Longevityn of carbon skis

I'm after feed back regarding the longevity of carbon skis. One of my skis is the epic v12 in the performance lay up and its one of the first v12 skis made. It's been well paddled on average three to four times a week since new and is still in great condition with only normal wear and marks. Would a carbon ski be in the same condition or is there life Span a lot less then fibre glass and etc. I'm well aware about the carbon skis being easier to damage however I only interested about the longevity of the carbon skis.

The problem with a carbon ski is it is made for racing. It is super light and has no gel coat, this is for weight saving. The drawback of this is that UV will hammer the resin in a relativly short time if used often. However if you paddle at night you should be good!

The Ultra has a gel coat with a similar construction, this adds weight but being white is is much cooler and the resin is not subject to as much UV, this will give it a much longer life in the sun, as you have found with your current ski.

I'd say that carbon skis are stronger and less likely to get damaged in the water.
There is certainly a huge difference between a performance layup and an ultra in the general stiffness of the hull.
I can really notice this as my new ultra sits steady on the roof of my car and the performance would rock around a fair bit, especially noticeable when you go over demon speedbumps.

I can only imagine a full carbon to be even more so.

I'm actually coming to the conclusion that performance layup skis are not as good as you may think, they flex a fair bit and my mine is really stating to fall apart with soft spots forming.

I'm beginning to believe that in a layup as light as our skis are, that the sonic core is slowly being compromised as the ski flexes around and takes hits in the surf zone.

I may be wrong, but that is my gut feeling based on my own experience.

The dearer layups have a full wet high strength material core whereas the sonic core is basically held together with filaments of resin that I think slowly become compromised as they get battered in the surf zone.

I think that a soric core performance style layup needs to be made heavier such as the SLS skis are to resist the flex that I believe may slowly make them deteriorate.

So I've certainly changed my mind, my next ski will be carbon, it would have been this time except for Epic Australia's inability to supply one.
The ultra is pretty good though and still has the same core.

But soric core for lightweight fibreglass skis? I'm over it.
Especially if they are not using an epoxy resin.

I infuse Soric core with Vinyl Ester resin and Fibreglass all the time with no issues , All cores have some drawbacks , Nomex honeycomb's is minimal bonding area , PVC/SAN foams is denting , Sorics is resin consumption/weight and Coremat is " dryspots/delamination" so choose your poison !

Rightarmbad wrote: I can really notice this as my new ultra sits steady on the roof of my car and the performance would rock around a fair bit.

You bought a new ski? V10/V12?

If so isnt this a turnaround after giving Epic a serve for the price of thier ski's in Australia?

Find it hard to believe that you could see the difference on stiffness between an ultra and performance on roof racks? Almost all the movement I would put down to the flexibility of the rubber roof rack cradles?!

Just to explain myself andto keep this topic simply I was not meaning the all black carbon boats. Will a epic ultra/fenn carbon which are both white in colour have the same life Span as their heavier lay ups. Will a three, four or five year old carbon (white) ski that's paddled numerous times a week and well cared for be in similar condition to the heavier lay up.
.
We have had numerous discussions on stiffness and resins in previous forums. Let's keep this topic about peoples experience with the lifespan of their carbon/ultra skis. Thanks

As always, it depends.
There are skis out there that are ancient and are still fine.

It's all in how they are treated.
A few good poundings in the surf can change everything.

Yes, I bought an Epic, but only by making a two ski purchase and getting a really good price.
The main factors in the decision were a bricks and mortar seller that insulates me from a shitty wholesaler and the single biggest factor of the most comfortable bucket.

But there is no way I would have paid the retail price for it, it's just not good value.

The roof racks are the same, the straps are the same, I didn't go looking for stiffness differences, just couldn't help but notice that the ski doesn't rock around like my old one out of the corner of my eye as I drive along.

The ultra layup is much stiffer.
When you try and press it with your hand, it is very noticeable.
I got aV12, so much more stable in the ocean for me.
But a bit wriggly on a short sharp breaking shore wave like coming into the alley as I found out yesterday by falling off twice whilst out playing after a paddle.
It shows up my out of practice stroke and gives me a moment when I paddle hard to come down the face of the wave.

I think the less rocker may be the culprit there.
And possibly the fact that I have only paddled 3 times in the last 4 months.

Quite funny really, falling off the V12 is like slow motion, whereas the V10 is simply a spit you off in an instant when you get it wrong.
I have to be way out of shape and pretty much lying sideways in the water before it actually becomes unrecoverable.

The profile of the stability curve just gells with me, very similar to a Uno max, the secondary just seems to come in at the right time and amount for my body proportions.

Rob1 wrote: I was not meaning the all black carbon boats. Will a epic ultra/fenn carbon which are both white in colour have the same life Span as their heavier lay ups. Will a three, four or five year old carbon (white) ski that's paddled numerous times a week and well cared for be in similar condition to the heavier lay up.

Sorry for the hijack, but it's sorta on topic and I'm sure plenty more people will contribute the original question.

As RAB and Latman have pointed out, it's not so much about the carbon material but the core and resign used. If you are only interested in comparing a Fenn Carbon versus Glass or Epic carbon versus glass that would be easier for people to comment on, but again there would only be a handful of people that have owned both boats and they would need to have owned them for the period you described to be able to comment.

As someone who has shopped around for seconds hand ski's in Carbon I can tell you there is a marked difference between similar aged ski's depending on how the owners treated them, transported them etc. I have asked the same question a few years ago without much success. So my plan for now is to handle my ski(s) with great care and upgrade them frequently. One thing I have noticed is that really light carbon ski's (less than 11kg) are very hard to find in good condition 2nd hand, whereas heavier lay-up carbon 12-13kg always appear to be in better condition over time.

