WindWing's Synthesis vs SailWorks' Retro?
(Pete Cresswell)
Synthesis.
WindWing's been good to me - especially the Synthesis, which seems to
have good stability in the gusts, enough range, and pretty good low
end.
For me low end is where it's at...I'm heavy and a fairly slow sailor.
But, after much use and abuse, the 6.1 single-cam and the 7.5 are
getting a little ratty (those breaking masts are hell on the luff
sock....) and this summer might be replacement time.
However my local dealer sells SailWorks so I'm trolling for a
rationale to switch. Maybe a 6.5 and the biggest thing that'll fit
on my 460/7-foot booms....like a high sevens...
Does anybody have TOW on both? Tradeoffs?
How about Naish's "Boxer" line? Sounds like more sail on less
mast/booms.
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
KarabaszJP
easy to rig.
But then you knew I'd say this
Your mast & a 7' boom will do a 7.5 Retro
KarabaszJP
Pete There is a Sailworks/Starboard Demo next weekend I'm sure you can get them
to let you demo whatever you like Oh yeah it is FREE
See Ya then I'm off this weekend
Steven Slaby
> All my sails are WindWing: four single-cam convertables and a 7.5
> Synthesis.
>
I have both and I feel that the Windwing is slightly better in my
situation (realy gusty conditions). Of course I have not tried the new
2002 Retros, but people have raved about them being even better; of course
I would probably guess that the new 2002 Synthesis is better as well!
The boxer line sure sounds interesting. Rigging a 6.0 on a 400cm mast
!!??? That's something I would love to demo just to see how it works
in gusty conditions.
Steve.
--
--------------------------------------------------
Ottawa Windsurfing http://www.magma.ca/~slaby/wind/
CMWA newsletter editor
WC website development
Bill Hansen
Sorry to hear your Windwings are getting tired but you are in for a
treat if you get new sails - no matter the brand.
I'm sure you will find plenty of Retro supporters at rec.dot. They are
no doubt good sails and judging from the latest 'advances' touted by
their designers and dealers, now even better having adopted
traditional Windwing Synthesis features like 7 battens ('98), a
truncated tip ('99) and a moderate 'S' shaped leech profile first
evident in the 2000 Synthesis. Unfortunately they don't have the
Windwing de-coupled head system ('98), the new 2002 Synthesis II's
dual pivoting roller cam option or the new 2002 Windwing CAD 3D
spiral-cut shaping feature which builds twist into the sail membrane
rather than creating it with downhaul-dependant distortion. Maybe next
year...
The Retro does have the Synthesis clearly beat in one definitive area
- more money - $518 MSRP for a 2002 9.0 Synthesis II Vs $597 MSRP for
a 2002 Retro 9.0.
FYI: You can sail a new 2002 8.3 Synthesis II on a 460 mast with a std
long mast base such as Chinook, Windsurfing Hawaii or Fiberspar. And,
it will mesh nicely with your Formula quiver if you decide to mix
tight sleeves with full-on cambered race sails.
Oh, Jim, you can be a Windwing dealer too and you will love it...
------------------------
William D. Hansen
Sail & Kite Design/R&D
Windwing Designs
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message news:<685ucuoobar48vs70...@4ax.com>...
Will V
-Will-
"Bill Hansen" <han...@xws.com> wrote in message
news:fee4b84e.02050...@posting.google.com...
Ellen
We're planning on being there on May 11 & 12.
Half of the team will be in TX for a few more days still.
(Maybe it's that age thing again?) 8-)
Ellen
KarabaszJP
May 11 & 12 Sailworks Starboard Demo at Extreme Windsurfing Lakes Bay, Atlantic
City NJ
10 am until Ellen & Roger need a Geritol break...ONLY KIDDING GUYS (a maybe to
inside joke) These 2 if you don't know it run THE BEST windsurfing Demos ever.
No preassure, hype just the facts and only the TRUE facts. They (Roger & Ellen)
are there when you need them (For another rig/tuning advise) and they are not
bothering you when you just wanna sail or rest. I consider their efforts a true
gift (because NO ONE could pay these 2 what they are worth) to the sport of
windsurfing.
I wouldn't miss this Demo (as we usually get decent wind) or any of their other
myrid of demo dates. They REALLY are fun.
Even if I discribed them a bit differently to a hostess at a local eatery
earlier this year...A mistake I bear the (brunt) pain of everyday. We all look
forward to your return to Lakes Bay.
See you guys REAL soon
Ellen
experience of the past few weeks, I think we are tuned up and ready to go. Yours
could even qualify as a "restful" event in comparison. We may even rest and sail!
I know I'm looking forward to it, and I may even get to come back for whatever it
is that is happening in mid-June down there.
Sprinter demo also!
Ellen
Nowind
which is the biggest I have. It has tremendous low end and best of
all rigs soooooo easy. The quality and workmanship of the sail are
obvious. I also like that you don't have to de-tension the battens to
roll it up and stow it. I just adjust it and leave it. It is very
sensitive to tuning and you have to learn what you're doing to get the
most out of it.
KT
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message news:<685ucuoobar48vs70...@4ax.com>...
(Pete Cresswell)
> Sprinter demo also!
That's the one that'll get me there - wind or no wind....
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
Dave
First off : great retort. Really enjoyed it.
Secondly, what's the largest Windwing that would work with a 490. I've got a four year old or so
Neil Pryde 95% carbon RacePro. Will that work with your sails?
Lastly, what was the deal with the photo shoot of your sails at Barton's shop in Hatteras a couple
of weeks ago? Are you now partnered up with American Windsurfer/John Chao?
Inquiring minds.
Dave.
Sten Larsson
> roll it up and stow it. I just adjust it and leave it. It is very
I don't know of any recent sail you have to de-tension the battens between
sessions. (I had to do that with my ca 1985 sails.)
/sten
Bruce Peterson
Your comparison of the Synthesis and the Retro failed to mention that
Synthesis is heavier (why don't you publish the weights of your
sails?); slower and more frustrating to assemble; and offers no low
end power advantages (Pete's primary question) over the Retro.
Is your "3D spiral-cut shaping feature" a recent invention? Or
another cute tag line for how most modern windsurfing sails (since
1988), including the Retro, are created? To insinuate that Windwing
sails are free of "downhaul dependent distortion" is utter fallacy.
Are Windwing sails NOT diffused of tension at the head and upper
leech? This is the kind of BS that makes people feel suckered when
they buy into it and find out it was just hype.
It does not surprise me that Windwing's are offered at lower prices
than Sailworks. By eliminating print advertising, participation at
sail tests, national product demos, website maintenance, attendance at
industry supported trade shows, windsurfing dealers who stock your
sails and essentially closing your business for half the year must
surely be saving Windwing money. The added value you get from
Sailworks is current product information, easy accessibility, national
brand awareness and year round support and service to our customers.
The inquires from Windwing customers, employees and team riders we've
had so far this year seems to indicate that there are good reasons to
why the Retro out sells all Windwing models combined.
Its good to have you back Bill. Lead on!
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
Mike
high quality sail lines to be squaring off in a kind of insulting manner. I
think it is fine to be extolling the virtues of your own sails, but I don't
I appreciate each of you insulting the other in this public forum--and Bill
started this one.
I have a couple of 2001 Retros that I bought last fall based on all the
raves on this newsgroup. The raves called them easy to rig with good low
end power and good twist off so that you can sail them overpowered. I have
used the 8.3 quite a bit as I keep it rigged in my garage and sail on the
local salt water lagoon in 10-30 mph winds. My first experience rigging is
that it is a pain to insert the mast to the tip (I do have a 490 cm mast of
the recommended stiffness). The luff curve forces the mast to bend enough
that it takes quite a bit of force to get the mast up to the top of the
sail. I find that I have to go up to the top of the sail and force the sail
upwards, walk towards the foot of the sail and pull up some slack, and
repeat this process a few times to get the sail all the way inserted. I am
glad that I keep it rigged most of the time, because of this. I am also not
particularly impressed with the sail rigs. When I downhaul the sail such
that the slack between the top two battens slackens to the "minimum
downhaul" position or slightly less downhaul, the sail is twisted off quite
a bit at the top (At this setting I am using 2.5-5 cm shorter luff length
than the minimum recommended in the rigging instructions). Even when
sailing under power the top of the sail looks flopped back and looks like it
is not giving me the power that it should (This is different than other
sails that I have used that look floppy on the beach, but look correct when
powered on the water. The floppiness gets more severe with more downhaul.
Since I don't have any sailing buds who use these sails, I don't know if the
sail I have is defective or if they are all like this.
My last two quivers of wave sails have been Windwings--I had a 1996 quiver
of Interface sails and I am now sailing and a 1999 quiver of catalysts. I
have to say that I am very happy with these sails--largely due to knowing
how to rig them with no muss and fuss after using them for several years.
They can be rigged full for high power and tight for overpowered conditions.
Can't comment on the Synthesis because I haven't ever sailed them but I am
getting a new set of 2002 Catalysts.
Mike
"Bruce Peterson" <sail...@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:3cd2a074...@news.gorge.net...
Bill Hansen
Bruce:
For the enjoyment (or dismay) of the readers out there (and my apology
to them for the length in advance,) I'll answer between your lines.
> Nice spin Bill.
Not spin - fact. The number of battens and truncated head featured in
your new Retro were all evident starting with the '98 Synthesis. The
leech profile was evident starting in '00. Do you dispute this?
> Your comparison of the Synthesis and the Retro failed to mention that
> Synthesis is heavier (why don't you publish the weights of your
> sails?); slower and more frustrating to assemble; and offers no low
> end power advantages (Pete's primary question) over the Retro.
