No worms. We've talked about this before. F16 is F16.

F16 is F16 and 104 is something very different. All discussed and explained earlier
Ref: http://www.catsailor.com/forums/sho...7&an=0&page=0#Post129527

Exactly so how can the Viper be rated as the slowest when in reality the Viper should be at an advantage (faster) over the "new" old Taipan in many/most conditions. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Oops I meant the old Taipan design with "spi" and "new" mainsail (original jib) non-F16 compliant. Sorry for the misunderstanding. <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

????
Macca... Why would anyone want a slower heavier boat?

There is nothing to be gained in the F16 migrating. Fact is even you could build a F16 to weight.

What is amusing is AHPC built a F16 to weight without carbon for decades.. Now claiming it cant build one to weight!!

I was under the impression AHPC were continuing to strive for minimum weight as non-F18 parts are slowly incorporated...?

I don't really see the problem from our F16 side. The Viper could be 180 kg and still be a fully compliant F16. Whether it is economically smart for AHPC to go that far needs to be seen however. from our perspective there is no problem. Hell, I sail a 121 kg F16 myself, the only difference being that I'm not bitching about wanting a slower handicap.

Also people need to realize that the Viper as advertized is NOT at 104 under the SCHRS handicap system and therefor is NOT, I repeat, NOT a F104 compliant boat itself. They have to weight the bloody thing down to 132 kg to even get to that rating.

The problem with the French fleets right now is that these designs are non F16 compliant for a score of reasons. Their hulls are too long, their jibs are too large, often their mainsails as well, spinnaker are oversized, etc.

Afterall when you make a boat at 150 kg you'll need to fit a larger engine to get it back up to 104 (under SCHRS) performance. Same with the Nacra I-17 or whatever its name is now.

Also, I think calling these F104 efforts "a fleet" is a bit over the top. Currently they are pairing pretty different designs into a single class. Much like the F16 class did back in 2002. These "fleets" still have a lot of work to do before becoming a serious competitor. The F16 class has got about a 5 to 6 year head start on them and our boats cost less as well.


Wouter

Taipan 4.9 is 107 kg but has little hull volume and small beams. Whilst the boat can be fitted out with a kite, the boat was never designed for it. Viper is designed for the kite and its associated extra loads, has greater hull volume, more robust beams and more structural rigidity. It is also built with minimum exotics to keep the cost down which is important.

What are current F16s weighing in at..... 110 to 115 kg. Why not build a boat with a little extra weight to allow ease of building to min weight and add a small amount of corrector weights that can balance out variations and be removed as the boat gets heavier.
If the class would like to take the next step increasing their fleet numbers, then they will have to make it attractive for the larger catamaran manufactures such as Nacra and Hobie. If they stick with their hard nose attitude towards super light boats using exotics, then it will stay a very small class.
I would not be surprised if in the future we see an F16 ‘manufactures’ class get off the ground, supported by major manufactures and the current F16 class will soon become like the F18HT is to the F18 class.

Well one of the new Vipers snapped off the centreboard today. Big bearaway to go for a reach. Kite wasn't up. Guess those heavy boards aren't quite sturdy enough yet.

And MarkMT, to give you an idea of what to expect based on today and the past couple of days. 12 to 15 knots, flat water, water temp 24 degrees celsius. Absolutely awesome sailing. And seeing one of those new A380s taking off over the top of you is quite surreal. Expect them to drop out of the sky as they are monstrous.

I think you are wrong.

1: Hobie is making their money from rotomoulded kayaks and similar. Their main market is no longer catamarans
2: NACRA is doing their different 17 foot configurations. I dont see them dumping a successful class in the US by creating a direct and more versatile competitor to their own class.
3: There is nothing exotic about building a min-weight F16 at home or in a production environment. But to succeed you need some good design work done and a production environment with skills and good quality control. I want boats built by skilled workers under a good quality control system, dont you? Mulling over your 'exotics' statement, I am puzzled by what is so exotic about vinylester/glass or wood/epoxy construction?

4
Disagree. You probably think about the history with the 18HT in the US? If you re-check that story you will see large differences in how the F16 class is buildt and how the 18HT was introduced.

Well, when the Nacra Infusion was launched in Europe they all broke their daggerboards within something like 6 weeks. Every single one of them. At the end there was not even a replacement daggerboard left in Europe and I think a new batch had to be rushed in. Then they changed the daggerboard design and since then all problems are gone, that must be said too !

However, it shows like nothing else the fallicy of adding minimum weight to class rules to arrive or even garantee at a dependable boat. Not even the 180 kg minimum platform weight and the 3kg/board mimimum daggerboard weight rules of the F18 class were enough to prevent this little situation from happening. And having to replace all those broken parts sure makes no economic sense either when compared to doing it right the first time.

