I know that no one is really serious about bringing back the Inter18 to Formula 18 racing but I think we would be surprised. With an updated mast and sailplan I think it would fair pretty well. The reason for not trying this is cost. By the time you get to a competitive class legal Inter18 boat you could have bought something proven. We sometimes allow a carbon masted I18 sail with us and they are not bad.

Later,
Dan

I think if you throw a N20 under a bus you need to make sure the passengers are people you don't like. The 20 should be fine.

On a slightly more relevent note. My wifey used to build spinnakers for a loft in SF. It as much art as science, but the consistancy and quality goes up with volume and experience. Her loft (Pineapple)was/is absolutely awesome at building consistant and fast sails for the classes they supported. If EP was serious about building decent sails for these great boats they could and would.

You guys need to revolt and open up the sail making within a measurement rule. Who owns the class / boats, you or Nacra?!?!?!

Herbie,

So far EP has been more than accomodating in their offer to resolve our faulty spins.

As for the sail development... I don't think open "revolt" is going to accomplish much to be honest. Working within the infrastructure already established will bring about change much faster IMO.

Its not like there haven't been changes to the N20 platform before. Snuffer/spin pole, rudder shapes, alum rig (which hasn't yet shown up yet tho) so the precedent is already there for the manufacturer to change things and remain class legal. To be honest, I really like it this way as opposed to something like the laser, where the owners have to have a vote on whether they can put a stupid bungie on their outhaul.

I'm not sure I follow, but maybe revolt is too strong of a word. Many very successful one design classes have the sail making open within a measurement rule (Melges, J22, Etchells, in fact most OD keel boats.. not that I'm a fan of racing keel boats). The key benefits of this are competition amongst the makers to keep costs down / quality up and local service (a big one I think unless you live near where EP is).

But then you have to deal with getting the sails measured in by a certified measurer. There are definitely pros and cons to each approach.

What I noted between the two mainsails I had was
1) the head on the newer sail wasn't as wide as the older sail
2) the leech down near batten 5 & 6 was about 2" different

Also, the battens for one sail didn't fit the same way in the newer sail. I attributed this primarily to stretching. I had to cut the top battens about an inch on the new sail to keep it from sticking out so far...

I figure #279 sail was probably a bit different as well, as that was the earlier generation sail. I think the same was true with the three spinnakers I had (the shoulders looked different, even before they were heavily used - probably just my uneducated eye)

It's good to know that they're computer cut and good quality control.

And whatever the sail cut was or was not, the sail's effect on my performance was negligable compared to my sailing ability...

The contention that changing from one sail maker to open sail makers will necessitate the need to measure the sails is interesting.

In light of the fact that EP N-20 spinakers have different lenghts (as much as 18") and that EP mains have as much as 6" delta in luff lengths, etc., shouldn't all sails be measured to assure everyone is on the same footing?

Is there a site or rule book that outlines the dimensions of the sails for the N-20 class? I know that most other one-design classes have a specific set of luff, leech, mid-girth, foot, sail area and other criteria. Without such a rule, how do we know if the sails are to spec?

A set of rules that states that simply that the sails must be made by a specific sailmaker leaves a lot to be desired. Perhaps, the fact that there might not be a specific set of dimensions is driven by the lack of consistantcy in the sailmakers sail sizes and cuts? Just wondering.

IMHO, all sails should be measured by an independent sail measurer to assure that everyone has the same size sails.

Unfortunately ,I think this may be the case. Another advantage of an open sail plan is the cost will drop the second it is implemented, I've heard by as much as 25%. Competition can be a wonderful thing.
EP has been excellent in dealing with the spin issues ,so far, so customer service is there. I just believe that the sail plan could be so much faster. If performance/nacra and EP are willing to tighten up the quality and advance the design then there would be no need to open up the sails. I'm sure they have the ability, it's just a matter of making it happen.

