I got a new short foil board a couple of weeks ago, and noticed some nose damage today during the 4th session on the board (with 2 of them being mostly slog practice). This must have happened during the one breach - nose dive crash today, which was pretty un-spectacular. I did not even check the nose afterwards, even though the board is cheap SUP-style construction (no sandwich). Really not a big crash.

It would not have been a big deal to just fix the nose, either. But when I peeled back some of the damage to see if the board needs drying first, I noticed an area that did not seem to have any fiberglass under the paint:

The yellow-brown stuff seems to be just filler without any glass, and crumbles quite easily. Most of the stuff around it has glass and none of the filler.

I've contacted the store where I bought the board 2 weeks ago, but have not heard back yet. Based on past experience, it's quite possible that this will lead nowhere.

My question: is this indeed a construction issue? Or should I just ignore it, repair the damage, and hope for the best? I did buy the board to learn wing foiling, where damage in crashes should be no issue, but I'd like to use it with a rig, too. But I wonder what would happen in a bigger crash.

No glass even on a single skin sup seems pretty dodgy to me, so dodgy it would be hard to believe. Are there any other areas that are soft or is this an isolated section?

Select to expand quote

thedoor said..
Are there any other areas that are soft or is this an isolated section?

That is the question! The board is brand new and shiny - probably the shiniest board I have ever owned. The top layer clear coat alone looks quite hard - obviously not hard enough for masts falling on it. I'm not sure I would have felt that this area is soft before the damage. I don't usually touch new boards all over to look for soft spots, but may have to make an exception with this one now.

Mike (Decrepit) thinks it might be a case of "sanding through" that was just filled up with filler before painting. It that's the case and this is the only spot, I can probably live with it. Still weird, though. When building a board by hand, I'd still expect a couple of layers on the rails, from top and bottom overlap, even with just a single layer glass construction. But this one is "Made in China", and they may have minimized the use of expensive glass.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..

thedoor said..
Are there any other areas that are soft or is this an isolated section?

That is the question! The board is brand new and shiny - probably the shiniest board I have ever owned. The top layer clear coat alone looks quite hard - obviously not hard enough for masts falling on it. I'm not sure I would have felt that this area is soft before the damage. I don't usually touch new boards all over to look for soft spots, but may have to make an exception with this one now.

Mike (Decrepit) thinks it might be a case of "sanding through" that was just filled up with filler before painting. It that's the case and this is the only spot, I can probably live with it. Still weird, though. When building a board by hand, I'd still expect a couple of layers on the rails, from top and bottom overlap, even with just a single layer glass construction. But this one is "Made in China", and they may have minimized the use of expensive glass.

That sanding through theory sounds reasonable, and not super troublesome I guess

We often do get what we pay for I guess.

Bummer for sure.
I wonder...the only China made board I know is from the new Kinetic factory, which has a first year bad construction history, but got good their second thru 4th years.
Still, Monday and Friday boards, production deadlines, and worker biorythums, account for lemons from almost every market.
That said, a mast slamming the nose of a board DOES account for thousands of nose jobs...separations, splits, cracks, dings, and dents

Select to expand quote

thedoor said..
We often do get what we pay for I guess.

True enough. Funny thing is, I would not have minded at all to pay more, but one board I wanted was not available in the US, and another board I considered would have been great for windfoiling, but clearly was not designed for winging (track boxes all the way back, padding only at the foot strap positions).

Maybe I'll end up making my own. My wife likes the idea that I make a small board for winging for her, and the cost for a simple prototype-kind of board are around $350-$400. The quality should be at least as good as the $1000 board, and probably better (except for the art work). If that goes well, I might just make a larger and slightly fancier version for myself, assuming we don't run out of warm days first. No room in the garage to work in, too many toys .

I can guess which board it is - Progressive Riser?

Select to expand quote

philn said..
I can guess which board it is - Progressive Riser?

I was going to ask the same thing.

I have the same board. Looks like a single layer of cloth and a brown filler layer that is thicker than the cloth layer. I'm on repair number 5. I've used it 5 times.

Select to expand quote

philn said..
I have the same board. Looks like a single layer of cloth and a brown filler layer that is thicker than the cloth layer. I'm on repair number 5. I've used it 5 times.

Yes, the same board. I guess I'm lucky with just one repair after 5 windfoiling sessions!

Thanks for sharing. I was a bit hesitant to review the board on my blog, but I'll do so now to warn others against buying it. Overall, I was quite disappointed in the board. I found it surprisingly hard to slog for a supposed 138 l board - the nose just wants to go down, especially with a sail > 5.6 m. Even my wife, who weighs <60 kg, had the same impression. Her 115 l JP Foil SUP 7.0 is a lot easier to slog. Where we foil, almost every session includes some slogging, so this matters.

I did like the board once in the air, but the only real comparison I have is my 8 ft slalom board that is a few inches narrower. I had tons of much harder crashes on that board, it never needed a repair. It's easier to get going, too. But in the air, the stability is clearly not as good as with a shorter, wider board. No surprise here, that's what everyone says.

But to say it clearly, I think the volume distribution and nose rocker line on the Progressive Riser 6.10 is remarkably bad. I had it out for one windy session (averages 22 knots), and found the water starts hard! A little bit too much pressure, and the nose would go down right away. But not enough pressure, and the board would jump straight onto the foil, making it very hard to control. Just about every run in that session ended with a crash. But that was not the session where it got damaged (seems amazing now). I think my 72 l Isonic speed board is easier to waterstart than this thing! Both the JP 115 l SUP and my long 117 l former slalom board are definitely a lot easier.

We'll have to see how this thing works for wing foiling. But to be safe, I added material for a second board today when I ordered the supplies to build a small wing board for my wife .

Make sure there is no COVID leaking out of that board.

Select to expand quote

philn said..
I have the same board. Looks like a single layer of cloth and a brown filler layer that is thicker than the cloth layer. I'm on repair number 5. I've used it 5 times.

Just started repairing the nose, and got a pleasant surprise: the board has wood reinforcements under the fiberglass.

On the bottom side, though, it looks like it has been sanded through partially:

Some glass on top of the wood is still visible after I sanded it down for the repair. Seems like Mike's diagnosis was correct: too much sanding. It also looks like they did not wrap the glass around from the bottom and top, so the edge has only one layer (and, at the small spot where the damage happened, not even that).
I'll fix this with some bog and a couple of layers of S-glass. If I'm lucky, that was the only spot on the edge that was weak. If I get another nose ding that requires repair in the future, I'll just reinforce the entire nose properly.