I've been using a supercruiser on a jp 120 for a couple of months now and although it kind of works, the combination doesn't feel as good as it could be.
I am wondering if the foil is a bit meh !
or is it the way it is set up,
or it's perhaps slightly incompatible with the board.

My race foil wing setup, on a 95 plus, plugged into our Starboard freerides 150 or 125, seem to be pretty perfect.
They were plug in and play from day one. And as a bonus, they are so tuneable, moving from slight front foot or rear foot pressure by moving from - 0.5 to -1.5 deg shims depending on how the mood takes you.
They're stable and predictable, and we've been using them a lot recently, so I've got a really great benchmark to compare.

However the Sc didn't really work with the free rides
Its a much more of a rear footed setup, than the other Starboard foil system, which is definitely front footed.
So I've plugged it into our Jp's, thinking that would work, as the JP's seem to like a rear footed foil.

Its ok, but I'm not that impressed with the ride, and its unfortunately not living up to my expectations.
Sometimes it feels that the foils dragging in the water, as I can feel a vibration in the foil, and that's with a carbon mast...
My stab is set to neutral as well, so it can't be that.
also it's fairly unstable.
Someone on here ( WOH?) once described it as balancing on a beach ball, which is definitely how it feels.
it needs a lot more of rider input than I expected, and it's really twitchy at times when the wind gets up.
We call the Jp120 with the Sc ' el Diablo' .. the devil

As a plus point, the stall speed, as anticipated, is lower - so is more forgiving through the corners, when it's not that breezy.

Maybe it's because the Sc wing is quite flat so hasn't got built in stability?.
So am I expecting too much from the SC? I'd be interested in other users input.

It would be also useful, if someone could measure up a foilX 135, to see if the mast foot position from the front bolt hole, and also foot straps are similar to my JP120. I trust Starboards settings as our other boards were just pretty much spot on.
I could at least try to replicate the settings and eliminate that variable.

Otherwise, any other thoughts?


Trying out footstrap positions using a hedge!
thanks!

I'm using a JP 135 with same foils as you. When I'm on the SC I have the mast base between 5 and 7cm further back. I don't find it twitchy but can feel a bit draggy when underpowered. The shorter fuse on the SC probably makes it feel more unstable than the 95+. I think I've got the balance nailed as I done 108km on the weekend non stop with only 2 offs and I didn't get cramp in my legs later on. That was on the 1300 wing which is a bit more back foot heavy than the 1700 if set up isn't right.
Not a complete answer to your question but hope it helps a little.
One person I know uses the wing mounted in the front holes on the fuse and that works well for him on a not ideal board.

Its funny. I wrote a simular question in another thred just some 12h ago :)
"Im on the SB125 and the Supercruiser. Experimenting with different tunings. Since the Supercruiser is optimized for the x-boards it would be very interesting to hear some x-board messurements. Distance along the centerline from the front tuttle screw to: 1 middle of inner back foot straps. 2 middle of inner front foot straps. 3 middle of the mast track."
I Will give you my current numbers later.

Great minds.. not all foils are compatible with all foil boards
Look at the extreme difference between foilX and freefoil with mast foot position.
Running a GTR type foil on a foilX would put the foil somewhere under the mast base

Select to expand quote

RuddeBos said..
I've been using a supercruiser on a jp 120 for a couple of months now and although it kind of works, the combination doesn't feel as good as it could be.
I am wondering if the foil is a bit meh !
or is it the way it is set up,
or it's perhaps slightly incompatible with the board.

My race foil wing setup, on a 95 plus, plugged into our Starboard freerides 150 or 125, seem to be pretty perfect.
They were plug in and play from day one. And as a bonus, they are so tuneable, moving from slight front foot or rear foot pressure by moving from - 0.5 to -1.5 deg shims depending on how the mood takes you.
They're stable and predictable, and we've been using them a lot recently, so I've got a really great benchmark to compare.

However the Sc didn't really work with the free rides
Its a much more of a rear footed setup, than the other Starboard foil system, which is definitely front footed.
So I've plugged it into our Jp's, thinking that would work, as the JP's seem to like a rear footed foil.

Its ok, but I'm not that impressed with the ride, and its unfortunately not living up to my expectations.
Sometimes it feels that the foils dragging in the water, as I can feel a vibration in the foil, and that's with a carbon mast...
My stab is set to neutral as well, so it can't be that.
also it's fairly unstable.
Someone on here ( WOH?) once described it as balancing on a beach ball, which is definitely how it feels.
it needs a lot more of rider input than I expected, and it's really twitchy at times when the wind gets up.
We call the Jp120 with the Sc ' el Diablo' .. the devil

As a plus point, the stall speed, as anticipated, is lower - so is more forgiving through the corners, when it's not that breezy.