Those are interesting comments. Hobie had the same issue with the 18. In regards to sails the rule book only stated that a Hobie sail was a legal sail and all others were not. When I decided to seperate from the class rules I went searching for measurements to have a new sail made. Guess what, nobody could produce them. In fact when I called the factory the response I got was "if it is a Hobie sail then it is a legal sail". Now I am starting to wonder why this is such a closely gaurded seceret. I began measuring sails from other Hobie 18's on the beach. Out of the 10 sails I measured the luff was only the same length TWICE! The variance on my 10 test sails was five inches. For one design that is unacceptable. Makes it seem more like you are racing "Almost One Design".

ROFLMAO! SM(almost)OD!

You guys are dreaming and I have heard quit a few contrary aruments wihtin this thread.

Price is not likely to go down unless you happen to shop at some local bargain sail maker. To get a "Name brand" sail you are likely to pay even more than for the EP. Not much volume and you now spread it out even thinner so getting a Landy or Glaser to design and then back up a sail plan will not be cheap.

The big complaint here seems to center on different sails not all being the same. Open it up to different builders and you expect those to all be the same? You are now definitely not sailing 1-design.

Not that it matters, but what exactly are people trying to accomplish with this. Now everyone has to pay 20-40 bucks to play officialy with no more unifority to the class concept than you have now.

Not as big an issue as you think. Tornado has open sail makers. Quality/consistency is second to none. As for measurements, this is only needed at class sanctoned events (nationals, worlds etc) and takes about 30 min. per boat. There are ways to stream line the process...something like a class rule that to make a legal sail a manufacturer must certify it measures in/affix a label/stamp before selling the sails. If fraud is a concern, then enforce on site measurement in official/important events.

The reason the I20's have not evolved with current trends in sail plans is precisely b/c they are SMOD. The builder needs to keep his profit margins and without competition there is little incentive carry out sail development.

Matt... You should disclose that you build boats and purchase sails in bulk from sailmakers. Your perspective will be different then a sailor.



I agree with your price point idea. A better way to have descibed the trade off is would be to address the VALUE provided for your dollar.

The major international catamaran classes are Hobie 16, F18, A Class and Tornado. All but the Hobie 16 owners have decided that the best value for their $$$ comes from having a sail rule and having the CHOICE of sailmakers. Herbie reports that the majority of monohull OD classes ALSO choose the Value inherent in having multiple sailmakers.



This is a false choice... unless the sailors are one design as well.... eg same size and weight... you decidedly do not want one design sails. The majority of racing sailors, monohull or multihull interpret one design to mean a measurement rule which restricts the dimensions of the power plant. Historically catamaran builders convinced the consumer that their monopoly called ONE DESIGN SAILS was good for them. The competitive sailing world has mostly rejected this argument.



A red herring argument. The 20 to 40 bucks is going to an independent (from the sailmaker) class member who takes time certify TO THE CLASS OF SAILORS... that the sail rule is followed and the playing field is level. The 20 to 40 bucks ENSURES that the rule is followed to the class!... AND it validates the sail to the consumer who KNOWS he is not only legal for the class... but also he has the largest legal sail he is allowed... Not just one that is 4 inches too short... BUT measures in to the SMOD spec! If your independent sail does not measure in... or is not close to your specs.... the sailmaker fixes the problem!

I guess the bigger picture would be to ask what, specifically, needs to be changed with the current sail plan?

Are the sails to full/flat?
Materials too flimsy/heavy?
Sail life too long/short?
Sail shape unable to be changed by controls?
Is wind/angle performance band too narrow?
Sailplan not adaptable to various sized crews?

Its time some one lightened up!

now if there is going to be some n20's thrown under a bus, then this is the machine we need!!!!

could the new sail plain which is used in europe be used N20-OD? this seems be be a well thought of design
http://www.nacraeurope.com/product.php?product_id=21

If you're talking about the sails in the pics... I'm pretty sure thats the current sailplan since thats Trey and Boog on the boat.

Exactly what I was going to say.... Can't mistake that hair

Besides the fact that is the US-N20, I don't think it's how well thought out the design is that people are complaining a/b, it's the quality and consistency of the sails.

okay. I gleaned from the conversations that the "sail plan" needed to be changed, not just the supplier.