Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bendingit_sendingit

Waszp vs. Moth

Recommended Posts

Just a Interesting topic on which boat would be the "better' boat. I do realise they arnt the same but in terms of the easier boat to foil, manover and worrys of the waszp letting you down,

 

thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a large thread in this forum called "....got stung by the WASZP..." that probably has some answers to your questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude. posting such a question on a public forum is a recipe for getting a great deal of responses from people who have never sailed either. your best bet is to go down to the local fleet and ask questions. don'the ask one person, ask 5.

 

if your from WA there are active fleets at south perth, mounts bay and freshy.

 

Only talk to bugs or Payno if you have a spare hour. those boys can talk.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waszp is easier to handle on land and to lowride,moth is easier to sail on foils and is faster.

 

Waszp is one design,moth is not.

 

Waszp is cheaper.

 

Chose the one which suits you better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a Interesting topic on which boat would be the "better' boat. I do realise they arnt the same but in terms of the easier boat to foil, manover and worrys of the waszp letting you down,

 

thanks

Better is relative and everybody will have their own view. Why do you think the Waszp will let you down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only thing for certain is the Waszp has the potential to be a better One Design class, because the Moth will never be one.

 

I know of only one person who owned one of each for a while, and he sold the Waszp. But thats only expressing his personal preference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stepping away from intent of classes, (one design, one commercial owner vs open, multi supplier development class), to someone who has never sailed a moth, and is starting at the bottom of the learning curve both boats are, in essence, the same. 11 feet long, narrow skiffs. So the stability and manuverability are, in percentage terms very similar.

 

Waszp is a lot heavier. Stays hurt when you run into them so removing them is a good choice if you don't care about absolute performance.

 

If you compare the Waszp to the UFO you will get much bigger differences.

 

I would try both before you buy either, and don't rely on an Internet forum to make your buying choice if you are considering buying one.

 

If you are trolling and trying to start a flame war, please don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOps forgot to mention this:-

 

"Sailingfast will be exhibiting the Waszp at the RYA Suzuki Dinghy Show on 4-5th March at Alexandra Palace."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the POVs.

 

To add to that. Theres a word that the waszp could take off wth numbers and potential isaf youth boat etc. hmm interesting. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the POVs.

 

To add to that. Theres a word that the waszp could take off wth numbers and potential isaf youth boat etc. hmm interesting. Thanks

I think there have been a number of potential game changers since the waszp came out. In particular, the UFO seems to be gathering a momentum all of its own. If ISAF (or Word Sailing) started looking seriously at a foiling youth boat, I think there would be some competition for the spot. Amac took a year too long to get the boat out there and might suffer the consequences of unforeseen competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waszp is still at least 2 years ahead of any of the potential opposition, with several hundred boats in the hands of owners and in many countries. So far none of the newer designs have started to deliver boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waszp is still at least 2 years ahead of any of the potential opposition, with several hundred boats in the hands of owners and in many countries. So far none of the newer designs have started to deliver boats.

So what? World sailing could be made to look rather stupid choosing a youth design at the moment based on the fact one has delivered more boats to date. It would only be a relevant factor if the boats delivered were in the hands of youths, which there is little evidence of. Instead, WS should and I am sure will look at all the alternatives. The UFO seems to me to be far more suited to being a youth boat than the Waszp which is effectively a detuned Moth, even with the smaller rig option. The UFO is $3000 cheaper, it appears more robust, easier to learn on and about the same speed. It is being built by a family who have rather a good track record of scaling up to meet demand, so that isn't an issue.

 

The reality is that the lead that the Waszp has is worth no more than a few months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Waszp is still at least 2 years ahead of any of the potential opposition, with several hundred boats in the hands of owners and in many countries. So far none of the newer designs have started to deliver boats.

 

So what? World sailing could be made to look rather stupid choosing a youth design at the moment based on the fact one has delivered more boats to date. It would only be a relevant factor if the boats delivered were in the hands of youths, which there is little evidence of. Instead, WS should and I am sure will look at all the alternatives. The UFO seems to me to be far more suited to being a youth boat than the Waszp which is effectively a detuned Moth, even with the smaller rig option. The UFO is $3000 cheaper, it appears more robust, easier to learn on and about the same speed. It is being built by a family who have rather a good track record of scaling up to meet demand, so that isn't an issue.

 

The reality is that the lead that the Waszp has is worth no more than a few months.

+1 and nothing a ramped up manufacturer couldn't overtake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WASZP has a pre existing international network of KA / Mach2 dealers, past moth customers with off spring, and a well greased delivery network. I think that counts for more than a few months. I believe they will have the required class structure and international fleets in sufficient countries and continents to achieve World Sailing Approved Class status this year. That will be a big jump on the opposition.

 

BUT I do believe the WASZP is a very complex item to manufacture with a huge part count and that opens up the market to other products which can be built and sold more cheaply. Interesting times. We will inevitably end up with a long list of new OD classes which look similar but all of which will not gain sufficient numbers to be really viable. It always happens with new ideas, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Waszp is still at least 2 years ahead of any of the potential opposition, with several hundred boats in the hands of owners and in many countries. So far none of the newer designs have started to deliver boats.

