Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 15 to 21 of 22
  1. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    678
    Surely a snowboard works with inverse rails because of its flex? A wind surf board doesn't (shouldn't) flex anywhere near enough for this to work?

  2. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,274
    Quote Originally Posted by richarli View Post
    Surely a snowboard works with inverse rails because of its flex? A wind surf board doesn't (shouldn't) flex anywhere near enough for this to work?
    Hmmm. I thought the whole point of side cut was to influence the turning radius to keep maximum edge contact with the surface of the snow. Snowboards generally speaking are not rockered in the same way as sailboards, i.e. when the person is standing on it is it pretty flat regardless of whether it has banana tech or conventional camber. If you look at the early snowboards they were prerockered stiff plywood beasts. They still worked, albeit not as well as the current crop.

    I don’t see why, if you have a preformed rocker that compliments the side cut, it should be a problem.

    I am not sure this anecdote helps, but what the heck… I have built a number of alaias with sidecut and the ones that flexed most were the ones that felt best. But you only have to look to the Firewire Cornice to see boards with little flex still work.

    I think you could argue it is the rocker, short length and very narrow width that play the largest roles, rather than the sidecut.

    About 5 years ago I built an 8’ x 21” x 1 ” composite alaia. It had a sidecut akin to a tapered powder board. But it was stiff, flex was a few mm rather than cms. It was a pig and I chopped it up for spares after only a few surfs. It was longer than my usual alaias and it was much thicker (normally alaias are a maximum of 25mm). I had hoped it would be a mush buster, I spent hours pearling or side slipping... rubbish.

    On the other hand I built a 6’ x 18” x 2” composite alaia, which was also stiff, but it was epic. It surfed in a similar way to the Wegener Tuna (albeit with a kook mostly falling off). It had no rocker, but could easily trim and turn. It was narrower and shorter and worked great. On the back of that one I built another 6’ floaty alaia, but this time it had rocker and FAR more flex. Wow. It was astonishingly good fun.

    So I think with the short lengths of MB boards, combined a good rocker and very narrow width it is a very viable concept, which could be improved with flex. Hence my earlier comment about Witchcraft's flex tails.
    Last edited by JB:); 21st September 2017 at 07:51 AM.

  3. #17
    I don't really care if they look like snowboards or if they use ideas already seen in surfboards. The question is do they work for windsurfing?

    The freestyle range shown on the MB site is interesting if you check the dimensions. The four sizes are less than 2m long and the 92litre one is just 53cms wide – so I wonder if there's enough room to stand on the board when free styling?
    The tiniest one is 82litres/194/50

    The shapes allow a lot of volume to be packed in a small hull, but how early will such a shape plane?

    If you put a conventional 100litre/ 64cms wide freestyle board next to the MB 98, which will plane first? And how will they feel and perform differently?


    What a shame we no longer have magazines doing obvious tests on stuff like this.
    Last edited by basher; 21st September 2017 at 10:04 AM.
    Now back in the UK.

  4. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorgesailor View Post
    .... Funny, I have heard the exact opposite about the FW STB.. Everyone said it was very quick & lively, if anything not as comfortable as old design but much more quick & loose...
    It probably depends on what one means by that. I spent an afternoon, 2.5 hours, on a Demo in Bump and Jump conditions, with a powered up 5.0, nicely formed half mast swell to very confused choppy. The board felt maybe not "dead" but certainly slow and big, it was not that agile on the swell where it needed a lot of back foot pressure to turn ... and it did not go through the chop all that great. As a wave board, when you get used to the tail, it might be different. I was using it in a 3 fin set up, that might have slowed it down, and it is the wrong size board for my weight. The 85 felt like what it it looks like to me: an old style, narrow, parallel rails, 95L board (think Seatrend) with the front and the tail cut off.


    I was on a demo Starboard 82 Free style wave two days before and it is day and night: that is an agile board! Lovely really ...

    I am very curious about the MD board, unlike the Stubby, it is a very different take on a windsurfing shape.
    Last edited by duzzi; 22nd September 2017 at 03:00 AM.

  5. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    142
    Duzzi - your talking about FW stubby 85 ... ?

    Ive just been putting a wave stubby99 through its paces in bolt onshore - to logo sideshore - It has blown my mind on so many levels ... like the most FUN board Ive EVER used - doing nearly everything better than standard pumpkin-seed outlines yesterday on a 'perfect' 15 sec groundswell reeling point break with punchy bowl sections ... it makes all other boards Ive used before feel like the handbrake was half stuck on ....

  6. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by LDC View Post
    Duzzi - your talking about FW stubby 85 ... ?

    Ive just been putting a wave stubby99 through its paces in bolt onshore - to logo sideshore - It has blown my mind on so many levels ... like the most FUN board Ive EVER used - doing nearly everything better than standard pumpkin-seed outlines yesterday on a 'perfect' 15 sec groundswell reeling point break with punchy bowl sections ... it makes all other boards Ive used before feel like the handbrake was half stuck on ....
    Yes, FSW 85. No idea in the wave but in B&J conditions it makes absolutely no improvement (really, why would it? It is just a chopped off parallel outline) ... my ancient RRD 85 requires less back foot input and it is way more agile on a swell, not to mention a more modern FSW like the starboard 81 that jibed like a dream compared.

    Again it might be the size: at 72Kg the Fanatic Stubby 85 is big, go down 5 liters loose 2 cm width throughout and it might be ok ...

    BTW: The Blast 100 felt even more of a marketing stunt. It is no different (in outline) than a 2005-2010 Isonic (look mom: a chopped nose and tail and parallel rails!), clearly slower, but somehow is supposed to be something new or better?
    Last edited by duzzi; 22nd September 2017 at 03:20 PM.

  7. #21
    Senior Member Gorgesailor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    502
    Quote Originally Posted by duzzi View Post
    Yes, FSW 85. No idea in the wave but in B&J conditions it makes absolutely no improvement (really, why would it? It is just a chopped off parallel outline) ... my ancient RRD 85 requires less back foot input and it is way more agile on a swell, not to mention a more modern FSW like the starboard 81 that jibed like a dream compared.

    Again it might be the size: at 72Kg the Fanatic Stubby 85 is big, go down 5 liters loose 2 cm width throughout and it might be ok ...

    BTW: The Blast 100 felt even more of a marketing stunt. It is no different (in outline) than a 2005-2010 Isonic (look mom: a chopped nose and tail and parallel rails!), clearly slower, but somehow is supposed to be something new or better?
    Part of the idea with the Stubby shapes is that you can sail a flatter rockerline for a given turn radius because you can force the board more. This means you can, in theory have a faster board that still turns tight when pushed. That said you may not find it as responsive as a narrow tailed traditional board. It is also likely more sensitive to trim & you like also have to sail it as it was designed in order to get the benefits - back foot back on the tail & mast in the back 1/2 of the track. I only have experience with the Quatro Supermini which is actually an onshore wave board but very snappy & good fun in B&J.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •