Go Back   Starboard Forums > Ask Our Team

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 5th May 2010, 06:57 PM   #31
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken View Post
ChrisN,

I don't believe the JP SLW will plane as early as a formula board with the same sail and same sailor. Board width, volume, tail width, stiffness, weight, rail sharpness and fin length determine the planing threshold and the JP doesn't measure up (just guessing since I don't have all the comparable stats). However, the difference will be very small between the boards (1-2 knots?).

If not formula racing, the JP, iS150 or other "high performance" giant slalom board may be the best option for light wind slalom or freeriding. However, the JP will still not point as high or run as deep as a formula board.
Ken, here is the latest preview of the JP SLW 90 from SURF magazine, May 2010.



It seems that this lightweight (as JP's PRO is the same as SB's WC), lightwind concept is actually accelerating probably 1 knot after a typical Formula board. Here is my/BabelFish translation:

"This board category is the missing link in the chain. The powerful Early Planning Sails previously lacked a suitable base. Large Freeriders are often too heavy, Formulaboards too extreme. We had - unfortunately only very briefly, as the wind was then all gone - the opportunity to sail the new JP at about 7-14 knots.
Our impression: The Board with approximately Formula-dimensions is very stable and plans quickly with a bit of pumping. While planning, a decisive and really new sudden insight comes then: In contrast to Formula boards, one stands on the smart "Race deck" very comfortably. The feet are not overstretched, even though the straps are mounted very pleasantly further inside. Especially in the inner position, one can remain for a very long time relaxed in comparison to the the tiresome positions on a Formula.
The board has a very subjective nimble and quick feeling. We would recommend 8 to 10 m2 sails.
A complete Early Planning test against similar concepts follow as soon as possible."

Well, this is exactly as you predicted, as it plans a bit later, yet a bit more "agile", nimble, and comfortable than Formula boards.

It seems that I'll wait just a little bit longer to order my iS150 (which already seems old in comparison)! Latest I've read about LORCH going for a similar concept.

As we are awaiting some answers, SB is probably already cooking something here too (agree on that Agrelon)
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2010, 08:01 PM   #32
agrelon
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
Ken, here is the latest preview of the JP SLW 90 from SURF magazine, May 2010.



It seems that this lightweight (as JP's PRO is the same as SB's WC), lightwind concept is actually accelerating probably 1 knot after a typical Formula board. Here is my/BabelFish translation:

"This board category is the missing link in the chain. The powerful Early Planning Sails previously lacked a suitable base. Large Freeriders are often too heavy, Formulaboards too extreme. We had - unfortunately only very briefly, as the wind was then all gone - the opportunity to sail the new JP at about 7-14 knots.
Our impression: The Board with approximately Formula-dimensions is very stable and plans quickly with a bit of pumping. While planning, a decisive and really new sudden insight comes then: In contrast to Formula boards, one stands on the smart "Race deck" very comfortably. The feet are not overstretched, even though the straps are mounted very pleasantly further inside. Especially in the inner position, one can remain for a very long time relaxed in comparison to the the tiresome positions on a Formula.
The board has a very subjective nimble and quick feeling. We would recommend 8 to 10 m2 sails.
A complete Early Planning test against similar concepts follow as soon as possible."

Well, this is exactly as you predicted, as it plans a bit later, yet a bit more "agile", nimble, and comfortable than Formula boards.

It seems that I'll wait just a little bit longer to order my iS150 (which already seems old in comparison)! Latest I've read about LORCH going for a similar concept.

As we are awaiting some answers, SB is probably already cooking something here too (agree on that Agrelon)
It'll be interesting to see what their fuller test yields, though it will probably be much of what we've already heard.

It's insane how many board lines Starboard has. Maybe they'll drop their not-so-marketed, and from what I can tell not so popular, Rio and replace it with a light-wind user friendly formula style board.

Also, the Serenity also serves a much smaller market. Let's be honest, the Serenity only makes sense until a certain point. If you're lucky enough to have a liveable cabin by a non-windy, super flat lake, where transporting the board isn't an issue, then you can afford a Serenity in your back yard. (That being said, I haven't tried one and therefore can't comment on how fun "non-planing" windsurfing can be with it)

For most people, though, it's a question of dropping the backseats of the car and chucking the board in to get to the local spot because a mate just called to tell you it's blowing! For what? For PLANING conditions.

Despite their many board lines, no board fills the gap in the Starboard lineup as the JP SLW does in their board lineup, and they have a lot less boards too.

It'll be interesting to see what happens.
__________________
JP Super-X 106l, North F8 Ram: 5.8m,
175cm, 54kg

Last edited by agrelon; 5th May 2010 at 08:04 PM.
agrelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2010, 05:13 AM   #33
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Angry

We should close this thread down as SB is not willing to take the "risk" and answer the question posed!

Final contribution from my side though! BOARDS magazine from April'10 tested the Carbon/Kevlar with Honeycomb version of the JP Super Sport 69 (see in link) also called Gold versus the Full Wood Sandwich version (FWS). The Gold edition was nearly 1,5 kgs less static weight and the stiffest board construction available!

What they report was that: "the first thing the testers commented on was how much quicker it felt onto the plane! ... they felt they had more control due to the more direct feel though chop, which inevitably would lead to more speed. They also commented that it was easier to exit the gybe fully planning on the Gold Edition..." They highlight that Gold it was NOT necessarily faster than FWS, but it planned earlier...

So, bottom-line, the "lightest" and stiffest constructions plan earlier (yet no information how much earlier!). If iS150 was made in a similar construction as the GOLD version of the JP Super Light Wind 90 /154 Ltr, then it would have been an interesting comparison (looking forward to the upcoming SURF test).

What we have learned from the much appreciated forum contributions, is that if we are looking for the earliest planning, then we should just drop the Large Slalom boards! We should all go to the modern Formula equipment; for me it would be a 12,5 m2 racing sail with either SB's Wood Carbon HWR version OR the JP Formula 100 (Carbon); then I can move my 90kgs mass on planning by 8 knots
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2010, 01:57 PM   #34
agrelon
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 421
Default

Hi Chris,

My last contribution too. I was sailing today with my Futura 93l, HSM Psyclone 5.6m (terribly rigged on my part but it was my first outing with it and I was in a rush to rig), Drake Freeslalom Swift.

My Kestrel 2000 told me the wind was between 6-13 knots. These readings were taken on the water sitting on the board, it's quite easy to recognize by looking at the water state if the size of the gust measured would get me planing or not. I could get the board planing in about 11-12 knots.

These conditions would've been IDEAL for a Formula board as the wind rarely dropped under 6 knots and the water state was super flat. I definitely think that planing in 6-7 knots for me with a 10m and a Formula board would be no problem at all.

Thanks to my Kestrel, I now have a better understanding of what 6 knots of wind is and how early my freeride kit can plane. I think I'm definitely gonna try to get some formula kit in the future to exploit this low windrange.
__________________
JP Super-X 106l, North F8 Ram: 5.8m,
175cm, 54kg
agrelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2010, 02:53 AM   #35
Duracell
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 172
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
We have been debating this in another thread (see link) for some time now, but have not received any answer from SB's Team!

Both in these Forums and Website, SB is marketing the new construction with a lot of statements about the "premium" WC construction. For example:
  • In a thread less than a Y ago, IAN FOX mentioned: "The Futuras (and iSonics) can definitely be made lighter in Wood+Carbon tech, which offers an advantage in earlier planing in lighter winds and on flatter water."
  • In the presentation of the iSonics and Futuras, here is the statement: "WoodCarbon offers the lightest weight of all with a stiffer construction that offers quicker acceleration in lighter winds."

What I've been asking is that if I use the same sailor (advanced skill) with the same sail (e.g. 10 m2 OverDrive/NP V8/etc.) and Fin (e.g. 520) in the same conditions (e.g. flatwater with chop), which of these 2 board will plan earlier? By which margin?

Please share some of your test results (even informal), as it then makes sense to invest the 200 difference on a WC board rather on the Wood one...
Woh Woh Woh,

I haven't been reading this forum since ages(OMG WTFHH).

The actual question was: Does it then makes sense to invest the 200 difference on a WC board rather on the Wood one.

