01 Nov 2003 05:39:15
Dustin T. Hughes
Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Are carbon booms worth the money? I read in the past that they are
prone to breaking easy as they get old? I know they are much more
stiffer that Aluminum booms. Is it worth the money for mid range
sails? 205-255cm booms. I know the large sails today only allow carbon
booms due to compressions and strenght issues. Who would want to sail
a 12.5 with a Aluminum boom?

The aka "Fibersnap booms and the Gulftech snap and leave you in the
gulf".

I have had bad luck with carbon booms, broke 2 in the last 4 years.
Only broke 2 aluminum booms in the last 10 years.

All comments welcome and need!


01 Nov 2003 12:26:50
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Dustin: Whomever you read had it backwards: The aluminum booms fail
naturally as they get old. Aluminum gets softer, weaker and more brittle
with each cycle. Every aluminum boom will break at some point.. Carbon
also cycles to failure (or, rather, the interface between the carbon fibers
and the epoxy bonding agent does) but at a rate far, far slower than any
type of aluminum. There are plenty of windsurfers who have sailed carbon
booms 50+ days per year for many years without even a hint of problems from
the carbon components themselves.

Most problems arising out of the use of carbon booms come from the front
end. 10 years ago every boom manufacturer provided carbon arms with an
aluminum front end. Not so anymore, and thus the weak link in the boom
system was changed. You will also see that when Fiberspar first came out
with its All-Carbon boom (carbon front end and tail piece) the sail sizes
used by most racing windsurfers were a good 3 meters smaller. When the
biggest FW sails began to put too much pressure on the front end, Fiberspar
(and other makers) beefed up the front end in response. You almost never
see carbon front ends fail on the new carbon booms.

Of course, any boom can fail under certain conditions. A carbon boom can
snap with excessive point loading or if it is loaded up after suffering some
damage. If an aluminum boom doesn't snap right way, it certainly will bend
and buckle after getting dinged and then subjected to high loads such as
landing a jump hooked in. Anyway, a bent aluminum boom seems about as nice
as a broken aluminum boom.

Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail sizes, in
my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the aluminum
to handle. The sails depend on precise tuning to really rip and remain
stable. Aluminum has too much slop for that sort of thing. Just about
every carbon boom offers far more than most alu booms. With carbon, you can
get reduced diameter yet still retain decent stiffness and light weight.
Except in the small sizes, the taper-grip aluminum booms simply don't offer
that level of stiffness without increasing the wall thickness and weight.
This is not to bash the basic functionality of alu booms. Alu booms do
provide the best bang for the buck in the smaller sizes, for sure. But they
simply do not perform as well for as long as their more expensive carbon
counterparts.

--
-Dan
"Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Are carbon booms worth the money? I read in the past that they are
> prone to breaking easy as they get old? I know they are much more
> stiffer that Aluminum booms. Is it worth the money for mid range
> sails? 205-255cm booms. I know the large sails today only allow carbon
> booms due to compressions and strenght issues. Who would want to sail
> a 12.5 with a Aluminum boom?
>
> The aka "Fibersnap booms and the Gulftech snap and leave you in the
> gulf".
>
> I have had bad luck with carbon booms, broke 2 in the last 4 years.
> Only broke 2 aluminum booms in the last 10 years.
>
> All comments welcome and need!




01 Nov 2003 19:05:52
Glenn Woodell
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

In article <[email protected] >,
[email protected] says...
>
>Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail sizes, in
>my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the aluminum
>to handle. The sails depend on precise tuning to really rip and remain
>stable. Aluminum has too much slop for that sort of thing. Just about
>every carbon boom offers far more than most alu booms. With carbon, you can
>get reduced diameter yet still retain decent stiffness and light weight.
>Except in the small sizes, the taper-grip aluminum booms simply don't offer
>that level of stiffness without increasing the wall thickness and weight.
>This is not to bash the basic functionality of alu booms. Alu booms do
>provide the best bang for the buck in the smaller sizes, for sure. But they
>simply do not perform as well for as long as their more expensive carbon
>counterparts.
>
>--
>-Dan

All very well stated. I use a carbon for my 6.6. I like the stiffness and
light weight. For my 5.2 and 4.2 I use aluminum. Although I have used the
carbon boom with my 5.2 I do not see any advantage. It's about the same weight
as my smaller aluminum and flex is just not an issue at that length.

Glenn



01 Nov 2003 19:16:35
jeff feehan
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.

jeff feehan

Dan Weiss wrote:

> Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail sizes, in
> my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the aluminum
> to handle.



01 Nov 2003 15:33:03
Dustin T. Hughes
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Dan thanks for the insight on the carbon vs Alu issue.

I truly agree about the larger sails require carbom booms.

It does make a difference with the larger sails. I just wonder about the smaller

sail issue.


01 Nov 2003 20:19:21
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Interesting, but not what I would conclude based on observation (no
empirical #s). The boom head breakages only became problem when sailing the
big sails. We could say that some amount of additional flex in the boom arm
creates bigger angles of flex in the boom head. At the same time whatever
force is there is being distributed and absorbed by the flexing boom arms.
It seems to me that the boom head breaks (when they did) when the loads are
higher than both the head itself and the flexing boom arm can control.

All I know is that some of the biggest slams I've ever had was on my 9.8.
Full body off the top rope slams where I thought either I or the board
broke. Nothing like that ever occurred on any 4.5 I've sailed, even though
I fall lot more on small gear.

--
-Dan
"jeff feehan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
> not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
> as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
>
> jeff feehan
>
> Dan Weiss wrote:
>
> > Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
sizes, in
> > my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
aluminum
> > to handle.
>




01 Nov 2003 18:08:14
JM
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Ahh, I'm sorry to say that it absolutely makes a difference with the small
sails too. I sailed carbon booms for a couple years, then decided it made
sense to stick with aluminum, since my quiver is just small stuff (3.7 -
5.8). It wasn't a year before I was back on carbon.

While I wouldn't argue that it's more crucial than with the big sails, I
might say it matters just as much. Higher winds tend to be gustier, and the
way the carbon booms maintain the integrity of your sail's shape is so worth
it. Not only does it feel better, but I think carbon booms extend the range
of your sails.
JM



"Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Dan thanks for the insight on the carbon vs Alu issue.
>
> I truly agree about the larger sails require carbom booms.
>
> It does make a difference with the larger sails. I just wonder about the
smaller
>
> sail issue.




01 Nov 2003 21:38:19
Jack (Sarasota)
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Agreed that the extra length gives you a much longer lever to bend stuff.
Jeff, Are you saying the larger sails don't generate higher loads because
they are sailed in less wind?

Dan,

I though you were coming to St. Pete?

Jack (Sarasota)

"jeff feehan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
> not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
> as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
>
> jeff feehan
>
> Dan Weiss wrote:
>
> > Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
sizes, in
> > my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
aluminum
> > to handle.
>




02 Nov 2003 03:36:58
jeff feehan
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

i'm saying that it's an interesting question, but one that we don't
really have to answer in order to figure out why aluminum booms
don't work so well on big sails.

the fact is that even at the same loads a longer boom will flex more
than a short boom made of the same tubing - aluminum or carbon. long
tubes flex more than short tubes. the problem is similar to buckling
of a column - not exactly the same, because in addition to being
compressed at the ends, the boom is pulled by the harness lines from
somewhere between the ends. leverage isn't really a cause of the problem.

it's the same reason that, all else being equal, long masts are less stiff
than short masts.

jeff feehan

Jack (Sarasota) wrote:

> Agreed that the extra length gives you a much longer lever to bend stuff.
> Jeff, Are you saying the larger sails don't generate higher loads because
> they are sailed in less wind?
>
> Dan,
>
> I though you were coming to St. Pete?
>
> Jack (Sarasota)
>
> "jeff feehan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>>the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
>>not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
>>as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
>>
>>jeff feehan
>>
>>Dan Weiss wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
>
> sizes, in
>
>>>my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
>
> aluminum
>
>>>to handle.
>>
>
>



02 Nov 2003 03:50:45
jeff feehan
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

i am not saying loads aren't greater with bigger sails, only that you
don't have to call on higher loads to explain the problem. as boom length
increases, deflection will increase (nonlinearly) for the same load.

i understand that you are citing the failure mode as evidence that the
loads are greater for bigger sails, but, but failure really isn't relevant
as far as the poor performance of aluminum booms with big sails is concerned.
the real problem isn't that they break, it's that they suck even when they
aren't breaking.

i'm not really taking up the question of when the loads are greater.
but, my worst slams have been with small sails.

jeff feehan

Dan Weiss wrote:

> Interesting, but not what I would conclude based on observation (no
> empirical #s). The boom head breakages only became problem when sailing the
> big sails. We could say that some amount of additional flex in the boom arm
> creates bigger angles of flex in the boom head. At the same time whatever
> force is there is being distributed and absorbed by the flexing boom arms.
> It seems to me that the boom head breaks (when they did) when the loads are
> higher than both the head itself and the flexing boom arm can control.
>
> All I know is that some of the biggest slams I've ever had was on my 9.8.
> Full body off the top rope slams where I thought either I or the board
> broke. Nothing like that ever occurred on any 4.5 I've sailed, even though
> I fall lot more on small gear.
>
> --
> -Dan
> "jeff feehan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>>the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
>>not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
>>as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
>>
>>jeff feehan
>>
>>Dan Weiss wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
>
> sizes, in
>
>>>my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
>
> aluminum
>
>>>to handle.
>>
>
>



02 Nov 2003 07:29:43
Jack (Sarasota)
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms


"jeff feehan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]

>snip
leverage isn't really a cause of the problem.

I see what you are saying about the flex under compression like your column
illustrations, but the pull from the harness lines is certainly exacerbated
by the additional distance from the point of pull to the ends. To me that
is leverage (moment arm if you will).

Jack (Sarasota)

> i'm saying that it's an interesting question, but one that we don't
> really have to answer in order to figure out why aluminum booms
> don't work so well on big sails.
>
> the fact is that even at the same loads a longer boom will flex more
> than a short boom made of the same tubing - aluminum or carbon. long
> tubes flex more than short tubes. the problem is similar to buckling
> of a column - not exactly the same, because in addition to being
> compressed at the ends, the boom is pulled by the harness lines from
> somewhere between the ends. leverage isn't really a cause of the problem.
>
> it's the same reason that, all else being equal, long masts are less stiff
> than short masts.
>
> jeff feehan
>
> Jack (Sarasota) wrote:
>
> > Agreed that the extra length gives you a much longer lever to bend
stuff.
> > Jeff, Are you saying the larger sails don't generate higher loads
because
> > they are sailed in less wind?
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > I though you were coming to St. Pete?
> >
> > Jack (Sarasota)
> >
> > "jeff feehan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> >
> >>the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
> >>not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
> >>as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
> >>
> >>jeff feehan
> >>
> >>Dan Weiss wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
> >
> > sizes, in
> >
> >>>my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
> >
> > aluminum
> >
> >>>to handle.
> >>
> >
> >
>




02 Nov 2003 15:30:15
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Jack: I had made plans to do so but my work schedule shifted and made
it very difficult to travel. I hope it went well!

-Dan

"Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Agreed that the extra length gives you a much longer lever to bend stuff.
> Jeff, Are you saying the larger sails don't generate higher loads because
> they are sailed in less wind?
>
> Dan,
>
> I though you were coming to St. Pete?
>
> Jack (Sarasota)
>
> "jeff feehan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
> > not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
> > as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
> >
> > jeff feehan
> >
> > Dan Weiss wrote:
> >
> > > Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
> sizes, in
> > > my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
> aluminum
> > > to handle.
> >


02 Nov 2003 23:31:26
Jack (Sarasota)
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Sorry you couldn't make it. The weather was great. I sailed so-so, but we
had a good time.

Jack (Sarasota)

"Dan Weiss" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Jack: I had made plans to do so but my work schedule shifted and made
> it very difficult to travel. I hope it went well!
>
> -Dan
>
> "Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected] >...
> > Agreed that the extra length gives you a much longer lever to bend
stuff.
> > Jeff, Are you saying the larger sails don't generate higher loads
because
> > they are sailed in less wind?
> >
> > Dan,
> >
> > I though you were coming to St. Pete?
> >
> > Jack (Sarasota)
> >
> > "jeff feehan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > the problem isn't that the larger sails generate higher loads (it's
> > > not at all clear that they do) - rather, it is a geometric problem.
> > > as tubes get longer, they deflect at lower and lower loads.
> > >
> > > jeff feehan
> > >
> > > Dan Weiss wrote:
> > >
> > > > Aluminum booms are perfectly competent for all but the larger sail
> > sizes, in
> > > > my view. The larger sails simply create too much pressure for the
> > aluminum
> > > > to handle.
> > >




03 Nov 2003 18:06:05
Charles Ivey
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

The Carbon versus Aluminum boom issue is certainly interesting. No doubt
the carbon boom is an advantage for larger sails, and likely all size sails.
IF you can afford carbon, get it -- you will like the feel and stiffness of
carbon. If you find carbon booms a little too expensive, then read on.

Until the last few weeks, there really were no aluminum booms that worked
well with sails in the 10.5 size and up. The big course boom from Chinook
only extended to 274 cm (I think) and a large sail rigged with this boom was
near (or even past) the max extension of the arms. Such booms were not
stiff enough for such sails and the flex was easily apparent.

