You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Seems like the test of the 4.7 Fire in Boardseeker didn't turned out that well. With so many happy Fire sailors here at this forum it seems odd that the test is that bad (no details from the test yet - but the numbers are not that good).
Do the testers get the rigging wrong!? they should be capable!?
It's not clear to me that being in the middle of each scale = bad (save for softness, which the Fire "led" but that trait appears not to be a valued based on the way they rank pull). Plus, "untuned range" is kind of a useless scale, don't you think? And it isn't apparent what masts were used (i.e., if each maker provided a mast or if they just used a particular mast). Admittedly, the diagram of applicability looks very narrow compared to the other sails, but I think it deserves waiting for the narrative before calling this a bad review.
I think he's referring to the tuning remarks. The test isn't complete but the tuning points indicates that the Fire has a small "sweet spot".
It will be interesting to read the full test when it's publshed. At first glance the Fire results seem at little odd. If you sort by Power delivery the Fire comes in at the extreme end as 'soft' - to quote "SOFT = More Forgiving feel - Can lack responsiveness and feel" but then if you rank them by sail stiffness it comes in as being flexible - to quote " FLEXIBLE = + lots of feedback and feel ". So it seems that it's 'soft' and therefore can lack feel, butat the same time it's 'flexible' and there gives 'lots of feedback and feel'!! I'm confused so I look forward to reading the full test.
If they tested the sail at El Medano I can imagine that the Fire would not be as good there when compared to the Smack, as it tends to be cross-on with windswell (quite big at times) - well that's my view anyway!!
The Boards forum have some naysayers talking about the Boardseeker tests, BEFORE the entire test is shown/printed in Boards. People making assumptions about what they have not even read, just looked at the charts, and did their own deductions of what is.
Boardseeker show weights on these sails, and I can hardly believe the Serverne S1 is that light, this test shows it even lighter than the Serverne site does.
I would perfer to read the test when the magazine comes and draw conclusions based on ALL the information.
Last edited by tooold2dance (2011-11-06 19:01:33)
The fire in my opinion HAS a very little sweetspot and requires the correct tuning. But when my 4,2 and 4,7 is tuned correctly I wouldn't change them for anything else (even in euro-mush).
If the sail doesn't get the correct amount of fx. downhaul it is horrible.. (Maybe their experience?).
I saw it too, & according to the chart it has the worst range of any sail in the test! It show almost no range - the test is completely bogus, That sail must have more top-end than any sail out there & they don't show that on the chart at all.
Regardless of what they write in the commentary this is really one of the worst test results I have ever seen in Boardseeker. .... Something definitely VERY wrong here!
Here is another interesting and much better test results for Fire 5.3 2011. It is in german but you can translate it with google. Link: http://www.windsurfing-test.de/index.ph … mp;sid=249
You can check also test results for other HSM wave sails 2011.
Regards from Slovenia,
Robert Bajs
Last edited by Wind hunter (2011-11-07 11:18:48)
This test quite accurately reflect my Experience with the Fire I would think even more so in 4.7 conditions.
Here is the Translation:
The first impression
Compared to its predecessor was in the 2011-Fire in the bottom of the sail shape revised, changed the Minibatt and batten tensioners. The Fire has six slats, which are all sewn on one side of the sail. It also has four Minibatt, which are filled with a small round bar. The bar ends are protected on both sides by Lederpads. The sails are three different types of X-Ply sail installed and only the window is made of monofilament lm. On the Vorliekbahn two fingers is sewn Dacron. The Achterliekbahn is protected by a very robust Kevlar thread and four fingers broad Dacronlage. The complete Unterliekkante is protected up to the two Achterliekösen by a rubber lip. Unlike many other sails the leech is not issued, but tapers towards mast so the sail is at the top of increasingly narrow. Very strong, this is from the fifth bar. The lightweight mast protector can be solved far from the sail to allow good access to the triple role trim. The mast is held by a pin in the sail and this area is very well protected by leather. Like all sails from Hot Sails Fire also has a vario, if the mast should be smaller than 400 centimeters.
