Is a carbon boom worth it?

[bred2shred]

Rinsing an aluminum boom (or any other aluminum part) with fresh water after sailing in salt water will greatly reduce corrosion. That said, cleaning every little nook & cranny as well as "sealed" areas of the boom will be difficult. If I used aluminum booms, I would be super vigilant about disassembling and rinsing it after use and storing in a dry location. Really what we're talking about is cyclical loading, galvanic corrosion, and stress corrosion cracking (SCC). These are all factors that can severely reduce the strength of aluminum components and ultimately cause failure. Carbon booms are, for all intents and purposes, are not affected by galvanic corrosion or SCC. They can also withstand a higher rate of cyclical loading before failure when compared to aluminum.

That said, no boom is immune to poor design. I cracked several older Chinook carbon tail pieces on their first generation carbon booms. I have also broken two carbon triple clamp boom arms after several years of use. So if you're looking for a boom that "won't break", that boom doesn't exist. If you're looking for a boom that is the stiffest possible construction, then carbon is the material of choice.

sm

[kevinkan]

[isobars]

[kevinkan]

also when i ranked stiffness, I was ranking the boom heads not the booms, although if i were to rank the booms that I used in the sizes that I use them I think the order would be the same.

also, windsurfing is all about feel (at least for me... I don't race), some people like stiff, others like more give. I remember when I was relatively new to windsurfing and i had high carbon content stuff... i got on somebody else's sail w/ lower content mast and alu boom, and everything felt so dampened and smooth... a plus for somebody just struggling to sail over chop. If I were to do the same comparison today, I probably would think that rig was more mushy and dead.

[spennie]

+1 from Spennie, excellent post, Kevin!

[GURGLETROUSERS]

Eight years ago I bought two carbon booms (long and short) at the middle of the price range, from a small specialist company with a goodish reputation. (M &K.)

The long one (bigger sails) snapped an arm at the head last year, but the short one is still apparently sound, despite the usual beatings in 'tough' conditions.

I replaced both with a pair of new latest North alloy booms (special deal from friend - new design said to be almost as good and durable as carbon). I use the long one turn about with an old, built like a bridge, Chinook alloy which I Laid up eight years ago after buying the carbon (dismantled, cleaned, oiled, and still sound). But I'm still using the short carbon boom, with the new North alloy waiting, and as yet unused.

I may not be correct, but it seems that long carbon booms are the more prone to failure than the shorter ones, in that the tubes at the head area are not sufficiently thickened and tapered to stand the extra leverage of long tubes and big sails. (Mine wasn't - a high stress area!)

Perhaps it makes more sense to use short long lasting carbon booms, but not the very expensive long ones, unless they actually are thickened and reinforced at the head (most seem to snap there) to take that extra strain. That's something the adverts don't tell us.

[cgoudie1]

I have carbon booms for sail sizes 3.2 to 9.5 (that would be 4 booms, because I try not to run a boom fully extended). I bought them all new,
but at considerably less than retail. The oldest is an HPL Hybrid.
I have replaced the front end on it twice now. The arms are still going strong, and the thing has got to be at least 10 years old. They all
are worth every penny I paid, but the huge one that rigs the 9.5 is
most critical. It was also the most expensive at about $350. Frankly,
I'm addicted to the positive feel of the things, even with a 3.7.

-Craig