So what? World sailing could be made to look rather stupid choosing a youth design at the moment based on the fact one has delivered more boats to date. It would only be a relevant factor if the boats delivered were in the hands of youths, which there is little evidence of. Instead, WS should and I am sure will look at all the alternatives. The UFO seems to me to be far more suited to being a youth boat than the Waszp which is effectively a detuned Moth, even with the smaller rig option. The UFO is $3000 cheaper, it appears more robust, easier to learn on and about the same speed. It is being built by a family who have rather a good track record of scaling up to meet demand, so that isn't an issue.

 

The reality is that the lead that the Waszp has is worth no more than a few months.

 

i just beleive that the waszp would be more suited. i qoute u saying "ufo... easier to sail" the ufo could be fine and meets the criteria of say a ex opti sailor, or maybe not even as opti sailors are able to foil within very little amount of time. i beleive the waszp would be perfect as the isaf or world sailing where to pic a boat for the Youths it would be the waszp as it is a bit harder i agree, but would be more suited, if u think about it, why wouldnt they us the 29er xx at youths if it was easier to sail. this is just my opinion but we had trails in adelaide (South Aus) and 95% of kids from lasers - optis - 29er sailors - cadet sailors even, could foil the boat and a average 29er sailor spent 4 days on it and could foil gybe.

 

i just beleive performance and skill should be taken into account as the waszp meets this to be a compedetive foiler or youth dinghy/foiler/whatever you want to call it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Waszp is still at least 2 years ahead of any of the potential opposition, with several hundred boats in the hands of owners and in many countries. So far none of the newer designs have started to deliver boats.

So what? World sailing could be made to look rather stupid choosing a youth design at the moment based on the fact one has delivered more boats to date. It would only be a relevant factor if the boats delivered were in the hands of youths, which there is little evidence of. Instead, WS should and I am sure will look at all the alternatives. The UFO seems to me to be far more suited to being a youth boat than the Waszp which is effectively a detuned Moth, even with the smaller rig option. The UFO is $3000 cheaper, it appears more robust, easier to learn on and about the same speed. It is being built by a family who have rather a good track record of scaling up to meet demand, so that isn't an issue.

 

The reality is that the lead that the Waszp has is worth no more than a few months.

 

i just beleive that the waszp would be more suited. i qoute u saying "ufo... easier to sail" the ufo could be fine and meets the criteria of say a ex opti sailor, or maybe not even as opti sailors are able to foil within very little amount of time. i beleive the waszp would be perfect as the isaf or world sailing where to pic a boat for the Youths it would be the waszp as it is a bit harder i agree, but would be more suited, if u think about it, why wouldnt they us the 29er xx at youths if it was easier to sail. this is just my opinion but we had trails in adelaide (South Aus) and 95% of kids from lasers - optis - 29er sailors - cadet sailors even, could foil the boat and a average 29er sailor spent 4 days on it and could foil gybe.

 

i just believe performance and skill should be taken into account as the waszp meets this to be a competetive foiler or youth dinghy/foiler/whatever you want to call it

 

I am not really sure what your argument is in favour of the Waszp, other than you keep saying it would be more suited.

 

The reasons why I believe the UFO is a more suitable boat is for many reasons. To start with, it is significantly cheaper. The performance seems to be comparable, or maybe faster, but that is based on a prototype UFO against a production Waszp. In training mode with ride height low, the UFO is easier to sail than a Waszp, when full on high foiling, it is more than enough of a challenge for even the most experienced sailors. In training mode, it would actually be able to start people who have very little sailing experience at all and progress them from low ride mode to full foiling as their skills develop. this makes it far better than the waszp, because in countries where money and resources are limited, having one boat that can be used for multiple purposes is very attractive. It is a great way to draw and/or people into the sport.

 

I also believe that the UFO will prove to be more robust. It has less moving parts without the wings and the hull is more substantially constructed.Launching and recovery are much easier with the UFO and the wand system is easier to connect (its always connected).

 

Overall, it isn't just about speed and/or how easy a boat is to master. You need to consider many other things. I also believe that the easier a boat is to foil, the better the quality of the racing. Add it all up and in my opinion, the UFO makes a very strong case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UFO is a multi-hull. Most UK sailing clubs don't allow multi-hulls because they take up too much dinghy-park space or, in the case of the multiple dinghy clubs around Chichester Harbour, because harbour usage agreements ban multi-hull racing.

 

OK, maybe that is a UK-specific issue. It's still a significant market for early-adopter dinghy purchases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UFO is a multi-hull. Most UK sailing clubs don't allow multi-hulls because they take up too much dinghy-park space or, in the case of the multiple dinghy clubs around Chichester Harbour, because harbour usage agreements ban multi-hull racing.

 

OK, maybe that is a UK-specific issue. It's still a significant market for early-adopter dinghy purchases.

Have you ever physically ever seen a UFO, it is narrower than a moth and is no more a multihull than the Vortex was!

