I think the big question is who else will build sails for this boat? I really don't see any minus's to going open, people are still going to buy sails at the same rate and I doubt they are going to be THAT much faster than a good helm with newer sails. I just don't see the market being that big, the local lofts honestly don't have the experience that people like EP, Performance Sails, Landenberger, Smyth and Glaser have when it comes to high performance catamaran sails. I also agree that EP makes awesome sails as far as quality and longevity are concerned, and it could be hard to beat them in this area.

As far as boat on boat performance, I'm not sure it matters that much (i.e vs. F18). Yes we would like to be faster, but I think a lot of it comes down to helm time and practice time. Sails are of course important in distance racing scenarios, and I think this is where people are complaining. Personally, I prefer sailing one-design or in a box rule against the same type of boats, so I know if I beat someone across the line I beat them fair and square, not based on some arbitrary formula. This matter, however, comes down to race organization, not boat speed per say. I will agree that it is tough to sail the N20 to its rating (a lot of good sailors several years ago made that rating plummet like a rock), and new sails will certainly help with this, but time on the water matters most imo.

At the end of the day, the N20 fills a niche: its a tough boat, capable of open ocean sailing, its RELATIVELY inexpensive, holds its value well and is downright fun to sail. My opinion stands that we should have EP do some R&D on there sails, and allow Performance Sails to be sold and used in the U.S (which the CURRENT, ONLINE rules don't SPECIFICALLY ban). This makes it a two sail maker market, i.e, introduces some competition which can help lower prices and drive quality, eliminates some R&D money by another sail maker/manufacturer/the class, and at the end of the day we get two potential suits of sails that are faster than the current set.

See if you can sell that to Peter . . .

It WON"T lower prices because they are still using the factory as the middle man.They are both under factory control. You won't be buying them from EP unless it's opened. You will be buying EP sails from the factory with a markup for that service.

Understood. This also means the factory absorbs R&D costs, correct? That may mean the net cost is the same (i.e, no factory=we pay R&D), although over the course of a sails design life we are likely to benefit significantly (couple hundred $$'s) cost wise by eliminating the middle man. I think mummp's point is more valid, I know people have fought this argument before and lost, perhaps even beaten down with an iron fist?

My question to the class is the following: if we as a class say you can use E/P sails and you can use Performance Sails, what's to stop you from buying either set? Other than Peter owns Performance and might stop you from buying, so say we bring Glaser or Landenberger on board and say these two sets of sails are class legal? Of course, this is up to the class to decide.

How often do the F18's have to buy new sails to be competitive, i.e, when do the sails themselves die (material's soft) and when do you have to upgrade simply because the new design is faster? Most racers buy a new main and jib every 2 years and a new spinnaker ever year in the N20 class, agreed? If the improved design cycle means we still buy sails at the same interval, whats the loss to the class (factory aside)?

R&D cost=red herring
the lofts know how to build 'em. . .

I had a lengthy conversation on the phone with Todd today, and his arguments for opening up the sail plan to all lofts are compelling, however I still want to do some research and see if the economics of it all works out. Of course, if we do go open sails - then the only way to roll is an owner's class association. Just making sure that that is blatantly clear to everyone.

If we go the SMOD route - 2 things need to happen to make me stay in this camp. First, the cost of the sails needs to come down. The markup on the sails is obscene and everyone knows it. Second, the sails we get can't just be the Vink/Performance sails, sent over and just blindly duplicated by EP without any kind of R&D. You cannot expect Nacra to pony up for sail development for a class that they have abandoned for all intents and purposes.

I have created a google group for "Nacra 20 owner's association" If your an owner and don't recieve an invite to the group within the next few hours(I sent out what I had at 10:45 pm), please PM me your Email address so I can send you an invite. Please spread the word to anyone who doesn't frequent Catsailor or PM me their Emails.
The intent of this group will be to open lines of communication between all nacra20 owners and co-owners so everyone can have a voice.
Thanks,
Todd Hart

Thanks Todd, got it.

Since you're all in this frenzy of class-love, now is exactly the right time to go and sign up for your North American Championship at Racine! - http://crawsailing.net/Racine2010/registration. So far Jake is the only non-local to pull the trigger (Mike, you're a local ). It's hard to argue that the class has a healthy future if you don't have a well attended championship event.

If you're interested, here are some photos of the regatta location - a few of mine from CRAW events in 07 and 08 here (sorry, taken from shore so some quite distant shots), and some by Moving Target Photography from the last Performance NAs there in 06 here.

Sorry if my controversial comments have derailed your discussion and changed the direction of all the N20 owners..

No problem. I don't expect much constructive input from your posts, and wasn't disappointed.
Bashing Hobie1616 is a worthwhile effort though, so your excused.

"bashing" is your thing... not mine

OK then your not excused, now piss off like a good little wannabe comedian.

GeeWiz Todd, you sure one heck of an ambassador for the sport and your class (makes me want to rush out and get a n20 to be with such warm and welcoming people).

Dude,
Who are you kidding you'll never own a N20, quit stirring crap.As far as the ambassador, I'm more like the bouncer.

I will stop responding ONLY because this is such an important topic (to N20 owners) and out of respect of all the others in this post...

but it aint me stirin' this pot

I'm sure any sailmaker would like to know as exactly as feasable how many sails will be produced per year for the class.

The class association is a good basis to determine the approximate number of actively sailed N20 boats, and using the avg. main/jib every other year and spin every year would put the total annual sail production at......?

And what R&D are we talking about here?
- shape
- size
- material

I'm not sure I understand how much R&D costs (labor, testing, materials,.... what else?)

I think that's one of the big question marks. R&D from the factory would consist of what? versus R&d from an independent sail loft. My guess is there would not be alot of either. If I went to an independent loft, I would show them what I had and explain what I was looking to improve on and let them change within measurement constraints as they see fit.
My thoughts are(open or SMOD): for the spin -Flatter more current design like a tornado or f-18. For the main- a flatter (maybe) cut with more sail area moved to the square top from the foot area like an A cat or the new F20 sail. The jib would need to be tailored to whatever changes are made to the previous 2.

So, in effect, you are shouldering the burden of R&D costs yourself:
- you're paying for the sail with its new configuration
- you are sailing it and judging your performance change
- if it turns out to be a dog, you wasted your dollars on that sail, and will have to buy another one
- if it's a clear winner, the loft will sell the "new" design to other sailors

I guess if we're constraining our sailplan change to only sail shapes, perhaps this open development is feasable. What if the class considers an entirely different sailplan that incorporates a wing mast?

In my opinion, I think that something major like that should be undertaken by the factory (since their name's on the back) and I would be more likely to pay more for equipment to offset their R&D costs which would presumably be much higher.

For instance, with a new mast, would you want to change shroud/forestay measurements/angles? Would you need to reshape the leading sails to optimize the wing mast? Would a different boom/rotator configuration be more effective? How about mainsheet system? Would there be any changes to the mainbeam to accommodate these other changes? All those answers cost R&D money... likely far in excess of just trying out a new sail or two...

Jay

I don't think the factory will dish out any $$ for development of the new sails. I think what Todd says is true - they'll just hand a set of the Performance sails from the EU and tell Skip to make his own copy.

If this ISN'T going to be the case, and there is going to be a documented R&D process involving several sets of different versions of the sails to be produced and feedback documented by the sailors and returned to the loft, then I'm all for THAT solution. If that isn't going to be the case then I'm not so gung-ho about it.