Go Back   Starboard Forums > Ask Our Team

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 22nd April 2010, 05:47 PM   #11
agrelon
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
Default

Just thought I should pickup on one thing you said:

"If WIDTH is more important than WEIGHT, then why did you launch a WC line at all?"

I think what you're missing to spot here is that weight is not the only variable when changing material. Woodcarbon is much stiffer than technora, so even if the weight of these materials were the same, the WC one would be more efficient and have a cleaner release meaning it would still plain earlier, work better through lulls, etc, despite the same weight.

I would always opt for a wood/WC board. After changing from my protec AHD - JP 106l (wood) and then my Futura 93l (wood) the difference in feeling of the board on the water/hitting chop is really significant.

Both the AHD and the JP were from the from the same year, and the JP was a nominal 1cm less wide but MAN did the JP plane up earlier! I'll always remember how surprised I was the first time I tried it, the thing just kept accelerating and got onto a plane super quick (and I ended up getting catapulted cause I never got my back foot in the strap before hitting topspeed...)

So yeah, conclusion: construction makes a huge difference for stiffness and not just weight (however, the difference between protec and wood is probably much more significant than between wood and WC).
__________________
JP Super-X 106l, North F8 Ram: 5.8m,
175cm, 54kg
agrelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd April 2010, 06:40 PM   #12
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

Agrelon, good points, and close to my own experiences with the F122. It's true that the stiffness of WC provides a cleaner release thus earlier planning (beyond the weight)!

Bottom-line, if iS150 existed in WC then it would be able to plan btw 1-3 knots earlier than a more "soft" version - right? Would that also be the case for the iS144 in WC vrs. Wood versions?
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 12:08 PM   #13
PG
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 234
Default

At this point I just have to chip in... Weight is significant, but shape, rails and rockerline is much more important! Early planing comes from a straight rocker, a hard and sporty feeling on the vater often comes from minimal vee. On the other hand, a board with deep double concaves often feels very soft on the water.
With regards to your SUP, the reason it does not release properly is not because it is heavy, but because it has a lot of rocker. A Kona One is equally heavy , as is a Phantom raceboard, but both of these boards are fast thanks to a relatively straight rocker.
The Kona One is 350 cm long, has a weight of 16 kg or so (probably more), yet I am faster on it than most freeride guys (and much faster than those on Freestyle boards!).

Claim: construction makes a difference, as does weight, but both are only secondary factors.

I think that in order to do the really lightwind play you should get yourself a Severne Glide 8.5 (I think it will rig well on the mast for your Simmer), and a iSonic 141 (or something in the same size range) or a Futura 144 (may be more forgiving to lesser sail stability than the iSonic). The Glide is made exclusively to push down the planing threshold, and should equal a 10 m2 regular sail. I think that a board smaller than iS 150 will be more fun immediately when teh wind has filled in a little.
And then I do think you should switch to a 105 liter FSW for your "over 20 knots" sailing. It is a waterstart board for you, but floats you comfortably even with very little sail pull. And is so much fun!
PG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 02:01 PM   #14
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Question

PG, thanks for your clarifying comments on the Rocker-Scoop line effect on planning. Someone also mentioned that sharper rails ensure quicker release that also help on early planning! I've had my doze of "banana" wave boards in the 80's which could only turn but not plan.

Your iS144 recommendations are valid, if I was supposed to jump from the light wind SL board straight to my HyperSonic 105. However, I've already acquired an RRD SL, a 120 X-Fire, which goes like a rocket from 15 knots upwards. Therefore the discussion on SL on the 6-15 knts range.

The BIG question we have been discussing is whether the same advanced sailor on the same board shape (e.g. iS144) with the same sail (e.g. OverD 9m2) in different weight classes affect how early the board will reach planning?

E.g. does a iS144 WC plan a 2-3 knots earlier than the same iS144 Wood?
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 06:08 PM   #15
agrelon
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
PG, thanks for your clarifying comments on the Rocker-Scoop line effect on planning. Someone also mentioned that sharper rails ensure quicker release that also help on early planning! I've had my doze of "banana" wave boards in the 80's which could only turn but not plan.

Your iS144 recommendations are valid, if I was supposed to jump from the light wind SL board straight to my HyperSonic 105. However, I've already acquired an RRD SL, a 120 X-Fire, which goes like a rocket from 15 knots upwards. Therefore the discussion on SL on the 6-15 knts range.

The BIG question we have been discussing is whether the same advanced sailor on the same board shape (e.g. iS144) with the same sail (e.g. OverD 9m2) in different weight classes affect how early the board will reach planning?

E.g. does a iS144 WC plan a 2-3 knots earlier than the same iS144 Wood?
I don't think WC would make the same board plane 2-3knots earlier. Take the Formula 162 as an example. This board was wood construction, and good plane in 6 knots with a >11m2 rig. You take the latest HWR or LWR formula boards, WC, and they are still planing in as low as 6 knots, but not lower. At some point the windspeed is simply too slow to allow planing.
__________________
JP Super-X 106l, North F8 Ram: 5.8m,
175cm, 54kg
agrelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 08:35 PM   #16
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

Abs. agree! Yet, as you recall in MarkH iS144<>150 comparison, he mentioned that the iS144's ideal wind for a 10m2 starts from 12 knots and above, while the iS150 ideal wind for the same sail starts from 9/10 knots.

If I can get the iS144 WC to start from 9/10 knots then the debate is over - for the same shape and sail, the WC will start planning a bit earlier.

Can't understand why the TEAM is not contributing here. They are stating that WC is "accelerating faster in light winds" both in their website and product/technology pages. Therefore,the iS144 WC should plan earlier than it's Wood cousin! Our question is how much (given same sailor, sail & conditions)?

Knowing that makes a heck of a difference!
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 08:53 PM   #17
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

Chris,

Just a guess from 26 years of windsurfing - .65 kg of weight difference between the WC and W boards will not make a noticeable difference in the planing threshold for the 144, especially for someone at your weight. I used the word "noticeable" since there probably is a very, very, very small difference, just not one that could be measured.

I still think the 150 is your best bet for your under 15 knots wind range. As for sail size, I can only speak to my experience with my largest sails - Maui Sails TR 9.2 and 11.0. There is a very noticeable difference in power and early planing between the two, especially between 8 -12 knots on my formula board. I weigh 78kg (170lbs).
__________________
Toys:
Formula 160; iSonic 111; HiFly Move 105; Tiga 263; '85 Mistral Superlight.
Maui Sails TR 11.0; 9.2; 8.4; 7.6; 6.6; Maui Sails Switch 6.0; 5.2; Maui Sails Global 4.5; 4.0.
Ken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2010, 09:29 PM   #18
agrelon
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
Abs. agree! Yet, as you recall in MarkH iS144<>150 comparison, he mentioned that the iS144's ideal wind for a 10m2 starts from 12 knots and above, while the iS150 ideal wind for the same sail starts from 9/10 knots.

If I can get the iS144 WC to start from 9/10 knots then the debate is over - for the same shape and sail, the WC will start planning a bit earlier.

Can't understand why the TEAM is not contributing here. They are stating that WC is "accelerating faster in light winds" both in their website and product/technology pages. Therefore,the iS144 WC should plan earlier than it's Wood cousin! Our question is how much (given same sailor, sail & conditions)?

Knowing that makes a heck of a difference!
Especially seeing the price tag of WC boards.... those suckers don't come cheap.
__________________
JP Super-X 106l, North F8 Ram: 5.8m,
175cm, 54kg
agrelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2010, 01:16 PM   #19
PG
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 234
Default

My guess that a realistic difference in early planing between WC and W would be half a knot, something like that.
PG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2010, 04:35 PM   #20
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

Ken, you mentioned "...TR 9.2 and 11.0. There is a very noticeable difference in power and early planing between the two, especially between 8 -12 knots ...".

Do you mean that the 11m2 is MUCH better? Someone mentioned that there is NO niticable difference between a 10m2 and a 11 m2 (e.g. Overdrive). Yet, it seems that you would go for the 11m2 for 8-12 knts winds - right?
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
futura; isonic

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
Futura 155: Best light-medium wind sail/fin? johnd12 Free Forum 0 8th April 2010 02:46 AM
light wind board to replace futura 133 w DJluc Ask Our Team 1 25th August 2009 05:45 AM
Futura 122 or 133 for light wind conditions? Stef68 Ask Our Team 8 28th April 2009 10:37 PM
Isonic 133 or 144 for ultra light wind Tur53 Ask Our Team 7 8th November 2007 11:47 AM
Isonic 115 & Light-wind setup Daniel B Kevin`s Corner 2 28th May 2007 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 09:05 PM.