1

Topic: Mast list for Super freaks

This unscientific thread will be a clearing house for information regarding masts suitable for Super Freak sails.
I suggest rating the mast on a 1 through 10 level based on your experience. I will start here, please copy and paste as you add masts, or notes on each mast or certian sizes that may need additional information.

Hot Rod=10

Powerex RDM 92% =8
340=9, 370 =9, 400= 8, 430 = 7, 460 = 5

Neil Pryde RDM = 8
Gaastra Ignition = 2

No Limitz RDM =5
340 = 8, 370 = 7, 400 = 5, 430 = 2

Fiberspar RDM = 7
Amex RDM = 6
North RDM = 7
Gun 65%= 2
Windsurfing Hawaii RDM = 3
Naish Firestick = 7
Ezzy RDM = 5
Simmer RDM = 7
Technolimits RDM=6
340 = 8, 370 = 7, 400 = 7, 430= 4

Thumbs up Thumbs down

2

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Its hard to rate in numbers..but i found the 5.5 Freak gets a little more power with the old 430 Powerex RDM.
Maybe it limits the upper range a little, but being 86kilo i would rate the feel as a 9 as you gain some low and leave some high-end.

The Powerex 4m mast and Tecnolimits 100% work and bent identically as the Hotrod...both 10 (maybe 11 being lighter wink)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

3

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

HOTROD=10

POWEREX RDM 92%
340=9
370=9
400=8 ~ 10
430=7 ~ 9
460=5

NEILPRYDE RDM=8

GAASTRA Ignition=2

NO LIMITZ RDM
340=8
370=7
400=5
430=2

FIBERSPAR RDM=7

AMEX RDM=6

NORTH RDM=7

GUN cross 65%=2
GUN expert 75%=...
GUN select 100%=7

WINDSURFINGHAWAII RDM=3

NAISH Firestick=7

EZZY RDM=5

SIMMER RDM
400=9
430=9

TECNOLIMITS E-slim 65%
400=7
430=5
TECNOLIMITS Slim 100%
400=8 ~ 10
430=9

Thumbs up Thumbs down

4

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Jeroensurf wrote:

Its hard to rate in numbers..but i found the 5.5 Freak gets a little more power with the old 430 Powerex RDM.
Maybe it limits the upper range a little, but being 86kilo i would rate the feel as a 9 as you gain some low and leave some high-end.

The Powerex 4m mast and Tecnolimits 100% work and bent identically as the Hotrod...both 10 (maybe 11 being lighter wink)

PX- When extended, it drops to a 7. I just tested a 5.3m SF and it was horrible in high wind on that sail when compared to the Hot Rod.

Tecno. Same bend, very different construction. Light is nice until you have to swim 1K or further with a broken mast. Those break in Hawaii surf.

All great input!

Thumbs up Thumbs down

5

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

NP X-Combat = 11 (perforomance only)

I assume that the other references here to the NP RDM are the NP X-Combat. We have a 430 NP X-Combat amongst our 370 - 490 Hot Rods. Joanna and I both found it just perceptively better than the Hot Rod and from others who put it through extreme conditions in the Maui surf it seems indestructible. However if one factors in the price tag about double the Hot Rod then the overall value rating I would give the same as the others here, an 8 or even a 7.

Perhaps you could clarify Jeff, is your rating scale on performance only or overall value? I would suggest performance only, then everyone can make their own value analysis.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

6

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Jeffrey Henderson wrote:

Jeroensurf wrote:

Its hard to rate in numbers..but i found the 5.5 Freak gets a little more power with the old 430 Powerex RDM.
Maybe it limits the upper range a little, but being 86kilo i would rate the feel as a 9 as you gain some low and leave some high-end.

The Powerex 4m mast and Tecnolimits 100% work and bent identically as the Hotrod...both 10 (maybe 11 being lighter wink)

PX- When extended, it drops to a 7. I just tested a 5.3m SF and it was horrible in high wind on that sail when compared to the Hot Rod.

Thats weird, can you explain this? becvause with a litle extension (max20cm i never noticed this on my other sails (SO+Smack+(demo)Freak5.3)

Jeffrey Henderson wrote:
Tecno. Same bend, very different construction. Light is nice until you have to swim 1K or further with a broken mast. Those break in Hawaii surf.
All great input!

True, but not everybody sails a Hawaiin break wink  ...a lot of freaks see only fresj water.
For those the Tecnolimits100% offer a great performance.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

7

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Are we to assume that 10 = orgasmic and 0 = er, ah, non-performing?
That seems the logical conclusion but was never clearly stated.

Along these lines...anyone used the SF with a Fiberspar reflex wave? If not, I'll be posting my opinions by summer...

Other queries:

Jeff...how does one get a SF with, like, polka dots, or the asterisk things, or the big HOT logos, etc.?
The sail configurator doesn't give input on how to order sails with the patterns on them (aside from panel colors).

GEM

Thumbs up Thumbs down

8

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Dolf- Performance only INCLUDING strength.

Geoff- Reflex Wave- Great 400 and 430 for SF =8 Medium strength.
Custom...just ask!

Thumbs up Thumbs down

9

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

I want to say that it is good to share mast impressions on this forum smile but I want to make the notice that it is just what you prefer? direct feeling, indirect feeling, and what do you want to do with the sail? freestyle,freeride,super-x ...enz And this preference influence your opinion about the performance of a mast in a sail (but keep on shareing information big_smile)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

10

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

This is an interesting thread, and with my SF on order, I'm curious about how my masts will work with the sail. I've got some fabulous masts for freerace stuff, and have had some that I would rather have had a telephone pole. FYI - being a fresh water / big lake (Great Lakes) and small lake / river sailor, I have a couple FS Reflex Wave masts (460 & 430), and an Ezzy RDM 400. Switching to mainly RDM's is not painless, since there is a mast cost, but also my bases are Chinook carbon that can't be adapted to skinnies.

For the most part, I've thought the Reflex Wave masts are pretty good for B&J and small mushy wind-driven waves. Haven't put one through the tumble dry section, so I can't comment on durability. So I'm eager to see how the 430 works on my SF 6.3. Jeff's rankings make me optimistic.

A more general question is that these mast ratings seem to be independent of sail size, but clearly that's a factor. There is a definite pattern of the bigger the mast the lower the score, independent of who makes the rating. [Forgive me, Jeff, but I must discount your scoring of 10s for the Hot Rod independent of size...you may well be right since the sail is designed for the mast, but you have too much bias.] The problem is that almost all the rated masts are skinnies. I've wondered (long before now), if sails needing a 460 or longer really need an SDM mast. The ratings here would support that hypothesis, but there isn't a lot of data on SDM masts in the 430 / 460 / 490 range (I haven't checked but assume that the 8.0 takes a 490, and surely Dolf's 9.0 takes a 490).

Comments?

Thumbs up Thumbs down

11

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Yes, SDM masts are FINE for mid ad large sized sails. I have always agreed with this. In fact very few 460 RDm masts are good at anything. Most 460 + SDM masts are great. I used Hot Rod as a starting point as we designed the MAST around the sails, where other masts may hit the mark here and there, there is no other line of masts that hits as close as the Hot Rod for our WHOLE line of Super Freak sails.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

12

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Hi Geoff,

I would agree with Jeff that SDM's are "fine" for mid to large size sails, but I think that skinnys are better. While I tend to pick our gear for functional reasons, my wife has the final choice as she is much more sensitive to the feel of the equiipment than I am. I am blessed to be married to my windsurfing buddy and I want to keep it that way. Joanna finds that the skinnies all the way to the 490 give a similar but lesser improvement in feeling lighter and more responsive as our shift from NP to SF. The 8.0 works VERY nicely on the 490 Hot Rod.

I presently use the 9.0 on the 490 Hot Rod with a long extension because I am scared to take it in any sized waves with a SDM as I have broken a few SDM's. I am asking Jeff to build me a custom 520 Hot Rod as I believe that this will be the ultimate in function for me and the ultimate in performance for Joanna.

For our SF quiver, I think that the Hot Rods are simply the best performing masts for the price.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

13

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

And Dolf is a patient man....

Thumbs up Thumbs down

14 (edited by Geoff 2007-02-26 16:20:21)

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Hi Dolf

Every day, as we are shoveling snow and living with a foot and a half of the white stuff, I drive past the lake and look at the ice and waves where it's not frozen, and dream of sailing my new A117 and SuperFreak! Alas, it'll be a few months, but it's coming...  I think I'll be recognizable - check out sail design #339 if you're curious.

Your wife's views are noted. Well, by proxy they're noted. You seem like a very good guy, but I can't but think there is something lost in the translation.

Some random mast observations - JH forgive me these are not SF observations but if I can have some license they contribute to the discussion in that I really like what you've started but I think there are some qualitative parameters that aren't readily captured in a 0-10 rating....

Best mast / sail combo I personally ever owned was a FS 460 4700QT and NP Z1 7.0 - that combo lit up my Berky and was controllable to 20+ kts, never getting unbalanced, as it got windier all it did was pull harder. One day on Lake Erie, I was out with everybody from the area, and they couldn't hold me off with a 50% head start across the bay. It was THAT good. The local best (far and away not me) took the board out and came back saying that he thought they just work perfectly together. Sadly, using a different sail, I broke that mast on Lake Ontario...I was sailing great, totally dialed in on a 6.0 day, so much so that I did a duck jibe in the surf zone and muffed it sticking the mast in the sand. Alas, entropy is a deceptively powerful force. I still feel pain over that one...

Close second to a FS 520 5000QT with a NP Z1 8.7 - best rigged VERY flat, even in super light air, because once you got it planing with a LONG series of monster pumps it was G  O  N  E. Same board, Berky 295.

Either sail you could wreck TOTALLY by using any other mast. It was like the board / mast / sail / fin were made for each other. Actually, one of the things that amazed me the most about this board was that the 8.7 had a totally different feel, but was awesome when dialed-in, only to be surpassed by the 7.0 sailed in as much wind as you could hold on to (which is of course how I broke masts...).

Buddy of mine has a 7.5 Ezzy (OK, so this SuperFreak I've got ordered is my very first HOT sail), and rigs it on an Ezzy 490 skinny. About all I can say for that setup is that it fits your hand nicely when you grab the mast.

I have an Ezzy 7.5 too (JH, that's on the chopping block for an 8.0 SuperFreak), which is an OK sail but I rig it on a weird mast. Being the cheap bum windsurfer that I am, I took a 460 bottom section (of the nicest lightest mast I ever owned until the 7.0 Z1 broke the top section), and mated it to a 520 FS 5000 top section...after a little bit of fiberglass work to get the sections to fit perfectly. It's an interesting effect, actually, as I rig it, well, hard to describe that, but the effect is a slippery feel that handles gusts magnificently and pumps well, but isn't totally flat like you would expect with a stock 490.

I have a bunch of littler sails (6.5 - 3.7) that, hands down, are better on a skinny than an SDM. For the same reasons as your wife espouses (pun intended). At least, as best I can tell from her proxy.   wink

I guess that's why I'm intrigued by the declining relationship between mast ranking and the rated performance on JH's scale. Not that a skinny can't be great in the 460-520 range, but if you really look at the dimensions of the spindle and then look at the task - it's an awful lot for a thin pencil-lead shaped thing to do. My hypothesis is that the radius of the mast confers an added degree of stability that is not adequately measured by static load techniques. Sure, you can rig a 490 or even 520 (have to give you credit for pushing the envelope, Dolf), but will it control deflections under dynamic load?

Thus far, my bias is that skinnies lose their HUGE advantage when you get above 430; their advantage at the 460 level is probably application / sail dependent; at 490 and above I'm not convinced and think an SDM is a safer bet. One might do great with an RDM, but the objective ratings don't support that.

As I said, this is very interesting and I hope others will post their experiences and observations.

Best,

GEM

PS - Where did you find a wife like that?  (You can treat that as a rhetorical question since this is a forum...)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

15

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Very interesting thread - I have 5 SF's from 3.5 to 6.3, I would never consider any other mast than the Hot Rod. I dont think anyone would by a Ferrari and test its peformance with other brand engine.
Awsome Sails Jeffrey, just interested what you gona pull out of your sleave next to improove a perfect sail.

Holger

Thumbs up Thumbs down

16

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Holger wrote:
I dont think anyone would by a Ferrari and test its peformance with other brand engine.

Ha ha, amusing. Probably not a Ferrari, you're right. But on the F1 circuit (and all others) they pull the engines all the time. Kind of like sails, the main criteria for a car engine are the horespower limit and whether or not it fits in the allocated space...

Hey, JH, you've got some committed Hot Rod fans! I think one problem with mast comparisons is that it's hard to compare. Not a lot of visual difference; can't demonstrate differences in dynamic performance (not in the shop, anyway). Hence all the trial and error observations.

If the HR is better, then why and how is it better? I mean, lots of makers use pre-preg; many have a kevlar area for the boom, lots are RDM....so amongst your competitors, what is the design difference? It would seem to be the curve characteristics, so what makes that better than others?

GEM

Thumbs up Thumbs down

17

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Geoff,

Quite right, from an engineering perspective longer skinnys should loose their advantage as they have to get very thick to achieve the required moment resistance with the reduced cross sectional area which has a square relationship on the moment resistance. But that is also what makes them so strong in the wave as they will endure a relative huge deflection before ultimate stress.

But the 490 works AWESOME on the 8.0 and I have spent a literal fortune to make the worlds largest perfect wave sail (9.0) set up that I am not going to let Jeff's procastination on a 520 stop me. We arrive in Maui in 2 days, March 1. Jeff you are warned!

I can't tell you WHY the Hot Rods are better, except that Joanna says that they "feel" better, with the exception of the NP X-Combat at double the price "feels" even better.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

18

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

To explain the feel wink .....
On a good level it isn't that one mast is so better as the other one but... they work best in a certain needed curve while others work better in a different curve.
For example:
A Ignition RDM give a great feel on a Gaastra wavesail, i think at least 10% better as a Powerex or Hotrod..put them in a Hot and you will get maybe a 5 or 6....just because the mast won,t fit the curve needed.

If the curve is right you get weight and reflex/response vs strength.
For example a Tecnolimits is very light and  great for freestylestuff but won,t take the beating as well as the heavier built  Hotrod making that one better for waves.
response...well in a lab you can test it, but i can,t feel the diff between 90%mast number 1 and 2 :z

Because of that i wonder what make the NP feel better to you as the Hotrod...as some Prydeguys like that Hotrod over the XCombat    roll

Thumbs up Thumbs down

19

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Hi Jeroensurf,

I think that you hit the nail on the head with your explaination behind the feel.

I would add that the improved feel of a RDM over a SDM is that it has less wind resistance due to it's smaller profile so it has less drag so it feels lighter as you don't need to keep it pushed forward against the wind even though it is actually physically heavier.

I asked for Joanna's help why she prefers the X-Combat. She says it is like driving my Audi TT vs her Nissan Sentra. It feels a touch tighter and quicker responding. But again it is splitting hairs and when you put the cost in the equation, we would call the Hot Rod the hands down winner.

I continue to look with envy at your 3 SOS's that would so nicely complete my SOS quiver.

Thumbs up Thumbs down

20

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Maybe its a quicker reflex at the Prydes making the difference (the wall thickness of the top of the Xcombat looks a little thinner).
My SOS they are very sweet but come at a price...i,m 32years old and still without a driverslicence because i "can,t afford it"  wink big_smile

Maybe next year..(or a paddleboard big_smile).

Thumbs up Thumbs down

21

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Dolf and Jeroensurf:

I'm pretty familiar with the "feel". Again, I think specific mast/sail combos have it, others are good, others are like a barn door mounted on a telephone post (if one were strong enough, and had a really floaty board, I think you could sail that arrangement). You guys touched on my thoughts about it, so let me try to express it.

A static sail is not a real situation, but one can design a mast / sail combo that takes on the desired foil outline and shape with any number of masts. I personally think frontal area of the mast is over-rated, as the frontal area one would consider in assessing drag is the frontal area of the foil, not that of the mast. A wider diameter mast adds a little to the frontal area of the whole sail rigged-up, but nothing near the difference in area when comparing the masts alone. But the wind doesn't see the mast any more than the wind sees the struts in an airplane wing; the wind sees the sail. The mast shape affects the depth of the foil a little, and somewhat more dramatically affects the shape of the leading edge. If the leading edge were that critical, then light aircraft would have a fine leading edge. In fact, at the slow speeds of windsurfing sails (compared to wings), there is little to no compression of air at the leading edge, flow is laminar at this point, and thus local drag (i.e., drag attributable to the leading edge of the sail) should be minimal with both kinds of masts. So I really doubt that would explain the difference between the two.

A dynamic sail, the real situation, is a much more difficult problem. First, as the board bounces and gusts alter the lift / drag on the sail, the changes in lift alter the shape of the foil and bend the mast in many directions. When the sail is made of a non-compliant material, which is true for all modern windsurfing sails (even the SuperFreak), the material CANNOT alter shape to maintain an "ideal" foil. So as the mast deflects, the foil is transiently re-shaped to a less efficient form. In Fiberspar-ese, the reflex response is how quickly the foil returns to it's design shape parameters. If the deflected shape is a higher drag shape (almost certainly), and/or if the deflected shape has a change in the Center of Effort, then that will take away from that "feel" we're aiming for.

Dolf, I think correctly, points out that a good deal of what resists the mast deformation and leading to an inefficient shape, is the radius of the mast's cross section. This is what resists the deflection moment. As a shorter radius has less mechanical advantage, it has to be thicker. This leads to a situation of diminishing returns, in which the small advantage of the RDM in frontal drag is offset by a disadvantage in needing to make the walls thicker (and heavier). The advantage of an RDM must necessarily diminish as the masts get longer. I would argue that the empiric data in this thread is suggesting that the crossover point is currently at about 430 - 460 cm.

If, in fact, Hot Rods have a higher crossover point, then comparing their construction and response to dynamic load ought to shed some light as to the interactions of mast and SuperFreak. Not that I don't think it's possible, but if the Hot Rod really is better than other brands at long lengths, then close scrutiny of their construction should reveal why. I could understand HSM (or any other brand) not wanting to undergo that scrutiny.

I agree with Dolf that skinnies have a much better record when their tip is stuck into the sand and surf pounds the board down onto the mast. SDMs give up the ghost in that situation. Oh, and by the way, Dolf, if he really agrees to build you a custom 520, for such a tall order I think you should be very patient.

GEM

Thumbs up Thumbs down

22 (edited by Jeroensurf 2007-02-27 23:49:44)

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Hi Geoff
I think you are right about the Frontal aera.
The diff between sdm vs rdm is to small in the total picture to give such a change.
I cant, explain the difference in feel in that one
About the static sail..i dont see a rig as static, the ideal situation is movement within a certain bandwidth. Going outside that bandwidth gives a change of the C/E. and loss of control.
to keep a reliable C/E we use battens, seam shaping, and tension in the sail as well sacrifice a part of the sail to the total picture.
15 years ago a 6m sail used almost the complete surface of the 6m. Today you need a 6.5 or a 7.0 to match the same amount of power/drive....
But those older sails worked only in a very small bandwidth due lack of twist/movement etc while the modern ones even with there bigger sizes got a way bigger range.
Only downtrade is a loss in maneuverability due physical the bigger sizes
(Because of that i asked Tom and Jeff to think about a 5.5-6.0 lightwindwavesail with a smaller bandwidth but lots of punch, aiming to sail a smal rigg for lightwind instead of 6.3-7.0).

Tom, Jeff, what are your thoughts about this mast vs rig vs dynamic rigg? im thinking and guerssing about it, you guys make it working.:)

Thumbs up Thumbs down

23

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Jeroensurf wrote:

About the static sail..i dont see a rig as static, the ideal situation is movement within a certain bandwidth. Going outside that bandwidth gives a change of the C/E. and loss of control.

i totally agree with you. Only reason I brought up a static concept is that it is what most sailors "see" in their rig when it is set up on the beach and they check out the sail shape / tension / etc. It has little bearing on real world function, really, since (and I'm in a total WAG-mode here) the sail is in that conformation maybe 10-205 of the time. I mean, most of the time the mast is deflecting, if so then the majority of the time the sail isn't anywhere NEAR its static shape. I suppose the flatter the water / steadier the wind the more you are close to design parameters; the bumpier the water the gustier the wind you spend more time away from the design parameters.

If the mast is heavily deflected, it would seem that monofilm would be a terrible choice. In such a condition, it would be better to have an elastic sail that "contracted" to the right shape (I'm aware that there have been attempts at this concept). Thus, I suppose race sails are rewarded for being on very stiff masts, low deflections, limited change in shape; wave sails need to be lighter, maneuverable, and thus are not as stable / range-y. Wave masts, of course, need to be durable in the tumble-dry / pole-vault mode of windsurfing.

Obviously, my belief (emphasis on the religious overtones) is that bigger sails need higher diameter masts to do the job. The Hot Rods clearly have some converts, which somewhat contradicts my theory.

TA - we need your input, man!

GEM

Thumbs up Thumbs down

24

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

I first thought that I agreed with you on the diameter difference not making a difference on wind resistance, but I am changing my mind.

We discovered that we had to give up on the 9% NACA0009 profile for our big wave fins as they had too much drag even though we really tried to make it work for power under slower speed. Going back to the NACA0008 made all the difference.

Try swinging a piece of 3" poly pipe in the air and then try a 2". The difference is noticable.

But I am going to try to ease out of this tangent. I don't think that Jeff had this in mind when he said "This unscientific thread will be a clearing house for information regarding masts suitable for Super Freak sails."

Thumbs up Thumbs down

25

Re: Mast list for Super freaks

Dolf

I do think you retired. Or maybe you were just too excited about your trip to Maui!

First, in comparing fins to a sail you have mixed symmetrical and asymmetrical foils. In a sail, the frontal area is not the mast, but the depth of the chord being seen by the wind, measuring the perpendicular distance from a line mast to leech and then to the maximum depth of the sail. In these dimensions, the effect of the mast diameter alters mainly the sharpness of the leading edge. Discounting the symmetrical / asymmetrical problem, if you look at NACA 0008 vs 0009, the sharpness of the leading edge is not markedly different.

Second, comparing the aerodynamics of a foil to a cylinder is, well,...you shouldn't do that. Airflow behind a cylinder is very turbulent, which is of course why we use a foil known as a sail. If cylinders worked, we'd just use masts (the last time I checked, sailing under bare poles is a downwind technique).

If the effect of the mast as a cylindrical component with very high drag at the front of the sail were THAT big of a difference, then non-cammed sails wouldn't be anywhere nearly as good as cammed sails, since the cammed sails use a wide luff sleeve that serves as a fairing to the monofilm. Based on the observation that there a lot of really good non-cammed sails out there, that can hold their own against cammed sails, it would appear that this contribution to the overall drag must be low.

GEM

Thumbs up Thumbs down