What's new

Laser 2 stuff; one piece mast mystery and hull dissection

joe c

banned
Some msg back and forth with @LaLi revealed that the 1980 masts might be the same as every other year. im pretty sure ive seen some documentation with the same mast i have on my boat. its a single piece. has the same step and tensioning mechanism. (internal by way of bolt jack screws in the plate on the foot). i did find the aftermarket masts that were being made in 2011/12 but this is not one of them. those were euro/aus from what i could tell. selden and proctor made (?) looking at photos i found online, those look nothing like this one. so just posting pics of my mast for anyone interested. i picked up another laser2 this past week for parts and have the 2 piece next to it for comparison. some definite differences. different spin pole location. the halyard sheave is in a different location and about an inch and a half difference in length to the halyard block center. for reference...in the photos...i have the foot eyeballed flush with each other. discuss.

i also dissected the hull of the laser2 i bought. it was delaminated from the deck. some significant osmosis. and horrible oxidization on the gelcoat. i really was only hopeful to get the mast which i got. plus a very nice rudder and dagger standing rigging and a nice set of sails.. i pulled everything from the hull then peeled the deck off. somethings i noticed. first. this hull did not have mainsheet cleats on the gunwhales. there was no blocking for them either. so they specifically blocked for specific options. they did not block every boat the same then just added options as ordered etc. they blocked for the options specifically. at least if you were to go by this. the other thing i noticed is that the blocking is only 3/8" what looks to be a 5 ply marine ply. so its not very thick stiff. i pulled the mast step out. it is a solid piece of somehting i havent looked into yet. ipe maybe? when i replaced the one in my boat it appeared to be sitting on a plywood pedestal. and just bonded to the step with bonding putty. that is exactly how this was. i kept the actual hardwood step. so if anyone is replacing one....i have the dimensions and angles to fabricate new if needed. otherwise nothing interesting. just run of the mill production boat fast and nasty. pics attached of the carcass. one full bulkhead aft of the mast step. forward of the dagger trunk. one supporting bulkhead under the cockpit aft of the mainsheet block. the aft section of the cockpit floor sits on blobs of bonding putty. the dagger trunk supports a lot of it and the mast step too. hopefully this is some good info people can use later. messages_0 (41).jpegmessages_0 (40).jpegmessages_0 (39).jpegmessages_0 (38).jpegmessages_0 (37).jpegmessages_0 (36).jpegmessages_0 (35).jpegmessages_0 (34).jpegmessages_0 (33).jpegmessages_0 (32).jpeg
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
I've scratched my head for a couple hours now but the masts still don't make sense :confused:
Could you measure the pole ring height on both? Please measure the gooseneck height, too, as I don't have a number for that. But what I do have is a weak hypothesis to test :D

_
 

joe c

banned
One piece mast
24" to gooseneck center
34" to spin pole ring

2 piece mast
24" to gooseneck center
46" to spin pole ring

Lengths are from flat of plate. Not on the tongue
 

joe c

banned
after laying them next to each other....realizing my spin pole is going to be in a different location. so now what to do? hmmm......
 

joe c

banned
nothing is ever easy. so whats the difference here? im guessing cleaner air. i have the laser olympic spinnaker from fogh. im guessing the same as the red white and blue one. but that pole location is drastically different on those 2 masts. id say close to the difference in the 2 masts i have.


yjYrrl.jpgLaser-2-Europeans-2.jpg
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
Alright! The pole ring on your 2-piece mast is at the max high position, and the other one is about 10 cm up from the minimum. Both extremes have been widely used during the history of the class, and you actually found a rather good pair of pictures to demonstrate those. In the 1990s boats the top position was the North American standard, and the low one the European. These corresponded to single- and double-ended pole systems, but as your pictures show, people did mix and match, too. (8602 actually has an interesting bridle-style topping lift, which I've seen only once or twice before.)

The difference is more philosophical than practical: do you want the pole to be maximally extended when the outboard end is high or low? The low position makes sense in that it keeps the sail farthest from the rest of the rig in light air. The difference is minimal, though, and the sheer length of the pole makes it even less of an issue. The top position can be argued for that the geometry minimizes the need for a pole downhaul/foreguy. I'd probably fit one anyway just to be safe, although I've never seen a single-ended/trolley system include it.

History lesson: there is reason to believe that the "old" one-piece mast, with the low pole position and spinnaker halyard above the diamonds, was the original L2 mast. You can see those details in what I understand was a prototype boat from 1979 (I'll see if I can upload the picture later), and with you having a similar spar, it looks like that was what the first few hundred production boats had as well.

_
 

joe c

banned
Alright! The pole ring on your 2-piece mast is at the max high position, and the other one is about 10 cm up from the minimum. Both extremes have been widely used during the history of the class, and you actually found a rather good pair of pictures to demonstrate those. In the 1990s boats the top position was the North American standard, and the low one the European. These corresponded to single- and double-ended pole systems, but as your pictures show, people did mix and match, too. (8602 actually has an interesting bridle-style topping lift, which I've seen only once or twice before.)

The difference is more philosophical than practical: do you want the pole to be maximally extended when the outboard end is high or low? The low position makes sense in that it keeps the sail farthest from the rest of the rig in light air. The difference is minimal, though, and the sheer length of the pole makes it even less of an issue. The top position can be argued for that the geometry minimizes the need for a pole downhaul/foreguy. I'd probably fit one anyway just to be safe, although I've never seen a single-ended/trolley system include it.

History lesson: there is reason to believe that the "old" one-piece mast, with the low pole position and spinnaker halyard above the diamonds, was the original L2 mast. You can see those details in what I understand was a prototype boat from 1979 (I'll see if I can upload the picture later), and with you having a similar spar, it looks like that was what the first few hundred production boats had as well.

_
Cool! Thanks. That answers a lot of questions. Kinda fun. And yeah..be cool to see another pic of one.

Thanks again.

j
 
Top