New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: The Tasar v the Icon
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Tasar v the Icon
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3435363738 43>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Medway Maniac View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 13 May 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2788 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Medway Maniac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Tasar v the Icon
    Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 7:30pm
Originally posted by Rupert

From the perspective of GRF's comment, the Phantom would be a poor choice for a doublehander, I think. Mind, I'm struggling to think of a good choice for a singlehander conversion.

Any una-rigged singlehander is going to run into helm balance problems once you add a jib.  

From the hull perspective, though, the Contender would be a good candidate.  Indeed it was tried back in the 70's/80's, but the low hounds meant a very small, short-luffed jib.  Add an Icon rig instead, stepped further aft, 3k kite and a lightweight crew and you'd have a nice boat, I reckon.  But it might just be simpler to buy a V3k!

Jim, you often remark disparagingly about older hull designs, but provided a hull is fair and doesn't induce premature flow separation, there is no such thing as a bad hull.  It just depends on what you want it to do.  I can think of few hulls worse than, say, an RS800 in light airs, for example, but those are not the conditions for which people buy it.  

More modern hulls tend to be aimed more at planing performance, but we don't actually spend that much of our sailing  planing as a percentage of time...  Which is maybe why the Laser and Scorpion have PY's significantly lower than their basic data of length/beam/weight might suggest, and they achieve that without being stupidly tippy - the usual 'easy' route to higher performance.
Wilsonian SC
3000 Class
Back to Top
iiitick View Drop Down
Far too distracted from work
Far too distracted from work


Joined: 04 Jun 14
Location: gb
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 478 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iiitick Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 6:27pm
Originally posted by dogslife

Having taken part in 3 Tasar Championships (UK Nationals, Europeans & Worlds) in the mid 80's and having spent many happy hours chatting to Charlie McKee (9 times Tasar World Champ & current US Sailing High Performance Director - http://www.sailracingmagazine.com/features/charlie-mckee-us-sailing-high-performance-director) I well remember how important he felt kicker tension was when it came to making Tasars go quickly, especially upwind. So much so, he used to get Becky (his crew at the time) to continually play the kicker & the jib.

Without question Tasars are very technical boats to sail and if you get it right they're an absolute joy, but if you can't get your head around what you should be doing with the various controls I would accept that they can become a bit frustrating..........

In addition to the typical Enterprise type controls, not only do you have the 'spanner' and the jib stick to master, but you also have shroud runners (to rake the mast forward on the run), both mainsheet & mainsheet traveller to play going upwind & a raking daggerboard to control.

There's loads of info on the CA site - http://www.tasar.org/racing-a-sailing

When be bought our Tasar about ten years ago it was properly calibrated with all the 'red dots' in place. We thought, 'Ha! just read the manual, set it to the dots and away we go. No, not that simple. To get performance you have to concentrate and observe, particularly on a lake. When you get it right they fly. Rumor has it that upwind planing is possible and it is if you just knock it off a bit, not the best idea when lake sailing. On a decent windy reach we could hold a 300 though.
Tasars are really great boats.
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 6:22pm
If ever a boat appears to need to be sailed upright, the Phantom is it. I think this might be one of the reasons why top Phantom sailors seem to be able to sail the boat so much faster than the rest.

From the perspective of GRF's comment, the Phantom would be a poor choice for a doublehander, I think. Mind, I'm struggling to think of a good choice for a singlehander conversion.
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6662 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 1:07pm
Originally posted by Chris 249

I know some designers who reckon that some of the advances of the newer hull designs can rely on them being sailed upright, whereas the older hulls can sometimes tolerate more heel. Therefore a less expert crew can do better on an older-style hull in some situations.

As a general observation that's true of course, and wasn't it you who pointed out that the dynamics of a V hull with 5 degree deadrise sailed with 5 degrees heel might be quite similar to those of a flat floored hull sailed bolt upright? But in the specific case of the wide low deadrise stern Phantom hull - maybe not!
Heel tolerance has certainly got to be a major consideration for the designer of a one design.
Back to Top
Chris 249 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Chris 249 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 11:26am
Originally posted by JimC

Originally posted by iGRF

3)Convert a Phantom,

But why on earth would you want to use a 1971 hull design when so much was learned in the 70s and 80s?

I know some designers who reckon that some of the advances of the newer hull designs can rely on them being sailed upright, whereas the older hulls can sometimes tolerate more heel. Therefore a less expert crew can do better on an older-style hull in some situations.

S'pose that's one reason????


Edited by Chris 249 - 19 Jul 14 at 12:02pm
Back to Top
dogslife View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 17 Feb 12
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 58 		Post Options Post Options   Quote dogslife Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Jul 14 at 11:21am
Having taken part in 3 Tasar Championships (UK Nationals, Europeans & Worlds) in the mid 80's and having spent many happy hours chatting to Charlie McKee (9 times Tasar World Champ & current US Sailing High Performance Director - http://www.sailracingmagazine.com/features/charlie-mckee-us-sailing-high-performance-director) I well remember how important he felt kicker tension was when it came to making Tasars go quickly, especially upwind. So much so, he used to get Becky (his crew at the time) to continually play the kicker & the jib.

Without question Tasars are very technical boats to sail and if you get it right they're an absolute joy, but if you can't get your head around what you should be doing with the various controls I would accept that they can become a bit frustrating..........

In addition to the typical Enterprise type controls, not only do you have the 'spanner' and the jib stick to master, but you also have shroud runners (to rake the mast forward on the run), both mainsheet & mainsheet traveller to play going upwind & a raking daggerboard to control.

There's loads of info on the CA site - http://www.tasar.org/racing-a-sailing
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6662 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jul 14 at 9:35pm
Originally posted by iGRF

3)Convert a Phantom,

But why on earth would you want to use a 1971 hull design when so much was learned in the 70s and 80s?
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6499 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jul 14 at 9:07pm
3)Convert a Phantom, with a jib, wingwang kite trap.... two normal sized people = one phantom sailor, rock n roll!

Edited by iGRF - 18 Jul 14 at 9:08pm
Snow Equipment Deals    New Core Kite website
Back to Top
Null View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 May 14
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 745 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Null Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jul 14 at 3:23pm
Well you got a couple of options then buddy.
1) Import something like an MG14 from Australia and modify it to meet your criteria (fit centre board)
2) Buy an ex prototype or demo Icon and make your own boat that works!  An Icon with a swinging kite and trapeze.
If there was much of a market for this type of boat the Alto would of sold in 'some' volume, the 4000, Buzz, Iso etc.  would be around properly.  
Back to Top
iGRF View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 07 Mar 11
Location: Hythe
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6499 		Post Options Post Options   Quote iGRF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jul 14 at 2:39pm
Originally posted by Null

Jeez Graeme for someone that hates old stuff you do seem to hanker after most of the dross that was launched in the 90's


Er because that's all there is?
Snow Equipment Deals    New Core Kite website
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3435363738 43>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy