28 Jun 2006 19:51:22
(PeteCresswell)
Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

Has anybody figured out what moving the mast all the way forward on this board
does?

I can't see any decrease in planing threshold - or is that just me?

But I'm sure that greater minds than mine have tested the mast track's location
extensively - so I'm probably missing something.
--
PeteCresswell


29 Jun 2006 21:20:37
LeeD
Re: Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

Track forward increases waterline, increasing early planing.....and
increasing waterline also means it goes slower and slower as the winds
pick up, because you are increasing the waterline.
Track back gives you a smaller board to get planing with, but when
you're planing along, you have the least possible wetted surface,
giving you the POTENTIAL to sail fast.



30 Jun 2006 09:12:52
(PeteCresswell)
Re: Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

Per LeeD:
> Track forward increases waterline, increasing early planing.....and
>increasing waterline also means it goes slower and slower as the winds
>pick up, because you are increasing the waterline.

That's the generic, conventional wisdom for virtually all boards - also more
controllability in overpowered conditions...

But has anybody tried it on the Aero? I can't perceive any of that on mine?
--
PeteCresswell


30 Jun 2006 09:04:16
LeeD
Re: Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

Instead of focusing on track back or forwards, try measuring the
distance of the track to your front footstraps on each of your boards.
You'll find a general distance you like, a personal preference, that's
usually within a couple of inches on any of your boards.
Every company and model board places the mast track in a different
setting from the tail, so just focusing on location of track in the
mast track is looking at only PART of the whole equation.
Also, wide boards have straps outset, so the above distance
increases. You know narrow boards, the distance decreases.



30 Jun 2006 10:16:36
shredulato
Mast All The Way Forward?




To me track forward means early planing , control in bumpy chop,
and abilty to plane earlier and longer in gusty conditions.
Track forward allows the sailor to distribute his/her weight over
the board better especially if you are not planing and schlogging along
trying to balance ontop of thr water waiting for that next gust. It is
more IMHO forgiving, period , especially when using a sinker.
However track forward is not as good for jumping, or gybing in
heavy wind, i being heavier at 190 lbs preferr track forward as a rule.
As to the aero try different locations , theres a general sweet
spot , it should change for heavier or lighter wind.
but then agin thats IMHO.
Shred



30 Jun 2006 14:17:30
(PeteCresswell)
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Per shredulato:
> or gybing in
>heavy wind, i being heavier at 190 lbs preferr track forward as a rule.
> As to the aero try different locations , theres a general sweet
>spot , it should change for heavier or lighter wind.

At #210-220, track forward has been my preference on many boards too.

On the Aero, center or further back seems to be the sweet spot with all the way
forward turning it into (as another poster characterized it some months ago) "A
water-pushing pig".

*Maybe* it planes earlier and stays on a plane better with mast forward - but I
cannot perceive it when I try it.

So, in the OP, I was wondering why Starboard included such a setting - figuring
that the experts there know something that I don't, and also considering the
possibility that it really does plane better but I'm just not perceptive enough
to notice the diff.
--
PeteCresswell


30 Jun 2006 13:10:17
shredulato
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?


(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per shredulato:
> > or gybing in
> >heavy wind, i being heavier at 190 lbs preferr track forward as a rule.
> > As to the aero try different locations , theres a general sweet
> >spot , it should change for heavier or lighter wind.
>
> At #210-220, track forward has been my preference on many boards too.
>
> On the Aero, center or further back seems to be the sweet spot with all the way
> forward turning it into (as another poster characterized it some months ago) "A
> water-pushing pig".
>
> *Maybe* it planes earlier and stays on a plane better with mast forward - but I
> cannot perceive it when I try it.
>
> So, in the OP, I was wondering why Starboard included such a setting - figuring
> that the experts there know something that I don't, and also considering the
> possibility that it really does plane better but I'm just not perceptive enough
> to notice the diff.
> --
> PeteCresswell


point taken, the aero is so short for width and volume that a putting
even a short track on a board like this and then moving the base may be
a larger change proptotionally then what moving a track on an older
style longer slalom board would do.

shred



02 Jul 2006 07:11:04
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Aero 127 tons of tail rocker , more than most wave boards available,
just face the fact that this board will need tons of wind.



