26 Apr 2005 12:23:04
Neil Wallace
Fat Smoothies from C2

Has anyone tried these yet?

If so, are you using them 5cm shorter than your old set up as per the C2
website?




26 Apr 2005 06:07:21
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

I have standard smoothies, and I recently cut 2cm off the ends of each
blade to make them smaller, so can't really see I'll be getting fatter
ones any time soon :)



26 Apr 2005 13:09:05
RMTT
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

andy.nield@ps.ge.com wrote:
> I have standard smoothies, and I recently cut 2cm off the ends of each
> blade to make them smaller, so can't really see I'll be getting fatter
> ones any time soon :)
>
Is it just me, or are blade shapes slowly going back to a macon style?
The new fatsmoothies are a lot rounder than the angular first generation
BigBlades.

RMTT


26 Apr 2005 14:12:53
Jon Anderson
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

RMTT wrote:
> Is it just me, or are blade shapes slowly going back to a macon style?
> The new fatsmoothies are a lot rounder than the angular first generation
> BigBlades.

Maybe but are blade lengths not shortening over time? Or is this just me?

Jon
--
Durge: jon@durge.org http://users.durge.org/~jon/
OnStream: accounts@rowing.org.uk http://www.rowing.org.uk/

[ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]


26 Apr 2005 14:03:00
Edd
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Jon Anderson <jon@durge.org > wrote:
> RMTT wrote:
>> Is it just me, or are blade shapes slowly going back to a macon style?
>> The new fatsmoothies are a lot rounder than the angular first generation
>> BigBlades.

> Maybe but are blade lengths not shortening over time? Or is this just me?

Yeah, you're right. The similarities of the most recent blades to macons
are rather different from the most important changes that big blades
brought in, so we won't likely be going back to anything like a macon in
my opinion even if there are superficial similarities appearing.

--
Edd


26 Apr 2005 07:29:04
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

What makes me laugh is that each time Dreher innovates in blade shapes,
CII copies it (without doing the testing to prove it is a worthwhile
innovation).

Interested? Read the history of the development of the Dreher macon,
the development of the cleaver blade, the smooth faced blade and in
2001, Dreher introduced a round spoon.
http://www.durhamboat.com/OARS.HTMis link - page down to "Other
relevant information" and read the series of articles on Technical
Discussion New Blade Shapes parts 1 - V.

This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of behaviour
developing here?

Don't buy until you've tried, is my advice.



26 Apr 2005 15:42:27
Jon Anderson
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
> Interested? Read the history of the development of the Dreher macon,
> the development of the cleaver blade

The cleaver blade shape that Dick and Pete are supposed to have come to
by cutting off and adding on bits to a macon until they got a blade that
worked better?

Jon
--
Durge: jon@durge.org http://users.durge.org/~jon/
OnStream: accounts@rowing.org.uk http://www.rowing.org.uk/

[ All views expressed are personal unless otherwise stated ]


26 Apr 2005 16:16:40
Alistair Potts
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

That wouldn't be the same Rebecca Caroe as the Dreher agent would it?

rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
> What makes me laugh is that each time Dreher innovates in blade shapes,
> CII copies it (without doing the testing to prove it is a worthwhile
> innovation).
>
> Interested? Read the history of the development of the Dreher macon,
> the development of the cleaver blade, the smooth faced blade and in
> 2001, Dreher introduced a round spoon.
> http://www.durhamboat.com/OARS.HTMis link - page down to "Other
> relevant information" and read the series of articles on Technical
> Discussion New Blade Shapes parts 1 - V.
>
> This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of behaviour
> developing here?
>
> Don't buy until you've tried, is my advice.
>


26 Apr 2005 16:25:32
Neil Wallace
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Alistair Potts wrote:
> That wouldn't be the same Rebecca Caroe as the Dreher agent would it?
>

Yes, but she makes a fair point.

I think Bill Atkinson deserves a mention first though.

His site *clearly* states that the first thing he would do is a backward
cant for sweeps.... Dreher adopted this without reference to his work
AFAICS.

His site also states that bigger surface area is worth a try..... C2 bring
out a Fatter blade.


> rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
>> What makes me laugh is that each time Dreher innovates in blade
>> shapes, CII copies it (without doing the testing to prove it is a
>> worthwhile innovation).
>>
>> Interested? Read the history of the development of the Dreher macon,
>> the development of the cleaver blade, the smooth faced blade and in
>> 2001, Dreher introduced a round spoon.
>> http://www.durhamboat.com/OARS.HTMis link - page down to "Other
>> relevant information" and read the series of articles on Technical
>> Discussion New Blade Shapes parts 1 - V.
>>
>> This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of
>> behaviour developing here?
>>
>> Don't buy until you've tried, is my advice.




