Sail cloth comparison between legal and "replica"

O

Off the beach

New Member
Hi , I am trying to find out if a standard size rig and radial size rig sail cloths are the same or different. At our club we have a couple of replica sail users who want to race alongside "legal" sail users. To make them welcome we propose setting them a modified yardstick. I need to convince our club measurer that the sailcloth is different for both sizes of rig. One boy is convinced that radial cloth for a legal sail is the same as a replica.
Any info would be helpful
 
Hi Off The Beach,

The cloths do vary but MOST of the replicas use a cloth weight very similar to the class legal sails. The exception I have come across is the Intensity sail which uses a heavier cloth for more durability.

We have found at Hunts that there is no real difference between the replicas and 'legal' cloths in terms of speed just in durability/price.

At Hunts we allow replicas for club racing only and the sail has to be 'measured' against a legal sail. If it is any different in terms of dimensions it is not allowed.

We use the I-Sails replicas on our club boats (not really justifiable spending out on genuine ones for these) and members do donate their old sails for use on the club boats (so they can be used in an open event if required).

I myself use and Intensity standard sail and whilst it does trim slightly differently to the normal standard sail (it needs a little more cunningham due to the heavier clioth weight) I do not go any faster or slower with them. If you look in the politics thread there is a lot of discussion on replica parts.

If you want more direct info feel free to send me a PM and I will fill you in on the setup we use at Hunts (which complies with the RRS).

Cheers,

Paul
 
We do actually use the same weight 3.8 ounce cloth. It is not heavier. We do have more resin in the finish of the cloth for resilience and durability.
From my experience sailing both of the sails I am not sure you can handicap one against the other successfully.
 
IntensitySails said:
We do actually use the same weight 3.8 ounce cloth. It is not heavier. We do have more resin in the finish of the cloth for resilience and durability.
From my experience sailing both of the sails I am not sure you can handicap one against the other successfully.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification guys :).

It does last a whole lot longer than the legal sail.....
 
IntensitySails said:
We do actually use the same weight 3.8 ounce cloth. It is not heavier. We do have more resin in the finish of the cloth for resilience and durability.
From my experience sailing both of the sails I am not sure you can handicap one against the other successfully.
Click to expand...

Not according to your website

"Fabric is a 3.7 oz High Performance Polyester. A high performance dinghy fabric that has been custom resin finished to meet the characteristics of the Laser mast. (160gm European weight medium finish cloth)"

http://www.intensitysails.com/prsaforla.html

I'm also quite surprised that Intensity sails has the measurement diagram on their webpage. According to my ILCA handbook and the ILCA website, this diagram is copyright protected. I wonder if they have permission to reproduce it on their website?
 
I'm also quite surprised that Intensity sails has the measurement diagram on their webpage. According to my ILCA handbook and the ILCA website, this diagram is copyright protected. I wonder if they have permission to reproduce it on their website?
Click to expand...
Making a fuss over one replicated diagram from a copyrighted document containing tens of drawings illustrates the pedantic way the class rules are enforced, in which the spirit of the rules are often trumped by inertia, reputation and tradition, justified by a narrow reading of the rules.

In particular I'm referring to the Bottleport, the Aussie glass fiber boards, and tillers.

The rules state you can have have an inspection port and clips, bags, etc. to hold things, yet the Bottleport comes along, which meets both requirements, and gets banned because it's novel and clever. I remember the silly argument asking how you'd like a manhole cover shaped like a Bottleport. That was totally spurious because the function of a manhole cover is to form a driving surface. The function of an inspection port cover is to keep water out.

The fiberglass boards are presumably legal, but the question has to be asked how it is that a strict one design class tolerates one but not all of the licensed manufacturers using a material and process that results in a clearly superior product in terms of dimensional accuracy and durability.

Finally, on tillers there are several issues. The rule is not well written, in that it encourages the use of very stiff, strong, and therefore relatively pricey materials. It's no coincidence that this is the only bit of carbon fiber you'll see on a Laser. Equally, it is not well enforced. A good proportion of the tillers protrude from the rudder stock, dip down and then continue on their straight line. Well, if they're going to be legal low profile tillers, they should taper down before extending from the head stock. But these tillers that don't actually meet the requirements of the rules have the names of well known manufacturers on them, so they slide by. Ultimately, the rule would be better written if it stipulated a minimum height of the top of the tiller above the deck, at the point where the traveler when taught crosses the tiller. If this dimension were selected appropriately, all tillers would have deep cross sections (like the standard aluminum ones), making the use of carbon fiber unnecessary to get enough stiffness to avoid bumping the traveler cleat.
 
