To be perfectly honest here, and going from the FXone to the Viper, the Viper feels almost numb to me. It probably has more to do with the fact that I've got a total of six days on the Viper and I don't know it that well, and probably close to 100 on the FXone. At this point I still like the FXone more than the Viper. For all of the reasons Wouter mentions it is a very visceral boat to sail. It requires input, and gives you a very loud response to that imput. It is quirky, and flighty, and while it definetly isn't squirrley like an A-cat, it doesn't feel like the tank that it is. Having to work at going fast, keeps me going fast. Its like my job, after a six months of going hard and working 60hr's a week I'm ok with it, when I sit around and do nothing for the same six months, its hard to build up the ambition to get back to work.

Three things pushed me away from the FXone and towards the Viper:
-No class. Zero. Zilch. Nada. I've already sailed against more F16's and Vipers than I have even seen or know of active FXones. As much as I love the boat, it will never be a popular choice in the US.

-The Viper has an extremely nice build quality, and is laid out very well, without the need to change around virtually everything. Hobie builds a nice boat, the AHPC hulls are that much better.

-Parts. HC-US & HC-EU don't seem to get along. Getting parts for the FXone can be an exercise in patience. Plus with the exchange rate/shipping, parts are rediculously expensive if they have to be sourced from Europe.

Other than that, I absolutely love my FXone. It has a killer Portsmouth number, and it is a very sexy boat. If it fit into the F16 rules I would not have looked for something else, but I never got a chance to ever race against another FXone. I really wish I could have made it to the Hobie Europeans last year on Lake Como, they had 12 or 13 on the line.


As for the telephone pole mast, well I haven't had any part failures with it. You could probably lose the main sheet, and not break it, which is probably a good thing for beginners. My mast failure wasn't AHPC's fault either, it was just a bad fitting and as far as I know was all taken care of by either Greg, or Robbie/Jill. Hopefully the new mast has the diamond wire attachment like the Cap/C2, that hole in the mast with a hook is just plain stupid in my eyes.

I am; people; take a chill pill.

Where are these online plans of which you speak? Also, do you have a dollar figure in mind when building an F16? I've heard $6k for the rig+sails+fittings, and $3k for the hulls, but I could easily see things being more expensive than that.

for Tiapan 4.9 go to http://www.ahpc.com.au .. they can help with tiapan hull plans.. This is a tortured ply build.. Brett Goodall does visit this page so he may contact you.. Wouters F16 is a modified tiapan. lots of tips in building ply Tiapans around.

The tortured ply boat "Blade" plans ask Phil Brander on here.. He may have his "stitch and glue ply " Razor available.. He is very helpful and may modify plans to help you.. His idea of a enjoyable day is arms deep in wood shavings building some boat or other..

Dollar value.. depends on where you live.. what method you use and your skill..
another alternative is design your own hulls
finally you have a number of choices in full or part buys..

best of luck..

Brett,

SIAM's original query mentioned that he expected to be solo half of the time. Can you comment on how the hull design and weight trade-offs you chose for the Viper suit singlehanded sailing?

Mark.

Indeed,

I widened the platform to full F16 width
Replaced the rearbeam with a better section
Raised the mainbeam by 30 mm to reduce beam slap
Fitted an asymmetric spinnaker
Fitted a square top mainsail with a larger head then the Taipan
Ignored the width rules for the mainsail (much straighted leech then Taipan sails at the time)
Replaced the trampoline based jib sheeting with a selftacker (what a room on the tramp now !)
Replaced the eye poking rotation limiter with a mast foot fitted one (All F18's are/have gone this way too now)
Improved the internal downhaul system by making it tripple cascading and carefully choosing lines.
Replaced the recirculating ball traveller with a wheeled stainless steel ball bearing I-track (soooo much better in the sand)
Fitted a cascaded internal outhaul system with a quick release setup (hooking a ball in a slot)
Fitted a tapered mainsheet
Fitted a downhaul system that sucks excess line underneath the trampoline

And a score of other improvements.

I really do like my F16 but it is definately a 1st generation F16. It is probably best described as the prototype F16 and several of the posters here have taken a demo ride on it before pulling the lever on a (2nd generation or later F16) themselves.

The basic Taipan platform is a good basis for an F16 but when deciding to build a new I would opt for an improved hullshape.

OR

Seriously think about fitting T-foil rudders to the basic Taipan platform (that is still modified to F16 specs).

