228Re: [ksurfschool] Using C-Quad:
- Jun 8, 2000At 08:58 PM 06/08/2000 -0400, Hung Vu wrote:
>Mark Frasier wrote:The C Quad is patented as well, I think, or at least a patent has been
>> The most important points are: C Quads are cheap and high-performance, but
>> more demanding to fly and don't normally relaunch from water. Naish AR 3.5s
>> are easier to fly (for someone starting out, or so I'm told, I know I can't
>> fly 'em worth crap), do normally relaunch from water and perform well
>> enough to be of use, but are expensive. Right?
>Given the price of the complete set of bladders is around $100 USD, why
>are the Wipika/Naish kites are so expensive compare to the C-Quad (both
>are single skin kites, the only somewhat "construction" difference is
>the bladders versus battens) ? Is it something to do with the Wipika's
>patent? If so, when will the patent expire such that we can have more
>affordable gear for the beginners?
Most of the CQ's are made in China, I don't know if the same is true of
Wipikas. The construction of a C Quad doesn't require much difficult
sewing. The tubes for the spars are simply strips of dacron, no curves, no
reinforcements except for a small patch of kevlar on the very end. The
bridle lines are not attached to tabs that must be sewn on, but are simply
threaded through the dacron sleeve and tied around the spars. Wipikas have
reinforcement patches (around the valve openings, for example) that need to
be glued &/or stitched. Since there are fewer bridle attachment points they
need to be heavily reenforced there, too. They have to come with a pump.
Bars are more expensive than handles. C Quads don't come with a "saftey"
leash. Peter Lynn has been buying huge quantities of kite fabric for many
years. They have also been making large numbers of kites for many years.
Wipika may have been the original production marine wing, but they are
barely getting started in the kite business compared to Peter Lynn Co., at
least in terms of number of kites made.
On the other hand, CQuads have more panels to be sewn together and more
bridle lines to be tied.
Also, there is a lot more fabric in a Wipika that powers me in 15 mph of
wind (8.5m) than in a CQuad that powers me in that much (4.2 m). But even
so, a Wipika 8.5 (flat) is twice as expensive as a CQuad 8.5(projected).
The Wipika seems to have been designed with easy relaunching and stable,
slow flying as the two main points. Cost of construction may not have been
one of the original design requirements, so it may take them some time to
refine the process, get different materials at better prices, use different
labor pools, etc. C Quads were designed for low cost and high performance.
Both kites have accomplished their tasks, I think.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>