Seems a bit pointless if the foils tested look like this. I’m sure not the only foils they have but you can’t really learn much by testing on that? Is there a HA aspect foil? Otherwise remain doubtful!
I think this is probably going to be a majority opinion, if/when foiling goes mainstream. At the moment the only person I know who rides a QR baseplate said to me “you can feel a bit of movement on the beach, but you can’t feel it while riding”… the foil looked like the slingshot, chunky.
This innovation is for people who want foiling to be easy, people on forums like foiling because it is hard.
My first foil was a SS and it was absolutely terrible. And it broke. I warrantied it and sold it immediately. Bought Gong gear instead and progressed rapidly after that. You’re absolutely right the foils matter just as much if not more than the connection system. You could have the best non-screw connection on the planet but if the foils still suck what does it matter?
I believe the topic was the invention of a new mast to stab system. Not a review of their foils.
Wouldn’t it be great if the system is flawless and everyone licenced it and every board mfg used 16" tracks so you could drop in your T-nuts and slide base plate without removing them?
I’m getting the impression some of you actually believe aluminum and Tef-Gel make for better foiling!
I’m a year in to foiling and have only ridden Slingshot. Started with the big PFI 835 low aspect front wing and am now on the PTM 926 which has been fun. I’m 43, work more than I want to, coach my kids’ soccer teams, and am only able to sneak in a few sessions a month. Because I don’t foil everyday and that I foil in saltwater, I always disassemble my setup after sessions. I feel like it takes an eternity to assemble/disassemble everything and stow it so I know where it is next time.
I’ve been planning to switch from SS to something higher end with my next progression. However, this new system could keep me with SS if it simplifies setup and allows me to get in more sessions or more time on the water.
It would ideally be better yeah. My personal skepticism is definitely about how well the connection holds up long term. Bolts can be tightened down manually always, and you can hack in pieces of metal or whatever to keep ensuring a tight fit. But not sure how this will be as carbon begins to wear down. I’ve seen the videos where they explain how overtime it wears and the mating surfaces/triangles will slide closer together to increase height and continue to fit the mast hole tightly. But that only handles the top and bottom of the fuse, not the side to side wear.
If you’ve seen how to remove the rear part, they wiggle it side to side to loosen it out. Couldn’t the intended method of removal be the very thing that widens out the mast hole over time? This is the part I would think may be problematic.
You’re right, didnt notice until another re-watch now that the mast hole itself was a triangle. I thought they were referring to something else initially. Makes sense in theory.
But yeah I was referring to the hole of the triangle itself getting wider from the wiggling. In which case not sure the uses sliding closer together can get bigger than the initial size of the mast hole. Probably nit pick. Might be totally fine.
Looks like great product development and engineering. Even if it’s not perfect on the first iteration, it’s a significant step towards simplifying assembly while potentially improving on-the-water performance at the same time. Perhaps we are not far from some accepted shared standards (think of the numerous shared standards in the bike industry). It would be awesome if Slingshot licensed this to other brands.
I’m skeptical that this is really stiff enough for the riding i do(but it could be!). I still regularly pick up new foil gear and find connection movement and for me, ANY connneciton movement is too much. I’m honestly finding that even independent of connection movement that carbon fuses don’t have the stiffness needed for agressive riding on bigger wings(aluminum is shockingly good for a fuse).
At this point i’m not even convinced some people in the indiustry even know what good connection stiffness is and that most riders can even assess it(kind of like mast stiffness 3 years ago). I’ll assess the stiffness of a set up on the beach by standing on the board, holding the mast fuse connection with myhand(to feel for relative movement), and pushing the other hand HARD on the wingtip(repeat to assess the front wing conneciton). Its so agressive that some people don’t like seeing it but honestly its a fraction of the load these things experience when foiling. I think if you handled any foil like that at AWSI they’d look at you like you were from the moon so i have 0 trust of any assessments of stiffness out of the event.
I’ll reserve my assessment for when i’m able to touch one in person, hopefull i’m surprised. As with all things i’d tell everyone not to trust ANY assessment that you havent made IN PERSON. Handle the merchandise (agressively) and if possible ride it before paying top dollar for ANYTHING. I’ve shelled out for new foils and paid for return shipping back to wherever when the stiffness assessment turned south.
That’s because aluminum is isotropic. The fuse loads in a lot of different directions, so aluminum or titanium are good because they are strong in every direction. Carbon is anisotropic, meaning it has to be strengthened by orienting the fibers to the load, which is difficult when the loads are so different throughout the fuse. This is a huge simplification but that’s the reason metal works better for a fuse. You probably already know this but I’m stating it for those who might not.
Honestly the Slingshot system is pretty interesting and creative. There will be a market. It’s just not me.
All your concerns and questions will be blown out of the water when you try it yourself. Being technically minded, you will love the engineering behind it. Sand/dirt etc no worries at all. Only will make it stronger, use over time, only makes it stronger.
I’ve had a play and ridden the one lock system. It’s bloody stiff, probably the most rigid system around at present. The fuselage is a triangular section, the two ends are chamfered so even as the joint wears these ends expand into the triangular hole and jam there.
It takes a good smack on the stab with the palm of the hand to release the fuselage sections.
The HM carbon mast is said to be 40% stiffer than the Phantasm.
Although I’ve ridden it, borrowed from a mate, I actually ride Axis.
Sorry about deleting last post was trying to add more pictures. Careful with the One-Lock if you push the limits of foiling. This one broke in a very powered 360 tack 2nd time out. The mast broke in the rear where it gets skinner. The fuselage didn’t hold with that space and stress fractured all the way around the rear stabilizer These would work great for traveling and flowy foilers. Not for those who dig in and grit their teeth. I think consumers should know this information.
I feel like you maybe shouldnt have thrown these pics up like that unless slingshot didn’t make you whole on it. That would be the real news. Production variances happen and things go wrong, The real question is will the people behind it make it right.
Unless they left you out to dry, Then burn em if you got em.
But since we have a pics, this doesn’t look like the result of direct G-force loading, This looks like a tip was breached, and one side of the wing was super loaded, and the other side wasn’t and the fuse twisted inside that collar.
If they don’t make you send a mast back to them I’ll buy it from you for 150.
Didn’t Armstrong go through a lot of issues early on when figuring out how to produce masts with a similar interface? I.e. a hollow tube on the end of the mast through which the fuse runs… The engineering to address all the loads has got to be pretty complex. I can imagine it is difficult to produce this type of system without making it too bulky. Time will tell if this is a one off failure or not.
