Last year I reviewed the 2013 Starboard High Aspect - www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Stand-Up-Paddle/Review/2013-Starboard-High-Aspect-Foil-Paddle/

This is a great paddle, but was due for a few updates for 2014. The blade angle was too great at 13 degrees and the blade stiffness was quite flexible. I was very excited to hear that the 2014 model was backed off to a 10 degree blade angle, the blade stiffness was also addressed. Both these factors in the 2013 paddle meant the blade 'washed out' in the second half of the stroke - requiring greater shaft angle forward to counteract - easy technique modification.

I had the 550cm2 blade size from 2013, and went for the large 545cm2 2014 HA - as the blade size written on the paddle matched up. Now I'm still not sure how Starboard measure their blade size, but this blade did not feel anything like my 2013 HA. I felt like I pulled through the water and couldn't power up in the 2nd half, which was the great thing about this type of blade - as you went deep, it powered up (except the excessive blade angle - explained earlier). I persisted for a couple of weeks, but couldn't find my mojo with it.

I recently had the opportunity to try the XL - 625cm2, technically 75cm2 bigger then the 550. Starboard have 4 blade sizes in their range - small, medium, large and extra large. The width stays the same at 16cm, only the length changes from each size. I wasn't sure if this was a great progression, as 16cm seems very narrow. In saying that I had noticed alot of paddlers seemed to be going very well with the large and medium blades. Being a large guy, I have always preferred a slightly larger blade, which is why i went the 550 last year. One session with the 2014 XL HA, I had my mojo back and suddenly the range all made sense......with the exception of the way they are sized.

I have traced out a comparison of the area difference between the 2013 550cm2 and 2014 625cm2 blades. As you can see below, there doesn't really seem to be much area change once you take off the wings and add that area to the bottom. Essentially the blades are identical at the top of the blade. There definitely not 75cm2 worth.














I really rate the High Aspect Design and Starboard have ultimately nailed it here - low load catch, deep power up and easy lateral release with the slim blade (pretty well one of the slimest blades on the market as I can see). It works for me...for those that may have tried this paddle and felt it didn't work. Try the next size up.

Note - Yep, I'm a starboard team rider, so take my review with a grain of sea salt if you wish. This is directed at the paddlers that are into High Aspect paddles and may have been confused (as I was) on the 2014 sizing. Hope this helps

Just the review I was looking for!
(Posted a topic a few weeks ago asking if anyone had any experience with both 2013 & 2014 HA)
Thanks!

I got the HA2014-L and love it.Its faster going in and out and through the water as my QB Magic90.Awesome

Select to expand quote

Jeroensurf said...
I got the HA2014-L and love it.Its faster going in and out and through the water as my QB Magic90.Awesome

I have a QB 100sqi kanaha - also a lovely paddle. The blade area is similar in feel to the XL 2014 HA. So the QB90 would correlate to the large HA.

Couple of corrections:
The large 2014 High Aspect I originally had is 585cm2 (not 545cm2 - that is the medium)

The 2014 HA range is - XS, S, M, L and XL

I didn't measure the area difference between the 2014 large (585) and 2014 extra large (625), but there is no reason suspect that this incorrect. I have just been told that the method of measuring area changed from 2013 to 2014 - which is what is evident here.

In summary I would recommend *:
2013 600 = 2014 nothing (this blade was too big last year)
2013 550 = 2014 XL ~100sqi
2013 500 = 2014 L ~ 90 sqi
2013 450 = 2014 M ~ 80 sqi?

* this is different to the Starboard catalogue values. All based off feel and the above direct comparison in terms of area.

Another great review Greg. I had the 2013 small blade which is far and away the best paddle I've ever used, and so I updated to the 2014 small when it became available. Big mistake. It is too gutless. But I had the opportunity to use a borrowed 2014 large at Supfest and I think it's definitely on par with the 2013 small in many ways, and an improvement in others. On the other hand, the person I borrowed the 2014 large from was moving up from a 2013 medium so he's a little disappointed - he needs the XL. Seems like the rule of thumb is you have to jump up 2 sizes from 2013 to 2014.

Ok, the paper cutouts and the square cm's are driving me nuts:) So to paraphrase, the 2013 and/or the 2014 blade sizes given are incorrect and/or the higher aspect of the 2014 has less bottom end? Is this just the case with higher aspect paddles? I just picked up my first high(er) aspect paddle, a 91si V Drive. Way more power then my 83si Flyweights, but thinking back to my previous 90si Kanaha, it's quicker with more pop, but I don't think it's as rock solid(paddle stuck in a rock feeling) as the Kanaha was.

Select to expand quote

PTWoody said...
Seems like the rule of thumb is you have to jump up 2 sizes from 2013 to 2014.

Thanks PT. Yes at least one size up. Although the width doesn't change through the range, that Extra depth on the bottom makes a big difference.

According the 2013 Starboard website, the High Aspect 550 = 624 sq. cm / 96.7 sq. in, clearly not what it shows on your paddle. The 600 = 666 sq. cm and the 500 = 586 sq. cm. Hats off to the devilish mastermind that devised this mind twister. Fooled everyone including whoever spec'd the wrong decals. Bet you guys thought you loved tiny paddles.

Thanks Baddog
That clears up and confirms what I felt and the comparitive true area between the 2013 & 2014 blades. The sizing last year didn't make sense - but I wasn't aware that the catalogue had those different numbers on it - all a bit of a mystery!?