From: janusz@leland.Stanford.EDU (Janusz Mrozek)
Subject: Re: Optimal Sail Quiver
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 19:26:41 GMT

Thanks all for responding to may questions about sail quivers.  Specific
and general comments follow.

Everyone seems to agree that sail increments in proportion are a good 
thing.  So why do Neil Pryde and Gaastra sell their race sails in fixed
increments?  Is it, as Kirk Lindstrom said recently, that they just want to
make more bucks?  When the trade show hits San Francisco in October, I will
ask them directly.

Regarding: From: kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom)

> I like the good race sails as they seem to have a good, wide range (but then
> I haven't sailed the other sails ).  I am not an expert but have sailed
> Race sails for quite some time.

So I'm confused.  I thought that race sails have a narrower, not a wider,
wind range than intermediate sails, and that's why one needs more of them.  Am
I just wrong?

Regarding: Roger Christal  rogerc@techbook.com  rogerc@ssd.intel.com  -=<<

> You mention a SFBay quiver of 4.2, 5.1 and 6.2.  This is great IF you
> have the boards to support the quiver.

> As an example, what happens when you're sailing the 6.2 and the wind
> picks up, but not quite enough to rig down to the 5.1?  You really
> want to be able to go to a smaller board so that you don't get totally
> blown away.  The problem is, this smaller board also has to support a
> wide range of sailing conditions; ie, fully powered 4.2.  That is
> quite a wide range of conditions, isn't it?

I don't really agree.  I sail my current board (Mike's Lab 120l 9'3") 
from 8.4 to 5.0 conditions (I'm 145 lbs).  I tried it once at 4.5, but I
quickly broke the connection between my harness line and my boom, and called
it a day, so while I can't confirm that the board can be sailed at 4.5, I
suspect, based on two minutes usage and on experience at 5.0, that
it can.  Sure I'd be more comfortable on a smaller board in the strong stuff,
but I just can't afford it.  If I have the mast and the straps forward, I can
still control the board.

If I'm sailing 6.2, and the wind picks up, I need only switch to a smaller fin,
and tug the downhaul some more, and I'm not blown away.  I suspect the
board will be miserable in 3.0 conditions, or maybe in 4.0 conditions if I am
at Coyote (chop) instead of at Candlestick (flat), but I believe that boards
have a wider range than you give them credit for (especially when one's wallet
is empty).  The gap between 6.2 and 5.1 may be a little too big to be 
manageable, but I don't think the solution is to get more boards.

> Think about a day on SFBay when it is blowing a perfect 5.5.  Which
> sail are you going to rig?  The 6.2?  What if the wind picks up
> significantly?  Or, how about the 5.1?  Are you willing do to the hula
> for a few hours?  What happens if the wind dies?  In either case, how
> far offshore are you willing to go when you know the sail you rigged
> isn't really right for the conditions?

Many days here it blows 5.5.  Since I based my quiver on a 7.5, I ended up
straddling this important sail size.  Nevertheless, the original point holds.
Say I get a 4.5 and a 5.5  (22% bigger).  Do I need a sail in between?  What
is the smallest sail that leaves the gap below the 5.5 manageable?
4.8? 4.5? 4.3? 5.0?  That is now my question.  My guess is that a 5.0 results
in an unnecessarily (and expensively) small gap.  

Janusz Mrozek    janusz@leland.stanford.edu