Cirrus Icon Development

Originally posted by nathan Is it going to be substantially quicker/ easier/ more pleasant to sail than a Tasar? I appreciate the NS has moved the game forward, but far enough?!

The standard NS14 is definitely quicker than the Tasar, especially in flat water. If I recall correctly (it's been a long while since we came up against a good NS14 on the Tasar) the Tasar can hang on in the light and choppy stuff (due to the bigger rig) but in upwind in flat water or in a breeze it's a few minutes back. In really lumpy stuff, there is a chance that the NS will drop back with the Tasar - it may be significant that the NS's big fleets are all in NSW where they normally sail on flatter water than other states.

Ignore the Aussie yardstick, which puts them close together - even year ago when we were finishing close to the front of the Tasar state fleet (50 boats at titles) we had no real chance against the top NS14s across the range of winds and in flat water. Accounts and experiences in rougher water were more variable.

On the other hand, quite a few people say the NS/Icon is more tweaky to sail because it's narrower and has to be sailed very upright, plus in light winds it appears to be a boat you tend to spend more time crouched in. But the beautiful way they go through the water is something to behold; very reminiscent of a Moth or Canoe to me.

Although the Tasar and NS/Icon have a similar heritage, in many ways they are now so far apart that they no longer really compare to each other. Both are great ways of having fun, with very different strengths and weaknesses.  

I'd see no issue with an Icon beating a Fireball. Aussie yardsticks put the 'Ball and 470 at 101, the Tasar and Contender are 107.5. I'd reckon something in the region of 102-105 would be right for the NS14. I can recall regattas with the world Tasar champ, world Contender champ and one of the world's best Fireball crews all together and the good Tasars and a good NS were right up there in the light stuff, and surprisingly quick upwind in the breezy and choppy stuff. We also had one very wild, windy and horribly gusty regatta where the Int Canoe that had been 6th in the world was struggling to beat the top NS14.




Edited by Chris 249

Originally posted by Chris 249 Originally posted by Skiffybob So what we're saying here is that the dinghy sailing world is full of luddites, and in order to make a new product commercially viable, it has to be "dumbed-down" t a level that the luddites will accept. God help us all. They could be luddites - or it could be that they have different priorities in life, like kids, careers, other sports, arts, whatever, that means they don't want to tinker with gear or risk their investment. Or (like us) you could just have changed from high-performance gear to slower SMODs so you can get more time on the water in bigger fleets. What's wrong with that? Different things suit different people, or the same people at different times in their life (or their week).  There's a lot of guys who have won in high-performance classes who also sail stuff like Lasers and Mirrors. They don't seem like luddities. The NS14 is built in Europe by a Tornado Olympic medallist who won a Moth worlds in a boat he designed and built, using a sail he designed and cut. He understands that FOR GOOD REASONS most Euros find even a simplified NS14 (stunning boat that it is) is too twitchy. Is he a luddite?

I get all that, but it's still no reason to "dumb down". I can see no logical reason for puttig an out-of-date, heavy tin rig on one. To a degree I can understand the preference for a centreboard, because a lot of people that will like these will sail on ponds with shalllows, but the arguments about the rigs I don't get.

Originally posted by Skiffybob Originally posted by Chris 249 Originally posted by Skiffybob So what we're saying here is that the dinghy sailing world is full of luddites, and in order to make a new product commercially viable, it has to be "dumbed-down" t a level that the luddites will accept. God help us all. They could be luddites - or it could be that they have different priorities in life, like kids, careers, other sports, arts, whatever, that means they don't want to tinker with gear or risk their investment. Or (like us) you could just have changed from high-performance gear to slower SMODs so you can get more time on the water in bigger fleets. What's wrong with that? Different things suit different people, or the same people at different times in their life (or their week).  There's a lot of guys who have won in high-performance classes who also sail stuff like Lasers and Mirrors. They don't seem like luddities. The NS14 is built in Europe by a Tornado Olympic medallist who won a Moth worlds in a boat he designed and built, using a sail he designed and cut. He understands that FOR GOOD REASONS most Euros find even a simplified NS14 (stunning boat that it is) is too twitchy. Is he a luddite? I get all that, but it's still no reason to "dumb down". I can see no logical reason for puttig an out-of-date, heavy tin rig on one. To a degree I can understand the preference for a centreboard, because a lot of people that will like these will sail on ponds with shalllows, but the arguments about the rigs I don't get.

A+

Well there's no doubt that "ease of ownership" is one of the biggest factors in how popular a class becomes.  Ease of ownership covers many things, from how you are able to buy the boat in the first place (does the retailer offer credit?, is it obvious where to go to buy?), to though life maintenance (will it need an overhaul every winter, can I get spares, how's the build quality?), to ease of launch and recovery and the learning curve (will I swim?).  To be a sucess in a development class means that performance is put ahead of ease of ownership.  The challenge for a one-design is to increase the ease of ownership whilst not sacrificing too much performance.   At the end of the day it will take on the water testing and judgement to decide whether a centreboard and alloy mast are a compromise too far.  As a purist my heart says carbon, but you pay more and need to get the two-pot out every other winter.  Is that a worthwhile trade?

Originally posted by Peaky and need to get the two-pot out every other winter.  Is that a worthwhile trade?

Paint seems to last indefinitely IME. It seems to be only varnish that flakes off, and you know I do wonder if perhaps the UV protection from varnish isn't that great and the top surface of the epoxy begins to suffer, degrading the bond. I could easily be wrong though.

A carbon wing mast *ought* to be very much better than a tin one simply because there are many more opportunities to tune bend characteristics. Bethwaite is on record as saying the Tasar rig was compromised between what they really wanted and what aluminium could deliver.