Old 12th January 2013, 06:26 AM   #1
Martin.M.A
New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10
Default Ask the question again !!

Ask the question again! is there no one who can explain if there is any difference in the shapen isonic 2011 and 2013 107.
Martin.M.A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2013, 07:21 PM   #2
Phill104
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 297
Default

Not easy for me to comment as I have a 2012 and before that I had the 2011. The 2012 has the same bottom layout as the 2013 though.

For me I could barely tell the difference on the water TBH. Both boards are fantastic both on the flat and in the close chop I often sail it in. Even sails side by side the changes are hard to pick out. That may be greater between the 2011 and 2013 and the look of the 2013 is stunning.

I'm going to hang onto my 107 for a few years as it is such a dream to sail I can see no reason why I would change it. I would still be interested to hear from those who have sailed the new on compared to the old.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
All the latest windsurfing news in one place.
Phill104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2013, 09:06 PM   #3
NWF
www.nationalwatersportsfestival.com
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Hayling Island Hampshire England
Posts: 93
Default

I have replaced my 2012 Isonic 107 with a 2013...... In the main.... The board gybes and tracks better, with enhanced board control in overpowered choppy waters with the new cutouts which have increased the acceleration and top speed overall. Just making an excellent board even better.......
__________________
Allan Cross
National Watersports Festival (NWF)

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

GBR68

The toys!

Starboard
2013 Kode Wave 87 (C), 2009 Futura 93 (W), 2013 Kode 103 (W), 2013 ISonic 107 & 127 (C)


Severne
2013 Blade 4.2, 4.7 and 5.3, 2013 Gator 5.7, 2012 NCX 6.5, 2013 Overdrive R4 6.2, 7.0, 7.8 and 8.6.
NWF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2013, 08:24 PM   #4
Phill104
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 297
Default

Thanks Allan, always good to hear your thoughts.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
All the latest windsurfing news in one place.
Phill104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 02:08 PM   #5
Martin.M.A
New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10
Default

But the question remains, when I still have read that there is a difference as below:

how much difference there is in the rocker and between a Isonic 107 2011 and the new Isonic 2013? It was Flat Vee to Double Concave to Vee Flat in 2011 and Flat Vee to Double Concave 2013 ?
Martin.M.A is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 06:46 PM   #6
Ian Fox
STARBOARD
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 532
Default

Hi Martin, you may be missing a key element of the discussion / response here; one of the main improvements in the 2013 board over the 2012/2011 is the way it runs more freely (over chop) with less impact under the mast foot area. This contributes to better top speed potential and a less tiring, less physical impact ride for the rider.

These are attributes (improved trim at speed) one normally associated with variations in rocker (!!).

In fact, the biggest gains in 2011>13 have been the result of pinching in the very back tail outline (2012 update over 2011) and new tail cutouts (2013 over 2012 and 2011), all of which allow the trim of the board to improve and run more freely, delivering high/er top end speed and more comfort/control than previous while still retaining the "maximum efficency" iSonics have become renowned for. There is a lot more going on here than simple "rocker" or bottom shape variance.

Rocker normally refers to the centreline template (often - as in this case- itself does not tell the story)..

As usual, doesn't sound like much in theory (and it does not represent a significant mm variance in rocker);
one can argue "no real difference, what's to bother about..." but for those who have tried it, the result/s are quite clear.

Not sure if this resolves the background to your question....or not ? A quick ride on both boards will.

Cheers ~ Ian

Last edited by Ian Fox; 15th January 2013 at 08:39 AM. Reason: Spelling typo....
Ian Fox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 08:18 PM   #7
Martin.M.A
New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10
Default

Thank you! it was precisely this answer I've been looking for. Thank you for a detailed and good answer
Martin Sweden
Martin.M.A 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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question for Ola H Lapin Free Forum 4 27th September 2010 02:41 AM
US-box question Unregistered Free Forum 2 13th November 2007 04:23 PM
Question 4 Ian Fox Unregistered Free Forum 6 7th November 2007 03:29 PM
iS 133/145/155 question Guest Free Forum 2 6th May 2007 02:56 AM
question about g0 155 jremirezm Ask Our Team 1 27th April 2007 05:22 AM


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 02:08 AM.