Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30th March 2008, 09:59 PM   #11
Roger
Dream Team - School Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,110
Default

Hi Unregistered,
Ummmm.... last time I saw one, the North "Carbon Xtender" was made in exactly the same way and of exactly the same materials as the mast it extends.
So, it will bend by design.
Putting a rigid aluminum or carbon (with a different fiber axis bias and not designed to bend) mast base extension up inside a mast that is already reinforced for hoop strength
from the boom area to the bottom really makes the bottom of the mast very rigid and unable to bend.
I guess the std. extension lengths are:
Stubby .....0 amount of adjustment
Short..... 10-12 cm of adjustment
Medium.... 26 cm of adjustment
Long/Tall.... 46 cm of adjustment
So, if your sail specification calls for the mast to be 455-460 cm, use a stubby.
If your sail calls for 462-472 cm use a Short extension
If your sail calls out a 474-486 cm use a Medium extension
If your sail calls out 488 cm or greater (up to 506 cm) use a long/tall extension (unless your sail specifies a longer/stiffer 490 cm IMCS 28-30 mast.
Hope this helps,
P.S. As suggested above, this is for getting the optimum tune from your race/slalom sails on standard diameter 75-100% CARBON Race masts.
RDM masts/Low carbon economy masts used in freeride and smaller wave sails probably are not as sensitive to having the right mast/extension geometry.
The North Carbon Extender System works well in North Sails designed for that mast Xtension system, but does not work so well in sails from other lofts.
Roger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 04:03 PM   #12
Klint
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 66
Default

Hi,

Interesting discussion. Iíve gone through specs for major brands slalom/race 7,5-ish sails and just about all manufacturers recommend 4,60 masts and long extensions for these sails. Except for my Gaasta gtx 7,5 which have a 4,90 mast specified as ideal. What do you think about running a 4,60 with long extension in my gtx instead? Reason for asking is that Iíve read a couple of post from people arguing that slalom / race 7,5ís will be not rig ok on stiff 4.90 masts. Which in turns contradicts to Gaastraís specifications.
Klint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 06:32 PM   #13
AlexWind
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 166
Default

North Extender is a usefull item, the only thing I fear is according the mast durability: anyone has some feedbacks on using the north extender?

Anyway the north system works becouse the sails are designed to be used with the carbon (and flexible as Roger said..) extender, so the mast curve is optimized.

According 7.5-ish sails, I have a 2 cambered R_type 7.8 (460 + 42cm alluminium extention) and it works great..
AlexWind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 07:18 PM   #14
Klint
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 66
Default

AlexWind,

Sounds fine, will try the 460 + extension on my 7,5 gtx. I do have a brand new 490 Gaastra 75% mast for larger sails, just interesting to try other combos and see if that does any difference.

/ Andy
Klint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st March 2008, 08:09 PM   #15
Roger
Dream Team - School Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,110
Default

Hi Andy,
My experience with "alternate" masts has always been that you can achieve some differences in the handling and performance of the rig by using a mast that's either
shorter/softer (460cm IMCS 24-26 in a sail designed for a 490cm IMCS 28-30 mast) or
stiffer/longer (490 IMCS 28-30 in a sail designed for a 460 IMCS 24-26).
If you are a lightwieght sailor, often the softer/shorter mast will give the sail the ability to twist off sooner and at less pressure so you can handle gusts more easily.
Sometimes, by very careful rigging (not "by the numbers) you can get a bit more draft and make the sail a little more powerful.
Conversely, if you are a heavier sailor, you can use a stiffer/longer mast and get the opposite effects.
More tension in the upper panels of the sail will put more power higher up in the sail and if you are big/stong enough to handle this, the sail can be rigged more powerfully and not twist off as much, and at a higher pressure.
The Sailworks Hucker sails are the most "tuneable" this way.
Take the 5.6 m2 Hucker and put the recommended std. dia. 430 IMCS 21-23 100% carbon race mast in it and you get the designed power and twist. The Huckers have more power up high and this is most evident on the 100% 430 Race Std. dia. mast.
Put in a 430 cm IMCS 21-23 Sailworks Backbone RDM and you get less power up in the top of the sail, and a deeper draft (due to the luff sleeve sizing around the dia. of the mast) down lower in the sail when it is fully loaded.
Put in a 460 cm Sailworks Backbone IMCS 24-26 RDM and you get a full on slalom tune (BP has used this combo with lots of success in the Gorge Cup Races) with a flatter head and more power down lower, but still fully tuneable with the adj. outhaul and on the beach downhaul adjustments.
So, give the softer 460 cm mast a try. You might like it. Do not go by what it looks like laying on the beach. Take it out and get it fully loaded up. That's the only way you can tell if it's better or not.
I'd guess that since Gaastra recommends the longer stiffer 490 IMCS 28-30 mast, you are going to see the top of your sail dump off at much lower downhaul tension and it will dump off alot more than it will on the 490 mast.
Whether this is good or bad...... only you can make that judgement out on the water.
Hope this helps,
Roger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2008, 12:24 AM   #16
steveC
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 639
Default

For a number of years now, I have been using 30-40cm of extension in my older 7.0 Windwing and my new 7.1 Hansen with great success. Although a 460cm mast was recommended for both these sails, a 430cm mast was cited as an alternate. Similarly, I used to go with a 460cm mast for my old 8.1 Windwing Race sail that recommended a 490cm mast.

Now, I probably wouldn't have normally deviated from the optimum recommended masts, but the path to the alternates was unexpectedly found due to broken masts. This led me to some experimentation with shorter masts and longer extensions. What I found is that I liked the result. The only important thing to keep in mind is adherence to the proper bend curve masts that the sail designer recommends. More and more today, going with recommended bend curve has increasingly been a prerequiste for optimum sail performance. Although it's sometimes it possible to use a different mast brand than recommended, it's often very dicey. I would hate to confront the dilemma that many NP sailors face after repeated X9 mast failures.
steveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
None

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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 03:57 AM.