ive been watching a post on the KA speed week at durrum and i have noticed 50% of the pics are sailing with there toes pointing up


i don't know if anyone can remember the bombora dromedery, it had a hump thought the middle, and as i remember it was the most comfortable sailing position to sail , you could push on it too lift the windward rail and trim the board,
well there doesn't look like there's going to be any wind for a few days so im going to take the router to my board and recess the footstraps about 25mm that will get my feet closer to the water and be able to put more pressure on the board rarther than the strapps, possitive or negative comments are welcome but wat ever im going to do it
ps sorry to the sailor in the pic , im useing your pic as a demo, if you dont want it there ill take it off, im sorry but i dont know whow you are if i did i would have asked your pomission ,sorry keef

Good luck with the Dromedary project. When I lived in the Illawarra region in the 90s friends of mine had a Dromedary. Even back then in the days of dedicated slalom boards it was a bit of an oddity. I quite enjoyed using it on light wind days and it seemed to go alright on the plane, but not as good as my Bombora Zot. However its true the Dromedary was easier on the feet than flat decked boards.

Select to expand quote

Mobydisc said...

However its true the Dromedary was easier on the feet than flat decked boards.

thanks mobydisk its great to get some feedback from someone whos ridden one

Select to expand quote

keef said...

Mobydisc said...

However its true the Dromedary was easier on the feet than flat decked boards.

thanks mobydisk its great to get some feedback from someone whos ridden one

Keef, how about posting pics of before, during and after mods, to see difference

Select to expand quote

mineral1 said...


Keef, how about posting pics of before, during and after mods, to see difference

ok mineral the strapps and pads are off the board ready to go tomorrow, i allso have to change the rail rocker so ill take a few pics as i go ,as you can see there is enough meat in the tail and front strapps to recsess 25mm the board at the moment is about 65 lts "heres a good shot"

Select to expand quote

keef said...

mineral1 said...


Keef, how about posting pics of before, during and after mods, to see difference

the project is going to plan , managed to get 25mm on the heel and 15mm on the toes , and with the recess with the pads & strapps thats 30mm on the heel, the dromedary is in place just have to do the plug inserts so my foot has pressure on the fin, the front rails were catching on downwind runs so sorted them out to the front foot strap

hi Keef,
My first board was a Bombora dromaderry, bought from BT at south nowra. 2 fin boxes under it, one at the tail and one up under the mast base. Came with two dolphin type fins, massive spin out with any type of speed. The tail was about 2 ft wide from memory.
Also I think the javalin that merv sailed had a hump too, it was hollow with a bung at the front.
Tim

Select to expand quote

airsail said...

hi Keef,
My first board was a Bombora dromaderry, bought from BT at south nowra.
.
Tim

hi tim the board your talking about ended up at john kojries shop south nowra, it was his advertiseing sign at the front of his shop
i think i gave him $20 and ive still got that BT wave board under the house (i'm sure it was yours), i havent heard it barking lately so i guess it is well and truley dead, its the blue one the one you first started doing forwards on and still in one piece keep your eye on this post tim this is the best board ive done , it doesnt look too good at the moment, the plugs are going in today
can't remember mervs board but it must have been the only board he didn't make

interesting observation keef,

i wonder how many of the sailors at the comp got feet cramps?

as for the photo, the sailor in the photo won last years comp so he is a very quick guy.

i know MK on the forum has some views on board rail design versus foot position as we've spoken about it at the beach. without quoting him it went something along the lines of rail shape versus comfort versus toe's. or somehting like that. certainly made plenty of sense to me at the time.

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said...

interesting observation keef,

i wonder how many of the sailors at the comp got feet cramps?

as for the photo, the sailor in the photo won last years comp so he is a very quick guy.

