Now online..Not much change but i wonder how the two formula boards will compare head to head.

Slalom:
www.jp-australia.com/2012/SLALOM-VIII.2188.0.html

Formula:
http://www.jp-australia.com/2012/FORMULA-II.2196.0.html

Does anyone know how wide the tail at 30cm both boards have?
JP always giving us less information.

From the website...."These boards are slightly longer but quite a bit thinner through-out, especially in the rail. This makes the board less powerful and much easier to ride.
Keeping up top speed is more relaxed and requires less physical strength. With their extra length they are easier to jibe and more forgiving. "

And yet, if you look at the specs all 6 boards are the same 235cm length. Great proof reading there!!!! In their defence they MAY be talking in comparison to last years boards, BUT if you were doing so wouldn't you mention that at least???
*Edit- I just checked....all last years boards are 235cm also Nice one JP

Select to expand quote

sick_em_rex said...

From the website...."These boards are slightly longer but quite a bit thinner through-out, especially in the rail. This makes the board less powerful and much easier to ride.
Keeping up top speed is more relaxed and requires less physical strength. With their extra length they are easier to jibe and more forgiving. "

And yet, if you look at the specs all 6 boards are the same 235cm length. Great proof reading there!!!! In their defence they MAY be talking in comparison to last years boards, BUT if you were doing so wouldn't you mention that at least???
*Edit- I just checked....all last years boards are 235cm also Nice one JP

On the side of the page the 66 & 78 are 240 long

but as you said the page hasn't been proof read

I don't think the data on the website is the 2012 data.

Yeah sorry Elmo I didn't see that. Still a bad oversight. And seriously, will 5cm extra length really make that much difference???? That wouldn't even be in the water 99% of the time.

Select to expand quote

sick_em_rex said...

Yeah sorry Elmo I didn't see that. Still a bad oversight. And seriously, will 5cm extra length really make that much difference???? That wouldn't even be in the water 99% of the time.

Found my iSo 94 which is 236cm vs iSo 242cm, is massive difference in ocean sailing in particular gybing transitions and going over swell, gives ya heaps more nose rocker and clearance, in flat water conditions the difference is not noticeable

Select to expand quote

sick_em_rex said...

From the website...."These boards are slightly longer but quite a bit thinner through-out, especially in the rail. This makes the board less powerful and much easier to ride.
Keeping up top speed is more relaxed and requires less physical strength. With their extra length they are easier to jibe and more forgiving. "

I think, they are comparing the 2012 sizes for smaller riders (56, 66 & 78) to the 2012 sizes for manliman fellows (59, 68 & 84).

Makes sense to me.

Markus

Tried the JP Formula POWER on the week end. Very fast and points up wind like a demon. The deck up front looks very flat and scary, but it glides over the Botany Bay NE chop with no signs of spearing the rolling chop. mmmmmmmmm very nice.

I have the new 108 and it is alot better than last years 112,much easier to ride and faster in the chop,a better board i think.

Select to expand quote

F2 said...

I have the new 108 and it is alot better than last years 112,much easier to ride and faster in the chop,a better board i think.

Of course its faster in the chop its a smaller and narrower board.
The 108 (66 wide) replaces the 101 (65 wide) and the 118 (68 wide) replaces the 112 (68 wide)