I'm thinking of buying a new boat.
The new Taipan is about 1000 AUS more expensive here in Australia then the N17. They claim at the website that the new N17 here in AUS is weighing 120 KG and that the new Taipan is weighing about 100 kg. Is that true? Sail power looks about the same. Hmmmm any feedback appreciated. Thanks

I don't know the weight of the Nacra 17 but if I was making a choice and they were the only two to consider I'd go for the Taipan. They are a great boat.
The best thing you can do is take both for a sail. Even if you disagree with me the answer to the question, for you, should be very clear after trying both of them. Anyhow, it is just sensible to try before you buy.

Good luck,
Regards,
Phill

Hi Flying Cat,

are you in OZ, if so there are more Taipans than Nacra 17's around so that may make a difference. Unless you intend to sail with spin. all the time? If so there would be no difference in number of boats to sail against probably, as most Taipans sail in OZ without spin. most of the time.

Are you comparing prices with spinnaker, I am assuming Nacra 17 comes with ? Taipan doesn't, so is price with optional Spin. ?

Weight quoted is probably about right for Taipan, no more than a few kg. out, don't know about Nacra weight, but I would expect it to be considerably heavier than Taipan, as materials used in Taipan constuction and rig, are generaly lighter than most "manafactured boats", as AHPC cut it's teeth building A's and Mosquito's which weigh even less than Taipan.

Highly agree with Phil, test sail both if possible, if you have the experience, you will know which is for you. If not take an experienced friend.

Hope you enjoy sailing which ever you buy, hope it has a kite, look forward to hearing your experiences.

Regards Gary.

I had the same decision to make a coupple of months ago, and I went for the Taipan. The weigth was the main reason.

No regrets?

for a discussion of the Taipan boat weight go to the following post on the main forum : 2001 nationals measured weights

Wouter

You had to wait for it for 2 days Flying_cat but here is my post on comparing the two boats.

First of all, I've personally sailed/raced the Taipan 4.9, Taipan F16, Stealth F16, Hobie FX-one and Blade F16 (last boat only a very short while). I have NOT sailed or raced the nacra 17 boat. Bear this in mind when reading my comments.




Personally I would put down the extra 1000 Aus and go with the Taipan, but then again I sail a Taipan myself and it would be weird if I wasn't biased towards this design. I'm however very happy with my Taipan F16.





I assume that you've taken this info of the following webpage :

http://www.nacra.com.au/Inter17.htm

In the middle of the text it is stated that a fully rigged carbon/kevlar hulled Inter-17 is 125 kg; only to later show 120 kg in the specs summary.

The specs also mention a 9.1 mtr mast. The combined sailarea is coined at 21 sq. mtr. And the width is said to be 2.45 mtr.


I recall the inter-17 and nacra 17 widths to be more like 2.5 mtr or 2.6 mtr.

In additional I really don't see this boat fly 21 sq. mtr. of sail area. That is the same amount as the F18's. And it will mean that it is flying some 16 to 17 sq. mtr. mainsail. This is quite alot of canvas to sheet singlehandedly.

In Europe the Inter and nacra 17 sloops are flying between 17 and 19 sq.mtr. of sailarea. The singlehanders having a 13.68 to 15.25 sq. mtr. mainsail. I also never knew that the Aussie nacra 17 was fitted with anything other than a 8.5 mtr aluminium mast. Of course the specs mention 9.1 mtr. That is quite a stick on a 17 foot platform.

I do know that the Aussie Inter-17's are noticeably lighter than the Inter-17's in Europe and USA, but I don't know about those claimed Carbon-Kevlar hulls. Certainly no US or EU inter-17 (nacra 17) has carbon or carbon/kevlar hulls. glass-vinylester is the most you can expect. But I'm certainly no expert on the Australia market.

But I would certainly do a proper check-up on those specs as they appear a little to promising to me. An example : If the boat truly has all those specs than it should run of a rating noticeably faster than both the A-cat and the F18's. It should be just shy to the Tornado in both the singlehander and doublehanded modes. I really don't see that reflected in the Australian VYC handicap ratings. Nor have I ever took notice of an regatta were the Inter-17 did so well in comparison to the F18's and A-cats. That is apart from one claim from the Michigan boys (USA) who claim that a fleet of I-17R's finishing level with a US nationals nacra F18 fleet that started 5 min ahead of the Inter-17's. Personally I think this to be freak occurence as no boat makes up 5 minutes to a properly sailed F18 when having to cut through miles of dirty air; not even A-cats or Tornado's. However I have seen many times that teh I-17's got nailed to the wall by other boats. Overhere in the Netherlands the Inter-17's are racing in the slow boat fleets because of the slow rating of these boats, that is when the 17's are flying a spinnaker while the other boats aren't ! A few times I saw the lead Prindle 16 (an old and medium speed design if there is one) riding the lead I-17's tail. I have a really hard time believe both these specs and the performance promise that comes from it. But make up your own mind; this is the info I have.

I personally expect the Aus Inter-17 to be :

130 kg overall weight with plain glass-vinylester hulls
8.5 mtr alu mast
15 sq. mtr. mainsail
3.5 sq. mtr. jib
19 sq. mtr. spinnaker

Being a few points slower than the F18's and A-cats.






See my other post. Expect for a new factory doublehanded taipan about 102-104 kg of weight excluding spinnaker gear (=5kg). Deduct 2 kg if the boat is a singlehander (no jib setup); deduct 5 kg is the boat is an exclusive singlehander with a lighter and more fragile mast.




All the nacra/inter 17's here in Europe are underpowered with respect to the Taipan. By some 1.5 sq. mtr. It is said that the newer versions of the 17 (2006 and later) are carrying 15.25 sq. mtr. mainsails and 3.5 sq.mtr jib. This rig will be comparable in surface area to the Taipans. I personally still favour the Taipan mastsection and the past 15 years of optimation that has been done on it with respect to proper mainsails.




My advice, get a test sail on all boats and make up your own mind. Also have all the specs taken up in the buying contract and demand refunding when these specs are not achieved. There is too much "creative writing" going on these days.

I think the strong point of the nacra design is the bow section, there is quite some volume in there, and the platform stiffness. In all other aspects I rate the Taipan as superior. The Taipan also has received alot more development over the years, although I would really advice to go for the Taipan F16 version over the standard Taipan 4.9 boat. The new advances in mainsail design and the selftacking jib setup really do make the Taipan a better boat then it already was.

From a singlehanding perspective I really like the Taipan fittings and fit-out over those found on the Hobie and Nacra boats. It is far more tuned to singlehanded sailing. AHPC experience with the A-cats is the cause of this. Also any kg you can leave of the boat is helping you put the boat in the water and on the trailer. Personally the A-cat is king in this respect and I find my own Taipan F16 to be acceptable, but 130 kg or more is really becoming a work-out.

I was never impressed by the Dutch Inter-17 race results but then again I think that the Dutch I-17s are the most downgraded boats of the nacra inter-17 or nacra-17 series. They seem to have the smallest mainsails and often sail without a spi while the FX-ones and F16 do pull their kites. I'm convinced that the US Inter-17R is a noticeable step up from the Dutch Inter-17's.

I know only of comments from Asia (signapore), were they also have a few Aussie build Inter-17's that the boats are closer together in speed than they are in Europe. However, the Taipan was also having the upper hand here in Asia. I can't make it more precise then that.

If you are also considering other boats then I can only say that the Blade F16 that we have here in NL was definately hard to keep up with when I was sailing my own Taipan F16. I really like the Blade F16 design and do expect alot from it. Also I have milked many Blade sailors for their experiences and they all liked the Blade design alot. One boat had an issue with a hull but the warrantee is covering this. This had not taken away from the feel and performance of the design itself. Currently a Blade F16 is on top of the leaderboard in the Florida distance racing championship.

I hope all this info helps you in your decision.

Wouter

Wouter,

you are constantly comparing the Inter 17's on the NL with your selves.

I have to take exception to this now:



The reason is that they are not good sailors.

How do I know ?

I've a good mate who was over at Texel a few years ago (2 or 3).

