Viper could be lighter. Carbon mast to reduce weight aloft, carbon hulls and beams also to reduce weight.
You forgot to mention why the Viper is basically over weight, its not the mast nor the hulls which is the real concern. AHPC choose for commercial economy ( cost to the bottom line on the balance sheet )to use the beams rudders and all ancillaries from its bigger sister the F18 and by design choice, to have larger bouyancy ( big hulls )than the other F16's.
No I did not forget to mention beams. If they were carbon also, retaining the same or more stiffness, then that would be an advantage. Extra volume is design choice because it performs better. If you were to build a Blade or Falcon with the same volume, then it would be heavier. Fact is the fat boy Viper is heavier than curent F16s and is competitive if not quicker.
So, it still comes down to weight?
Wasn't the Taipan down to min weight? If that's the case and the Taipan was so good, why didn't everyone build something just like the Taipan? For that matter, use all of the parts off of the Taipan like the beams and stuff, and then just make the Hulls with more volume? Why didn't that happen? Isn't the Taipan still being produced? So the beams should still be readily available, correct? So, other than the cost savings of using the F18 beams and parts, just use most of the parts of the Taipan. I would think AHPC would have thought of that.
Why didn't they do that then?
I'm not bashing the Taipan BTW or AHPC...
Just trying to have a good conversation...
Mike
The Taipan 4.9 is OD for starters, meaning it does not have to compete with market competition within the class. Secondly, the Taipan’s hull volume was too small, the platform not rigid enough to compete in the F16 class and the beam is also narrower then class allows. Increasing the beam length, diameter, reinforcing the beam seats for the extra load and twist for the kite all adds weight. Also remember the Taipan, whilst still a great boat is an old design now (about 22 + years old)
Either by design or by commercial risk aversion ( using existing parts to limit development costs and thats exactly the right route to go in my opinion ) the Viper has fallen into a real sweet spot for its handicap, good and hope all the new owners will enjoy what is obviously a cool boat.
AHPC have just built a boat that sails closer to it’s rating (Viper rating) then other F16s to their rating, thus allowing it to compete against a class that should be quicker.
My guess is that should a new Nacra or Hobie suddenly appear thats 16ft long and down around the 120 kilos then AHPC would immediately issue upgraded components to lower the weight. Nothing wrong in that in my opinion just a MK2 version.
I would bet they would produce a 125kg boat in line with the Viper, compete head to head with them and develop their own class which would be very similar to the F16, be better marketed, more numerous and active on the race curcit. F18 and F18HT.
The new Ashby boat (as well as the Flyer II) do not even have carbon hulls, they are Kevlar.
Kevlar would be another expensive option. Are the Ashby boats any cheaper then the carbon ones. Why have classes such as the F18 and tornado outlawed the use of Carbon and Kevlar in all but foils, tiller and tiller exentions and fittings. $$$$$$$$. But I am sure they are mistaking.
A landed Ashby A in the US is right around 30K. You can buy a full carbon – under min weight - Falcon for quite a bit less (~5K)than that, and you have a lot more kit on the F16.
Brett Goodall has posted a great post summarizing why it costs more for a volume manufacturer. You can do a search or I will find it for you later. Research and development to produce a boat that performs as close as possible to it’s rating, plus supplying a quality product with warranty costs $$$$$.
