i've had an Omen 5'7" 72L board for a while now, and it replaced my damaged F-One Rocket 5'4" 75L. i think the Omen is considered a mid length board, but i've seen people referring to mid lengths as anything from 5' to 7'. I like the Omen, but honestly it doesn't feel that much different than the F-One did. And why should it, given its closeness in specs? A buddy of mine was asking about getting a new mid length board, but it, too, was almost identical in volume/length to his current board. He thought being a 'new mid length board' meant a better light wind board. But I told him, based on my experience, it would be a side step mostly. Ignoring the marketing, seems to me most (under 6') mid length boards are just slightly narrower versions of the boards we were all riding a year ago. Now a 6'8"+ 100+L <23" wide board will likely have a light wind aspect to it, but is that really mid length? Probably only if you've been on a 9 footer.

I think it has more to do with the width/shape. The volume and length might be similar, but the narrower width should make a meaningful improvement in light wind takeoff and should handle differently than a wide board. I have seen and felt the difference myself. The reality is that most of the board in that length range are getting narrower, so boards are getting divided into shortboards (less than ~5'), midlengths (~5-7') and true downwind boards (over ~7'), and maybe a segment of wider boards for beginners.

I think that some brands like F One have been on a dedicated different route compared to overall market in the past. They never liked too much volume packed in short sizes and prefered thinner shapes to optimise direct foil feeling, if compared to e.g. Duotone, who prefered to get the best planing efficiency per length and went below 80l sub 5 feet only. So a medium length is always relative to a brands usual shape and design concepts. Duotone offers a 5.1 x 24.7" with 85l as a classic Sky Style shape and adds 7"/18cm length for its mid lengthy hybrid 85l offering, whilest reducing width by 2.7"/7cm. It makes sense to call it a hybrid, as it?s not a cut down DW shape per its DNA.

I think we need a new term.

Super Mids...lengths in the sixes. Between true DW (sevens and eights) and those slightly longer short wing boards in the fives.

You feel the differences when in the sixes and widths of 19-20

Not sure about that. My 65l amos sultan feels smaller, is more agile and foils up quicker than my old Amos nitro 60l or my rocket wing S 54l dueto it's shape and the fact so.much board is behind the mast.

Same with my f one 90l 5'10 midlength, better, more maneuverable etc than my old takuma CK 80l 5'2 it replaced.

Mike

Not sure about that. My 65l amos sultan feels smaller, is more agile and foils up quicker than my old Amos nitro 60l or my rocket wing S 54l due to it's shape and the fact so much board is behind the mast.

Same with my f one 90l 5'10 midlength, better, more maneuverable etc than my old takuma CK 80l 5'2 it replaced.

Mike

Beached57 it sounds like you were on a decent shape before going to another good design in the Omen. I'm curious on the widths of both boards. If you'd come from a sub 5' board over 23" wide, you would be seeing more gains.

I went from a 60L - 4'11" x 23.5" to a 55L - 5'5' x 18" and the ease of getting on foil with longer and narrower board is very much noticeable. Not only is the ease of take-off huge, but the bank angles are so much better with my 795mm mast. I also have an 85L 6'3" x 18.75", which is my go to for flukey wind conditions. No problems getting on foil ever.

IMO the mid length board comes with the 20" or narrower tag. I noticed you didn't put the widths on any of your boards in the OP. Without that, you shouldn't expect significant improvements.
Quite simply it always goes back to board aspect ratio.

Select to expand quote

BWalnut said..
IMO the mid length board comes with the 20" or narrower tag. I noticed you didn't put the widths on any of your boards in the OP. Without that, you shouldn't expect significant improvements.
Quite simply it always goes back to board aspect ratio.

my F-One was 25" wide, Omen 22". I bought the Omen only because I trashed my F-One, and though we all hope to improve our lot with each new board purchase, the motivating factor was simply i needed a board. But my point wasn't really to critique the Omen, but rather just the general misconception that these newer under 6' mid length boards are significantly better at getting going in light winds than their predecessors. Perhaps it was just my misconception, though my buddy, as mentioned in the OP, confirmed it's not just me.