He started well and was hit by a Tornado and had to land his boat and make repairs to one rudder.

He then went back out from the beach and re-joined.

He then passed all of the NL Inter 17's that were sailing. Now they did not have Kites. OK so you would expect him to pass them sailing single handed - they were sailing 2 up without kites and it was blowing about F5. Why, the boat can take it - I've sailed mine 30 kts with the kite up and was loving it.

When he was back in he happened to spot them landing and asked whem whay they were asiling 2 up, answer - too windy for sailing single handed. Do you have Kites he asked. Oh, yes. Much, much too windy for them !!!!


Please compare like with like.


I can lap (in a 3 lap race) one of the guys who is learning to sail his Shadow (Same SCHRS as the Inter 17) at my club. Does that make the Shadow a bad/slow boat. No.


BTW I would be expecting to LAP a P16's on most multi-lap W/L races.

If the Handicaps are similar and the boats are not performing the same, one of 2 things is wrong

1, The cacluation/measurement system is wrong
2, The sailors are not of the same skill.

Hey Scoob ! you have to read all of the post !

you wrote :




After I had written in the same posting you take exception to :



Source : post containing this quote


And in another posting of today (but before your posting) I also wrote :



Source : posting containing the quote


So I made all the explaining remarks that you have sought to introduce as corrections to my posts.

So in effect we are in full agreement and I never suggested otherwise in my posts.


In the remainder of your post you inteprete my words in a way that I cleary never intended them. I will not comment on that further with the exception of :





Well, I know the I-17 ratings numbers to be (texel/schrs) 110/1.07 while I'm sailing my F16 off (texel/schrs) 99/0.98 so if we are going by the numbers then the situation is clear enough. I only said (wrote) that my personal, on the water, experience resulted in nothing that contradicted these rating numbers. I saw these boats on the start line a fewe times and after that I never saw them again. Wether it is the crews or the boats is something the readers may determine. To be frank, I think it is a bit of both actually.

Of course I have never met the Inter-17R or Formula 17 or new Nacra 17 of course as the R version never really got into Europe for some reason and the others are still very much webpage-and-dealor-based-promises. Pardon my French in the last sentence. Lets face it; the US F17 is just a inter17R with a larger spinnaker for heavy skippers and the new EU nacra 17 is still to new to have been delivered to customers.

In addition, the thread is about the Aussie build inter-17 which is yet again a different animal then the US F17/Inter17R. So our F17 and I17R discussion may indeed be completely useless in the respect.

Mind you, that Aussie Inter-17 looks a whole lot more attractive than the EU and USA versions.

Regards,

Wouter

No, happy as ever, except the broken mast issue (see another thread).
The weight difference between the Taipan and the european Nacra I17 is almost 50 kg as I understand it, so that made the decision easy for me. Especially when it comes to be sure to be able to right the boat single-handed.
Both boats compared was second-hand ones from 1999.

Mangan,

Have you found a replacement for your mast yet ?

If not then mail me privately; for the coming few weeks you will have two possible options after that it can become difficult.

Wouter

YIKES! How'd that happen?

A storm flipped the boat over. I found the boat upside-down on the ground at my sailing-club

Forget the weight issue..
There are 4 different Nacra Inter 17's in the world.(The Aussie 1, the US 1, the R model and the original 'big' rig) But forget that!

In the world there is Formula 20, 18, 16 and 14 unfortunately the 17 won't cut it in F18 and is too big for F16! We have a nice one in Singapore that is selling cheap because no one will buy a boat that they can't sell later and without a class to race in, the boat 'doesn't exist'.

I've never trusted Nacra Australias spec' weight as it varies a lot! I've owned multiple 5.0's, 5.8's and I-17..they all varied!?

So it might cost you a 1,000 less now but when you want to sell it??? The Taipan is in my view a better boat anyway. It's lighter for sure and better through the water..but put a kite on it and its one of the most competent F-16's around and since the F-16 Class is growing there is always the potential to sell it easier..

Value for money..the Taipan..because there's almost always a ready buyer.

But go with the one-off if you must.

cheers

That's the impression I'm getting as well. Thanks for the info...