Carbon Poles Vs. Fiberglass Poles

[PVJunkie]

If I'm not mistaken, what PVJunkie is referring to is not just his opinion, but based on actual hard research performed at his company. I think I've got a copy of a summary but I think it's covered by an NDA.

That would be correct.

It seemed the information being shared was moving further and further away from what has been documented. I tried to keep it as simple as I could but still make it clear that all poles are not created equal even if on the surface they appear to be.

[PVJunkie]

Just to clear up some of this earlier post.

Sky poles are desighed to bend down slowly giving a beginning vaulter alot of time to get a full swing to inversion.

The Skypole is not designed to bend low. In fact in lab conditions it bends high since the sail piece is positioned lower in the pole. It is designed for a vaulter who bends the pole low (beginner to intermediate by todays standards). Keep in mind the skypole, which has not changed in design, held many world records.

A mystic has a low sail peice to accomadate the take off of smeone who is short or that has a low take off.

The original Mrs Stic was a modifed design of the skypole BUT when FX technology was introduced it was applied to the pole. the Mystic pole has not had a low sail piece for many years.

A spirit pole has a high sail peice which makes it able to bend a little more without breaking. Also it bends down slower then the carbons but the bend ecelerates a little bit through the top of the jump.

The Spirit pole does not have a high sail piece. While I have a lot of infromation on the Spirit pole I am not going to elaborate any more than that for obvious reasons.

A pacer fx is alot like a spirit but bends down a little easier without as fast of a recoil though they somtimes twist.

The Pacer FX and Spirit poles are very similar in performance. Twister poles are typically a result of poor storage and care of your poles. The physical soft side of a pole can be changed using heat and pressure, similar to what you might find in an outdoor shed in the middle of the summer. Now throw some wt vests, shots, blocks etc on top of your poles and see if the soft side is not somewhere else next season.

A carbon pacer pole which is the poles I have jumped most on were desighned to unbend faster then any other pole. However alot of people felt they unbent to fast to get a full swing. If however you are powerful enough to get a full swing or your are a swing tucker this pole has alot of potential on the top end of the jump.

Not a bad description of the original Carbon poles.

The carbon fx is the next generation pacer carbon it was desighened to give a little more time for the swing then the pacer carbon, but it is still lighter and unbends faster then any of the fiberglass poles.

Again not a bad description. FX technology focused on a allowing the pole to roll to vertical smooth and unbend smooth, in a meaningful way to the vaulter. When you change wts or lengths the design does not change dramatically but systematically so the only thing the vaulter feels is a stiffer pole. Not one with a radically different design.

The carbon weave is pretty much the same as the carbon fx except alot lighter. There is alot of potential to jump high with this pole but it tends to break easy. I broke three of the prototype poles in 2005. But since then they found out with the new carbon the poles needed to be heated perfectly evenly all the way across, so they spent millions buying new ovens however from what I here though stronger they still tend to break easy and are sensitive ti nicks and scrathes.

Pretty close again. Thanks for the props on the ovens but I have to admit it was not millions. They do not break easily yet I can appreciate your personal experiance on the prototypes. Nicks and scratches are bad for any pole made of any material. Carbon poles have a thinner wall (less material) but since that material is stronger they are just as durable as a glass pole. If any of you have seen the "extra" on Neo Vault you know what a Carbon pole can withstand before it fails.

The carbon ESSX was desighed with a low sail peice and high top of sail. It gives you the feeling of being lifted up at take off. It is the least likly pole to twist and was desighed to have a even unbend and recoil all the way through the jump resulting in a smooth jump. Also because it seems to bend high there is no problem if the mat hangs over or is really close to the box it will not block the bend of the pole. The disadvantage is it is just as heavy or heavier then many of the glass poles.

Once again while I have a lot of infromation on the Essx pole I am not going to address any of this for obvious reasons.

I hope that helped.

[kcvault]

Thank you for the descriptions. In the future would you know where I could get pacer carbon poles, or if Gill would still be willing to make the pacer carbons?

--Kasey

[ECvaulter30]

to be honest hearing it all layed out elaborately has really helped.. i really only thought i'd hear about the weight and how their more sensitive to nics and scratches

[rainbowgirl28]

Thank you for the descriptions. In the future would you know where I could get pacer carbon poles, or if Gill would still be willing to make the pacer carbons?

Do you mean you want poles made with the unidirectional carbon fiber (which the original CarbonFX poles were) or that you want the retro Pacer Carbon design and not the CarbonFX design?

[kcvault]

pacer carbon before the carbon fx, the ones made I think between 1994 and 2002 I just like them better then any of the other poles.

[rainbowgirl28]

pacer carbon before the carbon fx, the ones made I think between 1994 and 2002 I just like them better then any of the other poles.

Yeah that's not gonna happen, you'll just have to keep your eyes open for used poles!

[golfdane]

It is interesting to see opinions, salesmanship, wives tales etc over and over again. Lets look at some facts.

Lets say you have every brand of pole, all the exact same length and flex (using the same flex test for every pole). They are all the exact same pole EXCEPT for how they were made and the material they were made out of.

If you then took a steel cable and attached it to the top and bottom of each pole. Put a fishing scale in the middle to measure the force the pole wants to unbend with. Then bent each one to 70% of its length and measured the force each pole exerted you would find that some of them would have a greater force than others. So NO, poles of the exact same length and flex do not return with the same force. We refer to this measurment as the end load. The Slovers (Scott and his father) have done this and while I do not recommend it outside of controlled testing it is a fact. Glass poles vary depending on how they are made. Some carbon poles can and do have the same end load as some current glass poles. Some carbon poles have a noticably greater end load.

Poles with a higher end load return with greater force BUT are more difficult to roll to vertical. A more advanced vaulter can benefit from this. Since carbon poles are lighter the vaulter can generate greater speed so some of the difficuley to roll over is negated but not all. In additon the mechanics of the plant are easier with a lighter piece of equiptment as well. It is easier to manipulate a lighter implement than a heavier one.

Let the arguements begin.

I'd like to see facts, as in objective measurements. I've seen one of Slover's experiments with the scale. It's on disc2 on Neovault's "The Reckoning" (great DVD, btw). The experiment he shows, goes on why gripping up or down might mess up your jump. It shows the end load of a pole bent to 90 degrees when gripped 4 inches of the top, and the end load of the same pole when gripped a couple of inches lower. If I recall correctly, is the pole bent to 90 degrees in both experiments (what they probably should do, is to measure the length of the "chord" and keep that uniform).

Now, I'd like to see the same experiment done with a glass and a carbon pole of the same length, same flex and the overall same position and shape of the sail piece (should yield similar bend characteristics), with the grip at 4 inches from the top. If the flex and characteristics are the same, should it take the same end load to shorten the chord 20% (just a figure). If it doesn't, is it the design.

My argument is, that if a pole has higher end load, is it because of the design of the pole, and not the material (but bear in mind (and I've said it before), that carbon allows for different designs). The material itself adheres to the mechanics of springs.

[vaultwest]

PVjunkie
Thanks for the great explanation on some of these pole questions.

I would like to add that we all should be careful making judgments about poles from just watching someone vault. There are so many variables in every jump from the materials,make up, length, and flex of the pole to the vaulters size, vaulters speed, takeoff mechanics, takeoff impulse, takeoff foot ground contact duration, takeoff angle, hand spread, the vaulters angular rotation, amount of and which muscles are used, technique used etc. that we can not quantify all these variables in any reasonable manner. Making judgments about the pole being the problem or cause of what we see is not determinable. The different poles do react different, I just don't think we have spent the time or money to set up an experimental situation to capture all the variables so that we can definitively make an accurate statement about what certain poles do or do not do for a certain vault. Right now all that we can really say is what our opinion is and that is all it is, an opinion.

[Barto]

I think Dan summarized the topic perfectly. Locked.