Masts - which half usually breaks??

> 10 years ago
Reply
Register to post, see what you've read, and subscribe to topics.
Wet Willy
Wet Willy
TAS
2317 posts
TAS, 2317 posts
12 Apr 2006 1:07pm
I've never broken a mast, so maybe someone with a few more years of windsurfing under their belt can answer this question: which half of a mast is more likely to break??
Kremlin
Kremlin
418 posts
418 posts
12 Apr 2006 11:25am
Comrade Wet Willy
I have broken many masts... always I break the bottom piece.
Now i have 100% carbon wave masts... very strong very flexi.
I no break mast since going to full carbon
qwerty
qwerty
NSW
807 posts
NSW, 807 posts
12 Apr 2006 2:11pm
the 3rd half
Wet Willy
Wet Willy
TAS
2317 posts
TAS, 2317 posts
12 Apr 2006 2:43pm
Kremlin,
wow, I always thought the low carbon masts were more durable.

Does this apply only to wave sailing (due to wipeouts/getting dumped etc) or also to freeride, lots of pumping and strong wind blasting??

My so-called "wave masts" are 40% carbon. Not that we have waves here in Singapore. "Wave" stuff just sounds cool.
Pugwash
Pugwash
WA
7733 posts
WA, 7733 posts
12 Apr 2006 12:53pm
As I understand it... Higher the carbon in RDM, greater the durability. Higher carbon SDMs are more reactive and brittle.

Buy a 80-100% carbon RDM, then you won't look back

Pugs
mkseven
mkseven
QLD
2315 posts
QLD, 2315 posts
12 Apr 2006 5:29pm
There is a school of thought that suggests different materials in masts have different flex/response rates thus attributing to greater stresses and breakage (any engineering types could word this a whole lot better). Thus that 100% masts are more durable. I dont really believe this I think lower content masts are more durable and less susceptable to critical damage by knocks etc.

As said in the other mast thread bottom mostly unless there is user error.
snides8
snides8
WA
1731 posts
WA, 1731 posts
12 Apr 2006 8:11pm
in 25 years only broken 2 - fell on one with a 11kgs lead weight jacket on (which incidentally stopped me from going straight to the bottom of the river), 2nd one- backed the van over my fav ampro in the car park....bugger!!
snides8
snides8
WA
1731 posts
WA, 1731 posts
12 Apr 2006 8:15pm
sorry should of added.....bottom half with the weight jacket and top half with the van. hope this helps ;)
Gestalt
Gestalt
QLD
14968 posts
QLD, 14968 posts
12 Apr 2006 10:19pm
hi wet willy,
the way i understand it is this

carbon has a higher tensile strength than fibre glass.
fibre glass has a higher impact strength than carbon.

i agree with everyone else that high carbon masts are well worth the money. i have broken booms, fins, boards and sails but never broken a mast. the masts i have used are powerex and art all above 75% carbon. have had them for 5-6 years with no dramas. i also don't go in the surf much so i am not as hard on my gear but i have had some massive catapults. 75% carbon is a good price/performance ratio.

Wet Willy
Wet Willy
TAS
2317 posts
TAS, 2317 posts
13 Apr 2006 11:14am
Interestinger and interestinger...

Yesterday I scored a Mistral 2000 50% carbon 495 mast AND a spare bottom half...total price, let me see...ZERO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sorry I can't reveal my source...more where that came from, boys...

I'e always been afraid of high carbon masts coz of the high cost and well-advertised vulnerability to impact. But I recently scored a used 100% 520 for my big sail (thus enabling me to uphaul relatively hernia-free) and I love it. I say this because I haven't broken it yet.
Thanks for the advice, amigos. I see a broken mast or two lying around from time to time, and it kind of freaks me out...
Please Register, or first...
Topics Subscribe Reply