Answer: YES IT DOES
Reasoning: Remeber: Wide wood boards -> drop a coin on it -> ding, drop two coins on it -> have it repaired. Carbon Deck == holy grail == best of both worlds: bottom stiff wood is really performant, got myself a Manta 85 to painfully prove the fact that the Manta was always slower than the iSonic 133 BUT I did have the one or other accidental wipeout (hit something hinden under the water surface (guess I surprised a fish) and Manta/Carbon survied without any problem, mast smashed on deck but deck didn't mind). Same thing on iS133Wood == new board. End of story.

Then there were still quite a few interesting unrelated questions to stiffness, weight, sailor input and planing threshold and lack of SB-response:
Well, what are they supposed to say?

- The above they denied for quite some time: carbon was useless in their eyes (I had ranted quite some time about wide wood boards and I still can't believe they let me. I'm happy though, that they found a good way out marrying their concepts with practical use and weight loss (bravo!)).

- as to lighter boards: they will always feel nimbler because your feet can shift them much easier from one side to another or lift the rail every little more when you're really pushing it (a 1.5 Kg lighter board will definitely make you feel that difference).

- weight -> early planing: if you just wait until you have enough wind to plane you can easily add your weight to the boards weight and realize it will only be significant if YOU lose some 50 Kg weight...

- weight -> early planing II: if you add sailor input (and if you surf a lot and try a lot you will learn more every year) a lighter board will make a bigger and bigger difference. (again: why tell someone it only planes earlier if you are really good...)

- weight -> early planing III: when adding sailor input you actually pump pressing the boom down and also hanging weight through the wind off the sail so the only thing you have to actually push forward (with your feet) is the board. 1.5 Kgs less directly translates into being much easier to push which translates into ... RIGHT! early planing...

So you want to know what difference (in knots) it would make for a world class surfer, well maybe 0.25 maybe 0.5 it really doesn't matter, the board will feel noticeably better see above.

Hope I didn't piss off too many people, but I forced myself to read the thread to the end and thought: maybe a diffent angle could provide some controversy not related to apples, pears and grizzly bears...
Duracell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2010, 10:58 PM   #36
Ken
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 799
Default

Duracell,

I think you are a bit too critical of wood boards and their durability. I have had three wood formula boards and one wood iS 111. I have never made a repair on any of them.

My first two formula boards (175 and 147) took several mast slams to their noses while I was leaning to master the downwind runs. Yes, there were dents in the nose, but no repairs needed.

I have also gone over the nose at full speed (20+knots) on my formula boards after hitting submerged objects at least 6-8 times with never any damage to the bottom or fin box.

Sorry, but damage to the deck of a wood board with two coins is a bit of an exaggeration. Yes, carbon can be more durable, but they break too. It depends on how they were built.
__________________
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 18th May 2010, 12:02 AM   #37
Duracell
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 172
Default

Hi Ken,

I understand your point, I meant WIDE wood boards >= 80 cm.
My other wood board (K86) has no problems (except that the wood between the front and rear foot straps begins to look more woodish where as the area in front of the front foot straps still looks like new )...
And another reason to consider non wood decks:
Carbon much easier and better to repair, wood will ALWAYS look terrible after some real repair work so wood/wood-carbon argument still valid.
Duracell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd May 2010, 06:36 PM   #38
ChrisN
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 70
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duracell View Post
..............
Weight - Early planing III: when adding sailor input you actually pump pressing the boom down and also hanging weight through the wind off the sail so the only thing you have to actually push forward (with your feet) is the board. 1.5 Kgs less directly translates into being much easier to push which translates into ... RIGHT! early planing...

So you want to know what difference (in knots) it would make for a world class surfer, well maybe 0.25 maybe 0.5 it really doesn't matter, the board will feel noticeably better see above.
Duracell, that was certainly an entertaining entry in this winding-down thread. Reading the whole thread means that you are also interested in an answer, but given SB's lack of imaginative answers, you provided instead a much appreciated, animated one.

Regarding "durability", I've read similar stories from shops repairing Wood boards. My brother is against them too (long time pro /semi-pro). I am sure SB will NEVER share their stats on durability, yet their decision to go for WC is self-explanatory! Just check out the latest Formula boards...

