Triple & quad ripstop

[Greenturtle]

Any test results from naish or any other kite company, or a magazine test, cannot be viewed as the truth. Sorry. The graph and numbers are meaningless until it comes from independent sources in no way affiliated, which is probably just not going to happen.

To me, after weight, stretch is a more important factor than tearing resistance.
Any canopy from any manufacturer is going to rip when it encounters a sharp object.
In a tomahawk or wave break situation, the overall design of the kite is what will save it from damage.

In a tomahawk situation I believe that the lighter the kite the better. It is the kites own weight that rips them open on impact.
- Lighter kite going same speed does not hit with as much force, that is a fact.

If strength is the goal then why add more ripstop lines when you could just increase the thickness of the entire cloth a bit? Because you cannot see the difference, and thus defeats the marketing purpose.

Naish claims that because they used 4x they were able to reduce dacron and the kite is now lighter. BS if you ask me. Can anyone verify that the weight ACTUALLY dropped? Ive seen many a brand claim less weight year on year but the truth at the scales shows an increase!

And anyway, there are plenty of single ripstop kites with very little if any dacron....So naish could’ve reduced dacron AND kept the lighter canopy, so more BS...

[Greenturtle]

I have a “Jose Kites brand” 7m LEI that I picked up for 50 bucks in 2011. Single ripstop, with some really cheap and light feeling dacron. I got it as a beater for landboarding use and for friends and family to fly for fun, as it wouldn’t matter to me when it got damaged.

This kite has had the living sh!t beaten out of it and has not ripped, leaked, or broken in any way. 4 tiny pinholes, not patched, have not expanded despite-
More tomahawks onto solid ground than I can count or remember. Tangled in itself and powered up so many times. It has been tethered to a pole and flown hot in strong wind to see if it would blow out. Wadded up and shoved unceremoniously into a sack, or just tossed loose into the back of a van with the rest of the gear. It is straight brown at this point from dirt stains.

Yes it has been lucky not to snag on something and rip wide open. But it has in its way shown me that those materials can take more abuse than my “good” kites will ever see.

[tautologies]

Any test results from naish or any other kite company, or a magazine test, cannot be viewed as the truth. Sorry. The graph and numbers are meaningless until it comes from independent sources in no way affiliated, which is probably just not going to happen.

To me, after weight, stretch is a more important factor than tearing resistance.
Any canopy from any manufacturer is going to rip when it encounters a sharp object.
In a tomahawk or wave break situation, the overall design of the kite is what will save it from damage.

In a tomahawk situation I believe that the lighter the kite the better. It is the kites own weight that rips them open on impact.
- Lighter kite going same speed does not hit with as much force, that is a fact.

If strength is the goal then why add more ripstop lines when you could just increase the thickness of the entire cloth a bit? Because you cannot see the difference, and thus defeats the marketing purpose.

Naish claims that because they used 4x they were able to reduce dacron and the kite is now lighter. BS if you ask me. Can anyone verify that the weight ACTUALLY dropped? Ive seen many a brand claim less weight year on year but the truth at the scales shows an increase!

And anyway, there are plenty of single ripstop kites with very little if any dacron....So naish could’ve reduced dacron AND kept the lighter canopy, so more BS...

Why so skeptical? If a company say something it has to be bullshit? You say It's totally meaningless? Why not use it as another data point to inform part of a total picture?

I mean why would they lie about something that is so easy to check as total weight? My new slash seems quite the upgrade in all respects. I do not distrust companies as much as you apparently do.

What I do find odd tho, is that you use a single data point, the definition of anecdotal data, as if it is as valid as sets of data and now suggest that companies should somehow use that to redesign kites. Come on that is not reasonable at all. I do not know how the tests were conducted, but I also know that your single experience with one random kite does not invalidate anything. Let's just approach this with some moderation and reasonable skepticism instead.

[Bartolo]

How is it possible that Naish has the new quadtex. exclusively? I would think they are just minor users compared to the overall market, whatever that is. Can a new fabric be developed, produced for such a small market?

They don't. Eleveight is using quad as well.

[Faxie]

How is it possible that Naish has the new quadtex. exclusively? I would think they are just minor users compared to the overall market, whatever that is. Can a new fabric be developed, produced for such a small market?

They don't. Eleveight is using quad as well.

They had exclusivity for a certain time, just like North had with the D2.

[Faxie]

Any test results from naish or any other kite company, or a magazine test, cannot be viewed as the truth. Sorry. The graph and numbers are meaningless until it comes from independent sources in no way affiliated, which is probably just not going to happen.

To me, after weight, stretch is a more important factor than tearing resistance.
Any canopy from any manufacturer is going to rip when it encounters a sharp object.
In a tomahawk or wave break situation, the overall design of the kite is what will save it from damage.

In a tomahawk situation I believe that the lighter the kite the better. It is the kites own weight that rips them open on impact.
- Lighter kite going same speed does not hit with as much force, that is a fact.

