Go Back   Starboard Forums > Ask Our Team

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 3rd March 2009, 06:47 PM   #51
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Cool

Hey Ola I know !!!
But it does seem your explanation of current situation complicates issue.
Its very simple.
Manufacturers should (and always should have) quoted ACTUAL volumes.
Anything over that is complicating issue.(or as perfectly explained by windZ leads to manufacturers (or their marketing departments) playing with the figures .
Starboard have used volume measurements to identify year of manufacture !!! (In K range)
(ie K 106 was an 06; whereas K105 was an o5) How can that be justified if measurements are accurate !!! Are #B saying an 06 had 1 litre more than 05 ???

Obviously volume placement is important but you should be comparing like with like.
One 100 litre board ca be made uphaulable (or whatever your criteria) and another might not;but so what ????

All board measurement should be objective !!!

Cant see what the problem is !

A board either displaces 100 litres or it does not !!!

Why all the heartache ???
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd March 2009, 07:52 PM   #52
Ola_H
TEAM
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,191
Default

No heartache from my side. And for the record, I have no influence over Starboards volume quotations.

But I don't see why my post complicates the issue. It is just an analysis of why things are like they are and why there is kind of a paradox involved in the whole thing. My views of how it should be (in an ideal world) is just as clear as yours.

(On the kombats: they really did grow a little from 05->06->07, if I recall. And 2008, the last digit was all over the place (86, 105 etc). There has not been a case when a board name/volume quote changed but the actual board did not.)

There was a question on wether Starboard actually knows the real volumes or not. Afaik, not all protos sent for moulding are tank measured. Production samples generally are tank measured, but my info is that the measuring at Cobra is not that exact, ie +- a liter or so. Already there we can have a certain discrepancy. So it can be with volumes as it is with weights (web site weight represent a statistical sample of a number of real production boards), the real data may not even be known when the catalogue is printed. Again, not an excuse for not publishing it later, but still a part of the complicated state of things.

Aloha,
Ola_H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2009, 01:04 AM   #53
carlosgp5
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SC
Posts: 61
Default why so much difference!!!??

Just wanna add my view, as this topic changed a lot my mind about boards.
I started windsurfing 2,5 years ago, with SB FW 147.
I raced a lot with my mates who were always using the 160...
Well, I just sold this old board and I am trying to get a 160... reading this topic and discovered that my old 147 has actually 137 litres of volume, and I was racing guys using 162 litres boards!!!! 25 litres of difference.
I always new that my board was a lot different then theirs, but I dont know if I am right but I was all the time caring about fins, sails, technique, tactics... when I should just change the board straight away.
I canīt see a good reason why the name of the board is so much different then the actual volume.
carlosgp5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2009, 02:09 AM   #54
wiindz
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 65
Default

i think that one point more should be made, the volume of the board is only a meens of comparison when comparing two bords of the same modle same year or two boards with similar outlines, otherwise, as Ola logicly said, the shape of the board will do much much more towards its performance then a few litres here and there... therefore, when you are comparing two boards from the same modle and year (they should have very simmilar shapes in exception of the kodes and some slalom boards) and are trying to decide between say an evo 100l and 90l (very commonly the lasy decision a sailor makes b4 buying their board and also one of the most important) and you know you are okay on your old 105l but want to try something a litle smaller so maybe the 90l, but then it turns out that your "90l" board is actualy a 83l and now its too big of a step and the new board is not practical for them, then what?? you kinda just wasted 1,500-2,0004 on something u may never use...
i duno, i think its so much easier to provide both, instead of just a very rough estimate as is given now...
wiindz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2009, 04:17 AM   #55
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

If we have virtual volumes because of the performance characteristics, why not virtual lengths and widths? Remember, many boards in the past were identified by their length, but now that we are on much shorter boards, why not an:

"iS 111/60/250 that performs like a 60cm wide speed board but planes exceptionally fast"

Real volume is 108 L. Real width is 68.5 cm. Real length is 234 cm

Or name the board the "iSonic SUPERFAST M". (M=medium since it is the middle sized board in the iS lineup) Name it anything you like, just give us the facts about dimensions, weight and volume.
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2009, 10:15 AM   #56
wiindz
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 65
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken View Post
Or name the board the "iSonic SUPERFAST M". (M=medium since it is the middle sized board in the iS lineup) Name it anything you like, just give us the facts about dimensions, weight and volume.
nice name idea ken, but to touch up on that point, many manufactorers simply call their boards by size in the lineup, and then give you the real volume and dimentions afterwards, it looks great for marketing having a board names xxs, sounds fast;p anyways, i realy dont see what the big deal is, the manufactorer wants to make the buyer hppy, this is wut will make a lot of buyers happy and for very cheap, why not just do it?
wiindz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2009, 05:30 PM   #57
Ulf
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 32
Default

6 pages, It's about time SR or Tiesda popped up for comment.
Come on guys what can you do or why can't you do it????
Ulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2009, 07:40 PM   #58
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

wiindz,

Exactly my point. The iS111 claims 111 liters so they name the board the 111. However, it isn't 111 liters, they just say that because it performs like it has 111 liters. False advertising at the least.

Starboard - Call it an iS 111 if you like, just don't print that it has 111 liters of volume. Print that it has 108 (which I have read is the real volume).
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2009, 10:20 PM   #59
Floyd
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 459
Wink

Must be two firsts. Everyone agreeing on a thread and me agreeing with Ken ! Surely #B must do something !!!

Just off topic; think sailors are themselves partly to blame over charade with volume. Last time I was sailng a sailor (lighter and younger; both quite easy these days) came over and said
" bet you are bouncing about on that " (I wasnt)
It was a 105 litre board (62 wide); I weigh 102k (at moment)
Enquired his weight. 72k. He was on 80 litres !!!
Perhaps I look light !!!

We do have preconceived ideas about a boards performance irrespective of the load on it.
Leaves us at mercy of "manufacturers" to play marketing games with quoted volumes.

Its good advice for any sailor to try a board before s/he buys it and preferably in conditions s/he expects to use it .(in or be caught out in ?) Its essential for heavier sailors.

Windy down here. We`ve just had 54 knot gusts !(Yes knots) Calming down tomorrow !
Floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2009, 06:02 AM   #60
wiindz
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 65
Default

YOU ARE WAITING FOR IT TO CALM DOWN?!!! get out there!!!lol now back to the topic, solely based on wieght to vol ratio, that sailor should have been bouncing around a hell of a lot more then you, and if that was your wieght on that size board, it should take quite a bit of wind to make you bounce around, what sails where in use and how windy about? and back to the real topic, personaly i would realy like to hear from a starboard rep that can actualy get real vols printed on the boards so he or she could tell us all why this hasnt happend so far, why it cant happen (if it cant) or that it will happen (if it can)... but thats just my openion!
wiindz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
board volume, futura 122, overweight

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


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 07:07 PM.