Bruce those are pretty bold claims since you have not rigged, weighed
or sailed a new 2002 Synthesis II. They only went into production in
March. But, since you mentioned rigging ease and weight here is my
take on these subjects.
Rigging Ease:
Most if not all contemporary tight-sleeved sails rig in comparable
times. It really isn't an issue any more. How long does it take to
shove a mast up the sleeve, engage the mast tip fitting, rig a 6:1
downhaul and attach a boom? I fail to see where a hypothetical extra
minute or two of time (which probably isn't the case anyway) is of
such significance that anyone would base a buying decision on it. For
those interested, perhaps you could explain to the NG how/why your
sail rigs more easily or quicker than a 2002 Synthesis II first
without cams and once you are done with that, with cams. In fact the
rigging ease is virtually the same for either sail.
Weight:
Comparing weights objectively is impossible. All sails and battens are
pretty much made out of the same materials. If a sail is dramatically
lighter, it has to be sacrificing other important features - namely
the number of battens, extent of reinforcements or
thickness/construction of the membrane and/or sleeve material. In each
case, durability and lasting performance will ultimately suffer. Was
it fair in the past to compare the weight of your sail with fewer
battens and reinforcements to those with more? Should we reject your
new sail because it might be heavier than your old one due to more
battens? What about entrapped water when wet? What about swing weight?
Windwings have consistently been the most durable sails for 20 years
and in many cases also had more, stiffer battens and indeed were
heavier than many less expensive or less durable sails - our customers
never complained about it and even the magazine testers repeatedly
found they felt 'light' on the water. I'd be glad to have any consumer
compare the weight of a new 2002 Synthesis II with your 2002 Retro,
compare the quality, materials and construction and ultimately the
on-the-water performance. As a sailor, I'd rather invest in a lighter
mast and stiffer boom than scrimp on fabric, reinforcements or
battens. In any case, the weights are now comparable - the idea that
Windwings are heavy is a thing of the past.
Low end power:
Ditto the above regarding consumer comparisons.
High end stability and range:
Ditto the above. Lets put them on the water.
> Is your "3D spiral-cut shaping feature" a recent invention?
Yes. It is the result of several years worth of effort in getting
twist without looseness and distortion. It was first proven on the
water working with Mike Percy in San Francisco last season on our race
sails which everyone knows were extremely competitive. Then, the same
principles were applied to a number of test wave sails in the Gorge
last summer. It is also the result of 6 months of intensive 3D CAD
study and about 60 associated prototype kites in a dedicated program
to analyze foil profiles (section and thickness) and tip twist. And,
finally, a new production method which utilizes state-of-the-art
computer design linked with digital plotter/cutter capability makes it
possible as the shaping tolerances must be very precise.
Or
> another cute tag line for how most modern windsurfing sails (since
> 1988), including the Retro, are created?
Sorry Bruce. I don't consider it 'cute' or a 'tag' line - surely by
now you know that isn't my style. It is merely a descriptive way of
explaining the concept. Frankly, I don't care how you or anyone else
creates their sails. We all have the same tools and materials
available. It is how we use them that counts. Maybe you have already
done it? I suggest if you aren't doing something like this now, that
you investigate it for the future once you have the truncated head
sorted out. If you are already doing it, you have either been keeping
it secret or feel 'batten damping' is a more significant feature to
promote your new sails than 3D built-in twist independent of downhaul.
> To insinuate that Windwing
> sails are free of "downhaul dependent distortion" is utter fallacy.
Insinuate?
Sorry, I don't insinuate anything - I have more respect for my fellow
sailors. The sail without a mast or boom has 3D built-in twist in the
membrane just laying on the ground. Sure you can distort it by
'over-downhauling.' The point is to minimize rigging errors by
BUILDING IN twist rather than putting marks on the leech to show where
the distortion should lie or trying to explain to a
less-than-knowledgeable consumer how much downhaul-induced distortion
is right. The concept is to MINIMIZE distortion while creating the
PROPER leech/twist profile with minimal downhaul. I suggest you call
up Mike Percy in SF and ask him how much downhaul he needs relative to
the other recent '02 race sails and who of comparable stature can
carry their 9.0 in the most wind on a formula board of late on SF Bay.
His rig-it-right is currently corroding from lack of use.
> Are Windwing sails NOT diffused of tension at the head and upper
> leech? This is the kind of BS that makes people feel suckered when
> they buy into it and find out it was just hype.
Actually, it isn't a matter of tension, 'diffused' or otherwise -
especially in the head of the sail. Laying rigged on the ground, the
leech is indeed loose all the way to the clew until it is under load
because the 3D shaping makes it so. This is simply because a 3D
twisted shape is not planar. You can certainly create looseness and
associated twist with a suppressed luff curve and downhaul-induced
distortion (the old fashioned way) but that isn't the only or IMHO the
best way. But, while we are fielding insults, what sort of BS is
'batten damping?' And, again IMHO, getting 'suckered' has been the
hallmark of the Retro for years: less battens, less versatility, less
gust stability and less durability - more hype, more money. There, I
said it!
> It does not surprise me that Windwing's are offered at lower prices
> than Sailworks. By eliminating print advertising, participation at
> sail tests, national product demos, website maintenance, attendance at
> industry supported trade shows, windsurfing dealers who stock your
> sails and essentially closing your business for half the year must
> surely be saving Windwing money.
Bruce, did you really need write that? Since you opened this can of
worms, here is your just serving.
Advertising:
We spent over $500,000 over the years on print ads and got one cover
and a couple 'hot shots' in 20 years due to the domination of the
magazine editorial content by several large companies and their NA
distributors. A large part of this was due to written contractual
agreements with these same companies based on their high-volume ad
commitments, 'under the table' agreements or basic industry cronyism.
I became convinced that the print advertising available in the US to
manufacturers became considerably overpriced with time when one looks
at the actual subscriber-based distribution of the magazines. Perhaps
your conclusion is different and as such you feel it necessary to
burden your customer with the cost. That is your choice. I hope it
works for you!
Sail Tests:
We have participated in the sail tests for years and generally gotten
superior results but when it became evident they were tainted by a
lack of objectivity, poor organization and management, biased dealers
only testing what they sell and the same sort of cronyism mentioned
above, they became irrelevant to me as a designer and I would suggest,
equally irrelevant to the consumer. I also found that they were a
waste of time, expensive and not worth rushing out new designs almost
a year ahead of the intended North American season to meet their
schedules. Ever wonder why no new race sails are tested? Were your new
race sails available? Do you think they are capable of giving you a
fair test? Or is it simply a marketing game? And, if you introduced
something truly new and innovative at the sail tests, how long would
it be before it was copied and on the market with your competitor's
logo the following Spring?
National Product Demos:
Your association with Roger and his efforts is commendable. Over the
years, Windwing has supported industry and dealer-sponsored demos from
Cape Cod to Floras Lake, Corpus Christi to Minnesota. I have given
over a hundred in-shop rigging and theoretical sail-design/physics
clinics at numerous dealers and consumer-based events such as the
Triangle Boardsailing sailing club in Raleigh-Durham, Dallas, Boston,
Montreal, Ocean City etc, etc. I personally attended the recent
Windfest in Hatteras and will also be at Windfest in San Francisco and
Hood River. These efforts are hardly insignificant to the expense of
doing business. Perhaps Roger would embrace a new quiver of Synthesis
II's in his 4wd Box Truck and I can stay home?
Trade Shows:
Windwing is strictly a North American company so I assume you are
referring to Surf Expo in Florida. I served on the Board of Directors
of the AWIA when the decision to eliminate 'our windsurfing-only' show
and join Surf Expo in Florida was made. I was the only dissenting
vote. My alternative suggestion was a trade show which moved from
location to location combining the economy of travel to regional
airline hubs such as Dallas, Minneapolis, Denver, etc, a 'partnered'
event at a nearby hotel, and the participation of consumer sailing
clubs and local dealers to bolster the sport in areas of the country
that had no 'industry' involvement. Since moving to Surf Expo, the
sport has neither grown nor prospered and the cost has become
outrageous considering the lack of increased windsurfing business done
there. Of course if you want to buy wakeboards and water skis (and now
kites) or see scantily clad girls in bikinis, have at it. It is an
embarrassment to the sport of windsurfing to see the diminishing
minority role it plays at that show. Rather than denigrate Windwing
for a lack of participation, perhaps you should respect us for having
the integrity to back up our point of view with substantive action.
Website Maintenance:
Your point is well-taken and I agree. I have always personally done it
completely myself and unfortunately have been busy with other
design-related tasks. It will be updated soon now that the new sails
and kites are in production and hopefully to everyone's benefit it
will be better. We'll probably keep the dry theory stuff though and
leave out the 'cute tag' lines, hype and BS. ;-)
Dealers:
We are proud of the dealers who stock our sails and support them. I
don't know of any whom we purposely 'eliminated.' On the other hand we
have always had a strict no mail-order policy to protect the small
independent shop. Hence, no Sailboard Warehouse, Isthmus, Big Winds,
Tackle Shack, etc. Also, no pressing necessity to waste time and money
in Florida at a 'Trade Show' trying to make these large operations
happy while soothing the smaller dealer about unfair price competition
- many of whom can ill afford to leave their shops in September to
attend.
Closed for 6 months?
Windwing has been in continuous operation since October of 1982 when I
made one of the first high-aspect fully battened windsurfing sails.
(It also was tight-sleeved and camless I might add.) Your information
is clearly in error and your associated assumptions regarding our
price structure and business costs equally ill-founded and another
insult. But what does this have to do with my reply to Pete about his
Synthesis vs. Retro question?