26 Apr 2005 08:33:32
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


Neil Wallace wrote:
> Has anyone tried these yet?
>
> If so, are you using them 5cm shorter than your old set up as per the
C2
> website?

One club member just got a pair and they appear to be about 10cm less
outboard than the other smoothies hanging in the rack with them. He
says he can really get the rate up with them (lighter shafts too).

I've been out coaching an 8+ that is using the new blade on sweeps
(also about 10cm shorter), the rowers report that it "feels like we can
really pull on them". There is a little bit of a problem with the
blade being wider, the length being shorter, and the rig being about
the same height. It seems to be taking a while for the rowers to work
out the handle height changes, i.e. a bit more is needed to keep the
blades clear of the water when square, and this is amplified by the
shorter OAL. They are certainly more bottom heavy than the smoothies,
and this is "NOT a plus", IMO.

They are definitely NOT a move in the direction of Macons, more like a
move in the direction of giving something to the normal club hack, that
can't figure out bladework, and let them beat the hell out of the water
a bit more effectively. [;o)

- Paul Smith



26 Apr 2005 09:03:54
Rob Collings
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


paul_v_sm...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Neil Wallace wrote:
> > Has anyone tried these yet?
> >
> > If so, are you using them 5cm shorter than your old set up as per
the
> C2
> > website?
>
> One club member just got a pair and they appear to be about 10cm less
> outboard than the other smoothies hanging in the rack with them. He
> says he can really get the rate up with them (lighter shafts too).

Err - I think if I took 10cm off my outboard then I'd be able to get
the rate right up without having to buy new blades! What about
boatspeed...

Rob.



26 Apr 2005 17:15:16
Neil Wallace
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Neil Wallace wrote:
> Has anyone tried these yet?
>
> If so, are you using them 5cm shorter than your old set up as per the
> C2 website?

just an update...
oarsport have told me these won't be on sale in the UK until around the end
of May.




26 Apr 2005 17:03:43
Carl Douglas
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Neil Wallace <rowing.golfer*NOSPAM*@virgin.net > writes
>Alistair Potts wrote:
>> That wouldn't be the same Rebecca Caroe as the Dreher agent would it?
>>
>
>Yes, but she makes a fair point.
>
>I think Bill Atkinson deserves a mention first though.
>
>His site *clearly* states that the first thing he would do is a backward
>cant for sweeps.... Dreher adopted this without reference to his work
>AFAICS.

Bill is not alone in having long questioned what should be the correct
alignment of the blade on the shaft.

One point, which seems never to be given any thought, is that the blade
inevitably cants "backwards" (i.e. towards the bow) by quite a few
degrees under load, with that cant being proportional to the load & to
the cube of the outboard length. So the greatest cant is found shortly
before mid-stroke & is produced by the tallest, strongest rowers.

Is that what we want? And what do we want?

And they say oars are "designed".

;^)
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)



26 Apr 2005 16:48:49
Edd
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
> This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of behaviour
> developing here?

You're referring to the fat smoothie I assume? The shape isn't that
drastically different from the original vortex edge shape, and is nothing
like as rounded as a Dreher Apex blade. The vortex edge came out four
years ago. I think it's a bit unfair to describe the new design as a
copy of the Dreher shape that's suddenly appeared.

--
Edd


26 Apr 2005 17:52:18
Neil Wallace
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Carl Douglas wrote:
(snip)
> One point, which seems never to be given any thought, is that the
> blade inevitably cants "backwards" (i.e. towards the bow) by quite a
> few degrees under load, with that cant being proportional to the load
> & to the cube of the outboard length. So the greatest cant is found
> shortly before mid-stroke & is produced by the tallest, strongest
> rowers.

with the longest, softest shafts?




26 Apr 2005 10:03:07
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


Edd wrote:
> rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
> > This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of
behaviour
> > developing here?
>
> You're referring to the fat smoothie I assume? The shape isn't that
> drastically different from the original vortex edge shape, and is
nothing

It's pretty "drastic", but you are correct that there would have to be
the elimination of the "squarish" corners to match up with the Dreher
Round shape. [;o)

- Paul Smith

> like as rounded as a Dreher Apex blade. The vortex edge came out four

> years ago. I think it's a bit unfair to describe the new design as a
> copy of the Dreher shape that's suddenly appeared.
>
> --
> Edd



26 Apr 2005 10:03:56
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


Rob Collings wrote:
> paul_v_sm...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > Neil Wallace wrote:
> > > Has anyone tried these yet?
> > >
> > > If so, are you using them 5cm shorter than your old set up as per
> the
> > C2
> > > website?
> >
> > One club member just got a pair and they appear to be about 10cm
less
> > outboard than the other smoothies hanging in the rack with them.
He
> > says he can really get the rate up with them (lighter shafts too).
>
> Err - I think if I took 10cm off my outboard then I'd be able to get
> the rate right up without having to buy new blades! What about
> boatspeed...
>
> Rob.