Gestalt it sounds like your takeing things a bit personal, i dont think you understand what the post is all about,what i'm saying is i have modified the board so i can get my feet closer to the water, and have more control in high winds and leave the bump on the recesses so you have more pressure with the front part of your foot ,eg for jibeing or the back foot to put pressure on the fin
ive taken the photo off and ill apollogise too any sailor who took offence to my comments, but after saying that i dont know anyone who dosent sail with the toes up while they are putting pressure on the rail its allmost impossible not too.
anyway back to the board i'm not sure if this project will do anything except take some volume out of a critical area, last year i brought a CA55, this year i havent used it , the only problem i found with this board was the front rails were catching and the nose was lifting in high winds, wich meens i wouldnt have been on the CA in those winds anyway

what the?

seriously mate i wasn't making any negative comments about anyone. sorry if you took it that way.

sailing with toes up tends to cramp the feet. that's why i posed the question.

my comment on the sailor winning last years comp was more just about stating that toes up doesn't necessarily mean sailing slower.

was all intended to be constructive.

Select to expand quote

keef said...

Gestalt said...

interesting observation keef,

i wonder how many of the sailors at the comp got feet cramps?

as for the photo, the sailor in the photo won last years comp so he is a very quick guy.

Gestalt it sounds like your takeing things a bit personal, i dont think you understand what the post is all about,what i'm saying is i have modified the board so i can get my feet closer to the water, and have more control in high winds and leave the bump on the recesses so you have more pressure with the front part of your foot ,eg for jibeing or the back foot to put pressure on the fin
ive taken the photo off and ill apollogise too any sailor who took offence to my comments, but after saying that i dont know anyone who dosent sail with the toes up while they are putting pressure on the rail its allmost impossible not too.
anyway back to the board i'm not sure if this project will do anything except take some volume out of a critical area, last year i brought a CA55, this year i havent used it , the only problem i found with this board was the front rails were catching and the nose was lifting in high winds, wich meens i wouldnt have been on the CA in those winds anyway

Hey Keef you board is starting to look like mine now, I've done a similar thing with my starboard footstraps, I haven't sailed it enough to see if I want to do the port side as well. And of course my forward rails had a very heavy chine to start with.

Keef,

I reckon that anyone who does serious plastic surgery on their board has:
a) Balls
b) Guts
c) A willingness to experiment that is totally awesome


Can't wait to see how it turns out!

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said...

what the?

seriously mate i wasn't making any negative comments about anyone. sorry if you took it that way.

sailing with toes up tends to cramp the feet. that's why i posed the question.

my comment on the sailor winning last years comp was more just about stating that toes up doesn't necessarily mean sailing slower.

was all intended to be constructive.

Gestalt i was out of line for sticking that pic up without the sailors permmision, you know this post isn't about sailing with your toes up or a dromederry, the main project is for the big sailor 90kgs+and is restricted to thin wide boards so they have there feet closer to the water to have more control in high winds, but loose the manouverability of the narrower boards, eg snappy jibes
we have seen narrower boards with stepped bottoms with heeps of volume on the tail for heavy guys, but the there feet are to far of the water so when the wind gets up there out of control ,what im trying to do is sink the strapps and keep the volume to float the bigger guys if anyone has any suggestions let us know, allso i dont have a problem cos im' 75kgs

Select to expand quote

nebbian said...

Keef,

I reckon that anyone who does serious plastic surgery on their board has:
a) Balls
b) Guts
c) A willingness to experiment that is totally awesome


Can't wait to see how it turns out!

its not a problem i made the board fro scratch

Select to expand quote

decrepit said...

