Simmer team edition

Has anyone had the chance to compare the Blacktip against the team edition?

Select to expand quote

Ola H said..
I have the whole set as well as the 22/23 regular Blacktips. I only sailed 3.4, 4.0, 4.2 and 4.5 TEs so far. The TE feels a bit lighter physically in particular in the top, and it seems they prefer a bit less downhaul, although the regular BT's too can be sailed with a relatively tight leech and the TE's still handle a bit more downhaul when needed. The TE's feel a bit fuller and I'm pretty sure they generate more power when rigged for it. Many of my around 10 session in total with the TE's ended in underpowered sailing and I have ben VERY impressed how much speed and glide you get out from them. I had this underpowered 4.2 session when everyone else was on 4.5, 4.7 and 5.0. I had a small high rockered board too and still got around better than most. Still no problems whatsoever at the top end. All these things are things the regular BT is good at already. But it is like the TE is even more Blacktippy, so to say.

I haven't tried the TE, but the regular Black Tip 22/23. I thing this season Simmer finally nailed it with the wave sails. I am stoked with the BTips. As a matter of fact they made me try the G6 flywave 72l. Stoked again. Imho the have still way to go with booms and masts, but I am sure they will get there. Anyway, I quit my previous brand. Now I am on Simmer. It is that simple

Select to expand quote

sprayblaze said..

Ola H said..
I have the whole set as well as the 22/23 regular Blacktips. I only sailed 3.4, 4.0, 4.2 and 4.5 TEs so far. The TE feels a bit lighter physically in particular in the top, and it seems they prefer a bit less downhaul, although the regular BT's too can be sailed with a relatively tight leech and the TE's still handle a bit more downhaul when needed. The TE's feel a bit fuller and I'm pretty sure they generate more power when rigged for it. Many of my around 10 session in total with the TE's ended in underpowered sailing and I have ben VERY impressed how much speed and glide you get out from them. I had this underpowered 4.2 session when everyone else was on 4.5, 4.7 and 5.0. I had a small high rockered board too and still got around better than most. Still no problems whatsoever at the top end. All these things are things the regular BT is good at already. But it is like the TE is even more Blacktippy, so to say.

I haven't tried the TE, but the regular Black Tip 22/23. I thing this season Simmer finally nailed it with the wave sails. I am stoked with the BTips. As a matter of fact they made me try the G6 flywave 72l. Stoked again. Imho the have still way to go with booms and masts, but I am sure they will get there. Anyway, I quit my previous brand. Now I am on Simmer. It is that simple

What were your thoughts on booms and masts. I really like the precision of the boom head but would like the weight closer to the Severne booms.

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said..

Ola H said..
I have the whole set as well as the 22/23 regular Blacktips. I only sailed 3.4, 4.0, 4.2 and 4.5 TEs so far. The TE feels a bit lighter physically in particular in the top, and it seems they prefer a bit less downhaul, although the regular BT's too can be sailed with a relatively tight leech and the TE's still handle a bit more downhaul when needed. The TE's feel a bit fuller and I'm pretty sure they generate more power when rigged for it. Many of my around 10 session in total with the TE's ended in underpowered sailing and I have ben VERY impressed how much speed and glide you get out from them. I had this underpowered 4.2 session when everyone else was on 4.5, 4.7 and 5.0. I had a small high rockered board too and still got around better than most. Still no problems whatsoever at the top end. All these things are things the regular BT is good at already. But it is like the TE is even more Blacktippy, so to say.

thx.
Guess I better start saving. You just described my perfect sail. Sounds like a mix of tricera and Blacktip.

Should I read between the lines that the 2024 bt is the 2023 te shape

Yes I though about writing that - the Tricera similarity. I'm not 100% sure about the 2024, but from what I heard it is indeed similar to the TE. I will check and come back.

Yes, the 2024 will pretty much be like the TE's with only minor mods.

So far I think pretty much the same sizes, with some possible +-1 liter change here and there. Then (probably) an addition of a 106 or therabouts. In this stage of prototyping we also look at some tail length adjustments, shorter on some (78+84+92, biggest change on the 78) and longer on the 99. The 106 will have a tail like the new 99. Then some very small rocker adjustments. I'm also adjusting the rocker along the rail in the tail, ie increasing it to add some additional looseness. Inspired from some of my personal shapes I then run a different double concave flow with a deeper concave in the tail which give a bit of extra projection out of the turns. Not all of this is confirmed yet in testing but it is the current stage of development.

Select to expand quote

Ola H said..
Yes, the 2024 will pretty much be like the TE's with only minor mods.

Thx

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said..


What were your thoughts on booms and masts. I really like the precision of the boom head but would like the weight closer to the Severne booms.

I would also prefer a lighter head, but otherwise I like them. Personally I'm kind of odd since I prefer bigger diameter booms, so sometimes I still ride my old Hot booms that are like 15 years old, with an old fiberspar head which is even older. That's a very light setup and I modded one of them to 130-180. I would for sure like a Simmer 130-180 boom too.

Select to expand quote

Just to clarify-do you mean shorter or narrower tail? BTW I have heard that more tail length gives more control in strong fully powered conditions and vice versa. Narrower tail- board more turny and pivoty. Wider tail -early planning, better upwind, but less maneuverable - or I may be wrong ?

The treatment is to simply cut off some tail without doing anything else to the outline. So the tail will visually to most look wider, since it is wider at the very end. And the OFO measurement will increase. But the tail is in fact exactly as wide, only shorter. This is why the OFO measurement is fundamentally flawed and should never be used. And indeed, the idea of how close the strap is to the tail is flawed too. It is conceptually much better to think about how long the tail extends behind the strap. This tail length is a VERY fundamental notion. When I cut the tail, the way I have set up my general design principle makes the tail get a touch thinner, progressively from the center and back. So the 78 is in fact 3mm thinner at the back strap. A shorter tail does not really affect control a whole lot, in particularly not in a straightline. Just look at slalom boards. Less area behind the strap in fact make the board more free to move smoothly over chop. But tail length is relative other variables not very important in this aspect at all. The advantage of a shorter tail that you can turn much tighter with everything else being the same. The downside is a bit worse planing with everything else being the same. In practice the only situation when this matters is when pumping onto a wave in cross offshore winds. That seems to ba a special situation where more tail length adds some needed support.A shorter tail gives a bit less top turn grip too. This can be compensated with a bit less outline curve in the tail. In the boards that are being developed now I also add a bit of a tunnel double concave. This is done by increasing the rocker inside the double from between the straps and back. But despite this increased rocker, the effect is a more tracky feeling in the turns, with more projection out of the turn. So you get a bit more grippy feeling in general. But I also run a bit more rocker at the rail in the tail, which in fact gives more looseness. So overall I kind of compensate one change with another. But the end results is still a slight shift in character. As mentioned the 78, 85 and 92 gets a bit shorter tails, as this has worked well on the 72 and 99. But the 99 actually get a longer tail. If you are a lighter person using the 99 in smaller waves this will actually be a disadvantage. But for heavier people using it in better waves, in particular light cross off conditions, it will be a better compromise. The new 99 in fact also has a bit narrower tail, induced by a tiny bit more outline curve from between the straps to just in front of the winger.