Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21st September 2006, 10:42 AM   #81
Nathan
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Not too sure what all the fuss is about, because a racer could be carrying two board to a event RIGHT NOW, its just that the boards would be from different companies, to explain.....

Example: Lets say the board company "XXX-Boards" makes a fantastic formula board (named "Light Wind Machine" this formula board is the best light wind board on the market (up to 15knots), leaves everything for dead. Lets say Starboard makes a board name "161" is the best board on the market for winning races over 15knots.

A cashed up racer who has brought "Light Wind Machine" & "161" can go to a event, determine the overall conditions for an event and register the best board for what he thinks will win him the most races.

Nathan
Nathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st September 2006, 07:45 PM   #82
Remi
STARBOARD DEVELOPMENT
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Thailand
Posts: 2,453
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Hi Crwind,

If the isaf choose another board for the Olympic for 2012, that will a production board who have been race during one year and prove that is enough good (and also price and durability) before the decision who will be in september 2008. So that means clearly that we need to put it on the market september 2007. And make sure that the board feet the FW rules (so 8,5kgs Max)
Actualy we win more in early planing with a good shape and for sure a beter rig that we have right now on the market, the big progress have to made in this direction.
Yes a light board will help also, but do not have enough time for next year to be sure that this technology is enough good in therme of durability.
And the big question will be how much rider who don't race would like to pay double price for an early plaining 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 21st September 2006, 09:39 PM   #83
crwind
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Thx Remi,
I believe there is a market for Xlight boards for Xlight day and places, i-e guys like me will pay for that. Look at the generalisation of the "pro-model" boards in the line-up for brands like JP, Fanatic or even Mistral and Naish now. It shows that even non racer will like to have the best available in terms of rigidity and weight too.
I understand your focus for now, but maybe you guys will find time for a limited ed or "pro" model for the Appolo for example.
I also agree with you for sails. Looks like around 10m2 and optimized for light wind is the direction and best compromize , for now (weight is also a factor as 12m2 are quite heavier than 10m2).
Where I live now, we only have lacs and light wind, so I am particularly interested in Xlight wind perf and evolution.

Best regards,
crwind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2006, 12:24 AM   #84
sitka
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

The Olympics have demonstrated they want crap, heck they are even skillful at staging a democratic crap selection. So let's all set a course to reach those lofty standards shall we, that makes a lot of sense. After all it does culminate in a few races every four years that can put even the most hardcore fan to sleep.
sitka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th September 2006, 04:48 AM   #85
crwind
New Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7
Default RE: Apollo Vs F161

Sitka,
That's a very good post. Me too, I quite don't get all that fuss about the Olympics for windsurfing?.. I could understand the desire to get some "formula" legal, as there seem to be market there, before getting out the real light wind oriented Appolo for example, but the Olympics, no. Good point.B)
crwind 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 09:07 PM.