GWTW Forum
April 20, 2019, 10:01 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: With regrets ... the Forum is closing permanently on JUNE 8th
 
   Home   Help Forum Info Login Register Chat  
member support is greatly appreciated
Our forum is made possible by the support of the members of our community.

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Big Easy Kites M2 Upper Spreader  (Read 2518 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Michel
Trade Count: (+21)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 712


Location: France

« on: November 20, 2012, 02:21 PM »

Hi all,

I noticed that the upper spreader of my Big Easy Kites M2 is .156" (4 mm) solid carbon.

Do you know the reason for using a solid carbon rod instead hollow spar for an SUL kite... framed with full (very light) Avia Skinny UL ?

The weight of a hollow pultruded .156" Upper Spreader would be 6 g instead 11 g for a solid Upper Spreader.

Perhaps that 4 mm hollow carbon did'nt exist when the M2 was built by Ray Bordelon (1994-1995) ?

Thanks in advance !  Wink

« Last Edit: November 20, 2012, 02:47 PM by Tataouine » Logged
Ca Ike
Trade Count: (+29)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2031


Location: Stockton, CA

« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2012, 05:48 PM »

Hollow tubes existed back then but the solid rod was preferred for strength and mass.  157 tube tends to split lengthwise rather easily in some applications.  The spreaders on my Wala XL were always failing like that.
Logged
ndcmpc
Trade Count: (+23)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217


Location: Panama City, Panama

« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2012, 07:28 PM »

BTW, if you check your upper LE, it should be Skinny SUL, not UL.

Don't know on the solid upper spreader.  Mine is solid as well.  I am guessing the mass for flat spins would be the reason.
Logged

Doug
Blue Moon Geek
61/49: The most fun you can have with only one line
Michel
Trade Count: (+21)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 712


Location: France

« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2012, 11:23 PM »

Thanks for your answers my friends.

Hollow tubes existed back then but the solid rod was preferred for strength and mass.[...]

Maybe but 5 g more for this SUL and a hollow carbon Upper Spreader is stiffer than a solid carbon rod.
 
BTW, if you check your upper LE, it should be Skinny SUL, not UL.

I knew that Doug, thanks. And what about the spine  ? I have read Skinny UL and Skinny SUL too ?
Logged
Ca Ike
Trade Count: (+29)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2031


Location: Stockton, CA

« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2012, 01:56 AM »

The Skinny ul was the lighter of the two rods.  For AVIA SUL stood for Superior Ultra Light which was one step above,  stronger and stiffer than the Skinny UL.

Quote
Maybe but 5 g more for this SUL and a hollow carbon Upper Spreader is stiffer than a solid carbon rod.
 
That all depends on materials.  I have solid rod thats really stiff and some thats more flexible that FG just because of differences in the resin used to make them.  Really though only Ray would know the real reason he chose that rod and IMO I've never flown a bad kite from his line up.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.2.1 © 2008-2009
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!