There is of course a huge difference between "building" a bike (which normally means assembling bits) and building a boat, but it's interesting to see how people get into playing with bikes. One thing that strikes me is that the cycling manufacturers build kit to unofficial standards that makes everything much easier and more fun in many ways - if you replace a derailleur it just goes into a threaded hole the same size as the old one - if you replace a cleat you often have to fill in the old hole, drill a new one, get different size fastenings, etc.  There's more faffing and less tinkering, in a way.

As far as I know, there aren't any standards for fittings in sailing. Is the sport missing out by making messing with boats too hard these days, and could some (obviously not all) fittings be produced to more more modular and consistent in their mountings and fastenings, just as they are in bicycles? I may add that I saw the same sort of standards and consistency in plastic fishing kayaks when I looked into the depth sounders they use, and people seemed to love it.

Along the same line of thought - many people play with bikes by upgrading their equipment; they may go from Sora gears and brakes to 105, for example. In the cycling world, the hierarchy of equipment is explicit, so manufacturers make money from upgrades and people get to bimble without filling the house with epoxy dust. Would that work in sailing?

In some way this could tie together with the upcoming 3d printing of boats and gear - if kit is going to change dramatically in production and open up new avenues in design surely there should be an effort to create some standards before the developments bring chaos. I've got no idea about IT but it would seem to make it much easier to programme 3d printers if, for example, there were standards in bolt holes and base plates for pulleys. And having such standards could also make it easier to upgrade fittings to those of a superior quality.  So a 3d printed RS9er could be bought with Brandex ClubRacer fittings, and you could in the course of an enjoyable afternoon unbolt everything to uprade to CoolProDude level kit, without pulling out the grinder, bog and 'glass (NTTAWTT). 

Would this sort of approach fit the modern world better than the current one, where fittings appear to be pretty much designed with little thought to common standards and consistency and upgrading is often a PITA?  It certainly works for bikes.

[Cough]Bottom brackets[/Cough]

But isn't that both a recognised issue (there was plenty of comment about BBright and the lack of standardisation) and also fairly rare?

As an active cycle racer and an active dinghy sailor, I find that I can switch gear quite easily among my bikes (which include an aero roadie, a classic roadie, a time trial machine, a CX bike and a track bike) - much more easily than I can between the boats. The Tasar, Canoe and Laser all use different tiller extension sockets, different cleat hole patterns, yada yada yada, with almost no commonality.  

Fair point. I'm just interested in looking at a similar sport (or two sports, if you count the kayaks) that are currently doing better than sailing, and seeing what can be learned from them.

Also, on the other thread people have raised the issue of cheaper one designs (ie the budget 505) and others have rightly pointed out that they don't work. It's interesting to see that other sports, by making it easier to upgrade gear, may provide a path that satisfies both sides of the argument.

Still, this is just musing and putting ideas out there.

We are trying to do it with the Farr 3.7 - and our CNC files that enable the hull parts to be laser cut out. But undeniably there is still a tonne of work to do after this stage, even with our very good plans, instructions and online knowledge base.

I would concede that some standardisation of tiller extension fittings would not go amiss, but I do remember Mistral, Tiga, Bic mast foot fittings and skews not being particularly interchangeable ;.)

Camera lens systems aren't standardized, bikes aren't standardized (it's not a given that your Campy levers will work with Sram derailleurs and Shimano cassette, AIUI). Car's aren't standardized. Etc etc. 

I'm reminded of...:

Bonus point for anyone to name the chandler who used to say this every time you bought a metre of rope

You win the bonus point.

Goes with the advice "it is easier to make it shorter than longer"

...'one will break, so better take two' was another I remember.

'cos it's kit that led the way, does the job better and does not let you down

Yep those Harlem ratchets ain't so good.

I am a fan of Ronstan Autoratchets lots of holding power

Failed Harlem ratchets usually have a high body count...bad*assed mofo's all over the place!

Originally posted by Chris 249 One thing that strikes me is that the cycling manufacturers build kit to unofficial standards that makes everything much easier and more fun in many ways - if you replace a derailleur it just goes into a threaded hole the same size as the old one

You must be kidding; so does your 11 speed Shimano work with Campagnolo 9 speed shifters ... or 10 speed SRAM?

Bikes are riddled with incompatibility ... don't even get me started on BB90, BB30, BBright when we had perfectly good English threaded BBs for years ...

Bikes are a nightmare and as time goes on there become more and more difficult for the hole mechanic ... bikes are going the way of cars ...

I'll piggy back on top of this... tossing up a decision to buy parts for a current bike, or go for a brand new bike altogether. Nothing is compatible - only (of course) parts made by the same manufacturer for the same brand of bike, which I'm trying to stray away from. It's turning into a bit of a Theseus' ship paradox, so I might as well buy a new bike.

I'm fairly green in the sailing world, is it much the same?