Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 12 ... LastLast
Results 8 to 14 of 87
  1. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. T View Post
    The shape sounds thoughtful and really nice for "real world wavesailing". What about the construction, will it be lighter than the G3 boards? Full S-glass/carbon construction? Weight of an 90l cortex?
    I know a few people really liked the relatively narrow footstrap width of the G3 boards (14 cm). Same strapwidth on the Cortex? What about toe in on the front boxes vs centre fin (thruster set up)?
    It's the same construction as the last years G3 boards, the ones that are made in Vietnam, but the way we put on the graphics is different which saves some weight. I don't have the C90 weight yet.

    Strap width is the same as before too.

    We have 1.8 degree toe and 0.7 for the quad boxes. But most prefer it as a thruster and the ones that had the chance to ride it with asym fronts preferred that by far. We are developing such a fin too.
    Ola H.

    Simmer Style Boards and Sails

  2. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    236
    Thanks for the info. I like the sound of it.
    Depending on availability it could be a option.

  3. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by Ola H. View Post
    The Freegal has a fast tail, but a curvy center and the outline is compact by means of being very curvy, in particularly front-center. This makes it relatively easy, fast and stable to sail once planing, but there is still an element of technicality to get it planing.
    Mmh, I don't usually have problems getting a board to plane (compared to other people) but at the same time for light onshore (where you need to go upwind soon&fast) I would still need a board that planes early; what do you mean by "technicality to get it planing"? Say compared to a Flywave... as I said in the other thread, I would buy a Freegal 90 as a companion to my 78; but it's not a matter of volume rather than ability to go upwind fast when there's not much wind and the waves are small but 100% onshore... which makes going out much more complicated...

  4. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by ultimoamore View Post
    Mmh, I don't usually have problems getting a board to plane (compared to other people) but at the same time for light onshore (where you need to go upwind soon&fast) I would still need a board that planes early; what do you mean by "technicality to get it planing"? Say compared to a Flywave... as I said in the other thread, I would buy a Freegal 90 as a companion to my 78; but it's not a matter of volume rather than ability to go upwind fast when there's not much wind and the waves are small but 100% onshore... which makes going out much more complicated...
    If you don't have problems planing you won't have problems with the Freegal and it's gonna be as easy as the Fly when you oversize it like that. It's still a flatter rocker design and with sharper rails.
    Ola H.

    Simmer Style Boards and Sails

  5. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    692
    Sounds good Ola. Thanks for posting - great to hear from the shaper about the design intentions.

  6. #13
    Senior Member Bmg253's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Balham, Gateway to the South (coast)
    Posts
    423
    Has Marc Pare been using a proto?

  7. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Bmg253 View Post
    Has Marc Pare been using a proto?
    Yes. I saw some video from the other day when he was on one of the protos. He's been using it since Sylt.

    https://www.facebook.com/simmerstyle...0&notif_t=like
    Ola H.

    Simmer Style Boards and Sails

Posting Permissions

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