BIC ELECTRIC ROCK WANTED

BIC ELECTRIC ROCK WANTED

Post by Chatzigianis To » Thu, 02 Apr 1992 07:53:15


        Does anyone have an Electric Rock for sale ?

--

 
 
 

BIC ELECTRIC ROCK WANTED

Post by Ken Poult » Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:49:49

Quote:
>  Seriously, IMHO the electric rock has too much volume for a 260.

Nah, it just has too much volume for a sinker.  We use board lengths
because they're easy to measure, but you're right that at 107 liters,
the E-rock is no sinker.  This is generally not a problem, since most
shop folks I've talked to recognize that and class the E-rock with the
other ~100 liter boards.

Besides, the original poster never said he wanted a sinker.

Ken Poulton


 
 
 

BIC ELECTRIC ROCK WANTED

Post by W.Warburt » Wed, 15 Apr 1992 19:20:02

|> >  Seriously, IMHO the electric rock has too much volume for a 260.
|>
|> Nah, it just has too much volume for a sinker.  We use board lengths
|> because they're easy to measure, but you're right that at 107 liters,
|> the E-rock is no sinker.  This is generally not a problem, since most
|> shop folks I've talked to recognize that and class the E-rock with the
|> other ~100 liter boards.

 Yes indeed, but if you want a "marginal" rather than a "sinker" it
seems sensible to get one that can carry a reasonable size sail. My
gripe with the E-Rock is that it is (for most sailors) either too
floaty for a 260 or too short for a marginal. I suppose I disagree with
the concept- it ought to have a limited market (260 for heavyweights)
but instead has been really popular!
 Still, all power to Bic, the board has sold very well. I guess this
just shows that they know the market better than I do!

 At least it gives me a good subject to pontificate on :-).

|> Besides, the original poster never said he wanted a sinker.

 Yes, that's true too. I suppose that (as well as an overpowering urge
to pontificate :-) I wanted to make it clear that I thought that the
E-Rock was *probably* a poor choice. Apart from anything else it would
mean that he would get snobs like me winding him up :-) (not that that
is likely to bother anyone, of course!).

        W.

PS. Just in case anyone is wondering why I think 260cm is too short for
   a marginal board, it is generally recognised that a large sail with
   it's Centre-of-effort located a relatively long way behind the
   mastfoot is less comfortable on a shorter board because it is more
   prone to spinout (C-E is over the fin) thus a 270-275cm board will
   carry a 6m sail (say) more easily than a 260.
    Naturally it is possible to use a 6m sail on an E-Rock (so don't
   jump on me!) but it will, generally, be more easy & comfortable to
   use it on, say, a Mistral Screamer (275cm, 103 litres).

 --
VitSea 292, Tiga Slalom, Baxter 270 wave and half a Fanatic Bee,
6.2 Topsail 5.1/4.6 Tushinghams 4.2 sShokwave & half a Gaastra 3.2 :-)
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

 
 
 

BIC ELECTRIC ROCK WANTED

Post by Tom Alber » Fri, 17 Apr 1992 23:10:43


Quote:
>  Yes indeed, but if you want a "marginal" rather than a "sinker" it
> seems sensible to get one that can carry a reasonable size sail. My
> gripe with the E-Rock is that it is (for most sailors) either too
> floaty for a 260 or too short for a marginal.

> PS. Just in case anyone is wondering why I think 260cm is too short for
>    a marginal board, it is generally recognised that a large sail with
>    it's Centre-of-effort located a relatively long way behind the
>    mastfoot is less comfortable on a shorter board because it is more
>    prone to spinout (C-E is over the fin) thus a 270-275cm board will
>    carry a 6m sail (say) more easily than a 260.

        Just to clarify, the E-Rock is 265 cm or 8'-8".  The mast track
        is positioned equal distance from the tail as most 9'-0"s and
        9'-2"s.  That is, the distance from the mast track to the nose
        is where the sacrifice was made.  This board sails and carries
        a sail like a 275/280.  It should not be thought of as a 265,
        but rather a 100+ liter board for light to medium wind (as
        Ken said.)