Hey Keef you board is starting to look like mine now, I've done a similar thing with my starboard footstraps, I haven't sailed it enough to see if I want to do the port side as well. And of course my forward rails had a very heavy chine to start with.

well decrep your allway's comeing up great ideas lets hope were on a winner here, the pluggs went in today so its back in the bag tommorrow

well being a heavier guy myself and having tried loads of boards at different widths/volume/lengths/thicknesses

i'd have to say width is more important,
if the goal is to keep the board thin for control and still maintain a certain volume then i'd be adding it into the width (early planing)
and drawing it throughout the board with fairly straight rails through the middle and a nice fat nose.

problem for heavyweights is that using a narrower board with lots of volume does little for early planing. plus just adding more thickness into the tail for more volume on widish boards just upsets the volume distribution making them hard to tack and dredge.

in my mind the perfect board is relatively thin 3", nice and wide (dependant on wind strength), has even volume distribution throughout the length and 2.4m long.

it is possible to make wide boards gybe better, either loads of tail rocker (slow) or lots or curve in the outline from the middle of the straps to the tail or steps in the last part of the tail or in the bottom around the rear strap.

Select to expand quote

keef said...

Gestalt said...

what the?

seriously mate i wasn't making any negative comments about anyone. sorry if you took it that way.

sailing with toes up tends to cramp the feet. that's why i posed the question.

my comment on the sailor winning last years comp was more just about stating that toes up doesn't necessarily mean sailing slower.

was all intended to be constructive.

Gestalt i was out of line for sticking that pic up without the sailors permmision, you know this post isn't about sailing with your toes up or a dromederry, the main project is for the big sailor 90kgs+and is restricted to thin wide boards so they have there feet closer to the water to have more control in high winds, but loose the manouverability of the narrower boards, eg snappy jibes
we have seen narrower boards with stepped bottoms with heeps of volume on the tail for heavy guys, but the there feet are to far of the water so when the wind gets up there out of control ,what im trying to do is sink the strapps and keep the volume to float the bigger guys if anyone has any suggestions let us know, allso i dont have a problem cos im' 75kgs

Gesty, width is great in lighter winds, but once it gets over 25kt, narrower starts looking good.
Which is fine if the wind doesn't drop out too much.
Some people have an aversion to swimming a small speed board a kilometre back to shore.

Keef, hopefully I'll get to try my board again tomorrow, and be able to give you a report.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said...

Gesty, width is great in lighter winds, but once it gets over 25kt, narrower starts looking good.
Which is fine if the wind doesn't drop out too much.
Some people have an aversion to swimming a small speed board a kilometre back to shore.

Keef, hopefully I'll get to try my board again tomorrow, and be able to give you a report.

that's a fair point,

but i don't think it's possible to add enough thickness into a narrow speed board to give enough for a heavyweight to still be able to sail back to shore. especially as a speed board wouldn't be much more than 2.3m long and 50cm wide.

heavyweights get used to swimming gear.

if it's slalom on the other hand then width all the way.

unfortunately for us heavyweights the normal course of action for most designers is to take a narrow board and make it thicker for more volume. but it just doesn't give the range.

wide boards gave heavyweights a new lease of life with the sport. being 95+ kg it's not that hard to hold down a wide board in 25+ knots.

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said...

well being a heavier guy myself and having tried loads of boards at different widths/volume/lengths/thicknesses

i'd have to say width is more important,
if the goal is to keep the board thin for control and still maintain a certain volume then i'd be adding it into the width (early planing)
and drawing it throughout the board with fairly straight rails through the middle and a nice fat nose.

problem for heavyweights is that using a narrower board with lots of volume does little for early planing. plus just adding more thickness into the tail for more volume on widish boards just upsets the volume distribution making them hard to tack and

you know Gestalt im a light guy trying to design a board for the heavy weights , ive never been a lover of wide boards(cos i'm light), its the flat rocker&fin that gets you planneing not the width, once your on the plane it's the fin and rocker that keeps you on the plane

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said...
<<<<<<

but i don't think it's possible to add enough thickness into a narrow speed board to give enough for a heavyweight to still be able to sail back to shore. especially as a speed board wouldn't be much more than 2.3m long and 50cm wide.

heavyweights get used to swimming gear.

>>>>>>

Yes, you're right here, there are limits.
What I'm going for is to be able to sail/grovel a 43cm board back to shore, and I can do that on my new board, but I'm only 70kg

Select to expand quote

decrepit said...

