thanks for your answer! i can't move the foil but i have in board footstrap position. I will try that because i want to understand/feel the benefit of the uj back!

UJ back also tends to suit a shorter fuselage, closer to a winger in terms of setup.
I also find slogging easier with the UJ back but I can't slog in the straps on my board.

What I'd like to see are boards with a bit of length behind the foil mount like the new downwind foil boards being designed.

Sweet board Simon and neat idea with the compact stance with mast foot positioning.

Could Mark share any information on the board construction to get a nice light strong foil board?

I have my 6" thick 2lbs/ft3 eps blank glued up for my 166cm x 71cm x 5" thick ~115L. Going for a shape similar to the horue femto 115L. How does this sound for my glassing schedule; 2 layers 6oz fiberglass top and bottom, 10cm wide carbon tape up the center top and bottom with carbon patch over bottom half of board(over foil box+ 3x6oz patches). No vacuum bag just simple hand layup surfboard style , hopefully I can keep her under 20lbs.

Select to expand quote

CAN17 said..
Sweet board Simon and neat idea with the compact stance with mast foot positioning.

Could Mark share any information on the board construction to get a nice light strong foil board?

I have my 6" thick 2lbs/ft3 eps blank glued up for my 166cm x 71cm x 5" thick ~115L. Going for a shape similar to the horue femto 115L. How does this sound for my glassing schedule; 2 layers 6oz fiberglass top and bottom, 10cm wide carbon tape up the center top and bottom with carbon patch over bottom half of board(over foil box+ 3x6oz patches). No vacuum bag just simple hand layup surfboard style , hopefully I can keep her under 20lbs.

With the glassing schedule you are thinking of you might look up an older video about the way Jimmy Lewis was glassing some of his custom SUP,s he called it the poor man's vacuum bag the result was a lighter board. Don't know what epoxy your thinking ,he was using the clear surfboard type like RR resin research.

Feeling pretty comfortable on the new board now


Gave Tacking a go for miamiwindsurfe, think I'll stick to gybing

Anything that worked better than expected? Any changes you'd make for v.2?

Select to expand quote

2keen said..
Gave Tacking a go for miamiwindsurfe, think I'll stick to gybing

You almost made it

Select to expand quote

Paducah said..
Anything that worked better than expected? Any changes you'd make for v.2?

I think the flat bottom with hard rails worked better than expected, no sticking just pops straight up. I discussed it with others prior to build and we concluded there was no reason it wouldn't work but until I actually tried it I wasn't sure.
There is nothing I would change, very happy with it.
Sure it's my first custom but I spent hundreds of hours sailing Slingshots: Wizard 125, Wizard 105, Wizard 114 and Freestyle 87 and this board takes what I loved from those so it's like a v5
Credit to Mark again for nailing the production, What I wanted was clear in my mind and he produced it exactly

Select to expand quote

2keen said..

Paducah said..
Anything that worked better than expected? Any changes you'd make for v.2?

I think the flat bottom with hard rails worked better than expected, no sticking just pops straight up. I discussed it with others prior to build and we concluded there was no reason it wouldn't work but until I actually tried it I wasn't sure.
There is nothing I would change, very happy with it.
Sure it's my first custom but I spent hundreds of hours sailing Slingshots: Wizard 125, Wizard 105, Wizard 114 and Freestyle 87 and this board takes what I loved from those so it's like a v5
Credit to Mark again for nailing the production, What I wanted was clear in my mind and he produced it exactly

Simon I really like the look of the rail chime into sharp rail the transition looks good. kinda like the slingshot wizard did you start the transition from chime to square around the front foot strap? Just shaped the rocker on my 166x71x5". Going to put some chimes in and maybe bit of double concave like the femto 115. Going to keep it chunky no cutouts and send the volume

Select to expand quote

CAN17 said..

2keen said..

Paducah said..
Anything that worked better than expected? Any changes you'd make for v.2?

