Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 27th September 2008, 11:54 PM   #31
nonopr
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico
Posts: 573
Default

I am sure that McGain has chosen Tabou because he know they work for him.
As a fact in his first heat of the day he ended second and Bjorn third.
nonopr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2008, 03:09 AM   #32
geo
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 327
Default

I don't think Phil needs feedback from Josh Angulo about tuning: rather the opposite. As far as I know, Phil tested on water and his last selection was Manta or iSonic. I guess Mantas are better fit for Maui Sails, as iSonics seem to work so nice with RS:R and Warps.

Last edited by geo; 28th September 2008 at 03:16 AM.
geo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2008, 02:18 PM   #33
Vincef
New Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 12
Default

i'm afraid that Mcgain and Angulo have tested at least Mistral, Isonic and tabou boards.

Angulo is pretty clear when he explains why he choosed Tabou over Mistral and Starboard. See www.mauisails.com
Vincef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th September 2008, 03:34 PM   #34
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

he tested also Fanatic and the finalists were Starboard and Tabou.He spent about 1 whole month daily testing before take his decision so,in the end,I assume he was pretty sure about his choice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2009, 01:40 AM   #35
davide
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
The Carbon Art has more lenght, and is REALLY THICK. Combined with sharp rail, and no tailkick. What is happening with this board when you send it downwind in (1m??) chop, good power in sail, it breaks automatic. In my believing the board hit that brake a bit to early for most conditions. The thick tail combined with no tailkick give less freedom to kick the board over the edge. Personally I don't like this, I try to release the board between the front/rear strap, but flat water/ backside of waves just are BREAKING. When I go about 32kn on the CA it is over, I am pushing really a lot with my backfoot, while I know on another board I can take that load away... Also the masttrack is a bit much forward... Giving some problems if you like Deeep-downwind.
It is probably apple and oranges to compare "Isonics" with "CA" as if they were a single board. I own a CA SL 52 and 58 and these design do not seem "that" different from a Isonic 76-86-94, but from the Isonic 101 up is a different story. But other then argue shape and thickness and rails, I just want to mention that I do not really run into a "wall" with my CAs.

My 52 (when I check my GPS) is regularly in the 28-34 range, and I peaked it at 38+. Note that I am a good sailor but very, very far from a PRO. That is: I see no reason why a pro should not bring the CA regularly close to 40 top speed, it is my target for the new season (good luck!). I think the 58 would be just behind.

The boards are easy to sail, so easy that it feels like cheating, but I do not detect any "breaks automatic" , nor any particular need to "push" on the tail. The jibe of the 52 takes some tender loving care (it is a small board, 32.6 tail, somewhere in between the Isonic 76 and Speedspecial W53) but I see no problem with the 58 ... again a PRO would jibe either with his/her eyes closed ...

Last edited by davide; 11th January 2009 at 09:47 AM.
davide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2009, 04:10 AM   #36
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Cool

Davise
You`ve probably mentioned it someplace; but what`s your weight.
Thanks
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2009, 04:11 AM   #37
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Default

Sorry (typo) meant Davide
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th January 2009, 04:45 AM   #38
davide
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floyd View Post
Davise
You`ve probably mentioned it someplace; but what`s your weight.
Thanks
70-73Kg depending on the amount of pasta I eat
davide 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 10:09 AM.