Northwest Kiteboarding
Forum | Classifieds | Lost & Found | CGKA | Industry | Sensors | Forecast | Spots | Seattle | Decals | RSS | Facebook

Events | Photos | Search | Register | Profile | Log in to check your messages | Log in 

2021 Phantasm 400 rear wing

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Northwest Kiteboarding -> Gorge / Portland / Oregon Coast
previous topic :: next topic  
Author Message
phill

Since 26 May 2016
32 Posts

 



PostSun Oct 25, 20 12:05 pm    2021 Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

2021 Phantasm 400 rear wing

Are the specs correct for this rear wing?

567 surface area?

Seems like a massive stabilizer.


   2021_Phantasm_kite_chart.jpg 

View user's profile Send private message
eric

Since 13 Jan 2006
1648 Posts

XTreme Poster



PostSun Oct 25, 20 1:09 pm     Reply with quote

No way is SA correct. That would be too large if stab were a perfect rectangle...(8.9 x 40 = 356 cm^2)

View user's profile Send private message
KiteGirlHR

Since 19 Apr 2019
7 Posts
97031
Kook



PostFri Oct 30, 20 1:07 pm    Phantasm Rear Stabilizer specs Reply with quote

Hey,
the proper surface area for the rear 400 Phantasm Stabilizer is 271cm. I checked with Slingshot R & D. Smile

View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
phill

Since 26 May 2016
32 Posts

 



PostSat Oct 31, 20 6:57 pm    Slingshot Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

Does the winglets on the 400 rear reduce the looseness in the yaw?

Or is the increased stability of the new set up mostly from the front wing winglets pointing down?

View user's profile Send private message
ldhr

Since 21 Jul 2009
1312 Posts
Hood River
XTreme Poster



PostSun Nov 01, 20 7:12 am    Re: Slingshot Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

phill wrote:
Does the winglets on the 400 rear reduce the looseness in the yaw?

Or is the increased stability of the new set up mostly from the front wing winglets pointing down?


Curious what you're referencing as loose - my 633 was never loose in the yaw axis.
That's why the 633 was so popular - it's very stable in all 3 axis - pitch, yaw, roll.
With the winglets - the Roll is a little more stable. I didn't feel the pitch or yaw were affected.

View user's profile Send private message
Nak

Since 19 May 2005
3901 Posts
Camas
XTreme Poster

CGKA Member


PostSun Nov 01, 20 8:02 am    Re: Slingshot Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

ldhr wrote:
phill wrote:
Does the winglets on the 400 rear reduce the looseness in the yaw?

Or is the increased stability of the new set up mostly from the front wing winglets pointing down?


Curious what you're referencing as loose - my 633 was never loose in the yaw axis.
That's why the 633 was so popular - it's very stable in all 3 axis - pitch, yaw, roll.
With the winglets - the Roll is a little more stable. I didn't feel the pitch or yaw were affected.


My stock 633 setup definitely had a yaw "shimmy" from time to time. I don't think everyone had this with the 633, but a lot of folks seemed to. Anyways, I modified a Slingshot 42 cm stabilizer--it has winglets--for use on the 633 fuselage. That completely eliminated the yaw shimmy. To me, the ride just feels more stable and refined than with the 483 stabilizer--but that is just subjective and could be bias confirmation. Still, given my experience with changing stabilizers, I'm going to guess that the Phantasm 633 setup is going to be more stable and refined than the old 633 for me. That's just a guess at this point though.

@ldhr, have you compared the production Phantasm mast to the old 91 mast? I compared a prototype 92 to my 91 and the Phantasm was significantly stiffer in all axis. I'm curious to see a production model. And anxious as hell for all the mast variants to become available! LOL.

View user's profile Send private message
phill

Since 26 May 2016
32 Posts

 



PostSun Nov 01, 20 9:31 am    Slingshot Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

I should have been more clear , I meant the looseness of the 483 rear wing I was using with the 633 , when I replaced the rear with the 450 , that resolved that.

I am curious as to the new Phantasm 400 with the winglets going downward in comparison to the 420 you adapted that has winglets going upward ( however I do realize the Phantasm 400 is a completely different new rear.

View user's profile Send private message
ldhr

Since 21 Jul 2009
1312 Posts
Hood River
XTreme Poster



PostSun Nov 01, 20 9:43 am    Re: Slingshot Phantasm 400 rear wing Reply with quote

Nak wrote:
ldhr wrote:
phill wrote:
Does the winglets on the 400 rear reduce the looseness in the yaw?

Or is the increased stability of the new set up mostly from the front wing winglets pointing down?


Curious what you're referencing as loose - my 633 was never loose in the yaw axis.
That's why the 633 was so popular - it's very stable in all 3 axis - pitch, yaw, roll.
With the winglets - the Roll is a little more stable. I didn't feel the pitch or yaw were affected.


My stock 633 setup definitely had a yaw "shimmy" from time to time. I don't think everyone had this with the 633, but a lot of folks seemed to. Anyways, I modified a Slingshot 42 cm stabilizer--it has winglets--for use on the 633 fuselage. That completely eliminated the yaw shimmy. To me, the ride just feels more stable and refined than with the 483 stabilizer--but that is just subjective and could be bias confirmation. Still, given my experience with changing stabilizers, I'm going to guess that the Phantasm 633 setup is going to be more stable and refined than the old 633 for me. That's just a guess at this point though.

@ldhr, have you compared the production Phantasm mast to the old 91 mast? I compared a prototype 92 to my 91 and the Phantasm was significantly stiffer in all axis. I'm curious to see a production model. And anxious as hell for all the mast variants to become available! LOL.


I also experienced the "shimmy" on my 633. It happened when going hard upwind and when I was very powered up via kite size. It only lasted a second or 2 and did not cause me to crash or anything.
I spent hours sanding the mast and wings - the shimmy remained. I concluded it was the original Slingshot mast 91cm (it's a noodle - no torsional rigidity).
Eventually I switched to the 679 front wing which eliminated the shimmy and rides smoother all around compared to the original 633.... but remains just as responsive.
I had a chance to demo the new Phantasm 633 for a few hours. It was similar to the original 633 but not as responsive - it was a trade-off with a more stable ride, but less responsive. My takeaway is that it would be popular with beginner-intermediate riders and less popular with advanced riders.

View user's profile Send private message
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Northwest Kiteboarding -> Gorge / Portland / Oregon Coast All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum