If you wanted a fun, maneuverable board, (that did not require all of your weight over the back foot to make a turn), which dimension is most important?

Let's say you start with an idea of volume, based on your weight and balance, you need to choose the other dimensions to suit (and let's stick with traditional "pumpkin-seed" shape boards - not vanguard).

Obviously the combination of width, length and thickness (and variations in shapes) defines the volume. But if you wanted a maneuverable board, would you go with a shorter board, or a narrower board, or a thinner board?

For example, the new Sunova Flow is quite thin at 4 1/8" but it is 8'10" x 31 1/8" and 120 litres - so still a bit long and wide for a 120 l board IMO. Of course there are shorter and narrower boards, but for the same volume they become thicker - which potentially makes them corkier with thicker rails.

So which dimension is most important?

Dont forget about rocker too... so for a given combination more bottom rocker is generally more maneuverable.

More width, curvier rails and less length is going to be easier to turn. In terms of thickness, I used to always go for really thin boards during my prone short board days as I much preferred the feel (and flex) of a thinner board, but it really surprises me how a great big thick boat of a SUP "actually doesn't feel too bad". I don't ride a short SUP, but my guess is that thickness is going to less of a consideration that those other factors.

As said Foam baller quicker than me I add that Not really dimensions or volume but the compilation of curves (outline , vee, tail lift, total rocker, rail shape) doing the rail line curve . Also with proper cant and toe fins placement in combination with rail line .
And the most of all thing is speed : board has to do aqua planning on tail and fins more than dragging is all rail length .
My last design of something fast and lose 7'27" 87 liters geared with K3 and bonzer fin B5 from FCS

pretty much every surfboard you will have to turn from the rear of the board, using your weight or paddle as leverage, regardless of shape and design, they have summed it up n the above but for better turns and surfing you will need to use your weight and back foot over the fins

Jarryd

As other raid, rocker and rail shape & volume distribution are the most important.

I would add that it depends on the waves:
- narrower to be able to reduce rolling latency in hollow powerful waves
- shorter for small waves (a longer board wont fit)
- thinner for clean waves

A narrow board will feel like a dog in weak waves, short one will not be worth the trouble if you have room on the wave face, too thin will be unforgiving in chop...

Select to expand quote

Jradedmondo said..
pretty much every surfboard you will have to turn from the rear of the board, using your weight or paddle as leverage, regardless of shape and design, they have summed it up n the above but for better turns and surfing you will need to use your weight and back foot over the fins

Jarryd

Not necessarily so. Coming from pre thruster single fin days I well know the pleasure of driving a turn off a rail not pivoting off a set of fins and complex tail rocker, v, concaves etc. In answer to cantSUPenough I believe a 2+1 set up and fuller out line, something like the old Skip Frye egg is a board that you don't have to turn off the tail but can surf from further up. It's a more cruisey style of surfing as seen in prone mimi mal type of board. I'm old, heavy and a bit broken and really like my Naish Mana it's plain fun and relatively manoeuvrable to surf. You don't have to surf it from the tail and it handles a wide variety of conditions. There's probably plenty of other similar shapes.

Select to expand quote

CharlieF said...

Jradedmondo said..
pretty much every surfboard you will have to turn from the rear of the board, using your weight or paddle as leverage, regardless of shape and design, they have summed it up n the above but for better turns and surfing you will need to use your weight and back foot over the fins

Jarryd

Not necessarily so. Coming from pre thruster single fin days I well know the pleasure of driving a turn off a rail not pivoting off a set of fins and complex tail rocker, v, concaves etc. In answer to cantSUPenough I believe a 2+1 set up and fuller out line, something like the old Skip Frye egg is a board that you don't have to turn off the tail but can surf from further up. It's a more cruisey style of surfing as seen in prone mimi mal type of board. I'm old, heavy and a bit broken and really like my Naish Mana it's plain fun and relatively manoeuvrable to surf. You don't have to surf it from the tail and it handles a wide variety of conditions. There's probably plenty of other similar shapes.

I pretty much agree.

Thanks for all the comments!