Rig and settings
-
Handling
The Fire has always been a hardcore wave sail. The only sail with six slats critics always try again the heavy weight into the game, only in reality you realize it is not on the water. The sail sits comfortably in the hand and gives impetus of the rider to quickly and accurately. There is sailing, which used to plane as the Fire, trimmed properly but you can adjust the wind field down considerably. During maneuvers do not need much power to tell the Fire, where it's at. It responds directly to impulses. Developed as a side-shore sail for use in Hawaii, and the surprise on the propulsion shaft. Especially the acceleration is explosive, the bottom turn, it is automatically set to "OFF". Really in his element is fire in high winds. Through the six bars of the pressure point also deviates from the strongest gust an inch to the side. Also the upwind properties are particularly noteworthy, what is just in districts with lots of flow advantage where it otherwise has to ride a wave problems, come back to the peak.
Pros
Highest quality materials and workmanship, festbetonierter pressure point, endless control.
Cons
Low wind performance.
I'm not with Hot anymore as you know, but it's still interesting to look at that test. As mentioned, without the accompanying words we can't say much. But since I still know the Fire quite well I think the results will tell me as much about the test as it tells me about the sail.
In general I think boardsseekers tests are quite good. But as far as sails go, they do tend to value range quite a lot and to me it has always seemed like they are a bunch of testers that prefer to ride rather powered up. I remember them slaughtering the NP FLy fx, while german SURF rather found some limitations in range but still overall loved it for it's other traits.
And regarding the sail (Fire), as Caleb points out, it indeed is quite a challenge to tune, with more or less one sweet spot where it (to me) feels really nice. And I think it wants more downhaul that one might be lead to believe when only looking at it. With too little downhaul it has a VERY narrow range. Even in the correct trim the range is not the best out there but I still think it's a very nice sail as far as wave riding related parameters go. Anyway, lets wait for the text part of the test and then see.
Indeed with too little downhaul the sail is crap. However with proper downhaul & six battens? It has unbelievable top-end & most other characteristics are (to me) unmatched. In fact I think the German test above put it very well. If the Boardseekers testers like to sail really powered than they should have LOVED the Fire ..... rigged properly.
Last edited by calebchinookRD (2011-11-07 12:20:09)
I read the test now and it puzzles me. It sounds like they did go through quite some trim options. But the very explicitly point out the softness of the sail. This is not how I remember the Fire. And they complain of of a sort of heavy feel, particularly in the top. While the Fire is not the lightest sail, when set right the top really will not be intimidating like that. I only got that feel when I used it on a softer mast. And behold, in the test they actually do comment that the mast feels more flexible (the new HotRod) than other masts. Personally, I suspect they got a faulty mast. In fact, most descriptions in the test to me seems to indicate a mast that is too soft, and particularly too soft in the middle. Worth checking, perhaps.
bakchiche: good test
No bakchiche: bad test 
I missed some of the posts above, but looking for something else ran across this:::
The Fire rigs up easily with less of a heave on the downhaul than most others. The leech twists off rapidly, so small adjustments can make a noticeable difference both visually and on the water. Small changes on outhaul make a noticeable difference in sail power as well.
As the softest sail in the test, the Fire is hot on the wave with the true power on/off ability. Regulating the power is easy and smooth, so you’re in complete control of how much speed you take from section to section. Even with plenty of downhaul to try and lower the draft, we found the Fire powerful enough to help get weight forward and drive the rail. On some sails a high draft makes balance off the lip awkward. But the short boom, high clew and lightness make it easy to shift weight and react to the wave.
This from a North America magazine test, from a few years back. IMO have never been particularly kind/ but not hostile to HSM, except the Liquid which was VERY KIND
Shame that either the Fire Power or Fire Light versions were not tested, but we know how testing goes, you test what you have
Last edited by tooold2dance (2011-11-09 15:11:20)
Another GREAT day on my 2011 Fire 4.7 ......
Sailed it rigged with moderate downhaul - 18cm(spec is 17-19) & moderate outhaul (sail not touching boom). Mast: Rigged on a new 90% Carbon 400cm Chinook mast bending IMCS 19 X 63%B X 77% TOP. Me: 75kg on a fast rockered 83lt Twinfin .... Wind: gusty East wind 14-28mph- Plenty of Power in the lulls & Stable as can be top end plenty of speed for hitting the bumps & upwind against the current like a dream .... could have made it even more comfortable with a tad more down & out but didn't need it. Still really confused by that test - this sail has great range!