If strength is the goal then why add more ripstop lines when you could just increase the thickness of the entire cloth a bit? Because you cannot see the difference, and thus defeats the marketing purpose.

Naish claims that because they used 4x they were able to reduce dacron and the kite is now lighter. BS if you ask me. Can anyone verify that the weight ACTUALLY dropped? Ive seen many a brand claim less weight year on year but the truth at the scales shows an increase!

And anyway, there are plenty of single ripstop kites with very little if any dacron....So naish could’ve reduced dacron AND kept the lighter canopy, so more BS...

Why so skeptical? If a company say something it has to be bullshit? You say It's totally meaningless? Why not use it as another data point to inform part of a total picture?

I mean why would they lie about something that is so easy to check as total weight? My new slash seems quite the upgrade in all respects. I do not distrust companies as much as you apparently do.

What I do find odd tho, is that you use a single data point, the definition of anecdotal data, as if it is as valid as sets of data and now suggest that companies should somehow use that to redesign kites. Come on that is not reasonable at all. I do not know how the tests were conducted, but I also know that your single experience with one random kite does not invalidate anything. Let's just approach this with some moderation and reasonable skepticism instead.

Well, for one, according to the 'test results', D2 and T9600 are very similar. That was not what we were led to believe when D2 was introduced. So at least someone is lying, wether it be North, Naish, or Teijin.

According to North about Trinity: The 3x2 yarn combination has proven to be the best solution in performance as well as durability, overall superior to any 2x2 or 4x4 yarn solutions. Well, looking at the graph, not according to Naish.

Somehow I have a feeling that in a few years the multiple ripstop hype will stop (people are already opening their eyes it seems, because we are getting to a point where it gets kinda ridiculous) and it will be single ripstop again, but with smaller squares. Will be called 'high density ripstop' or something like that (looks like that name already exists, but you get the point). Just watch.

[tegirinenashi]

Keep hype alive, bring on the Fractal ripstop!

Fractal ripstop features classic - 150% thicker - reinforcement thread every 5 mm.
Then, 200% thicker thread is distanced every 5 cm.
Then, 300% thicker thread...

[Greenturtle]

Any test results from naish or any other kite company, or a magazine test, cannot be viewed as the truth. Sorry. The graph and numbers are meaningless until it comes from independent sources in no way affiliated, which is probably just not going to happen.

To me, after weight, stretch is a more important factor than tearing resistance.
Any canopy from any manufacturer is going to rip when it encounters a sharp object.
In a tomahawk or wave break situation, the overall design of the kite is what will save it from damage.

In a tomahawk situation I believe that the lighter the kite the better. It is the kites own weight that rips them open on impact.
- Lighter kite going same speed does not hit with as much force, that is a fact.

If strength is the goal then why add more ripstop lines when you could just increase the thickness of the entire cloth a bit? Because you cannot see the difference, and thus defeats the marketing purpose.

Naish claims that because they used 4x they were able to reduce dacron and the kite is now lighter. BS if you ask me. Can anyone verify that the weight ACTUALLY dropped? Ive seen many a brand claim less weight year on year but the truth at the scales shows an increase!

And anyway, there are plenty of single ripstop kites with very little if any dacron....So naish could’ve reduced dacron AND kept the lighter canopy, so more BS...

Why so skeptical? If a company say something it has to be bullshit? You say It's totally meaningless? Why not use it as another data point to inform part of a total picture?

I mean why would they lie about something that is so easy to check as total weight? My new slash seems quite the upgrade in all respects. I do not distrust companies as much as you apparently do.

What I do find odd tho, is that you use a single data point, the definition of anecdotal data, as if it is as valid as sets of data and now suggest that companies should somehow use that to redesign kites. Come on that is not reasonable at all. I do not know how the tests were conducted, but I also know that your single experience with one random kite does not invalidate anything. Let's just approach this with some moderation and reasonable skepticism instead.

First of all, Im sure your slash is an awesome kite, and I respect that you find my own materials analysis to be short on science in almost every regard, because it is.

Well, I am skeptical of companies data about themselves generally speaking, not just in the kiting world, Im guilty as charged there. However-

Specifically I can offer that Best kahoona 10.5m going from 2014 to the 2015 model gained 136g of weight as measured by myself, despite the company proclaiming that it reduced dacron and lowered weight. They did reduce dacron. But added some plastic rubber scuff guards all over it instead of using “kevlar” as before. Also, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, ocean rodeo still claims they are making their lightest kites ever on the website, and as much as I give them credit for producing a really nice, truly lightweight 3 strut kite, it is not as light as it used to be. Liquid force says the solo v3 is lighter than v2, others on here have found them to be the same weight in reality.

If it is so easy to check the figures, then please someone other than naish employee, tell us how much a slash, pivot, etc weighed then (pre-quadtex) vs now. And while youre at it please lay them out to verify that the size did not change.