Regarding weight distribution, it seemed to me that the vanguard and other boards (like the Speeed) required a foot over the fins. My speeed is very stiff if I just try to use weight on the rails. My Hokua X32 is more of a traditional shape, and while weight back over the fins will make it much easier to make fast turns, it turns much easier than the speeed if I am not on the tail. My Minion goes better if my weight is back, but it is a foot shorter and thus the back of the board is closer. But I find the Minion a bit corkier, and I feel it has bigger, more rounded rails and thus it kind of rolls from side to side. The speeed has thinner rails thanks in part to the slightly domed deck, but also because it is longer, so it feels quite different.

It is all good, they are all good boards, and I am not the master of any of them.

I was looking at a few boards, including the Sunova Acid, Flow and Soul and was wondering why you would choose one over the other. For a given volume, one big variable was the thickness/length/width ratios.

Select to expand quote

colas said..


A narrow board will feel like a dog in weak waves, short one will not be worth the trouble if you have room on the wave face, too thin will be unforgiving in chop...

Why is that? Is it because it will probably have lower volume? I thought being thin would help compared to having a thicker, corkier board.

Select to expand quote

cantSUPenough said..
If you wanted a fun, maneuverable board, (that did not require all of your weight over the back foot to make a turn), which dimension is most important?

Let's say you start with an idea of volume, based on your weight and balance, you need to choose the other dimensions to suit (and let's stick with traditional "pumpkin-seed" shape boards - not vanguard).

Obviously the combination of width, length and thickness (and variations in shapes) defines the volume. But if you wanted a maneuverable board, would you go with a shorter board, or a narrower board, or a thinner board?

For example, the new Sunova Flow is quite thin at 4 1/8" but it is 8'10" x 31 1/8" and 120 litres - so still a bit long and wide for a 120 l board IMO. Of course there are shorter and narrower boards, but for the same volume they become thicker - which potentially makes them corkier with thicker rails.

So which dimension is most important?

back to your question I would say this reply as a shortcut without erasing what did I say before : the most important dimension to make a board manouvrable is the volume . It has to be at its minimum to allow to bury rail and to control fins. Because if the board is liters oversized, volume is masking the planning effect of the board on its water contact 's dims.

So cantSUPenough any board is as much good as other one , to be manoeuvrable it has just to be accurate to the own SUPer's weight. Kilo per liter

Sorry if you struggle with my english and what I do mean

Select to expand quote

Kami said..

cantSUPenough said..
If you wanted a fun, maneuverable board, (that did not require all of your weight over the back foot to make a turn), which dimension is most important?

Let's say you start with an idea of volume, based on your weight and balance, you need to choose the other dimensions to suit (and let's stick with traditional "pumpkin-seed" shape boards - not vanguard).

Obviously the combination of width, length and thickness (and variations in shapes) defines the volume. But if you wanted a maneuverable board, would you go with a shorter board, or a narrower board, or a thinner board?

For example, the new Sunova Flow is quite thin at 4 1/8" but it is 8'10" x 31 1/8" and 120 litres - so still a bit long and wide for a 120 l board IMO. Of course there are shorter and narrower boards, but for the same volume they become thicker - which potentially makes them corkier with thicker rails.

So which dimension is most important?

back to your question I would say this reply as a shortcut without erasing what did I say before : the most important dimension to make a board manouvrable is the volume . It has to be at its minimum to allow to bury rail and to control fins. Because if the board is liters oversized, volume is masking the planning effect of the board on its water contact 's dims.

So cantSUPenough any board is as much good as other one , to be manoeuvrable it has just to be accurate to the own SUPer's weight. Kilo per liter

Sorry if you struggle with my english and what I do mean

Thanks Kami - there is no problem with your English (and it is 1000 X better than my French).

What you have said is very useful. At 85 kg (but rising again ) and my current level of skill and balance I have guessed that 120 litres might be my limit, but seeing your videos I am tempted to experiment with something smaller - but it is an expensive experiment. (I would love to have a 110 litre board for those perfect days just to give it a go.)

But I have read posts about swing weight - and that is influenced by length.

And people often wonder how a wide board can be good if you are trying to string a few turns together (even though it helps with stability).

And then there is the buoyancy effect (corkiness) of a thicker board, and how narrow the rails are.

But perhaps I am overlooking the more important issue in rocker and tail shape.

I just wonder how, for example, you would ever choose between a Sunova Flow, Acid and Soul - let alone all the other brands with similar shape.

Thanks for all your comments. With your shaping experience, and the fact that you are able to ride such tiny boards, you are clearly a long way ahead of me.

Hi can'tsupenough,
I can really relate to your question, and I am on a quest of trying different boards trying to get a better handle on the variables. The last two mornings were interesting, and addressed some of your questions.
Tried an 8'3" x 32 @ 117 liters thinking that the short length and lower volume combined with all of the curve in the outline would make it great for short turns. Nope, very stable because of the width but very stiff to carve an arc and yet twitchy rail to rail; not fun.
Caught a couple of waves on the 8'11" x 31 AllWave that I have not ridden in awhile, and found that the thick rails made the board feel corky and a little out of control on head high waves.
Then went to a 9'0" x 31.5 145 liter Tabou wondering what I was doing going to a board that was longer and wider than the AllWave with about the same volume. Board was great. Very smooth, nice variety of turns, and the best roundhouses of any board I have ridden. My only explanation is that is it has thinner rails than the AllWave with a more domed deck, and the tail is much more pulled in. The taboo is the exact same width as my Starboard 8'8" x 31.5 123 liter Air Born, but it feels at least an inch narrower. My only guess is because the nose and tail are more pulled in, probably close to two inches in the tail.
The Air Born is the lowest volume board that I own, in part because it is the thinnest down the midline (even less than the 8'3"), but it is by far the most stable. I think that this is because it carries so much width into the nose and tail, which can feel like a lot to control at times.
Not a lot of clear answers here to your questions, but a lot more pieces to the puzzle. Hope some of it helps.
(PS. My favorite board of the day was my Speeed, largely because I am training myself to be in a long enough stance that I can have my back foot right back over the thrusters and my front foot right over the carry handle, a stance that I have noticed a lot of the top guys using. This allows me to quickly shift my weight from tight turns to speed trim within each turn.)

Thanks obijohn!

That information feeds perfectly into the questions I have about the shape, volume, etc.

What length is your speeed? I have the 8'10" but I am 6'3" so my legs are plenty long enough to take the stance you describe. And I guess I just have to practice getting into that stance more often - but when I do it does not "feel" right to have my feet so far apart. But if it is right, it is right.

And when my foot is over the thrusters on smaller waves I feel like I am putting the brakes on. But it maybe I just need to improve my technique.

There was a great post by dogman where he compared the nose and tail shapes of his boards with the effect achieved. The post is halfway down this page www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Stand-Up-Paddle/Review/Laguna-Bay-Dogman-model-opinions/?page=1 but his summary was:

Front end nose shapes:

1)High Performance (non catching during steep drops n turns)
2)Standard Performance ( increased stability with added surface area)
3)Hybrid Performance (nose ridable allows for reduced board length)

Rear end tail shapes.

1)Rounded Square (ultra loose)
2)Swallow (powerful hold in larger waves)
3)Round (all rounder great in fat waves)

So I guess we have to take these factors into account...

cantSUPenough, my Speeed is an 8'10" also. I completely relate to your comment about feeling like you are losing speed when your foot is over the thruster in small waves, but the stance I am working on seems to solve that problem unless the wave is really tiny and gutless. I started studying closely where a lot of the top guys have their feet, and realized that they often have their back foot back on the stomp pad and their front foot right on the handle. When I get my rear foot right on the thrusters and my front on the handle, it did feel really wide and strange at first, but the boards love it, so I am starting to get used to it and loving the performance improvement. Just as I observe in those top guys, it feels like my upper body is often out over my front foot to keep the speed up, while by back leg is flexed and loaded, ready to pump the rail. Not sure if it will work, but I am attaching a photo showing the stance that I am trying to copy. The only time that I narrow my stance now is if I move up to the nose.


webkit-fake-url://B9FF11DD-1BB7-4739-AF69-F4FC2C7C8562/jp15-sup-surf-kda-02-bilderback.jpg

Unfortunately I can't see the image.

