Someone know any more about these boards. Seem to perform well despite the fugly shape.

Might only work with MW Sails?

Interesting shape and whilst many wave boards have gone to parallel rails this is pretty extreme so I wonder how they turn?
Or if they do still turn well, how they made up for the strange plan shape using other ways. Hmmm gonna have a read up

They offer "XS-sized" boards with more closely spaced footstraps for shorter sailors. I don't think anyone else does this.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Might only work with MW Sails?

Interesting shape and whilst many wave boards have gone to parallel rails this is pretty extreme so I wonder how they turn?
Or if they do still turn well, how they made up for the strange plan shape using other ways. Hmmm gonna have a read up

As much as I want MW to succeed, just reading the rigging manual gave me a headache and heartburn.

Jebus they're ugly. How could you have pride of ownership in that?

Indeed..... "it seems" Ben Proffitt calls them penis boards
windsurfing.tv/video/penis-board-testing-balz-muller/

I can't say much about them, but I've seen Balz M?ller sail them and know from what he's got in his van that he only sails these nowadays. Last year he was still on his Patrik boards. The only conventionally shaped board he seems to use is his foilboard.
I didn't get round to talk to him about the boards, though.
MB-boards from Switzerland is originally a fin brand who have the boards shaped and laminated with Flikka in Slovenija.

A peanut board. Keef produced one of those years ago. They should turn fine. Skis have had a waist to improve turning ability for 100 years. It makes sense from one direction of thought. In fact it surprises me that up to this point in time we've been able to make boards turn at all! Keef should set us straight shortly.

Yes, I was right. Just checked the website.
" NDO shape gives you the smoothest carving."

Starboard nut SUP

Yes there it is. On his avatar. You saw it here first on sea breeze. So don't call it a new k*****t

and it's called a " Peanut " , not an NDO. As the inventor Keef has naming rights.
www.seabreeze.com.au/Members/Profile/Details.aspx?member=keef

I'll stick to gybing the old way. Too ugly to contemplate.

The money is all in surfing so I wonder why they have not gone this route?
We ain't on snow......

Also, given the predominance in freestyle of aerial pop moves then I wonder if the outline is fine for that but not necessarily good for the carve of pure wave riding?


Then, for slalom if the "waist" area adds drag if you are not 100% blasting on the last 20% of the board.....



Just pondering....

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..
A peanut board. Keef produced one of those years ago. They should turn fine. Skis have had a waist to improve turning ability for 100 years. It makes sense from one direction of thought. In fact it surprises me that up to this point in time we've been able to make boards turn at all! Keef should set us straight shortly.

Yes, Skis, and then snowboards have been shaped like this for ever. However it is for a very different reason.

Skis and snowboards flex considerably as they turn, and the flex is enhanced/encouraged by the sidecut shape. Windsurfers and surfboards don't flex to turn (maybe a just a tiny bit for some small surfboards) so the mechanical design principle is totally invalid for rigid water craft.

Hey, you can windsurf a door, but that doesn't mean it has good handling characteristics!

It's the ultimate in marketing spam though. Look! There is even a forum thread started about it!!

Wouldn't call the guy's business "marketing spam". I mean his entire board range follows the concept and in a way his flow concept seems to make sense if you look at a board in a jibe an outward curved (traditional) would cut deeper into the water (more drag?) whereas this almost puts most of the forward part of the board at a flatter angle to the surface of the water.



Lets maybe not hack it till we get more feedback from it. If it dies out, then hey..... it wasn't meant to be.

I suspect its fugliness might just kill it though

Select to expand quote

Dar said..
Wouldn't call the guy's business "marketing spam". I mean his entire board range follows the concept and in a way his flow concept seems to make sense if you look at a board in a jibe an outward curved (traditional) would cut deeper into the water (more drag?) whereas this almost puts most of the forward part of the board at a flatter angle to the surface of the water.



Lets maybe not hack it till we get more feedback from it. If it dies out, then hey..... it wasn't meant to be.

I suspect its fugliness might just kill it though

Lock it in Eddie. Maybe not a full on peanut but at least straight to slightly concave rails. The egg-shaped wide styles were all wrong. Fanatic was heading in the new direction already.
Put the straight outline of the old narrow 280s ( which used to gybe like a dream. Remember? ) onto a short board.

Select to expand quote

Dar said..
Wouldn't call the guy's business "marketing spam". I mean his entire board range follows the concept and in a way his flow concept seems to make sense if you look at a board in a jibe an outward curved (traditional) would cut deeper into the water (more drag?) whereas this almost puts most of the forward part of the board at a flatter angle to the surface of the water.



Lets maybe not hack it till we get more feedback from it. If it dies out, then hey..... it wasn't meant to be.

I suspect its fugliness might just kill it though

I see the idea but I'm a bit suss.
I agree the super wide round boards are not the best especially for heavy guys , ( the sides grab the water trying to get planing ).
This peanut shape would work on ice I suppose or increadibly unrealistically flat water. Something has to dig in the water and grip. I'd rather a rounded specific part of a rail sinking six inches into the water for grip apposed to two inches the whole length of the rail.
Could be wrong.
Ill happily unbiostly test one for free in rough water for average talented sailing. XL size please.

Interesting concept, I always thought there was an inconsistency in design concept between snow vs wind/surf boards. I've no idea what actually works best, but what we think looks fugly now, might be ultra cool in 12mths time?
i love the look of the F Blast

IanK I agree

The straighter lines worked better in longer boards and the egg ones are limited.
The straighter lines in the modern stubbies (largely) work OK in intended range.... and really are inspired by Tomo's work and Stoney's work years ago.

BUT nobody has done a concave rail/ peanut shape except for this mob.

