Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 27th November 2008, 03:15 PM   #11
John Kemsley
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 59
Default

Hi having had a HS111 and HS133, and the only difference being volume/thickness I always felt happier on the 133 (which I still have), but then at over 90kg it may just be the self preservation factor when the wind drops.
John Kemsley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th November 2008, 11:35 PM   #12
Farlo
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 528
Default

In light wind you will apreciate ~30 L extra buoyancy. Of course the 126 was maybe a bit more nervous and kept planning in lulls better, but it became cumbersome quickly once overpowered. With 103 L x 65 cm, I can float comfortably in no wind, plane early in 12 Knts and still enjoy 20+ Knts. My Electric Rock was also 103 L x 63 cm, and an early planner too, but was nothing fun in 20 Knts + chops for 68 Kg (maybe less at that time).

Last edited by Farlo; 28th November 2008 at 08:35 PM.
Farlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2008, 02:41 PM   #13
feuser
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3
Default

Only the length and the circumference are being the only important things.
The volume as compared to the width for early planning and the bigger sail is not important, maybe for floating you home but really HS 105 uphaul & slogging no problem 80Kg.

Hope this helps.
feuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th December 2008, 10:36 AM   #14
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yep, can't overlook the ability to slog home when the wind is done which flotation provides. Narrow boards definately slog faster, as they displace water better.

The only kiting ( a no volume board example) i've seen has been in the premises of a safety boat if shoreline access is a problem. On small deep lakes i've sailed on this is especially true. Otherwise i've not seen a kite user stray too far from the beach. Though many definately do. I'd want some relaunch experience before doing a multiple kilometer tour.

Interesting that many of you have mentioned that excess volume compromises control. Couldn't agree more. Being caught out in 30 knots on a 250l raceboard is hectic. Being overpowered on a 120 l freeride board is too.

I used a 112 bic for a long time, even in 4.5 weather. It went upwind in that sail size well enough at least. But turning downwind and holding it together was tougher and jibing in rolling chop was difficult.

Many sailors ive seen carry 110- range Tiga X-Game style boards with 40 cm fins for 10-18 knots but quickly downsize to narrower bump/jump boards and 25 cm fins when 20 knots plus comes around.

As for a one-board "best compromise" Starboard had the Hybrid Carve a few years ago. Seems to have been dumped.

Fetch is a big factor, as is temperature. It may not be a question of a "best board" for low fetch (wide sail-carrying boards seem best). But on hot summer days on lakes, the wind mass is not consistent at all. A kite might reach into the "infinite fetch" just above the lake surface and best any sailboard rig.

As for planing through lulls... i don't think volume has anything to to with it. If you're planing then the board's not displacing water and thus creating no buoyant force.

A wide board like the GO and a big sail seem to keep you going when a narrower freeride board would fall off the plane.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 05:07 AM   #15
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

No. It is all about DISPLACEMENT not volume.

The simple rule of buoyancy.

An aluminium dingy has about 10L of volume but can float a 100kg engine plus 5 people.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 04:04 PM   #16
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Red face

I failed physics too. !
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 09:46 PM   #17
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

An aluminium dinghy has thoasands of litres volume "of displacement".

Thats why it floats with all that weight in it !
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2009, 08:58 AM   #18
davide
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 249
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
An aluminium dinghy has thoasands of litres volume "of displacement".

Thats why it floats with all that weight in it !
Problem is that for a windsurfer displacement and volume are almost one and the same ... we do not have nice tall sides on our boards ...
davide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2009, 11:07 AM   #19
Unregistered
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davide View Post
Problem is that for a windsurfer displacement and volume are almost one and the same ... we do not have nice tall sides on our boards ...
To some extent ... but that correlation becomes increasingly irrelevant with boards that don't sink particularly combined with boards of greater width.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd January 2009, 03:58 PM   #20
Farlo
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 528
Default

This is true and not true. You need a minimum volume to get going (notably in low wind) then everything above waterline doesn't help for buoyancy. Once planning you could even consider that all volume is in excess. Volume seems more the result of many other parameters: you need a certain thickness over the desired outline to achieve the required stiffness with a given technology. Overall width and OFO are more relevant to define the fins/sails, thus the wind range. Modern shapes tend to be flatter with less liters; for instance a 90 L x 67 cm slalom board may now carry a 8+ mē sail. One reason is that excess volume = excess weight. On the other hand, new boards are always lighter and more controlable. So where is excess volume, and is it such an issue?

Last edited by Farlo; 3rd January 2009 at 09:17 PM.
Farlo 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 10:31 PM.