Maybe it's because the Sc wing is quite flat so hasn't got built in stability?.
So am I expecting too much from the SC? I'd be interested in other users input.

It would be also useful, if someone could measure up a foilX 135, to see if the mast foot position from the front bolt hole, and also foot straps are similar to my JP120. I trust Starboards settings as our other boards were just pretty much spot on.
I could at least try to replicate the settings and eliminate that variable.

Otherwise, any other thoughts?


Trying out footstrap positions using a hedge!
thanks!

Hi Rod,

I think the SC relies on having a decent amount of angle on the stab to move the balance point further forward. The front wing is really close to the foil mast and is always going to be rear footed without the stab pushing down. It has a long fuselage behind the mast compared to most free ride foils presumably to help the stab have more effect.The slingshot hover glide has a fixed rear stab angle of about 2 degrees which helps keep the balance point quite forward.

There's been a few posts with people using the unsupported forward position of the wing too. Personally, I don't like flat front wings or stabs. They feel like they don't grip in a turn which is something you really want in a free ride foil.

I've just got the Lokefoil Performance wing to replace the (flat) LK Freeride wing. It's shaped more like a seagull wing and in my opinion is way better for carving and general free ride. I can carve it in a really tight arc without it lifting a wing tip or feeling unstable.

I use the super cruiser with a carbon mast and stabiliser set at neutral and find it great in a variety of conditions and also use the starboard race setup and have no problem but it takes a bit of time to adjust between them both which maybe giving you a unstable period in the transition from each foils if you are swapping in between them
ive had the super cruiser up to mid 24kts speed
i also are using the same board for all seshes
Happy Days

I'm one that prefers SC wing in the forward position and a flatter stab. Reason for this is I feel a better front-rear foot balance that can be maintained as wind strength increases. With the stab in centre position and wing back, it would quickly change from too back foot heavy to unable to hold the front down as wind increased. This is on an old SB formula board with the straps moved inboard

Centre position still has a lot of angle Strop. What do you mean by neutral?

Yeah stretch exactly that middle position and it has still some angle in it

I'll give it another crack. I dont reckon it will end well!

Select to expand quote

simonp123 said..

RuddeBos said..
I've been using a supercruiser on a jp 120 for a couple of months now and although it kind of works, the combination doesn't feel as good as it could be.
I am wondering if the foil is a bit meh !
or is it the way it is set up,
or it's perhaps slightly incompatible with the board.

My race foil wing setup, on a 95 plus, plugged into our Starboard freerides 150 or 125, seem to be pretty perfect.
They were plug in and play from day one. And as a bonus, they are so tuneable, moving from slight front foot or rear foot pressure by moving from - 0.5 to -1.5 deg shims depending on how the mood takes you.
They're stable and predictable, and we've been using them a lot recently, so I've got a really great benchmark to compare.

However the Sc didn't really work with the free rides
Its a much more of a rear footed setup, than the other Starboard foil system, which is definitely front footed.
So I've plugged it into our Jp's, thinking that would work, as the JP's seem to like a rear footed foil.

Its ok, but I'm not that impressed with the ride, and its unfortunately not living up to my expectations.
Sometimes it feels that the foils dragging in the water, as I can feel a vibration in the foil, and that's with a carbon mast...
My stab is set to neutral as well, so it can't be that.
also it's fairly unstable.
Someone on here ( WOH?) once described it as balancing on a beach ball, which is definitely how it feels.
it needs a lot more of rider input than I expected, and it's really twitchy at times when the wind gets up.
We call the Jp120 with the Sc ' el Diablo' .. the devil

As a plus point, the stall speed, as anticipated, is lower - so is more forgiving through the corners, when it's not that breezy.

Maybe it's because the Sc wing is quite flat so hasn't got built in stability?.
So am I expecting too much from the SC? I'd be interested in other users input.

It would be also useful, if someone could measure up a foilX 135, to see if the mast foot position from the front bolt hole, and also foot straps are similar to my JP120. I trust Starboards settings as our other boards were just pretty much spot on.
I could at least try to replicate the settings and eliminate that variable.

Otherwise, any other thoughts?