> The added value you get from
> Sailworks is current product information, easy accessibility, national
> brand awareness and year round support and service to our customers.
Sounds good to me...would you like me to forward some Windwing
customer testimonials? I have a nice one just received last week from
a PhD NASA aerospace engineer who appreciated the prompt service and
customer support given him regarding a damaged sail and broken mast.
He's been a customer since he was a grad student at UC Berkeley in the
mid '80s.
> The inquires from Windwing customers, employees and team riders we've
> had so far this year seems to indicate that there are good reasons to
> why the Retro out sells all Windwing models combined.
Another unsubstantiated and ill-founded statement Bruce. Did you study
logic and the basic informal fallacies in school? Are you appealing to
the masses? In what market? How many Ferraris or Porsches vs. Ford or
Chevys are sold? Does it make the Retro a better sail?
> Its good to have you back Bill. Lead on!
Thanks Bruce. I intend to. Not that I came 'back' from anywhere I
haven't been before. BTW, I thought I complimented your product at the
beginning of my post to Pete. Wonder what would happen if I replied to
one of your posts the way you replied to mine? If you want this to
strictly be a Sailworks forum where Roger, Ellen, Jim and others
constantly push Retros on every consumer without regard to the many
significant advances made by other designers and companies, I'd be
glad to reply in the future to questions like Pete's 'off-line.' But,
I'll stick with my original reply to Pete (a happy Windwing customer)
which is basically this: the new Retro is more than likely a good sail
but it looks remarkably like a 2 year old Synthesis, is less versatile
and costs more - period.
Best regards,
- Bill
------------------------
William D. Hansen
Sail & Kite Design/R&D
Windwing Designs
------------------------
Bill Hansen
Dave:
Sorry about the delay in responding. Certainly a 9.0 Synthesis II or
9.0 Formula R would work well on a 490 with a std base extension like
Chinook, Windsurfing Hawaii or Fiberspar, etc. With a 40cm fixed base
extension (FBE), you could go to a 9.8 and with a 60cm FBE to the
10.6. The new 2002 Synthesis II and Formula R both have the same
sizes, luff/boom dimensions and mast stiffness/flex specs. That old NP
RacePro should work reasonably well as the new sails are less mast
specific having the twist built-in rather than through suppressed luff
curve. They are designed for a true constant curve bend flex.
The 'photo shoot' was a spur of the moment event following Windfest at
Frisco Woods. The conditions were just about ideal except for the
shallow water wreaking havoc with the Drops MB14 Formula Race board
and 70cm weed fin both of which I had never previously sailed. There
is no 'partnership' with the magazine but I have long been a supporter
of John and his alternative approach to the sport's 'more sensitive'
side. You may recall the two-page spread in his first issue with only
a seagull flying and a lone small Windwing sail in a vast sea of ocean
swells.
Hope you enjoyed the informal preview of the new sails...
Best regards,
- Bill
----------------------
Bill Hansen
Sail & Kite Design/R&D
Windwing Designs
----------------------
Bill Hansen
My sincerest apologies for 'starting it.' You could not be more
correct. I think Bruce makes a nice product and have stated as such
many times in the past. Unfortunantly, I thought his reply far
exceeded the scope of the point I was trying to make. I just spent a
lot of time trying to explain myself to him about everything from what
is and isn't design BS to industry politics and corporate planning.
I'm sure you will find this even more out of line. I'll let my design
innovations and products stand on their own two feet and the chips can
fall as they may. Unless someone directly requests a response from me,
I'm finished. First I am going to go chop some wood and then I'm going
surfing. We got a bit of a south swell coming and the evening tides
are perfect...
-Bill
"Mike" <mwl...@stop.spam.attbi.com> wrote in message news:<b_IA8.110937$CH.1...@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>...
Lois Stufflebeam
>
> that it is a pain to insert the mast to the tip (I do have a 490 cm mast of
> the recommended stiffness).
Yes, the first time you rig the sail it is a pain. But after the sail
has been in the water a few times, the luff sleeve looses its brand
new stiffness, and you can shove the mast all the way thru to the tip
with ease. And once you've got the rigging sequence down, you should
be on the water in 5 minutes. I have a friend in San Diego who used
to keep track of how long it took to rig his Retro 8.0. Something
like 3 or 4 minutes, and this guy is in his late 70's. You should be
able to beat him!!
I don't know anything about the Windwings, but I have to give 2 thumbs
up for the Retros. We have been sailing them almost every day this
winter, and they have definitely performed well. We are the only
sailors with Sailworks sails on the water here in Margarita, and
people actually come up and ask us about them because they see us
flying by everyone else, or planing when others aren't. Maybe it is
our superior sailing ability, but I seriously dowbt that!!
Bruce Peterson
usually my style. I do feel compelled to defend my sails and myself
when they are publicly thrashed as a means to promote another product.
On to your questions ....
I am assuming that you have a Retro 8.5 (there was no 8.3). The
character of the leech twist you describe, especially what happens at
low downhaul settings has me wondering about your mast. You don't
mention what brand and model your 490 mast is. There are a few mast
models out there that deviate significantly from the generally
accepted "constant curve standard", and the effects on the sail are
not subtle. What you describe in your sail is typical of a very flex
top mast, like a Pryde Race Pro for example.
The shaping character of the Retro does incorporate leech and head
looseness, even at low downhaul settings, but the character of the
diffusion of tension (looseness) should be smoothly progressive up the
leech to the head. The application of increased downhaul will
accentuate this profile by drawing the looseness both further in and
further down the leech. It is this looseness that allows the sail to
achieve a three dimensionally twisted profile that will articulate
symmetrically from port to starboard tacks. Keep in mind the concept
of incorporating sail twist is "drag reducing", not "lift producing".
The net effect of reducing sail drag improves overall efficiency and
wind range.
Tell me more about the make and model of your mast and we'll go from
there.
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
On Sat, 04 May 2002 03:56:55 GMT, "Mike" <mwl...@stop.spam.attbi.com>
wrote:
Bruce Peterson
I don't appreciate your penchant for thrashing me and my sails as a
means to promote Windwing. It does compel me to defend my ideas,
especially when you coyly spin facts into your marketing hype. Surely
there are virtues in your product you can extol with degrade your
competitors. We evidently have some strongly divergent ideas on how
to create the same toy. The readers of this NG would probably be more
interested in a more gentlemanly debate. I would be quite happy to
publicly agree to a truce in mud-slinging if you would do the same.
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
Mike
I hqave to admit that you are right on about my mast. After I bought the
sail, I went to the local windsurfing shop and purchased a Pryde 490 mast
specifically to use with the Retro 8.5. I figured that all of the modern
masts are pretty much the same. Sounds like this might have been a mistake.
"Bruce Peterson" <sail...@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:3cd3f7ba...@news.gorge.net...
Dave
> The new 2002 Synthesis II and Formula R both have the same
> sizes, luff/boom dimensions and mast stiffness/flex specs. That old NP
> RacePro should work reasonably well as the new sails are less mast
> specific having the twist built-in rather than through suppressed luff
> curve. They are designed for a true constant curve bend flex.
Thanks for the info Bill. I think I'll demo one of your sails at Barton's shop next light wind day in
Hatteras. It'd be nice to keep one of those big boys rigged in the garage, available for that
occasional 10 mph breeze that comes up occasionally on a hot summer afternoon.
> There
> is no 'partnership' with the magazine but I have long been a supporter
> of John and his alternative approach to the sport's 'more sensitive'
> side.
I enjoy John's magazine too. There are enough mags with gear reviews and how-to articles already.
Dave.
Don Blair
> snip <
> Sorry about the delay in responding. Certainly a 9.0 Synthesis II or
> 9.0 Formula R would work well on a 490 with a std base extension like
> Chinook, Windsurfing Hawaii or Fiberspar, etc. With a 40cm fixed base
> extension (FBE), you could go to a 9.8 and with a 60cm FBE to the
> 10.6. The new 2002 Synthesis II and Formula R both have the same
> sizes, luff/boom dimensions and mast stiffness/flex specs. That old NP
> RacePro should work reasonably well as the new sails are less mast
> specific having the twist built-in rather than through suppressed luff
> curve. They are designed for a true constant curve bend flex.
> snip<
Hold on now Bill. The Neil Pryde Race Pro mast is a commonly accepted
Flex-Top mast. This has been argued to death on the Pryde and Gaastra
forums and acknowledged to be so by their respective sail designers.
How is it that your 2002 sails that are "designed for a true constant
curve bend flex" will work "reasonably well" with a Flex-Top mast?
Don
Bruce Peterson
Most modern masts are very similar and interchangeability between sail
and mast brands is quite broad. Regrettably you have stumbled on one
of the few anomalies in general mast and sail compatibility.
Please contact me my email [in...@sailworks.com] with your location and
Sailworks dealers name and I will see what we can do you get you a
better suited mast for your Retro.
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
On Sat, 04 May 2002 16:26:16 GMT, "Mike" <mwl...@stop.spam.attbi.com>
wrote:
(Pete Cresswell)
>and offers no low
>end power advantages (Pete's primary question) over the Retro.
Somebody explain to me how a non-camber-induced sail can have the same
low end as one with cams.
Unencumbered by any real knowledge of sails, it seems obvious to me
that something that holds it's draft through a lull is going to get
powered up sooner when the wind comes back than something that blades
out in that same lull.
Again, I know nothing - I'm trolling for a little back-and-forth from
the experts in hopes of attaining a little illumination myself...