04 Jul 2006 08:52:56
m--newsguy
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Several years ago I got to hear Peter Thommen talk about mast track
placement and where to rig your mast foot. His main points were that
mast tracks are generally much longer than they need to be for any
board, because the smaller the mast track, the harder it is to secure
it to the board well enough for it to be able to sustain all the stress
it might go through.

He also said that for any given sailor on any given board, the sweet
spot is only about 3 cm long, even when changing sails. I've had
success applying this (once I find through experimentation or luck the
position that gives great speed plus controllable turning) I only ever
move the foot along a stretch of about one and a quarter inches,
changing sail sizes up to 1.5 meters.



04 Jul 2006 13:59:59
Glenn Woodell
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

I use the Chinkook two-bolt bases and just leave mine in one spot for
most of my sails. I will occasionally move mine back about an inch
when I go to my 3.7. But for 6.5 to 4.2 I leave it right in the middle
of my track. Seems to work fine right there.

FWIW, I have an old 88L, 263cm '97 Screamer which has the older,
longer mast track.

Glenn

On 4 Jul 2006 08:52:56 -0700, "m--newsguy" <mtvnewsguy@aol.com > wrote:

>Several years ago I got to hear Peter Thommen talk about mast track
>placement and where to rig your mast foot. His main points were that
>mast tracks are generally much longer than they need to be for any
>board, because the smaller the mast track, the harder it is to secure
>it to the board well enough for it to be able to sustain all the stress
>it might go through.
>
>He also said that for any given sailor on any given board, the sweet
>spot is only about 3 cm long, even when changing sails. I've had
>success applying this (once I find through experimentation or luck the
>position that gives great speed plus controllable turning) I only ever
>move the foot along a stretch of about one and a quarter inches,
>changing sail sizes up to 1.5 meters.



04 Jul 2006 17:16:35
(PeteCresswell)
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Per (PeteCresswell):
>*Maybe* it planes earlier and stays on a plane better with mast forward - but I
>cannot perceive it when I try it.

I think I found one reason to have it all the way forward: shifty/fluky
conditions where you're slogging 90% of the time. Makes slogging considerably
less work and makes it easier to go straight downwind.
--
PeteCresswell


04 Jul 2006 17:30:08
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Of course, older style sailboards had the mast track waaay forwards,
and slogging was easy compared to the new stuff with the track 52" from
the tail nowadaze.
I ride the old stuff all the time, just to spite the local shop.
Even thos the new stuff does indeed work better overall, the old late
80's stuff can still be competitive, and to a viewer on shore, almost
no difference.
This in the context of freeriding and slalom, not freestyle.



04 Jul 2006 23:31:24
Glenn Woodell
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Older can in some cases be as good as newer styles I assume but it can
be misleading too.

My first sinker was a Fanatic Mamba. Probably vintage 1988 or so.
Great little board. I was jumping all over the place on this thing and
my 73L Mosquito until they got stolen one night around 1998.

I replaced these boards and got used to the new shapes eventually but
I sure missed my Mamba. Then one day I saw one at WindFest Hatteras
and I asked the owner if I could take it out for a spin. I was in for
quite a surprise when I found out that it was a dog compared to what I
was now riding.

I have upgraded since and now ride an 88L '97 Screamer (and the same
in the '96 Electron version) both of which are old by today's
standards. I'm a little hard headed and do not like change but I am
having so much fun on my 88's. I've tried the newer, wider boards, but
none suit my fancy quite like my little do-everything boards.

But my point is that we can be fooled by our own hard headedness
sometimes.

Glenn

On 4 Jul 2006 17:30:08 -0700, "LeeD" <domsports@yahoo.com > wrote:

> Of course, older style sailboards had the mast track waaay forwards,
>and slogging was easy compared to the new stuff with the track 52" from
>the tail nowadaze.
> I ride the old stuff all the time, just to spite the local shop.
>Even thos the new stuff does indeed work better overall, the old late
>80's stuff can still be competitive, and to a viewer on shore, almost
>no difference.
> This in the context of freeriding and slalom, not freestyle.



05 Jul 2006 09:40:05
Ellen Faller
Re: Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

I've sailed the Aero with 5.5, 6.5, and 8.5. In all cases, I've had the
mast track in the same place. I like it positioned so that the wide part
of the track, where you insert the screw, shows just as a square. Once
you find the sweet spot, stick with it. The board doesn't have that much
waterline in front of the mast in any case.
Ellen

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per LeeD:
>
>>Track forward increases waterline, increasing early planing.....and
>>increasing waterline also means it goes slower and slower as the winds
>>pick up, because you are increasing the waterline.
>
>
> That's the generic, conventional wisdom for virtually all boards - also more
> controllability in overpowered conditions...
>
> But has anybody tried it on the Aero? I can't perceive any of that on mine?


05 Jul 2006 07:55:47
shredulato
Re: Aero 127: Mast All The Way Forward?

As to Old boards i was sailing last year in some pretty heavy
offshores. a guy i know getting ito the sport has an old seatrent atv
9"6", a board i had sailed years back at lake arenal in costa rica ,
and had moved onto new owners twice and had been repainted etc etc
other then the track being way forward for my liking, sailing this
thing was a blast. one thing the track did do is force on to keep the
weight over the front of the board in the lulls. Which helped me to
keep plaining longer in the lulls.
a nice reminescence.
shredout



05 Jul 2006 09:39:36
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

I never embraced the deep double concave idea of the Fanatics, rather
preferred the F2 255 those years with flat nose going into a panel V
bottom.
Hated the HipHop too, even thos it's similar to the F2.
Electron great, but Stinger not bad when powered up and ridden onto
it's thin, narrow, tail. Bad when underpowered and the Ophiphi dent
hits the water.
Old Screamers from late 80's still go fast and turn really smooth and
long.
One of the best boards made, SunsetSlalom (deep double concaves), can
still be competitive with ANYTHING on the market nowadaze, as was the
F2 Axxis 270.
Sure, there were bad boards in the old days, but some classics,
ridden by competent sailors, can still accelerate as well, go as fast,
and turn as well as anything new.
Some friends on Fanatic Geckos of varying sizes are still some of the
fastest sailors around, making smooth jibes, handling weird chop, and
floating back home.



05 Jul 2006 19:51:48
Jerry McEwen
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 23:31:24 -0400, Glenn Woodell
<letsrig@!!cox!!.net > wrote:

>I replaced these boards and got used to the new shapes eventually but
>I sure missed my Mamba. Then one day I saw one at WindFest Hatteras
>and I asked the owner if I could take it out for a spin. I was in for
>quite a surprise when I found out that it was a dog compared to what I
>was now riding.

Man, can I relate. My first shortboard was a custom glass 115 liter
and I was extremely comfy on it. I blew out the fin box and a buddy
carried it down to his shop in Florida and kept it for about six
months. I got another board and when I got the old one back with the
new box, I rode it exactly once.



05 Jul 2006 20:52:45
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Ha ha.....
Bud of mine uses the HiTech 9'4" poly glass quad cave for his all
asround board, and a 8'10" LocalMotion RobinProdanovich 3 fin for his
high wind and wave board.
Dude sail maybe 70 days a year, sails as well as anyone. No tricks,
of course.



06 Jul 2006 07:19:37
m--newsguy
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?


LeeD wrote:
>
> One of the best boards made, SunsetSlalom (deep double concaves), can
> still be competitive with ANYTHING on the market nowadaze, as was the
> F2 Axxis 270.
> Sure, there were bad boards in the old days, but some classics,
> ridden by competent sailors, can still accelerate as well, go as fast,
> and turn as well as anything new.

Unless you're talking about sailing in a straight line, and fully
powered, that's nonsense.

There are modern boards (I ride a JP 109) that are 8 feet long, turn as
tightly as an 8 foot board from any era, but plane earlier than any old
giant slalom board. They are also much easier to jibe. Take any
two sailors of equal ability, put one on a Sunset Slalom or any other
board of that era, and the other on a modern equivalent, and the sailor
on the modern board is going to have much more fun.



