Sent an email to Vectorworks Sail. No response yet. Here's the gist:



So, how'd I do? Is thinking about this boat mainly as recreational heretical? Like hooking up a thoroughbred racehorse to a kiddie cart?

I really like this hull config pic:

Shipping to Canada was no problem for them. At a price of course. The boat was boxed up in 2x2 and plywood crates with foam supporting the boat. A forklift had punctured the plywood but the hull was untouched. The mast was shipped in a cardboard tube. Some assembly required of course but I found the instructions fairly good.
I am confident the VWM can adjust the price for your de-optioning it.

The last question is a bit more difficult. Being a performance boat means that it is more delicate than anything else you've ever sailed. I moved up from a solid glass Nacra and was shocked to find out that knees and elbows can and do dent the hulls while you are climbing back on after a capsize. So imagine what more "abusive" type behaviours can do. It needs to be treated with respect.
Will you be able to use beach wheels to launch and retrieve your boat? No dragging this puppy across the beach.

Matt had to go out of state for a few days, death in the immediate family, I'm sure he will work with you when he gets home.

As far as is the Blade a "Recreational Boat"? Well, like any top end race boat, if you take care of it, it will take care of you. If you drag it up the beach over rocks with no beach wheels, not so much.

What is your experience level with catamarans, and how do you intend to "treat" the boat?

That's good to know.


That's good to know too.


But that surprises me. Beach wheels I do have. Abusive behaviors I am not looking to do, but once in a while stuff happens. Specs on hull thickness compared to other boats?

Part of reason that I am asking is that the company website is basic with few boat specs, parts specs, shipping option information, trailer information/recommendation, etc.

Nice to hear from people who have dealt with them. Thank you.

Other reason is that I simply like the hull config compared with other 16' boats. Adverts emphasize an important "tweaking down" feature -- the no-pitch bows. (I know that there is no cat that can't be stuffed...)

Plus I am assuming that the US version is somewhat different from other versions? Or not?

For instance, are the rudders longer or shorter than other location models or on older boats?

We have really enjoyed our Blade. Matt offers GREAT customer service, is a great guy, and builds a great boat. Yes, it can be pitched -we have done it---but not easily. We have had ours underwater plenty of times and it just keeps driving. Yes, the boat is light weight and that can come with a price. Don't drag it around the beach like a Hobie 16 or 18 and you should be fine. We have had a few chips on corners (dagger boards and rudders) but nothing that a little Marine Tex can't fix.
The Blade is a great boat that will fly! Good luck, and great sailing!!!

I have a EU model of the American blade. Hulls are the same and I think also ruddershape and daggerboards are.

I have sailed the boat for 2 years now on the Northsea (rough conditions) and haven't had any problems with the Blade.
What concerns options, I would recommed to take the spinnaker, it is soooooo much fun. As far as I know, the only real options you still have are: 1up or 2up configuration (with or without jib) and carbon used in the hulls or not. I have the version without carbon and don't have any issues with it.

My father (65) takes the Blade out and he's also very happy with it.

Gill

Thanks.

Quick note: I got a nice email package from Matt (yes, Joanna) that touched on most all questions. Hull construction/specs are involved and haven't time yet to go through that in detail yet.

The opportunity to look at product information is something I appreciate much -- somewhere between abyss of no response (like getting a roofer when you need one) and the hand-holder where the salesperson won't leave you alone to think.

There is a third choice of boat that is between premium don't-touch-the-dock! racing boats and the drag-it-up-the-beach recreational boat, isn't there? Just a great, agile ride. Does Blade 16 compare with FXOne or the 580?

I think the Nacra 500 would be more suitable for comparitive purposes than the 580.

A few boats get a bad rap here with respect to being labled "fragile". The A's primarily and the F16 to a lesser extent.

It is true from the standpoint you can not build lighter without making the skins thinner. (at least with the materials used to fab hulls today) It does not however, take a very large difference in skin thickness to make a huge difference in hull weight, so the relative impact resistance between most brands of boats is not as large as some would have you believe.