The Taipan is still a very good lightweather F16; I even feel it has the advantage there. Its hulls shape seems to track very well in that stuff. But in rough seastate and strong gusts the bows are too fine and you can overload them quite easily. Still, a little help from T-foil rudder will indeed go a very long way in correcting this downside. You only need a little extra margin there. Just enough to keep the rudders in and the bows a little more out, because then full steering is maintained and you can get out of trouble. That is the main drawback, that once the bows dig in, the boat quickly goes limp on the rudders. So even a reduction of a little diving can already have large positive effects.

Other then that. I think I paid some 12.500 Euro's to have this boat build and lots of spare time. Homebuilding is not adviced when you want to save money. Better get a second job then (less consuming of your spare time) and just buy a commercial boat for 15.000 Euro's. I suspect similar ratio's in costs for area's with different tax laws and currencies.

Wouter

So, the recommendation is not to go the home built route as far as saving time and money, correct? What about finding an older Taipan 4.9 and modifying it to F16 rules? Is that amongst the cheapest options available to get into the class?

Finally, Wouter, can you post some pics of your downhaul system? Looking at improving rigging on the N20 and getting the downhaul off the tramp may be a good idea.

I have contemplated adding on the stealth rudders but got hung up when I figured that I would be breaking a rule regarding width. If the boat is already max beam, wouldn't the foils exceed that? Or are you creating your own mini T-foils?

I do wish people would read the F16 class rules more carefully (or indeed more often).

See rule 7.5 (rather a definition)

7.5 Overall width of the platform

The overall width of a platform corresponds with the horinzontal distance between the verticals passing through the extremities of the sides of the platform, with the boat being levelled on it's waterline and excluding protruding daggerboards, rudder blades or tiller bars. When wings are being used than the equivalant overall beam is determined by measuring the overall width including only one fully extended wing.


Therefore the answer is ; No T-foils can never break the width rule


For other important definition look at this pagem:

http://www.formula16.net/content/view/17/39/lang,en/

Certainly not in the way of saving time. In the way of saving money, well, you only safe a little if you do it right but at great expenses in time. That is just not efficient as spending the same amount of hours on a second job will earn you lots more then you can possibly save.

So yes, I think the answer is that you are correct.

Homebuilding if for people who want things to be just the way THEY want it and enjoy the journey of having made things themselves. Or people who create new classes where there are no commercial builders yet !




Yes, that would be the case. Especially if you would forget about making it wider. If you do then you can still use the standard Taipan beam (but now of greater length) and replace the rear with something like 80x2 6068 T6 or 6005-T5. The first can be had from a broken Taipan mast the latter was used in the past for A-cats and some still have these laying around; I know AHPC has a few.

Other then that buy a spinnaker package and a selftacking jib setup. The latter will really open up the trampoline. Then you are ready to go. You'll accept some speed loss compared to modern F16's but not more then 1 or 2 minutes per hour bouy racing. Sailing enjoyment will be much the same. Also note that the Taipan is not really suited to carrying lots of crew weight. Without a raised beam I would stop at 145 kg (320 lbs) combined. Well, when racing that is; for recreational sailing it will carry up to 180 kg quite easily (400 lbs). The main hit is that the hulls will sit relatively deep in the water and slow the boat down. I sailed my boat (Taipan hulls) up to 205 kg (3 adults on board) and still had (recreational) fun.




See the diagrams below.


First picture,

Triple cascaded 12:1 downhaul.

Blue is 6 mm swiftcord (nice on the hands)
Red is 2.5 mm dyneema
Green is 3.0 mm dyneema with a hard outer mantle (not D12 or whatever) that is UV and abbrasion resistant

The green line simply ties off to a saddle on the backside of the mast. Others use a sail hook here. With my sail the little block is secure to and inside the sail, so I only run the green line through it and tie it off to the other side ; with a slipknot and a few hitches as security. The slip allows for easy derigging even when LOTS of force has been on the line. I'm very pleased with this setup. Just make sure the gooseneck doesn't have any sharp edges (mine had in the beginning !)

Second picture,

Red in second picture is bungee cord. Blue is still the 6 mm swiftcord.
I got SS rings fitted to the inside of my sidestays and the swiftcord runs through them.
Then I got two small blocked stitched to the underside of the trampoline (The once in the red line). The blocks on the transition from blue to red are free hanging. The small blocks in the blue line and the ends of the blue line are just tied together and the thickened ends are slid into the trampoline track of my mainbeam. As a result everything can be just slid out, untied and disassembled for transport. Leaving only the stitched blocks to the tamp and the blue line + everything else ties to the mast. My trampoline is secured to the trampoline track by sliding a 5 mm rod through the tunnel that is stitched to the front of the trampoline. The rod is longer then the tramp is wide so the blue lone and blocks are held away from the gap by that rod.