06 Jul 2006 13:12:29
Dan Weiss
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?


LeeD wrote:
> Ha ha.....
> Bud of mine uses the HiTech 9'4" poly glass quad cave for his all
> asround board, and a 8'10" LocalMotion RobinProdanovich 3 fin for his
> high wind and wave board.
> Dude sail maybe 70 days a year, sails as well as anyone. No tricks,
> of course.

I don't think you do anyone any favors by observing that really good
sailors still sail really well on old stuff when trying to describe the
differences between the gear. I suppose these comparisons are helpful
to anyone who thinks all the reasons for some difficulty in progressing
can be tagged to the gear. But most do not think that way, anyway.

If people who could ride anything they wanted (like Robby Naish) but
chose NOT to continue to ride what they used the prior year, it is
entirely b/c of th design progress that leads directly to increased
performance compared to the old stuff. We all agree that most
windsurfers of today cannot do as much as Robby did in 1986 on his
then-current gear. But that proves nothing about whether Robby do
more, more easily,
on gear from 1996. Of course, he did.

Your affection for older gear is totally fine and pretty well reasoned.
In fact, I happen to appreciate the love for whatever stuff a sailor
considers a personal classic. I just bought a 1991 sedan and use it as
a daily driver for similar reasons. But it would be dumb to say my
1991 sedan is as good a car as the equivilent 2006 model. It's not,
but it is easier on the wallet and gives as good as it ever did,
mostly.

-Dan



06 Jul 2006 21:25:51
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Pure bullcrap !!
Either you cannot windsurf, or you are trying to justify your new
purchases.
I sail the old crap all the time, including Stingers, Axxis278's, and
all sorts of boards from the mid '90's.
I also rode "06 Naish's, JP's, Mistrals in the 85 to 103 liter range.
Most good days, I sail with the best freestylers and some good slalom
sailors here in Berkeley.
No way the new stuff is better except for the elusive "FUN". I'll
give you that.
For freestyling, yes the new stuff is easier, but not much more so
than AHD's '99 MaxRides (250 long and 59, 60, 62, or 64 wide), Exocets
260 x 58, Kinetics 262 x 57, or the old Freemoves from JP.....and a
host of others.
For pure go fast, planing jibes, big jumps, IT DON'T MATTER, it's the
pilot that makes it work, not the gear they are riding.



06 Jul 2006 22:45:00
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Spoken like an intelligent, level headed experienced sailior who
knows his stuff .......
but still biased towards the new gear for whatever reason.
OK, the new stuff is marginally better than the best stuff of 1986!
So what happenned in the TWENTY years in between?
If the stuff get better EVERY year like you say, we should be sailing
much better than we did 17 years ago, right?
In 1986, as a development rider for Seatrend, I was mostly riding 9'
x 23 slalom boards around 13-15 lbs., and we experimented with
different constructions, me being the test rider who could break any
board within 20 sailing days.
That board, with a flat tail rocker for 30", going to a progressively
accelerating nose kick, is easily competive with any slalom board today
with sails in the 5.5 to 7 meter sizing.
No, YOU did not get to ride that board. That was the custom sandwich
race boards given only to the team riders, and never put into
production.
Seatrend made over 100 of them, in slightly different constructions.
My high wind and wave board in 1984 was a RobinProdanovichLocalMotion
7'7" x 22.5 TWIN FIN. It weighed exactly 16.5 lbs., no straps, no fin,
no base.
What's better? And by how much? That was 1984 !!
And I snapped the nose off my 1996 Axxis 262. We stuck it back
together as a 7'10"er with little nose kick, and it sailed fine until
F2 replaced that board. Maybe we didn't appreciate how good it was,
but I always thought it was a dog at 8'6" anyways.



07 Jul 2006 11:16:41
Glenn Woodell
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

In article <1152246351.071741.190420@s26g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
domsports@yahoo.com says...
>
> Pure bullcrap !!
> Either you cannot windsurf, or you are trying to justify your new
>purchases.
> For pure go fast, planing jibes, big jumps, IT DON'T MATTER, it's the
>pilot that makes it work, not the gear they are riding.