I still haven't seen one video of the UFO foil gibing or tacking, and I believe that the simplicity of the platform could be a big negative in that regard, on the moth, when the boat is upright, the deck is below the outer wing bar, on the UFO the centre of the bridge deck is above the gunnel height, this will probably make more sense to moth sailors........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I haven't physically seen one, I'm not sure anyone outside the USA has so far. If you compare photos with the Vortex I don't think the comparison holds. The Vortex, which didn't entirely set the world on fire, has one weirdly shaped hull moulding. Photos of the UFO shows two distinct hulls, knock yourself out arguing that a boat with two hulls is not a multi-hull.

 

hqdefault.jpg

 

 

2lctrit.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UFO is a multi-hull. Most UK sailing clubs don't allow multi-hulls because they take up too much dinghy-park space or, in the case of the multiple dinghy clubs around Chichester Harbour, because harbour usage agreements ban multi-hull racing.

 

OK, maybe that is a UK-specific issue. It's still a significant market for early-adopter dinghy purchases.

 

Its a bit of a non argument really. Clubs that wanted to categorise the Vortex as a monohull and let them in did so and will do the same with the UFO. Its clearly a dinghy sized boat that will fit in normal club sized berths. The hull unit is a single structure from a single pair of moulds, just like the Vortex, and the hulls hit the water quite separately, just like the Vortex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The UFO is a multi-hull. Most UK sailing clubs don't allow multi-hulls because they take up too much dinghy-park space or, in the case of the multiple dinghy clubs around Chichester Harbour, because harbour usage agreements ban multi-hull racing.

 

OK, maybe that is a UK-specific issue. It's still a significant market for early-adopter dinghy purchases.

 

Its a bit of a non argument really. Clubs that wanted to categorise the Vortex as a monohull and let them in did so and will do the same with the UFO. Its clearly a dinghy sized boat that will fit in normal club sized berths. The hull unit is a single structure from a single pair of moulds, just like the Vortex, and the hulls hit the water quite separately, just like the Vortex.

 

 

imagin cockey english accent:

 

Still, I have to say that after all it is a multihull and no we don't like multihulls. They are too fast and make our beautiful old boat look slow and out of place. Multihulls disrespect one of the fundamental unwritten rules of sailing: one hull only. Please.

I'm sorry but there is no point on arguing about this. it has two hulls. not one.

two

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People with cockney accents don't sail. They can't afford it and they think it's for "posh c'nts".

 

The above statement would be made in a cut glass Home Counties accent with silver spoons literally pooping out with each word.

 

Actually it would probably be more like: "multi hulls are so vulgar, it looks like something the French would sail. We can't have that here, someone might go sailing! Pass the gin my dear chap"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cockney accents went out decades ago. Estuarial English now, innit.

 

Cut glass accents in a dinghy club? Don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clubs that wanted to categorise the Vortex as a monohull and let them in did so and will do the same with the UFO.

It's not a club-level issue as far as Chichester Harbour goes. You may not like it there but it's the biggest concentration of small-boat racing in the UK, possibly in the world.

 

As for as those who think the multi-hull racing ban there is about snobbery, sail sometime around the lower harbour on a summer weekend when several clubs are all running racing in the same small area, plus the cruising traffic weaving along narrow channels between the sandbanks, then come back to us on how comfortably multi-hulls would fit into the melee.

 

The Moths have the right idea to stay un-banned. They just forget about RRS and avoid everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The UFO is a multi-hull. Most UK sailing clubs don't allow multi-hulls because they take up too much dinghy-park space or, in the case of the multiple dinghy clubs around Chichester Harbour, because harbour usage agreements ban multi-hull racing.

 

OK, maybe that is a UK-specific issue. It's still a significant market for early-adopter dinghy purchases.

 

Its a bit of a non argument really. Clubs that wanted to categorise the Vortex as a monohull and let them in did so and will do the same with the UFO. Its clearly a dinghy sized boat that will fit in normal club sized berths. The hull unit is a single structure from a single pair of moulds, just like the Vortex, and the hulls hit the water quite separately, just like the Vortex.

 

 

imagin cockey english accent:

 

Still, I have to say that after all it is a multihull and no we don't like multihulls. They are too fast and make our beautiful old boat look slow and out of place. Multihulls disrespect one of the fundamental unwritten rules of sailing: one hull only. Please.

I'm sorry but there is no point on arguing about this. it has two hulls. not one.

two

 

JimC is/ was an Australian, I believe.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People with cockney accents don't sail. They can't afford it and they think it's for "posh c'nts".

 

The above statement would be made in a cut glass Home Counties accent with silver spoons literally pooping out with each word.

 

Actually it would probably be more like: "multi hulls are so vulgar, it looks like something the French would sail. We can't have that here, someone might go sailing! Pass the gin my dear chap"

 

yeah that sounds better

 

however nobody wroth anything about cockney...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Clubs that wanted to categorise the Vortex as a monohull and let them in did so and will do the same with the UFO.

It's not a club-level issue as far as Chichester Harbour goes.

 

 

And yet they seem to accept the Vortex racing there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites