PDA

View Full Version : Apollo Vs F161


Pacs
16th August 2006, 05:12 PM
Hi all,

Fantastic 2007 range and nice new website!
-----------

Perhaps does the binomial (Apollo, F161) represent an alternative in the future of the FW?

These two models have different purpose? or only are for diferents conditions?

Traditionally, the board with more witdth and more liters were for heavier sailors and/or little wind... but, Apollo is less voluminous, longer ... what innovation hides the design of the hull that makes it work better with heavy sailors and/or low wind?

Perhaps is the Apollo thought for a more recreative/weekend use?

It is less technical / physical?

Thanks a lot!

Francisco

oddvar
17th August 2006, 03:13 PM
I can se that the Apollo has a 75 cm fin, will this be allowed for in FW?
It says in the text that it will be permitted to race in FW class?

aus404
17th August 2006, 04:44 PM
And where does the 95 CM wide Isonic fit in here? That sounds aufully like a formla board to me...

barks
17th August 2006, 05:34 PM
aus404 wrote:
And where does the 95 CM wide Isonic fit in here? That sounds aufully like a formla board to me...
To replace the F-Types for a fast low-wind ride without the up/downwind commited stance/trim of formula. It does make sense to me to morph the F-Types into the iSonic range that way.

Jean-Marc
17th August 2006, 05:44 PM
oddvar wrote:
I can se that the Apollo has a 75 cm fin, will this be allowed for in FW?

No. FW class rules limit fin up to a lenght of 70 cm.

It says in the text that it will be permitted to race in FW class?

Yes, the board is FW class-legal, providing you will use a 70 cm fin...

Cheers !

JM

barks
17th August 2006, 06:19 PM
Jean-Marc wrote:
Yes, the board is FW class-legal, providing you will use a 70 cm fin...

Cheers !

JM
It will be interesting to see how much of the claimed low-wind performance can be accredited to the board shape and how much to the 75cm and probably very powerful fin, i.e. how well the Apollo will do in an actual low-wind FW race.

Remi
17th August 2006, 06:52 PM
Hi All,

The Apollo is deliver with a 75 fin, but can be used in Formula event with a 70cm.

To compare the F161 and Apollo, we can say that the Apollo it's special light wind machine and the F 161 is for all conditions.

The Apollo is beating the F 161 in light wind, it's our proposal to the olympic game for 2012.

All the best

Hardie
17th August 2006, 07:12 PM
I'm looking for a light wind board, and am interested in the Apollo, Phantom, and iSonic 155.

I am 90 kilos+, do my light wind sailing in shallow water Estuary, or reef infested ocean, so will need to have a shallow water fin or raked weed. The Appollo looks ruled out bec of 75cm fin, geuss it wouldn't work with a 42cm shallow water fin?

The other thing is I like reaching, not so crazy about an upwind, downwind machine.

I prefer to sail with my 8.5 mt Ezzy Infinity, but can use my 9.5 mt formula sail.

Some advice please.

barks
17th August 2006, 07:13 PM
Remi (or other SB people who have sailed it): At what wind speed does the Apollo's light wind edge even out compared to the F161?

Remi
17th August 2006, 07:20 PM
Hi Hardie,

I never try this kind of fins on a Formula boards and Apollo. I don't think that will work.

This board are interest with a minimum of 11m and 70cm fin.

Seems that you are interest by freeriding in light wind, so the iS 155 must be beter for you with your sails.

All the best

MA_Pete
17th August 2006, 11:04 PM
Hardie:

Per my other post on the iSonic thread, I use a 51 cm True Ames Shallow Water Weed fin on my F-Type 148 (now iSonic 155), with a 9.5, my largest sail at this time. It is supposed to have as much lift as a 65-70 cm Formula fin. It has been working well for me with the 9.5.

I would bet it would be not as good as the 75 cm formula-style fin on the Apollo, but that it still would be okay.

I have tried both the 43 cm True Ames Blade Weed and the Gsport 42 cm DC-Driver fins with F-Type 158 and 148. Both spin out like crazy, especially with a 9.5. So if you can live with a 51 cm shallow water weed fin it would probably work okay for the Apollo and great for the iSonic 155.

(I go down to the 44 cm Shallow Water Weed for 8.5 and below...)

-Pete

steveC
18th August 2006, 01:39 AM
Hi Pete and Hardie,

At many venues, weeds are a compelling obstacle that is very difficult to ignore. In the past, I was always very disappointed with the performance of weedfins, even the True Ames ones. Ultimately, I bought a 20" SB Weed, and it worked fairly well, but it was a lot of fin. I ultimately sold it after destroying my 8.1 in late 2004. However, I recently bought a new 8.3 and found myself needing another big weedfin. This time around I bought a 34cm Lessacher carbon Duo Weed in light of my excellent results sailing with one of Lessacher's 28cm carbon Duo Weed S fins in combination with a 7.0. I can't tell how impressed I am with his weedfins. They offer excellent upwind drive with absolutely no spinout, despite their much shallower depth. Surprisingly, they perform so well without any front overhang in the finbox. In my opinion, Lessacher is offering "the" benchmark in weedfins. I believe that his use of asymmetric foiling is the secret. Very different, yes, but they truely perform. Do yourselves a favor and check them out at the following website.

http://www.cameraid.com/Lessacher/

Ken
18th August 2006, 03:39 AM
It looks like the apollo is a long formula board with less volume than the 161, plus a longer fin. No doubt, the apollo will outperform the formula in sub planing conditions.

The question is - will the apollo outperform the 161 in light wind planing conditions (6-8 knots) if the 161 has a 75cm fin? Once you have pumped up to planing speed, the board length isn't an issue, but the volume is. Seems like the 161 with more volume would have the advantage over the apollo, if both have a 75 cm fin.

Am I missing something here? Does the added length help achieve planing speed when pumping in 6-8 knots? With all things being equal, if both boards are planing side by side in 8 knots, will the water lines (wetted surface) be the same or different.

Just curious about the concept.

PaulM
18th August 2006, 06:27 AM
I don't get it. The Olympic testers tried a formula with 85cm fin but rejected it before, so why will they go for Apollo ? They emphasised they need to race at all the international venues, not just the games.
Now if Apollo had a lifting/pivoting fin then just maybe the wind range might be enough.

MA_Pete
18th August 2006, 08:38 AM
steveC:

Thanks for the tip and the link on the Lessacher fins. I will check them out...

-Pete

Steen2000
18th August 2006, 05:18 PM
Ken, I believe the longer length will make it plane earlier. So you plane when F161 doesn't.

SteveC: What about the lift/early planing of such a shorter light wind fin? One thing is spin-out another is getting onto the plane. How does Lessachers fins perform regarding that important issue????????

Remi
18th August 2006, 06:12 PM
Hi Ken,

If we compare the Apollo against the F 161 with the 75cm fin, Apollo we will win by far in light wind. The rocker is more lower with more lenght with a tail of 84,5cm. This help a lot for plainig hability, not the volume.

The water line close to be the same with the help of the 75cm fin. With the 70 cm fin the water line is in the avantage of the F161, but Apollo still wining.

All the best

Remi
18th August 2006, 06:21 PM
Hi Paul M,

I was their when they make this test in Guarda Lake, but it was with Formula with a narow tail compare to the Apollo. The limit wind to race is normaly 6 knots and right now the Apollo can plane even under this limit with a 11m and his 75cm fin. I know they race sometimes under this limit, but not much.
So the question is do they want to continue to race with extremely heavy board for only 1 knots under the limit? When you can plane all the time with less physical effort and maximum pleasure?

All the best

scotty
18th August 2006, 08:22 PM
Hi Remi,

I think the Apollo concept is great. But how would the Apollo work compared to the current RSX in 20 knots of wind?

Anyway by 2012 the Apollo will be superseded by something newer and better, so perhaps by then the world of pumping will be over!

This would give to less breakages of equipment possibly?

lucofede
18th August 2006, 10:38 PM
Hi SB team:

Which sail would be the ideal to achieve all the Apollo early planing potential.
In the marketing blurb is mentioned ?a softer, earlier planing rig concept?.

I would be a frerace sail (V8, overdrive, etc), a full race sail (Code Red, RS6) or you are working on a specific sail for this board?

Best regards

Remi
19th August 2006, 06:30 PM
Hi Scotty,

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

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

All the best

Remi
19th August 2006, 06:33 PM
Hi Luco,

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

All the best

steveC
20th August 2006, 01:19 AM
Hi Steen2000,

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

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

Racer
21st August 2006, 11:26 AM
Being heavy, in marginal winds i want to plane as early and as easily as possible, but i dont want to use above 10m sail. Is the Apollo the board for me?

Remi
21st August 2006, 07:37 PM
Hi Racer,

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

All the best

mark h
22nd August 2006, 10:01 PM
So in say, 8ish knots, how much faster is the Apollo compaired with the F161. When you say the Apollo is beating the F161, do mean upwind downwind angles or speed or both? Is the 75cm fin available as a seperate item to use on my current F159?

Cheers

James
23rd August 2006, 12:50 AM
http://www.sailwet.com/olympic_fins.html

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

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

True Ames also sells 75 and 80 cm fins; http://www.trueames.com/wind_select.php?wind_products_id=12

scotty
23rd August 2006, 01:49 AM
James I see you have a F 158 listed and a 12 Nitro. Just curious what size fins do you use on this one and of what brands?

Tiesda You
23rd August 2006, 10:42 AM
Hi Ken,

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

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

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

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

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

Jean-Marc
23rd August 2006, 06:52 PM
Tiesda,

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

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

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

Cheers !

JM

scotty
23rd August 2006, 08:34 PM
Is planning in 6 knots of wind possible with Formula? That's impressive if it is! 4 knots sounds impossible to me, but lets hope it isn't!