The internal downhaul keeps everythign clean and tidy (no maintainance required even over many years) and the excess line system under the tramp is easy to access and rinse. I prefer it to any system that runs inside the mainbeam.


Third picture,

Here the blue line is actually my spinnaker sheet. The grey coloured line is the downhaul line that was depicted as blue in the other pictures. There are also some other lines in this picture that you can ignore; for example the ones wrapped around the boom. These are just there for emergencies out on the water. I think this picture was taken just before or after a long distance race or a tour along the coastline.


Interesting note, when I'm on full downhaul then the sail touches the boom (5 inches travel AFTER the sail is already pretensioned when fitting the downhaul = about 2 inches). And the green line sings like a guitarstring. Made me worried initially, but I have never replaced the line after it cut itself on a sharp edge in the first few months. Everything seems up to the task and is on the boat for many years.

I hope this is clear.

Wouter

I do wish people would read the F16 class rules more carefully (or indeed more often).

Ok you got me. <BURN>.
I was lazy and instead of asking Google I thought I would ask the guy who wrote the rules. I have bookmarked your link.

Smooth move !

Flattery works and I think I'll let it slide this time !

No worries,

Wouter

Quote
"Lighter boats are easier to handle?? On the beach yes, but on the water I don't agree with you at all.
From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.
But Hell... what do I know?"

You can't really be serious? Perhaps we should use this argument to get the A class guys to raise their minimun weight by 20 plus KG so that they can be more competitive? I'm sure that would go down the same as this lead ballon for the F16's

Come one, this is hardly anything to get worked up about.

A heavy boat is less fighty (as with a wide beam boat) ie when hit by the gust there is more resistance to heal.

A light boat is more resposive

A heavy boat takes a bit more effort to accelorate but once it has, it is easier to keep in the groove and does not stop as quick as a lighter boat. A light boat you can loose the groove very quickly if you stuff up.

You can stop an A very quickly if you hit a wave the wrong way. An F18 will push through it.

A heavier boat will forgive you if you gybe in strong winds without carrying good boat speed. A light boat you are swimming.

A heavier or wider beam boat is easier to sail then a light boat. That is not a negative for the lighter boats but fact.

+1 for TA's comments, heavy is definitely less flighty.

Can definitely park an A very quickly in waves, but not as quick as parking a moth...

I agree. Moving from the 5.2 (big, heavy, really heavy) to the Stealth (probably half the weight, or close to it) the difference on the water is huge:

In light wind it is actually easier to sail the 5.2. Once it gets some speed it will not stop. In stealth you move your but 50cms one way or another and that's enough to stop the boat dead...

In high wind you better be quick on the Stealth when a gust hits. On the 5.2 you have time to sheet out or go on the trapeze. On the Stealth if you are not quick enough, you're in for a bath.

First you say it's impossible to build to minimum weight without an autoclave and pre-preg carbon ....but in reality almost all the builders are building at or within 5 kg of minimum weight using standard building practices
Second to make them light they will be too expensive… over 30K...but in reality they are being built and sold for reasonable prices, a little more than half of what you claim... and the one who is using the most carbon in his boats is actually one of the best priced…

Third...now you want to make them heavier because a light cat takes too much effort to keep moving....on the water…

Can we just jump past all the "death by a thousand cuts" comments and go straight to its logical conclusion.
Which is...just forget sailing altogether and rent a (heaven forbid don't buy..they might come out with a newer/better model by the end of the year...you can't have the guy anchored up next to you having more cup holders than you have) Party Barge (outboard powered pontoon boat) You have a couch to lay out on, a big cooler for your alcohol beverages and a canopy to keep you in the shade. No sails to worry about just turn the key and go. It doesn't matter how fast or heavy it is cause you’re only going to the sandbar anyway...no need for the after race party...why waste the time sailing ...it’s a party all day....
There problem solved...now wasn't that easy?
All those who want a heavier F16 can go the party barge route and the F16 Sailors/cat owners can go about enjoying their boats….everybody’s happy!

Bump. Interested in your thoughts on this Brett.

Mark.

Mark you can take mine for a spin if you like too. I'm sure Feldman(?) will take the Falcon for a ride anytime you like as well. your lucky in that you'll have both handy for comparison

Thanks Karl - I'd definitely like to take you up on that. You coming to Ripley? Roll on May!