Two major changes have happened. First some background... Large classes
like the Formula Experience class must be able to have less expensive rigs.
I have learned a great deal about this since I work with the FE junior
program. Countries with far more participation in their youth programs than
the US are so concerned over the cost of equipment components that the class
rules for any development class like FE must be such that the kid with the
biggest checkbook cannot purchase an advantage over less well off kids, and
so that national authorities can more easily promote racing to larger
groups. The FE youth class is limited to 11.0 sails but in reality there
were no really good boom choices for 11.0 meter sails -- even though all FE
events require aluminum booms. At the European FE Championships, national
teams were sailing with aluminum booms. They had booms we were unable to
buy in the USA. That is the background.

What has just happened is both Chinook and Nautix have stepped up and will
produce much better solutions. Chinook can make aluminum booms with their
new triple clamp front end (a much better clamp for stiffness) and arm
length to work out to 290 cm. This now means the arms can handle 11.0 sails
and have much more tube insertion in the main body of the boom -- and this
makes these booms much stiffer as well. Nautix is also offering a boom
beginning about year end (I think) that will go to 290 cm. These two
companies reacted to the need for better large aluminum booms and will make
these for those that need the less costly aluminum boom. As I mentioned,
these booms are required for FE competitions and any continential or world
championships for FE. With FE activity in over 20 countries now, having a
better boom solution was critical. The cost per participant is much less
and more people can race in the class. This was a requirement that the
European countries seemed very determined to enforce in the class rules. In
order to have a large class there was no other choice possible given current
cost factors.

So, even though I favor and like carbon, I know this more expensive solution
is not going to work for large programs in Europe and for the FE class. It
may well be that any potential new Olympic class may also require aluminum
booms. For these reasons, I was very glad to see two aluminum boom
solutions that will greatly improve large sail rigs. Based on the way a
junior was sailing at this week's Suncoast event in St. Pete, the new
Chinook triple clamp 290 boom he had seemed to be working very well against
a fine fleet of formula riders. I don't think the many good formula riders
behind him had any idea he was sailing aluminum with his 11.0 and 9.8 sails.

Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to get
the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your checkbook.
You can sail larger sails with these new booms.

CI






04 Nov 2003 06:08:37
Dustin T. Hughes
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Charles,

The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.

You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.

http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29


take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.

http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En


04 Nov 2003 09:56:28
Charles Ivey
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Good information Dustin...Any idea of the price of the new Nautix 290 boom?
I knew the bigger Nautix was coming but early last year we could not find
them. Now I am told the 230 to 280 Nautix is being upgraded to a 240 to 290
cm boom (as your web site reference shows) which should be better. The
Europeans had the 280 booms and had no trouble rigging 11.0 sails with them.
One of the US kids had a Chinook boom larger than the published 274 cm, but
now I believe Chinook dealers can get the triple clamp front end and the 290
length. For the price, both Chinook and Nautix should really work well.

Again, understand, I am personally a carbon boom lover, but even I have to
admit these new designs will be good enough that few if any races will be
won or lost due to choice of boom. Heck, the way the French (and other
countries, too) sailed their gear, they would have won even with wooden
booms (I think.) I was told later that France had thousands of kids in
their programs and 165 participants in their FE Championships. When you
take the best of those for your national team, you are going to have a few
really outstanding racers -- and they did. We will get better, but we are
clearly behind for the time being. I am just glad we now have more
equipment choices here in the USA. I am really pleased with the industry
response to the equipment requirements. Companies like Dakine, Sailworks,
Gaastra, Chinook, Curtis, Nautix, Powerex, etc., and really all the
component makers, as well as Starboard and BIC have been making what we need
to help grow participation levels in FE racing. I wish others would submit
more boards for approval. Makes most people who find out about it wish they
were once more kids and could do this all over again (me included.)

CI

"Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Charles,
>
> The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
>
> You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
> This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
>
> http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
>
>
> take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
>
>
http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En




04 Nov 2003 12:05:24
FFF
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

In <[email protected] > Dustin T. Hughes
wrote:
> Charles,
>
> The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
> <snip>

> take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
>
> http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/
> 2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En
>

Is it okay to buy french again?

florian :)

BTW:

The nautix site says about the wave boom:
"Wave:reduced tube curve for maniability"

Gotta have that.


04 Nov 2003 17:05:09
Bob Jacobson
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Charles,

I know you're a good guy, but I think American kids have more than enough
opportunities to learn how to be competitive. When I was a kid, we just
played: pick-up games of baseball and hockey, shot games of horse, explored
on our bikes, caught frogs and crawdads - and all without much adult
supervision, or any great regard to winning and losing. Now kids are on
teams, have uniforms, get ferried to practice and games in SUVs, and get
yelled at by parents living out their own fantasies.

Anyhow, Charles, I just hope you just make sure the kids are really having
fun, and don't get too caught up in winning and losing.




"Charles Ivey" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:a%[email protected]
> Good information Dustin...Any idea of the price of the new Nautix 290
boom?
> I knew the bigger Nautix was coming but early last year we could not find
> them. Now I am told the 230 to 280 Nautix is being upgraded to a 240 to
290
> cm boom (as your web site reference shows) which should be better. The
> Europeans had the 280 booms and had no trouble rigging 11.0 sails with
them.
> One of the US kids had a Chinook boom larger than the published 274 cm,
but
> now I believe Chinook dealers can get the triple clamp front end and the
290
> length. For the price, both Chinook and Nautix should really work well.
>
> Again, understand, I am personally a carbon boom lover, but even I have to
> admit these new designs will be good enough that few if any races will be
> won or lost due to choice of boom. Heck, the way the French (and other
> countries, too) sailed their gear, they would have won even with wooden
> booms (I think.) I was told later that France had thousands of kids in
> their programs and 165 participants in their FE Championships. When you
> take the best of those for your national team, you are going to have a few
> really outstanding racers -- and they did. We will get better, but we are
> clearly behind for the time being. I am just glad we now have more
> equipment choices here in the USA. I am really pleased with the industry
> response to the equipment requirements. Companies like Dakine, Sailworks,
> Gaastra, Chinook, Curtis, Nautix, Powerex, etc., and really all the
> component makers, as well as Starboard and BIC have been making what we
need
> to help grow participation levels in FE racing. I wish others would
submit
> more boards for approval. Makes most people who find out about it wish
they
> were once more kids and could do this all over again (me included.)
>
> CI
>
> "Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Charles,
> >
> > The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
> >
> > You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
> > This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
> >
> > http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
> >
> >
> > take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
> >
> >
>
http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En
>
>




04 Nov 2003 01:19:10
Ray Kuntz
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Bob,
I agree with you whole heartedly, right down to catching crawdads (we
used bacon tied to string with a pebble for a weight) and am personally
very concerned about the amount of individual family and organizational
time, effort, money and drugs that are going into the development of
young athletes to the detriment of the values and experience of your
(our) youth.

That said, I've met Charles, his wife Susan and several of the kids
involved and I assure you that Charles is the antithesis of all our
shared concerns. A better man to work with our kids I do not know. His
charges will uniformly be truly better people/citizens as a result of
their exposure to him.

Ray

Bob Jacobson wrote:
>
> Charles,
>
> I know you're a good guy, but I think American kids have more than enough
> opportunities to learn how to be competitive. When I was a kid, we just
> played: pick-up games of baseball and hockey, shot games of horse, explored
> on our bikes, caught frogs and crawdads - and all without much adult
> supervision, or any great regard to winning and losing. Now kids are on
> teams, have uniforms, get ferried to practice and games in SUVs, and get
> yelled at by parents living out their own fantasies.
>
> Anyhow, Charles, I just hope you just make sure the kids are really having
> fun, and don't get too caught up in winning and losing.
>
> "Charles Ivey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:a%[email protected]
> > Good information Dustin...Any idea of the price of the new Nautix 290
> boom?
> > I knew the bigger Nautix was coming but early last year we could not find
> > them. Now I am told the 230 to 280 Nautix is being upgraded to a 240 to
> 290
> > cm boom (as your web site reference shows) which should be better. The
> > Europeans had the 280 booms and had no trouble rigging 11.0 sails with
> them.
> > One of the US kids had a Chinook boom larger than the published 274 cm,
> but
> > now I believe Chinook dealers can get the triple clamp front end and the
> 290
> > length. For the price, both Chinook and Nautix should really work well.
> >
> > Again, understand, I am personally a carbon boom lover, but even I have to
> > admit these new designs will be good enough that few if any races will be
> > won or lost due to choice of boom. Heck, the way the French (and other
> > countries, too) sailed their gear, they would have won even with wooden
> > booms (I think.) I was told later that France had thousands of kids in
> > their programs and 165 participants in their FE Championships. When you
> > take the best of those for your national team, you are going to have a few
> > really outstanding racers -- and they did. We will get better, but we are
> > clearly behind for the time being. I am just glad we now have more
> > equipment choices here in the USA. I am really pleased with the industry
> > response to the equipment requirements. Companies like Dakine, Sailworks,
> > Gaastra, Chinook, Curtis, Nautix, Powerex, etc., and really all the
> > component makers, as well as Starboard and BIC have been making what we
> need
> > to help grow participation levels in FE racing. I wish others would
> submit
> > more boards for approval. Makes most people who find out about it wish
> they
> > were once more kids and could do this all over again (me included.)
> >
> > CI
> >
> > "Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > Charles,
> > >
> > > The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
> > >
> > > You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
> > > This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
> > >
> > > http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
> > >
> > >
> > > take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En
> >
> >


04 Nov 2003 13:59:17
Ellen Faller
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Bob,
I think you are seeing problems where none exist as far as the Team
USA thing goes.
If you've seen, and especially if you've met the kids on the team and
Charles, you would have absolutely NO DOUBT about the positive aura
around this whole thing. I'm getting the age changed on my birth
certificate (as soon as my hands heal from spontaneously taking up
racing again this past weekend...) so that I can join the FE program.
These kids aren't just learning to be competitive, they are having
fun and learning to be good competitors too. That last thing is way more
important.
I was sailing against one of Charles' team, Angela Hurley, in the
Women's Formula class, and she is an awesome young lady. Getting caught
up in winning and losing just isn't part of it.
I sailed the FE board with stock fin this weekend, and have bought
one of the new Chinook aluminum booms. In my opinion, it wouldn't hurt
to have a masters/seniors end to the FE stuff.
Ellen
(typing with just a few fingers today...)


Bob Jacobson wrote:
> Charles,
>
> I know you're a good guy, but I think American kids have more than enough
> opportunities to learn how to be competitive. When I was a kid, we just
> played: pick-up games of baseball and hockey, shot games of horse, explored
> on our bikes, caught frogs and crawdads - and all without much adult
> supervision, or any great regard to winning and losing. Now kids are on
> teams, have uniforms, get ferried to practice and games in SUVs, and get
> yelled at by parents living out their own fantasies.
>
> Anyhow, Charles, I just hope you just make sure the kids are really having
> fun, and don't get too caught up in winning and losing.
>
>
>
>
> "Charles Ivey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:a%[email protected]
>
>>Good information Dustin...Any idea of the price of the new Nautix 290
>
> boom?
>
>>I knew the bigger Nautix was coming but early last year we could not find
>>them. Now I am told the 230 to 280 Nautix is being upgraded to a 240 to
>
> 290
>
>>cm boom (as your web site reference shows) which should be better. The
>>Europeans had the 280 booms and had no trouble rigging 11.0 sails with
>
> them.
>
>>One of the US kids had a Chinook boom larger than the published 274 cm,
>
> but
>
>>now I believe Chinook dealers can get the triple clamp front end and the
>
> 290
>
>>length. For the price, both Chinook and Nautix should really work well.
>>
>>Again, understand, I am personally a carbon boom lover, but even I have to
>>admit these new designs will be good enough that few if any races will be
>>won or lost due to choice of boom. Heck, the way the French (and other
>>countries, too) sailed their gear, they would have won even with wooden
>>booms (I think.) I was told later that France had thousands of kids in
>>their programs and 165 participants in their FE Championships. When you
>>take the best of those for your national team, you are going to have a few
>>really outstanding racers -- and they did. We will get better, but we are
>>clearly behind for the time being. I am just glad we now have more
>>equipment choices here in the USA. I am really pleased with the industry
>>response to the equipment requirements. Companies like Dakine, Sailworks,
>>Gaastra, Chinook, Curtis, Nautix, Powerex, etc., and really all the
>>component makers, as well as Starboard and BIC have been making what we
>
> need
>
>>to help grow participation levels in FE racing. I wish others would
>
> submit
>
>>more boards for approval. Makes most people who find out about it wish
>
> they
>
>>were once more kids and could do this all over again (me included.)
>>
>>CI
>>
>>"Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]
>>
>>>Charles,
>>>
>>>The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
>>>
>>>You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
>>>This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
>>>
>>>http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
>>>
>>>
>>>take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
>>>
>>>
>>
> http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En
>
>>
>
>



04 Nov 2003 10:53:27
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms



Charles Ivey wrote:

> Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to get
> the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your checkbook.
> You can sail larger sails with these new booms.

Hi Charles,
First off, I'm totally behind you and your program, as you well know...
however, as a dealer I would "temper" any general recommendation of
using these newer, Formula length aluminum booms for the bigger sails.
They were developed, as you note, to keep costs down associated with
racing for kids in Europe, not as a carbon substitute for meat and
'tater eating (super-sized) American adults on a budget...

Even though they will be available to us dealers this season, I will
still make every attempt to help sailors get on carbon, up to and
including, selling my personal booms, which I've done several times...
I just hate to see someone score a new bigger sail and mast, then try to
cut corners on the boom...performance buzzkill...
We'll order them for lighter weight sailors on a budget, but I don't
personally foresee a huge demand...the grips will be 32mm and not sure
about weight specs, but I would suspect more than carbon with greater
wall thickness.
I know that you are happy with your HPL carbon booms, as you have noted...

It is extremely rare for anyone that has upgraded to carbon to drop back
to aluminum, for any size boom, including small wave booms.
Small sails are used in high winds, which are normally quite gusty...
The more carbon you use (boom and mast), the faster the sail will react
and the better the energy transfer will be.

I'm getting excited about the new, less expensive, carbon booms coming
out...especially the new Epic Gear carbon 250cm-310cm formula boom with
wide rear end, that we should have in a couple of weeks.

Keep up the good work...

Warm winds...{:~)

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com


> The Carbon versus Aluminum boom issue is certainly interesting. No doubt
> the carbon boom is an advantage for larger sails, and likely all size sails.
> IF you can afford carbon, get it -- you will like the feel and stiffness of
> carbon. If you find carbon booms a little too expensive, then read on.
>
> Until the last few weeks, there really were no aluminum booms that worked
> well with sails in the 10.5 size and up. The big course boom from Chinook
> only extended to 274 cm (I think) and a large sail rigged with this boom was
> near (or even past) the max extension of the arms. Such booms were not
> stiff enough for such sails and the flex was easily apparent.
>
> Two major changes have happened. First some background... Large classes
> like the Formula Experience class must be able to have less expensive rigs.
> I have learned a great deal about this since I work with the FE junior
> program. Countries with far more participation in their youth programs than
> the US are so concerned over the cost of equipment components that the class
> rules for any development class like FE must be such that the kid with the
> biggest checkbook cannot purchase an advantage over less well off kids, and
> so that national authorities can more easily promote racing to larger
> groups. The FE youth class is limited to 11.0 sails but in reality there
> were no really good boom choices for 11.0 meter sails -- even though all FE
> events require aluminum booms. At the European FE Championships, national
> teams were sailing with aluminum booms. They had booms we were unable to
> buy in the USA. That is the background.
>
> What has just happened is both Chinook and Nautix have stepped up and will
> produce much better solutions. Chinook can make aluminum booms with their
> new triple clamp front end (a much better clamp for stiffness) and arm
> length to work out to 290 cm. This now means the arms can handle 11.0 sails
> and have much more tube insertion in the main body of the boom -- and this
> makes these booms much stiffer as well. Nautix is also offering a boom
> beginning about year end (I think) that will go to 290 cm. These two
> companies reacted to the need for better large aluminum booms and will make
> these for those that need the less costly aluminum boom. As I mentioned,
> these booms are required for FE competitions and any continential or world
> championships for FE. With FE activity in over 20 countries now, having a
> better boom solution was critical. The cost per participant is much less
> and more people can race in the class. This was a requirement that the
> European countries seemed very determined to enforce in the class rules. In
> order to have a large class there was no other choice possible given current
> cost factors.
>
> So, even though I favor and like carbon, I know this more expensive solution
> is not going to work for large programs in Europe and for the FE class. It
> may well be that any potential new Olympic class may also require aluminum
> booms. For these reasons, I was very glad to see two aluminum boom
> solutions that will greatly improve large sail rigs. Based on the way a
> junior was sailing at this week's Suncoast event in St. Pete, the new
> Chinook triple clamp 290 boom he had seemed to be working very well against
> a fine fleet of formula riders. I don't think the many good formula riders
> behind him had any idea he was sailing aluminum with his 11.0 and 9.8 sails.
>
> Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to get
> the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your checkbook.
> You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
>
> CI
>
>
>
>



04 Nov 2003 12:27:05
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Charles: What are your thoughts on the increased rig weight of th FE
rigs versus the same sized sails rigged on carbon components? I
wonder how much extra effort and fatigue the heavier(?) rigs create.

One thought that you might care to consider to increase effective boom
stiffness is the 'ole boom-to-boom line-through-sail trick. A number
of recent innovations in this regard have come out of the jump to
monster sails.

-Dan
"Charles Ivey" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<a%[email protected]>...
> Good information Dustin...Any idea of the price of the new Nautix 290 boom?
> I knew the bigger Nautix was coming but early last year we could not find
> them. Now I am told the 230 to 280 Nautix is being upgraded to a 240 to 290
> cm boom (as your web site reference shows) which should be better. The
> Europeans had the 280 booms and had no trouble rigging 11.0 sails with them.
> One of the US kids had a Chinook boom larger than the published 274 cm, but
> now I believe Chinook dealers can get the triple clamp front end and the 290
> length. For the price, both Chinook and Nautix should really work well.
>
> Again, understand, I am personally a carbon boom lover, but even I have to
> admit these new designs will be good enough that few if any races will be
> won or lost due to choice of boom. Heck, the way the French (and other
> countries, too) sailed their gear, they would have won even with wooden
> booms (I think.) I was told later that France had thousands of kids in
> their programs and 165 participants in their FE Championships. When you
> take the best of those for your national team, you are going to have a few
> really outstanding racers -- and they did. We will get better, but we are
> clearly behind for the time being. I am just glad we now have more
> equipment choices here in the USA. I am really pleased with the industry
> response to the equipment requirements. Companies like Dakine, Sailworks,
> Gaastra, Chinook, Curtis, Nautix, Powerex, etc., and really all the
> component makers, as well as Starboard and BIC have been making what we need
> to help grow participation levels in FE racing. I wish others would submit
> more boards for approval. Makes most people who find out about it wish they
> were once more kids and could do this all over again (me included.)
>
> CI
>
> "Dustin T. Hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Charles,
> >
> > The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
> >
> > You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
> > This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
> >
> > http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
> >
> >
> > take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
> >
> >
> http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En


04 Nov 2003 15:44:45
Charles Ivey
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Hi Dan, Steve, Wardog, Ray, Ellen, Bob, all of you, and many others,
(including those I left out)

Thanks for some nice words from many of you...but these are not needed. I
started doing this to get more kids sailing, and I've pointed out many times
when a better way comes along and a more qualified person is available, I
will gracefully step aside. That day will certainly come and when it does,
I just want to know the juniors who have been sailing and racing have had a
good time, and that some valuable experiences have happened to enrich their
lives. Most think we are still improving on the situation so we will keep
going for now.

Lots of information in this string...I should mention a few things and also
ask a question...

First of all, I am a carbon boom guy..clearly. I fought the good fight. I
lost. I understand why. I know the carbon boom is lighter and easier as
are 100 percent carbon masts. I also know that the rules FE races under
will equip about 3 young sailors for the cost of one sailing under the
normal FW rules. This drives the whole decision tree. For the same amount
of money 3 kids rather than one can be sailing with gear that provides the
excitement and fun of formula racing. This is how that set of rules got
adopted by the rest of the world and the US has a choice. We have to sail
by the same rules if we want to compete with them. Now I have finally come
to peace with this because they are right, we can get more kids sailing when
the cost is less. In fact, like Ellen, I think a lower cost formula class
is actually a good idea. If you have been on the Gaastra site of late,
there is a lot of discussion about a free formula class "for the rest of us"
so to speak. The FE class is just that, a developmental racing class at
lower cost that happens to fit youth quite well. It limits kids choices to
sails with no more than 3 cams and 7 battens, restricts by sail size in
different groups of ages, limits booms to aluminum and masts to 75 percent
or less carbon. Sail sizes are limited in divisions to 7.5, 9.5, and 11.0
but only two rather than three sails. Boards are open to any manufacturer
who will submit one that becomes approved. The boards have to be more
rugged than the lightest potato chip FW boards. The kids cannot buy a new
board every year, they cannot out-spend each other to get lighter rigs or
better sails, etc. I am adamantly against junior racing only for the
wealthier parents who can spend a lot of money to buy the most expensive
equipment. FE is a type of one-design formula racing but open to all brands
that meet the criteria. Could you put a youngster out on the course with
better gear...absolutely, but that is the point, they are limited to gear
that provides very good performance and excitement, but it is not permitted
for there to be an arms race for the lightest, latest, best components. The
Olympic class changes, if they come, will be exactly like this...strictly
governed but likely open. Other sailing is done this way, in class boats
with limits.

It has taken me a long time to get comfortable with all this but finally I
am comfortable. The reason is I see how well the FE equipment is sailed,
how much fun the kids have sailing with it, and I see the results of more
young people racing. Whether people know or not is not important, but a lot
of the kids who have finished ahead of many adults with the latest FW gear
have been sailing the FE gear they use for FE competitions. Heck, I've
sailed the same gear to see how it works and it is fun and plenty fast.
When 12 and 13 year old young ladies sail a 9.5 with a 75 percent carbon
mast and an aluminum boom and can plane around in the straps (yes this
happens with the juniors I know) and (this is the big "AND") they come in
happy, smiling, and ready to do more -- that is what flipped my switch to
understand why these rules work. In Europe they did this for a year before
we found out about it...and they knew it would work. I also saw in Europe
some older sailors (not juniors but adults and older adults) sailing FE as a
lower level of formula racing for development or just because that is the
level of racing they want to do. FE is for those that do not want to
compete against a 12.5 sail and the latest, greatest equipment. Truthfully,
there are a lot of us who like to race that, due to age, ability, or
whatever reason, would probably be able to sail about the same with FE gear
as the FW gear. I am glad I can buy the full blown best stuff personally
and that this is what I sail (and would advise all who can to do so as well)
but I am now glad there is a developmental class for younger people and
adults who do not have to step up to the higher cost levels in order to
compete. Hopefully, in time, carbon booms will come down in cost and they
will then become approved for this class.

So sure, kids would like lighter masts, lighter booms, etc., but not every
kids who might sail can afford the same rig that I want to sail. FW racing
is such a great class and hopefully many of the juniors learning to race in
FE will progress into FW as they learn more and can earn the funds to do
this. Then they can sail with whatever gear is approved at that time for
the more advanced class.

Finally, about the only non-fun I do working with junior sailors is insist
upon good grammar (and good grades in school) and to actually conduct
grammar lessons. I assure you this leads to lots of fun for them however,
because when they catch me in a grammar error, they roll around laughing
like you cannot imagine. Even grammar can be fun.

My question, "What is the 'ole boom-to-boom line-through-sail trick' that
you mention in your post below?" Is that a line tying the boom arms
together through a hole in the sail (from the deep dark years of the past?)

CI

"Dan Weiss" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Charles: What are your thoughts on the increased rig weight of th FE
> rigs versus the same sized sails rigged on carbon components? I
> wonder how much extra effort and fatigue the heavier(?) rigs create.
>
> One thought that you might care to consider to increase effective boom
> stiffness is the 'ole boom-to-boom line-through-sail trick. A number
> of recent innovations in this regard have come out of the jump to
> monster sails.
>




05 Nov 2003 00:20:02
Bob Jacobson
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss of
performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the sail
reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the boom
getting shorter when under load?

WARDOG" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
>
> Charles Ivey wrote:
>
> > Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to
get
> > the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
checkbook.
> > You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
>
> Hi Charles,
> First off, I'm totally behind you and your program, as you well know...
> however, as a dealer I would "temper" any general recommendation of
> using these newer, Formula length aluminum booms for the bigger sails.
> They were developed, as you note, to keep costs down associated with
> racing for kids in Europe, not as a carbon substitute for meat and
> 'tater eating (super-sized) American adults on a budget...
>
> Even though they will be available to us dealers this season, I will
> still make every attempt to help sailors get on carbon, up to and
> including, selling my personal booms, which I've done several times...
> I just hate to see someone score a new bigger sail and mast, then try to
> cut corners on the boom...performance buzzkill...
> We'll order them for lighter weight sailors on a budget, but I don't
> personally foresee a huge demand...the grips will be 32mm and not sure
> about weight specs, but I would suspect more than carbon with greater
> wall thickness.
> I know that you are happy with your HPL carbon booms, as you have noted...
>
> It is extremely rare for anyone that has upgraded to carbon to drop back
> to aluminum, for any size boom, including small wave booms.
> Small sails are used in high winds, which are normally quite gusty...
> The more carbon you use (boom and mast), the faster the sail will react
> and the better the energy transfer will be.
>
> I'm getting excited about the new, less expensive, carbon booms coming
> out...especially the new Epic Gear carbon 250cm-310cm formula boom with
> wide rear end, that we should have in a couple of weeks.
>
> Keep up the good work...
>
> Warm winds...{:~)
>
> WARDOG
> http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
> > The Carbon versus Aluminum boom issue is certainly interesting. No
doubt
> > the carbon boom is an advantage for larger sails, and likely all size
sails.
> > IF you can afford carbon, get it -- you will like the feel and stiffness
of
> > carbon. If you find carbon booms a little too expensive, then read on.
> >
> > Until the last few weeks, there really were no aluminum booms that
worked
> > well with sails in the 10.5 size and up. The big course boom from
Chinook
> > only extended to 274 cm (I think) and a large sail rigged with this boom
was
> > near (or even past) the max extension of the arms. Such booms were not
> > stiff enough for such sails and the flex was easily apparent.
> >
> > Two major changes have happened. First some background... Large classes
> > like the Formula Experience class must be able to have less expensive
rigs.
> > I have learned a great deal about this since I work with the FE junior
> > program. Countries with far more participation in their youth programs
than
> > the US are so concerned over the cost of equipment components that the
class
> > rules for any development class like FE must be such that the kid with
the
> > biggest checkbook cannot purchase an advantage over less well off kids,
and
> > so that national authorities can more easily promote racing to larger
> > groups. The FE youth class is limited to 11.0 sails but in reality
there
> > were no really good boom choices for 11.0 meter sails -- even though all
FE
> > events require aluminum booms. At the European FE Championships,
national
> > teams were sailing with aluminum booms. They had booms we were unable
to
> > buy in the USA. That is the background.
> >
> > What has just happened is both Chinook and Nautix have stepped up and
will
> > produce much better solutions. Chinook can make aluminum booms with
their
> > new triple clamp front end (a much better clamp for stiffness) and arm
> > length to work out to 290 cm. This now means the arms can handle 11.0
sails
> > and have much more tube insertion in the main body of the boom -- and
this
> > makes these booms much stiffer as well. Nautix is also offering a boom
> > beginning about year end (I think) that will go to 290 cm. These two
> > companies reacted to the need for better large aluminum booms and will
make
> > these for those that need the less costly aluminum boom. As I
mentioned,
> > these booms are required for FE competitions and any continential or
world
> > championships for FE. With FE activity in over 20 countries now, having
a
> > better boom solution was critical. The cost per participant is much
less
> > and more people can race in the class. This was a requirement that the
> > European countries seemed very determined to enforce in the class rules.
In
> > order to have a large class there was no other choice possible given
current
> > cost factors.
> >
> > So, even though I favor and like carbon, I know this more expensive
solution
> > is not going to work for large programs in Europe and for the FE class.
It
> > may well be that any potential new Olympic class may also require
aluminum
> > booms. For these reasons, I was very glad to see two aluminum boom
> > solutions that will greatly improve large sail rigs. Based on the way a
> > junior was sailing at this week's Suncoast event in St. Pete, the new
> > Chinook triple clamp 290 boom he had seemed to be working very well
against
> > a fine fleet of formula riders. I don't think the many good formula
riders
> > behind him had any idea he was sailing aluminum with his 11.0 and 9.8
sails.
> >
> > Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to
get
> > the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
checkbook.
> > You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
> >
> > CI
> >
> >
> >
> >
>