Slack design goals only lead to inferiour products. I've seen that plenty of times in software development and as an engineer. If the designer is not a little bit scared then he will get lazy and careless and more often then not come back with a shitty product.

I once talked to a building contracter and he told me that after 30 years in the business he found out that he made the most money in projects were he had to duck below his intented quotes in order to get the job. Turned out that being scared of losing money on such projects was a great way of focussing his employees in working efficiently.

If we raise our F16 minimum weight to 115 kg or even 125 kg then all Hobie and Nacra will do is bitch that it is still too low compared to their 145 kg products. Basically what they want is for the competition to "go away" by lowering themselves to their level of technology and quality control. As if that is in any way attractive to us. The low minimum weight is actually our biggest selling point together with the proven 1-up/2-up versatility. Why on earth would we consider degrading such an important selling point for a fools hope of attracting Hobie and Nacra to the class ?

I don't think Hobie and Nacra will ever join the F16 class UNLESS they absolutely have too. This irrespectibally of whether we have a 107 kg, 125 kg or even a 145 kg minimum weight rule. I think they are humming the F104 class as well, because then they have to compete directly with the likes of Boulogne who will redesign their boats for maximum performance and to gain an advantage inside the F104 class. I REALLY don't believe that both Nacra and Hobie are interested in having another design, next to their F18's, that needs constant attention in this way. Hell, they never tried to group their 17 footers together before some 3rd party came up with the F104 ! These companies really don't want to subject their 17 foot or singlehander designs to competition from other builders. It will show far too quickly were corners have been cut to maximize profit. And then it become pretty hard to convince a customer that he needs to pay 15000 Euro's or more for their design. Hell even the new SL16 is more expensive then halve the F16's on offer today, despite it being an embarassing low tech glass 16 footer (155 kg !). Even the new upgraded but rotomoulded Dart 16 is breathing down its neck engineering wise and in specs.

Doesn't it strike anybody else as odd that the heavier designs (low tech = cheap ?) are also the most expensive in comparison ? Or that the most challenging rule set (=F16) has lead to the most active fleet the world over between these 3+1 (+1 = SL16) alternatives ? Maybe this is because of the fact that we are "higher" tech (as we are not high tech really) and have a more challenging (=inspiring) rule set ?


Also, I for one refuse to put 25 kg of lead on my mainbeam because Nacra and Hobie can't even outbuild a bunch of (mediocre) amateurs who can build a timber F16 at 120 kg already. Skilled amateurs must be able to acieve a F16 weight of 110-115 kg.

To me both Hobie and Nacra are companies who must come to step up to our level rather then us stepping down to theirs. Because lets face it, their claim that they can't go better then a 115 kg Hobie Wave or a 155 kg SL16 is not very convincing, is it ?

Wouter

Gday Mate,

I snapped a board on my Capricorn some time ago also. This was put down to a manufacturing fault in that particular board. AHPC replaced it promptly without hesitation. My new board and other old board as well as MANY other Capricorns have sailed and pushed their boats hard without problems with these boards. A manufacturing fault will happen when you are producing large volumes. The factory support from them was second to non.

I am sure this Vipers board would be a simular issue and Greg will respond in much the same way.

As for Greg pushing the 104 rating of the Viper at this event, it is pretty clear he is pushing the 104 rule over the F16 rule because he as well as many can see the writing on the wall for the F16 class.

Yes, Hobiecat USA is. Hobiecat Europe manufactures multihulls and are not even considering an F16 because it is not economically viable. They are however are interested in the 104.


Once again, as above. Nacra are also moving towards the 104 with no interest in the F16 as AHPC are likewise. F18 V’s F18ht ?????


Ask the manufactures who do make the boats at min weight and find out how expensive it is for them and how hard it is to achieve. Sure you can build a boat lighter but how durable would the boat be. What is its competitive life span before it gets soft? Carbon masts, foils, stocks, tiller cross arm booms, carbon or Kevlar in the hulls ect are significantly more and to say they don’t is kidding yourself.


Different path, same result. The F16 class was warned about this in the past and chose to ignore, now as a result the 104 is here and will build at a rapid rate, the F16 will become the 16 foot equivalent to the F18ht

If anybody sees the writing on the wall for the F16 class then they are warmly invited to try their luck elsewhere.

I say this because any alternative to the F16 is at this time still miles behind.

If anything, our most serious competitor is the Spitfire class and they too are miles ahead of any alternative like the Viper or the Boulogne Evolution. The Spit class has been around longer then the F16 class and despite that fact the F16 class was succesfully established and has grown to rival the Spits in Europe and has trumped it in all other area's in the world.

With the F104 class being the Spitfire class for over 75% I don't really see great hardships ahead that we didn't face in much more potent fashion in our past.

