I have some other thoughts on the subject actually.


When I look at the new N17 and some of the specs that are floating around on the various blogs, I think " it is basically a carbon masted F16 with curved foils"

The hullshape is a scaled copy of the nacra F16, that is very clear if you look past the distracting paint job.

The length, according Mischa de Munk who is there is exactly 17 feet instead of 17.6. If so then it is 5.18 meters against 5.0 meters of the F16. Or indeed only 7 inches longer. Indeed a length difference of a wooping 4%, you'd actually have to put the boats side by side to see the difference in length. Note that all of nacra's earlier 17 footers were all 5.25 mtr long = 17 foot 3 inches. It seems weird to go for 17.6 or 17 foot 7 inches now. Why not go for the full 18 foot and milk the marketing predjudice that is related to these numbers ?

I gether it is 2.6 meters wide against the 2.5 of the F16's. Again a difference of 4 inches and 4%.

Its mansail is 16 square meters in surface area against 15 sq. mr. for the F16. 7% difference.

The mast doens't appear to be much taller then the F16's but no hard data is available on that. I guess the mainsail luff is about 8.75 mtr on a 9.25 mtr mast (based on predecessors) so I can put a Texel rating to the boat. Compare this to 8,5 mtr by 8.5 mtr for the F16's. Less then 3%.

The overall weight is rumoured to be about 130 kg which is heavier then even the alu masted Viper despite the use of a carbon mast and a possible 5kg reduction because of it. Of course the F16 class allows caron masts to those who want one. So when pushed the viper will grow one very quickly. 130/107 = 21% difference, none in relation to Viper and indeed (130+135)/(107+135)= 9.5 % difference regarding combined overall weight, no difference with the Viper.

Its texelrating on these specs will be 101 whereas F18's is 100 and F16's at 102 with the Viper at 104. No big differences there, all less then 3% which is bugger all on the water as the Viper is proving.


It seems to me that the new nacra 17 is basically a Viper / F16 with enough of the specs slighly altered to be a totally separate class of boat but without being in a different class of performance.

That in it self is a good move by nacra. It has all the benefits of the F18 / F16 line of boats without interfering with either class.

However I don't expect it to be a game changer in the way of performance. I expect it to adhere to the Texelrating just as much as the Nacra 20 carbon appears to be doing despite its curved foils. That boat was launched in 2010 so did have sufficient time to get dialed in.

So if the new nacra 17 is to be selected then it should be for its non-interference, not for its hyped quantum leap forwards in design or performance. The data doesn't seem to support such claims at all. That is my point.

Wouter