Re: ASD Board Review

From: Erik Eiseman (eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis)
Date: Fri Jan 04 1980 - 00:43:23 PST


Return-Path: <eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis>
Received: from opus.labs.agilent.com (root@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis [15.0.168.176]) by jr.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id KAA14720 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unicorn.labs.agilent.com (unicorn.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.5]) by opus.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id KAA25874 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 10:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alex1.labs.agilent.com (alex1.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.55]) by unicorn.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with SMTP id e6BG8oG00496 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 130.29.252.5 by alex1.labs.agilent.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:06:31 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Received: from pangalan.labs.agilent.com (pangalan-130.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.4]) by unicorn.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with ESMTP id e6BG8nB00492 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alexed.labs.agilent.com (alexed.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.59]) by pangalan.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with SMTP id e6BG7X210641 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 130.29.252.5 by alexed.labs.agilent.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:07:33 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Received: from pangalan.labs.agilent.com (pangalan-130.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.4]) by unicorn.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with ESMTP id e6BG7WB00448 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:07:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alexed.labs.agilent.com (alexed.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.59]) by pangalan.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with SMTP id e6BG6G210601 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 130.29.252.5 by alexed.labs.agilent.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:06:15 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Received: from pangalan.labs.agilent.com (pangalan-130.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.4]) by unicorn.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with ESMTP id e6BG6FB00396 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:06:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alexed.labs.agilent.com (alexed.labs.agilent.com [130.29.252.59]) by pangalan.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with SMTP id e6BFs0r09953 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 130.29.252.5 by alexed.labs.agilent.com (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT); Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:54:00 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
Received: from cosrel2.hp.com (cosrel2.hp.com [15.88.200.10]) by unicorn.labs.agilent.com (8.10.2/8.10.2/Agilent Labs Mail Hub v 01.00 2000/06/20) with ESMTP id e6BFrxl29809 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.46]) by cosrel2.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DD7599 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:53:26 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from utcpoqli ([12.72.65.117]) by mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122) with SMTP id <20000711155327.ZHWX1264.mtiwmhc21.worldnet.att.net@utcpoqli> for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:53:27 +0000
Message-ID: <00f701a8ea4c$a1c3dca0$7541480c@utcpoqli>
Reply-To: "Erik Eiseman" <eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis>
From: "Erik Eiseman" <eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis>
To: <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>
Subject: Re: ASD Board Review
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 1980 00:43:23 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3

After waiting for 1+ months to get a saxo 270 warrenty repaired I would
dispute that "robust" claim. Thanks VERY much to bic for fixing it but I
don't believe that the board carries any more "robust" qualities than most
other boards.

E

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernie Perry <BPerry@nrtnorcal.com-DeleteThis>
To: Multiple recipients of list <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis>
Date: Thursday, July 06, 2000 4:26 PM
Subject: RE: ASD Board Review

>
>I agree with Kirk that you're probably better off with the Techno 283 if
>you're only going to have 1 board. The epoxy boards are nice but they're
so
>easy to damage. I think the Bic is more robust.
>
>BTW, I have a Fat Mutant that I sail with a 5.3 to 6.5. (Just bought it
this
>year and love it!) I also have a Seatrend 70 All-star that I switch to when
>my 6.5 sail no longer keeps me planning on the Mutant. In most cases, I
can
>get another hour of decent sailing just by switching boards. I don't find
>the 28" tail to be a problem with a 6.5 sail unless the wind picks-up, in
>which case, I switch back to the Mutant.
>
>
>Good sailing!
>
>Bernie
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kirk Lindstrom [mailto:KirkLindstrom@ix.netcom.com-DeleteThis]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2000 6:03 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: ASD Board Review
>
>
>> Any thoughts on whether the board is toast and I should start looking
>> for a new one? Also any thoughts on a board for a over 200 lb, sort of
>> intermediate, no illusions about Waddell kind of guy. My goal is to
>> have a single board as I can't justify a quiver. I had some thoughts
>> about a Fat Mutant or a Techno 283.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jim Murdy
>
>Fat Mutant (24" at max width) is great for good wind from 5.5 to 7.5 for me
>at 230lbs
>Fairly advanced shape in that it is fat in the tail and short (8'11").
Some
>like more length
>
>
>150L Techno is good for lighter wind (like we've had this year) for 6.5 to
>8.5 with 7.5 being ideal. Probably a great board if you are not used to
>epoxy that is much lighter.
>
>I had ASD make a custom version similar in volume that is faster and more
>fun than the Techno but harder to sail at 8'11" and 26.5" wide. I LOVE the
>board for 6.5 even on those 15 to 30 days. The Techno is easier to sail as
>it seems slower and thus easier in gusty days. For an intermediate, I'd go
>with the Techno for light days and the FatMutuant for good wind days. This
>will cover most days.
>
>For light days and a 3rd board, go with a Seatrend AllStar80 for 8.5 to 10
>perhaps (I am borrowing a 70cm wide one while my MegaMutant is being
>repaired and it is great for light wind and 7.5 but the extra 10cm would be
>appreciated for the really light days. The 70 is too wide for having fun
>with a 6.5
>
>4th board would be an Enduro for when it is really windy! I have an 8'10".
>
>so my 3 board quiver is
>8'10" Enduro 22" wide for 4.0 to 5.5 (don't have a 6.0)
>8'11" FatMutant 24" wide for 5.5, 6.5 & 7.5
>8'11" Custom 26'5" wide for 6.5 & 7.5 (eventually an 8.5)
>
>Hope this helps
>Kirk out
>
>PS I have an 8'8" ASD Epoxy Slalom Board for sale $400 (too narrow for my
wt
>so I replaced it with the Enduro)
>
>--
>best regards
>Kirk Lindstrom
>Editor: "Kirk's Investing & Personal Finance" @ Suite101.com
>http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/investing
>and "Kirk's Online Newsletter"
>http://www.suite101.com/files/topics/270/files/WhatLetter2Buy.html
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 27 2002 - 12:24:27 PDT