Tiesda, that was a great explanation. I do have one thought about your website in that specialty products like the Serenity, Apollo deserve more than one page. Something like Exocet have done for their Kona or Hot with their Superfreak helps creat more understanding and thus interest and confidence to try a more radical product.

just my two cents,

Scott

James
23rd August 2006, 09:35 PM
To Scotty-

I use the stock 70 cm drake fin with both my 12.0 and 9.8 for no great reasons other than I'm pretty light (72 kg) and I can't afford aftermarket fins on my grad student stipend! :) If price were no object I'd get some of Kashy's fins- a powerful 70 and a low-drag 66 or something.

G
23rd August 2006, 11:02 PM
Hallo,
like many people here I have lot of questions about how do the 2 boards work.I'm enough confident that both are 2 great products.As you've said they're both racing machine but they perform best in 2 different wind range.OK.
Please,for a normal formula sailor (ex. 80 kg,180 cm,11,0 mq sail) what is the dead line for the Apollo vs 161?
I mean,I know that Antoine is able to race and win easy in 25 kns on Apollo but many of us could have some difficult....
How much harder is play the Apollo game when pretty windy?
Till now every short Starboard formula has had the easyness in every situation as prerogative (expecially when hard).Does the Apollo continues this tradition?
Do you expect to see more Apollo or 161 in the race courses?
What is the Apollo feeling when sailing?I mean,158,159,160 were similar (not the same!).
I remain much curious about 161 too.What are now its best points?
Thank you

scotty
23rd August 2006, 11:18 PM
I guess the interest in either Apolo or 161 iare very different depending on your usage requirements. I'm purely recreational these days, but still want speed over handling to a certain degree.

So for me I like the idea of a dedicated lightwind board which I could use up to a max of 15 knots, but ideally gets used in 5 - 12 knots. In a way both the Serenity and the Apollo are matching boards for me, in that lightwinds where I normally wouldn't go out in become accessable to sail.

The things that put me off Formula gear was price and the size of it all and the hideous look of it all! (no offence Tiesda:D ) I prefered to slog it on my IMCO until one day my buddy who used to bug me to join him in recreational formula sailing went sailing past me in winds I though impossible to plane!

So now I've sort of joined the club with a 10m sail and F-148. I'm just adjusting to the setup and it's funny how you get used to such a big sail!

Scott

G
23rd August 2006, 11:35 PM
Scotty,maybe the apollo's born with a different philosophy behind but to explore all the best it can do we have to go on a big rig as well (with exactly the same problem formula stuff presents!).No way to plane in 6 kns and a 6 mq!So I can't accept your point of view of people lovin slogging here and there on IMO while wait for a miracle stuff.Get a powerfull combo,pump up your sail as hard as you can do (I'm sure you know what I mean) and gain the plane.
We're all part of the same family.... ...sometimes different skills

scotty
23rd August 2006, 11:47 PM
But sailing on big rigs isn't always what everyone wants. The fun in railing a longboard upwind is also something which is enjoyed by many. It's a much more serene feeling, just crusing along, which is why I'm sure the guys at Starboard decided to go back to the roots of windsurfing and provide those who enjoy windsurfing with less effort a modern twist of an old design. (Div 2 & ocean Kayaks)

For me the Serenity is a more exciting product than the Apollo, mostly because it's slender lines are more appealing. :)

Jean-Marc
24th August 2006, 06:30 AM
Scotty,

Yes, the FW class rules set a wind limits at 6 knots and yes, a FW board can plane as of 6 knots with a big sail (11-12.5 sqm), depending on your weight and skills (plenty of posts on this subject).

Althought both the Apollo and Serenity target ultra light wind, they do on different scale with distinct segment's end results : planing with the Apollo as of 4 knots (true ?) or "gliding" with the Serenity as of 1-2 knots of wind.

The Apollo looks extremely interesting to me because if I can achieve planing as of 4 knots with that gear, this will be a very significant leap from my actual 7 knots of wind planing threshold with current gear. I mean 4-6 knots of wind is 2 Bft, i.e., almost half the wind force of 3 Bft (7-10 knots). By contrast, FW's planing threshold is only 6 knots, so not worth the investment just to gain 1 knot over 7 for my case...

Cheers !

JM

GeorgeUSA39
24th August 2006, 12:24 PM
FW rules wind minimum is 8 knots not 6, however the best sailors can plane in 6. So the question is can the Steve Allen's of the world get this board to plane in 4 knots?

Tiesda You
24th August 2006, 02:30 PM
Hi JM,

1) Assuming the minimum planing threshold for a FW board is 6 knots of wind, are you really able to make the Apollo planing with as low as 4 knots of wind ? Is that correct ?

Tricky one to state specifically as planing early involves not only the board but also the wind conditions, water conditions and the sailor's weight and ability; what is categorical however is that the Apollo planes earlier than a Formula board to the point where FW can become viable as an Olympic class (and FW itself can hold races more often).

2) Would a 80 cm fin be able to lower the planing threshold even further or not ?

