Boat Building Forum

Find advice on all aspects of building your own kayak, canoe or any lightweight boats

Re: Material: is CF lighter> *LINK*
By:JeffHouser
Date: 10/31/2003, 11:31 am
In Response To: Re: Material: is CF lighter> (Mike and Rikki)

: Good question, ready?

: CF is somewhere around 40-60% "stronger" at a given cloth weight
: then fiberglass. Conversely one can say CF is 40-60% lighter at equal
: performance criteria. CF comes in various weights and weaves, the common
: denominator is that they are all very expensive...VERY expensive. Still,
: it's light and doesn't absorb excess epoxy, an added bonus.
: I have a roll of 5.4 ox 2 by 2 plain weave CF by Hexcel that really works for
: me.

Personally, I love carbon for ease of use. I'm sure there'll be arguement, but I find it much cleaner to work with. I also find that I can wet out a lay up with much less resin than with glass (though you have to be very careful to ensure you do actually get the cloth wetted out).

My FG sprint boats weigh in at 11.5 - 12.5 kg, the same layup in carbon is just around 8kg. As for price... given I can use less carbon, there really isn't a big difference. Shopping around you'll find a range from just over $10 to upwards of $60 for a metre of 5.7 oz CF so it can be frustrating.

And then all the cool things you can build with the cut scraps.....

Jeff H

coachcom

Messages In This Thread

Material: is CF lighter>
Jay Doorly -- 10/31/2003, 2:53 am
Summary
Jay Doorly -- 11/1/2003, 1:15 am
Also fame and prestige! *NM*
Sam McFadden -- 11/1/2003, 10:35 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Chuck -- 10/31/2003, 7:33 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
LeeG -- 10/31/2003, 10:29 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Sam McFadden -- 10/31/2003, 10:15 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:43 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
mike loriz -- 10/31/2003, 2:11 pm
How about Spectra??
Mike and Rikki -- 11/1/2003, 1:00 pm
Re: How about Spectra??
mike loriz -- 11/1/2003, 4:13 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
ChrisO -- 10/31/2003, 11:58 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
srchr/gerald -- 10/31/2003, 5:36 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *LINK*
srchr/gerald -- 10/31/2003, 12:15 pm
Re: Why?
Mike Scarborough -- 10/31/2003, 10:27 am
Re: Why?
Sam McFadden -- 10/31/2003, 4:16 pm
Re: Why?
Ted Henry -- 10/31/2003, 10:45 am
Re: Why?
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 11:31 am
Re: Why?
Ted Henry -- 10/31/2003, 2:32 pm
Re: Why?
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 3:20 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *Pic*
Kyle T -- 10/31/2003, 8:09 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 5:02 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter> *LINK*
JeffHouser -- 10/31/2003, 11:31 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:54 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
ChrisO -- 10/31/2003, 1:09 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 6:32 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 5:48 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 10/31/2003, 12:03 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 10/31/2003, 6:20 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 11/1/2003, 1:05 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Malcolm Schweizer -- 11/1/2003, 11:49 pm
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
Mike and Rikki -- 11/2/2003, 1:50 am
Re: Material: is CF lighter>
LeeG -- 10/31/2003, 10:32 am