I have just returned on a session on the speeed and tried to keep my feet where you suggested. Got some OK turns going, but still needed to get more speed up before I was happy to get my back foot that far back. The waves weren't fantastic though. But there is no doubt that when you get your position and weight right, the board becomes a lot more fun to ride

cSe..... the thing that I like most about the Speeed, is the way it carves, tight, small arc turns... with minimal effort.

I am not so much a student of shape..... but what I have said about the Speeed is "there is some special sauce in that tail"

When your foot is back near the stomper, you engage the "bump down" sharp curve in the rail line.... it is right at the side bite and forward channel.
The effect of that combination is pure magic.
It not only turns like it's on ball bearings, but it "squirts" out of each turn with noticeable acceleration.

If you ride the Speeed from the middle only, you are trying to turn a board with very parallel rails, which will be a more drawn out, down the line turn.

Look at my feet in this video..... especially from the 3:30 mark, to see the tail engaged... I am not on the stomper..... I simply place my back foot near the rail, just behind the "bump down"

The wave at 4:28 shows tail turning and mid-board speed

I think, no matter what board you get..... if you don't move back a bit on the board, you will find they all turn slowly.

Here's a good exercise to understand that.
in flat water:
place one hand on the stringer, several feet up from the tail and push down HARD. Nothing will happen.

now.... place one hand near the rail, a foot ahead of the stomper and push down hard.... the nose of the board will shoot up in the air and turn hard toward the side your hand is on.

If you put your hand near the rail, in the middle of the board and push down, the entire board will tilt to the "hand" side.... but the nose will not lift up..... meaning any turn done from that spot will only have the arc of the rail to turn on and will be a much slower turn

Lastly...."leaning" is steering your board.... not turning
turning is an act of commitment. You must commit out over the rail if you want to achieve a meaningful turn.... then add in compression and extension... and you got something!

Select to expand quote

cantSUPenough said..

Why is that? Is it because it will probably have lower volume? I thought being thin would help compared to having a thicker, corkier board.

Oops, I means mostly the trail volume in turns.
During turns, boxy rails with volume will not change too much the behavior of the bord if tripping on chop. In this way it is forgiving, in that you cab get away with not putting the board on the rail optimally. If you look at most pro boards, they have boxy rails, since they attempt rad moves, they need some "safety net" for recovery.

For free surfing, you may be OK wil falling off more, but have thin rails for a nicer rail grip feeling

Thanks very much STC and Colas. Mr. Creek - it sure looks like you really have that board dialed in.

And perhaps I should clarify my situation. I can get it turning - not Kelly Slater turning, but I do "OK". And I achieve that with my back foot back. But I do best when the wave has a bit of size and there is a bit of face to work with. I feel like I am putting the breaks on when the wave is a bit fatter and and smaller (slower). Or I feel like I am a bit of a kook with my legs too far apart - but again, that is mostly on the smaller, fatter waves.

But where this discussion started was due to my belief that with a more traditional shape board you could turn with the rails more than the tail. Sometimes when I turn the speeed I feel like I have a lot of board waving around in front of me, instead of simply having a board carving underneath me. So then I wondered about length v width v thickness. (For example, I have to get my weight back on my Hokua, but it isn't the same as the speeed.)

Again, don't get me wrong, I love the speeed. The speeed is good. And watching your video reminds me of how much fun it can be!

Hey STC. I love the little 'strolls' you go for around 4.50. I've gotta say there is something about the 'Speed' that annoys me. It looks as if you're going to catch a rail all the time. I can't recall you actually doing so, but it just looks like it is going to happen. Did you end up trying any of the L41 SIMsups as a comparison? If you have, did you take any video? Are there any guys from the 'zone' that have compared the two boards?