On "Weight", if I did shed 5 to 10 kgs it would help a bunch, but the effort for reaching the latter is herculean and long-term (need to take on Marathons). If I can go down to 85 kgs (my weight at my 20th birthday), then I'll be fine, and will be able to plan a bit earlier.
More important is my technique; as you mention handling big sails in light conditions require more time in the water, and that's what I am aiming for wth buyng such a combo.

On Weignt for the Board, and to Agrelon's comments in our other thread, everyone here and the test of JP's SuperSport Gold is confirm that "lighter" boards are "feeling" faster, plan earlier and so forth. Even SB is marketing their WC construction as one that "plans earlier"! Beyond feelings, I did ask the simple question - "how much earlier?". In the end SB claims to be innovative engineers - not artists!

In your Delphian foresight, I certainly got no aswer from SB. It seems that your "0,5 knots earlier" is at least a statement; combining it with better Durability(?) and Ease of Handling (given lower weight), it makes it a good sense to invest in a Carbon-based board. Bad luck that the board I wanted iSonic 150 is only in Wood. In our case, there is a test of the new generation light-wind boards like the JP SLW90 and others in the German SURF in July'10. I'll share the results...
ChrisN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2010, 01:33 AM   #39
mark h
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW England,
Posts: 710
Default

Iv'e read a couple of GPSSS session for SLW, and was suprised how low the top speeds were?? I'd normally expect boards to be going quicker in the winds that were quoted. You can read the session details if you search the UK sessions.

Would be interesting to read the SURF mag test
__________________
Cheers - Mark H

The toys:
iSW44 - - iSW49 - iSW53 - iSW58 - iS107 - iS137 - F161.
North Warps: F2012 5.2m, 5.7m, 6.3m, 7m, 8m, 8.6m, 9.5m F2006 11m.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
mark h is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th May 2010, 06:16 AM   #40
mark h
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW England,
Posts: 710
Default

Sorry, the above post was short, had just got in after a super light wind (sub 8 knots) formula session and needed food

Just checked GPSSS.com for the "only" two SLW logged sessions. I know the guy who rides it, and he is a very talented light weight sailor and I'm sure he wont mind me posting his speeds here.

Speeds logged were:

7k to 12k winds: Max speed - 20 knots, Neilpryde Helium 7.5 sail, JP Slalom III 56 fin.

7k to 15k winds: Max speed - 23.2knots, Neilpryde Helium 7.5 sail, Select S10 Slalom XL 57 fin.

Decent enough speeds for light winds, but in gusts of 12k on Formula or XL slalom I would expect at least a 2:1 ratio for speeds I.E. 24 knots min. The SLW did 20 knots and would eaten alive by my Formula or iS144 or an iS150 in those winds. Being overtaken by some one doing 4 knots more is not good

In 15 knot gusts, again I'd expect a Formula, iS144 and iS150 to be getting 26k to 28k peaks, not 23k.

This intended to be negative against JP, just an observation. Last weekend, I had a quick go of my mates 2005 JP freerace 157 with my 11m in 15k winds, and I managed 28k peak speeds which was 1 knot faster than my formula 161 was doing, but it did have a much smaller 56cm fin c/w the 70cm fin that was on my F161 which would explain why it was faster "on that day".

My thoughts about the SLW now are that, I would rather give up 1 knot or so on wind minimums to gain much faster top end speeds.

I guess that until some one tries all these boards side by side, we will all just be speculating But so far, I'm pretty convinced that the iS150 (the SLW's main rival) will be faster in 9/10 knot winds.
__________________
Cheers - Mark H

The toys:
iSW44 - - iSW49 - iSW53 - iSW58 - iS107 - iS137 - F161.
North Warps: F2012 5.2m, 5.7m, 6.3m, 7m, 8m, 8.6m, 9.5m F2006 11m.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by mark h; 24th May 2010 at 06:21 AM.
mark h is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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
Is isonic earlier planner than Futura?? MOP Free Forum 4 8th March 2010 08:01 PM
Go 155/175, which one planes earlier? zion Ask Our Team 1 24th September 2009 06:02 AM
is133 vs. is144 malenki Kevin`s Corner 3 23rd March 2009 01:57 PM
Fin for IS144 AJ Ask Our Team 4 8th January 2008 10:00 PM
iS144 mark h Ask Our Team 1 15th October 2007 05:07 PM


All times are GMT +7. The time now is 01:09 PM.