RE: Bottle Port: The Technical committee and the measurers seem to be in favour of it, but as the class rules are currently written, it is illegal until the members of the association have voted for the class rules to be re-written in this section so that the Bottle Port is legal. Just because something is a good idea, doesn't mean that the class rules should be thrown away instantly, we including you have deliberately chosen to sail a class of boat which has one design with

RE: Fibreglass Boards, please provide the data from your testing showing that these boards are superior to the Crompton boards
The testing done by the ILCA indicates that the fibreglass boards fall within the tolerances of the class rules and for all intents and purposes equal to the Crompton boards in their characteristics. Further, from my understanding, fibreglass boards were around 20 years ago and were legal back then, but the manufacturing process did not lend themselves to mass production like the Crompton boards. This is not the first time that the manufacturers have opted to produce fibreglass boards.

RE: Tillers, I still use an aluminium one, I think it's more durable than the carbon tillers and has is no weaker (they cost about $15 to build). But all the carbon tillers I've measured meet the class rules. I'm sure there are ones out there, that don't, it just that I haven't had one presented yet that doesn't measure within the class rules. As long as the class rules are met, it's up to the individual to decide what they want to use as a tiller, the class has no input into the design, materials etc which various manufacturers have taken.

Just out of interest, is your boat 100% class legal every time the boat is raced? Are you a financial member of the association?
 
AlanD said:
RE: Bottle Port: The Technical committee and the measurers seem to be in favour of it, but as the class rules are currently written, it is illegal until the members of the association have voted for the class rules to be re-written in this section so that the Bottle Port is legal. Just because something is a good idea, doesn't mean that the class rules should be thrown away instantly, we including you have deliberately chosen to sail a class of boat which has one design with

RE: Fibreglass Boards, please provide the data from your testing showing that these boards are superior to the Crompton boards
The testing done by the ILCA indicates that the fibreglass boards fall within the tolerances of the class rules and for all intents and purposes equal to the Crompton boards in their characteristics. Further, from my understanding, fibreglass boards were around 20 years ago and were legal back then, but the manufacturing process did not lend themselves to mass production like the Crompton boards. This is not the first time that the manufacturers have opted to produce fibreglass boards.

RE: Tillers, I still use an aluminium one, I think it's more durable than the carbon tillers and has is no weaker (they cost about $15 to build). But all the carbon tillers I've measured meet the class rules. I'm sure there are ones out there, that don't, it just that I haven't had one presented yet that doesn't measure within the class rules. As long as the class rules are met, it's up to the individual to decide what they want to use as a tiller, the class has no input into the design, materials etc which various manufacturers have taken.

Just out of interest, is your boat 100% class legal every time the boat is raced? Are you a financial member of the association?
Click to expand...

Agree on the bottleport... I think it's very unfortunate that the argument surrounding this has turned into a political town hall meeting... however the rules are clear here. While I do see that sometimes there tends to be a 'pendantic' interpretation of the class rules, Alan brings up a very salient point that you, Alan and myself have chosen to sail a boat that is governed by a strict set of class rules that have so far served the Laser class well.

I think Alan's question about being 100% class legal everytime a boat is raced is a stupendous question... It's my intent that whenever my boat is raced it is 100% class legal. That doesn't mean that I am class legal every time the boat is sailed... frankly, what I do with my boat is my business... When my sailing activities come under the purview of the laser class I am subjecting myself to the rules and regulations of same, to both my own detriment and my own benefit.
 
Hi All;

I'm new to Laser sailing and will soon be racing it in my first race.

I maybe have something to contribute to the issue of "narrow interpretation" of the rules for this class.

For the last 35 years or so (almost as long as Lasers have been around) I have been involved in radio controlled model airplane pylon racing. During this time, all of the classes have either disappeared or have morphed beyond recognition from their original intent. In other words there has been a lot of instability with the rules. Classes have come and gone. The original intent of each class' rules was to level the playing field. New classes have been formed on a regular basis in order to "get back" to the original intent of the rules. Just imagine how fragmented this can make things and how adversely it effects participation.

What always happens to a perfectly good class is what I call the "inchworm" method of rules changes. Someone wants to "improve" some little thing with some "innovation". This improvement may or may not increase speed or expense, but, be sure, there is always a "good" reason given for this. One thing leads to another and in a few years a class that once cost $300 per plane and had a speed of 120 mph or so has somehow been transmuted into a plane that costs $1,300 (yes, $1,300.00) and goes 160-170 mph! The rate at which these changes happen is so fast at times that it's hard to keep up with the latest "rule change of the week". Associated with this transmogrification is a loss of attendance at the races. We are STILL plagued with this problem of people constantly wanting to "diddle" with the rules.

All I'm saying to the Laser racing community is to be VERY careful about changing things. From what I read about the Laser class, it seems to have been a remarkably stable class of racing. Cubic dollars doesn't buy success. As far as equipment is concerned, the playing field is very level. That's partially what drew me to Laser racing in the first place.

