I note the carbon is considerably more expensive that the ast version. The question is, is the carbon worth it?

And does anybody know how these boards compare in weight, say the 12'6" x 25"?

Whether it's worth it is going to depend on your requirements.

The weight difference is going to more noticeable carrying the board than it is paddling it. (And for some people, the difference in carry-ability will be important, and for others not).

On the water, unless you are doing elite racing, I don't think it will make that much difference.

Also, the AST will be less fragile and more durable.

So that's four things to think about.

The 12'6 x 25's are only just hitting our shores this week so not sure how much info you will find but give it time and it will filter back. I will be picking up my carbon hopefully in the next few days and will be able to report on it.

I think the carbon vs AST debate is an interesting one. I am used to paddling carbon boards but at the Nationals paddled the AST Ace and actually think there might be something to paddling a heavier board. In the fact it doesn't get as blown around or thrown around in chop, but when it does it is harder to get back on line. I think also that when they get moving they have more momentum behind them could help.

I've had my 2013 SB Allstar 12'6"x 27.5 for the last 3 weeks and it is sensational especially the weight. I had a naish glide ast before this and the comparison is tugboat vs a race boat. The board is super easy to carry and put on the car (wrecked my shoulder in a nasty wipeout at beginning of year so this was a big consideration re carry/ lifting weight) and in the water was so much faster. Stability is also great with its recessed deck. So impressed I've ordered the 14'x26 Allstar carbon. AST is great for durability but if you've got the denero then the carbon is better.