Catsailor.com

Falcon compared to Viper

Posted By: SIAM

Falcon compared to Viper - 03/17/10 12:25 AM

Will buy my first f16 this year moving up from a H16
I will probably sail half the time with crew half solo. No other boats here and no serious racing yet.

I will have to import a new boat so am choosing between the Viper and Falcon as they are the newest designs

Has the Falcon moved on much from the Viper hull design and general boat set up?

As I see it the Viper seems to come from a much longer pedigree which is attractive . but the Falcon weighs 20kg less according to specs which surely will help moving the boat around on soft sand and righting when I am on my own.

Are there any other major differences?

I have sailed the Viper for a few hours but will have no chance to try a Falcon

I appreciate its all a compromise and would appreciate any advice before making a final decision
Posted By: pdwarren

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/17/10 01:18 PM

I have a brand new Falcon sitting on my driveway right now, having sailed one at the GC last year and been very impressed by it, so obviously my opinion is that of a man who chose the Falcon over other F16s...

The Falcon is a new hull shape, but in terms of build and set up it's very much an evolution of the Blade that Falcon Marine (formerly Vectorworks) have been building for a number of years. This shows in the design and layout of the various systems, which in my opinion, are now extremely well sorted as it comes from the factory.

For me, the extra weight ruled the Viper out, and that's not particularly a concern about boat speed or even ability to right: when the tide's out at our club*, the ramps up from the water are pretty long and steep, and the idea of dragging an unnecesary 20kg up those ramps single handed just doesn't appeal.

Beyond that, I don't think there are any great differences. The Viper uses an under-the-tramp downhaul system whereas the Falcon uses an internal downhaul system in the mast. Both are neat, but I had the internal system on my old Blade and I know it works well.

Paul

* Yes, I sail at an inland reservoir, but every few months London gets thirsty, or Thames Water screw something up, and we end up sailing on a puddle at the bottom of a 75ft deep reservoir.
Posted By: LuckyDuck

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/17/10 06:23 PM

I like both boats very much but I'm buying the Falcon for the same reason, weight. Coming up our club beach is where the extra weight would punish me as I pretty much sail solo always. Ed
Posted By: tshan

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/18/10 04:03 AM

Interesting ... you guys like lighter boats??? Stop the insanity.

You can't go wrong with either. If I were buyin' today: Falcon + Goodall sails. Just me - don't be a hater.
Posted By: Stewart

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/18/10 07:33 AM

I don't know where you are.. maybe also consider the Stealth and Blade..
best of luck.
Posted By: Learning to Fly...

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/18/10 10:22 AM

From the other thread it seems the ideal solution is an Aussie Blade with a Viper rig. Get best of both worlds.
Posted By: Gilo

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/18/10 11:39 AM

Unless you are a very talented sailor, stick with what the manufacturer offers.

On catsailingnews.blogspot.com there is a small article on the Falcon.

Gill
Posted By: Buccaneer

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/19/10 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by nacrajon
From the other thread it seems the ideal solution is an Aussie Blade with a Viper rig. Get best of both worlds.


Does the "viper rig" include the beams or do you mean essentially the Taipan rig?
Posted By: Learning to Fly...

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/19/10 11:33 AM

The comment was in jest, Viper mast and sail on a Aussie blade.
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/19/10 12:35 PM

Quote

Does the "viper rig" include the beams or do you mean essentially the Taipan rig?



Actually Buccaneer, the F16 rigs are not the same as the Taipan rigs.

We started out with the Taipan rigs (with an added spinnaker) but soon fitted longer spreader arms (not allowed by Taipan class rules), raised the hound fitting (not allowed by Taipan rules), fitted a larger squaretop mainsail (not allowed by Taipan class rules), hoist the mainsail to higher points above the mainbeam (not allowed by Taipan class rules), have a different width distribution along the mainsail (not allowed per Taipan class rules), etc.

Over the years the F16 rig and Taipan have diverged although some convergence was seen when the Taipan class voted to accept their new squaretop mainsails (F16 spin-off). Both classes still use the same basic bare mast section but increasingly differ in the way they are fitted out and how they flex in combination with their difference mainsails.

They are becoming increasingly different engines.

Of course each vote in the Taipan class to open up their class rules to allow for these F16 inspired changes will see a momentary converge. That is true.


The Taipan rig was a great starting point, absolutely no doubt about that, but there has been significant (and specific) F16 related development.

Wouter
Posted By: Buccaneer

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 03:48 AM

True. grin

It's also true that lighter boats are a hell of a lot more 1) practical and more importantly 2) handle that much better. That's why I'd tend to go for the Falcon over the heavier Viper (speed is not an issue between the two designs as AHPC has proven that the heavier boat can keep up).

So from a purely business standpoint it makes since that AHPC would want to raise the class minimum weight as they lack two important selling points over their competitors. cool

Also interesting to me how the Aussies have moved production overseas while the Americans and Europeans seem to still be able to manufacture lighter boats and be competitive. Funny but somehow I assumed that cost of production was actually lower in AUS then it was in let's say the US or Europe so I do really need to update my economic reference points for these new modern times.. wink

Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 03:52 AM

What is the real world weight difference? I'd look myself, but I'm not sure where to look for the last GC stuff.
Posted By: Brett Goodall

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 04:52 AM

Lighter boats are easier to handle?? On the beach yes, but on the water I don't agree with you at all.

From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.

But Hell... what do I know?
Posted By: Tornado_ALIVE

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 06:05 AM

So what is the hull volume difference between the Viper and the Falcon? Which is the stiffer platform? What weight are the Falcons comming in at. For that matter, how many F16s weigh min weight, how many are 5 or more kg over min. Are there any F16s carring lead correctors.

There is a reason why the heavier Viper is so quick. It is a better hull design, has more voulme and is a stiffer platform.

All these weather you want to believe it or not, do make a difference.

As for boat weigh and handleing, as what Brett said.
Posted By: Stewart

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 08:52 AM

every design is a compromise.

AHPC has its compromise as does Vectorworks, as an examples.... To skew the rules to suit one design over another is wrong. Unless your pushing for an one design class..
Posted By: Brett Goodall

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 09:10 AM

Who is trying to skew the rules. We have a major concern at a cost blow out in the class. The class has weighed up this and doesn't agree, that's fine. It is their decision. I'm not going to debate the where's and how much's in regards to this, that has been done to death I've the last year.

But to answer you question: take the boats for a test sail and see which one you prefer. If you think you can build/assemble a better one than the manufacturers, go for it!! We might learn something out if it.
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 09:42 AM

Quote

From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.

But Hell... what do I know?




Humm, from experience I say light boats are more fun to sail.

I find F18 sailing (outside of fleet racing) a little dull by comparison and I know that I'm not the only one.


Besides I know the heavier FX-one (150 kg) was significantly less fun to sail then my lightweight F16 because it was significantly more flighty, less forgiving and harder to drive. I put that down to its use of a cut-down Tiger F18 mast (far too stiff), use of F18 daggers (far too long and too much surface area) and hull volume too much centralized under the main beam for 1-up sailing (stern dragging or pitchpoling). As a singlehander it should have been designed noticeably different. As a versatile boat (1-up + 2-up) it should have been designed alot more clever, especially in the keel line. Overall boat weight was hardly a redeeming factor in the way this boat sails.

Therefore I don't think there is much truth to the rule of thumb you state.
Posted By: Jalani

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Wouter
You ask us :" What do I know ?"

I answer :"Good question. I'm beginning to wonder."


If I was a moderator ....................


Wouter, can we keep discussions civil please? Your posts of late have been enjoyable reading - informed, reasoned and well constructed. Why go back to personal attacks? In general, they're unwarranted, vague and essentially wrong.
For your own good, if nothing else, I'd like to see you withdraw the above throw away comment as, in truth, it shows you in a very poor light.
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 10:07 AM

Quote

What is the real world weight difference? I'd look myself, but I'm not sure where to look for the last GC stuff.



Karl,

A good rule of thumb is that fully fitted 2-up glass/alu F16's such as the US Blade and Falcon are about 3 to 6 kg above min. ready to sail 2-up weight (107 kg). First generation Blades were a bit heavier then that; later Blades like the Alter Cup Blade (and the Aussie Blades) are low in that range.