All done now . . .
 
I think I've started one of those moaning threads !!! All I was asking was....
Is the cloth for a standard sail the same material as the radial & 4.7 sail, or are they different ?

It stems from a difference of opinion as to whether using a "copy" sail was the same as an " manufacturer" supplied one. I pay for official sails and got a little p***** when someone turn up with a new copy and couldn't see what was wrong for class racing. I would like our club measurer to put a 1% handicap penalty on for not being in class. Then when it comes to prize giving, if they are in the medals , they don't get the "laser class" silver cups.
 
what dwb said, I agree!!!! seen it in the opti world and plenty of other "one design" classes that are NOT anymore where you are NOT competitive if you don't have 100 percent of the "new" go fast widgets. a strict class rule (amongst other beauties) is what attracted me to the laser class. it is no the guy's spars or blades or sail or whatever that is beating me...it is the sailor being faster than me...and I need to learn more, hike more, be smart about course management, and for one..get better starts!!!

enough said :)

Antolin
full rig 155456 CHEESECAKE
 
Off the beach said:
I think I've started one of those moaning threads !!! All I was asking was....
Is the cloth for a standard sail the same material as the radial & 4.7 sail, or are they different ?

It stems from a difference of opinion as to whether using a "copy" sail was the same as an " manufacturer" supplied one. I pay for official sails and got a little p***** when someone turn up with a new copy and couldn't see what was wrong for class racing. I would like our club measurer to put a 1% handicap penalty on for not being in class. Then when it comes to prize giving, if they are in the medals , they don't get the "laser class" silver cups.
Click to expand...

I dont think it's moaning, I think each of us assign value the class rules in a different way... I for one have no problem with replica parts as long as it's understood that they are what they are... not class legal.

The flip side is that such tight control makes Laser parts more expensive (specifically with regard to the sails)... the boat is the class and the class is the boat...
 
Off the beach said:
I think I've started one of those moaning threads !!! All I was asking was....
Is the cloth for a standard sail the same material as the radial & 4.7 sail, or are they different ?
Click to expand...

For the class legal North Sail, the answer is no, it's not the same cloth. I would suspect the answer is the same for Hyde as well - The standard uses fill oriented, the radial uses warp oriented.
 
On the centerboards first, because it's my biggest beef. If someone wants to pony up several thousand dollars to compare the fiberglass boards to the foam core ones on a coordinate measuring machine and then with wind tunnel tests (easier to match Reynolds numbers in a wind tunnel than a water tunnel), I'd be happy to arrange it. But, in the absence of hard data, I am confident that the fiberglass boards are superior in dimensional accuracy and durability. That these new boards meet the class rules really doesn't mean much, because all the class rules specify is the planform and maximum thickness. It wouldn't be hard within those constraints to come up with a vastly superior centerboard.

On the Bottleport, conveniently, the class rules on inspection ports and clips for storage are adjacent to each other.
20. INSPECTION PORTS
Inspection ports not exceeding 153 mm internal diameter
may be installed on the deck or in the cockpit to provide
access to the hull cavity, provided that any inspection
port is fitted with watertight threaded covers (any bayonet
mounted parts are deemed to be not threaded). Storage
receptacles are permitted underneath hatch covers.
21. CLIPS AND STORAGE BAGS
Clips, ties or bags to stow or secure safety or other
equipment may be used on the deck, in the cockpit, or
around the mast.
​
As I interpret it, the Bottleport combines the function of inspection port cover and storage clip, so I think it's fine.

On tillers. I have quite a few Rooster products, and I'm happy with them. However, I'm pretty sure the fillet between the shaft of their tiller and the part inside the headstock lies outside of the headstock. According to the class rules, that fillet should be inside the headstock. I think it's unlikely, though, that a Rooster tiller would be chucked out of a regatta.

I think we all like it that the Laser is a one design class that actually means one design. However, I think common sense should be overriding principle both in the writing and interpreting of the rules.

Lastly, I don't think it's kosher to edit one's post ex-post facto, and I'm surprised the forum allows it.
 
Centreboards: Like most design aspects of the laser the mechanical and physical properties (dimensions, shape, bend characteristics, weight etc) are covered in the builder’s manual and not the class rules. The fibreglass boards had to match properties with the Crompton boards.

Bottleport: Fortunately, your interpretations of the class rules mean naught.

Tillers: I suggest you go read the class rules, in particular 16(a)iii.

Editing: The edit function allows me to correct any typos, poor English expression and clarify a point. I'm sure most forum users would rather attempt reading something which is readable.

This is just covering old ground, rehashed yet again by people who only want to interpret the class rules to their own benefit or whinge when they believe that someone is getting an advantage that they aren’t, but are usually quick onto something new to gain an advantage. :tired:
 
Beachcomber said:
It's your sarcasm that makes you so charming. Apparently, though, it's the rules themselves that count for naught.
Click to expand...

I would beg to differ. The class rules are extremely tight and specifically disallow anything that is not specifically permitted.

Some might say that is a backward way of doing things but it does stop people people doing things under the banner of 'well the rules don't say I am not allowed this.....'

In terms of interpretations of the rules the only opinins that count are those of the measurers. The class does have a chief measurer who (I believe) has the final say if there is any ambiguity. I could be wrong (and Alan do correct me here) but I believe that it was the chief measurer who deemed the bottleport 'illegal' under the class rules. I also believe that a lot of people think that the bottleport is a very good idea and is going to be included in the next round of changes to it becomes legal. Having said that there is nothing stopping you from using one you just need to be aware that (if you are at a regatta) you are likely to be protested (or thrown out by a measurer). I also believe that you can put a 'normal' cover on the bottleport mount which may satisfy the measurer (as long as you do not have a bottle in it or if you can take the container for the bottle out).
 
Almost correct Jeffers. :)

Like district measurers even as an ISAF measurer I can only make an interim interpretation for a specific event and I must seek clarification from the World Measurer, ASAP. Usually, I'll have clarification from Jean-Luc within 36 hours. He is the only person within the class that can make lasting interpretations. However, he’ll often run his thoughts past the technical committee and other select people on things which are not clear cut.

I will add that the ISAF measurers generally are aware of previous decisions and interpretations. In addition at major events we often work together so that we become as a group more consistant.
 
Just have seen some of my words below are now redundant, in reason of the relpies #18,#19, but I do not delete my remarks now.. However:

Beachcomber said:
....
I think we all like it that the Laser is a one design class that actually means one design. However, I think common sense should be overriding principle both in the writing and interpreting of the rules.

...
Click to expand...

Hi,
1.)

If one reads the international class rules for the LAser class correct: Only the Chief measurer is permitted to interpret the class rules (Source: "ILCA By-Law 1": Part Two, No. 2.: "Measurement", Sentence 1).

This aspect has been discussed to death, in the former past here at TLF. Alan gives us many very helpful "hints" but at least, if you really have "problems" with the class rules: go and write a long letter to the "ILCA Chief Measurer" (in the moment this is: Mr. L. Michon, from France). His email address you find easy in the Laser Handbook (if you are member of the ILCA you get it once a year). The more "feedback" the ILCA Chief Measurer gets, the more he gets something to think about to perhaps optimize the actual class rules.

Of course we, the common Laserites, are permitted to interpret the class rules, too. BUT, it is never the "official sight". And: if your "interpretations" are "correct or not correct" you get a very serious answer at the next official measuring at a major sailing event of the Laser Class. Good luck for....


2.)
sorry to say it:
"Beachcomber" you began to steer this thread absolutely out of topic of this thread.
I would appreciate, if the admins of TLF separrate replies #5,#6,#7,#8,#9,#10,15,#16,#18,#19,#20 (my relpy) to a separate thread.

I have nothing against a "bloody discussion", as I am sometimes an "edge head in discussions", ... all know that here at TLF.

But "Off the beach" has presented an interesting question ABOUT SAILS and he wants ansers to this topic, I am afraid.
As for me: I'll try to do my very best, next time if I am downstrais at my sails or at the club, to look for an answer and compare my North Radial Sail to a Hyde Radial Sail (Both "MK VI" Series) and I compare the results to my Hyde Standard (of 2005). Unfortunately don't own a North Standard sail in the moment.


Ciao and happy Wednesday sailings

LooserLu
 
IntensitySails said:
We do actually use the same weight 3.8 ounce cloth. It is not heavier. We do have more resin in the finish of the cloth for resilience and durability.
Click to expand...

Slightly off topic but last year (or even the year before) I bought an Intensity sail off of e-bay. I haven't used it yet but I did take it out and look at it last night in anticipation.

It was a great deal and came with lots of extra items. In the sail bag I found a new style clew tie-down, a roll-up sail bag, tell-tale's, numbers, battens, the nicest sailing calendar I've ever seen, and of course, a brand new sail.

I just wanted to thank you guys for making a great replacement product that's clearly high quality. The extras are all things that I needed and only made me more pleased that I'd bought the product.

This will be the first new sail I've ever used after sailing for 27 years with the original Laser sail (that's NOT a joke!) I'd never seen a new sail before and the difference between the original and the new one is incredible. My 27 year old sail is so soft you could make a satin bedsheet out of it.

I can't wait to get out on the water with my new sail - thanks very much and thanks for the extras - I needed them all :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top