X-OldHeader: From eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis.com Tue Jul 17 16:24:41 2001 Return-Path: <eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis.com> Received: from opus.labs.agilent.com (root@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com [130.29.244.179]) by jr.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id QAA11407 for <wind_talk_ls@jr.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:24:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (msgbas1.cos.agilent.com [130.29.152.58]) by opus.labs.agilent.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3 AgilentLabs Workstation) with ESMTP id QAA22191 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:24:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.48]) by msgbas1.cos.agilent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 122A4F46 for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:24:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from default ([12.72.89.131]) by mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.03.16 201-229-121-116-20010115) with SMTP id <20010717232424.CDYE1777.mtiwmhc23.worldnet.att.net@default> for <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>; Tue, 17 Jul 2001 23:24:24 +0000 Message-ID: <004b01c10f16$ed5bd440$646c480c@default> From: "Erik Eiseman" <eeiseman@worldnet.att.net-DeleteThis.com> To: <wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com> References: <3B548449.101A0664@skolar.com-DeleteThis.com> Subject: Re: Lost Board Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 16:19:26 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
What are you talking about?
Do you mean that the rubber of the universal is floppier when purchasing the
two bold base rather than the one bolt. Buy the tendon. I love it.
As for the F2 Maui Project Style Large. Got it. Sailed it. loved it.
Amazing. Back at work.
Erik
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Harris" <harris@skolar.com-DeleteThis.com>
To: "Multiple recipients of list WIND_TALK"
<wind_talk@opus.labs.agilent.com-DeleteThis.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Lost Board
>
>
> So actually I was the big proponent of the double bolt bases about two
months
> ago when this subject came up. I've never thought the safety compared to
the
> hassle of not being able to move the base back an inch mattered. I bought
two
> when my latest base failed at Crissy. However, I found they were
extremely and
> overly floppy in terms of their strength. About one/two months later,
just from
> the abuse of sailing it really hard I had turned one into jello. I could
turn
> the whole thing around with my hand easy. I think if I landed a big jump
flat
> the pressure probably would have made the high part of the hourglass flex
so
> much it'd kiss the top of my board. I went back to a shop to try and see
about
> getting one that wasn't so floppy, but the guy at the shop said the recent
> chinook shipments of the two bolts were really floppy... and they were.
He said
> each shipment is a little different in strength and marked by a little
insignia
> on it. Anyway, I found myself having to make a choice between strength of
uni,
> two-bolt base and having the webbing. Nothing had all three. Irritated,
I
> exchanged some of the crappy ones I bought for a one bolt, webbing design
(still
> Chinook, although for whatever reason, far stronger than the two bolts) in
hopes
> that later Chinook will start make the two bolts not so floppy (which they
used
> to do). So if you're thinking about getting the two-bolt, I'd compare it
to
> some of the other hour glass ones for strength before you buy.
>
> greg
>
> John Morris wrote:
>
> > >I had a similar experience a mile out at 3rd in 4.5 SqM conditions.
The
> > >base had worked loose (unscrewed slightly). ...
> >
> > >>Mast base came out of the track. Seemed to be suddenly loose, it was
ok
> > >>for an hour of hard sailing. The mast & base (with nut) came free of
the
> > >>board at the conclusion of a jibe ...
> >
> > I also have had the mast base come loose at inopportune moments. I
switched
> > to the double-bolt mast base 4 years ago and have not had any
separations
> > since. I keep a base plate fixed to each board, so I just check the
> > tightness every 10'th session or so. The one time a double bolt base
came
> > loose while sailing, the plate slid forward and the second bolt kept it
from
> > coming out of the track. It was a big non-event.
> >
> > On the down side, the double bolt base reduces the range of mast track
> > position by an inch in each direction, and it is marginally heavier for
> > those who worry about every half ounce. For me, the increased safety is
> > worth it.
> >
> > My experience with double bolt bases has been very positive. I was
wondering
> > what others think of them.
> >
> > - John Morris
> > Menlo Park, CA
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 02:10:16 PST