Main reason for this is that the builders figure that there is no point in producing the alu/glass version at lower weights as the upgrade to a carbon mast will lower overall boat weight by about 4.5 kg and place the boat right near to min. class weight. Going below below the min. class weight is not considered attractive.

The Vipers are quoted by AHPC as being 129 kg in 2-up mode. I remember actually some of the measured weights at the GC2009 to be around 130 kg and just over. All boats were previously sailed (both Vipers and Blades/Falcons) and it maybe logical to see them weight in a little heavier.


There are minimum weight boats around in the F16 class.

I say a good rule of thumb of the weight difference between both alu/glass boats is (on average) 130-112 kg = 18.5 kg with on average about 22.0 kg when compared to a Carbon masted/alu/glass F16.

Wouter
Posted By: Stewart

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 10:30 AM

actually if you look at my past posts I suggest to anyone who is looking, looks at all available boats and decide..

I have built a F16 and will again (hopefully soon).. Second boat in the F16 class as an "optimised" design, I believe to Wouter's F16 and a unique design (I was too cheap, perhaps, to order Tiapan plans).. It did come off second best to a SS34..
So first lesson I can teach you is:
a 34' 6 tonne 15 mm thick solid glass hull isn't dented by an F16.. One may scrape some paint but that is it..the F16 hulls (well mine at least) do/did not look so wholesome after the incident.. I would suggest a Viper may also be worse for wear.. grin

Secondly : these new planes have internet access... I know not F16 related but a hopefully a helpful tip.

Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Wouter
Besides I know the heavier FX-one (150 kg) was significantly less fun to sail then my lightweight F16 because it was significantly more flighty, less forgiving and harder to drive. I put that down to its use of a cut-down Tiger F18 mast (far too stiff), use of F18 daggers (far too long and too much surface area) and hull volume too much centralized under the main beam for 1-up sailing (stern dragging or pitchpoling). As a singlehander it should have been designed noticeably different. As a versatile boat (1-up + 2-up) it should have been designed alot more clever, especially in the keel line. Overall boat weight was hardly a redeeming factor in the way this boat sails.



To be perfectly honest here, and going from the FXone to the Viper, the Viper feels almost numb to me. It probably has more to do with the fact that I've got a total of six days on the Viper and I don't know it that well, and probably close to 100 on the FXone. At this point I still like the FXone more than the Viper. For all of the reasons Wouter mentions it is a very visceral boat to sail. It requires input, and gives you a very loud response to that imput. It is quirky, and flighty, and while it definetly isn't squirrley like an A-cat, it doesn't feel like the tank that it is. Having to work at going fast, keeps me going fast. Its like my job, after a six months of going hard and working 60hr's a week I'm ok with it, when I sit around and do nothing for the same six months, its hard to build up the ambition to get back to work.

Three things pushed me away from the FXone and towards the Viper:
-No class. Zero. Zilch. Nada. I've already sailed against more F16's and Vipers than I have even seen or know of active FXones. As much as I love the boat, it will never be a popular choice in the US.

-The Viper has an extremely nice build quality, and is laid out very well, without the need to change around virtually everything. Hobie builds a nice boat, the AHPC hulls are that much better.

-Parts. HC-US & HC-EU don't seem to get along. Getting parts for the FXone can be an exercise in patience. Plus with the exchange rate/shipping, parts are rediculously expensive if they have to be sourced from Europe.

Other than that, I absolutely love my FXone. It has a killer Portsmouth number, and it is a very sexy boat. If it fit into the F16 rules I would not have looked for something else, but I never got a chance to ever race against another FXone. I really wish I could have made it to the Hobie Europeans last year on Lake Como, they had 12 or 13 on the line.


As for the telephone pole mast, well I haven't had any part failures with it. You could probably lose the main sheet, and not break it, which is probably a good thing for beginners. My mast failure wasn't AHPC's fault either, it was just a bad fitting and as far as I know was all taken care of by either Greg, or Robbie/Jill. Hopefully the new mast has the diamond wire attachment like the Cap/C2, that hole in the mast with a hook is just plain stupid in my eyes.
Posted By: scooby_simon

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/20/10 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Jalani
Originally Posted by Wouter
You ask us :" What do I know ?"