I'm pretty sure it would, but with diminishing returns. We've been using 75cm because it's a less scary step than a whole 10cm, and its a good size to start lowering FW wind limits.

3) What top board speed are you able to reach : 8, 10, 12, 16 knots, i.e., twice to 4 time the wind

Another tricky question to answer. I confess I wasn't wearing the GPS when testing.. When we test the boards, we invariably go head to head to find results because GPS readings can be misleading. But a key point to remember is that an efficient high-aspect planing surface not only needs less energy to get planing, but it also starts planing at lower speeds.

Hi Scotty,

I like the idea, thanks! Will get on to the case with our web people..

Jean-Marc
25th August 2006, 06:57 AM
Thanks a lot Tiesda !

Cheers !

JM

PaulM
26th August 2006, 05:00 AM
Scotty, You're right formula is pretty amazing in it's elemet but looks far from sleek - especially from the front where you see the full 'barn door'. Of course there's no prizes for elegance, but many formula are bought by non racers, whom I bet normally prefer to buy things they feel have a certain amount of style. I've wondered if a formula board would look better if it was a more normal width to somewhere between mast foot & footstrap, then tapered out to the full metre in the standing area. To make tacking possible for weekend warriors the nose would have to be pretty thick - maybe semi canoe nose ?

BTW has Apollo got cut outs ?

steveC
26th August 2006, 07:41 AM
Hi PaulM,

Maybe I'm missing something here, but isn't the high volume line of the iSonic line what you're thinking about? Narrower tails, yet still a fairly healthy width in the nose. Somewhat less upwind/downwind in concept, so I would think that might integrate a bit better with the more back and forth folks (most intermediates). Nonetheless, I bet it could still be pretty directional, given the right sailor and fin combo. Also, larger sails are in the mix too. I think Starboard is already offering a product to suit your needs.

scotty
26th August 2006, 10:42 PM
Hi Tiesda,

Website is getting a little better! :D See more details involving the boards now! I can now see how the wood Serenity really looks much easier. The image for the Serenity used in you technology section is a really good one and a good angle! I do hope that the guys at Windsurfjournal get a wood version for their images as at the moment I prefer the white, but I think could be I haven't seen the wood properly.

But for sure cool stuff! Going to have to start saving some pennies for next year!! :o

PaulM
26th August 2006, 11:39 PM
Hi SteveC, I mean the other way round. For upwind work we know we need width at the back for leverage over the fin, but why does the nose have to look like a barn door coming towards you across the water ? Must have a fair bit of aero drag when in the nose up attiude it's designed for. Whats the function of that nose width ? - as soon as the boards up and running the front half is out of the water anyhow.
I'm saying there's anything wrong with formula performance, but Scotty was reluctant to buy something ugly and I think there's are quite a lot of people who agree. One reason my personal width limit is 80cm.

scotty
26th August 2006, 11:53 PM
Yeah Paul,

I agree that for me Forumula gear tends to look pretty aweful! I mean an Equipe has much nicer lines. But Formula is purely a factor of function. I went for the F-148 just because the looks were not bad for such a board.

I think the wide nose acts like a giant wing, and compresses the air to promote eary planing on the F-types and then the tapered tail just provides a more ergonomic position for general back forth sailing. I think had I the chance again, I'd have gone for the F 160 or 161. Maybe it's fine I didn't as it would appear the F type has plenty speed to keep our fun social racing pretty even with a friend on a 2003 SB Formula board.

steveC
27th August 2006, 01:36 AM
Hi PaulM,

I guess I misunderstood your earlier post above. When you were talking about tacking and the thick nose, I thought wide up front. My apologies.

I have to admit, the super wide formula designs, to include many of the jumbo short wide designs are more problematic for me too, but my reasoning is a bit different. Actually, my two widest boards are only 61cm, and I'm not very inclined to go much wider because the bars on my stainless steel rack are only 61cm long. I had it built for my van in 1998, and the short wide concept boards were only just beginning to be introduced. If I purchased a super wide board, to include the giant sails, masts and booms required; I would be forced to totally rethink and modify the existing interior of my van. A troublesome and expensive task, at the very least.

Still, with an 8.3 sail, my old course slalom has a surprisingly early planning threshold, and it remains very fast and capable in B&F mode. Yet, the upwind drive available to me is far short of the standards now associated with current formula designs. In spite of my dated light wind board, I'm still quite happy with my light wind potential.

Nonetheless, I can't help being tempted a bit, especially by the likes of the Serenity. It would be very cool to have a high performance board where I could be out in super light wind well before the kiters could even dream of hitting the water. Other than obvious storage and transportation issues I would have, I still worry about kelp and weeds with a formula length fin. It would have to work with a weedfin. Frankly, I have my doubts that the concept would work near as effectively with a sufficiently raked fin. While I have probed a number of times about this on the forum, still no one a Starboard appears to want to tackle this issue.

mark h
27th August 2006, 05:46 AM
Steve C
A couple of months ago, I bought a Formula weed fin from Wolfgang Lesscher to use in neap tide conditions (loads of very shallow sand bars) on light days. Used it properly today, conditions where varied through the day. First was 20 knots wind with swell, second was in 12 ish knots with very flat water. The fin looks weired on the beach but works really well. Down wind was nearly as fast as my C3 fins. Speed is needed before you can get decent angle upwind. Gybing is'nt great, you can really feel the over-hang from the fin, but you can get around the corners.

sitka
27th August 2006, 06:52 AM
crimminy....!!

the noses are wide because when you go deep down wind you need a trim mechanism to handle to huge variations in power experienced by the rig, fin and sailor. the board is of slight consequence as long as it keeps those things aligned. If that means wide nose who cares.

It's not estetic, it's neccesity. Once connected to the forces involved the wide nose is beautiful in it's time and place. Ugly only to the un initiated.

steveC
28th August 2006, 12:58 AM
Hi mark h,

It is good to hear that Lessacher's weedfins work well with formula boards, despite the overhang. I know I was initially a bit worried about the overhang of the 34cm Duo Weed (still I really have to be careful when waterstarting), but it didn't seem to be a problem, even in the jibes. But, like I indicated above, my course slalom is quite narrrow. What size did you buy for the formula board?

mark h
28th August 2006, 04:45 AM
Hi Steve C
The Lesscher formula weed fin isnt on his web site, but it has a vertical drop of 41cm, the length is around 55/60cm (will measure it some time), it has a massive surface area and a very thick chord. Wolfgang told me its very popular with the formula guys/girls in Strandhurst, Holand.

Cheers

PaulM
28th August 2006, 05:26 AM
Sitka, you mean to stop the nose burying ? Yep that does make semse, although my 02 FF138 ssems to use the nose scoop to do the same job without so much width. But with the ultra short nose the problem must take more solving. I do remember the Exocet 'canoe nose' open 310 was said to be frightening in a blow downwind. I'm sure Scotty's point about lift generation plays a part too in getting that 'dancing on the fin' attitude.

Guess I'm gonna have to try and learn to love functionalism :)

scotty
29th August 2006, 10:12 PM
Hey Starboard guys, just want to say the product pages are getting better every day! I like the new images which show top and bottoms of the boards. A few broken links on the PA and Isonic pages, but I'm sure you'll have that sorted! The bigger image of the wood Serenity is great as I'm starting to sway towards that model. Also I like the opening of a separate page with the forum!

Got my wish list... which comes first??

PA 74, I sonic 87, Serenity, Isonic 50, Isonic 97.... B)

Garda
4th September 2006, 07:50 AM
I'm with Paul and Scotty, aesthetically FW boards are very dodgy to my eye......frankly ugly in fact.

Sure, they work, but "handsome is as handsome does" only goes so far, or else an efficient recycling facility (ie garbage tip) or chemical factory would be seen to be as attractive as the Taj Mahal or a beautiful but dumb model. We humans seem to prefer more streamlined shapes (ie slender) with lots of curves.

I love the look of my Kombi towing a rusty old trailer full of windsurfers and it's very effective at the job, but that doesn't mean that most people would think it looks as good as a Bentley Speed Six or Jaguar driven by a supermodel.

What works doesn't always look good, and it's not just a matter of being initiated.

Nathan
6th September 2006, 11:03 AM
Scotty & PaulM

Have either of you guys used formula equipment?

Nathan

scotty
6th September 2006, 06:50 PM
Hey Nathan

I've used a 2003 model Formula board a few times with a 10.6m sail. I decided to go for the more free formula route and go with a F-148 and 10m sail.

Thinking about it now, I would have gone for the 160 Formula board as basically if you want to plan really early and go up and downwind really well the wide tail with parallel rails is the only way I think. But anyway I'll put that on my 2008 budget!! :D

PaulM
9th September 2006, 07:50 PM
Natham,

I've tried a little formula & sail with 'em on the water not infrequently. They're impressive, no question. It's the combination of transport, storage , windrange (for mortals) & maybe (if I'm honest) looks that sets the 80cm limit for me.

Ken
13th September 2006, 12:38 AM
When you are hanging on to a 9m sail running downwind in 25 knots over 1m chop, you want function, not form. Getting killed on a pretty board makes no sense.

Personally, I think if you could engineer a bus that could beat a formula 1 race car, you would draw a lot of attention. Same with a formula board. You see a lot of heads turn when you blow by a keel boat or cat.