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
Bruce Peterson
A windsurfing sail is a pre-stressed flexible wing. Its design boils
down to "shape" and "tension" - the quality and quantity of those two
parameters define its form.
It is easy to focus upon the shape the sail has, as that parameter is
readily visible. Camless sails are by no means without shape or foil
depth. They may rely on some wind loading to achieve their fullest
depth, but good camless sails are statically comparable in depth to
many camber sails. Further, it only takes a small amount of wind or
induced loading from forward momentum to set a camless sail at its
maximum depth.
The distribution of tension within a sail is much less obvious, but
equally important as its shape. Camless sails are designed with the
use of increased outhaul tension, which pre-loads the foot and lower
perimeter with tension. This gives the rider an extremely positive
feel for any pressure difference developed over the surface of the
sail, even at very low speeds. The high perimeter tension also makes
the sail extremely responsive to pumping action, if required to
initiate planning conditions. Note that "high perimeter tension" does
not mean tight leech or head. Camless slalom sails have loose leeches
and twist just like cambered slalom sails.
By comparison, many cambered sails rig with little or no outhaul
tension. Despite the fully induce foil shape, many cam sails give the
rider low responsive feedback in light wind conditions as the initial
pressure difference created by the wind (lift) is wasted as the
internal tension distribution must be shifted aft to the perimeter.
Remember, you are holding the boom; the boom is attached at the rear
by the outhaul through the clew. If the outhaul tension is low, you
won't be feeling the sail pressure until the tension distribution
shifted to load the outhaul. The shifting of internal loading dampens
out light wind power and responsiveness. This effect is easy to
recognize on large cambered sails, which pump better in marginal
condition with the outhaul pulled on. However, once planning, a
fuller setting will maintain power and planning.
That's my take on the subject and also the basis for my Retro camless
sail design. Size for size, in terms of power per square meter, the
camless Retro out pulls our cambered NX2 sails. Cambers are a
stabilizing mechanism that aids the top end (high load) performance.
That's why racers love them.
I'm sure other sail designers will have their own opinions and you
probably won't have to wait long to read them.
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
AD.
> low end as one with cams.
>
> Unencumbered by any real knowledge of sails, it seems obvious to me
> that something that holds it's draft through a lull is going to get
> powered up sooner when the wind comes back than something that blades
> out in that same lull.
I'm no expert, but I think it's more of a rec vs race sail thing than a no
cams vs cams thing.
What I mean is that most cammed sails are race sails, and race sails are
normally designed for low drag and using more sail area to make up for the
lift lost by being quite flat.
While a sail like the retro, seems to have more draft and be designed for
power to get recreational sailors planing without a huge sail.
The kind of sail you have is independant of cams vs no cams. eg for a drafty
grunty sail you could have a no cam Retro or a cammed NP V8, while for a
flatter top speed kind of sail you could have a no cam NP Diablo or a cammed
race sail.
I don't think making a cammed version of the Retro would hinder it's ability
to plane through a lull.
Confused?
Cheers
Anton
Craig (gsogh) Goudie
-Craig
Lois Stufflebeam wrote:
> [snip]
>
> I don't know anything about the Windwings, but I have to give 2 thumbs
> up for the Retros. We have been sailing them almost every day this
> winter, and they have definitely performed well. We are the only
> sailors with Sailworks sails on the water here in Margarita, and
> people actually come up and ask us about them because they see us
> flying by everyone else, or planing when others aren't. Maybe it is
> our superior sailing ability, but I seriously dowbt that!!
>
> Lois
> www.sailbrisas.com
--
Craig (Go Short or Go Home!) Goudie
Sailing the high desert lakes of Utah on my:
RRD 298, Starboard 272 and Cross M 8'2" with
Sailworks/Naish Sails and Rec Composites Fins
Sailing the Gorge on my: 9'1" RRD Freeride,
8'3" Logosz Squish, 8'0" Hitech IBM with
Sailworks/Northwave Sails and Curtis Fins
Bill Hansen
Good question.
He said it was 4 years old. Their flex curves have changed since then.
Even with these changes, they are not that close to true (62/82) flex
tops only varying a percent or two from the 'classic' constant curve
specs. The new sails are less sensitive to mast flex than strict
supressed luff curve designs but in any case, the mast in question is
not a flex top.
- Bill
don_t...@yahoo.com (Don Blair) wrote in message news:<3773ad8c.02050...@posting.google.com>...
Bill Hansen
You got it. Truce declared.
For the record, your original post claimed 3D built-in shaping and
diminished downhaul etc. was 'BS,' a 'cute tag line,' etc. You also
claimed your new sail rigged quicker, was lighter and more powerful
than my new sail which are all dubious and unsubstantiated claims. In
addition, YOU made extremely damaging comments regarding my business
practices, customers, employees and team riders. That is where the
mudslinging started Bruce, and the mud is still on your hands.
NONE of my dealers or demo reps have ever promoted a Windwing on this
forum like Jim, Roger, Ellen, etc. commonly do. I understand Roger's
and Ellen's hard work and extra dedication and appreciate them. But,
Jim and others are retail dealers. Had Jim stayed out of it, I would
have never commented. Once he did, I felt compelled to point out to
Pete that the new Retro now has many of the features of a 2 year old
Windwing Synthesis and cost more. He asked for a head to head
comparison - Jim didn't give him that. I did.
Actually, I think our ideas on creating the same 'toy' are pretty
similar - more battens, truncated tips, etc. I've been promoting more
battens, truncated tips and the versatility of removable cams in a
tight sleeved sail here for years and the highly vocal response from
your supporters (most who never sailed a Synthesis) and yourself is
always the same - hard to rig, heavy, complicated, etc. Now that your
sails feature many of these same items, you are extolling them for me.
Here is my truce offer:
1) No more promotion on this newsgroup of the Retro or other products
by your dealers and reps without first acknowledging they are
commercially or otherwise substantively biased.
2) No more ignoring the existence of the many other similar new and
innovative products in the marketplace by the same individuals which
may be as good if not better.
3) No more using the newsgroup to promote your products (refer to last
fall's posts regarding your racing with the Retro.)
4) A direct apology for your references to true but possibly
unknown-to-you design innovations as 'BS' or 'cute tag lines.'
5) A direct apology for attacking Windwing's and my personal business
decisions regarding sail tests, print ads, trade shows, etc.
When this happens, I'll be glad to go back to discussing physics and
sail design objectively like I have for many years on this NG.
I will repeat again for the record: I think you make a great product.
I owe you no apology for attacking your business practices because I
have never done it.
Best regards,
- Bill
sail...@gorge.net (Bruce Peterson) wrote in message news:<3cd3fdcf...@news.gorge.net>...
Bill Hansen
Anton and Bruce have both pointed out the reality of the matter which
is that there are many other parameters besides the presence of a
'cam' which determine peformance. Certainly, a cammed sail can have
perimeter tension as easily as a no-cam can have low outhaul tension
and vice-versa. It is simply a matter of design. My approach is to
build-in twist 3-dimensionally rather than use suppressed luff curve
and the attendant excessive downhaul to obtain it. Why? Because high
downhaul loads are focused along the mast instead of the perimeter and
tend to counteract the natural draft built in to the membrane. The
result of true 3D built-in twist is a perimeter-tensioned sail that
also twists naturally - with or without cams.
- Bill
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message news:<bso8ducfvf16ddufh...@4ax.com>...
charlesivey
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message
Oddly enough Pete there are times when near drifting, that a properly cut
sail with no battens at all will have more low end power and speed than a
battened sail, cambers or no cambers.
Ray
Roger Nightingale
left behind.
Bill, I was wondering how shaping the twist into your sails affects their range. If I understand
this right, you do not recommend adding dowhaul tension to the Synthesis for increased high end
range. I assume that your sails have progressively more twist with increased aerodynamic loading,
but how is that different from a "traditional" floppy leech? For a given dowhaul setting, doesn't a
loose leech also twist progressively? What are the theoretical advantages of a shaped twist vs luff
curve suppression? It's taken me 2 years to get a handle on luff curve suppression - why are you
messing with me? :)
Roger (not Jackson)
jfe...@ix.netcom.com
thanks.
jeff feehan
sailquik (Roger Jackson)
I really wish you had not brought Ellen and I into this.
We believe in Retro's because they work! For us, and for nearly everyone
we SUGGEST them to.
If you really want a comparison, figure a way to send a 7.5, 8.5, m9.5 or 10.5 Synthesis II to me
or to Jim K. and we will put it on the water this weekend at the Lakes Bay demo event with a
similar or identical sized Retro.
Then Pete C. and everyone else can sail it, weigh it, measure it, get planing on it, and we can
those who sail both sails for feedback and post it here.
The Synthesis II, like the original Synthesis is a very good sail, but unless you've
added a great deal of static draft, I wonder what else you may have done in the
design to get the low end that the much deeper Retro's seem to have.
I'm interested in resolving this, as I would like to be able to make an objective
comparison, for my own understanding as well as both the Windwing and Sailworks
customers throughout the US and the world.
Please specify what mast and the rigging specs and I will rig the Synthesis II as precisely as
possible.
Roger
Roger Nightingale
Most sails twist because the luff curve is suppressed in the top 1/3 of the sail. I have Bill to thank
for this knowledge. What that means is that the luff curve is basically flattened. If you make the luff
curve between the top 2 (or 3) battens of your sail perfectly straight rather than smoothly curved, you
have completely supressed the luff curve. This tightens the sleeve on the mast, which forces tension
forward in the sail and loosens the leech.
WARDOG
Roger Nightingale wrote:
> I don't mind you guys slinging mud, because there are always a few jewels
> left behind.
Ditto...it almost seems mandatory for the passion level to reach a
certain amplitude before a few truthful jewels pop to the surface...
Are you planning a trip to the Baja this Summer, Roger?
WARDOG
http://surfingsports.com
Roger Nightingale
Kath and keep him from wandering off the bluff. But plans are firm for summer of 2003 - hope to finally
meet you.
Roger
WARDOG wrote:
--
Roger Nightingale
Associate Research Professor
Department of Biomedical Engineering
Duke University
Heinz Kiosk
Another angle to annoy participants:
I don't know anything either. Personally I struggle with the "optional cams"
of the Windwing. It seems to me that this must induce (ha!) compromise
between the performance advantages of cams and the feel/ease advantages of
no-cams thereby creating at best a sail that is very good in both settings
but not as good as the best of either of the exclusive design
possibilities....But argument from the point of view of personal incredulity
is necessarily weak when compared with the actual experience of Windwing
owners which I understand to be very positive. I wonder how often they use
them in "Retro" mode, ie without the cams? Windwing owners... do you
always/often/never put the cams in? There's an interesting survey. (to me,
anyway)
In specific response to your low-end power point, I can't comment
specifically about the Windwing because I've never seen one (consciously)
but I have never noticed a low-end disadvantage sailing Retros alongside the
mass of recreational cammed sails that are around. Rather the opposite.
Regards
Tom
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message
news:bso8ducfvf16ddufh...@4ax.com...
Rainman
Good suggestion, Roger.
I also would like to see the two sail brands compared side by side.
That is the only way to really sort this out... on the test-bench.
R.
"sailquik (Roger Jackson)" <sail...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:3CD68DDA...@mindspring.com...
> Hi Bill
Bill
Have been following the rec.dot.Retro mania for a few years, since you
were first enamored of the 9.5 for early planing.
Why the emphasis on sails with a great low end? Maybe, it makes sense
for my largest sail to have a good low end, esp. for a septuagenarian
on a 12 footer sailing a lake. Otherwise, why not choose a larger
sail with a good top end and do more than just plane?
When the wind picks up, you have to rig an adjustable outhaul or
rerig. Further, the Retro is far less stable than race sails causing
earlier fatigue in high winds, no matter how much down and up haul.
Unless all sails in the quiver are Retros, the sailor must make
allowances for the radically different handling characteristics of a
sail whose draft varies much differently with angle of attack than a
more conventional design. The last thing I need when sailing a large
rig is a more nonlinear sail power response to strong gusts.
Why not focus more on the range of the sail rather than the low end?
My 6.5 and 9.5 Retro's do not luff well when rigged full anyway, at
least on the two brands of mast I have tried. Why wouldn't a cammed
sail would give me a better low end AND a better high end. A good
race sail should be at least as rangy, more stable in gusts.
Just like Bill's claims for Windwing, your claims for the Retro are
subjective and more of a social movement than a measure of
performance. Especially since you have not tried the competitive
models, or at least discussed them. All the more shame if your claims
do have some basis.
The original emphasis on ease of waterstarting, ease of rigging and
light weight of the Retro are questionable. Any sail that I rig a few
times becomes easier and easier to rig. I am getting very good at
threading the mast on my Retros, which could be easier. The Retro
weighs more than some other brands. Ease of waterstarting applies
perhaps to some beginners who have not had adequate instruction. My
2000/01? 6.2 Simmer Onshore Wave sail rigs more easily, luffs much
more easily, waterstarts much more eaisly, handles a greater range,
weighs much less, is more durable, has seen much more use and costs
much much less than my 2000 6.5 Retro.
My cammed Neil Pryde V8 8.5 from 1999 is exhausting to rig and derig.
The 6.5 North Spectro with cams was a cinch, any few seconds taken to
pop the cams gained many times over by the ease of threading the mast.
Retro mast threading could be much easier on both the sailor and the
sail.
Anyone like to buy two Retro's, 6.5 and 9.5, 2000 models, great
condition, good prices?
"sailquik (Roger Jackson)" <sail...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<3CD68DDA...@mindspring.com>...
sailquik (Roger Jackson)
> Have been following the rec.dot.Retro mania for a few years, since you
> were first enamored of the 9.5 for early planing.
Well, let's go back a little further to when I was doing very well in local racing,
and vintage racing with the Retro 6.5 and the Retro Raceboard 7.5.
That's were it all started.
My original "Retro experience" was based on a suggestion I try one from a very
good Hatteras sailor who noticed at one of Barton's Fall race events that he was
getting going much easier and more quickly on a 7.5 Retro than many of the other
racers on their race sails.
I tried one, and Keith was correct, the Retro powered up far more quickly and in
less wind than the North race sails (Prisma's and IQ3D's) that I was using.
So, I switched to Retro's and they got bigger, I got going alot earlier as the boards
got wider. But I also sail them very overpowered, and they work very well in
5th or 6th gear mode. It only takes a minute to retune a Retro from 1st gear low end
deep draft power, to way overpowered 5th and 6th gear performance equal to or better than other sails.
> Why the emphasis on sails with a great low end?
Because pumping a big, heavier, more complicated race sail does not get me fully
planing in < 5.5-6 knots. The 10.5 Retro will do this and I can still be sailing in on
12 knots plus at my small size. I could retune it and sail it further up the wind spectrum, but I have other Retro's
that work even better once the wind is up to around 8 knots.
I now have a 12.5 NX2 and 11.0 NX2, and they plane pretty early as well, but
I have to use a longer mast and boom and this adds weight. If I can get going with
the smaller Retro, on smaller lighter spars, why would I want to use the big sails for
recreational sailing?
> Maybe, it makes sense for my largest sail to have a good low end, esp. for a septuagenarian on a 12 footer sailing
> a lake. Otherwise, why not choose a larger
> sail with a good top end and do more than just plane?
I do not understand your question here...? Why choose a larger sail to get you planing...... any larger than is
really necessary. The Retro's I've rigged for myself and
for many demo sailors have just as much top end performance as any other sail
in the same size range (within + or - one meter) when reaching.
The only advantage to the huge race sails is their better straight downwind performance. But, you need to carry 1.5
to 2.5 meters more sail and pay the
penalty of the longer mast and boom to realize the full downwind performance over
a Retro. I think Bruce pretty well explored this aspect when he sailed the new Retro's at the US Nationals last
year.
> When the wind picks up, you have to rig an adjustable outhaul or
> rerig.
An adjustable outhaul is nice, but not really necessary. You can easily retune a Retro (both large and small) even
out on the water if necessary. Just downhaul it
a lot more and crank on the outhaul tension. The on the fly adjustable outhaul is
really nice, but I can extend the boom and add outhaul to a Retro (or any other sail)
in about a minute or 2 even out in deep water.
> Further, the Retro is far less stable than race sails causing
> earlier fatigue in high winds, no matter how much down and up haul.
I have no idea who has been rigging your Retro's, but this statement suggests that
someone has not paid attention to the rigging instructions or to some of my long
winded suggestions on how Retro's need to be rigged.
A correctly rigged Retro has every bit a much stability as a similar sized race sail,
and is far more forgiving and less fatiguing. A correctly rigged Retro, on a compatible
mast, also has a much wider tuning range than most if not all race sails.
Why not use one sail all day, in a wide range of conditions, and simply make little
downhaul and outhaul adjustments as the conditions change? Retro's do this splendidly, for nearly everyone, on a
daily basis, in all kinds of conditions.
> Unless all sails in the quiver are Retros, the sailor must make
> allowances for the radically different handling characteristics of a
> sail whose draft varies much differently with angle of attack than a
> more conventional design.
Now I know you are doing something incorrectly. A correctly rigged Retro (or any
other camless, RAF, Wave or B&J sail rigged correctly on the right mast) inflates
and deflates completely transparently to the sailor. It's a slightly "softer" feel, but
provides the sailor with far more feedback.
There is no "radically different draft with angle of attack, unless you are sheeting in and out all the time
unnecessarily. Why would you want to do that?
> The last thing I need when sailing a large rig is a more nonlinear sail power response to strong gusts.
Power response in gusts does not change "non linearly". Power response in gusts
is a function of head twist, and nearly all modern sails twist off in response to higher
upper panel loading to "handle" the gusts in an easy to control linear manner in
response to mast loading. I think Bruce, Bill, and the other sail designers have had
this figured out pretty well, but they do get a little better at it each year, and as
mast characteristics have become more predictable.
> Why not focus more on the range of the sail rather than the low end?
OK, you've aroused my curiosity....Why not? Retro's seem to have as much, if not
more overall range of use than any other sails on the water, in my experience.
They have the low end punch (lot's of static draft) to get going as early (usually earlier in my experience) than
similar sized sails by the other sailmakers that do not
have this feature, yet they can be tuned to give up a little of the low end, to get a
much broader range of use. Or, you can downhaul and outhaul to the max. and
the same sail will have great top end speed and handle way overpowered.
I'm often (me as a 155 lb. smaller sailor) sailing a smaller Retro (8.0 and down) when most other sailors are using
sails .5-1.5 sq. meters smaller. How could I
be doing this if the Retro didn't have great stability and top end speed, combined
with ease of handling and gust absorption qualities?
> My 6.5 and 9.5 Retro's do not luff well when rigged full anyway, at
> least on the two brands of mast I have tried.
Ummm.... Bill...Why do you want your sails to luff?
Fully battened sails (windsurf sails in particular) were never designed to be luffed.
You can sheet out, and the power will go away, in a manner similar to a soft sail,
but the sail will never flatten and ripple like a soft sail.
