Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The J Glass Section is DBROO I (this is the stiffest/heaviest with the webbing on the side wall and thicker track bead)
Capral K4621 (I suspect this is the medium stiffness/Binks variety?)
Alcan/Comalco (This may be what Keelys is using as its definately the most flexible and lightest…especially when annodised. Bob Keeley may have/own the Dye for this one)
Boating Hardware would have a Keeley Section and I think a J Glass section for you to compare in Perth.
I think you will find it comes down to hull length being the dominant ratio ( Laser being 14ft vs Sabre 12ft) As neither the Laser or Sabre plane upwind at their best VMGs (or if your not Tom Slingsby) their course speed is very much dictated by their hull speed….which means longer = faster. “Hull speed” of a Sabre would be close to 5 knots.
As far as design efficiency goes I would imagine the Sabre is more efficient in planning mode, reaching with the chines enabling a cleaner plane but the other points of sail the Laser would be more efficient.
Thats not to say the Laser is a nicer boat to sail than a Sabre…. it steers like a truck with that silly raked rudder blade!
If you want to sail for fun and enjoyment and not sheep stations the Sabre is a better choice.current VYC Yardstick has Sabre at 127
Laser standard rig at 113
Laser Radial at 116
Laser 4.7 at 122What will tear your class apart is the infighting, networks and “purple circles” of groups aligned together against others, not minute differences in hull shapes.
Get them built, measured and on the water….then argue about what’s the best and greatest….but attack each other at your peril. There are a couple of new designs in the Northern hemisphere that would love a foothold in Australia (RS Aero & DS Zero) and they will find success at the Sabre’s (and other classes) expense on the back of the type of BS that has been mentioned here.
Why is only FS mentioned in all these posts?..there was another mold commissioned by XSP and this got zero attention or scrutiny? It measures and is also a viable option, and I’m sure is potentially fast, and created in a similar way but no controversy……..how can this be a balanced debate?My disclaimer: Not a sailor, but an admirer of your class and interested observer. I own a FS 125….and not a “Guestmember”.
I think you will find that these sections are all off the shelf from manufacturers and these companies are simply adding their names to them. Originally Alcan and Comalco produced them with varied serial numbers. There is also a James Glass section that has a thicker wall and sail track bead which makes it quite a bit stiffer (and heavier).
As to your original question Craig I would think the builder of your particular boat would be easy to track down in WA and ask him what it is/where it came from?Just a few questions, does anyone know which ply hull the new XSP Sabre plug was built from?
The original FSC plug was built from a ply hull yes?
Was there no attempts by builders (amateur or professional) of ply hulls to improve their shapes in years gone by?Maybe the min weight is too low to make comparably stiff ,weight competitive, lasting hulls in timber?
There are a number of things you could do to engineer stiffness into ply but it will always add weight…even with carbon.
I think the bow shapes and rocker lines of most ply sabres need optimising, as they are in the foam boats, and the symetry and fairness will always be a challenge.
Not sure the stiffness is really the issue. For a single sail, low rig tensioned class it should be sufficient.Hi
As an interested observer of the Sabre class and son of a current owner I read this thread with interest. As a long time 125 sailor I also took notice when “guest member”made reference to my class of choise.What the Sabre class seems to be going through now is almost a carbon copy of what the 125 class has had to deal with many years ago but in a very fast period of growth. Id be happy to discuss it in details but it would take a long time and not particularly constructive here.
Suffice to say that I hope the Sabre class maintain its roots for people to build at home (Plywood and Foam Sandwich if possible) as we have done. Yes, professional builds have their place, I own one myself due to the time/space/confidence to build issue, and it was an excellent investment (well, boats are rarely an investment).
Don’t get so hung up on shapes unless you are after that last few percent. I see the fleet at EFYC every week start and 3 quarters of them have lost at the starting signal, no matter what shape they sail. The result from last weekend saw a Formula Sailcraft hull first, home built ply boat second, YMS 3rd…….no super shape there I would say. The guys that are winning are the ones who have done the most sailing. Sabres are fortunate in that stiffness is not as big an issue so ply hulls in good condition/on weight should be more competitive than a ply 125 v foam 125.
What Barry mentions is so true and I wish the 125s had dealt with it in a similar way. Simply, the end product must measure. You may aspire to a one design principle but as anyone who has read widely on the topic will tell you it is almost impossible to achieve. Dont throw out, via misguided thoughts on creating a one design utopia, what created the class ie the ability to build at home a competitive and economical (due to no labour cost) boat.
The 125 Class is not destroyed by the way “Guest Member’. It is dealing with the usual difficulties any class does of participation, change, not “preferred” by Yachting Australia etc etc but it remains in place across the country with State and National Championships and is still a great boat to sail.
Good luck to the Sabre Association for its first WA Nationals.
Regards
Andrew Tailor
President WA National 125 Division
