Laser Quality

I agree with many posts around, including how expensive optimist sailing can be (it already was back in the mid 80s when I was still strongly involved in the class as a sailor). However, if you check recent world podiums you see a bunch of south Americans, South Asians, etc, ruling in the classifications. Europe is not the major force anymore, but countries that are economically challenge (to some extend). I know there are many rich people in these countries too, however not all of the top sailors belong to the upper classes. So economics is a factor, but not the only one. I would say that european sailors being physically bigger younger, can be a factor too.

Just a thought.
 
...However, if you check recent world podiums you see a bunch of south Americans, South Asians, etc, ruling in the classifications. Europe is not the major force anymore, but countries that are economically challenge (to some extend). I know there are many rich people in these countries too, however not all of the top sailors belong to the upper classes.
Just a thought.

But do you think that they are sailing boats that are significantly worse than the other competitor's boats? I don't know because I'm not familiar with any of these sailors, their families, and I don't know what they sail. Once again, you can't blame the families that are well off for wanting their child to have the best out there, and possibly give them the upper hand. Wouldn't you do that for your kid (hypothetical)? But I do agree with your overall message. Great boats don't make great sailors. The boat is merely a tool.
 
Well I never meant to say that the rules force them to botch the boats and pump out pieces of shit, dunno how you got that

I meant that if the rules were changed, the boats could be built with much high quality materials, and could last a lot longer, instead of replacing a boat every year, more like every 3 or 5 years, make them stiffer and all around better
Well, I'm still using a boat from '90.
I've considered getting a new one on several occations but after comparing new boats to mine I've seen no reason to.
The hull is just as stiff as new boats, the weight is the same, it has some soft spots in the cockpit but thats about it (dosn't matter anyway so =P).
Now add that I treat my boat like a pience of crapp... If people are having problems with boats 3-4 years old now then there's defently something wrong =p
I also know alot of other people with boats around the same age and they're all fine.

Anyway, what he pointed out was not things that comes from using normal materials, but things that is caused by misstakes in manufacturing.

instead of replacing a boat every year
Unless the boats are total crapp I can not understand why that would be needed.
I've compared pretty much every single inch of my boat to new boats and there is no diffrence on the stuff that matters, neather do I feel any speed diffrence between my boat and new boats.
I'm quite sure the only reason, unless the new boats are actualy total crapp, why people switch so often is cause of psycological reason (which is quite understandable, need to be sure that you have the absolute best to be able to performe =P).

Maybe I've gotten lucky with my boat, but considering that I know of many other boats of similar age that are quite ok that dosn't seem very likely. Maybe european boats are just that much better, I don't know.
 
Anyway, what he pointed out was not things that comes from using normal materials, but things that is caused by misstakes in manufacturing.

I strongly believe that this is no mistake in manufacturing. This is a new design, and it doesn't work because when they put the hull and deck together it's not straight. Like I said, on the older boats (I'm talking a few years here) there is no lip on the underside of the deck where the deck part of the trunk fits into the hull part, like the new design is. For the older ones it's flush, I don't know how they did it back then but it looks great.

Olympic guys get new boats every year because they go soft

Theres another point, just like what we were saying about the Opti kids. When people have the means to get a new boat every year, and new gear or whatever, they'll do it. Olympic sailors have sponsors and whatever so it's no problem for them to get whatever they want.
 
Olympic guys get new boats every year because they go soft
Olympic guys get new boats every year because if they don't they'll start wondering if it's the boats fault that they're not winning =p
Another thing I've noticed is how they sell their boats for more than they payed for them so they probably actualy make money of it. Now if it works like it does in many other classes where you can buy the boats you borrow at events for a reasonably low prize they make even more money of it. I don't know if this is the case with the laser class though.
 
Olympic guys get new boats every year because they go soft

Olympic guys get new boats every year because if they don't they'll start wondering if it's the boats fault that they're not winning =p
Another thing I've noticed is how they sell their boats for more than they payed for them so they probably actualy make money of it. Now if it works like it does in many other classes where you can buy the boats you borrow at events for a reasonably low prize they make even more money of it. I don't know if this is the case with the laser class though.