I'm not at all sure on what point you are trying to make here.
> Why wouldn't a cammed sail would give me a better low end AND a better high end. A good race sail should be at
> least as rangy, more stable in gusts.
It might do this, better low end, and better top end, if you had a way to adjust both
the downhaul and outhaul (or perhaps a way to adjust the size, making the sail larger
with a deeper draft for good low end, and making it flatter and smaller for better top
end speed and range).
But, the designers haven't quite figured out how to make the adjustable size sails yet,
so we have larger size flatter draft profile multi cammed race sails that equal the low
end performance of a smaller Retro, but being much larger (like 1-2.5 m2). There are sailors who love to pump one of
these monster low draft large area sails, to get
going very early, but they then have to use the adjustable outhaul to really flatten them out even more for the best
top end speed and stability. Going upwind, in Formula mode requires them to be flattened even further.
Most of the race sails I'm ever owned and sailed (North, Sailworks, Windwing,
Gaastra, etc. have a fairly specific tuning range, and do not work so well if you
try to rig them fuller. They have good power, when rigged full, but are not "slippery"
and easy to handle when rigged with less than the normal amount of downhaul.
If rigged correctly, they have a tremendous range, and great stability overpowered,
but you need a larger sail to get going early, and still be slippery on the top end.
> Just like Bill's claims for Windwing, your claims for the Retro are
> subjective and more of a social movement than a measure of
> performance.
I could not disagree more.
I would hope that the many people who come in off the water, raving that they sailed
faster, got going earlier, found the sails easier to uphaul and waterstart at the Sailworks and Starboard demos
would give me some measure of objectivity.
I've tested Retro's, XT's, XT2's, NX's, NX2's and yes, I even have GPS data on
the original Windwing Synthesis's that I tested for Bill Hansen a few years back,
in both cammed and camless modes.
In fact, I'm the one guy who has been looking for the means to come up with a
completely objective "on the water" test lab for about 5 years now, but no one in
the windsurfing industry seems interested enough to go forward and measure the
performance of all the sails and boards. It's as if "total objectivity" would be a little
too much and some boards and sails would actually prove to be as good as their
designers claim, but others would not, and objective testing would show the world
who's performance claims are valid and who's are nothing more than marketing hype.
Bring your gear to one of the demos, and we'll do some head to head objective testing.
> Especially since you have not tried the competitive
> models, or at least discussed them. All the more shame if your claims
> do have some basis.
Sorry, Bill, but I sail lot's of different gear. I also tune gear for people, regardless of
who made the gear. I also provide suggestions almost on a global basis about which
boards, masts, booms, and sails I feel will work the best for the people who are asking. Yes, my suggestions are
often Starboards and Sailworks products, because
I believe in these products, and know how to make them work.
I try to be more general with my advice if it's about some product or brand I've
never tried, and I normally say I have not tried it.
Where's the shame in providing good solid suggestions in response to people's
questions, regardless of brand ? Nearly all the feedback I get suggests that I have
been beneficial with my suggestions.
> The original emphasis on ease of waterstarting, ease of rigging and
> light weight of the Retro are questionable. Any sail that I rig a few
> times becomes easier and easier to rig. I am getting very good at
> threading the mast on my Retros, which could be easier. The Retro
> weighs more than some other brands. Ease of waterstarting applies
> perhaps to some beginners who have not had adequate instruction. My
> 2000/01? 6.2 Simmer Onshore Wave sail rigs more easily, luffs much
> more easily, waterstarts much more eaisly, handles a greater range,
> weighs much less, is more durable, has seen much more use and costs
> much much less than my 2000 6.5 Retro.
OK. What can I say? You are comparing apples and oranges here.
A Retro 6.5 weighs more than a 6.2 wave sail? OK, if you say so, but if this is
true, I'm not sure I'd want to use it in serious waves. I sure wouldn't use a Retro in
serious waves.
Please bring your longboard (a vintage one if you have it) to one of the demos, and
we'll set a couple of marks and see if your Simmer wave sail will power a longboard
around a vintage race course as efficiently as the 6.5 Retro. This would be a measure
of the low end power available with the Retro I think.
I think I'm beginning to see why you want a "luffable" sail (your term).
What I think you mean is that you want a sail that depowers quickly like a wave sail.
Well, here's the apples and oranges part. You won't get a sail with as much draft
as a Retro to depower quickly. For this Sailworks designed the Bongo and the
Revolution SR-8.
You also won't get a fixed draft camber induced race sail to depower at all, unless
you sheet it way out. This drops your mast foot pressure to zero, a very dangerous
thing to do, in my opinion. Much easier to slightly sheet out a Retro, keep the
mast foot pressure steady, and let the sail do the "adjusting".
> My cammed Neil Pryde V8 8.5 from 1999 is exhausting to rig and derig.
> The 6.5 North Spectro with cams was a cinch, any few seconds taken to
> pop the cams gained many times over by the ease of threading the mast.
> Retro mast threading could be much easier on both the sailor and the
> sail.
I agree, but you can't get the luff curve that the Retro needs to give it great
low end power, great range, and excellent overpowered stability, in an easy
to rig sleeve. You could have it easy to rig, like your wave sail (or the Revo SR-8)
but it wouldn't have the draft and twist characteristics that we find in a Retro.
Sorry, but you can't have it both ways.
> Anyone like to buy two Retro's, 6.5 and 9.5, 2000 models, great
> condition, good prices?
So, have you sailed any of the 2002 Retro's yet?
Bring on your V8 and your Simmer OnShore Wave. It would be fun to make a
very objective comparison.
Rigging time, earliest to plane, overpowered stability, and any other parameter you'd
like to test. We can even trade boards and sails so the skill levels won't be a factor.
We could probably get a line of people at one of the demos to just try them out and
give us their opinions.
I'm ready, and my schedule for the year is posted at Starboard and USWindsurfing,
and well as in the Starboard advertisement in Windsurfing Magazine.
Sorry to be so longwinded, but you have attacked me personally here and the products that I use, and believe are the
best on the market for the majority of sailors in all sorts of conditions. If you wanted an reaction, you got it.
Let's get together and put the products you believe in to the test.
Regards,
Roger
Lois Stufflebeam
> 1 vote for your sailing ability. The sails are good, but you 2 can sail!
>
> -Craig
>
Thanks, Craig! You made my day!!
Lois
Roger Nightingale
I've been following your posts for a long time, and I'm still not sure what your relationship is with Starboard and
Sailworks. You are undoubtedly an excellent teacher and sailor, and your commitment to the sport is impressive. I
understand that you believe in the products and I'm sure that they are excellent. But I would like to know if you get
get a free quiver of Retros every year, and if your Formula boards are courtesy of Starboard. Do you get any
compensation at all from either company? My apologies if you think this is a rude question, but since you've made
yourself the de facto guru of Retro/Starboard, I think you owe this group some disclosure.
Roger Nightingale
(Pete Cresswell)
> compared with the actual experience of Windwing
>owners which I understand to be very positive. I wonder how often they use
>them in "Retro" mode, ie without the cams? Windwing owners... do you
>always/often/never put the cams in? There's an interesting survey. (to me,
>anyway)
On my Synthesis, I always run all three cams. I've tried it with
two, one, and none but always came back to three. When rigged
properly with three cams, it feels very light - nothing like as big a
sail as it is and people who know and watch from shore say that it's
noticibly more stable than other sails....i.e. the tip of the mast
stays steady.
My other 4 sails, however are Black Diamond Interface single-cam
convertables. On the 6.1 and 5.5 I've always run the cam. On
the 4.9 and 4.4 I'll go either way depending on how overpowered I am.
Last week, 4.9 with the cam was a bit much in the crazy gusts we were
getting, but there were too many extended lulls to think about 4.4.
I pulled the cam, flattened the sail, and it was like a whole
different sail.....totally managable even in the craziest gusts. It
also reminded me how nice it is to go through a gybe, flip the sail,
and just have it rotate all by it's little self.
I've had the same experience sailing the 4.4 overpowered when others
were on low-to-mid threes.
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
sailquik (Roger Jackson)
Sailworks provides me with sails, and Starboard provides me with boards,
for use at all of the demos and other events. (24 events all over the country),
so that sailors who wish to try them out have that opportunity in a non
sales oriented format. I have nothing to sell as I do not own any of it.
At the end of the year the boards and sails are returned to the respective manufacturers.
I receive no other compensation and derive no income from the sale of this gear.
They also pay some of my travel expenses.
In return, I keep the boards and sails repaired and in top condition, and provide technical support for both companies
and several others that make fins, masts, booms. I am not paid by any of them either. I just get the use of the demo
gear when I'm not actually engaged in doing demos or traveling between events.
Plus I lose my salary at my real job when I'm traveling extensively.
I will be "on the road" for more than 4 months this year.
So, I'm not getting rich, and the only reason I have selected these products is I find
them to be (in my opinion) the best products on the market. They work really
well for the vast majority of sailors, both new and more experienced.
Roger
Heinz Kiosk
> >owners which I understand to be very positive. I wonder how often they
use
> >them in "Retro" mode, ie without the cams? Windwing owners... do you
> >always/often/never put the cams in? There's an interesting survey. (to
me,
> >anyway)
>
> On my Synthesis, I always run all three cams. I've tried it with
> two, one, and none but always came back to three. When rigged
> properly with three cams, it feels very light - nothing like as big a
> sail as it is and people who know and watch from shore say that it's
> noticibly more stable than other sails....i.e. the tip of the mast
> stays steady.