Gesty, width is great in lighter winds, but once it gets over 25kt, narrower starts looking good.
Which is fine if the wind doesn't drop out too much.
Some people have an aversion to swimming a small speed board a kilometre back to shore.

Keef, hopefully I'll get to try my board again tomorrow, and be able to give you a report.

decrep how can you do it to me you know its easter, i came up with this mind blower and you bet me to it and your on the water

Select to expand quote

keef said...

Gestalt said...

well being a heavier guy myself and having tried loads of boards at different widths/volume/lengths/thicknesses

i'd have to say width is more important,
if the goal is to keep the board thin for control and still maintain a certain volume then i'd be adding it into the width (early planing)
and drawing it throughout the board with fairly straight rails through the middle and a nice fat nose.

problem for heavyweights is that using a narrower board with lots of volume does little for early planing. plus just adding more thickness into the tail for more volume on widish boards just upsets the volume distribution making them hard to tack and

you know Gestalt im a light guy trying to design a board for the heavy weights , ive never been a lover of wide boards(cos i'm light), its the flat rocker&fin that gets you planneing not the width, once your on the plane it's the fin and rocker that keeps you on the plane

i can't see myself agreeing with that.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said...

[b]

Yes, you're right here, there are limits.
What I'm going for is to be able to sail/grovel a 43cm board back to shore, and I can do that on my new board, but I'm only 70kg

is that your new board with a step , hows it going, i remember that board , thats where i got the idea of recessing the strapps , and a board that Gestalt did a post on ,it had great graphics

Select to expand quote

keef said...
>>>>>
is that your new board with a step , hows it going, i remember that board , thats where i got the idea of recessing the strapps , and a board that Gestalt did a post on ,it had great graphics

Well I've had it up to 35kts, but it wasn't all that comfortable. Then I recessed the foot pads, made it better, but I had too much curve under the arch of my foot. So now I've ground the centre of the pads down a bit, hope to try that tomorrow.

Select to expand quote

Gestalt said...

keef said...

Gestalt said...

well being a heavier guy myself and having tried loads of boards at different widths/volume/lengths/thicknesses

i'd have to say width is more important,
if the goal is to keep the board thin for control and still maintain a certain volume then i'd be adding it into the width (early planing)
and drawing it throughout the board with fairly straight rails through the middle and a nice fat nose.

problem for heavyweights is that using a narrower board with lots of volume does little for early planing. plus just adding more thickness into the tail for more volume on widish boards just upsets the volume distribution making them hard to tack and

you know Gestalt im a light guy trying to design a board for the heavy weights , ive never been a lover of wide boards(cos i'm light), its the flat rocker&fin that gets you planneing not the width, once your on the plane it's the fin and rocker that keeps you on the plane

i can't see myself agreeing with that.

gesty you have to think like a light weight guy, my board is 520 wide 2350 long and about 65lt, and carries a 6/7mt down to a 4.5mt i sail with a guy that has an isonic 122 the biggest sail he uses on that board is a 7/0 he's about 85kgs, he has 3 board changes and 3 sail changes , i have 3 sail changes 6/7 to 4.5 and im still on the same board, if the wind gets to a 7.3mt im on my CA55, and then a rrd advantglide 125lt
the board ive been thinking about these modifercations is a dropps 120lt, there a fast narrow slalom with heeps of backend volume and you can get them cheep, and by recessing the strapps you dont loose a lot of volume , but at the moment ill see how this goes on my board , as i said before i could be wasteing my time

Select to expand quote

decrepit said...

Well I've had it up to 35kts, but it wasn't all that comfortable. Then I recessed the foot pads, made it better, but I had too much curve under the arch of my foot. So now I've ground the centre of the pads down a bit, hope to try that tomorrow.

