Product Overview
What's new?
In the case of the 211 base, the forces acting on it were simply broken down. Conventional 1-bolt systems work through a force-fit transmission of forces. The tighter the mast base is tightened, the more securely it sits. With the 211-Base, on the other hand, the horizontal force component is absorbed by a firmly screwed sliding block like a 2-bolt mast base system. The only difference is that no mast base plate is screwed onto the board, but the screw connection takes place in the mast rail. The last degree of freedom, namely torsion, is prevented by the cover cap, the locking pins of which engage in the mast rail. A clean solution that has never been seen before, but that has clear advantages!
Advantages over 1-bolt mast base systems
- No unintentional loosening of the mast foot from the mast track
- No excessive tightening of the mast base required
- No more stuck mast foot that has to be loosened with a tool
- No need to look for the optimal mast foot position again and again
- Weight only approx. 260 gr instead of 350 gr and more ...
- Low overall height of only approx. 69mm instead of approx. 85 mm and more ...
- The fork can be struck higher, which means more sailing power
- Tidy design, no sharp edges or annoying levers
Advantages over 2-bolt mast base systems
- No protruding mast base plate
- More than one mast foot position adjustable
- Weight only approx. 260 gr. Instead of about 350gr and more ...
- Low overall height of only approx. 69mm instead of approx. 85 mm and more ...
- The fork can be struck higher, which means more sailing power
- Cost savings with 3 boards of approx. 80 €
- Tidy design
Idea
As is so often the case, the idea comes with the problems or negative experiences that you inevitably go through in your windsurfing career. As a beginner you usually choose the cheaper option, which is usually a 1- Bolt mast base system is. The functional principle is always the same, namely guide the sliding block into the mast rail and tighten the mast base. But how tight actually? And at which point again? If the mast base is tightened too tightly, the hammer has to be used to dismantle it, if it is too loose it comes loose during the journey, so that in the worst case the board and sail are separated from each other. In addition to the problem of finding the correct torque, the incorrectly positioned mast foot forces you back to the beach. All problems that you don't necessarily want to have in the surf. Of course, there are also the 2-bolt mast base systems, which, however, also have their disadvantages. On the one hand, there is the bulky plate that can remain on the board, and on the other hand, of course, the significantly higher price of approx. 90 € per mast foot and a further 30 € per additional mast footplate. The more elaborate construction not only costs, but also adds more weight to the scales. In addition to the price and the higher weight, the system also results in a higher design of approx. 85 mm. All not so satisfactory the whole thing, which is why I thought that it could be better and that, as with the ATW 277, the functional principle of distributing the forces would work well. The result is a combination of both systems, i.e. a kind of 2 in 1-bolt mast base system without the disadvantages mentioned above.
What's New?
In the case of the 211 base, the forces acting on it were simply broken down. Conventional 1-bolt systems work through a force-fit transmission of forces. The tighter the mast base is tightened, the more securely it sits. The 211 Base works in the same way, but has been expanded so that the horizontal force component is absorbed by a firmly screwed sliding block like a 2-bolt mast foot system. The only difference is that no mast footplate is screwed onto the board, but the screw connection takes place in the mast rail. The last degree of freedom, namely torsion, is prevented by locking pins that grip into the mast rail. The problem of previous 1-bolt mast feet slipping inside the mast rail is thus safely prevented. Due to the design, this results in immense advantages in terms of performance, design and functionality.
Why A Rubber Joint?
The 211 base is coming with a rubber joint. The decisive factor here is the material and the geometry. Many surfers do not even think about this and yet the choice of the joint is crucial. So why not use a Tendon or a cardan joint? The answer to this depends on the area of application. My preferred area is the wave. In connection with this, you can also use one or the other ramp. When landing, strong forces act on the base of the mast, which are noticeably dampened by a rubber joint. If, on the other hand, a cardan joint is used, the damping effect is zero. A Tendon joint, on the other hand, has a much smaller cross-section, so that the material has to be much harder compared to the rubber joint, so that here too the damping is much worse than that of the rubber joint. The advantage of Tendon joints lies in the low overall height, which allows the surfer to hit the fork higher. The height of the 211 base is comparable to that of the Tendon mast feet. The cardan joint is particularly suitable for training because it enables the board and sail to be connected without exertion.
Why The Low Height?
Tendon joints are mainly used in the performance area. The lower construction height of up to 20 millimeters compared to conventional mast base systems with rubber joints allows the surfer to strike the fork higher, which reduces the flex in the top. So the lever arm of the mast above the fork is reduced, which physically means that it becomes stiffer. The sail opens less and generates more power, which enables higher performance. A lower mast foot means better planing performance and higher speeds. With a height of approx. 69 mm, the 211 base is only approx. 6 mm above the allegedly lowest Tendon mast feet of approx. 63 mm. However, with the difference, the much better damping properties of a rubber joint.
Where Is The Safety Line?
I am of the opinion that this external strap is ugly and annoying, as well as making it difficult to detect damage to the rubber joint. The fact that damage is more difficult to detect naturally also reduces safety, which is why I laid the safety line in the core of the rubber joint. The so-called neutral fiber runs through the core area of a component. The neutral fiber of a component is the area in which the stress due to a bending moment is zero. A hollow core is therefore statically unproblematic. However, if the outer jacket has even a slight tear, the entire cross-section is at great risk of rupture. For example, if you look at a cotton swab with a plastic shaft, this shaft is usually hollow and yet it does not bend so easily. But if you only slightly notch this shaft and bend the rod in such a way that the notch is stretched, the rod breaks even with the slightest load. Therefore, before each session, check whether there are cracks or the material is porous by bending the joint in all directions and replace the joint if necessary.
European
The Europin used is of course made of one piece with an M10 Thread turned. This means that the pin is more resilient than with two-part M8 Europin threads and there is one less adhesive point that can come loose. The Europin and the threaded pin are glued with green Loctide.
