From the IQ Foil class website - looks like a good initiative for inclusive and fair racing at a local level rather than limiting to a strict one design rule.
www.iqfoilclass.org/RulesAndRegulations0005v01.htm
iQFOiL Open - 2020 Equipment Rules
The class will invite organisers to include an iQFOiL Open division in their 2020 events:
Board - one board
Any World Sailing Registered Formula board (ie max width 100.5cm)
Foil - one foil
Any foil defined as - 1 mast, 2 fuselage, 1 front and 1 back wing
Each fuselage of a different length - maximum 115cm
Front Wing: 900sq.cm | Tail Wing: 255sq.cm | Mast: 100cm maximum
Fin - one fin
Any fin each of different size for men and women
Men - 68 cm Women - 66 cm
Sail - one sail
Any sail each of a different size for men and women
Men - 9.0 sqm Women - 8.0 sqm
Mast/boom - one mast, one boom
The above, with modifications, is the future for club foil racing in my opinion leaving money in the tin for sailing club fees. However why is the Formula board prescribed why not include a 91 cm PWA foil board. ? Why not allow a 9.5 m2 sail as not everyone has a 9.0 m2 sail ? The rules seem to be geared to Severne foil sail sizes for some reason. Someone with a 9.5 m2 RSX, raceboard or slalom sail does not necessarily want to have to buy a new sail to race a foil.
My assumption would be that boards like the 91 cm PWA foil board are OK.
Some appear to be on this WS list here:
www.sailing.org/37680.php
Regarding sails, I think they are trying to align with the iQFoil sail sizes.
Agree this is a bit inconvenient if you already had a suitable 9.2m or something.
I wouldn't worry too much about the IQ class rules. The above would be mainly to get the one design class up and running, so opening some restrictions as not everyone will have the new equipment yet.
Yes it will be great for Olympic hopefuls but I see all state / regional / club / national racing being more inclusive / less restrictive on equipment, probably better to think of it as Formula Foil (not the IQ one design)
The great thing with the IQ class is it will be competitive with open class equipment so we will be able to have larger mixed fleet racing.
Yeah, to get racing going numbers are important. I can see this as an ideal class for those wanting to compete without havIng to outlay money unnecessarily. Grab a board, 9m, 900 wing etc and get amongst it. Guaranteed you'll always be on the right gear. 
The open division won't be affected. 
I think its a shame they limited mast size to 100cm, with 100 I somehow really feel like I miss some height compared to 105 or 110 when conditions get rough. Anyhow, most people are slower on a 105 anyway because they sail em too low.
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
Select to expand quoteCJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
Select to expand quotecammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
My 95 fit only just in the airports scanners with its bag. There is maybe less than a cm on each side.
The formula would definitely not go through.
Select to expand quotecammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
On this train of thought, why not build 120 wide boards? or 140 wide?
Select to expand quotejusavina said..cammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
My 95 fit only just in the airports scanners with its bag. There is maybe less than a cm on each side.
The formula would definitely not go through.
Would that be the reason for 95, the max you can fit through a scanner, makes sense for an Olympic One design board but will they be as fast as wider boards in open fleets
Select to expand quotejusavina said..cammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
My 95 fit only just in the airports scanners with its bag. There is maybe less than a cm on each side.
The formula would definitely not go through.
Yes the 100 wide boards don't fit thru the Nz scanners. so I just had to slide around the side. I must look honest
Select to expand quoteDarrylG said..jusavina said..cammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
My 95 fit only just in the airports scanners with its bag. There is maybe less than a cm on each side.
The formula would definitely not go through.
Yes the 100 wide boards don't fit thru the Nz scanners. so I just had to slide around the side. I must look honest
I tried to slide it around the side but they clearly thought I was looking dodgy
Select to expand quotecammd said..jusavina said..cammd said..CJW said..
Yes, more righting moment. The original reason the PWA went to 91 wide was they are easier to transport than a 100cm wide board, doesn't sound like much but makes a difference. The iQfoil is somewhat of a compromise between the two at 95wide.
the difference between fitting through a airport scanner or not is what I read somewhere. Crazy that boards are designed less than opitmal for sailing so that they fit through security scanners that 99 percent of them will never do. All to accomodate the convenience of a handfull of pro sailors.
So why 95 for the IQ board, will it go through scanners and if not why not go to 100
My 95 fit only just in the airports scanners with its bag. There is maybe less than a cm on each side.
The formula would definitely not go through.
Would that be the reason for 95, the max you can fit through a scanner, makes sense for an Olympic One design board but will they be as fast as wider boards in open fleets
Yes, that was one of the criteria for the selection.
In theory they should be less powerful than a 100 cm. Does that mean slower? I don't know.
Well out last nationals went
1st 91
2nd 95
3rd 100
so if there are any advantages to width it is not huge
Select to expand quoteDarrylG said..
Well out last nationals went
1st 91
2nd 95
3rd 100
so if there are any advantages to width it is not huge
That's the Oceanics results. The 95 won the National 
Select to expand quotejusavina said..DarrylG said..
Well out last nationals went
1st 91
2nd 95
3rd 100
so if there are any advantages to width it is not huge
That's the Oceanics results. The 95 won the National
Yes you are correct that was the oceanics
I was also going to add it went Youth / Old / Older but thought that was irrelevant. I must be the equipment not the sailor.
So the IQ class have said if you have the above equipment then you can race with us at our events as open division ?
Is the IQ class run by manufacturer or seperate association - has it even formed yet ?
How competitive is a JP 150 PWA foil board v a JP 190 or JP 175 ? Assuming everything else is equal (same foil) is a 95 kg sailor using such a 150 litre board in a club race or similar outclassed on such a board vis a viz a lighter say 80kg sailor on the latest bigger volume foil boards. I notice, excitingly the volume is now increasing in the arms race, for example, Exocet have a 220 litre and JP a 230 litre hydrofoil board for course racing.
Select to expand quoteRichardG said..
How competitive is a JP 150 PWA foil board v a JP 190 or JP 175 ? Assuming everything else is equal (same foil) is a 95 kg sailor using such a 150 litre board in a club race or similar outclassed on such a board vis a viz a lighter say 80kg sailor on the latest bigger volume foil boards. I notice, excitingly the volume is now increasing in the arms race, for example, Exocet have a 220 litre and JP a 230 litre hydrofoil board for course racing.
Richard
I used to have the 150 and traded to the 190.
It's funny but upwind I felt the 150 held the groove better than my current 190 perhaps because it didn't get blown around as much as the 190,
but all in all they where similar IMO.
Off the wind however I found the wider 190 had more control And as such slightly faster as it meant the straps where further outboard.
What's the theory behind the larger volumes for racing, 230lts is more than an RSX.
I feel a parallel stance is more important than absolute width. A 91 wide with 91 in the tail will be faster around the course than a 100 wide with 86 in the tail (standard formula sizes). The 95 IQ seems to be the worst of both worlds, but since they added tail extension llates to move the backfoot further out for foiling I think it will be fine. Those 5cm won't change the world, especially since he 95 wide will predominantly be used by the best riders in the field, and at the moment skill greatly outclasses equipment (as long as you're somewhat in the ballpark with your kit).
Another fun discussion: I personally think the added fin will not be used by racers at all, even in 25 knots they will hold on to 9.0 on the foil since its just plain faster, and in the end more controlable than a fin.
For youth currently racing Techno293, and want to cross over to foil racing at club level using their techno rig with an old formula board with minimal initial cost (assume Open iQFoil parameters above), what race foil options would best match the SB race foils on a price/performance basis?
It is hard to beat the starboard foils on price or performance. The junior and youth classes use the ally mast version.
iqfoil.star-board.com/equipment/iqfoil/
Select to expand quoteazuli said..
For youth currently racing Techno293, and want to cross over to foil racing at club level using their techno rig with an old formula board with minimal initial cost (assume Open iQFoil parameters above), what race foil options would best match the SB race foils on a price/performance basis?
Try the Zulu foil. I have been using it for the past six months and can keep up with sailors of similar abilities on Starboards. About 40 % of the price.
zulufins.com/collections/foils/products/zulu-race-foil-2019
Select to expand quoteMitch Pearson said..azuli said..
For youth currently racing Techno293, and want to cross over to foil racing at club level using their techno rig with an old formula board with minimal initial cost (assume Open iQFoil parameters above), what race foil options would best match the SB race foils on a price/performance basis?
Try the Zulu foil. I have been using it for the past six months and can keep up with sailors of similar abilities on Starboards. About 40 % of the price.
zulufins.com/collections/foils/products/zulu-race-foil-2019
That's definitely the budget racer setup - and I say that in a good way. Not that it matters but how is the weight of the Zulu?
Select to expand quotePaducah said..Mitch Pearson said..azuli said..
For youth currently racing Techno293, and want to cross over to foil racing at club level using their techno rig with an old formula board with minimal initial cost (assume Open iQFoil parameters above), what race foil options would best match the SB race foils on a price/performance basis?
Try the Zulu foil. I have been using it for the past six months and can keep up with sailors of similar abilities on Starboards. About 40 % of the price.
zulufins.com/collections/foils/products/zulu-race-foil-2019
That's definitely the budget racer setup - and I say that in a good way. Not that it matters but how is the weight of the Zulu?
I haven't weighed it but wouldn't say it's any heavier than the starboard aluminium mast setup.
I was comparing the masts of the starboard foil to the phantom. The starboard mast won't fit in my "normal" deep tuttle without cutting at the line that slopes up from left to right. We haven't tried the phantom in a starboard board but it doesn't look like it's going to work.
The phantom should fit just fine in a starboard board.
The standard that cobra / starboard are trying to introduce with the flat top Tuttle box and foil head is a better design. Better load support and easier trimming. the flat top boxes will also fit sloping top foil heads. Ideally the front edge still bottoms out in the box to take the load. And if you have a sloping top box and new starboard foil then you will have to trim to the line marked on the head.