Why would they go soft?

...too much overtraining?

...too many dates with the olympic-gymnast hopefuls?

:p

I think it's a combination of all of this... except the gymnast thing =0P. I think they get new boats because they CAN. Wouldn't you? They want the best of the best. And they make money off of the boats because everyone wants to by an Olympian's boat. Wouldn't you?
 
exactly

and you sail a boat for for an average of 4 hours a day, say 280 days a year, its gonna get soft no question
 
It's not the design. It's the low weight and the fact that introducing carbon to the hull would kill the class and price it out of reach.

Competitive Mumm 30 and Melges 24's trade up to new boats every few years too because they think they get soft. However, the older J22's and J24's seem to do just fine.

I agree that lasers do soften over time as most boats do. When I went from a 76 hull to a 94 hull it was like day and night. However, it's only the elite Olympic sailors that can tell the difference between a boat that is 1-2 years old compared to one fresh out of the box.
 
it's only the elite Olympic sailors that can tell the difference
Defining diffrence might be a good idea.
Anyone can notice the diffrences in stiffness by just banging around on the hull, speed diffrence might be another story though. =P
 
Yes well it always depends on how much you use the boat. Olympic sailors would obviously practice more than the majority of people. They're not exactly doing recreational sailing. They really give their lasers a work out. Well unlike Midwinters East where everyone had new charter boats, at ACCs there were a lot of really good sailors, and I don't think even one of the top ten had a 2006 or 2007 boat.
 
Changeing the hull material/design/whatever would be incredibly bad for casual sailors unless the change really makes the class ALOT cheeper and ALOT more durable.
With the hulls now a casual sailer can use his laser for some 10+ years and be reasonably competetive, even though olympic sailors might feel that they "need" to buy new boats.
If the boats are changed, then everyone will need to buy new boats or they won't be able to compete.
 
Good thinking. Being a one-design class, if you change the definition of a class legal boat would mean that everyone needs to buy a new one. If that happened that I think all of the Laser sailors would just mutiny and start a new Laser racing organization =0P. Plust anything that reinforces the structure or makes it more durable would cost the manufacturer more money and.... well it just wont happen. I think that the durability of the boats is fine the way it is... and olympic sailor can just do what the freak they want.
 
Actually, a cheaper to build, longer lasting Laser has been possible for at least 30 years. Initially the cheaper version would only be faster in chop as it would be slightly stiffer as it came from the factory.
As time passes, the cheaper Laser would stay stiff longer while older Lasers of the current design become soft and fail sooner.
Building Lasers is a business. People invest money and lives and expect to get a return on those investments. CURRENTLY< There is nothing to be gained for the manufacturers of the Lasers by producing better and longer lasting toys.
Better and longer lasting lasers will only come when there is a financial reward for the builders.

examples:
Another similar boat comes out and because it does everything a laser does except fall apart, people switch to the new boat.

Suggestion:
Build a boat that goes about the same speed as a laser and lasts a long long time. The sailors will buy your boat. Fleets of your boat will form. In an attempt to survive, Some Laser fleets will allow the similar boat to join their Laser races. Lasers will be replaced by the new durable toys.

First guy with a million bucks and the knowledge to manufacture the new improved toy can have the market.
 
I think something that could work would be if ILCA or something got someone to start building a boat that is as close to the laser as possible, but with as much durability/prize improvments as possible.
Then when the fleet of new boats has grown enough and been around for a wile so there's a good second hand market they can allow the class to compete with normal lasers (and get classed as Lasers).
The problem with this is that no matter how you do it the 2nd hand prize of lasers will probably go down quite alot.
 
That's... interesting. Vanguard would never allow this. They don't want someone else making a boat thats practically the same. And I bet the ILCA and Vanguard are great buddies. This would have to be a private thing, with a new organization, unless you can convince Vanguard to set up a whole new Laser... which they're not going to do because they're profiting off of the Laser right now and everything is going smoothly. There's no epidemic going on where everyone's boats are falling apart and they have to do a recall and stuff... like with those laptop batteries that were exploding. Though, it would be cool if Vanguard took mine and my friend's boats and gave us new 2008's. Sorry, but I really don't think that what you're saying will happen unless you get a million bucks like gouvernail was saying. You can do it!
 