I answer :"Good question. I'm beginning to wonder."


If I was a moderator ....................

Wouter, can we keep discussions civil please? Your posts of late have been enjoyable reading - informed, reasoned and well constructed. Why go back to personal attacks? In general, they're unwarranted, vague and essentially wrong.
For your own good, if nothing else, I'd like to see you withdraw the above throw away comment as, in truth, it shows you in a very poor light.


I am; people; take a chill pill.

Posted By: samc99us

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 04:05 AM

Where are these online plans of which you speak? Also, do you have a dollar figure in mind when building an F16? I've heard $6k for the rig+sails+fittings, and $3k for the hulls, but I could easily see things being more expensive than that.
Posted By: Stewart

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 06:35 AM

for Tiapan 4.9 go to http://www.ahpc.com.au .. they can help with tiapan hull plans.. This is a tortured ply build.. Brett Goodall does visit this page so he may contact you.. Wouters F16 is a modified tiapan. lots of tips in building ply Tiapans around.

The tortured ply boat "Blade" plans ask Phil Brander on here.. He may have his "stitch and glue ply " Razor available.. He is very helpful and may modify plans to help you.. His idea of a enjoyable day is arms deep in wood shavings building some boat or other..

Dollar value.. depends on where you live.. what method you use and your skill..
another alternative is design your own hulls
finally you have a number of choices in full or part buys..

best of luck..
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 07:32 AM

Brett,

SIAM's original query mentioned that he expected to be solo half of the time. Can you comment on how the hull design and weight trade-offs you chose for the Viper suit singlehanded sailing?

Mark.
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 10:09 AM

Quote

Wouters F16 is a modified Taipan



Indeed,

I widened the platform to full F16 width
Replaced the rearbeam with a better section
Raised the mainbeam by 30 mm to reduce beam slap
Fitted an asymmetric spinnaker
Fitted a square top mainsail with a larger head then the Taipan
Ignored the width rules for the mainsail (much straighted leech then Taipan sails at the time)
Replaced the trampoline based jib sheeting with a selftacker (what a room on the tramp now !)
Replaced the eye poking rotation limiter with a mast foot fitted one (All F18's are/have gone this way too now)
Improved the internal downhaul system by making it tripple cascading and carefully choosing lines.
Replaced the recirculating ball traveller with a wheeled stainless steel ball bearing I-track (soooo much better in the sand)
Fitted a cascaded internal outhaul system with a quick release setup (hooking a ball in a slot)
Fitted a tapered mainsheet
Fitted a downhaul system that sucks excess line underneath the trampoline

And a score of other improvements.

I really do like my F16 but it is definately a 1st generation F16. It is probably best described as the prototype F16 and several of the posters here have taken a demo ride on it before pulling the lever on a (2nd generation or later F16) themselves.

The basic Taipan platform is a good basis for an F16 but when deciding to build a new I would opt for an improved hullshape.

OR

Seriously think about fitting T-foil rudders to the basic Taipan platform (that is still modified to F16 specs).

The Taipan is still a very good lightweather F16; I even feel it has the advantage there. Its hulls shape seems to track very well in that stuff. But in rough seastate and strong gusts the bows are too fine and you can overload them quite easily. Still, a little help from T-foil rudder will indeed go a very long way in correcting this downside. You only need a little extra margin there. Just enough to keep the rudders in and the bows a little more out, because then full steering is maintained and you can get out of trouble. That is the main drawback, that once the bows dig in, the boat quickly goes limp on the rudders. So even a reduction of a little diving can already have large positive effects.

Other then that. I think I paid some 12.500 Euro's to have this boat build and lots of spare time. Homebuilding is not adviced when you want to save money. Better get a second job then (less consuming of your spare time) and just buy a commercial boat for 15.000 Euro's. I suspect similar ratio's in costs for area's with different tax laws and currencies.

Wouter
Posted By: samc99us

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 02:20 PM

So, the recommendation is not to go the home built route as far as saving time and money, correct? What about finding an older Taipan 4.9 and modifying it to F16 rules? Is that amongst the cheapest options available to get into the class?