No idea on the overall speed increase, but have no doubt the hull gets
moved along faster during the higher rate which would only be a good
thing if the trade-off doesn't bite back too hard.

I'll ask to give them a try and report back later in the week, though
I've always been a believer in the "more time in the water" is better
than "less time in the air" method of getting more speed. [;o)

Personally, Macons work great, ApexR's are slightly better. Regular
Apex is better handling than C2 smoothies/big blades, but not as good
as the Macons or ApexR. Croaker Slicks tracked well, but the sleeve
seemed to be high friction. We seem to have the best outings after
several days with the Macons (getting very clean) and then swapping to
the ApexR's (very easy to be clean).

- Paul Smith



26 Apr 2005 17:08:49
Edd
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

paul_v_smith@hotmail.com wrote:

> Edd wrote:
>> rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
>> > This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of
> behaviour
>> > developing here?
>>
>> You're referring to the fat smoothie I assume? The shape isn't that
>> drastically different from the original vortex edge shape, and is
> nothing

> It's pretty "drastic", but you are correct that there would have to be
> the elimination of the "squarish" corners to match up with the Dreher
> Round shape. [;o)

Nah, it's just got a bit extra stuck on the bottom. Admittedly the
bottom-most corner looks a little rounder, but the VE didn't have a sharp
angle at the equivalent point either. The rest has barely changed.

--
Edd


26 Apr 2005 10:18:24
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


Edd wrote:
> paul_v_smith@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Edd wrote:
> >> rebecca.caroe@pembridge.net wrote:
> >> > This year, CII introduce a round spoon.....see any pattern of
> > behaviour
> >> > developing here?
> >>
> >> You're referring to the fat smoothie I assume? The shape isn't
that
> >> drastically different from the original vortex edge shape, and is
> > nothing
>
> > It's pretty "drastic", but you are correct that there would have to
be
> > the elimination of the "squarish" corners to match up with the
Dreher
> > Round shape. [;o)
>
> Nah, it's just got a bit extra stuck on the bottom. Admittedly the
> bottom-most corner looks a little rounder, but the VE didn't have a
sharp
> angle at the equivalent point either. The rest has barely changed.
>
> --
> Edd

Seriously, there is a lot of material and reshaping. It would be
pretty easy to reshape it into a more "rounded" profile that would
resemble the ApexR, but I don't think the top "lip" would be a good
thing that has been left behind. (same as the smoothie) They also have
what appears to be the same negative pitch, even though it's "zero
pitch" according to C2.

See for yourself:
http://www.concept2.com/05/oars/fatblade.asp

- Paul Smith



26 Apr 2005 18:27:10
Edd
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

paul_v_smith@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Nah, it's just got a bit extra stuck on the bottom. Admittedly the
>> bottom-most corner looks a little rounder, but the VE didn't have a
> sharp
>> angle at the equivalent point either. The rest has barely changed.
>>
>> --
>> Edd

> Seriously, there is a lot of material and reshaping. It would be
> pretty easy to reshape it into a more "rounded" profile that would
> resemble the ApexR, but I don't think the top "lip" would be a good
> thing that has been left behind. (same as the smoothie) They also have
> what appears to be the same negative pitch, even though it's "zero
> pitch" according to C2.

> See for yourself:
> http://www.concept2.com/05/oars/fatblade.asp

Yeah, that's the page I was looking at - going off the profile diagrams
they have there, but I'll take your word for it if there's more to it than
is immediately obvious there.
--
Edd


26 Apr 2005 20:02:16
Carl Douglas
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2

Neil Wallace <rowing.golfer*NOSPAM*@virgin.net > writes
>Carl Douglas wrote:
>(snip)
>> One point, which seems never to be given any thought, is that the
>> blade inevitably cants "backwards" (i.e. towards the bow) by quite a
>> few degrees under load, with that cant being proportional to the load
>> & to the cube of the outboard length. So the greatest cant is found
>> shortly before mid-stroke & is produced by the tallest, strongest
>> rowers.
>
>with the longest, softest shafts?
>
>
I doubt that a tall, strong sculler would deliberately choose soft
shafts, but he would probably choose long ones. And you'll have seen
how heavily a strong sculler or rower bends their oar-shafts. This
causes a substantial variation of blade alignment (cant) WRT the line
between pin & centre of spoon during the stroke.

Cheers -
Carl
--
Carl Douglas Racing Shells -
Fine Small-Boats/AeRoWing low-drag Riggers/Advanced Accessories
Write: The Boathouse, Timsway, Chertsey Lane, Staines TW18 3JY, UK
Email: carl@carldouglas.co.uk Tel: +44(0)1784-456344 Fax: -466550
URLs: www.carldouglas.co.uk (boats) & www.aerowing.co.uk (riggers)



26 Apr 2005 13:05:09
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


Carl Douglas wrote:
> Neil Wallace <rowing.golfer*NOSPAM*@virgin.net> writes
> >Carl Douglas wrote:
> >(snip)
> >> One point, which seems never to be given any thought, is that the
> >> blade inevitably cants "backwards" (i.e. towards the bow) by quite
a
> >> few degrees under load, with that cant being proportional to the
load
> >> & to the cube of the outboard length. So the greatest cant is
found
> >> shortly before mid-stroke & is produced by the tallest, strongest
> >> rowers.
> >
> >with the longest, softest shafts?
> >
> >
> I doubt that a tall, strong sculler would deliberately choose soft
> shafts, but he would probably choose long ones. And you'll have seen

> how heavily a strong sculler or rower bends their oar-shafts. This
> causes a substantial variation of blade alignment (cant) WRT the line

> between pin & centre of spoon during the stroke.
>
> Cheers -
> Carl

This is a very important point for those of us that "row shorter than a
school girl" but always seem to be in the water longer than most other
rowers. The very early rise in force bends the shaft and sends the
blade off on a path closer to the "zero slip tractrix". I've often
wondered if a more flexible shaft would lend itself to even further
distortion in the desired direction, but "flexibility" is a bit
dependent on the person doing the flexing, or more accurately, their
ability to generate force quickly and sustain it through the stroke.

Also note that the angle at the release is going to be much more
shallow if the blade were "canted" toward the bow on the shaft, and
this will change the nature of extraction considerably for a
conventional Cleaver that makes advantageous use of Drag instead of
lift. The APexR, OTOH, can be released at this more shallow angle
without extra effort, leaving only the strange angle toward the water
while on feather to deal with.

All in all, it seems that shaft flexibility should be dependent on the
rate that the athlete is able to supply force to drive the boat ahead.
And as many things are in rowing, there is some counter-intuitiveness
to deal with. i.e. To be longer in the water you must get force on
more quickly, NOT ease up and wait for the others. (See Carl's
"bluffers guide to large puddles" to understand those that think they
are getting through the water so much faster because they are _So
Strong_.)

- Paul Smith



26 Apr 2005 16:06:49
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


paul_v_sm...@hotmail.com wrote:

> Croaker Slicks tracked well, but the sleeve seemed to be high
friction.
> - Paul Smith

Ooops! "CROKER", I've been informed. [:o)

Love their Grips BTW - Yellow. I'd go pink, but they required too much
stretching to fit over my handle. (Yeah, go ahead Neil, I know you want
to...)

- Paul Smith



16 May 2005 09:30:33
Re: Fat Smoothies from C2


paul_v_smith@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I'll ask to give them a try and report back later in the week, though
> I've always been a believer in the "more time in the water" is better
> than "less time in the air" method of getting more speed. [;o)
>
> - Paul Smith

Well, finally got to give these new blades a spin, the set I used was
also the "Low-inertia" shaft. 281cm/88cm inboard. 159cm span.

First impression: Holy smokes, these things are as light as a feather!

What might be guessed about being able to rate up sure is evident, they
felt feather light and really quick out of bow without even trying.
The combination of the lighter blade and Square Sleeve pretty much
eliminates the "bottom heavy" feeling I get with the regular
Smoothies/sleeves.
The shape change did not seem to be as drastic as I thought it might
be, but that could have been offset a bit by having a shorter overall
length, which seemed to result in a more acute catch angle, but that
must have been an illusion, because the inboard was the same. We had
very smooth water to deal with and there was very little clearance when
square, so they might have been tougher to use in light chop.
The release wasn't as clean as I like, but the connection point
(shaft/blade) is not as smooth as the Drehers, so doesn't slip out of
the water quite as nicely, and I also could have been rowing out a
little with the shorter overall length.
A half pressure piece at SR=13 was yielding 15m/stroke, so the blade
was holding quite well even at slow speeds.

Overall, I'd say that C2 made a step in the right direction. I'm going
to shift the balance point on my oars to give that lighter feel and see
what happens. I checked the difference and the balance point was about
6cm closer to the handle than my Macons, about 10cm closer to the
handle than my ApexR's.

If I were to recommend them for a particular group it would be,
lightweights who find rating higher increases their average speed. We
did some mid pressure, but fairly high rate trials, and the speed was
on par with what I would term slightly higher pressure but lower rate
pieces, difficult to say if it was a "fair trade" or not, though it was
fun to be "spinning along" at a 36-38 with a likely ratio of 1.

- Paul Smith