I don't expect it to happend eather, just abit of random theorys that will never actualy be shown in action =p
If we are to keep the incredibly strict one-design idea that regulates the laser class we'll just have to live with this.

It's like democracy, it sucks but it's still the best way =P
 
So you don't like the strictness? I kind of do. I mean I like that someone with a lot of boat/sail/blade/spar making resources can build something better than everyone else. For me, it's only the second class I've ever been involved with, so it's great for me to be able to speed test someone else, without taking into account all of the variables in equipment we might have. I agree... it's the best way.
 
All I can say is that I am glad that they don't manufacture cars. What we would have is a vehicle that has over priced parts, no aftermarket parts only OEM available at the dealership, constantly breaking apart, inconsistant build quality and rusting out.

And oh yes the car would cost more than any other comparable vehicles
 
"What we would have is a vehicle that has over priced parts, constantly breaking apart, inconsistant build quality and rusting out."


Steve I think you just basically described every American car ever made
 
FORD....
Fix
Or
Repair
Daily
I know, an old joke.

When I was in the Navy my ship was the USS FORD and that was our motto too!

Seriously though I think that you guys who think the boats are crap are generally off base or at least going on isolated bad experiences. A small boat that holds up for 10 or even 20 or more years and keeps a pretty high resale can't be all that bad.

And for everyone who wants a cheaper boat that's even better quality (all of us, I'm guessing) it might be a good idea to remember that every North American Laser builder before Vanguard went bankrupt and Vanguard is, I believe, generally doing a much better quality control job than previous builders (weren't the '80s vintage boats generally reviled?). It doesn't do us any good at all having builders who can't stay afloat just so we can save a buck or two up front.

Certainly I'd hate to see the current builder "rest on their laurels" and not keep making incremental improvements to the product.

But I read somewhere once that car companies could make a bumper that would work at 60MPH but it would cost a fortune and weigh so much that performance and gas mileage and so on would suffer. So I'm sure someone could probably build a Laser out of unobtanium that would never break or wear out but it would likely cost so damn much that even Bill Gates might have trouble affording it. Or it would probably be such a heavy tank of a boat that no one would want to sail it. And either way the company would go out of business because no one would ever buy a second one!
 
I have a Laser that is of 1988 vintage and still looks and performs almost like new and owned it since 1993. I am perhaps very cautious of my Laser and treat it with care and luckily have gone unscathed all these years.

Yes it leaks (tried many times to find the culprit without success), the hull has gone a bit soft in the bow.

I think it is the sum of the parts (not to mention the cost) that give the boat a bad rap. Such as:
-masts have a habit of snapping
-traveler fairleads breaking at the worst time
-sails that only have a one year competitive life span that costs about 3 times as much as they should
-bailers that are one level above 'junk'
-mast steps in older boats that were under-engineered
-gel coat that is about a 1/16" thick
 
---snip---

And for everyone who wants a cheaper boat that's even better quality (all of us, I'm guessing) it might be a good idea to remember that every North American Laser builder before Vanguard went bankrupt and Vanguard is, I believe, generally doing a much better quality control job than previous builders (weren't the '80s vintage boats generally reviled?). It doesn't do us any good at all having builders who can't stay afloat just so we can save a buck or two up front.

Certainly I'd hate to see the current builder "rest on their laurels" and not keep making incremental improvements to the product.

But I read somewhere once that car companies could make a bumper that would work at 60MPH but it would cost a fortune and weigh so much that performance and gas mileage and so on would suffer. So I'm sure someone could probably build a Laser out of unobtanium that would never break or wear out but it would likely cost so damn much that even Bill Gates might have trouble affording it. Or it would probably be such a heavy tank of a boat that no one would want to sail it. And either way the company would go out of business because no one would ever buy a second one!

Not all prev builders went belly up - The prev owner before Vanguard was Sunfish/Laser - Sunfish/Laser was making money building the two boats. They bought it from Pearson. Pearson did have financial difficulties, but not because of the Laser, because of bad business decisions on the other parts of their business which led them to try and make up some of the losses cutting corners on the Laser and Sunfish. There may have been other owners that had trouble in the 80's as well building the Laser, I was out the class at that time, but I know Performance Sailcraft did just fine as the builder in the early/mid 70's too.

The whole premise of the Laser precludes the builders and the World Concil from making the boat better under the heading of "all boats are the same" Many classes have died when the class has allowed a new/improved model to be used, obsoleting all prev boats. This must be first and foremost in the decision making process, otherwise it would not be costly to fix the glaring weaknesses and produce a better boat, sail, spars and blades for a very small increase of the current cost of the current boat. But this new "improved" Laser would not be the same as those before it.

I also agree that there is some truth to the statement above that if they fixed the weaknesses, the builders will sell less new boats and replacement sails and spars and their bottom line would be affected negatively. So that would mean in addition to obsoleting all the prev boats, they would have not choice but to charge more for the new boat.
 
Coming back to quality of new Lasers. Vanguard has a problem with the centre board trunk in general. From 6 boats that I helped unloading between Christmas and New Year, 4 of them had the trunk offset to one side. One of them as much as 3/4". I don't know what the allowed tolerance is. Our coach said he has seen worse. I picked the best two for my relatives and left it at that.

In the fall there was a new boat at the Canadian NQR fresh from the dealer and the sailor noticed a definite difference on the two tacks. That boat supposable was worse than what I have seen. The dealer took it back and was trying to sell it as a recreational boat at a reduced price.

Last Year at least 2 new boats at our club were leaking. The dealer came in and fixed the gunnels.

By the way, in case you wonder how I measured the offset of the centre board trunk, we flipped the boat upside down and pulled a string from the split line at the bow to the point where the rudder attaches, that gave us the centre line.

I would rather pay 10% more and get better quality and also a longer lasting boat, but I admit I like that it is an affordable boat.

Some people here say the boats from Australia are better and buy them there. They could not buy a container load though. Vanguard got wind of it and put a stop to it.

The two boats from my relatives seem pretty good so far.

Has anybody done a weight comparison on new boats?
 
---snip---

By the way, in case you wonder how I measured the offset of the centre board trunk, we flipped the boat upside down and pulled a string from the split line at the bow to the point where the rudder attaches, that gave us the centre line.

Has anybody done a weight comparison on new boats?

Are you saying that the location of the trunk itself in the hull (not deck) was off center ? If you are, given that the trunk location is part of the hull mold how do you think that is possible.

Or, are you saying that when the board is in place, it is not dead center fore and aft and/or perpindicular to the hull bottom ?

On the weight issue, a few of us that post here have weighed new boats that join the fleets we sail in, I have the weights of 10 new boats from the past year and a half, all within a 3 pound range - now that could be because most of them are weighed before buying and the buyers are using that weight to help select, or ....
 
Coming back to quality of new Lasers. Vanguard has a problem with the centre board trunk in general. From 6 boats that I helped unloading between Christmas and New Year, 4 of them had the trunk offset to one side. One of them as much as 3/4". I don't know what the allowed tolerance is. Our coach said he has seen worse. I picked the best two for my relatives and left it at that...

...By the way, in case you wonder how I measured the offset of the centre board trunk, we flipped the boat upside down and pulled a string from the split line at the bow to the point where the rudder attaches, that gave us the centre line...

Thank you Matthias. Wow.The most Relevant post! I knew the faultiness wasn't just in two boats!

Are you saying that the location of the trunk itself in the hull (not deck) was off center ? If you are, given that the trunk location is part of the hull mold how do you think that is possible...

I agree, It looks to me that the deck part would be offcenter. I mean, if you look at the gunnels you can see that the joints are off when you follow it around. I don't know if it's that, or if theres a problem with the alignment in the mould itself.
 

Back
Top