Finally, Wouter, can you post some pics of your downhaul system? Looking at improving rigging on the N20 and getting the downhaul off the tramp may be a good idea.
Posted By: bobcat

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/24/10 11:27 PM

Quote
Seriously think about fitting T-foil rudders to the basic Taipan platform (that is still modified to F16 specs).


I have contemplated adding on the stealth rudders but got hung up when I figured that I would be breaking a rule regarding width. If the boat is already max beam, wouldn't the foils exceed that? Or are you creating your own mini T-foils?
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/25/10 08:53 AM


I do wish people would read the F16 class rules more carefully (or indeed more often).

See rule 7.5 (rather a definition)

7.5 Overall width of the platform

The overall width of a platform corresponds with the horinzontal distance between the verticals passing through the extremities of the sides of the platform, with the boat being levelled on it's waterline and excluding protruding daggerboards, rudder blades or tiller bars. When wings are being used than the equivalant overall beam is determined by measuring the overall width including only one fully extended wing.


Therefore the answer is ; No T-foils can never break the width rule


For other important definition look at this pagem:

http://www.formula16.net/content/view/17/39/lang,en/
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/25/10 09:19 AM

Quote

So, the recommendation is not to go the home built route as far as saving time and money, correct?



Certainly not in the way of saving time. In the way of saving money, well, you only safe a little if you do it right but at great expenses in time. That is just not efficient as spending the same amount of hours on a second job will earn you lots more then you can possibly save.

So yes, I think the answer is that you are correct.

Homebuilding if for people who want things to be just the way THEY want it and enjoy the journey of having made things themselves. Or people who create new classes where there are no commercial builders yet !


Quote

What about finding an older Taipan 4.9 and modifying it to F16 rules? Is that amongst the cheapest options available to get into the class?


Yes, that would be the case. Especially if you would forget about making it wider. If you do then you can still use the standard Taipan beam (but now of greater length) and replace the rear with something like 80x2 6068 T6 or 6005-T5. The first can be had from a broken Taipan mast the latter was used in the past for A-cats and some still have these laying around; I know AHPC has a few.

Other then that buy a spinnaker package and a selftacking jib setup. The latter will really open up the trampoline. Then you are ready to go. You'll accept some speed loss compared to modern F16's but not more then 1 or 2 minutes per hour bouy racing. Sailing enjoyment will be much the same. Also note that the Taipan is not really suited to carrying lots of crew weight. Without a raised beam I would stop at 145 kg (320 lbs) combined. Well, when racing that is; for recreational sailing it will carry up to 180 kg quite easily (400 lbs). The main hit is that the hulls will sit relatively deep in the water and slow the boat down. I sailed my boat (Taipan hulls) up to 205 kg (3 adults on board) and still had (recreational) fun.


Quote

Finally, Wouter, can you post some pics of your downhaul system? Looking at improving rigging on the N20 and getting the downhaul off the tramp may be a good idea.


See the diagrams below.


First picture,

Triple cascaded 12:1 downhaul.

Blue is 6 mm swiftcord (nice on the hands)
Red is 2.5 mm dyneema
Green is 3.0 mm dyneema with a hard outer mantle (not D12 or whatever) that is UV and abbrasion resistant

The green line simply ties off to a saddle on the backside of the mast. Others use a sail hook here. With my sail the little block is secure to and inside the sail, so I only run the green line through it and tie it off to the other side ; with a slipknot and a few hitches as security. The slip allows for easy derigging even when LOTS of force has been on the line. I'm very pleased with this setup. Just make sure the gooseneck doesn't have any sharp edges (mine had in the beginning !)

Second picture,

Red in second picture is bungee cord. Blue is still the 6 mm swiftcord.
I got SS rings fitted to the inside of my sidestays and the swiftcord runs through them.
Then I got two small blocked stitched to the underside of the trampoline (The once in the red line). The blocks on the transition from blue to red are free hanging. The small blocks in the blue line and the ends of the blue line are just tied together and the thickened ends are slid into the trampoline track of my mainbeam. As a result everything can be just slid out, untied and disassembled for transport. Leaving only the stitched blocks to the tamp and the blue line + everything else ties to the mast. My trampoline is secured to the trampoline track by sliding a 5 mm rod through the tunnel that is stitched to the front of the trampoline. The rod is longer then the tramp is wide so the blue lone and blocks are held away from the gap by that rod.