Last edited by calebchinookRD (2011-11-09 13:35:19)
In my heavy-butt-poor-waver test o Fire 5,3 (2008) I've had a nice experience when ovepowered and with the sail downhauled to max level, outhaul next to max. At the beginning wind was more for a 4,7 but then slowly decreasing I was in almost perfect balance. For first time in my windsurfing life I've experienced something like the feeling of forgetting the sail over a wave and trying free to surf it, a clear difference from the most powered but not neutral Smacks in my quiver. The day before being overpowered with the Smack 6,3 wasn't so easy.
On the opposite for my poor waveriding level I find that I cannot suggest a Fire for a low planing board. Second, curiously I've never found Fire 4,5 and 5,3 so soft, imho my concern was I feel them way more direct than all my previuos North Voodoo '99 and actual Hot sails, even too much for my spinal ernia c6-c7.
Last edited by Nico (2011-11-11 00:47:41)
the Boards magazine came today with the 4.7 tests. The conclusions , for the Fire, less stable, in lighter winds , they could get pull but seemed difficult to convert into forward drive, they did not get a chance to wave ride (tests were in Tenerife, Grand Canaria) ,, so perhaps on a glassy wave it will come into its own.
Reading the overall impression, I would not be able to pick a clear winner, several received praise in certain areas.
the Boards magazine came today with the 4.7 tests. The conclusions , for the Fire, less stable, in lighter winds , they could get pull but seemed difficult to convert into forward drive, they did not get a chance to wave ride (tests were in Tenerife, Grand Canaria) ,, so perhaps on a glassy wave it will come into its own.
Utter BS ... er .... Bollox !
Last edited by calebchinookRD (2011-11-17 14:28:21)
don't shoot the messenger
No ones shooting here 
!
Just seems pretty obvious that they either had the sail rigged VERY wrong or they had the wrong/bad mast. I could see them complaining about the weight or perhaps lack of grunt compared to some. But rigged correctly the Fire is very, very, very stable, & the pull is quite forward compared to many sails - including other HSM...
Bit of a head scratcher this test because most of what the testers say just doesn't agree with my experience. I've got 5.0 and 5.3 2009 Fires and I love em because they are so stable, so predictable, and so easy to power / depower. Its hard to imagine that the 2011/12 ones are so different particularly in terms of a high centre of effort and feeling unsettled?
I mainly sail down the line groundswell waves at Gwithian in the UK where conditions are notoriously gusty with the likelihood of big wind holes on the inside and being overpowered on the outside. I'm a good sailor but no pro and I love the Fires because they make my life easier. Easy is good, easy means sailing for longer and less stress on my middle aged body. Sailing here on a more grunty sail is a right workout as you're endlessly avoiding getting pitched and dealing with killer gusts.
I'm 90kg and do rig them on HotRod 430 bottom with 400 top to give me more a bit grunt and so that I can use a shorter stronger extension. Also the HS sail/mast combo seems bomb proof, I've been worked a lot in decent sized waves and watched other guys wandering up the beach with trashed kit whilst mine pops up intact and ready to go again. What's not to like?
For a Medano/Pozo test I'd have thought the Smack may have been better canditate for an "All round" wave sail test.
I'm not convinced on the validity of expert Pro sailors opinions in tests for products aimed at recreational sailors anyway. Their needs and requirements can be very different different.
Might be interesting to see who are sponsoring the "pro" sailors or what the ride at "home"
Views might be biased....
Full test read here:
Full text of the review is very honest on tuning and conditions.
Next time HSM better make sure the most suitable sail is tested for the conditions and against competitors.
Funny, I don't really recognize the 4.7 Fire's published traits in the Boardseeker review. I'm 90 kgs and find it ultra stable (I'm often riding comfortably overpowered), decent bottom end, very direct, and good for side-on conditions too. I too suspect something was up with the test mast (too soft somehow). Disappointing test result for a killer sail. I usually tend to agree with most of Boardseeker's test findings. This one doesn't match my experience well at all.
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
The pun_posts_feed official extension is installed. Copyright © 2003–2010 PunBB.