35kts thats fast the best ive done since i got the GT31 is 30 and i thought that was fast

well it was a good day, some of the faster guys were pushing 40kts

yeah i don't want to suggest your wasting your time. in my mind all options need to be explored otherwise it's not possible to decide which outcome works the best.

to share some of my experiences so far, doing very similar things to both yourself and decrepit, see below. certainly it's not a list of everything i've tried.

lightwind planing

thick versus wide

thick - 70cm wide board, lots of thickness about 270 long. using big fins, to get the early planing. it worked to a degree but the boards were prone to porposing and had a limited wind range with the nose lifting out of control at speed.

then tried wide, formula. wow. early planing, lots of speed and massive amounts of control. no rocker, used several version with different bottom shapes that got wider and wider.

which morphed into

proto 120lt wide slalom board (no rocker) - a reduced version of the formula board. 220 long 72cm wide, great board and fast, and very controllable even in 20+ knots with a 6.4m on it. although needs softer rails for chop than the formula plus the "lack of" length made it harder to tack. still way way better than the old school narrow and thick board mentioned above of similar volume.

then went to speed

speed - proto 50cm speed board - plenty of thickness for extra volume for my weight, 90lt approx, so very thick for it's width. unfortunately, the thickness led to control problems at speed as the board wanted to roll from side to side when on the run. plus the hard rails up front made it a risk when hitting boat wake. front rails were chimed which resolved the wake issue but board still to thick in my mind. (i guess this is what decrepit is trying to overcome). anyways, thinner resolved the board roll issue but meant a lot less volume.

then tried freestyle

proto freestyle board - "reduced bottom shape similar to decrepits board" then running into a duck tail. basically a wide board at the deck and a reduced outline underneath simialar to a gun surfboard outline. great at speed in good wind, gybed very well but lacked early planing ability. not a good outcome for a freestyle board.

so modified that board -

by filling in the reduced bottom shape to take it from 37cm wide at 30cm from tail to 42cm wide at 30cm from tail. this also made the rear rails sharper but we kept the duck tail. wow, what a difference that made. early planing improved, tracking improved and speed still the same. board an absolute pleasure to sail. no difference was made to rocker or length of flat at all.

now working on mk2 freestlye, wider tail still, 45cm at 30 cm from tail and thinner throughout. i've learnt that the width between the straps of the hull is very important. the duck tail now has a chamfer as tail thickness is less.

can't wait to sail that.

looking at starboard. they impress me with inovation, they are now designing boards with wingers that are still wide between the straps and up front with little rocker. all of my experiences so far suggests that this is the way to go. mr love's boards have similar tails also.

Gesty, seems to me your aversion to thickness, may be the height of your feet above the water line.
This will, as I've found out, induce lack of control of the board's attitude. Sailors weight is acting to roll the board in the same direction as the fin is, ie to leeward, means the ankles have to be used for control. At speed the body's reflexes just aren't fast enough. The closer to the water line the rider's weight is acting, the more stable the board will be.
And a similar thing for the mast base, the closer that is to the water line, the more stable the board will be.
That doesn't mean the board has to be thin, both mast track and feet can be lowered, without sacrificing much volume.

Or do you think there is some other effect, happening here.

Edit, of course gybing may be an issue, once feet are out of the lowered area, but I've yet to work that out.

think i've come to the same conclusion as yourself.

but my aversion to thickness is more than just board rolling, on bigger boards that's not so much of a problem, but lack of width does kill allround performance and early planing for heavywights.

definately lowering the mast and feet would help but i'm not sure it's really enough as i think it's the thickness through the entire length of the board that needs to be looked at. getting the axis of mass lower to the water may be the best solution. so to keep the volume the board needs to be wider in general terms for it's reduced thickness.

but i'm only talking about narrow boards. wide boards it's not such a problem. the thing that heavy guys figure out is that width means everything. i guess up until the drag is to high.

so introducing winglets, steps etc allows the width up front and the reduced tail behind the front straps for less drag etc.

*edit* looking at the angulo magnum with the cutout to the rail. personally i don't think they needed to keep the deck at a different width. the tail of the board could have just stepped in so the deck outline was the same as the tail. except of course if the straps don't fit anymore.