Strongest and lightest (while relatively affordable and usable) is going to be a tubular carbon fiber monocoque with hemispherical ends, sealed with a top coat for UV protection. - A torpedo, essentially.
As expensive as carbon fiber is, I still think it could be used to produce a stronger teardrop shaped monocoque, that doesn't need as much of a frame and doesn't cost as much as many of the over-built stick or skeleton builds here.
But foam and glass vs sticks and aluminum get very tricky to compare. Fiberglass is heavy. But most people over-build with lumber. Aluminum skins are a light way to finish. But foam is lighter.
It's more about an individual's own build techniques than the materials, alone.
greygoos wrote:I must have missed that, can you show me how you came to that conclusion? I am very curious.I believe the first foam trailer on here was foam covered in fiberglass. I am not trying to be controversial just trying to get my facts straight. Thank
Indeed.
To me, that's more personal opinion than hard and fast definition.
To John, a "foamie" may only qualify with his parameters.
But to many here - as I've seen in discussions and many builds - "foamie" is pretty much anything where the structure is built with foam and covered to strengthen it.
To me, that "foamie" definition is a bit like arguing that "sandwich" walls are only sandwich walls when you use XPS for the insulation.
But, I've seen similar arguments about shapes. People have their own opinions.
"It ain't a teardrop if it looks like a toaster."
"It can't be a standy if you have to hunch."
"That' isn't a trolley top, because it doesn't have windows."
"It's not a square-drop if it has angles."
"A v-nose is not a teardrop."
And even an argument against being a foamie, again: "It isn't a real foamie if you use a PVC frame."
I don't think there's any point in nitpicking basic concepts, especially while discussing build techniques in general.