I am very doubtful if surfing has not done it as the money and ability to test bazillion prototypes is all in surfnong.

MB have an idea, claim it works (good testers and knowledgable people unlike MWSails BTW...) but so far it is one idea and a claim it works cos it "looks like a snowboard"

I'm hesitant. When they have a wave season in Hawaii, a season in WA or South Africa, a full PWA slalom tour and a couple of pro riders (not just one freestyler) going well I'd be more into it. Freestyle largely consists of one water state and short runs.....

Select to expand quote

Stretchy said..
Interesting concept, I always thought there was an inconsistency in design concept between snow vs wind/surf boards. I've no idea what actually works best, but what we think looks fugly now, might be ultra cool in 12mths time?
i love the look of the F Blast

The inconsistency is for precisely the reasons sailquik said. Skis and snowboards have "side cut" (ie the hourglass shape), because that is the main way they produce curve (equivalent to "rocker") when they are laid over under pressure to carve on more-or-less solid/flat snow surfaces.

Skis/snowboards are very flexible, have nil or negative "rocker" and snow is pretty hard. Surf/sailboards are quite rigid, have rocker and water is pretty soft.

Interestingly a few powder-specific skis have rocker (rather than camber) and negative side cut. (ie more like a surfboard than a traditional ski). Powder snow is a lot more like water than normal hard snow. It is interesting to read the common problems of how traditional skis behave in deep powder, and consider how this may relate to an hourglass shape in sailboards. www.evo.com/what-is-so-special-about-the-volant-spatula-powder-ski-how-do-i-ski-the-spatulas

Surfing shapers did indeed play around with the "ski shape" in the 80s. One variant was the "ski tail" where the back part of the board was like an hourglass, widening out to a wide square tail. Interesting article on it here: www.surfresearch.com.au/00000327.html



Frank Latta (ex San Jaun) made mals which were known as "bottles" (with a very similar plan shape the the Starboard "nut" above) in the 90s when he was based at Skipp in Wollongong.

Hey I'm curious how they work, I think maybe in 4 or 5 years we'll know, but for now I'm dubious. Seems like a young company only a couple of riders for feedback a couple of guys with pc design experience, getting their ideas constructed from another company. Hopefully with more testing and feedback they will improve over the next few years, For now it's transferring a shape traditionally used on different constructed, sized boards used in a different medium,. We have vee rocker and fins to be combined with this outline. Good luck to them, if they work I'll make one mine will be called.... Knob Rider or D1ckstylewave or stiffy.... So many potential good funny names... yeah they look fugly

I guess you won't be able to use peanut boards in schools?

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
MB have an idea, claim it works (good testers and knowledgable people unlike MWSails BTW...) but so far it is one idea and a claim it works cos it "looks like a snowboard"

I love it when companies come up with new ideas. Making theoretical arguments why it should or should not work is fun, but the real test will be how they work. The freestyle boards seem to work great for Balz Mueller - but he could probably throw loops sailing a door.

Funny thing you should mention MWSails. The sail actually made an appearance at the US Nationals last week, and raised quite a bit of interest. But I saw it only on one of the four days of the event, and that was the light wind day. There would have been enough wind and time to test it on at least two other days, with plenty of top slalom sailors and GW-60s around, but the sail was nowhere to be seen on the windy days. Go figure.

Select to expand quote

Imax1 said..

Dar said..
seems to make sense if you look at a board in a jibe an outward curved (traditional) would cut deeper into the water (more drag?) whereas this almost puts most of the forward part of the board at a flatter angle to the surface of the water.

Something has to dig in the water and grip. I'd rather a rounded specific part of a rail sinking six inches into the water for grip apposed to two inches the whole length of the rail.

I think Imax and Dar have nailed the differences. To turn a board you need to generate a force towards the centre of the turn. To do this in a fluid you need to throw fluid away from the centre of the turn. The force to the centre is directly related to and in exact proportion to the rate of generating that outward momentum mv. Now that mv can either be made up of a big m and a small v or a small m and a big v. i.e. grab a lot of water and accelerate it moderately or take a smaller amount of water and accelerate it hard. Engaging a lot of water gives you more friction drag whereas accelerating a smaller amount harder requires an aggressive angle of attack and more induced drag. (Ie you've angled the board such that more of the reaction is backwards rather than to the centre of the circle.

I'd guess an egg shaped board grabs a smaller amount of water and flings it hard. This is possibly more draggy but the rider can better control the location and magnitude of the force by quickly trimming and engaging different short sections of the rail? The straighter- to- peanut railed boards might grab more water and have less drag while turning but not be as easy to quickly change trajectory.

The manufacturers claim of "less friction, natural drive, maintain speed" seems to confirm this. They don't claim more manoeuvrability or easier to gybe. But then they use the shape on wave boards?



Of course a board of any shape is not the best thing for throwing water sideways. A blunt instrument at best. it's probably possible to do a planing gybe on a door. The best thing for throwing water is a foil. The sail is pretty good too, but it only works as an inward force generator for about half a second before it loses apparent wind. If you can get the sheeting angles right in that first half a second of the gybe, (mostly not ) it relieves the board of a lot of work and you come out like a champion.

The snow skiing analogy falls down in that snow is solid and has a direct connection to mother earth. Experts can carve a snow ski exchanging momentum directly with massive earth. The sidecut and flex keeps the tail following in the same track as the tip. Non-expert skiers throw a lot of snow, using some of the physics of the "carve" gybing windsurfer.

You could say the same about gybing in very shallow water, the purity of the fluid dynamics is starting to break down, you're starting to have a bit of a direct connection with massive mother earth. Just not cricket, you can consider walking of course?