The issue with the very light boats is that they are so much easier to lift and move that it is not difficult to take the extra steps to make sure they stay protected. You pay a lot of money for a new boat, so it is a pretty big advantage in my book to be able to more easily take care of that investment. The truth is, that no, cored, round bottom boat is going to take being drug across rocks or banged into docks without some damage, ding or dent.

As far as comparing boats go, the only real way is to arange to get a ride yourself on whatever options you are looking at. There is not any boat that fits everyones needs or desires. There is a pretty good variety of boats avaialble in the 16 footish range, all with a like variety of feel and performance. Forum opinions will be slanted to the boat they own or the most prevalant design in an area. If you race 1 design, you will want whatever is the boat being raced. If performance/feel is the important factor then you need to feel it yourself and let that help decide your path.

I would go ahead and post my view here on boats, but you can probaly already guess <img src="http://www.catsailor.com/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

This boat is very fast and responsive. Matt and Vectorworks back up their product in a very professional manner. I can tell you from experience that this boat walks away from an FX-one upwind and does a horizon job downwind. If you aren't the type to do D-Day beach landings and understand that sand is an efficient abrasive-you'll do fine. Watch out for rocks!

Here's a bit more info for you.
We modified the Blade and came up with a Hybrid. This was my first post on it.
http://boatsbikesboards.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/hybrid-sailing/

Since then I've raked the mast back a bit as the 'new' settings on the Goodall Wingmast really powered the boat up a lot! Raking the mast back will give us more windward ability as well as lift in the nose... then she'll fly.

We'll soon be having a 'face-off' with the Viper here so that should make a good read. Will make another post about Hybrid as she looks really nice now in her new livery!

The Hybrid Blade is much stiffer than original and this one is up for sale and its got the full works... Contact info@prosail-asia.com if you're interested.

More soon, going to prepare for the "Face-Off"...

I like your website, a lot of interesting stuff up there (also non-sailing).
You have also devoted a whole page about the extra weight of the Viper vs the Taipain but without actually telling how much the Viper weights.
So what is the all-up weight of the Viper?

10cm of stretch in 8 knots??

I think the FX-one compares alot more closely to the Blade F16 then the Nacra 580. I personally don't see any advantage of the Nacra 580 over the other boats mentioned. It is not significantly faster, but it does weight a ton more. It still has foamed core hulls and that means that it too will dent and crack when struck or encountering a rock or sharp pebble.

The FX-one is just as much a modern foam cored and flat keeled hull as any other modern cat. In fact, halve the difference in weight between an F16 and FX-one is found in other parts then the hulls. Heavier mast, heavier daggerboards, heavier rudders, heavier rudderstock and heavier beams. So don't expect its hulls to be significantly more dent resistant. The data simply doesn't support such a claim. In fact there is a FX-one with two dents in its hulls that I'm guilty of putting them in.

Best advice is as Matt says; get a test ride on all of them and then decide.

Wouter

Thanks for the comments on other topics. F16's are fast but ultimately Ducatis are way faster!

There was much debate about the weight of the Viper which came from 001 using the F18 Capricorn boards and rudders. Platform weights are now 120kgs.

If you made a Taipan the same width and blew the hull volume out to the same - it'd weigh exactly the same too! Pulling the Viper, Taipan and Blade up the ramp at the end of a sail it's Taipan, Viper, Blade in terms of 'easy'.

I can definitely tell you, any kilos the Viper is perceived to be carrying is more than compensated for by the dynamics! Seriously you can push it way harder than anything I've tried in the past.

We'll be pitting our Hybrid Blade against the good Vipers here so it's going to be an interesting shoot out! I guess we're in a rather unique situation as far as F16's go. 20 X Taipans, 3 X Blades, 11 X Vipers.

Jumping from one to another gives us a good taste of all of them...

Stretch indeed!
There's abit of give in all sorts... if you release the luff line and stretch the sail.. you'll be surprised how far it will go.
Its more in the knots that hold all the bits together.. halyard, pole bow ropes...it all compress under load. We like to have the luff tight if a nice deep entry and then flatten the entry as required by easing some halyard - works good and took us a few solid races to get the luff length right...

lol


Oh yeah.


I had read in particular that post that you wrote on the site. Interesting, says:

"...the beam landings have been completely re-worked to accept bigger beams." and "All this work addresses what I think was the problem with the original." and "The huge beam setup has dramatically improved the boat. It was clearly evident the amount of deflection on the Original but almost none on the Hybrid."

More particulars? (Just a question.)

OH, you Ducati?! Put a mast on Ducati Monster?:



Thanks for responses on FX. I threw in the 580 was just as a clunker. While I got challenges from Bobcat and Wouter, I fully expected more. Like: "580 weighs like a truck, it's got no daggerboard, just centerboards, and it's 18 feet long! What's wrong with you?!!"

When I mentioned needing a critique in the beginning, it was not only on the email to Vectorworks but a critique of the boat also.

In the opening line at formula16.org says:

Early in 2001, a small group of sailors felt the Formula 18/20 and the A-cat classes left a part of the sailor community wanting.

Yeah? A-cats have always looked like the hottest class...

JJ,

Ducati Scott (Scott McCook) is one of the main pushers behind the AHPC Viper F16.

Additionally the VWM Blade F16 that went to Singapore is of the 2005 variety with an Ulman suit of sails and McKenzie set of rudders etc. The newer VWM versions have progressed significantly beyond the 2005 version (very first) in my personal opinion. I have personally crewed on both versions and the 2007 version with EU boards was a significantly better boat all-round. In fact this version with the same skipper came second in this years Global Challenge. Sadly, the Viper was unable to complete its series.

I'm writing this down as I feel you should be aware of what the guys in Singapore are using as a "benchmark". Basically the Blade F16 versions currently sold by VWM will compare much to the older 2005 version as the new Viper does. The Viper does have a different volume distribution however that improves its downwind ride as does the Aussie build Blade F16. VWM never changes the hullshape from the original model, while it did change the foam core, the laminate layup and local reinforcements to improve the final product and reduce its weight.

Also note that the Viper team will consistantly advertise that "blowing up the boat" will result in 120 kg ready-to-sail weight or more. Fact of the matter is that all F16 builders (VWM, Australian formula cats and Stealtmarine) are building F16's down or under minimum weight using the alu mast. All of these designs have more volume enclosed in the hulls then the Taipan with the Stealth and Aussie Blade having lots more volume in the hulls.

While I personally believe the Viper to be a good boat and I will say both in public and private that a 120 kg F16 will be a fast puppy; I don't think that any comparisons to a 2005 VWM Blade (first batch) is a good and honest endeavour. Much like "benchmarking" the 2007 prototype 137 kg Viper F16 would be fair.

My own widened and upgraded Taipan F16 weights 120 kg ready to sail and is pretty fast. A friends early F16 is of the same weight with an early 2006 Ashby suit of sails and we are sailing that boat down to its European F16 rating (= basically same as F18 rating). I don't think that 13 kg overweightness to the absolute minimum (107 kg) that the Viper F16 is now claimed to be is a major drawback. Although I personally do lay the line at 125 kg "garanteed and confirmed". The development going into the sails and systems is far more important. I say this out of personal experience with two 120 kg F16 boats. But of course I'm equally convinced that say a 110 kg Viper F16 will be better then a 120 kg (or 125 kg). Basically the first boat will be able to carry a heavier crew at the same performance. This may not be a much importance for crews at Singapore, who I classify as typically light), but it may matter to crews from north-west Europe who tend to come in above of 145 kg. The crews I have formed with the owners mentioned in this post are betwee 155 and 160 kg so my experiences are derived from boats being sailed by heavy crews. My own boat is a homebuild upgraded and widened Taipan 4.9

I hope this all helps.




I don't think things are so hot when even I on a homebuild boat (absolute amateur) are passing them on the downwind leg. Personally, I don't go for looks but for real performance !

And of course there is not a more manly picture then a solo F16 skipper trapping downwind under a spinnaker. Looks way better then crounching in the middle of the tramp doing the wildthing trying to saw your way through the mainsheet blocks !

Honestly, the A's have a very nice class going with very high grade international events and technical innovation, however there is more to the comparison. Performance wise I don't really dare call a winner in a contest between an A and a F16. That spinnaker is a huge boost downwind and the A has to be really in front on the upwind or see its lead disappear within seconds almost. Sailing under spinnaker is a huge recreational crew pleaser, it is just so much more fun. The F16 is also a significantly better distance racer/tourer then the A, which is also not unimportant for recreational crews as that is often the only type of race they do. Often there isn't alot up straight upwind work in these events, which is by far the biggest strongpoint of the A. The differences technology wise between the A's and F16 are not that great. Put a well developped carbon rig on a well tested F16 platform and there will be almost nothing between these two types of boat. The F16 can be raced very well against other modern spi boats like the F18's which are unbundanned the world over. The A-cat / F18 comparison is problematic to such an extent that A's often are placed on a seperate course then the F18's. No A-cat skipper enjoys rounding the A-mark in front of a pack of aggressive F18 crews. As soon as they round the mark they put up the kite and go hunting downwind where the A's are indeed unpredictable obstacles that snake about downwind unless they were really far in front when rounding. After that is pretty much game-over as even an A has trouble getting back in the lead through a pack of 10 larger boats producing lots of dirty air. The F16 will handle such a mixed fleet better then the A, mostly because it can defend its position downwind and even gain on this leg; thus setting itself up for a good second upwind leg.

This are things to consider in my opinion.

Wouter

This is why I have set up my boats with pre-bent pole, using static lines, and generally removing all the stretch I can from the systems. I want my luff stable so I can trim it. If it stretches 8cm, that is a huge change of shape to the luff of the spi which you can not control.
All my spis have had a 2mm or thicker spectra line in the luff, which I have set up as I want it on the beach. The cloth may stretch, but the luff line should take most of the load. With well aligned panels the luff should handle the loads gracefully. The number of panels and their layout is one of the large factors when trying to account for stretch. Few panels is cheaper, but many panels makes the spi more stable, prolongs lifetime of the sail and of course makes it more expensive. Personally, I think a gore larger than 7degrees for a panel in the luff is too wide and will have too many threads in the cloth off-axis to the loads for best performance. Much the same goes for the leech.
Personally I dont subscribe to the "ease to flatten" idea. I think it is much more important to sheet the spi and sail the proper way to get best VMG, and going the right way of course.


What is excluded from this weight. Sails? Boards? Rudders? Or is this ready to sail weight?


Why?

Thanks for the pic' of the Monster... Ducatis are great - not as fast as the Suzuki Hayabusa 1300 that I had before the Duc'! I swapped cos' the Brembo brakes on the Duc are worth every penny!!

The issue
The US Blade has a small (by comparison) front beam. When we put the boat on the lawn and picked a bow up there was a large deflection (something like 80mm) before the other hull left the ground.

Flex on any platform is the speed robber! We decided that if we need more speed from the Blade platform, it had to be stiffer!

Most 'rotation' is around the fore beam. The rear takes up the torsional load - we learnt that when we made Agent Orange some years back. So a huge rear beam was required.

At the sametime the Viper landed. Its got F18 sized beams - stiff you bet (about 15mm deflection)! So we decided to go that way as we could get beams and rig from one good source.

But beefing up the beams would then mean that the load would transfer to the hull bulkhead. So we had to beef these up as well. That meant decks off! Once the decks were off, new beam landings and bulkheads went in. We took the opportunity to add a subdeck into the bow area as we knew that the Goodall Wingmast with the current F16 set up, would develop more load and the additional load would be carried in the bows.

It was a huge job but expertly carried out on an Indonesian Island 20 miles south of us! The same factory that builds the Capricorn F18! So now we have a Blade F16 that's built tough to carry all the extra loads. When the decks went back on, the join line was polished out so it looks as smooth as now! Beautiful.

On our first sail, it was noticeably stiffer than the original... that can only mean good things.

Of course our next challenge is to sail it against what I believe is the benchmark platform now. A bit of rake, a bit of tweaking the ruder alignment and we'll see what we can do.

It's interesting for us as we've just got the Vipers so tuned up now. But with the same exact rig, we'll be pushing the lessons over to the Blade platform. If you looked through the Archive on my Blog, you'll see very detailed explanations. Soon we'll have those for the Blade too.

The Nacra 580. Yes its big, about the same weight as a F18. We've just resurrected an old Nacra 5.8 and surprisingly, its nice to sail. Sort of like driving a Limo!