The internal downhaul keeps everythign clean and tidy (no maintainance required even over many years) and the excess line system under the tramp is easy to access and rinse. I prefer it to any system that runs inside the mainbeam.


Third picture,

Here the blue line is actually my spinnaker sheet. The grey coloured line is the downhaul line that was depicted as blue in the other pictures. There are also some other lines in this picture that you can ignore; for example the ones wrapped around the boom. These are just there for emergencies out on the water. I think this picture was taken just before or after a long distance race or a tour along the coastline.


Interesting note, when I'm on full downhaul then the sail touches the boom (5 inches travel AFTER the sail is already pretensioned when fitting the downhaul = about 2 inches). And the green line sings like a guitarstring. Made me worried initially, but I have never replaced the line after it cut itself on a sharp edge in the first few months. Everything seems up to the task and is on the boat for many years.

I hope this is clear.

Wouter


Attached picture Typhoon_F16_downhaul_full_diagram.gif
Attached picture Typhoon_F16_downhaul_excess_line_system.gif
Attached picture Typhoon_F16_setup_around_mast.jpg
Posted By: bobcat

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/25/10 03:56 PM


I do wish people would read the F16 class rules more carefully (or indeed more often).

Ok you got me. <BURN>.
I was lazy and instead of asking Google I thought I would ask the guy who wrote the rules. I have bookmarked your link.
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/25/10 06:05 PM


Quote

... I thought I would ask the guy who wrote the rules ...



Smooth move !

Flattery works and I think I'll let it slide this time ! grin

No worries,

Wouter
Posted By: Darryl_Barrett

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 03:33 AM

Quote
"Lighter boats are easier to handle?? On the beach yes, but on the water I don't agree with you at all.
From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.
But Hell... what do I know?"

You can't really be serious? Perhaps we should use this argument to get the A class guys to raise their minimun weight by 20 plus KG so that they can be more competitive? I'm sure that would go down the same as this lead ballon for the F16's
Posted By: Tornado_ALIVE

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 07:53 AM

Come one, this is hardly anything to get worked up about.

A heavy boat is less fighty (as with a wide beam boat) ie when hit by the gust there is more resistance to heal.

A light boat is more resposive

A heavy boat takes a bit more effort to accelorate but once it has, it is easier to keep in the groove and does not stop as quick as a lighter boat. A light boat you can loose the groove very quickly if you stuff up.

You can stop an A very quickly if you hit a wave the wrong way. An F18 will push through it.

A heavier boat will forgive you if you gybe in strong winds without carrying good boat speed. A light boat you are swimming.

A heavier or wider beam boat is easier to sail then a light boat. That is not a negative for the lighter boats but fact.
Posted By: taipanfc

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 09:13 AM

+1 for TA's comments, heavy is definitely less flighty.

Can definitely park an A very quickly in waves, but not as quick as parking a moth...
Posted By: pepin

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 09:38 AM

Quote

Lighter boats are easier to handle?? On the beach yes, but on the water I don't agree with you at all.
From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.
But Hell... what do I know?
I agree. Moving from the 5.2 (big, heavy, really heavy) to the Stealth (probably half the weight, or close to it) the difference on the water is huge:

In light wind it is actually easier to sail the 5.2. Once it gets some speed it will not stop. In stealth you move your but 50cms one way or another and that's enough to stop the boat dead...

In high wind you better be quick on the Stealth when a gust hits. On the 5.2 you have time to sheet out or go on the trapeze. On the Stealth if you are not quick enough, you're in for a bath.
Posted By: Seeker

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 05:33 PM

First you say it's impossible to build to minimum weight without an autoclave and pre-preg carbon ....but in reality almost all the builders are building at or within 5 kg of minimum weight using standard building practices
Second to make them light they will be too expensive… over 30K...but in reality they are being built and sold for reasonable prices, a little more than half of what you claim... and the one who is using the most carbon in his boats is actually one of the best priced…

Third...now you want to make them heavier because a light cat takes too much effort to keep moving....on the water…