Hi Leroy
I have only tried a few SIMmons inspired boards and they don't suit me at all.
I have not had a go at a newer L41... some of those look interesting, because the rails and channels look to mitigate to wide/flat tail syndrome of that style board.
Kirks boards are beautiful, and I will get a shot at one someday.

The Speeed is not really similar to any of them, a "bump in" at the side bites plus nice rocker give it an entirely different approach.

I used to catch rails on the 1970's Twin Fins all the time, but its not an issue on the Speeed.
The nose looks imposing in the videos, but it never gets in the way, and I never even feel it.....till I need the nose to handle a steep drop, then it's awesome

Sure here the Speeed the looser board because of the hips or what's Bert masterly described on the video showing the Speeed on construction. Dogman laguna pointed nose got hips too and that's the key of looseness but those laguna's got pulling nose so far I remind in 80's we call that design "'needle nose concept". Even a bit of enlarged nose of the usual pointed nose SUP , they are very hard to paddle even when it's over literage at 1.5. ( don't try with crouches too)
So the Speeed fit the bill on any of inquiries you ask from a SUP, take off easy, cranky bottom turn, off the top , reentry, looseness in its all, fast and stable in wall still making easy the round house cut back due to its wide tail area.
Finally and by looking on Southcreeks's videos I feel the Speeed quite similar to my board 6'5" except for the nose length which I think Bert will do the nose's Speed shorter once customers will leave confort to gain more surfing performance than actual Speeed versus.

Maybe that's the answer - a smaller Speeed. At 85 kg (at the moment) I could consider dropping to a smaller version. I wonder how much improvement there would be by dropping to the 8'5" at 112 litres (given the investment). Anyone ridden both? Probably should just take it easy and keep having fun on my 8'10".

Hi cantSUPenough,

Interesting post. This is just my view. Get a Soul! And this is why.

I haven't ridden a Flow or a Speeed but I have studied their shapes & sizes because i am thinking of getting a Speeed at 8ft 2" at my weight: 80kgs plus/minus 5kgs, 5ft 10" tall.
Love my 8ft 3" Soul. I have just put my opinions on the forums section if you want to read it.
Putting myself in your shoes I feel the Speeed does not carve by its parallel sides. It is a board for down the line speed which means full speed straight ahead.
But this can be stopped if you are the type to be able to put your foot back far enough, (very rare for me), to be able to slow it & turn it. Which is your problem I think. You sound like my style. I like to lean into turns & expect the board to turn that way. If I want to get radical on those rare days then I will get my foot back & my Soul will get sooo loose but still maintains control. It is definitely not corky over chop which I love cause it feels like a short board. It maintains speed over flat sections & at the base of the wave. You turn & it goes the way you want.
So why not the Acid? Well generally I think it is for the younger lighter & aggressive generation that want to be aggressive & smash every turn possible for the maximum performance possible! If you chose an Acid then it will be longer.
Why not the Flow? In my opinion the Flow is the thinner version of the Soul which would suit the lighter like the females of the Soul users. Or the shorter or lighter males. If you chose a Flow, it again would be longer.
For you? Again my opinion is the Soul at 8ft 3" which is what I am currently riding at my current weight at 79kgs. But this would be my comfortable stable, static, no paddle waiting for a wave board.
At your height & weight would be the next size/ length up. You will love it!

Thanks SeaJuice - I just read your other post as well - thanks for the info.

The Soul does sound good. And that is where this started - looking at the Acid, Soul and Flow and wondering how you would choose between length, width and thickness. The 8'3" Soul would be a stretch for me at 110 l but it would be a fun (albeit expensive) challenge. But if it is "comfortable, static and easy to wait out the back" for you, it should not be impossible for me. Getting an easy board would defeat the purpose - I have the 8'8" X32.

Turning the speeed isn't that hard - it does love to go straight and fast - but as STC and others have demonstrated, you can have a lot of fun if you get way back.

Select to expand quote

cantSUPenough said..
But I do best when the wave has a bit of size and there is a bit of face to work with. I feel like I am putting the breaks on when the wave is a bit fatter and and smaller (slower).