04 Nov 2003 21:54:00
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Yes, that's it. There was a picture posted on naxama.com about 2 years ago
(the Worlds in Forteleza and dead link, I think) that showed a pretty
ingenious method to deal with the challenges of a changing sail shape from
an adjustable outhaul.

Cut a circular hole in the sail about 10" in diameter. Using pattern Mylar
cut two discs about 2 inches larger in diameter than the hole. Cut two
rings with an interior circumference that is smaller than the circumference
of the two holes and whose outer circumference reaches at least 2" larger
than the 2 discs. Confusing?

The intention is to create a pair of discs through which passes a line
connecting the booms. As the sail shape moves relative to the fixed boom
line, the disks float within and between each ring glued to the sail, thus
preventing the boom line from destroying the sail. The discs serve to cover
the hole cut in the sail.

In cross section, you see the outer ring, then the disk, then the sail, then
the disk, then the final outer ring.

--
-Dan
"Charles Ivey" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>SNIP>
> My question, "What is the 'ole boom-to-boom line-through-sail trick' that
> you mention in your post below?" Is that a line tying the boom arms
> together through a hole in the sail (from the deep dark years of the
past?)
>
> CI
>
> "Dan Weiss" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > Charles: What are your thoughts on the increased rig weight of th FE
> > rigs versus the same sized sails rigged on carbon components? I
> > wonder how much extra effort and fatigue the heavier(?) rigs create.
> >
> > One thought that you might care to consider to increase effective boom
> > stiffness is the 'ole boom-to-boom line-through-sail trick. A number
> > of recent innovations in this regard have come out of the jump to
> > monster sails.
> >
>
>




04 Nov 2003 19:24:24
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms



Bob Jacobson wrote:
> I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss of
> performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the sail
> reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the boom
> getting shorter when under load?

Hi Bob,
The business is that higher carbon masts have better reflex response...
Carbon has more direct energy transfer, because it deflects less...
A stiffer boom aids sail performance in higher winds because it won't
distort as much, keeping the sail rig in it's optimum shape for dealing
with gusts.

Feel free to engage the materials specialists and/or research the net
for the why and how...

I know because, I made the "mistake" of demoing a carbon wave boom on a
gusty 4.2m2 day...carbon "felt" better...

All I really have to say is, it comes down to economics...
That's a personal decision...
If money isn't an issue, you'd be on them for your small sails...
People that can afford carbon are on them, people that either can't, or
won't, rationalize that it really doesn't matter much...
Ignorance is bliss...;-)

Furthermore, I only know of a few cases (2) of sailors that have gone
back to aluminum booms, once the switch to carbon is made in small booms...
They were over 230 lbs and crashing very hard while hooked in learning
to jump...they are both back on carbon...

Are $450 carbon booms 3X better than $150 aluminum booms?
No...
Are carbon booms significantly better?
Yes...

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com






>
> WARDOG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>>
>>Charles Ivey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to
>
> get
>
>>>the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
>
> checkbook.
>
>>>You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
>>
>>Hi Charles,
>>First off, I'm totally behind you and your program, as you well know...
>>however, as a dealer I would "temper" any general recommendation of
>>using these newer, Formula length aluminum booms for the bigger sails.
>>They were developed, as you note, to keep costs down associated with
>>racing for kids in Europe, not as a carbon substitute for meat and
>>'tater eating (super-sized) American adults on a budget...
>>
>>Even though they will be available to us dealers this season, I will
>>still make every attempt to help sailors get on carbon, up to and
>>including, selling my personal booms, which I've done several times...
>>I just hate to see someone score a new bigger sail and mast, then try to
>>cut corners on the boom...performance buzzkill...
>>We'll order them for lighter weight sailors on a budget, but I don't
>>personally foresee a huge demand...the grips will be 32mm and not sure
>>about weight specs, but I would suspect more than carbon with greater
>>wall thickness.
>>I know that you are happy with your HPL carbon booms, as you have noted...
>>
>>It is extremely rare for anyone that has upgraded to carbon to drop back
>>to aluminum, for any size boom, including small wave booms.
>>Small sails are used in high winds, which are normally quite gusty...
>>The more carbon you use (boom and mast), the faster the sail will react
>>and the better the energy transfer will be.
>>
>>I'm getting excited about the new, less expensive, carbon booms coming
>>out...especially the new Epic Gear carbon 250cm-310cm formula boom with
>>wide rear end, that we should have in a couple of weeks.
>>
>>Keep up the good work...
>>
>>Warm winds...{:~)
>>
>>WARDOG
>>http://www.surfingsports.com
>>
>>
>>
>>>The Carbon versus Aluminum boom issue is certainly interesting. No
>
> doubt
>
>>>the carbon boom is an advantage for larger sails, and likely all size
>
> sails.
>
>>>IF you can afford carbon, get it -- you will like the feel and stiffness
>
> of
>
>>>carbon. If you find carbon booms a little too expensive, then read on.
>>>
>>>Until the last few weeks, there really were no aluminum booms that
>
> worked
>
>>>well with sails in the 10.5 size and up. The big course boom from
>
> Chinook
>
>>>only extended to 274 cm (I think) and a large sail rigged with this boom
>
> was
>
>>>near (or even past) the max extension of the arms. Such booms were not
>>>stiff enough for such sails and the flex was easily apparent.
>>>
>>>Two major changes have happened. First some background... Large classes
>>>like the Formula Experience class must be able to have less expensive
>
> rigs.
>
>>>I have learned a great deal about this since I work with the FE junior
>>>program. Countries with far more participation in their youth programs
>
> than
>
>>>the US are so concerned over the cost of equipment components that the
>
> class
>
>>>rules for any development class like FE must be such that the kid with
>
> the
>
>>>biggest checkbook cannot purchase an advantage over less well off kids,
>
> and
>
>>>so that national authorities can more easily promote racing to larger
>>>groups. The FE youth class is limited to 11.0 sails but in reality
>
> there
>
>>>were no really good boom choices for 11.0 meter sails -- even though all
>
> FE
>
>>>events require aluminum booms. At the European FE Championships,
>
> national
>
>>>teams were sailing with aluminum booms. They had booms we were unable
>
> to
>
>>>buy in the USA. That is the background.
>>>
>>>What has just happened is both Chinook and Nautix have stepped up and
>
> will
>
>>>produce much better solutions. Chinook can make aluminum booms with
>
> their
>
>>>new triple clamp front end (a much better clamp for stiffness) and arm
>>>length to work out to 290 cm. This now means the arms can handle 11.0
>
> sails
>
>>>and have much more tube insertion in the main body of the boom -- and
>
> this
>
>>>makes these booms much stiffer as well. Nautix is also offering a boom
>>>beginning about year end (I think) that will go to 290 cm. These two
>>>companies reacted to the need for better large aluminum booms and will
>
> make
>
>>>these for those that need the less costly aluminum boom. As I
>
> mentioned,
>
>>>these booms are required for FE competitions and any continential or
>
> world
>
>>>championships for FE. With FE activity in over 20 countries now, having
>
> a
>
>>>better boom solution was critical. The cost per participant is much
>
> less
>
>>>and more people can race in the class. This was a requirement that the
>>>European countries seemed very determined to enforce in the class rules.
>
> In
>
>>>order to have a large class there was no other choice possible given
>
> current
>
>>>cost factors.
>>>
>>>So, even though I favor and like carbon, I know this more expensive
>
> solution
>
>>>is not going to work for large programs in Europe and for the FE class.
>
> It
>
>>>may well be that any potential new Olympic class may also require
>
> aluminum
>
>>>booms. For these reasons, I was very glad to see two aluminum boom
>>>solutions that will greatly improve large sail rigs. Based on the way a
>>>junior was sailing at this week's Suncoast event in St. Pete, the new
>>>Chinook triple clamp 290 boom he had seemed to be working very well
>
> against
>
>>>a fine fleet of formula riders. I don't think the many good formula
>
> riders
>
>>>behind him had any idea he was sailing aluminum with his 11.0 and 9.8
>
> sails.
>
>>>Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix) to
>
> get
>
>>>the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
>
> checkbook.
>
>>>You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
>>>
>>>CI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>



05 Nov 2003 03:57:40
Bob Jacobson
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Of course, the rationalization could be that "because I've paid more for the
carbon booms, they 'feel ' better" ;-) I've had carbon masts and booms since
they first came out, and I like the masts because they're light, and the
booms for large sails because they're light and stiff. I just don't find
that short carbon booms are noticible stiffer, or significantly lighter than
aluminum. Maybe its just the fact that I sail mostly out of the Berkeley
Marina, where the delta between gust and lull isn't that large?




"WARDOG" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
>
> Bob Jacobson wrote:
> > I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss of
> > performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the sail
> > reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the boom
> > getting shorter when under load?
>
> Hi Bob,
> The business is that higher carbon masts have better reflex response...
> Carbon has more direct energy transfer, because it deflects less...
> A stiffer boom aids sail performance in higher winds because it won't
> distort as much, keeping the sail rig in it's optimum shape for dealing
> with gusts.
>
> Feel free to engage the materials specialists and/or research the net
> for the why and how...
>
> I know because, I made the "mistake" of demoing a carbon wave boom on a
> gusty 4.2m2 day...carbon "felt" better...
>
> All I really have to say is, it comes down to economics...
> That's a personal decision...
> If money isn't an issue, you'd be on them for your small sails...
> People that can afford carbon are on them, people that either can't, or
> won't, rationalize that it really doesn't matter much...
> Ignorance is bliss...;-)
>
> Furthermore, I only know of a few cases (2) of sailors that have gone
> back to aluminum booms, once the switch to carbon is made in small
booms...
> They were over 230 lbs and crashing very hard while hooked in learning
> to jump...they are both back on carbon...
>
> Are $450 carbon booms 3X better than $150 aluminum booms?
> No...
> Are carbon booms significantly better?
> Yes...
>
> WARDOG
> http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > WARDOG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> >
> >>
> >>Charles Ivey wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix)
to
> >
> > get
> >
> >>>the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
> >
> > checkbook.
> >
> >>>You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
> >>
> >>Hi Charles,
> >>First off, I'm totally behind you and your program, as you well know...
> >>however, as a dealer I would "temper" any general recommendation of
> >>using these newer, Formula length aluminum booms for the bigger sails.
> >>They were developed, as you note, to keep costs down associated with
> >>racing for kids in Europe, not as a carbon substitute for meat and
> >>'tater eating (super-sized) American adults on a budget...
> >>
> >>Even though they will be available to us dealers this season, I will
> >>still make every attempt to help sailors get on carbon, up to and
> >>including, selling my personal booms, which I've done several times...
> >>I just hate to see someone score a new bigger sail and mast, then try to
> >>cut corners on the boom...performance buzzkill...
> >>We'll order them for lighter weight sailors on a budget, but I don't
> >>personally foresee a huge demand...the grips will be 32mm and not sure
> >>about weight specs, but I would suspect more than carbon with greater
> >>wall thickness.
> >>I know that you are happy with your HPL carbon booms, as you have
noted...
> >>
> >>It is extremely rare for anyone that has upgraded to carbon to drop back
> >>to aluminum, for any size boom, including small wave booms.
> >>Small sails are used in high winds, which are normally quite gusty...
> >>The more carbon you use (boom and mast), the faster the sail will react
> >>and the better the energy transfer will be.
> >>
> >>I'm getting excited about the new, less expensive, carbon booms coming
> >>out...especially the new Epic Gear carbon 250cm-310cm formula boom with
> >>wide rear end, that we should have in a couple of weeks.
> >>
> >>Keep up the good work...
> >>
> >>Warm winds...{:~)
> >>
> >>WARDOG
> >>http://www.surfingsports.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>The Carbon versus Aluminum boom issue is certainly interesting. No
> >
> > doubt
> >
> >>>the carbon boom is an advantage for larger sails, and likely all size
> >
> > sails.
> >
> >>>IF you can afford carbon, get it -- you will like the feel and
stiffness
> >
> > of
> >
> >>>carbon. If you find carbon booms a little too expensive, then read on.
> >>>
> >>>Until the last few weeks, there really were no aluminum booms that
> >
> > worked
> >
> >>>well with sails in the 10.5 size and up. The big course boom from
> >
> > Chinook
> >
> >>>only extended to 274 cm (I think) and a large sail rigged with this
boom
> >
> > was
> >
> >>>near (or even past) the max extension of the arms. Such booms were not
> >>>stiff enough for such sails and the flex was easily apparent.
> >>>
> >>>Two major changes have happened. First some background... Large
classes
> >>>like the Formula Experience class must be able to have less expensive
> >
> > rigs.
> >
> >>>I have learned a great deal about this since I work with the FE junior
> >>>program. Countries with far more participation in their youth programs
> >
> > than
> >
> >>>the US are so concerned over the cost of equipment components that the
> >
> > class
> >
> >>>rules for any development class like FE must be such that the kid with
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>biggest checkbook cannot purchase an advantage over less well off kids,
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>so that national authorities can more easily promote racing to larger
> >>>groups. The FE youth class is limited to 11.0 sails but in reality
> >
> > there
> >
> >>>were no really good boom choices for 11.0 meter sails -- even though
all
> >
> > FE
> >
> >>>events require aluminum booms. At the European FE Championships,
> >
> > national
> >
> >>>teams were sailing with aluminum booms. They had booms we were unable
> >
> > to
> >
> >>>buy in the USA. That is the background.
> >>>
> >>>What has just happened is both Chinook and Nautix have stepped up and
> >
> > will
> >
> >>>produce much better solutions. Chinook can make aluminum booms with
> >
> > their
> >
> >>>new triple clamp front end (a much better clamp for stiffness) and arm
> >>>length to work out to 290 cm. This now means the arms can handle 11.0
> >
> > sails
> >
> >>>and have much more tube insertion in the main body of the boom -- and
> >
> > this
> >
> >>>makes these booms much stiffer as well. Nautix is also offering a boom
> >>>beginning about year end (I think) that will go to 290 cm. These two
> >>>companies reacted to the need for better large aluminum booms and will
> >
> > make
> >
> >>>these for those that need the less costly aluminum boom. As I
> >
> > mentioned,
> >
> >>>these booms are required for FE competitions and any continential or
> >
> > world
> >
> >>>championships for FE. With FE activity in over 20 countries now,
having
> >
> > a
> >
> >>>better boom solution was critical. The cost per participant is much
> >
> > less
> >
> >>>and more people can race in the class. This was a requirement that the
> >>>European countries seemed very determined to enforce in the class
rules.
> >
> > In
> >
> >>>order to have a large class there was no other choice possible given
> >
> > current
> >
> >>>cost factors.
> >>>
> >>>So, even though I favor and like carbon, I know this more expensive
> >
> > solution
> >
> >>>is not going to work for large programs in Europe and for the FE class.
> >
> > It
> >
> >>>may well be that any potential new Olympic class may also require
> >
> > aluminum
> >
> >>>booms. For these reasons, I was very glad to see two aluminum boom
> >>>solutions that will greatly improve large sail rigs. Based on the way
a
> >>>junior was sailing at this week's Suncoast event in St. Pete, the new
> >>>Chinook triple clamp 290 boom he had seemed to be working very well
> >
> > against
> >
> >>>a fine fleet of formula riders. I don't think the many good formula
> >
> > riders
> >
> >>>behind him had any idea he was sailing aluminum with his 11.0 and 9.8
> >
> > sails.
> >
> >>>Talk to you local dealer and have him/her contact Chinook (or Nautix)
to
> >
> > get
> >
> >>>the new stiffer boom if that is something that better fits your
> >
> > checkbook.
> >
> >>>You can sail larger sails with these new booms.
> >>>
> >>>CI
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>




06 Nov 2003 07:34:07
Scott
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

I decided to go all carb (small and big sails) primarily for strength
reasons. I weigh in at 230 and I worry about the constant flexing of Al with
that weight hanging on. Also, the new Chinook Carbon has fully articulating
heads so that an 80 deg. boom angle relative to the mast will not torque the
boom arm attachments to the head. I suppose you can get an articulating head
for Al but I have not seen that.

Scott

Bob Jacobson <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss of
> performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the sail
> reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the boom
> getting shorter when under load?
>
> WARDOG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>




06 Nov 2003 21:22:53
Anthony
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

The Neil Pryde aluminium booms have an articulating head, don't know of any
others.

Anthony


"Scott" <[email protected](removethis)halcyon.com > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I decided to go all carb (small and big sails) primarily for strength
> reasons. I weigh in at 230 and I worry about the constant flexing of Al
with
> that weight hanging on. Also, the new Chinook Carbon has fully
articulating
> heads so that an 80 deg. boom angle relative to the mast will not torque
the
> boom arm attachments to the head. I suppose you can get an articulating
head
> for Al but I have not seen that.
>
> Scott
>
> Bob Jacobson <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss of
> > performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the sail
> > reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the boom
> > getting shorter when under load?
> >
> > WARDOG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>




06 Nov 2003 23:36:42
Dan Weiss
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Fiberspars also feature an articulating head.

--
-Dan
"Anthony" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> The Neil Pryde aluminium booms have an articulating head, don't know of
any
> others.
>
> Anthony
>
>
> "Scott" <[email protected](removethis)halcyon.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > I decided to go all carb (small and big sails) primarily for strength
> > reasons. I weigh in at 230 and I worry about the constant flexing of Al
> with
> > that weight hanging on. Also, the new Chinook Carbon has fully
> articulating
> > heads so that an 80 deg. boom angle relative to the mast will not torque
> the
> > boom arm attachments to the head. I suppose you can get an articulating
> head
> > for Al but I have not seen that.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > Bob Jacobson <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > I use aluminum booms on 5.0 and below and don't really see much loss
of
> > > performance vs. carbon. I don't understand that business about the
sail
> > > reacting faster with carbon boom and mast. Are you referring to the
boom
> > > getting shorter when under load?
> > >
> > > WARDOG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>




07 Nov 2003 03:51:05
Little John
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Been using Nautix booms.

VERY good gear.

Some sailors I know also use it and are VERY happy with its dirability!

LJ
Portugal


[email protected] (Dustin T. Hughes) wrote in message news:<[email protected] >...
> Charles,
>
> The Nautix booms are made in france and you can get them in the US.
>
> You can buy the boom from Isthmu Sailboards out of Wisconsin.
> This is a listing of all the booms they carry that are not carbon.
>
> http://www.isthmussailboards.com/store/products.asp?dept=29
>
>
> take a look at the boom on the nautix website. Not a bad looking boom.
>
> http://www.nautix.com/Nautix/Nautix.nsf/VuVoileGamme/2eba6ba543ca3574c1256cf30058efc9!OpenDocument&Langue=En


17 Nov 2003 20:03:59
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now, ranging
from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a tapered WH,
and a Dynafiber.

The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're lighter
than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince myself
I
feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons, despite
swapping off among them often must minutes apart.

The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first reach; a
fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after which
I don't notice the fatter grip.

The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception. I've
used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems, but
the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the front
head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2, my
most-used sail).

The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good, but I
worry
about them in surf or nasty weather.

The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH heads
flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the flex on
port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus have
maintained their stiffness better.

The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever used,
right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.

The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and off
the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the luff
sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails show up
next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split inner
piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)

The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to 1.0 in
my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor use
giant sails.

And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the showroom
rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on the
free side.

Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per reach
because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water. He
loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom Gorge
jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds, and
he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he gives
it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.

Mike m/




18 Nov 2003 18:52:46
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an aluminum.

OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt it,
with the boom arms epoxied into the head.

Mike m/

"Mike F" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
ranging
> from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a tapered
WH,
> and a Dynafiber.
>
> The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're lighter
> than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
myself
> I
> feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
despite
> swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>
> The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
> carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first reach;
a
> fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
which
> I don't notice the fatter grip.
>
> The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception. I've
> used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems, but
> the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
front
> head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2, my
> most-used sail).
>
> The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
> carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good, but I
> worry
> about them in surf or nasty weather.
>
> The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
> really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH heads
> flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the flex on
> port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
have
> maintained their stiffness better.
>
> The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever used,
> right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
> transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>
> The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and off
> the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
luff
> sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails show up
> next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
inner
> piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>
> The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
> performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to 1.0 in
> my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor
use
> giant sails.
>
> And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
> model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the showroom
> rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on the
> free side.
>
> Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
> progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per reach
> because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water. He
> loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
> despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom Gorge
> jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds, and
> he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he gives
> it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>
> Mike m/
>
>




19 Nov 2003 08:26:33
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...

We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
"squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
you mentioned in a previous post...
Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
ratings...
Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
testing protocol...

Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried them...
They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
all rolled into one, at a killer price...
http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp

The new Epics are very similar...

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com


Mike F wrote:

> Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
> convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
> especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an aluminum.
>
> OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt it,
> with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
>
> Mike m/
>
> "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>
>>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
>
> ranging
>
>>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a tapered
>
> WH,
>
>>and a Dynafiber.
>>
>>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're lighter
>>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
>
> myself
>
>>I
>>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
>
> despite
>
>>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>>
>>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
>>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first reach;
>
> a
>
>>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
>
> which
>
>>I don't notice the fatter grip.
>>
>>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception. I've
>>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems, but
>>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
>
> front
>
>>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2, my
>>most-used sail).
>>
>>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
>>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good, but I
>>worry
>>about them in surf or nasty weather.
>>
>>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
>>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH heads
>>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the flex on
>>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
>
> have
>
>>maintained their stiffness better.
>>
>>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever used,
>>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
>>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>>
>>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and off
>>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
>
> luff
>
>>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails show up
>>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
>
> inner
>
>>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>>
>>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
>>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to 1.0 in
>>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor
>
> use
>
>>giant sails.
>>
>>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
>>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the showroom
>>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on the
>>free side.
>>
>>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
>>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per reach
>>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water. He
>>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
>>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom Gorge
>>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds, and
>>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he gives
>>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>>
>>Mike m/
>>
>>
>
>
>



19 Nov 2003 13:53:22
Will Harper
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

Wow, nice descriptions on the Gulftech booms on your website! Couldn't
have said it better myself ;-)

-w

WARDOG wrote:
> The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
>
> We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
> "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
> you mentioned in a previous post...
> Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
> ratings...
> Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
> testing protocol...
>
> Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried them...
> They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
> all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>
> The new Epics are very similar...
>
> WARDOG
> http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
> Mike F wrote:
>
>> Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
>> convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
>> especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an aluminum.
>>
>> OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt it,
>> with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
>>
>> Mike m/
>>
>> "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>
>>> I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
>>
>>
>> ranging
>>
>>> from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a tapered
>>
>>
>> WH,
>>
>>> and a Dynafiber.
>>>
>>> The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're lighter
>>> than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
>>
>>
>> myself
>>
>>> I
>>> feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
>>
>>
>> despite
>>
>>> swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>>>
>>> The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
>>> carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
>>> reach;
>>
>>
>> a
>>
>>> fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
>>
>>
>> which
>>
>>> I don't notice the fatter grip.
>>>
>>> The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
>>> I've
>>> used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems, but
>>> the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
>>
>>
>> front
>>
>>> head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2, my
>>> most-used sail).
>>>
>>> The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
>>> carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
>>> but I
>>> worry
>>> about them in surf or nasty weather.
>>>
>>> The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
>>> really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
>>> heads
>>> flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
>>> flex on
>>> port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
>>
>>
>> have
>>
>>> maintained their stiffness better.
>>>
>>> The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever used,
>>> right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
>>> transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>>>
>>> The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on
>>> and off
>>> the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
>>
>>
>> luff
>>
>>> sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
>>> show up
>>> next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
>>
>>
>> inner
>>
>>> piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>>>
>>> The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
>>> performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
>>> 1.0 in
>>> my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor
>>
>>
>> use
>>
>>> giant sails.
>>>
>>> And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
>>> model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
>>> showroom
>>> rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up
>>> on the
>>> free side.
>>>
>>> Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
>>> progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
>>> reach
>>> because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water. He
>>> loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
>>> despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
>>> Gorge
>>> jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28
>>> pounds, and
>>> he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
>>> gives
>>> it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>>>
>>> Mike m/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>



19 Nov 2003 14:06:15
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms



Will Harper wrote:
> Wow, nice descriptions on the Gulftech booms on your website! Couldn't
> have said it better myself ;-)

It's gonna cost you a beer/word...;-)

Killer shots you guys got of Devon and Ponch, BTW...

http://www.surfingsports.com/images/wwdevon.jpg
http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ww_ponch.jpg
http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ponch_jump.jpg
http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ponch_tweak.jpg

Hey, what are you doing lurking?
Don't you have an AW issue to get to press?...;-)

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com




>
> -w
>
> WARDOG wrote:
>
>> The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
>> carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
>> The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
>>
>> We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
>> "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one
>> that you mentioned in a previous post...
>> Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish
>> stiffness ratings...
>> Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
>> supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
>> Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard
>> and testing protocol...
>>
>> Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
>> them...
>> They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
>> all rolled into one, at a killer price...
>> http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>>
>> The new Epics are very similar...
>>
>> WARDOG
>> http://www.surfingsports.com
>>
>>
>> Mike F wrote:
>>
>>> Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
>>> convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
>>> especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
>>> aluminum.
>>>
>>> OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
>>> it,
>>> with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
>>>
>>> Mike m/
>>>
>>> "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>
>>>> I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ranging
>>>
>>>> from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
>>>> tapered
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> WH,
>>>
>>>> and a Dynafiber.
>>>>
>>>> The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
>>>> lighter
>>>> than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> myself
>>>
>>>> I
>>>> feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> despite
>>>
>>>> swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>>>>
>>>> The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
>>>> carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
>>>> reach;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> a
>>>
>>>> fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> which
>>>
>>>> I don't notice the fatter grip.
>>>>
>>>> The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
>>>> I've
>>>> used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
>>>> but
>>>> the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> front
>>>
>>>> head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my
>>>> 4.2, my
>>>> most-used sail).
>>>>
>>>> The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
>>>> carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
>>>> but I
>>>> worry
>>>> about them in surf or nasty weather.
>>>>
>>>> The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
>>>> really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
>>>> heads
>>>> flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
>>>> flex on
>>>> port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> have
>>>
>>>> maintained their stiffness better.
>>>>
>>>> The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
>>>> used,
>>>> right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
>>>> transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>>>>
>>>> The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on
>>>> and off
>>>> the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> luff
>>>
>>>> sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
>>>> show up
>>>> next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> inner
>>>
>>>> piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>>>>
>>>> The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
>>>> performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
>>>> 1.0 in
>>>> my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> use
>>>
>>>> giant sails.
>>>>
>>>> And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
>>>> model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
>>>> showroom
>>>> rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up
>>>> on the
>>>> free side.
>>>>
>>>> Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
>>>> progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
>>>> reach
>>>> because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the
>>>> water. He
>>>> loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
>>>> despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
>>>> Gorge
>>>> jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28
>>>> pounds, and
>>>> he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
>>>> gives
>>>> it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>>>>
>>>> Mike m/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>



19 Nov 2003 23:32:43
Brian Mck
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:06:15 -0800, WARDOG
<[email protected] > wrote:

>Killer shots you guys got of Devon and Ponch, BTW...
>
>http://www.surfingsports.com/images/wwdevon.jpg
>http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ww_ponch.jpg
>http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ponch_jump.jpg
>http://www.surfingsports.com/images/ponch_tweak.jpg
>
>Hey, what are you doing lurking?
>Don't you have an AW issue to get to press?...;-)



The sails look very nice for '04. Maybe Will needs to get the web guy
to finish up the website. Looked at the "mail" site to get a quick
fix, but everything is not there.

Is Web P going to be on WW for '04?

Bri


20 Nov 2003 11:18:31
Scott G
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
club, I have broken a few booms.
Carbon seems to last longer for me.
Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
those last month.

Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
the brands you sell versus those you don't).

Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).

If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
greatly.
Thanks for your advice,
Scott G


WARDOG <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
>
> We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
> "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
> you mentioned in a previous post...
> Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
> ratings...
> Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
> testing protocol...
>
> Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried them...
> They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
> all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>
> The new Epics are very similar...
>
> WARDOG
> http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
> Mike F wrote:
>
> > Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
> > convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
> > especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an aluminum.
> >
> > OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt it,
> > with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
> >
> > Mike m/
> >
> > "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> >
> >>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
> >
> > ranging
> >
> >>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a tapered
> >
> > WH,
> >
> >>and a Dynafiber.
> >>
> >>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're lighter
> >>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
> >
> > myself
> >
> >>I
> >>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
> >
> > despite
> >
> >>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
> >>
> >>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
> >>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first reach;
> >
> > a
> >
> >>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
> >
> > which
> >
> >>I don't notice the fatter grip.
> >>
> >>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception. I've
> >>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems, but
> >>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
> >
> > front
> >
> >>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2, my
> >>most-used sail).
> >>
> >>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
> >>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good, but I
> >>worry
> >>about them in surf or nasty weather.
> >>
> >>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling? Not
> >>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH heads
> >>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the flex on
> >>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
> >
> > have
> >
> >>maintained their stiffness better.
> >>
> >>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever used,
> >>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
> >>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
> >>
> >>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and off
> >>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
> >
> > luff
> >
> >>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails show up
> >>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
> >
> > inner
> >
> >>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
> >>
> >>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
> >>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to 1.0 in
> >>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race nor
> >
> > use
> >
> >>giant sails.
> >>
> >>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
> >>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the showroom
> >>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on the
> >>free side.
> >>
> >>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
> >>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per reach
> >>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water. He
> >>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
> >>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom Gorge
> >>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds, and
> >>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he gives
> >>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
> >>
> >>Mike m/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >


20 Nov 2003 13:41:27
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

I plan to check out the Gulftechs and the Nolimitz
http://www.nolimitz.com/booms.htmlin Hood River, and make a choice after
fondling the hardware. Nolimitz' reputation is par excellence in the Gorge,
even with big hands that tiny grip on the Nolimitz (it's padded only on the
inside, a la the old Carbon Creations) feels great, and even with the
Streamlined front end their price is well under Chinook's.

OTOH, my bud with almost 50 pounds on you has > 150 days (i.e., over 15,000
loop attempts?) on his Chinooks with zero complaints.

Mike m/

"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
> club, I have broken a few booms.
> Carbon seems to last longer for me.
> Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
> those last month.
>
> Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
> be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
> by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
> the brands you sell versus those you don't).
>
> Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
> and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
> reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
> front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
> Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
> continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
> fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
>
> If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
> to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
> greatly.
> Thanks for your advice,
> Scott G
>
>
> WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected] >...
> > The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> > carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> > The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
> >
> > We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
> > "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
> > you mentioned in a previous post...
> > Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
> > ratings...
> > Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> > supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> > Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
> > testing protocol...
> >
> > Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
them...
> > They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
> > all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> > http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
> >
> > The new Epics are very similar...
> >
> > WARDOG
> > http://www.surfingsports.com
> >
> >
> > Mike F wrote:
> >
> > > Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
> > > convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
> > > especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
aluminum.
> > >
> > > OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
it,
> > > with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
> > >
> > > Mike m/
> > >
> > > "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]
> > >
> > >>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
> > >
> > > ranging
> > >
> > >>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
tapered
> > >
> > > WH,
> > >
> > >>and a Dynafiber.
> > >>
> > >>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
lighter
> > >>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
> > >
> > > myself
> > >
> > >>I
> > >>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
> > >
> > > despite
> > >
> > >>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
> > >>
> > >>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
> > >>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
reach;
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > >>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
> > >
> > > which
> > >
> > >>I don't notice the fatter grip.
> > >>
> > >>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
I've
> > >>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
but
> > >>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
> > >
> > > front
> > >
> > >>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2,
my
> > >>most-used sail).
> > >>
> > >>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
> > >>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
but I
> > >>worry
> > >>about them in surf or nasty weather.
> > >>
> > >>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling?
Not
> > >>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
heads
> > >>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
flex on
> > >>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
> > >
> > > have
> > >
> > >>maintained their stiffness better.
> > >>
> > >>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
used,
> > >>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
> > >>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
> > >>
> > >>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and
off
> > >>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
> > >
> > > luff
> > >
> > >>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
show up
> > >>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
> > >
> > > inner
> > >
> > >>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
> > >>
> > >>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
> > >>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
1.0 in
> > >>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race
nor
> > >
> > > use
> > >
> > >>giant sails.
> > >>
> > >>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
> > >>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
showroom
> > >>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on
the
> > >>free side.
> > >>
> > >>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
> > >>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
reach
> > >>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water.
He
> > >>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
> > >>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
Gorge
> > >>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds,
and
> > >>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
gives
> > >>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
> > >>
> > >>Mike m/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >




20 Nov 2003 18:20:28
Jack (Sarasota)
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

Where did you break the HPL? If it was the head itself that broke, rather
than the actual boom, consider getting the Streamlined boom head. I love
mine. I am a 190ish flat water sailer, but I do pump a lot, and mostly sail
12.5.

Jack (Sarasota)

"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
> club, I have broken a few booms.
> Carbon seems to last longer for me.
> Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
> those last month.
>
> Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
> be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
> by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
> the brands you sell versus those you don't).
>
> Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
> and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
> reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
> front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
> Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
> continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
> fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
>
> If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
> to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
> greatly.
> Thanks for your advice,
> Scott G
>
>
> WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected] >...
> > The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> > carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> > The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
> >
> > We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
> > "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
> > you mentioned in a previous post...
> > Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
> > ratings...
> > Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> > supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> > Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
> > testing protocol...
> >
> > Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
them...
> > They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
> > all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> > http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
> >
> > The new Epics are very similar...
> >
> > WARDOG
> > http://www.surfingsports.com
> >
> >
> > Mike F wrote:
> >
> > > Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
> > > convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
> > > especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
aluminum.
> > >
> > > OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
it,
> > > with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
> > >
> > > Mike m/
> > >
> > > "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]
> > >
> > >>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
> > >
> > > ranging
> > >
> > >>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
tapered
> > >
> > > WH,
> > >
> > >>and a Dynafiber.
> > >>
> > >>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
lighter
> > >>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
> > >
> > > myself
> > >
> > >>I
> > >>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
> > >
> > > despite
> > >
> > >>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
> > >>
> > >>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
> > >>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
reach;
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > >>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
> > >
> > > which
> > >
> > >>I don't notice the fatter grip.
> > >>
> > >>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
I've
> > >>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
but
> > >>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
> > >
> > > front
> > >
> > >>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2,
my
> > >>most-used sail).
> > >>
> > >>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
> > >>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
but I
> > >>worry
> > >>about them in surf or nasty weather.
> > >>
> > >>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling?
Not
> > >>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
heads
> > >>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
flex on
> > >>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
> > >
> > > have
> > >
> > >>maintained their stiffness better.
> > >>
> > >>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
used,
> > >>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
> > >>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
> > >>
> > >>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and
off
> > >>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
> > >
> > > luff
> > >
> > >>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
show up
> > >>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
> > >
> > > inner
> > >
> > >>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
> > >>
> > >>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
> > >>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
1.0 in
> > >>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race
nor
> > >
> > > use
> > >
> > >>giant sails.
> > >>
> > >>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
> > >>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
showroom
> > >>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on
the
> > >>free side.
> > >>
> > >>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
> > >>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
reach
> > >>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water.
He
> > >>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
> > >>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
Gorge
> > >>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds,
and
> > >>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
gives
> > >>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
> > >>
> > >>Mike m/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >




21 Nov 2003 11:03:01
Will Harper
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Aluminum Booms



Brian Mck wrote:

>
> The sails look very nice for '04. Maybe Will needs to get the web guy
> to finish up the website. Looked at the "mail" site to get a quick
> fix, but everything is not there.
>
> Is Web P going to be on WW for '04?
>
> Bri

Brian: Thanks, we worked really hard on the sails, they're in production
now. The website is getting there, there's a lot to do with the kites
and snow stuff, etc. We hope to launch the new site in a week or so,
I'll for sure post on rec. when it's done.

As for Web, we gave him some '04 sails and he really likes them, but it
doesn't look like he's ever going to be able to compete again. Damn
those motorcycles! How many pro sailors have been messed up messing with
motorcycle? JP, Sean Ordonez, Web, I'm sure there's a lot more.

Anyway, thanks for the words, and thanks to Wardog for posting those
pics. We'll have a gallery on the site where you can see a lot more of
Kevin P, the Berkeley Boys (Rob Warwick and Wyatt Miller) Devon and the
new race team. I promise, it's coming soon.

-w



24 Nov 2003 06:40:16
Scott G
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

They broke where the carbon boom arm meets the front carbon boom head.
The usual place for breakage. Not sure if Streamlined clamp would
help or not? I would think a firmer connection with less give would
actually contribute to more stress induce breakage at this critical
juncture.

Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
for bombproof durability.
Scott G

"Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Where did you break the HPL? If it was the head itself that broke, rather
> than the actual boom, consider getting the Streamlined boom head. I love
> mine. I am a 190ish flat water sailer, but I do pump a lot, and mostly sail
> 12.5.
>
> Jack (Sarasota)
>
> "Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
> > club, I have broken a few booms.
> > Carbon seems to last longer for me.
> > Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
> > those last month.
> >
> > Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
> > be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
> > by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
> > the brands you sell versus those you don't).
> >
> > Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
> > and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
> > reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
> > front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
> > Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
> > continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
> > fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
> >
> > If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
> > to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
> > greatly.
> > Thanks for your advice,
> > Scott G
> >
> >
> > WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > > The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> > > carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> > > The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
> > >
> > > We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
> > > "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
> > > you mentioned in a previous post...
> > > Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
> > > ratings...
> > > Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> > > supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> > > Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
> > > testing protocol...
> > >
> > > Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
> them...
> > > They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
> > > all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> > > http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
> > >
> > > The new Epics are very similar...
> > >
> > > WARDOG
> > > http://www.surfingsports.com
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike F wrote:
> > >
> > > > Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
> > > > convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
> > > > especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
> aluminum.
> > > >
> > > > OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
> it,
> > > > with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
> > > >
> > > > Mike m/
> > > >
> > > > "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[email protected]
> > > >
> > > >>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
> > > >
> > > > ranging
> > > >
> > > >>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
> tapered
> > > >
> > > > WH,
> > > >
> > > >>and a Dynafiber.
> > > >>
> > > >>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
> lighter
> > > >>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
> > > >
> > > > myself
> > > >
> > > >>I
> > > >>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
> > > >
> > > > despite
> > > >
> > > >>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
> > > >>
> > > >>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
> > > >>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
> reach;
> > > >
> > > > a
> > > >
> > > >>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
> > > >
> > > > which
> > > >
> > > >>I don't notice the fatter grip.
> > > >>
> > > >>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
> I've
> > > >>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
> but
> > > >>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
> > > >
> > > > front
> > > >
> > > >>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2,
> my
> > > >>most-used sail).
> > > >>
> > > >>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
> > > >>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
> but I
> > > >>worry
> > > >>about them in surf or nasty weather.
> > > >>
> > > >>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling?
> Not
> > > >>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
> heads
> > > >>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
> flex on
> > > >>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
> > > >
> > > > have
> > > >
> > > >>maintained their stiffness better.
> > > >>
> > > >>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
> used,
> > > >>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
> > > >>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
> > > >>
> > > >>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and
> off
> > > >>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
> > > >
> > > > luff
> > > >
> > > >>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
> show up
> > > >>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
> > > >
> > > > inner
> > > >
> > > >>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
> > > >>
> > > >>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
> > > >>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
> 1.0 in
> > > >>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race
> nor
> > > >
> > > > use
> > > >
> > > >>giant sails.
> > > >>
> > > >>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
> > > >>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
> showroom
> > > >>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on
> the
> > > >>free side.
> > > >>
> > > >>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
> > > >>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
> reach
> > > >>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water.
> He
> > > >>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
> > > >>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
> Gorge
> > > >>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds,
> and
> > > >>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
> gives
> > > >>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
> > > >>
> > > >>Mike m/
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >


24 Nov 2003 07:57:17
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms


Scott G wrote:

>>>As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
>>>club, I have broken a few booms.

No doubt...I've broken a few , too...
EVERY branded carbon boom will eventually and inevitably break...with
that kind of "abuse"...;-)
Especially, if you get catapaulted whilst hooked in, coming down from a
big jump or loop...
I've seen it, I've done it, I know the kind of forces generated with
point or shock loading...

As I'm sure you are aware...you can either use them until they fatigue
and/or replace regularly by selling them off every season (and let
someone else break them...;-)

I am someone who takes their gear to the limit, and is hooked on carbon
booms...
I also don't like the hassle of breaking them in life threatening
conditions, 1/2 mile offshore in 48*, shark infested H20 on a 4.0m2...
I also don't like to deal with frequent breakage from our customers...
It ruins their day...
So that's why I sail the booms, I sell...
HPL, Windsurfing Hawaii, and Gulftech...

Some people might bitch about the HPL head...but, the beauty of it is,
it might be the weak link, that's easy to replace and breaks instead of
the boom arms...that said, I have retroed my HPL's with the Streamlined
heads...several times in big crashes, I've broken inhaul lines...now
I've removed that weak link, so prolly something else will break...

>>>Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
>>>and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd
>>>when reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe.

They do swedge at the front and rear, but "ugly and very odd"?!?!
The 27mm grip more than compensates for a little "oddness" in a duck
jibe...;-)
http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp

The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Makai should also be considered:
http://www.surfingsports.com/product.asp?prod=wsh_00811
They are bomber...the gray Ampro of booms...
http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai.jpg
http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai_head.jpg
http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai_tail.jpg

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com


> They broke where the carbon boom arm meets the front carbon boom head.
> The usual place for breakage. Not sure if Streamlined clamp would
> help or not? I would think a firmer connection with less give would
> actually contribute to more stress induce breakage at this critical
> juncture.
>
> Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
> have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
> they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
> for bombproof durability.
> Scott G
>
> "Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>Where did you break the HPL? If it was the head itself that broke, rather
>>than the actual boom, consider getting the Streamlined boom head. I love
>>mine. I am a 190ish flat water sailer, but I do pump a lot, and mostly sail
>>12.5.
>>
>>Jack (Sarasota)
>>
>>"Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]
>>
>>>As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
>>>club, I have broken a few booms.
>>>Carbon seems to last longer for me.
>>>Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
>>>those last month.
>>>
>>>Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
>>>be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
>>>by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
>>>the brands you sell versus those you don't).
>>>
>>>Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
>>>and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
>>>reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
>>>front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
>>>Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
>>>continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
>>>fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
>>>
>>>If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
>>>to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
>>>greatly.
>>>Thanks for your advice,
>>>Scott G
>>>
>>>
>>>WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:<[email protected]>...
>>
>>>>The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
>>>>carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
>>>>The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
>>>>
>>>>We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
>>>>"squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
>>>>you mentioned in a previous post...
>>>>Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
>>>>ratings...
>>>>Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
>>>>supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
>>>>Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
>>>>testing protocol...
>>>>
>>>>Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
>>
>> them...
>>
>>>>They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
>>>>all rolled into one, at a killer price...
>>>>http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>>>>
>>>>The new Epics are very similar...
>>>>
>>>>WARDOG
>>>>http://www.surfingsports.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Mike F wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
>>>>>convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
>>>>>especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
>>
>> aluminum.
>>
>>>>>OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
>>
>> it,
>>
>>>>>with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike m/
>>>>>
>>>>>"Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>news:[email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
>>>>>
>>>>>ranging
>>>>>
>>>>>>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
>>
>> tapered
>>
>>>>>WH,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>and a Dynafiber.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
>>
>> lighter
>>
>>>>>>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
>>>>>
>>>>>myself
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I
>>>>>>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
>>>>>
>>>>>despite
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
>>>>>>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
>>
>> reach;
>>
>>>>>a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
>>>>>
>>>>>which
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't notice the fatter grip.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
>>
>> I've
>>
>>>>>>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
>>
>> but
>>
>>>>>>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
>>>>>
>>>>>front
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2,
>>
>> my
>>
>>>>>>most-used sail).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
>>>>>>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
>>
>> but I
>>
>>>>>>worry
>>>>>>about them in surf or nasty weather.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling?
>>
>> Not
>>
>>>>>>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
>>
>> heads
>>
>>>>>>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
>>
>> flex on
>>
>>>>>>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
>>>>>
>>>>>have
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>maintained their stiffness better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
>>
>> used,
>>
>>>>>>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
>>>>>>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and
>>
>> off
>>
>>>>>>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
>>>>>
>>>>>luff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
>>
>> show up
>>
>>>>>>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
>>>>>
>>>>>inner
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
>>>>>>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
>>
>> 1.0 in
>>
>>>>>>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race
>>
>> nor
>>
>>>>>use
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>giant sails.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
>>>>>>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
>>
>> showroom
>>
>>>>>>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>>>free side.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
>>>>>>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
>>
>> reach
>>
>>>>>>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water.
>>
>> He
>>
>>>>>>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
>>>>>>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
>>
>> Gorge
>>
>>>>>>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds,
>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
>>
>> gives
>>
>>>>>>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike m/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>



24 Nov 2003 18:38:55
Jack (Sarasota)
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

Doesn't sound like the Streamlined head would have made any difference. I
never should have bragged on my Streamlined head though because I apparently
invoked some corollary to Murphy's law and broke it this weekend. The body
of the clamp broke where the top strap hooks onto the body. I think I have
a warranty replacement on the way however, and I was able to sail in without
difficulty as the bottom strap was still intact.

Jack (Sarasota)


"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> They broke where the carbon boom arm meets the front carbon boom head.
> The usual place for breakage. Not sure if Streamlined clamp would
> help or not? I would think a firmer connection with less give would
> actually contribute to more stress induce breakage at this critical
> juncture.
>
> Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
> have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
> they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
> for bombproof durability.
> Scott G
>
> "Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected] >...
> > Where did you break the HPL? If it was the head itself that broke,
rather
> > than the actual boom, consider getting the Streamlined boom head. I
love
> > mine. I am a 190ish flat water sailer, but I do pump a lot, and mostly
sail
> > 12.5.
> >
> > Jack (Sarasota)
> >
> > "Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
> > > club, I have broken a few booms.
> > > Carbon seems to last longer for me.
> > > Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
> > > those last month.
> > >
> > > Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
> > > be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
> > > by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
> > > the brands you sell versus those you don't).
> > >
> > > Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
> > > and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
> > > reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
> > > front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
> > > Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
> > > continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
> > > fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
> > >
> > > If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
> > > to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
> > > greatly.
> > > Thanks for your advice,
> > > Scott G
> > >
> > >
> > > WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
> > > > carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
> > > > The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
> > > >
> > > > We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be
stiffer in
> > > > "squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one
that
> > > > you mentioned in a previous post...
> > > > Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish
stiffness
> > > > ratings...
> > > > Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
> > > > supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
> > > > Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard
and
> > > > testing protocol...
> > > >
> > > > Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
> > them...
> > > > They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other
brands,
> > > > all rolled into one, at a killer price...
> > > > http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
> > > >
> > > > The new Epics are very similar...
> > > >
> > > > WARDOG
> > > > http://www.surfingsports.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mike F wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real
hard to
> > > > > convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x
sail,
> > > > > especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
> > aluminum.
> > > > >
> > > > > OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I
doubt
> > it,
> > > > > with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike m/
> > > > >
> > > > > "Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right
now,
> > > > >
> > > > > ranging
> > > > >
> > > > >>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
> > tapered
> > > > >
> > > > > WH,
> > > > >
> > > > >>and a Dynafiber.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
> > lighter
> > > > >>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to
convince
> > > > >
> > > > > myself
> > > > >
> > > > >>I
> > > > >>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short
carbons,
> > > > >
> > > > > despite
> > > > >
> > > > >>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my
HPL
> > > > >>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
> > reach;
> > > > >
> > > > > a
> > > > >
> > > > >>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip,
after
> > > > >
> > > > > which
> > > > >
> > > > >>I don't notice the fatter grip.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one
exception.
> > I've
> > > > >>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no
problems,
> > but
> > > > >>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at
the
> > > > >
> > > > > front
> > > > >
> > > > >>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my
4.2,
> > my
> > > > >>most-used sail).
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the
HPL
> > > > >>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so
good,
> > but I
> > > > >>worry
> > > > >>about them in surf or nasty weather.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port.
Puzzling?
> > Not
> > > > >>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and
WH
> > heads
> > > > >>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
> > flex on
> > > > >>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The
alus
> > > > >
> > > > > have
> > > > >
> > > > >>maintained their stiffness better.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
> > used,
> > > > >>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the
boom,
> > > > >>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on
and
> > off
> > > > >>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch
the
> > > > >
> > > > > luff
> > > > >
> > > > >>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
> > show up
> > > > >>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp
split
> > > > >
> > > > > inner
> > > > >
> > > > >>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
> > > > >>
> > > > >>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range.
The
> > > > >>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1
to
> > 1.0 in
> > > > >>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither
race
> > nor
> > > > >
> > > > > use
> > > > >
> > > > >>giant sails.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand
and
> > > > >>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
> > showroom
> > > > >>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull
up on
> > the
> > > > >>free side.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops
are
> > > > >>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice
per
> > reach
> > > > >>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the
water.
> > He
> > > > >>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them
yet
> > > > >>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable
custom
> > Gorge
> > > > >>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28
pounds,
> > and
> > > > >>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating
he
> > gives
> > > > >>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Mike m/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >




24 Nov 2003 17:25:16
Kip Wylie
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

HPL Carbon is the very best boom I've every sailed/owned. My only
complaint, I don't understand why on earth they put that crappy
outhaul line from the factory (red twine). I replaced the line the
first day I owed it. Other than that, I can't wait til I save enough
$$ to replace all my chinooks.
Kip Wylie


On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 07:57:17 -0800, WARDOG
<[email protected] > wrote:

>
>Scott G wrote:
>
> >>>As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
> >>>club, I have broken a few booms.
>
>No doubt...I've broken a few , too...
>EVERY branded carbon boom will eventually and inevitably break...with
>that kind of "abuse"...;-)
>Especially, if you get catapaulted whilst hooked in, coming down from a
>big jump or loop...
>I've seen it, I've done it, I know the kind of forces generated with
>point or shock loading...
>
>As I'm sure you are aware...you can either use them until they fatigue
>and/or replace regularly by selling them off every season (and let
>someone else break them...;-)
>
>I am someone who takes their gear to the limit, and is hooked on carbon
>booms...
>I also don't like the hassle of breaking them in life threatening
>conditions, 1/2 mile offshore in 48*, shark infested H20 on a 4.0m2...
>I also don't like to deal with frequent breakage from our customers...
>It ruins their day...
>So that's why I sail the booms, I sell...
>HPL, Windsurfing Hawaii, and Gulftech...
>
>Some people might bitch about the HPL head...but, the beauty of it is,
>it might be the weak link, that's easy to replace and breaks instead of
>the boom arms...that said, I have retroed my HPL's with the Streamlined
>heads...several times in big crashes, I've broken inhaul lines...now
>I've removed that weak link, so prolly something else will break...
>
> >>>Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
> >>>and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd
> >>>when reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe.
>
>They do swedge at the front and rear, but "ugly and very odd"?!?!
>The 27mm grip more than compensates for a little "oddness" in a duck
>jibe...;-)
>http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>
>The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Makai should also be considered:
>http://www.surfingsports.com/product.asp?prod=wsh_00811
>They are bomber...the gray Ampro of booms...
>http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai.jpg
>http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai_head.jpg
>http://www.surfingsports.com/pimages/wh_carbon_makai_tail.jpg
>
>WARDOG
>http://www.surfingsports.com
>
>
>> They broke where the carbon boom arm meets the front carbon boom head.
>> The usual place for breakage. Not sure if Streamlined clamp would
>> help or not? I would think a firmer connection with less give would
>> actually contribute to more stress induce breakage at this critical
>> juncture.
>>
>> Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
>> have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
>> they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
>> for bombproof durability.
>> Scott G
>>
>> "Jack (Sarasota)" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>>
>>>Where did you break the HPL? If it was the head itself that broke, rather
>>>than the actual boom, consider getting the Streamlined boom head. I love
>>>mine. I am a 190ish flat water sailer, but I do pump a lot, and mostly sail
>>>12.5.
>>>
>>>Jack (Sarasota)
>>>
>>>"Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]
>>>
>>>>As someone who jumps and lands hooked in and is in the over 200 pound
>>>>club, I have broken a few booms.
>>>>Carbon seems to last longer for me.
>>>>Thought I had found the unbreakable boom in HPL, but I finally broke
>>>>those last month.
>>>>
>>>>Looking for more info on the toughest boom: requirements are that you
>>>>be a tough user or regular boom breaker, or, a retailer who can judge
>>>>by rates of return of broken booms (and try not to be too biased by
>>>>the brands you sell versus those you don't).
>>>>
>>>>Interesting about the gulftechs - a friend got some a year or two ago
>>>>and they were so fat at the rear that they were ugly and very odd when
>>>>reaching back for a jibe or duck jibe. OTOTH, it seems to be the
>>>>front of the boom where it connects to the mast that I keep breaking.
>>>>Have heard the new Chinooks are strong, but they do not have a
>>>>continuous front end, and I have doubts about the strength of that
>>>>fron end (although boom arms are replaceable).
>>>>
>>>>If only HPL and others would add a few more layers of carbon or kevlar
>>>>to the front end, it would add little weight and increase durability
>>>>greatly.
>>>>Thanks for your advice,
>>>>Scott G
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>WARDOG <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:<[email protected]>...
>>>
>>>>>The Windsurfing Hawaii carbon Power Tapers were replaced by the WH
>>>>>carbon Makai 3 years ago...same with the aluminums...
>>>>>The carbon Makai is overbuilt, if anything...
>>>>>
>>>>>We've found several aluminum booms including WH and HPL to be stiffer in
>>>>>"squeeze and pull" tests than some brand's carbons...including one that
>>>>>you mentioned in a previous post...
>>>>>Still waiting for manufacturers, or for a mag test to publish stiffness
>>>>>ratings...
>>>>>Paul Kelf at Hydrodynamix has already indicated here. that he is
>>>>>supportive of that concept....http://www.hydrodynamix.com/
>>>>>Obviously, the boom manufacturers would have to settle on a standard and
>>>>>testing protocol...
>>>>>
>>>>>Hard to improve on the Gulftechs right now...bet you haven't tried
>>>
>>> them...
>>>
>>>>>They have every good feature ever introduced by all the other brands,
>>>>>all rolled into one, at a killer price...
>>>>>http://www.surfingsports.com/gulftech_booms.asp
>>>>>
>>>>>The new Epics are very similar...
>>>>>
>>>>>WARDOG
>>>>>http://www.surfingsports.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Mike F wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Update: my WH carbon broke today. I have to rack my brain real hard to
>>>>>>convince myself it's worth paying > $400 for a boom for a 4.x sail,
>>>>>>especially when I get no more life out of a carbon than from an
>>>
>>> aluminum.
>>>
>>>>>>OTOH ... can we replace the head on a WH carbon Power Taper? I doubt
>>>
>>> it,
>>>
>>>>>>with the boom arms epoxied into the head.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike m/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Mike F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:[email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I've owned dozens of booms, tested hundreds. I use 6 or 7 right now,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>ranging
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>from short $50 Technolimits aluminums to longer carbons: HPLs, a
>>>
>>> tapered
>>>
>>>>>>WH,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>and a Dynafiber.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The lightest? Because my aluminums are for 5.0 and down, they're
>>>
>>> lighter
>>>
>>>>>>>than most carbons at the same length. And I find it hard to convince
>>>>>>
>>>>>>myself
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>feel any stiffness difference between short alus and short carbons,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>despite
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>swapping off among them often must minutes apart.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The two with the smallest grips? A thin-grip Technolimits and my HPL
>>>>>>>carbons. But boom grip size is not an issue for me after the first
>>>
>>> reach;
>>>
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>fat grip feels fat for a moment when switching from a thin grip, after
>>>>>>
>>>>>>which
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I don't notice the fatter grip.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The most durable? So far, the Technolimits alus, with one exception.
>>>
>>> I've
>>>
>>>>>>>used my pile of normal-grip Technolimits for years with no problems,
>>>
>>> but
>>>
>>>>>>>the thin-grip version creaked for two years and finally cracked at the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>front
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>head screw (I jump hooked in constantly and that boom was for my 4.2,
>>>
>>> my
>>>
>>>>>>>most-used sail).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The most worrisome booms? The tapered WH carbon for my 4.2 and the HPL
>>>>>>>carbon for my 5.0. Both creak and flex at the head. So far so good,
>>>
>>> but I
>>>
>>>>>>>worry
>>>>>>>about them in surf or nasty weather.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The stiffest? The carbons on starboard, the alus on port. Puzzling?
>>>
>>> Not
>>>
>>>>>>>really ... I jump higher and more often on port, and the HPL and WH
>>>
>>> heads
>>>
>>>>>>>flex more on the heavy-jumping side. I can hear, feel, and see the
>>>
>>> flex on
>>>
>>>>>>>port on the carbons, especially the HPLs, which flex visibly. The alus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>have
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>maintained their stiffness better.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The easiest to use? The Technolomits, by far. Best clamp I've ever
>>>
>>> used,
>>>
>>>>>>>right up there with Chinook. Effortless to get on and off the boom,
>>>>>>>transparent, never need inhaul adjustment, so far bomb-proof.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The most hassle? The HPLs, by far. Their clamp is a PITA to get on and
>>>
>>> off
>>>
>>>>>>>the boom, and can slice your luff sleeve if you screw up and catch the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>luff
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>sleeve in the clamp. (I'll get that 6" cut fixed when my new sails
>>>
>>> show up
>>>
>>>>>>>next week, and I sanded the sharp corners off the HPL boom clamp split
>>>>>>
>>>>>>inner
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>piece right AFTER I found out it will slice sails.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The costs have ranged from $50 to near $500, nearly a 10:1 range. The
>>>>>>>performance range is definitely NOT 10:1, probably more like 1.1 to
>>>
>>> 1.0 in
>>>
>>>>>>>my smaller sizes, maybe 2:1 with my 6.0 ... but then I neither race
>>>
>>> nor
>>>
>>>>>>use
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>giant sails.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And carbons can be stiffer or softer than alus, depending on brand and
>>>>>>>model. That's obvious within five seconds of taking them off the
>>>
>>> showroom
>>>
>>>>>>>rack, when you place one side on the floor, step on it, and pull up on
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>>>free side.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Someone asked about Chinook carbons. My bud's back and front loops are
>>>>>>>progressing pretty well, but he still crashes HUGE once or twice per
>>>
>>> reach
>>>
>>>>>>>because he pushes his aerial envelope every minute he's on the water.
>>>
>>> He
>>>
>>>>>>>loves his Chinook carbons, and has had zero complaints about them yet
>>>>>>>despite being a 250-pound body builder who trashes reputable custom
>>>
>>> Gorge
>>>
>>>>>>>jump boards in just days. His custom high-wind board weighs 28 pounds,
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>>>>>he still has to rebuild it every few days because of the beating he
>>>
>>> gives
>>>
>>>>>>>it, but his Chinook carbons are still primo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Mike m/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>



24 Nov 2003 21:23:54
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

Nolimitz masts are as good as it gets in durability, so I assume their booms
will be just as bomber. BUT . they're not hitting the streets until late
next Spring at the earliest.

Mike m/

"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote >
> Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
> have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
> they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
> for bombproof durability.




25 Nov 2003 07:20:47
Scott G
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

Was looking at NoLimitz booms on their website.
What is up with only putting soft grip on the INSIDE of the boom??
I never have seen that. Why???
I kinda think I use the grip on the top of the boom, and even if I am
not grabbing the grip on the outside, I can't help but think that
extra friction helps save my grip strength.

Does anyone know what's up with this half grip?? Is it just kewl and
different or does it have a purpose?
Scott G

"Mike F" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Nolimitz masts are as good as it gets in durability, so I assume their booms
> will be just as bomber. BUT . they're not hitting the streets until late
> next Spring at the earliest.
>
> Mike m/
>
> "Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote >
> > Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
> > have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
> > they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
> > for bombproof durability.


25 Nov 2003 07:40:37
p
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

The lack of grip on the outside just doesn't make sense. Wouldn't you
get horrible calluses? The grip on the outside seems to protect the
boom from impact against pavement, rocks etc., and protect your board
and body from boom impacts.

Scott G wrote:
> Was looking at NoLimitz booms on their website.
> What is up with only putting soft grip on the INSIDE of the boom??
> I never have seen that. Why???
> I kinda think I use the grip on the top of the boom, and even if I am
> not grabbing the grip on the outside, I can't help but think that
> extra friction helps save my grip strength.
>
> Does anyone know what's up with this half grip?? Is it just kewl and
> different or does it have a purpose?
> Scott G
>



25 Nov 2003 07:58:23
WARDOG
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms



Mike F wrote:

> Nolimitz masts are as good as it gets in durability

According to whom?

Gulftech is so confident on the durability of their RDMs that they come
with a 3 year warranty...
It doesn't get any better than that, for a wavesailor...

Powerex prolly has more RDMs in the waves on the West Coast and Hawaii
than the other brands combined...and I have only heard of a couple of
pros (2) who have broken them getting pogoed on macking days...
It doesn't get any better than that, for a wavesailor...

I've seen at least 6 broken NoLimitz RDMs at Jalama...
2 of them were 1 piecers...
Is that "as good as it gets"?

Not saying that NoLimitz aren't good masts...not saying they are not
durable, they are...I used to use them...just challenging , based on my
experience, the "as good as it gets in durability" hyperbole from a
Gorge sailor...

WARDOG
http://www.surfingsports.com

, so I assume their booms
> will be just as bomber. BUT . they're not hitting the streets until late
> next Spring at the earliest.
>
> Mike m/
>
> "Scott G" <[email protected]> wrote >
>
>>Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
>>have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
>>they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
>>for bombproof durability.
>
>
>



25 Nov 2003 18:20:54
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

Carbon Creations did the same thing many moons ago, and I loved it! Smallest
grip on the planet, very comfortable, and the only pressure on our hands is
from the inside of the boom, so why pad the outside? Oh, yeah ... to protect
the boom from the rocks. The simplistic answer is, "Don't lay your booms on
the rocks. That may or may not be a choice in some places. There's plenty of
friction, and it can easily be replaced if you manage to wear it out. . . .
which is unlikely because nothing ever touches it.

Mike m/

"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote
> Was looking at NoLimitz booms on their website.
> What is up with only putting soft grip on the INSIDE of the boom??
> I never have seen that. Why???
> I kinda think I use the grip on the top of the boom, and even if I am
> not grabbing the grip on the outside, I can't help but think that
> extra friction helps save my grip strength.
>
> Does anyone know what's up with this half grip?? Is it just kewl and
> different or does it have a purpose?




30 Nov 2003 22:16:26
Mike F
Re: Carbon Booms VS. Carbon Booms

The new Gulftech G-Spot boom I just bought certainly isn't playing the light
game. This sucker feels heavy for a 4'4" boom . . . certainly heavier than
my longer aluminum booms. But Don has always made strong booms, and these
have some nice features:
Very thin grip diameter, with minimal enlargement at head & tail.
Boom collar fits any size mast.
STIFF.
Outhaul can be laced to hook clew to boom in two seconds, with no lacing
required, without ever having to uncleat the line, even with an adjustable
outhaul. My one-sided cam & webbing needs no rollers, so I prefer this
instant-hookup, no-lace configuration; it saves me a vital minute when it's
windy.
It's also the cheapest carbon boom I've seen yet, listing <$400. (You don't
want to know what I paid for mine; they had been used once for a PR action
photo.)

Mike m/

"Scott G" <[email protected] > wrote >
> Any other votes, thoughts or experience on the best carbom boom? I
> have never seen the No Limitz, but that sounds intriguing, as long as
> they are not playing the ultra low weight game and instead are going
> for bombproof durability.
> Scott G