I think the flat bottom with hard rails worked better than expected, no sticking just pops straight up. I discussed it with others prior to build and we concluded there was no reason it wouldn't work but until I actually tried it I wasn't sure.
There is nothing I would change, very happy with it.
Sure it's my first custom but I spent hundreds of hours sailing Slingshots: Wizard 125, Wizard 105, Wizard 114 and Freestyle 87 and this board takes what I loved from those so it's like a v5
Credit to Mark again for nailing the production, What I wanted was clear in my mind and he produced it exactly

Simon I really like the look of the rail chime into sharp rail the transition looks good. kinda like the slingshot wizard did you start the transition from chime to square around the front foot strap? Just shaped the rocker on my 166x71x5". Going to put some chimes in and maybe bit of double concave like the femto 115. Going to keep it chunky no cutouts and send the volume

Hi Connor,
Well done for having a go at your own board.
The chines on mine are large at the front and gradually fade to nothing at 350mm from the tail.
166 is a touch shorter than mine but 71 is wider, what volume are you hoping for?

Select to expand quote

2keen said..

CAN17 said..

2keen said..

Paducah said..
Anything that worked better than expected? Any changes you'd make for v.2?

I think the flat bottom with hard rails worked better than expected, no sticking just pops straight up. I discussed it with others prior to build and we concluded there was no reason it wouldn't work but until I actually tried it I wasn't sure.
There is nothing I would change, very happy with it.
Sure it's my first custom but I spent hundreds of hours sailing Slingshots: Wizard 125, Wizard 105, Wizard 114 and Freestyle 87 and this board takes what I loved from those so it's like a v5
Credit to Mark again for nailing the production, What I wanted was clear in my mind and he produced it exactly

Simon I really like the look of the rail chime into sharp rail the transition looks good. kinda like the slingshot wizard did you start the transition from chime to square around the front foot strap? Just shaped the rocker on my 166x71x5". Going to put some chimes in and maybe bit of double concave like the femto 115. Going to keep it chunky no cutouts and send the volume

Hi Connor,
Well done for having a go at your own board.
The chines on mine are large at the front and gradually fade to nothing at 350mm from the tail.
166 is a touch shorter than mine but 71 is wider, what volume are you hoping for?

Cool thanks!
I want at least 115L. If it's a bit more I'd be fine with that, light wind board. I want to eventually make a shorty for high wind about 4.5ft long and 80-90L. That 4'2 custom flakka got me thinking. Looks so fun

Looks good.

Select to expand quote

2keen said..







Decided it was time to take what I've learnt from foil boards and put it into a custom.
I wanted a board with low swing weight but enough volume to uphaul. I wanted volume under my foot straps, so straps forward which means foil forward while at the same time the ability to move the UJ back towards my front straps.
"Mark Australia" has been building bulletproof custom wave boards for years so I went to him with pages of information
The result is everything I could have dreamed it would be.
170 x 66 x 14 ,110 litres , 8 kgs with straps
A board this short requires precision technique to pop it up onto the foil but it releases cleanly without feeling "sticky"
It is a carving machine, super low swing weight with the ability to schlog home if the wind drops.
Well done Mark

Very nice indeed. I am in the process on build myslef a second board; my first one is 210 x 76 x 130ish liters which behaves quite well in flight but having very deep double concaves on the front it sticks a bit when getting to fly, so not the fastest there. Moreover when trying to go upwind banking the board I tend to drop, I put tracks to move the foil and do so movin it forward for more power, but would need more leverage on the rear, I feel I need to put mu feet on the rail to gain someting but not enough. the board is only 48 cm large on the stern, nowadays even smaller boards like the wizard 114 are larger on the back (around 60 cm if I am not mistaken.

I would like to go narrower (around 70 cm max), shorter (around 190 cm), and give the board more volume on the back and more width to go upwind better. Volume seem not to add weight nor impact on manoeuverability once in the air so I would stay around 120 liters, but moving everything further back (done so even on my first design). On the bottom I would resenble your design, monoconcave into flat with bevels on the fron t and sharp, vertical rails on the back from front straps.

this should get up on to the foil earlier, I hope will be a good compromise for manouverability and straight line performances expecially upwind.

foilwise I would like to use 800 and 1000 front wings middle aspect ratio (fanatic flow), and sails wise I would go from 6.7 (very light wind), to 4.0 ish the change to the 800 wing instead of going smaller with sail.

I am 75 kg good windsurfer and windfoiler (nailing jibes at the moment), I ride in Italy so no swell here, messy wind driven wave, nice to ride them nevertheless.

What do you think about? Is my plan sound in your opinion?

cheers

Edoardo

Select to expand quote

dimacced said..

2keen said..







Decided it was time to take what I've learnt from foil boards and put it into a custom.
I wanted a board with low swing weight but enough volume to uphaul. I wanted volume under my foot straps, so straps forward which means foil forward while at the same time the ability to move the UJ back towards my front straps.
"Mark Australia" has been building bulletproof custom wave boards for years so I went to him with pages of information
The result is everything I could have dreamed it would be.
170 x 66 x 14 ,110 litres , 8 kgs with straps
A board this short requires precision technique to pop it up onto the foil but it releases cleanly without feeling "sticky"
It is a carving machine, super low swing weight with the ability to schlog home if the wind drops.
Well done Mark

Very nice indeed. I am in the process on build myslef a second board; my first one is 210 x 76 x 130ish liters which behaves quite well in flight but having very deep double concaves on the front it sticks a bit when getting to fly, so not the fastest there. Moreover when trying to go upwind banking the board I tend to drop, I put tracks to move the foil and do so movin it forward for more power, but would need more leverage on the rear, I feel I need to put mu feet on the rail to gain someting but not enough. the board is only 48 cm large on the stern, nowadays even smaller boards like the wizard 114 are larger on the back (around 60 cm if I am not mistaken.

I would like to go narrower (around 70 cm max), shorter (around 190 cm), and give the board more volume on the back and more width to go upwind better. Volume seem not to add weight nor impact on manoeuverability once in the air so I would stay around 120 liters, but moving everything further back (done so even on my first design). On the bottom I would resenble your design, monoconcave into flat with bevels on the fron t and sharp, vertical rails on the back from front straps.

this should get up on to the foil earlier, I hope will be a good compromise for manouverability and straight line performances expecially upwind.

foilwise I would like to use 800 and 1000 front wings middle aspect ratio (fanatic flow), and sails wise I would go from 6.7 (very light wind), to 4.0 ish the change to the 800 wing instead of going smaller with sail.

I am 75 kg good windsurfer and windfoiler (nailing jibes at the moment), I ride in Italy so no swell here, messy wind driven wave, nice to ride them nevertheless.

What do you think about? Is my plan sound in your opinion?

cheers

Edoardo

Hi Edoardo,

Sounds like you know exactly what you are doing.
I think your proposed 190 x 70 @ 120 litres sounds like a safe bet, as you said some volume and width in the back. I agree the bottom shape you describe should pop up cleanly.You mentioned the Wizard 114, it sounds spot on for the conditions you describe. See if you can get hold of a demo to compare it to your current board.

Let us know how you go

Select to expand quote

2keen said..

dimacced said..

2keen said..







Decided it was time to take what I've learnt from foil boards and put it into a custom.
I wanted a board with low swing weight but enough volume to uphaul. I wanted volume under my foot straps, so straps forward which means foil forward while at the same time the ability to move the UJ back towards my front straps.
"Mark Australia" has been building bulletproof custom wave boards for years so I went to him with pages of information
The result is everything I could have dreamed it would be.
170 x 66 x 14 ,110 litres , 8 kgs with straps
A board this short requires precision technique to pop it up onto the foil but it releases cleanly without feeling "sticky"
It is a carving machine, super low swing weight with the ability to schlog home if the wind drops.
Well done Mark

Very nice indeed. I am in the process on build myslef a second board; my first one is 210 x 76 x 130ish liters which behaves quite well in flight but having very deep double concaves on the front it sticks a bit when getting to fly, so not the fastest there. Moreover when trying to go upwind banking the board I tend to drop, I put tracks to move the foil and do so movin it forward for more power, but would need more leverage on the rear, I feel I need to put mu feet on the rail to gain someting but not enough. the board is only 48 cm large on the stern, nowadays even smaller boards like the wizard 114 are larger on the back (around 60 cm if I am not mistaken.

I would like to go narrower (around 70 cm max), shorter (around 190 cm), and give the board more volume on the back and more width to go upwind better. Volume seem not to add weight nor impact on manoeuverability once in the air so I would stay around 120 liters, but moving everything further back (done so even on my first design). On the bottom I would resenble your design, monoconcave into flat with bevels on the fron t and sharp, vertical rails on the back from front straps.

this should get up on to the foil earlier, I hope will be a good compromise for manouverability and straight line performances expecially upwind.

foilwise I would like to use 800 and 1000 front wings middle aspect ratio (fanatic flow), and sails wise I would go from 6.7 (very light wind), to 4.0 ish the change to the 800 wing instead of going smaller with sail.

I am 75 kg good windsurfer and windfoiler (nailing jibes at the moment), I ride in Italy so no swell here, messy wind driven wave, nice to ride them nevertheless.

What do you think about? Is my plan sound in your opinion?

cheers

Edoardo

Hi Edoardo,

Sounds like you know exactly what you are doing.
I think your proposed 190 x 70 @ 120 litres sounds like a safe bet, as you said some volume and width in the back. I agree the bottom shape you describe should pop up cleanly.You mentioned the Wizard 114, it sounds spot on for the conditions you describe. See if you can get hold of a demo to compare it to your current board.

Let us know how you go

Thank you for your support. I would have liked to test the wizard 114, not so Easy here in Italy, probably on Garda lake...what worries me about the wizard Is
Uphauling, slogghing and max sale size. We have often conditions when Wind drops suddenly, and was reported Is not so Easy on this board expecially on messy Sea state a, uphauling Is a mast since so often I get out with sail sizes I cannot waterstart with. Would Luke a board with tiny bit volume and Little more nose volume such has the starboard foilX for instance. On max sail size SS rider told me 5.7 would be the max ti sail comfortably...bigger than that would be gymnastic for my skill level :-)

Select to expand quote

aeroegnr said..

Paducah said..
I thought the mast track back looked aggressive - although very familiar with the Balz video - but then saw the set up on the Starboard FoilX in the Cookie jibe video that came out a few weeks back and posted on another thread. Plus a few shots of new combo boards I've seen lately. In that context, it would behoove me to try moving the mast foot back and seeing where it leads me.

fwiw, my 195cm board doesn't seem like it would gain anything by being shorter but I definitely ascribe to the notion that if something isn't useful, trim it away. With the mast track further back and all the volume under the rider, more nose, even if it isn't felt, isn't really providing much benefit so certainly makes sense to consider eliminating it. It's riders like 2keen who are pushing the boundaries that help inform the rest of us what is beneficial in a board design.

Yes the FoilX has the mast track pretty far back compared to fin/hybrid/race foil and freeride boards. I looked at the starboard freeride foil board that someone else had out this weekend and it was similar to my Blast's.

The comparison with race Gear Is Fair, with bigger sails COE to be almost in the same Place you Need to move UJ Fw. The comparison with the blast from the picture do not seem Fair, if you properly align straps positions you Will notice the UJ box Is almost 10 cm back on the starboard. I rode the blast on a foil...doable but not optimal...too much fwd everything on top of the board vs foil position, and lacking volume on tail as any windsurf board vs windfoil ones. It gets on Flight later, you Need much more sail and on the Flight you lack width on the back foot.

Select to expand quote

dimacced said..

aeroegnr said..

Paducah said..
I thought the mast track back looked aggressive - although very familiar with the Balz video - but then saw the set up on the Starboard FoilX in the Cookie jibe video that came out a few weeks back and posted on another thread. Plus a few shots of new combo boards I've seen lately. In that context, it would behoove me to try moving the mast foot back and seeing where it leads me.

fwiw, my 195cm board doesn't seem like it would gain anything by being shorter but I definitely ascribe to the notion that if something isn't useful, trim it away. With the mast track further back and all the volume under the rider, more nose, even if it isn't felt, isn't really providing much benefit so certainly makes sense to consider eliminating it. It's riders like 2keen who are pushing the boundaries that help inform the rest of us what is beneficial in a board design.

Yes the FoilX has the mast track pretty far back compared to fin/hybrid/race foil and freeride boards. I looked at the starboard freeride foil board that someone else had out this weekend and it was similar to my Blast's.

The comparison with race Gear Is Fair, with bigger sails COE to be almost in the same Place you Need to move UJ Fw. The comparison with the blast from the picture do not seem Fair, if you properly align straps positions you Will notice the UJ box Is almost 10 cm back on the starboard. I rode the blast on a foil...doable but not optimal...too much fwd everything on top of the board vs foil position, and lacking volume on tail as any windsurf board vs windfoil ones. It gets on Flight later, you Need much more sail and on the Flight you lack width on the back foot.

Yes agreed. The Blast was great to learn on but the tail volume and width was noticeable after riding foil only boards and coming back. And the wide strap setting I had for the Blast because it works great on fins is not great for freeride foiling.

Select to expand quote

r3st0ck said..

Paducah said..

r3st0ck said..
... i ride a 132cm / 4'3 board.

You can't say something like that and not include pics.

your right Paducah 75lt,132x61cm, 5kg
there are some more pictures and videos on my insta: www.instagram.com/r3st0ck/

Hello r3St0ck, I see all of you making your own board or even designing but then letting pro making it, doing flat decks for your board. I assume not to be an issue related to craftmanship, since Flikka or any other pro shaper can make domed deck with no problem.
Is there any reason why you prefer a flat deck rather than a slightly domed one? entry and exit from footstraps isn't more difficult with a totally flat deck?

Just curious to know, I actually may save myself a lot of time doing a domed deck if this is of no added value.

thank you

Edoardo

hi edoardo
my goal was to get maximum volume into the boardsize and keep the weight as low as possible. I didn't use any cut-outs or special cover shapes for this reason. keep it simple

Select to expand quote

dimacced said..

r3st0ck said..

Paducah said..

r3st0ck said..
... i ride a 132cm / 4'3 board.

You can't say something like that and not include pics.

your right Paducah 75lt,132x61cm, 5kg
there are some more pictures and videos on my insta: www.instagram.com/r3st0ck/

Hello r3St0ck, I see all of you making your own board or even designing but then letting pro making it, doing flat decks for your board. I assume not to be an issue related to craftmanship, since Flikka or any other pro shaper can make domed deck with no problem.
Is there any reason why you prefer a flat deck rather than a slightly domed one? entry and exit from footstraps isn't more difficult with a totally flat deck?

Just curious to know, I actually may save myself a lot of time doing a domed deck if this is of no added value.

thank you

Edoardo

For foiling you want flat or possibly even concave, not domed.

Edoardo,
I agree with the others comments
Maximise volume and a flat deck suits foiling, certainly no harder to enter and exit foot straps.

Select to expand quote

2keen said..

Feeling pretty comfortable on the new board now


Gave Tacking a go for miamiwindsurfe, think I'll stick to gybing

Eli Tack may be a nice option too, some do it flying as well!

Select to expand quote

2keen said..
Edoardo,
I agree with the others comments
Maximise volume and a flat deck suits foiling, certainly no harder to enter and exit foot straps.

Thank you 2keen, I noticed you got both the SS wizard and freestyle, when designing your board you made It with a narrow tail instead of One similar to the wizard. Don't you miss some width to go upwind or for Speed?

Select to expand quote

dimacced said..

2keen said..
Edoardo,
I agree with the others comments
Maximise volume and a flat deck suits foiling, certainly no harder to enter and exit foot straps.

Thank you 2keen, I noticed you got both the SS wizard and freestyle, when designing your board you made It with a narrow tail instead of One similar to the wizard. Don't you miss some width to go upwind or for Speed?

The width is still where I need it. When gybing or sailing upwind my back foot is on the rail where the board is 66cm wide( obviously back foot not in the strap)
This board was not made for speed, it's all about manoeuvrability

This is my 5'4 x 70cm x 5" thick. Used a flat deck also and no cutouts. Made sure to sand the square rails sharp so they dig into the water when pumping giving grip and easy water release. It is probably closer to 130L at a guess.
Interesting the response from Mr slingshot about cutouts. "With cutouts it planes early but is too powerful to force early takeoff. Cutouts allow easy planing and controlled early takeoff" this was in regards to his 4'2 bobba windfoil board with massive steps.

Select to expand quote

CAN17 said..
This is my 5'4 x 70cm x 5" thick. Used a flat deck also and no cutouts. Made sure to sand the square rails sharp so they dig into the water when pumping giving grip and easy water release. It is probably closer to 130L at a guess.
Interesting the response from Mr slingshot about cutouts. "With cutouts it planes early but is too powerful to force early takeoff. Cutouts allow easy planing and controlled early takeoff" this was in regards to his 4'2 bobba windfoil board with massive steps.

Hello CAN17, frankly speeking I struggle with cutouts concept; while I understand their role in trimming the board and reducing wetted surface on windsurf board at High Speed, I do not understand why they should promoter early lift on the foil when we get foiling before even planing.to me the board in the very early phases of acceleration has more drag with cutouts prior to water realease on their step in pre- planing conditions...really do not understand ...It seems a lot of marketing going on there. Race windfoil I may understand, they get on the foil After planing and are very large...but free ride... don't really buy it.
On motorboatds design, steps work well in certain range of speed and for sure the do not work in preplanning condition, in that phase you need more power than without steps in the hull.
The argument related to cutouts role when touching down, I tend to buy it , we are at planing speed on the air and suddenly we touch so the less the wetted surface, the less friction, and drag, though this happenas at the expence of early lift off to my understanding...my first board I included cutouts, on my new one I probably will not and do something similar to yours, totally flat. Please let me know how it goes when you finally get on the water.

thanks

Edoardo

Select to expand quote

2keen said..

dimacced said..

2keen said..







Decided it was time to take what I've learnt from foil boards and put it into a custom.
I wanted a board with low swing weight but enough volume to uphaul. I wanted volume under my foot straps, so straps forward which means foil forward while at the same time the ability to move the UJ back towards my front straps.
"Mark Australia" has been building bulletproof custom wave boards for years so I went to him with pages of information
The result is everything I could have dreamed it would be.
170 x 66 x 14 ,110 litres , 8 kgs with straps
A board this short requires precision technique to pop it up onto the foil but it releases cleanly without feeling "sticky"
It is a carving machine, super low swing weight with the ability to schlog home if the wind drops.
Well done Mark

Very nice indeed. I am in the process on build myslef a second board; my first one is 210 x 76 x 130ish liters which behaves quite well in flight but having very deep double concaves on the front it sticks a bit when getting to fly, so not the fastest there. Moreover when trying to go upwind banking the board I tend to drop, I put tracks to move the foil and do so movin it forward for more power, but would need more leverage on the rear, I feel I need to put mu feet on the rail to gain someting but not enough. the board is only 48 cm large on the stern, nowadays even smaller boards like the wizard 114 are larger on the back (around 60 cm if I am not mistaken.

I would like to go narrower (around 70 cm max), shorter (around 190 cm), and give the board more volume on the back and more width to go upwind better. Volume seem not to add weight nor impact on manoeuverability once in the air so I would stay around 120 liters, but moving everything further back (done so even on my first design). On the bottom I would resenble your design, monoconcave into flat with bevels on the fron t and sharp, vertical rails on the back from front straps.

this should get up on to the foil earlier, I hope will be a good compromise for manouverability and straight line performances expecially upwind.

foilwise I would like to use 800 and 1000 front wings middle aspect ratio (fanatic flow), and sails wise I would go from 6.7 (very light wind), to 4.0 ish the change to the 800 wing instead of going smaller with sail.

I am 75 kg good windsurfer and windfoiler (nailing jibes at the moment), I ride in Italy so no swell here, messy wind driven wave, nice to ride them nevertheless.

What do you think about? Is my plan sound in your opinion?

cheers

Edoardo

Hi Edoardo,

Sounds like you know exactly what you are doing.
I think your proposed 190 x 70 @ 120 litres sounds like a safe bet, as you said some volume and width in the back. I agree the bottom shape you describe should pop up cleanly.You mentioned the Wizard 114, it sounds spot on for the conditions you describe. See if you can get hold of a demo to compare it to your current board.

Let us know how you go

I will for sure let you know. I appreciate a lot sharing info with others that have experience, windfoiling is so in the infancy that will for sure evolve, but not in the official market I am afraid, since it tends to focus more on wingfoiling...more money flowing there, windfoiling is too much of a niche.
Meanwhile I share some pictures (no video available sorry) of my board and some construction phases.

2keen
Good job. Nice board specially if it has all your needs. Regarding mast track position, why not just use the 16' foil tracks as a mast track.?
Thanks
Ignacio

Select to expand quote

utcminusfour said..

boardsurfr said..
This whole discussions reminds me very much of the "smaller is better" trend in windsurfing maybe a couple of decades ago. Sure, the pictures of world class wave sailor in Hawaii were exciting. But the effect was that any board large enough to float you was "uncool", as was any sail 6 m or larger. So many people at regular spots simply ended sitting up on the beach waiting for wind, and many got frustrated and gave up on windsurfing completely.

Some of the trends in windfoil gear seem to follow a similar trend - promoting design changes that benefit a small, but vocal and highly visible group of very skilled experts. The "mast foot closer to the straps" idea mimics what we've seen in freestyle windsurf boards. Fantastic for PWA and EFPT competitors doing double and triple "power" moves. But for more average sailors, what was once a fantastic multi-use board (the ~ 2012 Skate 110) has now become an expert-only board. But at least Fanatic has bucked some of the trends in other products, like the rather long Blasts for windsurfing, and much-loved (but not flashy) Stingrays for windfoiling.

As someone has predicted here a while ago, the vast majority of windfoilers for whom longer board length translates to "excessive swing weight" have transitioned to winging, which gets rid of the "mast foot" and "excessive swing weight" problems completely. I have yet to see a windfoiler who matches the carving abilities of a decent winger, and the "wings are slower" argument is becoming a thing of the past as winger's skills improve and they transition to high aspect foils.

Winging can exceed all performance metrics relative to windfoiling and I still won't switch. I am fascinated by this new discipline and want to be the best windfoiler I can be.

Bringing the foil and sail closer together can make windfoiling easier in some ways.
It is a seperate detail from board length and volume so having a compressed geometry does not mandate a tiny board.

I ride a board that is 7' and 143 liters. With the foil placed forward and the sail moved aft it is very well mannered uphauling and in displacement mode.
I have a choice in how close the foil and sail are to each other. As I have shrunk that distance (now at 24"- 610mm uni to front bolt) the turning, carving, take off and upwind performance has increased. It is also easier to control the pitch as the sail loads change. So I have a very user friendly set up that takes off early and can turn fast and hard. Yes it took some adjusting too.

Simons board is actually conservative for his skill level, he can uphaul it and slog it in if the wind dies. I think Simons carving abilities are above the average wingers.

I get your point boardsurfr. The smaller is better mentatlity of windsurfing drove me away years ago, windfoiling brought me back.

I think these developments discussed here can be used to make windfoiling more fun for the average Joe, if they are applied to a higher volume board. I want to learn from the best and apply what is relevant to create user friendly gear.

All the research efforts are going into winging. If we don't experiment and create the gear we want, it may not happen.

Cheers to the trail blazers!

Hi utcminusfour, I could 't agree more, if we don't develop It May not happen, IQ foiling Is not interesting none of US, we Need to find our route, Exchanging info along the journey. Cheers
Edoardo

Select to expand quote

isandoval said..
2keen
Good job. Nice board specially if it has all your needs. Regarding mast track position, why not just use the 16' foil tracks as a mast track.?
Thanks
Ignacio

Hi Ignacio,

The different foils I use need mounting in different positions so adjustability is essential.
A foil mast which has securing bolts 8inches apart needs tracks 16inches to get 8 inches of adjustment

I also really like how 16 inch tracks distribute the load of the foil over a large area.

My board has an 8 inch mast track which regardless of the foil I'm using or the sail (from 3.4 to 5.9) I secure the UJ in the same spot so 16 inches of adjustment is not an advantage.

Cheers