This sounds like your board is just too long for the waves, and the tail doesnt not float you enough to push on it on weak waves.

I would advise to try a short length (7'6" or less) and wide tailed board (and wide enough for balance). Yes they will look like pigs, but what loves more crap conditions than pigs? :-) If you never tried a Simmons (with a real tail concave), this is the time...

In the sunova range it may be the Skate (but a tad too long for less than waist-high waves)

Thanks Colas,

Funny thing is; I own a 7'10" x 29" 124l Minion and love it.

I posed the question on the assumption that a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

Last night a nice fella let me have a paddle on his 8'4" x 28.5" 104 l prowave (I am 85 kg dry and hungry and 6'3"). Goodness me... I managed to paddle it for a little while until a ripple came along and knocked me off...

Select to expand quote

cantSUPenough said..
a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

On a good wave yes in sloppy crap no.

Nothing better than driving a solid bottom turn at mach speed on a big wave. Short fat boards cannot do that. The question you have to ask yourself is how often do you get to ride clean powerful double overhead + waves??

Quiver is the answer I have a Stungun and a World Wide so all bases covered.

Select to expand quote

hilly said..

cantSUPenough said..
a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

On a good wave yes in sloppy crap no.

Nothing better than driving a solid bottom turn at mach speed on a big wave. Short fat boards cannot do that. The question you have to ask yourself is how often do you get to ride clean powerful double overhead + waves??

Quiver is the answer I have a Stungun and a World Wide so all bases covered.

Good SUP quiver choice hilly that's a surfer's one
Can I say those boards are different in size but speaking back about maneuverability would be the position of the widest point

Select to expand quote

cantSUPenough said..
I posed the question on the assumption that a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

Like Hilly said. It depends on the wave. And whatever the question, a quiver is always a good solution :-)

As a side note... "Short fat boards cannot do that" - yes, they actually can (on clean faces). The paddle allow us a "stabilizer" to control hard bottom turns, and you do not have to make the "rear foot dance" all over the "dance floor" (the wide tail). It is quick, instinctive tight rail-to-rail action deep in the pocket that is the problem with volume & width.

A 6'11"x ~30~ 120 litres, not a toothpick in ponta preta:


But if you look at the whole sequences, you can see he is kind of "walking on eggs" at the top (but the wave is very close to the rocks, you want to keep a security margin when you cannot duck dive)
www.gong-galaxy.com/magazine/pics/mika-en-faking-1578/

Select to expand quote

colas said..

cantSUPenough said..
I posed the question on the assumption that a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

Like Hilly said. It depends on the wave. And whatever the question, a quiver is always a good solution :-)

As a side note... "Short fat boards cannot do that" - yes, they actually can (on clean faces). The paddle allow us a "stabilizer" to control hard bottom turns, and you do not have to make the "rear foot dance" all over the "dance floor" (the wide tail). It is quick, instinctive tight rail-to-rail action deep in the pocket that is the problem with volume & width.

A 6'11"x ~30~ 120 litres, not a toothpick in ponta preta:


But if you look at the whole sequences, you can see he is kind of "walking on eggs" at the top (but the wave is very close to the rocks, you want to keep a security margin when you cannot duck dive)
www.gong-galaxy.com/magazine/pics/mika-en-faking-1578/

Great set of photos!! And it was nice of his pre-school child to decorate his board What a great session!

Select to expand quote

hilly said..

cantSUPenough said..
a thinner, conventional shaped board was somehow better to ride than the simons/vanguard shape.

On a good wave yes in sloppy crap no.

Nothing better than driving a solid bottom turn at mach speed on a big wave. Short fat boards cannot do that. The question you have to ask yourself is how often do you get to ride clean powerful double overhead + waves??

Quiver is the answer I have a Stungun and a World Wide so all bases covered.

Not nearly often enough!!

You are absolutely right. 99.5% of the time I am in fat, fun-sized waves... In reality my main three boards really do have me covered for anything I am likely to surf in. And the other reality is that the boards are not limiting what happens on the wave - I am...