly" a Formula, with a thinner tail and longer outline, so I'll be coming as close to a Formula - like it or not! It's gonna be tough to gybe, yet planning should be as close to them doors anyway


PS: Read the other thread
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 10:19 PM   #28
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

Chris, my TR 11.0 will plane at least 2 knots earlier than my 9.2. If I go out in 5-12 knot winds (typical summer winds in Dallas, Texas), I will be planing 80% of the time. If I use my 9.2, planing would be cut to probably 40% of the time.

I have a sailing buddy that weighs about 25 pounds more than me and we are pretty evenly matched speed wise with him on his TR 10.0 and me on my 9.2. However, I can still pump on plane quicker than him. The point being, if you weigh a lot, you need the largest sail the board can manage with good balance for light winds. In your case, the 11.0 will give you a little edge over a 10.0 for early planing. You should also be able to handle an 11.0 up to about 16-18 knots with a little practice.

I am also talking formula race sails that have a much greater range on the top end than freeride sails, especially if you have an adjustable outhaul.

I have recorded all of my outings on a GPS for the last 4.5 years. Here is one from last summer:

Date: 4-July
Top Speed knots: 25.5
Average speed knots: 10
Distance sailed: 12 miles
Time sailed: 70 minutes
Winds speed knots: 4-16
Sail used: TR 11.0
Board: Formula 160
__________________
Toys:
Formula 160; iSonic 111; HiFly Move 105; Tiga 263; '85 Mistral Superlight.
Maui Sails TR 11.0; 9.2; 8.4; 7.6; 6.6; Maui Sails Switch 6.0; 5.2; Maui Sails Global 4.5; 4.0.
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 10:24 PM   #29
mark h
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW England,
Posts: 713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
PG, from what you are saying we would then have to pay 200/300$ extra for an iS144 WC (on top of the 1.660 / 2200$ for the iS144 Wood), to plan 0,5 knot earlier??

Both in the Forum and website, SB folks are filling us with a lot of marketing about the "premium" WC construction. For example, in a thread less than a Y ago, IAN FOX mentioned: "The Futuras (and iSonics) can definitely be made lighter in Wood+Carbon tech, which offers an advantage in earlier planing in lighter winds and on flatter water."

I would NOT mind paying the difference if someone from SB could tell us what were their test results? I just brought up the example of iS144 WC<>Wood with a 10m2 - same sailor + location - would it be planning 2-3 knots earlier then it does make a difference...

Hi Chris

I guess putting numbers/percentages is difficult to commit to as theres so many variables. Here's my take on WC vs Wood, and whom its for/not for. But bear in mind I could be way off

Who is WC NOT for:
Begginers, intermediate or regular sailors, there is probably no benefit in having WC over wood. The Wood version is only be slightly heavier and has a better range of use IE ability to absorb chop and soften ride, which 90% of the time will make regular sailors faster and potentially assist early planing. Early planing and top speed will not be increased for this group of riders by using CW models over Wood models.

Who is CW for:
Pro, expert riders looking to squeeze every bit of performance out of their kit. Serious racers will be after lots of 1% increases of performance out of their sail, fin, board etc. Added together, lots of 1% can make a huge difference around the race course. This group of riders want as much feedback from their equipment as possible, CW will relay this info back to the rider quicker than Wood (think how 100% carbon mast feels c/w 75% mast). This group of riders will be able to take advantage of the CW and they will get an improvement in early planing and top speed for sure.

I used to have 2005 carbon F2 slalom and speed board's, they felt very lively compaired to SB wood, but I personally did not travel faster with F2 carbon than I do on SB wood.

My first formula board was the old Free Formula 168 in Dynema. I changed this for the Wood version, this felt like it was faster, lighter, more fun and planed earlier. But in reality, the differences were very marginal.

If you'v got the spare cash, then go with CW as it will feel stiffer, lighter and give you more feedback. But unless your pro/expert level or weekend racing (and feel like you must have the best), your early planing and top speed will not increase. Plus, if the water state worsens, CW will not absorb the chop, making it physically harder to sail all day.

Definetly think that iS150 is the board for you, especially if you do not want Formula.
__________________
Cheers - Mark H

The toys:
iSW44 - - iSW49 - iSW53 - iSW58 - iS107 - iS137 - F161.
North Warps: F2012 5.2m, 5.7m, 6.3m, 7m, 8m, 8.6m, 9.5m F2006 11m.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mark h is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2010, 10:59 PM   #30
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

Chris,

Mark hit it on the head - good take on the WC or W issue.

My guess is that starboard may not want to address the WC vs W performance differences since it is pretty marginal for the majority of the consumers. My guess is that 80% of the windsurfers out there would find the wood model more comfortable to sail without sacrificing performance.

I have an '08 iS 111 (only the W version available in '08) and the ride can be pretty harsh in choppy water. If I wanted to update to the 2010 model, I would not choose the WC board because I would not want the ride to be any rougher than I am currently experiencing. For us mortals, comfort, control and a smooth ride means faster sailing.

However, there are a lot of sailors that want to have what the top sailors would choose, even if they have to give up some comfort and control, thus the WC model is available for the masses.

My comments are just that, and don't represent what Starboard may say or think about the issue. I love their products, but also know my limitations and what works best for me.
__________________
Toys:
Formula 160; iSonic 111; HiFly Move 105; Tiga 263; '85 Mistral Superlight.
Maui Sails TR 11.0; 9.2; 8.4; 7.6; 6.6; Maui Sails Switch 6.0; 5.2; Maui Sails Global 4.5; 4.0.
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
futura; isonic

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Futura 155: Best light-medium wind sail/fin? johnd12 Free Forum 0 8th April 2010 02:46 AM
light wind board to replace futura 133 w DJluc Ask Our Team 1 25th August 2009 05:45 AM
Futura 122 or 133 for light wind conditions? Stef68 Ask Our Team 8 28th April 2009 10:37 PM
Isonic 133 or 144 for ultra light wind Tur53 Ask Our Team 7 8th November 2007 11:47 AM
Isonic 115 & Light-wind setup Daniel B Kevin`s Corner 2 28th May 2007 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 02:11 AM.