Not entirely. I like old gear to an extent but I tried a new F2 something
this weekend and it was noticibly faster than anything I had sailed before. It
didn't want to jibe as well as my old board and I didn't try to jump it but it
was my first time trying it too.

I think there is definitely a market for the new gear, not that ever year
brings out all winners of course.

Glenn



07 Jul 2006 11:20:02
Glenn Woodell
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

In article <1152251100.446926.119830@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com >,
domsports@yahoo.com says...
>
> Spoken like an intelligent, level headed experienced sailior who
>knows his stuff .......
>but still biased towards the new gear for whatever reason.
> OK, the new stuff is marginally better than the best stuff of 1986!
> So what happenned in the TWENTY years in between?

Do you feel this way about sails as well?

You couldn't get me on a 20 year old sail.

I'm sure you or any experienced sailor could make it look easy on almost any
olg gear but I'm sure you have more fun and waste less energy on the new
stuff.

I love my new sails every year. I never move my harness lines and my sails
have much more range than sails of years past. I do like the older colors
though. Hard to beat the old Gaastra Heatwave with the dragon's teeth.

Glenn



07 Jul 2006 05:22:43
m--newsguy
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

No, Lee, you are the one peddling nonsense. It seems to me that you
are fond of your windsurfing past, not participating in windsurfing's
present, and so try and glamorize the past (which is fine) at the
expense of the present (which is silly, but worse in this newsgroup
it's misleading.)

You yourself can jibe a 2006 freeride board more easily and with more
control than a board from 1996. Denying this is nonsense.

Not only can I windsurf, but I can plane without a fin, something you
proclaimed impossible. I still encourage you to take a few
lessons...with all of your experience you could probably learn some new
techniques quite rapidly.

LeeD wrote:
> Pure bullcrap !!
> Either you cannot windsurf, or you are trying to justify your new
> purchases.



07 Jul 2006 06:13:18
Dan Weiss
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Actually, Damon, I did ride for Seatrend for several years, but started
four years later. I am intimately familiar with the top dog shapes and
construction coming out of the shaping bay of R.French. I rode them.
I tested them. I compared them and provided feedback.

Since some of us have ridden exemplary custom race boards since the
early days, we also know that comparing them to a production board of
the day is a fruitless endeavor for the most part. In 1987/8, for
example, I owned 2 custom Harold Igge slalom boards, both of which won
in actual world cup events and one of which was the board that won the
1986 or 87 Gorge Pro-Am . These boards were so far beyond what any
steel-molded production board could do it was a joke, and are a large
part of why I pursued windsurfing so passionately.

The conversation must compare production boards of yesteryear to those
of today rather than old custom boards versus today's production gear.
I think you'd have to agree that the old production stuff can't hold a
candle to the new in overall performance. For example, one of my wave
boards is an AHD PiT 99. I often sail it in very flat water without
any waves or significant chop in sight. Last Saturday I sailed it in
such conditions with a 5.4 wave sail and 9" flexy wave fin 'cuz that's
all I had. Sailing with me was a highly experienced windsurfer sailing
the classic Tiga 260 with a newer Sailworks race sail. That Tiga was
wolf in sheeps clothing, as you know. I had little trouble keeping
pace even when pointing upwind, and was able to pull away on a powered
beam reach and below. That, and the modern stuff jibed on a dime and
planed up faster in most instances. Had a rogue mast high set come
plowing through, guess which gear would be able to bottom turn and hit
the lip?

The question isn't whether vintage gear is great at one thing (lots of
it is better at a particular thing than much of the new gear), but
rather whether the old gear is better in its totality. Does it perform
with less effort? Is performance more or less accessible to a wider
range of sailing skills and styles? If my wave board can spend all
afternoon pacing and older racing without much sweat.....

My preference for new gear is bias based on reasoned observation rather
than some sort of dimwitted slant or knee jerking reaction as you might
be suggesting.

