Gorge Tested Cabrinha Crossbow

[feixaq]

dewey, i see the same thing on occasion -- where the "last post" author on the forum index is inaccurate. most often, i see this glitch whereby the "last post" author on the index shows up as the original poster, but in reality the last post is from a non-registered guest. might be some phpBB glitch, i dunno...

[OliverG]

Well, might be an occasional glitch. You guys are more observant than me, I guess. Everything works at least 99% well though. :)

[dewey]

I didn't know if Experienced1 was posting under Guest and the system was registering his real ID. Got to watch these things.

[sflinux]

IMO you should always compare kites based on their projected area.
For example:
A peter lynn Guerilla 2 15 M (flat) has a projected area of 9.4M.
A guerilla 22M (flat) has a projected area of 13.8M.
A 13M (flat) peter lynn venom has a projected area of 9M.
A 16 (flat) venom has a projected area of 11.3M.
A 19 (flat) venom has a projected area of 13.7M.
A wipika 20.8M flat and has a projected area of 15M.
A 11M (flat) slingshot fuel has a projected area of 8.5M.
A 13M (flat) slinghsot fuel has a projected area of 10M.
A 15M (flat) slingshot fuel has a projected area of 11M.
A 17M (flat) slingshot fuel has a projected area of 13.2M.
A flysurfer speed 17M (flat) has a projected area of 15M.
A flysurfer speed 13M (flat) has a projected area of 11.7M.
A flysurfer speed 10M (flat) has a projected area of 9M.
A flyurfer speed 7M (flat) has a projected area of 6.3M.

I'm guessing but a cabrinha crossbow probably has a projected area closely resembling a flysurfer.
So I would guess that a cabrinha crossbow 16M (flat) would have a projected area of ~14M.
I would guess that a cabrinha crossbow 12M (flat) would have a projected area of ~11M.
I would guess that a cabrinha crossbow 9M (flat) would have a projected area of ~8M.
I would guess that a cabrinha crossbow 7M (flat) would have a projected area of ~6M.

The cabrinha website says that a 12M crossbow is of comparable power to a traditional 14M or 16M U-shaped lei kite. So this means that a 12M crossbow probably has a 11M projected area, which so does a 15M slingshot fuel. And a 9M crossbow, with a projected area of 8M, is of comparable power to a 11M slingshot fuel kite. And the 16M crossbow, 14M projected, is comparable to a 19M U-shaped lei.

When you are comparing kites of similar projected area, you minimize their difference in power. IMO, more power = better upwind.
-bric

[MehYam]

IMO you should always compare kites based on their projected area.

I'm guessing drag and other shape factors come into play as well. So the higher the percentage of projected area is to "actual" area, the more efficient that projected area will be. i.e. the projected 11m on a Crossbow or similar flat kite provides a little more than a SS Fuel with projected 11m. All conjecture, but seems logical. It's definitely more complicated than this.

[Sonny]

I had my doubt and was not impressed when I saw the Crossbow 9 in action two weeks ago. I saw the Crossbow 12 yesterday at 3rd and it seemed better than the Crossbow 9 but still was not that impressed. Today I saw several of my friends ride it at 3rd and they were getting huge air and they all had very positive things to say. I had my doubt but now I'm a believer. I hope the Crossbow 16 will do just as well in little lighter wind.

[charlie]

i hope thay reduce the bridles to none, or very little.
thats was one of the things i like about the rapture.
just four lines......and all that safty depower.

[elli]

IMO you should always compare kites based on their projected area.

Thatís correct. Saying that the 9 crossbow pulls more than a 9 bucket kite of some brand does not mean a lot, its basically like saying that a 12 pulls more than a 9, quite obvious.

Funny that people still do that in almost all the crossbow reviews. Comparison by projected area is the proper size comparison. Flysurfer seems appropriate, even though it is very model dependant when it comes to FS kites. I think comparison to the XTC is fine (same general shape and closer AR). Speed is a weird beast even among foils. From the reviews it seems that the crossbow has wider wind range than the XTC, especially in the low end.

E

[gdorfman1]

This is only partly true. Sure, the good low end is probably b/c of basic high projected area, but the depower is incredible—far more than the “projected area” (or even flat area) would indicate. Thus, it is truly more like a 9, which spans from a 5-12m, rather than a 12m. If the depower were equal to a 12m then I agree it would just be a silly sizing difference, but this is indisputably not the case. I personally had been worried it would have good high end, but only average low end, so I think the low end numbers may actually be the strongest selling point.

IMO you should always compare kites based on their projected area.

That’s correct. Saying that the 9 crossbow pulls more than a 9 bucket kite of some brand does not mean a lot, its basically like saying that a 12 pulls more than a 9, quite obvious.

Funny that people still do that in almost all the crossbow reviews. Comparison by projected area is the proper size comparison. Flysurfer seems appropriate, even though it is very model dependant when it comes to FS kites. I think comparison to the XTC is fine (same general shape and closer AR). Speed is a weird beast even among foils. From the reviews it seems that the crossbow has wider wind range than the XTC, especially in the low end.

E

[elli]

Depower is a function of angle of attack, not area. So you can say that size wise the kite is equivalent to a 12, but can depower to low angle of attack where it actually pulls like a much smaller kite. So far what I have seen is that in low angle of attack kites become unstable and overfly the window, seems that the crossbow is well behaved.