Trying out footstrap positions using a hedge!
thanks!

Hi Rod,

I think the SC relies on having a decent amount of angle on the stab to move the balance point further forward. The front wing is really close to the foil mast and is always going to be rear footed without the stab pushing down. It has a long fuselage behind the mast compared to most free ride foils presumably to help the stab have more effect.The slingshot hover glide has a fixed rear stab angle of about 2 degrees which helps keep the balance point quite forward.

There's been a few posts with people using the unsupported forward position of the wing too. Personally, I don't like flat front wings or stabs. They feel like they don't grip in a turn which is something you really want in a free ride foil.

I've just got the Lokefoil Performance wing to replace the (flat) LK Freeride wing. It's shaped more like a seagull wing and in my opinion is way better for carving and general free ride. I can carve it in a really tight arc without it lifting a wing tip or feeling unstable.

Hi Simon I'll need to get my angle measuring gizmo to check and compare, rear stab angles.
I've resisted putting on lots of angle, as the setup feels draggy enough as it is, and I don't want to go slower than you!
Perhaps taking out the torx head key with me may help me dial into a better performance.
ive tried the forward wing position, and whilst it changes balance to the front foot (which goes some way to help if your foot straps are forward on the board
..it feels better balanced with the starboard freerides and jp 135 rather the Jp 120 ) it doesn't alter the handling of the wing and overall nervousness of it.

Im hoping that it's just not the front wing design, as you say it's really flat, with a slight dihedral, but that's all I can think that is the major difference between that and the Infinity 76.

Unfortunately I've recently seen a video of 4 new front wings and new stab that Starboard will be bringing out for 2021, presumably to tap into the wingfoil market.
They appear to have more gull wing profile and drooped winged tips, so may help with the stability.

Chances of getting one, as an individual item, may as always prove to be problematic and another expensive leap of faith.

Select to expand quote

Swindy said..
I'm using a JP 135 with same foils as you. When I'm on the SC I have the mast base between 5 and 7cm further back. I don't find it twitchy but can feel a bit draggy when underpowered. The shorter fuse on the SC probably makes it feel more unstable than the 95+. I think I've got the balance nailed as I done 108km on the weekend non stop with only 2 offs and I didn't get cramp in my legs later on. That was on the 1300 wing which is a bit more back foot heavy than the 1700 if set up isn't right.
Not a complete answer to your question but hope it helps a little.
One person I know uses the wing mounted in the front holes on the fuse and that works well for him on a not ideal board.

I've also continued to move the mast base back on the jp135, to get it to work, but it's not really the board for it, as it feels much too large.
im only using the Sc when I'm on 6m and below, so in theory would suit the jp120 perfectly.

Also the jp120 mast track is much further back than the jp135, so if I place the mast base further back in the 120 the setup becomes really twitchy.
Ive done similar amounts of mileage on the 120, and reasonable speeds out of it, but I'm hoping to get better turning performance out of it

To address the first part of balancing the foil, I see that the pictures show the back footstraps in the right position relative to the finbox. You want the front screw to be at the midpoint of the back foot. Both boards in the photo show this. So that part is fine.

Many pre-foil boards had the finbox further aft relative to the back footstraps. This made them back foot heavy with pretty much all foils.

Since the SC has the front wing right next to the foil mast, it looks to me like a kitefoil, not a windfoil. I know, i know, they bill it and sell it as a windfoil. However, even with a correctly placed finbox, that has to make it back foot heavy.

I continue to contend that the front wing has to be at or near the midpoint between the feet. The SC appears to put it right under the back foot.

Stab angle does not change the fore and aft position of the wing lift. It changes the magnitude of the lift at a given speed.

That mast track is at least 15cm further forward and the footstrap positions are quite a bit further outboard than the FoilX boards both of which can make for increased sensitivity to sail power.
The FoilX are designed so that changes in sail pressure have minimal impact on foil trim.
Specifically being able to ride swells depowered is really helped with that setup.

Funny enough I find the SC significantly more stable than the I76. Although I use the forward wing position since I also have a forward positioned mast track. I've built a mast track extender to let me experiment with the rear setup which all the good local foilers on the SC seem to love.
My board has the footstraps directly on center like a wave board which some people call unstable but for me it's extremely easy to ride with the SC. My gybe percentage is about double what it was on the I76 which was only a small improvement from the original H2.

My experience with SB is they will happily sell individual pieces. But it can take quite a while and it's not cheap compared to a complete foil. I was thinking to adapt one of the high aspect ratio Gong wings, the fitting is very close.

