Well it got me thinking when i seen decrepits new custom speed board that he made himself whitch i must say looked very sweet how narrow have people gone ????

Well back in the day when speed sailing hit the scene I think 12" or 13" was one of the smallest I saw, it was a Jump City custom from memory. Problem is with such small boards they never see much use and are hard to get going and are too narrow in most cases to really become unstuck and fly for most. As to wether they worked, well if you consider getting it on the plane I guess they worked. At the time if you could do a mid-high 30 on it would also give it "worked" cred'.

Things have changed a bit since and when you pull 34's on a 12'6" SUP, 37's on a 104L Quad and 41 on 75 wide 119L you know most boards these days work being a bit or alot wider. I'm sure a few other old salty's may enlighten us all with maybe some narrower ones they rode or seen in their time.

here's us at Sandy Pt a long time ago in an easterley on one of Byron M's old boards, think it was a 15 or 16". Seconds after that pic was taken the 'A' box in it split and let go ending in a good crash, was a nice ride but never had the conditions to give it a good hammering, then speed sailing died....

the way i see it is the fin and straps are much further back now, i would say you dont need to have a needle its the way the board tracks, i would also say keep the rails nice an boxy and parallel, from my experience speed boards have to much volume for the width and can be like riding a log in chop at high speed, i would also say keep a bit of width in the nose for stability, and theres no reason you cant go 240 300 from the tail, have a look at my avitar and you will get the picture all you need is a decent fin that works and you can trust at 40+

keef said...

speed boards have to much volume for the width and can be like riding a log in chop at high speed, i would also say keep a bit of width in the nose for stability, and theres no reason you cant go 240 300 from the tail, have a look at my avitar and you will get the picture all you need is a decent fin that works and you can trust at 40+

I've experienced that "riding on a log feeling" and, now that you mention it, that board you built for Leo doesn't have it. It's very comfortable. I'd put it all down to the footstraps.

Stroppo i have owned a F2 Missile small 63L x 48wide and now have a CASP50 they are both smillish and good for WA conditons. The CA50 is way better as its 81L so you get to use it a bit more over here.

I have have just picked up CA SP 40 for the 1 or 2 days a year we got 25+Knts. It's tiny so IMHO i dont think you need anything narrower that 40-44cm.

choco said...

new Mistral 41cm

Does Chris L know you borrowed his from the carpark the other day

sausage said...

choco said...

new Mistral 41cm

Does Chris L know you borrowed his from the carpark the other day

nah not mine, got pics off the net, looks nice

sick_em_rex said...

looks like you have to put the fin in before screwing in the back footstrap. What a clever design feature.....not!

rexy you need one of these with a hole

Still got my 13'' strapper

Nice one Hammer ! what else you got hanging in the shed ?

I Remember Ben's speed boards but also remember that (here in SA) Shane O'Callaghan had some tiny speed boards, narrower than Ben's Jump City..

Mr Silly, lift your game

Disappointed you haven't got your board back Chris, must have been a real brain surgeon to flog that one

slowboat said...

sick_em_rex said...

looks like you have to put the fin in before screwing in the back footstrap. What a clever design feature.....not!

Silly me, its obvious I should have specified a US box so that riders would be saved the enormous task of dealing with that whole extra fastener. And they could use all those awesome speed fins from the 80s. I've seen a few nice polycarbonate ones around.

Going from 2 to 3 screws to attend really does take the shine off the world.

Seriously? The alternatives are custom finbox, or custom footstraps (eg with a hole in). Neither are acceptable solutions for a production board.

Having actually used this system on previous boards also, its not a biggie.

If anyone sees one of those boards up for sale please let me know. Mine was taken off the beach last week in safety bay while I was sailing

Hey Chris, can I ask then what your reasoning was behind this setup. Fanatic, JP and Starboard, arguably the 3 biggest suppliers of mass made speed boards to the market, all have double footstrap designs on even their smallest speed boards enabling easier insertion and removal of fins. It seems only Carbon Art (your old designs) and your new Mistrals use the single strap. (please forgive me if I am incorrect here but I did try to research this a bit)
I know that if I am sailing I want maximum tow and so don't want the annoyance of having to undo my footstrap screws just so I can change over my fin.
I know in your opinion it is a small inconvenience to have to do but can you enlighten me as to why you only set the board up with a single strap? I presume the main reason will be the shape of the back of the board dictates only 1 but it would be good to get it from the horses mouth. (and I'm not saying you are a horse )
Thanks.

sick_em_rex said...

slowboat said...

sick_em_rex said...

looks like you have to put the fin in before screwing in the back footstrap. What a clever design feature.....not!

Silly me, its obvious I should have specified a US box so that riders would be saved the enormous task of dealing with that whole extra fastener. And they could use all those awesome speed fins from the 80s. I've seen a few nice polycarbonate ones around.

Going from 2 to 3 screws to attend really does take the shine off the world.

Seriously? The alternatives are custom finbox, or custom footstraps (eg with a hole in). Neither are acceptable solutions for a production board.

Having actually used this system on previous boards also, its not a biggie.

If anyone sees one of those boards up for sale please let me know. Mine was taken off the beach last week in safety bay while I was sailing

Hey Chris, can I ask then what your reasoning was behind this setup. Fanatic, JP and Starboard, arguably the 3 biggest suppliers of mass made speed boards to the market, all have double footstrap designs on even their smallest speed boards enabling easier insertion and removal of fins. It seems only Carbon Art (your old designs) and your new Mistrals use the single strap. (please forgive me if I am incorrect here but I did try to research this a bit)
I know that if I am sailing I want maximum tow and so don't want the annoyance of having to undo my footstrap screws just so I can change over my fin.
I know in your opinion it is a small inconvenience to have to do but can you enlighten me as to why you only set the board up with a single strap? I presume the main reason will be the shape of the back of the board dictates only 1 but it would be good to get it from the horses mouth. (and I'm not saying you are a horse )
Thanks.

Looking at it the single strap probably keeps your heel from dragging in the water and gets your foot centered more over the fin but i could be wrong.

There isn't any smaller (production) speedboard on the market than the sp40. Lots of other brands have, just like CA, a 44 cm wide board with double straps at the back - however, i'm not sure if that is possible to have on the sp40 due to its narrow tail?
But as Chris said it's not a problem. I actually have both the CA sp40 and the Mistral speed 41 and the trick is to open up the actual footstrap, not unscrew the strap, open up the the footstrap, then you're able to put the fin in the box afterwards just simply close the strap again.

In the picture CA sp47 and the Mistral Speed 47

Here I am worrying about converting a dual strap to a ingle rear strap . Having size 14 feet doesn't give me alot of room up the back. I would get both heel and toe drag !

The first board to break the 40 knot barrier over 500 meters was a 11" wide Mudshark shaped by Jimmy Lewis, back in November 1988. Erik Beale was the rider and always had the narrowest boards but 11" was his smallest.