Mambo Dave
Contributor
Is there some analogy between split fins' performance, speed and in current, and sport bikes? Please bear with me here as I explore this line of thinking out: Sport bikes are arguably some of the fastest vehicles on our roads, but just because they can do 170 miles per hour, does that automatically mean they'll pull a 5000 lb. trailer better than my truck?
My last truck only had 120 hp from the factory, but it was a 300 cubic inch six cylinder. Its peak torque was at 2000 RPM, and it had a good amount of it. My last sport bike came close to the hp rating of my truck, but it still wasn't meant for hauling. (The old engine adage 'There is no replacement for displacement' may apply here, but I'm still not sure)
Split fins are faster, granted, but it seems to me that the already fast kick needed for splits can't be sped up much more to counter currents. They can't be loaded, i.e. kicked with force, as their design flops over on itself like a wet noodle. Similarly, big kicks didn't seem effective during my test of them.
A paddle may not be as fast, but they can be powered, if need be, to effectively displace more water per kick in a load situation than a split (which is seemingly at its limit for normal waters). What i am claiming is that me way be looking at the displacement of water when the going gets rough. It seems to me that a large paddle would, by default, move more water, albeit slower, than a split fin. (So I guess this means a split fin aims it's lower water displacement better to use as thrust?)
In engine terms, an effective paddle (I'm thinking Jet fins here) can produce more usable torque, while a split fin may have more horsepower.
What fire hose is going to be tougher to hold steady - a small hose pushing forth a good amount of pressure, or a large hose at a moderate pressure?
I'm not claiming that I have the answer here, but I'd like some of ya to consider analogies to the split vs. paddle in current debate, as I am just as curious. In fact, I'm dead set on buying a set of split fins - probably Apollos at this point.
Personally, I'd like to test out multiple fins in an endless pool (the pools that keep water flowing). http://www.endlesspools.com/index.html
Best,
Dave
My last truck only had 120 hp from the factory, but it was a 300 cubic inch six cylinder. Its peak torque was at 2000 RPM, and it had a good amount of it. My last sport bike came close to the hp rating of my truck, but it still wasn't meant for hauling. (The old engine adage 'There is no replacement for displacement' may apply here, but I'm still not sure)
Split fins are faster, granted, but it seems to me that the already fast kick needed for splits can't be sped up much more to counter currents. They can't be loaded, i.e. kicked with force, as their design flops over on itself like a wet noodle. Similarly, big kicks didn't seem effective during my test of them.
A paddle may not be as fast, but they can be powered, if need be, to effectively displace more water per kick in a load situation than a split (which is seemingly at its limit for normal waters). What i am claiming is that me way be looking at the displacement of water when the going gets rough. It seems to me that a large paddle would, by default, move more water, albeit slower, than a split fin. (So I guess this means a split fin aims it's lower water displacement better to use as thrust?)
In engine terms, an effective paddle (I'm thinking Jet fins here) can produce more usable torque, while a split fin may have more horsepower.
What fire hose is going to be tougher to hold steady - a small hose pushing forth a good amount of pressure, or a large hose at a moderate pressure?
I'm not claiming that I have the answer here, but I'd like some of ya to consider analogies to the split vs. paddle in current debate, as I am just as curious. In fact, I'm dead set on buying a set of split fins - probably Apollos at this point.
Personally, I'd like to test out multiple fins in an endless pool (the pools that keep water flowing). http://www.endlesspools.com/index.html
Best,
Dave