Can we just jump past all the "death by a thousand cuts" comments and go straight to its logical conclusion.
Which is...just forget sailing altogether and rent a (heaven forbid don't buy..they might come out with a newer/better model by the end of the year...you can't have the guy anchored up next to you having more cup holders than you have) Party Barge (outboard powered pontoon boat) You have a couch to lay out on, a big cooler for your alcohol beverages and a canopy to keep you in the shade. No sails to worry about just turn the key and go. It doesn't matter how fast or heavy it is cause you’re only going to the sandbar anyway...no need for the after race party...why waste the time sailing ...it’s a party all day....
There problem solved...now wasn't that easy?
All those who want a heavier F16 can go the party barge route and the F16 Sailors/cat owners can go about enjoying their boats….everybody’s happy!
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by MarkMT
Brett,

SIAM's original query mentioned that he expected to be solo half of the time. Can you comment on how the hull design and weight trade-offs you chose for the Viper suit singlehanded sailing?

Mark.


Bump. Interested in your thoughts on this Brett.

Mark.
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 10:21 PM

Mark you can take mine for a spin if you like too. I'm sure Feldman(?) will take the Falcon for a ride anytime you like as well. your lucky in that you'll have both handy for comparison
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 11:18 PM

Thanks Karl - I'd definitely like to take you up on that. You coming to Ripley? Roll on May!
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 11:25 PM

Eek. Probably, depends on the weather. That is one tiny little F'd up lake.

If you want to sail it in a non-regatta type scenario let me know. (Cause who wants to get back on the water after a long day) I've still got the FXone, probably will for a while, and can probably get them both to the lake fairly easily. And I'm sure I could make room in one of the spare bedrooms too so you didn't have to drive back the same day.
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/26/10 11:45 PM

I know what you're saying smile. I'm sure it has the highest capsize rate of any venue we sail at.

A trip up north would be good (once it warms up smile ). Thanks for the offer.
Posted By: Buccaneer

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/27/10 01:27 AM

If what you say is true and the stealth is really that bad then strap 50kgs of lead and that should solve it! grin

The Taipan is another very old design that you may not have been aware of that absolutely smoked the 5.2 in every aspect and then there are even older designs like the Mosquito and Acats that handled reasonably well. wink

I’d liken your analogy to the deference in feel to the equivalent of comparing a moving van to a Ferrari and you are telling us that the moving van handles better… grin

Originally Posted by pepin
Quote

Lighter boats are easier to handle?? On the beach yes, but on the water I don't agree with you at all.
From experience I would say the heavier boats are less flighty, more forgiving and easier to drive.
But Hell... what do I know?
I agree. Moving from the 5.2 (big, heavy, really heavy) to the Stealth (probably half the weight, or close to it) the difference on the water is huge:

In light wind it is actually easier to sail the 5.2. Once it gets some speed it will not stop. In stealth you move your but 50cms one way or another and that's enough to stop the boat dead...

In high wind you better be quick on the Stealth when a gust hits. On the 5.2 you have time to sheet out or go on the trapeze. On the Stealth if you are not quick enough, you're in for a bath.
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 03/27/10 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by MarkMT
I'm sure it has the highest capsize rate of any venue we sail at.


Doesn't matter, I can do it in the ocean pretty easily too.
[Linked Image]
Posted By: Jalani

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 12/14/10 10:06 AM

Thanks Rick (or whoever) for deleting the post from "vin".

Sorry Karl but now your post below seems completely random???
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 12/14/10 01:32 PM

SPAM is made about a half hour from my house.

whew! Glad everybody knows that now.
Posted By: FRENZIED

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 01/06/11 07:12 PM

Great thread! Learned quite a lot!
Posted By: frozencdn

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 01/12/11 02:21 AM

Originally Posted by SIAM
Are there any other major differences?


I have been threw this thread a few times and keep hopping I missed the answer to this question.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 01/12/11 03:49 AM

Nope. smile
Posted By: mazda

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 01/18/11 08:42 AM

New data suggest a offline too.....
Posted By: Wouter

Re: Falcon compared to Viper - 01/18/11 01:45 PM

Okay,

But if anybody feels their question has been left unanswered then please restate it and I'll try to answer it.

Wouter
© 2024 Catsailor.com Forums