My experience with a beater kite is at least real world experience, and my personal conclusion is that those lighter materials are strong enough.

If keeping a given design as light as possible is good for performance, then thats what I want. If I was going to crash a kite over and over into bushes and trees, then maybe quad tex would be awesome, but added seams would probably contain the damage better than any canopy material choice.

My foundation in watersports is canoe racing, and we love us some lightweight carbon equipment. Some people even special order canoes and paddles in lighter layups than the lightest company offerings, requesting less resin or cloth, and paying more. This is true for marathon but also slalom, where agility is key. And this equipment does not even fly. So my viewpoint is kindof coming from that side of things.

[tautologies]

First of all, Im sure your slash is an awesome kite, and I respect that you find my own materials analysis to be short on science in almost every regard, because it is.

Well, I am skeptical of companies data about themselves generally speaking, not just in the kiting world, Im guilty as charged there. However-

Specifically I can offer that Best kahoona 10.5m going from 2014 to the 2015 model gained 136g of weight as measured by myself, despite the company proclaiming that it reduced dacron and lowered weight. They did reduce dacron. But added some plastic rubber scuff guards all over it instead of using “kevlar” as before. Also, as I mentioned earlier in this thread, ocean rodeo still claims they are making their lightest kites ever on the website, and as much as I give them credit for producing a really nice, truly lightweight 3 strut kite, it is not as light as it used to be. Liquid force says the solo v3 is lighter than v2, others on here have found them to be the same weight in reality.

If it is so easy to check the figures, then please someone other than naish employee, tell us how much a slash, pivot, etc weighed then (pre-quadtex) vs now. And while youre at it please lay them out to verify that the size did not change.

My experience with a beater kite is at least real world experience, and my personal conclusion is that those lighter materials are strong enough.

If keeping a given design as light as possible is good for performance, then thats what I want. If I was going to crash a kite over and over into bushes and trees, then maybe quad tex would be awesome, but added seams would probably contain the damage better than any canopy material choice.

My foundation in watersports is canoe racing, and we love us some lightweight carbon equipment. Some people even special order canoes and paddles in lighter layups than the lightest company offerings, requesting less resin or cloth, and paying more. This is true for marathon but also slalom, where agility is key. And this equipment does not even fly. So my viewpoint is kindof coming from that side of things.

Hey. Thank you for being able to discuss this in a neutral and analytical way. I appreciate that a lot. For me I know that a claim like what Naish is making doesn't impact my life a whole lot so I do not invest a whole lot of emotion or even that much thought into it. I make a mental checkmark and put it into a pile pile of overall impression. My impression is that they care about moving their product forward on multiple accounts. Not only by shape design but also by material design. What I care about is that the gear is great.

I think significant changes in weight I would probably care about, but tiny changes falls in my meh pile, but I can appreciate that we all focus on slightly different things tho. It is important that companies focus on all of it tho.

On the Best claim, I obviously have not tested it, nor do I really weight my Naish kites. Could it be that you had used the new kite and therefore it had some humidity? My pint on your anecdotal data point is that if you test one kite, there is just so much random variables that will never be uncovered if we stick to that. For instance, my buddy dropped his 14 Torch into some huge waves..the kite eventually washed over the reef as bundle and we all thought the kite was completely toast. Upon unraveling the kite was unscathed. It was nuts. Then a week later another friend dropped his kite from a different company (I'm not naming brand because people will just start moaning and it is beside the point) in some tiny barely knee high waves. The kite got hit and blew a panel before it popped on the reef. My point was I could conclude that the quality of Naish was so superior to the other brand that it was almost laughable, but I think one data point will not really be able to represent a full truth. Instead, it should try to inform part of the overall image. What you know from your example is that some kites can survive abuse for a lot time regardless of material. It would be interesting to see some neutral party test, but I am afraid that some people will trust it because a company paid the bill to have it verified etc. Its a hard cycle to bypass for a company.

Anyway. take care my friend. Not trying to discredit you or say that you are completely wrong, but maybe inject another perspective.

[tautologies]

Well, for one, according to the 'test results', D2 and T9600 are very similar. That was not what we were led to believe when D2 was introduced. So at least someone is lying, wether it be North, Naish, or Teijin.

According to North about Trinity: The 3x2 yarn combination has proven to be the best solution in performance as well as durability, overall superior to any 2x2 or 4x4 yarn solutions. Well, looking at the graph, not according to Naish.

Somehow I have a feeling that in a few years the multiple ripstop hype will stop (people are already opening their eyes it seems, because we are getting to a point where it gets kinda ridiculous) and it will be single ripstop again, but with smaller squares. Will be called 'high density ripstop' or something like that (looks like that name already exists, but you get the point). Just watch.

You know neither of these graphics are really showing enough for us to say much about how anyone are lying. It might be that both are correct. Your only assumption for someone not telling the truth is that the method in which they test are the same. That might not be the case. Both tests could be true because of how they test it.