I was into "looks" for sails and boards at one time, but now, its, function first, then let's see what it looks like.

scotty
13th September 2006, 09:11 PM
Although formula gear is impressive for VMG courses, wearing a GPS, shows the top end speeds are less than sensible sized gear in my experience. If you are planning to do back and forth sailing, then formula kit isn't ideal, unless early planning at all costs is the target!

crwind
18th September 2006, 09:37 PM
Hi Guys,

Sailing in a really non windy and full of lac place, I really welcome and appreciate the arrival of the Appolo.
I can race with my Formula but waht I would like to have is a machine that really optimize Xlight wind sailing. How about an Appolo that is NON formula class, i-e a limited version that is lighter that the formula class minimum weight? I believe that if you can get a borad that is 1 or 2 kg lighter, then we can push the limits further down?
What do you think (and yes it is going to be frigile, but that's the trade of many people take with all pro-models and custum boards - no problem there).
Second Q: other than the sail that's being developed by Severne, would you plane faster say on an RS6 12.5m2 than on a GTX9.8 for example? I am asking this because I red many times that the planing threshold is not so different, but the capacity to go up-wind better is really what you gain with the 12m5.

I look forward to any replies!

Regards,

Chris

milk laser
19th September 2006, 04:16 AM
I'm absolutely against Apollo. It doubles costs for racers. It eliminates weekend club racing from scene, because again you must have a lot of equipment.
Formula was fantastic class before Apollo arived. Only one board was enough to race every weekend all year long. So STARBOARD guys, don't register it to be legal IFWC board. Let it be as it is, but don't touch FW!!! If you'll register Apollo for IFWC, I'll made it not valid for local and national competitions for a year or two. I have an experience with an old style slalom which required more than one board. It died. Every racing discipline will die very quickly if it requires more than 1 board and 1-2 sails. Also more than one board killed and is killing children sport.
Let it be experimental board until all the industry will agree on its place. If it is Apollo class then it is Apollo. Not formula. Leave windsurfers in silence. Don't f*ck their brains with early planing progress. I see progress in marketing only:)

Best regards and don't think it's an angry post. I love formula very much:)

Remi
19th September 2006, 10:02 AM
Hi Milk Laser,

Their is no marketing plan here, just a new board to open your mind of what Apollo can give to the Formula Class. Particulary help to valid races in light wind condition. If you look to what happen in Portugal, Leba and Korea, you can see easily that the Formula equipment that we have right now need to be improve in this light winds (sails, boards and fins). The Apollo open a screen with his wider tail and 75cm fin.
The plan is definitely to make only one board next year who cover both F 161 and Apollo, but with a 75cm fin.
All the best

milk laser
19th September 2006, 03:03 PM
Hi Remi,
I'm not discussing better performance and progress of Apollo. I want make people to pay attention to social side of that board.

Do you remember the years when formula was borning? There were three years in a row when each year the boards width were increasing aprox 10cm. Technically we have a good board, but what happened to racing scene. I remember that during those 3 years it was totally lost. People was tired to buy new different width board every year. All the racers went to kiteboarding. In 2002 we started the season with clear IFWC standards, and 3 participants in competition. Now we have 10-20 FW sails in weekend races. It took 4 years to grow what was lost. Maybe now you understand why 75 cm and other improvements doesn't inspire me. Why we must repeat mistakes? I think it's too much motivation, believing and inspiration to be a "racer in racing community" will be lost. Maybe it's time to think in both directions and think what new designs gives to promote the sport locally. Your arguments about Leba, Korea and portugal defends only high level competitions organizers side.

So, my proposition is not to register Apollo for IFWC. When the next year Apollo will be ready to replace existing FW board, then it will be good decission. It's your responsibility to keep active and numberous local fleets too.

Lost of one racer in local communities is a big loss. To become a FW racer tooks about 3 years. Those are the years when beginner eats a whole fleet spray, adopts physically. looses every race, sees the leaders passing him sometimes two times. There was an hope that TOW will help him to become better. Now it's clear that only $ and additional board wins racing. It's straight way to kiting. And I see it now.10-15percent of people have left FW for kiteboarding and freestyle this year. Then let's promote kiting.

scotty
19th September 2006, 07:14 PM
Actually I kite, but have finally joined the Formula world... or more preciely the free formula world! My feeling is hardcore racers might imbrace such a design, but perhaps the one board limit should be maintained. So if you pick the Apollo for the year, you have to use it even if it's blowing 25 knots!

However I do agree that upping the equipment war isn't ideal as it for sure hurts fair competition. However the Apollo is great for lightwind recreation sailing so provides a new opportunity for regular guys to get planning!

One aspect I do think Formula sailing should alter is max sail size! 12m is huge and means big guys keep the advantage. If sails dropped down to 11m max, then the big guys would have to go for a fuller slightly slower sail, giving the lightweights the advantage for a change!

Remi
19th September 2006, 07:52 PM
Hi Milk Laser,

I understand perfectly your point, the reason why I propose at the last Formula Windsurfing AGM to lock in 2008 for 2 years the boards. That means all boards register the 30 september 2007 will be valid until 30 september 2009. No change between. This will help the majority of the racers. They can keep their boards 2 years.
The Agm was completely agree with this proposal, so valid for 2008.
All the best

Remi
19th September 2006, 08:13 PM
Hi Scotty,

I am not really agree concerning the 12m. For exemple during the last World Championship Steeve Aleen (81kgs), Michael Polanowski (80Kgs) was using a 12m and they show us that they was faster in light wind compare to heavy racers like Antoine Albeau (100Kgs) with 12,5m.
But the real interesting point is to make smaller sails (11m) who is more powerfull than the 12.5m. So the sail will be more easy to use for everybodies. Right now is really difficult to use this extremely heavy sails and doesn't help the class for sure. So hope that all the manufacture will work in this direction.

All the best

crwind
19th September 2006, 08:18 PM
Hi Remi,

You didn't answer my last post on Appolo and having a limited Edition that weights less (1-2 kg?) and is NOT Formula Class.
That would follow on you comment on having only one board next year mixing Appolo perf in light winds and Formula.
So for next year, a very light (as light as possible) and specialised Appolo, opotimized for light wind and non Formula racing?

I look forward to you reply.

Salut!

Garda
19th September 2006, 09:48 PM
Edited

Remi
20th September 2006, 12:17 AM
Hi Garda,

Where you see that??????? I never insult anybodies. So please make attention what you are posting here.

Best regards

scotty
20th September 2006, 01:25 AM
Hi Remi, what you said is true, but once the wind becomes normal, then big guys just have such an advantage. By limiting the sail size, it would add balance, unless racing always occurs at 6- 11 knots. Being a small guy, getting beat by big guys sucks!! :@

crwind
20th September 2006, 02:41 AM
Remi, pls have a look at my post, please!!!!
No one seems to care about weight... strange for a Xlight wind board discussion?..
Salut!

;)

milk laser
20th September 2006, 03:19 AM
Hi, scotty
"However the Apollo is great for lightwind recreation sailing so provides a new opportunity for regular guys to get planning!"
Recreation and competition are two different things. In recreation you are motivated by planing, exploring new places - relaxation thru being sure you'll be planing easily. In racing you are motivated by fight and wining. Not necessary to became a champion, you can compete and win or loose to guys like you, but if you know that you will loose before start, then racing looses all its atraction.

"One aspect I do think Formula sailing should alter is max sail size! 12m is huge and means big guys keep the advantage. If sails dropped down to 11m max, then the big guys would have to go for a fuller slightly slower sail, giving the lightweights the advantage for a change!"
I don't agree with this. 12 compensates the weight difference. What really works in racing is fittness and body dynamics with strength.

Garda, thank you very much for support, but I don't feel anybody is insulting me. I'm telling facts from my experience. Ignorance of facts or history causes repeating it.

scotty
20th September 2006, 07:23 AM
Hi Milk,

I just think even with two guys equal fitness, skill etc, the equipment and general wind strengths make it so big guys do better. I remember Robby Naish commenting on this and he's big compared to me.

Anyway that's my beef!! :@

Remi
20th September 2006, 07:35 AM
Hi All,

At the last Worlds their was a light weight division so no more problems with the sail size.

All the best

sitka
20th September 2006, 07:48 AM
here is an older early planer

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/9956/combov2maxzw3.th.jpg (http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=combov2maxzw3.jpg)

JW22
20th September 2006, 03:33 PM
1. Is sailsize was max 11 meters I doubt that Antoine would even been t the worlds. He would not have a change then. With th current max sailsize everyone can pick his optimum. We regulary get beaten by a youngster on 9.8 while sailing 11.5 ourselfs. The rule is perfect as a range and no-one is forced to use the biggest unless you are a big guy yourself.

2. Now that there are weightclasses the benefit for the greater guys diminishes. And some will always be better from nature, that is so in every sport, the tall can play volleybal the small are mostly better for gymnastics. So it will never be perfect in that way.

3. The Apollo is not a must. Most will again choose the F161 and not the Apollo. I doubt if there will be anyone who will buy and use both. The advantage of the Apollo will be not that great that I will be able to beat Antoine with it while he sails on the 161 in the lightest winds :)

4. Last but not least I would like to see R&D try to maken a significant lighter board (other building method other materials or what ever it takes) to give us a early planning board at max 6 kg. That would really mean progress. I do not mean FW class legal but completely out of the box as is tried with the Apollo too. Any plans on this adventure for Straboard? :D

Remi
20th September 2006, 08:15 PM
Hi JW22,

To built a board at 6kgs it's probably possible, but the cost will be really high compare to what we have right now.
Some years ago Ahd try to do it and finaly they don't sell Formula, the price was really too expensive.

Are you ready to pay double price?

Do you think that really help the majority of Formula Racers?

We are trying to make a board that can replace the RSX in London 2012. And in this case the package have to be at the same price as the curent Olympic board.

All the best

JW22
20th September 2006, 08:46 PM
;) Hello Remi,

I personally would pay a double price (once in two years from 2008 :) ) but I do realise that I will be a minority in that aspect. So I understand that there will be no big enhough market to go that way.

I also do not think that it will help the majority of Formual Racers (and I did not mention that as a goal of my idea), at least not in one or two years, it may so in say three or four years.

In the end, if you would be able to significantly lower the weight of the board, maintaning the current strenght of the boards and produce it in big enhough quantity's it might introduce a completely new eara.

For the olympics it might be the only way to go, cause you need to be able to plane as soon as possible and in those marginal winds weight is a significant factor, yes?

What happend to AHD was not only because of the buildingmethod but I see your point. At the same time starboard was able to make a little heavier board that was equally good performing so no one really needed to buy a AHD. If you coudl come up with that excotic Apollo lightversion (- 6kg) you probably have the new standard for lightwind windsurfing.

Would be great to have an invester who would pay for the R&D to make something like this happen. That invester should also invest in the first years of productiocosts so that the market will get enhough hunger that quantity can lower the final cost of the board. I know it can be done but one has to think out of every box (even the wallet one :) )

Who knows, maybe someday, I keep my fingers crossed and will enjoy every moment sailing with my current formula gear.

All the best,
JW22

crwind
20th September 2006, 08:52 PM
Remi,

A bit iritating that you won't even care answering my post but address the point from others...
Another thing, please understand that with the Appolo, some of use are NOT interested in Formula class (your Q: "will that help formula class?" I don't care when it come sto Appolo.) Also, we want a board that flies in light air, not something to go to the Olympics!
So make it light, as light as possible, we will pay the price and get the light wind machine for NO racing. I think there is a market there, no?
Salut,

crwind
20th September 2006, 08:52 PM
Remi,

A bit iritating that you won't even care answering my post but address the point from others...
Another thing, please understand that with the Appolo, some of use are NOT interested in Formula class (your Q: "will that help formula class?" I don't care when it come sto Appolo.) Also, we want a board that flies in light air, not something to go to the Olympics!
So make it light, as light as possible, we will pay the price and get the light wind machine for NO racing. I think there is a market there, no?
Salut,

windstock
20th September 2006, 10:30 PM
milk laser
Member

Posts: 6 Do you remember the years when formula was borning?
Can you remember about when the formula class was started?

Here's a little help from a rec.windsurfing post from 1993

Copy and paste

the url thing isn't working for me

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.windsurfing/browse_thread/thread/430969c72a56be6a/ac58530ed40741c7?lnk=st&q=formula+42&rnum=1&hl=en#ac58530ed40741c7


scotty
Member

Posts: 41

By limiting the sail size, it would add balance, unless racing always occurs at 6- 11 knots. Being a small guy, getting beat by big guys sucks!!


Being a big guy, getting beat by small guys sucks!!
Small guys on four year old 9.8s have won against heavies with new 12.5s in the avarage light wind racing we have around here.

crwind
Posted on 20-09-2006 19:52

Also, we want a board that flies in light air, not something to go to the Olympics!
So make it light, as light as possible, we will pay the price and get the light wind machine for NO racing. I think there is a market there, no?
Salut,

What do you mean when you say we?

We are trying to make a board that can replace the RSX in London 2012. And in this case the package have to be at the same price as the curent Olympic board.

All the best


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remi

Thought this class would of learned from the last selection process to get out of the Olympic Windsurfing biz.
Maybe if you get the ISAF to publish there class specs to match what you want, and place sombody on the selection board to direct the process you could have a chance.

ISAF dosn't seem to be interested in an established class. They would rather start from zero and allow two years to build it

By 2012 the rsx could have enough particpants to really claim that there an international class (not just olympic).
That's if NP dosn't cut there losses and bail on the program after the 08s.

Nathan
21st September 2006, 10:42 AM
Not too sure what all the fuss is about, because a racer could be carrying two board to a event RIGHT NOW, its just that the boards would be from different companies, to explain.....

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

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

Nathan

Remi
21st September 2006, 07:45 PM
Hi Crwind,

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

All the best

crwind
21st September 2006, 09:39 PM
Thx Remi,
I believe there is a market for Xlight boards for Xlight day and places, i-e guys like me will pay for that. Look at the generalisation of the "pro-model" boards in the line-up for brands like JP, Fanatic or even Mistral and Naish now. It shows that even non racer will like to have the best available in terms of rigidity and weight too.
I understand your focus for now, but maybe you guys will find time for a limited ed or "pro" model for the Appolo for example.
I also agree with you for sails. Looks like around 10m2 and optimized for light wind is the direction and best compromize , for now (weight is also a factor as 12m2 are quite heavier than 10m2).
Where I live now, we only have lacs and light wind, so I am particularly interested in Xlight wind perf and evolution.

Best regards,

sitka
22nd September 2006, 12:24 AM
The Olympics have demonstrated they want crap, heck they are even skillful at staging a democratic crap selection. So let's all set a course to reach those lofty standards shall we, that makes a lot of sense. After all it does culminate in a few races every four years that can put even the most hardcore fan to sleep.

crwind
24th September 2006, 04:48 AM
Sitka,
That's a very good post. Me too, I quite don't get all that fuss about the Olympics for windsurfing?.. I could understand the desire to get some "formula" legal, as there seem to be market there, before getting out the real light wind oriented Appolo for example, but the Olympics, no. Good point.B)