-Dan
LeeD wrote:
> Spoken like an intelligent, level headed experienced sailior who
> knows his stuff .......
> but still biased towards the new gear for whatever reason.
> OK, the new stuff is marginally better than the best stuff of 1986!
> So what happenned in the TWENTY years in between?
> If the stuff get better EVERY year like you say, we should be sailing
> much better than we did 17 years ago, right?
> In 1986, as a development rider for Seatrend, I was mostly riding 9'
> x 23 slalom boards around 13-15 lbs., and we experimented with
> different constructions, me being the test rider who could break any
> board within 20 sailing days.
> That board, with a flat tail rocker for 30", going to a progressively
> accelerating nose kick, is easily competive with any slalom board today
> with sails in the 5.5 to 7 meter sizing.
> No, YOU did not get to ride that board. That was the custom sandwich
> race boards given only to the team riders, and never put into
> production.
> Seatrend made over 100 of them, in slightly different constructions.
> My high wind and wave board in 1984 was a RobinProdanovichLocalMotion
> 7'7" x 22.5 TWIN FIN. It weighed exactly 16.5 lbs., no straps, no fin,
> no base.
> What's better? And by how much? That was 1984 !!
> And I snapped the nose off my 1996 Axxis 262. We stuck it back
> together as a 7'10"er with little nose kick, and it sailed fine until
> F2 replaced that board. Maybe we didn't appreciate how good it was,
> but I always thought it was a dog at 8'6" anyways.



07 Jul 2006 09:24:39
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Topsy turvy not fair examples from you......
Since you say my examples are unfair, and I AGREE with you, I'll say
a Tiga 260, and I had one two years ago trying to convince the
CalSailingClub it was a good board, is not representative of a top
freeride board from '95.
Tiga was heavy at 19lbs., was soft and flexy, that model was a slalom
shape with a round tail, NOT for wave riding, but yes, it was
relatively fast, but not nearly as fast as an Electron, Stinger, or
Fanatic's Bees of that size. Not to mention Priester, HiPertechs, of
the late '80's, or any customs from Canada in the mid '90's.
Not even comparable to my '95 shaped Kinetic 8'8" wave, which almost
keeps up with any freeride board even to this day.
I don't know the AHD Pit, as I thought they went out of biz last
year. Not availible in the SFBayArea.
How about pitting a HyPerTech 8'10"er against the faster custom
productions nowadaze?
Beam and below, I'd bet on the above.
Close to as high as humanly possible, a modern slalom would pull
away, due to the wider tail and bigger fin it can hold.
Now jibe them at a full on 27mph in chop. I'll take the HyPerTech.



07 Jul 2006 12:29:50
Dan Weiss
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Yeah, you might be right about the Hyper-Tech 8'10" being nicer to jibe
in sick chop than a very modern slalom board, at least the slalom
42-type shapes. The cool thing about that Tiga is what a great board
it was despite -perhaps because- of all its foibles. It was soft as a
rubber band but somehow it allowed it to be sailed at mach schnel
through just about anything by just about anyone. For kicks I raced it
in the Gorge summer series for one or two rounds and it performed very
nicely as long as it was windy and choppy. It was not terribly
competitive in flat water and moderate wind.