Select to expand quote

RuddeBos said..
Great minds.. not all foils are compatible with all foil boards
Look at the extreme difference between foilX and freefoil with mast foot position.
Running a GTR type foil on a foilX would put the foil somewhere under the mast base

I agree. I have an Exocet RF81 (Similar to JP135) I use with an AFS2 and Wizard 105/I76. I have tried the I76 on the Exocet and while it works, I lose all feel for the foil that I enjoy so much on the Wizard 105... The Exocet is way wider in the back and way heavier in the nose which you can really feel when trying to maneuver. But on a cambered sail (Sailworks Flyers for me) the Exo is awesome for straight-lining. I use Naish Lifts on the Wizard/I76 combo, the soft feel of the Lifts really let you connect with what's going on with the low-aspect foil like the I76

Select to expand quote

stroppo said..
I use the super cruiser with a carbon mast and stabiliser set at neutral and find it great in a variety of conditions and also use the starboard race setup and have no problem but it takes a bit of time to adjust between them both which maybe giving you a unstable period in the transition from each foils if you are swapping in between them
ive had the super cruiser up to mid 24kts speed
i also are using the same board for all seshes
Happy Days

That's impressive Stroppo, 24kts on the super cruiser, no fear... , we are looking for an Aussie to take on AA

Select to expand quote

RuddeBos said..

Swindy said..
I'm using a JP 135 with same foils as you. When I'm on the SC I have the mast base between 5 and 7cm further back. I don't find it twitchy but can feel a bit draggy when underpowered. The shorter fuse on the SC probably makes it feel more unstable than the 95+. I think I've got the balance nailed as I done 108km on the weekend non stop with only 2 offs and I didn't get cramp in my legs later on. That was on the 1300 wing which is a bit more back foot heavy than the 1700 if set up isn't right.
Not a complete answer to your question but hope it helps a little.
One person I know uses the wing mounted in the front holes on the fuse and that works well for him on a not ideal board.

I've also continued to move the mast base back on the jp135, to get it to work, but it's not really the board for it, as it feels much too large.
im only using the Sc when I'm on 6m and below, so in theory would suit the jp120 perfectly.

Also the jp120 mast track is much further back than the jp135, so if I place the mast base further back in the 120 the setup becomes really twitchy.
Ive done similar amounts of mileage on the 120, and reasonable speeds out of it, but I'm hoping to get better turning performance out of it

If you want more turning ability you need the 1300 wing. I was amazed how quick it turned first time I went into a gybe on it. As soon as the wind is up it's my go to wing now. It is a bit less stable and took a few goes to get used to it but I would now describe it as looser not unstable. When I get back on the 1700 wing it's like standing on the shore in comparison. The supercruiser is exactly what it says it is, a cruiser imho. It's also been a good tool to perfect flying gybe's. I now have a JP 105 which I am hoping will move things up to the next level. I would love to try it on a foil x but I haven't seen one in WA as yet.
Coming from the gtr to the SC I didn't like the mast as far back as it needed to be, it just felt wrong but now I'm used to it it's not a problem.
I now need to get back on the race gear to see if I can reproduce my gybing success that I have had on the SC as I was struggling before I got it.

Comments here inspired me to experiment with SC stab angle - now converted, prefer more forward in saddle ie. flatter/less lift, approx half way between mid-point/neutral and fully to front - only a small adjustment instantly gives steadier ride height, better handling in accelerations, plus slippery feel so a bit faster - neutral position is too powerful once you have things dialled (even with my 90+kg) ....
Thanks everyone!

Forward equals more downforce which generally means more front foot pressure and possibly a bit more drag.

Select to expand quote

Grantmac said..
Forward equals more downforce which generally means more front foot pressure and possibly a bit more drag.

yes, sorry - I meant stab further back, so bolts are further forward in slots and angle of attack is less/flatter

Hello
I've put another topic about adaptability comparison between supercruiser and infinity. I'm only a beginner. After reading, I'm getting the conclusion that the supercruiser is more difficult to adapt to different boards than the the infinity because of the position of the front wing?.

Only one suggestion regarding the adaptability problems of the supercruiser. As it has the front wing so close to the mast , the solution could be to put it in a double usbox tracks , and move it a little bit forward so that the front wing would be in the middle of the feet? Is it easy to buy the platine us box adpater for the supercruiser?

Thanks

You are comparing apples and oranges. There are two ways to adjust the pressure distribution between the feet. One is to move the front wing further forward. Slingshot does that with the A, B, C positions. Some other brands offer different lengths fuselages that have the same effect.

The second way is to change the angle of one or both of the wings. That's commonly done with shims for the rear wing. When the back of the rear wing points up more, you end up with more front foot pressure. One way to think about this is that the rear wing pushes down, which feels exactly the same as the front wing pushing up. (There's actually a third way that uses tuttle box inserts, but that seems to be rarely used).

Looking at the Super Cruiser review at windfoilen.nl/en/starboard-super-cruiser-test-2/, it seems that the Super Cruiser actually offers both ways to trim. The primary way, though, is to adjust the angle of the rear wing.

There's a few things that contribute to the confusion. One is the often-heard advice that the front wing should be in the center of the stance. This advice is useful, but specific to Slingshot foils (where the rear angle cannot easily be adjusted). It does not necessarily apply to other foils where the rear wing can be adjusted.

The second thing that can cause confusion is which boards the wings are designed for. Slingshot boards like the Wizard have the rear foot strap further back than many other boards - the front is aligned with the front tuttle screw, the rear with with back screw. Most windsurfing boards have the back strap about 2-3 inches further forward: the rear end of the foot strap is in between the two tuttle screws. If you want to use a Slingshot foil in such a board, you have to move everything forward. Which is why the Infinity 76 is typically used in the B position with Slingshot Wizard boards, but in the C position with windsurf boards and foil boards from other brands. To make things even more confusing, different wings can require different positions (e.g. the Slingshot i84 is often used in the C position on Slingshot boards, since it is set further back on the fuse than the i76).

I'm a big fan of tracks because they can give a relatively large range of adjustment. But I think you can probably get the Super Cruiser adjusted just as well by using the adjustments it offers, especially the rear wing angle. Theoretically, a larger angle on the rear wing should be a bit slower, but that's really not an issue for beginners, and the difference for freeride foils is probably quite small, anyway.

Select to expand quote

Lecum said..
Hello
I've put another topic about adaptability comparison between supercruiser and infinity. I'm only a beginner. After reading, I'm getting the conclusion that the supercruiser is more difficult to adapt to different boards than the the infinity because of the position of the front wing?.

Only one suggestion regarding the adaptability problems of the supercruiser. As it has the front wing so close to the mast , the solution could be to put it in a double usbox tracks , and move it a little bit forward so that the front wing would be in the middle of the feet? Is it easy to buy the platine us box adpater for the supercruiser?

Thanks

Yeah ya can buy the top plate adapter to fit the us boxes I have one on order various companies make the adapter

voila :

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..
You are comparing apples and oranges. There are two ways to adjust the pressure distribution between the feet. One is to move the front wing further forward. Slingshot does that with the A, B, C positions. Some other brands offer different lengths fuselages that have the same effect.

The second way is to change the angle of one or both of the wings. That's commonly done with shims for the rear wing. When the back of the rear wing points up more, you end up with more front foot pressure. One way to think about this is that the rear wing pushes down, which feels exactly the same as the front wing pushing up. (There's actually a third way that uses tuttle box inserts, but that seems to be rarely used).

Looking at the Super Cruiser review at windfoilen.nl/en/starboard-super-cruiser-test-2/, it seems that the Super Cruiser actually offers both ways to trim. The primary way, though, is to adjust the angle of the rear wing.

There's a few things that contribute to the confusion. One is the often-heard advice that the front wing should be in the center of the stance. This advice is useful, but specific to Slingshot foils (where the rear angle cannot easily be adjusted). It does not necessarily apply to other foils where the rear wing can be adjusted.

The second thing that can cause confusion is which boards the wings are designed for. Slingshot boards like the Wizard have the rear foot strap further back than many other boards - the front is aligned with the front tuttle screw, the rear with with back screw. Most windsurfing boards have the back strap about 2-3 inches further forward: the rear end of the foot strap is in between the two tuttle screws. If you want to use a Slingshot foil in such a board, you have to move everything forward. Which is why the Infinity 76 is typically used in the B position with Slingshot Wizard boards, but in the C position with windsurf boards and foil boards from other brands. To make things even more confusing, different wings can require different positions (e.g. the Slingshot i84 is often used in the C position on Slingshot boards, since it is set further back on the fuse than the i76).

I'm a big fan of tracks because they can give a relatively large range of adjustment. But I think you can probably get the Super Cruiser adjusted just as well by using the adjustments it offers, especially the rear wing angle. Theoretically, a larger angle on the rear wing should be a bit slower, but that's really not an issue for beginners, and the difference for freeride foils is probably quite small, anyway.

You are overlooking two other very important ways to balance out the equation - foot/footstrap position and (sail)mast base position. A lot is said about moving the foil around but just the same, you can change where the windfoiler is standing on the board. The centering over the foil concept works with fine with non-tracked foils by doing this.

Moving the mast base also changes the amount of pressure fore/aft - like moving the passengers/baggage on an airplane to get the CoG in the right spot. Sam Ross uses this method to put two very different foils - the SuperCruiser and Starboard Race - on the same board.

Rear wing angle also works, as you mention, but should, imho, be used a bit more judiciously, like a trim tab. It's good for getting things in final balance or responding to wind conditions.

Lastly, the A,B,C of Slingshot originally was a method to use a common fuse - The Switch Fuse - over different disciplines - kite, surf, wind. They ended up using it to make different sized wings work instead of doing like Moses who set the mounting point of each wing for a common fuse.

Select to expand quote

Paducah said..
You are overlooking two other very important ways to balance out the equation - foot/footstrap position and (sail)mast base position. A lot is said about moving the foil around but just the same, you can change where the windfoiler is standing on the board. The centering over the foil concept works with fine with non-tracked foils by doing this.

Adjusting footstrap positions is pretty limited on most boards. Removing foot straps helps somewhat, but there seem to be lots of foilers out there who prefer to use straps.

Often, moving the back foot further back is not an option at all, even without straps. Many beginners choose to start foiling with windsurf board. You can actually run out of board when you're trying to move your feet back. Slingshot foils are designed for Slingshot boards, which have the foot straps all the way back. If you're a heavier guy and choose a foil like the i84, Slingshot suggests to use the C position in Slingshot boards. Most windsurf boards have the foot straps mounted about 5 cm more forward than the Slingshot boards, even in the rear-most position. For a balanced position, you'd have to remove the straps, stand further back on the board than you ever would windsurfing. That's not really on option at all on most boards. They can be too narrow, you sink the tail, and so on. Adding tracks are more or less the only option in that case. I've tried without, and to create a "D" fuse position, neither worked well on the long run. The mast base was already in the rear-most position, so that did not work, either. I've seen several other beginner foilers with similar setup issues.

Select to expand quote

Slingshot foils are designed for Slingshot boards, which have the foot straps all the way back.

While this is a Starboard Super cruiser thread, to the comments above that SS foils are designed for Slingshot boards, (and why wouldn't they do that) and issues using the SS foils on windsurf boards. Gotta say, my SS HG i84 works well in C position on my Exocet RF91 foil board, back straps are in chicken position. Maybe the SS foils work well with foil boards?

No commercial affiliation with Slingshot.

Select to expand quote

boardsurfr said..

I'm not advocating the removal of front straps. I personally prefer them. However, the same front strap position that works fine for windsurfing may not work as well for windfoiling. That is just one of the several ways I mention to move the CoG around. And that was the point of my post - there are a number of ways to tune a board and if someone is having trouble with a foil, they should be aware of all of them. The board/foil behavior can be changed significantly even with a fixed foil position.

btw, I should have mentioned boom height as a tuning tool. I've found just a couple of cm to make a noticeable difference at times.

Again, I refer to Sam Ross who uses very different foils - not only in style but wing position - on the same board.

I'm using a FTY foil race board with a starboard race foil and the starboard super cruiser aswell and all I'm doing is moving the mast track to suit and some stabiliser trim adjustments and this works fine.

Select to expand quote

stroppo said..

Lecum said..
Hello
I've put another topic about adaptability comparison between supercruiser and infinity. I'm only a beginner. After reading, I'm getting the conclusion that the supercruiser is more difficult to adapt to different boards than the the infinity because of the position of the front wing?.

Only one suggestion regarding the adaptability problems of the supercruiser. As it has the front wing so close to the mast , the solution could be to put it in a double usbox tracks , and move it a little bit forward so that the front wing would be in the middle of the feet? Is it easy to buy the platine us box adpater for the supercruiser?

Thanks

Yeah ya can buy the top plate adapter to fit the us boxes I have one on order various companies make the adapter

Hello

Regarding the usbox plate for the supercruiser, here I can't find it in the shops for some months. Do you mean it could be got from other companies different from starboard? Which ones?

Thanks.