Thanks Matt, my point is that you want to reduce the variables in the boats and make it more about the sailor.
This discussion would be more productive with more information... Stephen, taking the Falcon as an example and assuming for the sake of discussion a nominal weight of 112kg, what do you believe would be the actual performance impact (say minutes per hour, or equivalent delta Texel) of (a) decreasing the weight to 107kg and (b) increasing weight to your proposed 115kg, all other factors being equal?
Originally Posted by Tornado_ALIVE
Matt, how much would a sloop Falcon set me back with alloy beams, mast, spinnaker pole, glass hulls and carbon foils. And how much would this boat way.
Now how much would a sloop Falcon set me back if it had carbon mast, beams, hulls, spinnaker pole?
Can I suggest that a more relevant question is how much Matt would charge you to produce a boat that is 107kg (or if you like, 3kg under)? (Also note that this question becomes even more interesting when combined with your answer to my question above.) A full carbon boat is an interesting idea but if it comes in way under weight it doesn't really help us understand the relative merits of 107 vs 115.
Originally Posted by Tornado_ALIVE
If a sloop Viper is so quick at 130kg, how much quicker would it be if it was 23kg lighter, had reduced weight aloft, out front (spinnaker pole), was as stiff or stiffer again?
A fair question, but I think it needs to be answered in the context of some other pieces of information... e.g. how much of the Viper's 130kg is a consequence of the decision to use bigger components like beams and choice of manufacturing methods, what is the actual impact of beam size (and maybe other things) on stiffness and of that stiffness on speed, and compared with say a Falcon, how much of the increased hull weight can be attributed to the size of the hulls vs say materials or construction methods? (BTW your question about the 130kg Viper would still be valid relative to your preferred class weight of 115kg.)