I know the Tiga isn't representative of a top freeride board from 1995.
Not sure why you pointed that out. Perhaps I missed it in an earlier
post. As for the AHD PiT, AHD is not importing to the USA this year.
They continue to produce boards and import to NA via Trident in Canada,
I think. The PiT is ofterred in 85 and 98 liter varieties. They are
intended to be all-world wave boards f.k.a onshore wave or euro wave.
I chose the 98 b/c I have access to real surf sailing conditions during
the summer and wanted a higher volume hulll for the light winds but one
that will still transition well from a frontside bottom turn in onshore
conditions. I have a 70l (ar so) true down the line board for when it
really kicks up or it fills in well enough in side to side off
(somewhat rare in the summertime).
-Dan
LeeD wrote:
> Topsy turvy not fair examples from you......
> Since you say my examples are unfair, and I AGREE with you, I'll say
> a Tiga 260, and I had one two years ago trying to convince the
> CalSailingClub it was a good board, is not representative of a top
> freeride board from '95.
> Tiga was heavy at 19lbs., was soft and flexy, that model was a slalom
> shape with a round tail, NOT for wave riding, but yes, it was
> relatively fast, but not nearly as fast as an Electron, Stinger, or
> Fanatic's Bees of that size. Not to mention Priester, HiPertechs, of
> the late '80's, or any customs from Canada in the mid '90's.
> Not even comparable to my '95 shaped Kinetic 8'8" wave, which almost
> keeps up with any freeride board even to this day.
> I don't know the AHD Pit, as I thought they went out of biz last
> year. Not availible in the SFBayArea.
> How about pitting a HyPerTech 8'10"er against the faster custom
> productions nowadaze?
> Beam and below, I'd bet on the above.
> Close to as high as humanly possible, a modern slalom would pull
> away, due to the wider tail and bigger fin it can hold.
> Now jibe them at a full on 27mph in chop. I'll take the HyPerTech.



08 Jul 2006 11:53:56
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

I suspect YOU are full of nonsense !!
To outright say a '06 board is easier to jibe than any '96 is pure
stupidity.
Try jibing an '06 F2 Missile in 20 mph winds compared to a '96
Freewave 90 liter board.
If you can't figure that one out, you LIE about your windsurfing
abilities!
And the fact you can plane without a fin..... my reco was to NOT
plane when your finbox breaks or your fin snaps off....not that you
cannot plane.
That applies when you break your boom, or your mastbase, or even snap
your board in half. If's safer, but slower, to make it back to shore
with BROKEN gear by not planing.
Sorry Newsguy, I suspect you all full of it about your windsurfing
skills if you made that first statement.



08 Jul 2006 12:57:23
M. Gunn
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

in article 1152384836.475424.112690@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, LeeD at
domsports@yahoo.com wrote on 7/8/06 11:53 AM:

> I suspect YOU are full of nonsense !!
> To outright say a '06 board is easier to jibe than any '96 is pure
> stupidity.


m--newsguy said..."You yourself can jibe a 2006 freeride board more easily
and with more control than a board from 1996.   Denying this is nonsense."

You said...

> Try jibing an '06 F2 Missile in 20 mph winds compared to a '96
> Freewave 90 liter board.

Boy! You had to dig deep to pull that one out of your a... er ...back
pocket!

Last time I checked the 2006 F2 Missile was/is a production speedboard.
Don't think it falls in the freeride category. Your argument makes no sense
to me.

mo
--
Team Coyote
http://www.teamcoyote.net



08 Jul 2006 20:31:23
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Newsguy said '06 vs mid '90's, not what model against what model.
Now read PeteCreswell's post, and try to understand it.
Just because it's newer, and I believe it's better, doesn't mean it's
always better for everyone all the time !!
And believe it or not, I actually prefer to ride WPoint forward
boards with thin tails and superthin rails, then have the float
forwards of the front strap for float back home.
Then you can ride on a small board when powered, and float home, if
you need to, with a more voluminous board !
Sure, in a pure slalom race, the new stuff can win in most courses.
But I don't race anymore, and it's not important if a couple guys can
finish any course a little faster than me.
Once again, the new stuff is better for freestyle than the old stuff.
I don't believe that all of us really care to freestyle.



08 Jul 2006 21:19:16
M. Gunn
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

in article 1152415883.245320.299940@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com, LeeD at
domsports@yahoo.com wrote on 7/8/06 8:31 PM:

> Newsguy said '06 vs mid '90's, not what model against what model.

Dolman, please read carefully;

m--newsguy generically suggested '06 "freeride" vs.'96 , <quote > "You
yourself can jibe a 2006 freeride board..." </quote >

Your subjects, (06' F2 Missile) which is a speedboard vs. an unnamed '96
freewave does not relate. You're the one who picked the models.

>Now read PeteCreswell's post, and try to understand it.

Dolman, try to understand this...the windsurfing world is far wider than our
beloved Bay Area. What you or I ride pales in significance to the wider
windsurf population. The fact that you or I ride with the "best and
brightest" really doesn't add much to the mix for Pete's (#210-220) Aero 127
OP.