Being a ski repairer myself I just want to let you know that there are no plain white carbon Epics.

All Epics do however get carbon in the high stress seat area, even the club spec which by the way the only ski in the stable to not use epoxy, but it is still post cured in an oven as are all Epic boats.

The ultra construction is Kevlar and carbon, but mostly Kevlar. The Elite is the only carbon ski that has no gel coat.

As for lifespan, which has been mentioned before it is all up to the abuse or lack of it that will determine this.

The worst skis I have had far as degradation goes will be the ones from Dubai, well lets say in the shortest period of time. A sure way of how to tell how sun damaged an Epic is by the rudder hatch cover. If it is pale and crumbly it had a lot of sun, the gel coat will also be pale, but will polish up fairly well.

As a basic answer to the question, no, there is no inherent compromise in carbon as far as longevity goes. Pound for pound, it's stronger and tougher than glass. But.... most carbon boats are going to use as little carbon as possible to get the strength and stiffness they're aiming for, as the stuff is expensive, and besides, what's the point of using carbon if you're going to make it as heavy as a glass boat? It would be bombproof for sure, but not many people would buy an expensive heavy boat. So I would guess that most mfr's are making their boats "roughly" as strong and durable as one another, regardless of the layup. The weight savings are merely a reflection of the fact that carbon is much stronger and stiffer on a per-pound basis.

I would expect that any mfr making black carbon boats should (1) be using only prepreg layup (it's the only way to ensure survival if the boat is left on the beach in the sun and heats up to equilibrium temp), and (2) be using a UV-blocking clear coat finish. I would be shocked if anyone is trying to sell a black carbon boat without both of these features. I certainly wouldn't buy one without knowing for sure....

Just to let you know not all skis are created equal. Dont be fooled by spin, generally you get what you pay for!

As for UV stability, there is no ski that I know of that has any sort of UV layer. As for prepreg skis I think Epic made about 10 or so of them and that is all that exists, these skis are around the 7kg to 7.5kg mark, and again to my knowledge there are none other than this, as for UV stability there is nothing once again.

Why put extra weight for no reason. These skis are used for racing only, not training.

Wally wrote:
Why put extra weight for no reason. These skis are used for racing only, not training.

This is just not true..plenty of people only own one ski and train/race in and not only racers buying top of the range skis.

dont know about the original question, as my plain black carbon ski has not yet seen the sun or water, but sooon

There are UV stablised epoxy resins available - have been used by wakeboarders, surfboards etc for a while now - they work well but are pricy!

Post curing the epoxy takes away the worry of your product deforming in the sun's heat

Wally, the Epic Ultra and Elite boats are prepreg.
You cannot infuse a nomex core.

The super light ones were made with unidirectional carbon and as such were very labour intensive and therefore very expensive, there were only a few made.

Sorry, Epic has not made a prepreg boat for many years as they do not have an autoclave anymore.

There are now new types of low temp prepreg that will enable them to do it again without an autoclave, but that is not on the cards as yet.

You do not need prepreg to make a Nomex cored ski.

RAB....I suspect Wally has forgotten more about ski construction than you will ever know. PS check his surname....there's a clue.....he knows his stuff.

Dicko wrote: RAB....I suspect Wally has forgotten more about ski construction than you will ever know. PS check his surname....there's a clue.....he knows his stuff.

I didn't think RAB had clicked....a legend in the Perth ski community for his repair work.

"Post curing the epoxy takes away the worry of your product deforming in the sun's heat"

Well, not really... Virtually all wet epoxy resins do benefit from post-cure, but they simply cannot be post-cured up to the temperature that a black object reaches in the midday sun. They turn rubbery and lose their strength at those temperatures, and no amount of post-cure can fix that. They simply don't have the proper chemistry to achieve high strength at very high temps. Now, if the boat is painted a lighter color, sure, post-cured wet resins are fine. But if you want a black boat, prepreg is the only way to safely get there.

And Wally is of course correct, you can make Nomex-cored boats just fine with normal wet layup techniques, and I suspect that most are still made that way. AFAIK, Stellar is the only mfr to specifically claim to use prepreg in their ultra boats, so it's likely that they are the only ones. But someone may know something I don't. (I'm not associated with Stellar, just saying.)

Your post implies that a carbon Epic will go rubbery in the sun?

Black objects in full sun, in the absence of convective cooling, will reach around 200F (90C). Most wet-layup epoxies will have Tg's between 140-180F, meaning that if they are fully post-cured, the better ones will just barely get to 200F and still have halfway decent physical properties. You may not notice the matrix actually feels "rubbery" to the touch (and besides, you'd burn yourself trying), but that's not the same as saying that it has full strength at those temps. (The term "rubbery", as I used it, has more to do with poor physical matrix properties than feeling like a squash ball.) And it certainly doesn't leave much of a safety factor, if any. Now perhaps they're using a special resin with a super-high Tg, but I'd like to know what it is before I'd believe that. More likely they're just using an off-the-shelf resin with a good post-cure, and figuring that the only time the boat sees any real stress will be when it's in the water and therefore much cooler. Which actually is not a bad assumption, most of the time. But when you can solve this problem completely and forever just by using prepreg, and not have to worry about it anymore (in addition to getting the inherent advantages of prepreg in terms of strength:weight ratio, consistency, etc.), I have to wonder why more mfr's don't just make the investment and be done with it. This is one of those cases where there are so many advantages, and so few disadvantages, that it's really a no-brainer. Unless, of course, your business plan is to just keep on doing what you've always done, and figuring that no one is going to wise up that there's a better way. The problem with that, of course, is that people always wise up sooner or later. That's when you change your name from General Motors to Government Motors, and stick the taxpayers with the bill. Oh, sorry, getting tangential. Time to take my medicine...