Thanks Pete, I predicted this answer, though I'd love to have more answers
to compare with my uninformed prejudice. I have a suspicion that the
"optional cams" thing is actually a piece of marketing, and that the
Synthesis is a superb cammed sail, which like most cammed sails is capable
of being sailed without the cams but whose performance without cams cannot
approach either its own cammed performance or the entirely different
performance of a sail specifically designed only to be sailed camless. Any
Synthesis sailors out there regularly and willingly sailing camless to put
my doubts to shame?
Regards
Tom
Bill Hansen
I thought I complimented you - I think you provide a great service. I
only asked for objectivity and an acknowledgement from those promoting
products on the NG that there are many great new sails on the market
which satisfy the needs of most sailors, are easy to rig, etc...
In response to your request for a sail to try and for those on the
east coast, I will be doing a sail design clinic followed by a demo
day or two in conjunction with Brad Miley's Ebbtide Windsurfing shop
in Montgomeryville, PA. The date will be mid-late June or early July
and this event will be posted here on the NG for those interested in
attending. I am also making an arrangement to see that we have a demo
rep on the east coast and that Barton has new demo sails in Hatteras.
Anyone who wishes to try one is cordially invited to use any of these
venues. We will also be at Windfest in SF and Hood River with a
complete selection of Windwing sails for demo.
-Bill
"sailquik (Roger Jackson)" <sail...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<3CD68DDA...@mindspring.com>...
Bill Hansen
OK, now some tech stuff.
Luff curve suppression is certainly a viable way to get twist in the
head of a sail - especially those with more conventional planforms. It
became a standard way for most sailmakers to get twist in normally cut
sails during the late 90's. The advent of shorter luff-length
truncated-tip sails makes the situation more complicated as they
naturally twist more at the head due to the dynamic loading. Some
sailmakers, in an effort to 'keep up,' just chopped their heads to get
the truncated 'look' while neglecting the other variables involved.
The combination of a truncated tip and conventional luff suppression
during these development stages provided the windsurfing consumer with
a wide selection of sails that basically had dangling and/or
near-useless heads. The problem is actually one of getting progressive
twist lower in the sail body without losing draft in those sections
while maintaining some moderate tension in the upper leech.
With the above in mind, I'll get more specific. Luff suppression works
but always 'sucks out' the draft along the mast (leading edge) in the
area of suppression. Hence, it is less desirable lower in the sail. We
discovered in our testing that twist with shape lower in a sail makes
it much better all around (both under and over powered.) At the same
time we discovered a higher clew also made the handling and
performance better. With a higher clew and truncated tip, it became
clear that conventional sail shaping techniques were insufficient to
further our goals in a making a better performing and more rangy sail.
At the same time, my kite design efforts allowed me to further
understand the principles involved in producing complex 3D shapes. The
result is a new way (for me at least) to shape the sails. It is more
complex but makes rigging and tuning easier for the consumer since the
sail has a more naturally twisted shape rather than a distorted by
downhaul shape. Certainly downhaul still has an effect but it's role
is far less important.
- Bill
Roger Nightingale <r...@duke.edu> wrote in message news:<3CD68D8C...@duke.edu>...
Steven Slaby
> performance of a sail specifically designed only to be sailed camless. Any
> Synthesis sailors out there regularly and willingly sailing camless to put
> my doubts to shame?
Next time I head out I think I will give it a try on my 7.5 Synthesis;
this week I had an excellent session with it (with the cams in). Most
others were on 6.0's and 6.5's when the wind picked up; I needed a little
more downhaul but was quite comfortable, even though some of the others
were getting overpowered needing to sheet out in the gusts. I believe
there was room for even more downhaul/outhaul, but I didn't need it.
Its the first time I used the 7.5 in overpowered conditions and was
thoroughly impressed!
Steve.
--
--------------------------------------------------
Ottawa Windsurfing http://www.magma.ca/~slaby/wind/
CMWA newsletter editor
WC website development
Roger Nightingale
Are you still using luff suppresion on the Catalysts or have you switched over to shapped twist on those
as well? In looking at the panel layout on your 2002 models, it appears that there is no seam under the
#4 batten, so I'm thinking you may still be using luff suppresion. p.s. I love the planform/look of the
new catalyst.
Roger
sailquik (Roger Jackson)
Thanks for the compliment.
Unfortunately, having your own demo, at Brad's, does not seem to make the "head to head" real time comparison I was
hoping for.
Maybe some other time, or when I get out to the Gorge in about a month.
Best Regards,
Roger
Bill
> > > compared with the actual experience of Windwing
> > >owners which I understand to be very positive. I wonder how often they
> use
> > >them in "Retro" mode, ie without the cams? Windwing owners... do you
> > >always/often/never put the cams in? There's an interesting survey. (to
> me,
> > >anyway)
> >
> > On my Synthesis, I always run all three cams. I've tried it with
> > two, one, and none but always came back to three. When rigged
> > properly with three cams, it feels very light - nothing like as big a
> > sail as it is and people who know and watch from shore say that it's
> > noticibly more stable than other sails....i.e. the tip of the mast
> > stays steady.
>
> Thanks Pete, I predicted this answer, though I'd love to have more answers
> to compare with my uninformed prejudice. I have a suspicion
Or, that the cammed Synthesis is a better sail than its uncammed Retro
counterpart.
My suspicion is that most of the users couldn't tell and that
whichever they used most often they would like and defend, whether
they had a "clue" or not.
Bill Hansen
All new Windwings for 2002 have 3D built-in twist. There are shaping
seams under the battens even though the panel seams appear otherwise.
The panel layout is intended to map the tensions via warp fiber
alignment as well as allow complex shaping of the membrane. It is also
sort of a 're-issue' of the early Windwing wave sail layout as sort of
an informal commemorative 20 year anniversary celebration. I'm glad
you like the planform - it has been under incremental development now
for several years starting with the '99 Catalyst and truncated tip
Interface Wave.
- Bill
Roger Nightingale <r...@duke.edu> wrote in message news:<3CDA6450...@duke.edu>...
Heinz Kiosk
"Bill" <utt...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:57d551ba.02050...@posting.google.com...
> "Heinz Kiosk" <no....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:<uDqC8.324$f06....@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net>...
> > > > compared with the actual experience of Windwing
> > > >owners which I understand to be very positive. I wonder how often
they
> > use
> > > >them in "Retro" mode, ie without the cams? Windwing owners... do you
> > > >always/often/never put the cams in? There's an interesting survey.
(to
> > me,
> > > >anyway)
> > >
> > > On my Synthesis, I always run all three cams. I've tried it with
> > > two, one, and none but always came back to three. When rigged
> > > properly with three cams, it feels very light - nothing like as big a
> > > sail as it is and people who know and watch from shore say that it's
> > > noticibly more stable than other sails....i.e. the tip of the mast
> > > stays steady.
> >
> > Thanks Pete, I predicted this answer, though I'd love to have more
answers
> > to compare with my uninformed prejudice. I have a suspicion
>
> Or, that the cammed Synthesis is a better sail than its uncammed Retro
> counterpart.
only be dragged back kicking and screaming; the Windwing in cammed mode is
irrelevant to me.
>
> My suspicion is that most of the users couldn't tell and that
> whichever they used most often they would like and defend, whether
> they had a "clue" or not.
variety of cammed sails who needed to try a modern camless sail only once to
find the experience manifestly superior... *to me*. OTOH I haven't heard of
the opposite often either on the beach or in this NG. (ie people used to
modern no-cams trying out cams and finding them superior)
(Pete Cresswell)
> OTOH I haven't heard of
>the opposite often either on the beach or in this NG. (ie people used to
>modern no-cams trying out cams and finding them superior)
I heard the opposite last week from a guy I've known on-and-off via
windsurfing for fifteen years.
He's some sort of mechanical or structural engineer/sales rep type
and sells windsurfing stuff out of his garage to keep himself immersed
in the very latest gear.
He may go through a couple of quivers of sails in a single season
looking for just the right feel and performance.
His take on cam vs camless was that above 6.0, there's just no
substitute for cams and battens: the more the better in his opinion.
He went on to say that he thought that full-on race sails have been
overlooked by a lot of users in recent years and (again, in *his*
opinion) offer the most power and range by far in the larger sizes.
As I said, I've known this person quite awhile and respect his
intelligence, perceptiveness, and knowledge. Having said that, I
would also note that this guy's preferred style of sailing is BAF-ing
to the extreme.
"Horses for courses..." and all that.
YYMV. Mine certainly will...
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
Bruce Peterson
Been busy so I have had much chance to reply.
For the record, Sailworks had 7 and 8 batten sail platforms back in
1991. We used a S-shape leech profile on our 1998 SX sails and
truncated heads on our 1999 and 2000 models. What is it with the
chronologically comparative references to the introduction of sail
features? Are you trying to present that some innovator/replicator
relationship exists between us? The fact that you can draw any
parallel between Windwing and Sailworks on these sail features seems
highly irrelevant. Other sailmakers did it before both of us.
I can understand and accept your excitement at discovering CAD
modeling, digital cutting and 3D built-in shaping. They represent the
current state of the art in sail design. However, these methods are
not new to windsurfing sails and have been in use for over a decade.
Sailworks has been CAD modeling and digital cutting since 1993. The
Retro, and for that matter, every sail I made dating back to
Rushwind/Gaastra days in 1987, has been designed with positive and
negative shaping elements to create a 3D shaped profile with built in
twist that is independent of stressed downhaul and outhaul loads.