Once again, you've lost track of the thread.

>Just because it's newer, and I believe it's better, doesn't mean it's
>always better for everyone all the time !!

Please note that the opposite is just as true.



mo

--
Team Coyote
http://www.teamcoyote.net



09 Jul 2006 10:14:19
LeeD
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Are you saying a '05 Carve 99 or XCite 105 is easier to jibe than a
Screamer from '96, the 103 liter model?
That increase of 3cm in width makes less difference than the added
length of the old board.
Short and wide can be harder to sail than long and moderately narrow,
if planing conditions exist. If not, long and moderately narrow can
still be easier to sail.



09 Jul 2006 11:58:44
M. Gunn
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

in article 1152465259.582429.261350@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, LeeD at
domsports@yahoo.com wrote on 7/9/06 10:14 AM:

> Are you saying a '05 Carve 99 or XCite 105 is easier to jibe than a
> Screamer from '96, the 103 liter model?
> That increase of 3cm in width makes less difference than the added
> length of the old board.
> Short and wide can be harder to sail than long and moderately narrow,
> if planing conditions exist. If not, long and moderately narrow can
> still be easier to sail.
>

I'll suppose you're asking me ;)
I can't speak to comparing an '05 Carve 99 - I don't think there was such a
board - but I can give a first hand opinion on an '05 XCite. I've owned and
ridden one for the past 2 seasons. It's my "extreme-light-air" board.
It's lowered my planing threshold to about 10 kts with a relatively small
6.4 sail.
The older production boards with their volume forward and narrower outline
required more effort, more wind or a larger sail to get on and stay on a
plane in similar conditions.
I don't find jibing the XCite difficult in any way. Planing thru a turn is
far more satisfying than the alternative. Use the appropriate board for the
conditions and you'll be a happy camper too!

Wind's already up here! Gotta run.

mo
--
Team Coyote
http://www.teamcoyote.net



11 Jul 2006 13:49:09
Ellen Faller
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

Sorry LeeD, but you are incorrect about Michael's sailing ability.
Michael is an excellent sailor, and can do all the things that he says
he can do, and a bunch more too.
As for the jibing remarks, you personally may be correct about your own
sailing, but many others have found the modern gear easier to jibe than
the older gear. You are entirely welcome to your own opinion, but it is
just that... your opinion. The rest of us are also entitled to opinions,
and many of those opinions are not shared by you. That does not make
them wrong, but your comments do tend to make you sound a bit
close-minded. Open your mind and consider that many of us do not sail in
the Bay area.
Ellen

LeeD wrote:

> I suspect YOU are full of nonsense !!
> To outright say a '06 board is easier to jibe than any '96 is pure
> stupidity.
> Try jibing an '06 F2 Missile in 20 mph winds compared to a '96
> Freewave 90 liter board.
> If you can't figure that one out, you LIE about your windsurfing
> abilities!
> And the fact you can plane without a fin..... my reco was to NOT
> plane when your finbox breaks or your fin snaps off....not that you
> cannot plane.
> That applies when you break your boom, or your mastbase, or even snap
> your board in half. If's safer, but slower, to make it back to shore
> with BROKEN gear by not planing.
> Sorry Newsguy, I suspect you all full of it about your windsurfing
> skills if you made that first statement.
>


11 Jul 2006 13:52:38
Ellen Faller
Re: Mast All The Way Forward?

I'll say that. The Screamers were great boards in their day, and the mid
90's one I had was quite nice. But, I find the Carve 99 (and 101) easier
to jibe. I prefer the ride and turn of the shorter board over the
length of the older Screamer.
Ellen

LeeD wrote:

> Are you saying a '05 Carve 99 or XCite 105 is easier to jibe than a
> Screamer from '96, the 103 liter model?
> That increase of 3cm in width makes less difference than the added
> length of the old board.
> Short and wide can be harder to sail than long and moderately narrow,
> if planing conditions exist. If not, long and moderately narrow can
> still be easier to sail.
>