Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19th August 2006, 05:30 PM   #21
Remi
STARBOARD DEVELOPMENT
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Thailand
Posts: 2,436
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Scotty,

I don't make any direct test with the RSX, but the Apollo it's not far behind the F161 over 20 knots who is better than the F 160. I think absolute no chance for the RSX to folow the Apollo.

Yes pumping can be over with that board and also more fun to see on tv.

All the best
__________________
Remi

Can answer if you have any questions on this following boards :

Carve 111, 121, 131, 141, 151 & 161
Futura 93, 101, 111, 121, 131 & 141.
iSonic 80, 87, 90, 97, 107, 110, 117 & 130
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

UltraSonic 147
Formula Experience One Design
Phantom Race 377 & 377 L / 320
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Phantom 295 L :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Formula 167 :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Racing Serinity Cat Concept
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Remi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2006, 05:33 PM   #22
Remi
STARBOARD DEVELOPMENT
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Thailand
Posts: 2,436
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Luco,

We make all the test with Code Red 11m. The board is working perfectly with that sail, but to increase again the performace of this concept, Severne is working on a new rig special for this board.

All the best
__________________
Remi

Can answer if you have any questions on this following boards :

Carve 111, 121, 131, 141, 151 & 161
Futura 93, 101, 111, 121, 131 & 141.
iSonic 80, 87, 90, 97, 107, 110, 117 & 130
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

UltraSonic 147
Formula Experience One Design
Phantom Race 377 & 377 L / 320
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Phantom 295 L :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Formula 167 :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Racing Serinity Cat Concept
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Remi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th August 2006, 12:19 AM   #23
steveC
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 639
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Steen2000,

Regarding the Lessacher weedfins, it has been my experience that they're extremely powerful fins that initiate planing speeds notably early for their size, yet they remain very slippery and quick overall. Also, I find that they pump quite effectively, and I believe this ability works hand in hand in design terms with their awesome resistance to spinout. In a way, Lessacher's designs are mysterious, but much of that is because I lack the technical and engineering background to explain how they work so effectively. However, I can say that they working on a close par with my Tectonics fins, and that says an awful lot. At the bottom line, I don't have to be bummed any more using weedfins, and this fact maybe says much about why I'm such an ardent supporter of Lessacher's weedfins.

Hey, sorry about using this thread about the Apollo and F161 as a foundation for a weedfin discussion. Still, many venues are plagued by weeds, and this fact can make vertical high aspect fins a true pain. I think that even formula type boards would benefit greatly from weedfins when it come to very shallow and/or weedy environments.

steveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st August 2006, 10:26 AM   #24
Racer
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 10
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Being heavy, in marginal winds i want to plane as early and as easily as possible, but i dont want to use above 10m sail. Is the Apollo the board for me?
Racer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st August 2006, 06:37 PM   #25
Remi
STARBOARD DEVELOPMENT
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Thailand
Posts: 2,436
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Racer,

Even with a 10m, this board will plane more earlier than anything else, but please notice that is a pure race machine, extremely high performance up wind and downwind and reach in super light windi, t's definitely not a free ride board.

All the best
__________________
Remi

Can answer if you have any questions on this following boards :

Carve 111, 121, 131, 141, 151 & 161
Futura 93, 101, 111, 121, 131 & 141.
iSonic 80, 87, 90, 97, 107, 110, 117 & 130
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

UltraSonic 147
Formula Experience One Design
Phantom Race 377 & 377 L / 320
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Phantom 295 L :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Formula 167 :
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Racing Serinity Cat Concept
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Remi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2006, 09:01 PM   #26
mark h
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NW England,
Posts: 710
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

So in say, 8ish knots, how much faster is the Apollo compaired with the F161. When you say the Apollo is beating the F161, do mean upwind downwind angles or speed or both? Is the 75cm fin available as a seperate item to use on my current F159?

Cheers
__________________
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 22nd August 2006, 11:50 PM   #27
James
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 236
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

http://www.sailwet.com/olympic_fins.html

The link above is to some pictures and blurbs about oversized Curtis / gSport formula fins that our local fin guru Dave Kashy experiments with. Pretty cool.

I think you can buy an 85 cm fin from gSport; www.gsport.com, under formula fins.

True Ames also sells 75 and 80 cm fins; http://www.trueames.com/wind_select.php?wind_products_id=12
James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd August 2006, 12:49 AM   #28
scotty
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 45
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

James I see you have a F 158 listed and a 12 Nitro. Just curious what size fins do you use on this one and of what brands?

scotty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd August 2006, 09:42 AM   #29
Tiesda You
Dream Team Designer
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Ken,

You've brought up some good points here. The Formula is designed to cover the current Formula rules' wind range, but Apollo covers even lighter winds to invite FW to expand towards lower wind limits and thus allow FW to be candidate for London 2012. This applies to an Apollo fitted with either a 75cm fin or a 70cm fin, but of course the deeper fin is preferable.

The Apollo also allows heavier or not so good sailors to get planing when they would otherwise get stuck..

To get planing earlier, the Apollo is longer with a rockerline that glides onto the plane more easily than the shorter, more banana-rockered Formula that tends to push water before rising on top of it. The Apollo's wetted surface is designed to be extremely efficient and powerful too - the tail is very, very wide for a very high aspect ratio planing surface (think a glider's wing) and alot of leverage over the fin (gives you power but control too). All in all, the Apollo gets planing very early, earlier than any other board including the F161 and also keeps planing in the lulls very easily. The entire package of an Apollo board, a 75cm fin and a powerful soft sail like the Severne Glide could really make planing racing viable for Olympics.

Then comes the question of overlap. Below FW wind limits, there is no question, Apollo is the board of choice. At the lower end of FW wind limits, all of us here at Starboard would choose to race on the Apollo. Towards the middle part of FW wind limits, it depends on the sailor, his weight and personal preference, and finally in the higher wind range the F161 is the better board.

As Svein puts it: think what wide Formula boards with 60cm fins did to course-racing a few years ago, then think what super-wide tail Apollo boards (still below the 100cm FW max width limit) with 75cm fins could do to Formula Windsurfing.

Tiesda You is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd August 2006, 05:52 PM   #30
Jean-Marc
TEAM
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,352
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Tiesda,

Thanks for sharing some of the Apollo's secrets with us.

Being crazy of ultra light wind planing, I have 3 questions :

1) Assuming the minimum planing threshold for a FW board is 6 knots of wind, are you really able to make the Apollo planing with as low as 4 knots of wind ? Is that correct ?
2) Would a 80 cm fin be able to lower the planing threshold even further or not ?
3) What top board speed are you able to reach : 8, 10, 12, 16 knots, i.e., twice to 4 time the wind speed ?

Cheers !

JM
Jean-Marc 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 11:30 AM.