You're a clever guy Bill, so I seriously doubt you were unaware of
this fact. I think you'd be challenged to find a sail that has more
built in shaping than a Retro in terms of broadseaming offsets (both
positive and negative). Thus, your comparative reference to the Retro
not having 3D built in spiral shaping is truly BS, as it couldn't be
further from the truth. No apologies from me, you misrepresented the
facts.
My experience the variables in shaping and tensioning a windsurfing
sail has me skeptical to your claim that low-tension sails which have
highly developed built-in foils tend to be less mast specific. In
fact, I found just the opposite. When you cut a profile relying on a
low-tension profile that is "just so", you'll find that small
deviations in stressed loading from the mast have a very large effect
on the profile of the sail. I guess time will tell how your version
works out …..
As to your truce terms, it would seem we would have to agree to
disagree. My participation on this NG is fueled by my passion for
windsurfing and sailmaking. I doubt anyone who reads my posts has any
illusions as to where my interests lay. While I don't have the time
read and respond to all posts (your reference to ignoring other
products), you won't find me initiating a post to slam another
product. I chose not to reply to Pete's original post for a Retro to
Synthesis comparison as my comments are obviously biased. Until you
pissed in the pool I was happy to read and enjoy the posts from other
users of both our products. It is ironic that you of all people are
telling me to stop using this NG to promote my products. As for
racing camless sails, hey, that WAS newsworthy (and there's more to
come in that department too).
See you around Bill,
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
Bruce Peterson
all trades, master of none. A better cambered sail can be made
without having to be concerned with the form of the sail with the
cambers removed. Vice versa for camless sails. The two types of
sails, at least the Sailworks versions, are quite different in their
shaping geometry. From our testing, adding cams to the Retro is no
benefit, in fact it sails worse. Similarly, removing the cambers from
the race sails degrades their performance.
I'm certain that a blended form of the two concepts could be created
that would give satisfactory performance in either mode. Satisfactory
at least until you came upon a sail dedicated to one version or the
other.
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
Dan Weiss
No doubt that a dedicated design will do certain things better and certain
things less well. A sail crossing over categories of typical uses might
offer some sailors the ability to experiment with tuning and performance in
different conditions. I sold and rode Windwing in the very early 90's and
my customers back then liked to fool around with the feel of the
convertibles. I never saw an actual value in it until one day in Hatteras
one of my customers switched from Canadian Hole to Ego Beach with a
convertible sail. He tried to sail backside in the waves, first with the
cam and then with the cam removed. His backside hits had more pop and were
executed in much more critical sections than with the cam, and his pointing
ability going out seems about the same. Obviously a dedicated wave sail
would have been preferred oceanside, but that wavesail never would have
found much of a home in the flats of Canadian Hole. One day, one sail, two
hugely different boards and conditions. I think for him the compromise
proved an asset.
All that said, many modern no-cams can do virtually everything a cammed sail
can do, but the feel in the hand is quite different and many people like the
front hand loading (push) that occurs when underpowered on a cam sail. I'm
not one of them, but some do prefer it. I had a chance to sail an older
Retro in very small waves, kind of in and out. It may be that at least for
that particular iteration that some convertible sails perform much better in
the waves than the Retro, even to say that the net difference between waves
and flat comes out in favor of certain reconfigurable sails. It may be that
some would say a convertible is higher performing than a dedicated design
due to range of use.
--
Dan
"Bruce Peterson" <sail...@gorge.net> wrote in message
news:3cdbbced...@news.gorge.net...
Mark H.
> First off, I have to say that I think it is bogus for the designers of two
> high quality sail lines to be squaring off in a kind of insulting manner.
> I think it is fine to be extolling the virtues of your own sails, but I
> don't I appreciate each of you insulting the other in this public
> forum--and Bill started this one.
At this point in the thread, if your reread the original posts, it is Bruce
that raised the discourse to the level of insulting. Now to finish reading
it...
Mark H.
The Bronx
Heinz Kiosk
news:lM9D8.14579$Ru2.2...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
comparison of Retro and Windwing insulting to Bruce. My recollection is that
that was the first stone.
Regards
Tom
Mark H.
> My recollection is...
>Tom
There are a range of terms other than "insult" that one might perceive to
describe Bill's initial post on this thread, but Bruce's reply leaves no
doubt.
Mark H.
The Bronx
Bill Hansen
Removing cams from a RACE sail is hardly relevant to 'optional cam
systems' because of the wide sleeve configuration. Your difficulty
adding cams to the retro is also unrelated to the independent
successes or failures of other sail designers. Would you have the NG
believe that since you have deemed it a failure, all others will fail
and should just give up? Did you forgot the Synthesis in the NO-CAM
mode was compared to all other no-cams by Windsurfing Magazine several
years ago and wound up with the highest overall marks followed closely
by the retro? Since then, you have no doubt improved your sail. IMHO,
I have likewise made improvements to the Synthesis (some of which you
have adopted and others which you boldly call BS.)
Let's face it. A tight sleeve IS a compromise on performance with or
without cams but user-friendliness makes this compromise desirable.
You keep trying to have it both ways by claiming superior ease of use
while at the same time claiming no compromise on performance (at least
for your sail.)
Fact is there are many excellent performing easy-to-use sails now
available with cams, without cams, and having cam options. The real
compromise is the lack of versatility of a dedicated no-cam. Why?
Because even if it had better performance (which is unproven) it has
no option and is thus constraining to a sailor looking for the
associated versatility, stability and handling in the larger sizes
popular today.
Bill Hansen
Sail & Kite Design/R&D
Windwing
sail...@gorge.net (Bruce Peterson) wrote in message news:<3cdbbced...@news.gorge.net>...
Piotr J
I recall windsurfing magazine writing that adjustable outhauls are
especially important to get the whole wind range out of a no cam sail.
Is this true? Do cams allow the sail to have more range without
requiring outhaul adjustment? As it seems that most non-racers don't
use on the fly adjustable outhauls, wouldn't this requirement reduce
attractiveness of no cam sails, especially in the larger sizes?
Piotr
p.s. sorry if this sounds like a troll-like return to the no-cam/cam
debate, but I'm geunuinely curious what the answer is.
(Pete Cresswell)
>Does anybody have TOW on both? Tradeoffs?
SailWorks demo day today.
A/B'd my 7.5 Synthesis and a 7.5 Retro for about a half hour.
They're both good sails (big surprise, right?).
But even I could notice differences.
The WindWing definately felt lighter and more balanced. How *much*
lighter and how *much* more balanced?...... I could undoubtedly get
used to the diff....but it's definately there for me in spite of the
fact that my particular Synthesis probably weighs more than the Retro.
(that Tyvek tape on the panels and the iron-on patches on the luff
sleeve maybe.....)
The Retro gybed better for me - but I think that's a cammed vs RAF
thing, not a Synthesis vs Retro thing..... I like it when the sail
blades out and flips so easily.... seems like I carry speed through
the gybe longer.... But the Synthesis felt steadier and more
predictable.....but then again, I've been sailing the thing for a few
years now....
If somebody put a gun to my head right now and said choose one or or
the other or die...they might have to pull the trigger.
-----------------------
Pete Cresswell
Bruce Peterson
Piotr.
Adjustable outhauls (AO) are important to get the whole wind range out
of ANY sail, not just no-cam sails. Short of adjusting your sheeting
angle, there is no simpler change that can be made >while sailing< to
adjust the range or performance of the sail. For those who have come
to value this advantage, like racers and other experienced sailors, an
AO system is as indispensable as harness lines.
Under-powered? Releasing the outhaul makes the sail fuller, moves the
draft aft and increases the twist, all of which improves low end power
and downwind speed. Over-powered? Pulling the outhaul flattens the
sail, moves the draft forward, and tightens the leech, which improves
stability, control and windward ability. Typically larger sails will
respond more dramatically to outhaul adjustments than smaller sails,
but I've never met a sail yet that did benefit from an AO.
The underlying concept is known as variable geometry. Virtually all
objects that fly, natural or man made, use some form of user
manipulated control to alter the shape or form, and thus the
aerodynamic performance of their foils. The AO gives a windsurfing
sail multiple gears, as opposed to just one gear with fixed outhaul
settings.
At the sail test you mention, Sailworks was the only sail company to
supply AO's with their sails (the camless Retro) for testing. For
inexperienced users, the ability to adjust the outhaul was initially
daunting. Often the sails would be put away tuned for high winds
(i.e. tight outhaul), but go out the next morning in lighter wind
conditions without a change in outhaul settings. Because the AO
system was new to many of the testers, and COULD BE adjusted while
sailing, making an outhaul adjustment registered more significantly.
After a session or two to figure the system out, many testers
questioned why all the sails were not similarly equipped.
With the AO systems that are available today, it is simply too easy,
and too effective an adjustment to NOT have it on your boom.
Especially so for recreational and/or budget conscious sailors, who
are trying to get the most performance for their money.
Sailworks has been a huge proponent of the AO system and has supplied
a simple, but effective, AO strap with every race and freeride sail
since 1995. To make outhauling larger sails easier, we recently came
out with an evolved two-sided version of the same strap, which has 4:1
purchase on each side, more adjustment range and low stretch Dyneema
line.
If you've never tried an adjustable outhaul, check it out! It gives
you more power to control the wind conditions, rather than be
controlled by the wind conditions.
Fair winds,
Bruce Peterson
Sailworks R+D
Heinz Kiosk
my designs (I'm not in the windsurf business) in the way that Bill posted
about Bruce's in a public forum I'd get *very* upset too. And my
inclination would be to lash out innappropriately too. Maybe I'd restrain
it, maybe not...
Regards
Tom
Paul K.
At what conditions did you compare them (were there same masts)?
Please, write more.
Paul