I think some are seriously underestimating the power enclosed in the F16 concept and class rules. Just look at all the uphill struggle and hardships this class has overcome in the past without any support from a big builder and against the promo efforts of our competition that DID have big builder support. And now that we are established we are certainly not weaker then we were in the past.

Wouter

Again: Texel 104 is different than 104 class based on SCHRS.

<off topic>
Personally I wouldn't mind putting weight to 120 kg's if we would get Hobie/Nacra on board with that move. If Hobie/Nacra would contact GC I believe that there would e ballot and vote as with normal rule change proposals.
</off topic>

In the 8 year history of the F16 class, how are you fleet numbers world wide. I would be willing to say less then the total of 104s that were at a recent French regatta alone. And the 104s class has not even got off the ground yet. What will be the result when AHPC, Nacra and Hobie swing into full 104 production. Should not be to long before they are being compared with the F18s.

I still don't see any relations to F16 as 104 is grouping of boats with similar performance and not a construction/box rule. What happens if SCHRS changes and drops boats out of it?

Also whole question is oranges vs apples, currently 104 is same than racing for example A vs F18 vs big T because they are close in performance. Situation might change if they agree on more formal rules but then they are throwing out some of the boats currently in the class.

Guys and girls don't go off on one as soon as someone dares to challenge the F16 concept, so what, let them, if the manufacturers take the soft poor engineering route of the 104 group then so be it, at least it will sell tough hard wearing catamarans to the public even if they are a little slow and portly.

Joe public is not stupid and when the Blades and Stealths whizz past and then are pulled up the beach by one person, they'll take note and will probably aspire to that next level up on the next boat they buy.

The A class is as strong now as its probably ever been, why do people buy these over priced, light weight rockets when they know that 2 years down the line they will be out of date, beats me but I reckon its that " high tech " tag which counts for a lot so why consider dumbing down the F16 concept.

The F16 concept ticks a lot of boxes for a lot of prospective owners, it fits in well with handicap racing, has a growing world wide fleet with growing fleet races and is very versatile, what more can we want.

Stephen,





The F16 idea was formed in the last week of may 2001, that puts us at under 7 years of ago. More like 6 years and 8 months.

Currently, the US and UK alone have over 100 F16's combined. I haven't done a full boat count in roughtly 2 years, but remote places like Finland, Sweden, Norway and China we have 4 F16 boats each and also 3 boats in Dubai. I don't think there were more then 20 F104 boats at the recent French regatta.

Call me stupid but if a major sailing nation like France can't even put more (dissimilar) boats in one starting field then the total number of F16 boats in just Finland, Sweden, Norway, China and Dubai combined then what kind of class do they have in comparison to the F16 class ?

I think the total number of fully compliant F16 boats world wide (not counting the Aus or NZ Taipans) is somewhere between 150 and 200. Of course more and more Taipans in Aus will cross over and that alone is a major potential growth that is not counted yet. Or do you think the F104 will replace the Taipan class in Australia ? I think the F104 won't stand a chance in Aus and when pressured between choosing between F104 or F16 the Aussies will flog to F16, no doubt about that.





Ahh, but here we have the true core of our disagreement. You think that there is much of a chance that AHPC and Hobie/Nacra will hook up and throw their combined weight behind a rival class to the F16's.

I really don't see that happening. In fact it would be foolish of AHPC to even try such a thing as Hobie and Nacra will only see AHPC as a junior partner that they are rather rid off. All that Hobie and Nacra really wanted was to keep selling the Standard Tiger and Inter-18 boats. It was only because of those pesky little companies like Boulogne and AHPC that Hobie and Nacra were forced time and time again to change their F18 models or even design complete new ones. For them that is an expensive proposition and they will always be trailing behind smaller and more flexible companies like AHPC. I'm convinced that they will see a junior partner like AHPC that way. Although if such a situation would come to pass they would play along long enough for the juniour partner to blow up the F16 class and then pull the plug while having rid themselves of two competitors at the same time. Meaning the F16 class and the junior partner itself who has to recouperate its investments on its own in a collapsed class.

From a political point of view it will be much wiser for the F16 class to stick to its guns and bases and not let such a junior partner have any significant influence on the F16 class. Meaning, stick to the 107 kg minimum weight and see the "junior partner" trying to convince the big builders that it actually has anything to offer that they are interested in. Comparing the standing of the Viper design outside of the F16 class with the very small but yet much more established FX-one and I-17 classes I think the junior partner is overestimating its negociation possition.


But having said all that, I'm not convinced that hooking up with Hobie and Nacra is really AHPC's play here. That is just us here speculating. I think AHPC motives are alot more simple and closer to home, which is the F16 class and their profit margin.

Wouter

Which 104 are you planning to buy Stephen?