Select to expand quote

beached57 said..

BWalnut said..
IMO the mid length board comes with the 20" or narrower tag. I noticed you didn't put the widths on any of your boards in the OP. Without that, you shouldn't expect significant improvements.
Quite simply it always goes back to board aspect ratio.

my F-One was 25" wide, Omen 22". I bought the Omen only because I trashed my F-One, and though we all hope to improve our lot with each new board purchase, the motivating factor was simply i needed a board. But my point wasn't really to critique the Omen, but rather just the general misconception that these newer under 6' mid length boards are significantly better at getting going in light winds than their predecessors. Perhaps it was just my misconception, though my buddy, as mentioned in the OP, confirmed it's not just me.

Comparing the two boards, the Omen with a wide tail, narrow nose, and torpedo bottom should be less stable, but much more capable of plowing through chop and lifting earlier. The F-one should be much more forgiving of wind lulls and easy to climb aboard, and might take-off easier for you as it's less tippy.
For me, I would replace the F-one with an Omen 60 knowing that I can take off about the same but be ridng a much smaller board. So the point being, apples to oranges. And beware of rhetoric like "game changer."

Select to expand quote

beached57 said..

BWalnut said..
IMO the mid length board comes with the 20" or narrower tag. I noticed you didn't put the widths on any of your boards in the OP. Without that, you shouldn't expect significant improvements.
Quite simply it always goes back to board aspect ratio.

my F-One was 25" wide, Omen 22". I bought the Omen only because I trashed my F-One, and though we all hope to improve our lot with each new board purchase, the motivating factor was simply i needed a board. But my point wasn't really to critique the Omen, but rather just the general misconception that these newer under 6' mid length boards are significantly better at getting going in light winds than their predecessors. Perhaps it was just my misconception, though my buddy, as mentioned in the OP, confirmed it's not just me.

Well, I would say that it's not a misconception, they undoubtedly are easier to get on foil in light winds if the dims are correct. However, they are not magic bullets, there is still a legitimate light wind skill that has to be developed. Once you have that skill, then you can tell the dramatic differences.
The omen was one of the first boards to explore this realm and is a step in the right direction, but definitely not the choice for top performers now.

I previously had a 5'0 x27x90L Sunova v1 wingboard, then I changed to the 5'10" x 20x 85L Sunova carver and the difference is night and day. It gets foiling so much easier and actually gets up on foil alot easier than the Sup's I have that are longer but wider. Despite being 10" longer it still feels smaller and more agile in the air than my previous wing board. The ability to bank over hard in turns is really nice.
As others have mentioned I think getting down to proper narrow widths 20" and below is key. The sup downwind foilers are mostly saying 20" is the widest that you want to go to be able to paddle up effectively so that seems like a reasonable reference point for winging

To me the mid length boards we see coming out at the moment seem to be aimed at people going for a one board quiver - the length isn't that much longer than a typical shorter board and the width is reduced a bit to allow better light wind performance. To me that is all a bunch of compromise. I have a two board quiver - my short board which is under 5' and a sinker and my light wind board which is 6'8" by 19" and is a true light wind weapon. You pick your poison here because it's a choice between ultimate performance for different wind strengths vs average performance in all wind strengths with the penalty for ultimate performance being the cost of two boards versus one board.

Select to expand quote

MeonAsh said..
To me the mid length boards we see coming out at the moment seem to be aimed at people going for a one board quiver - the length isn't that much longer than a typical shorter board and the width is reduced a bit to allow better light wind performance. To me that is all a bunch of compromise. I have a two board quiver - my short board which is under 5' and a sinker and my light wind board which is 6'8" by 19" and is a true light wind weapon. You pick your poison here because it's a choice between ultimate performance for different wind strengths vs average performance in all wind strengths with the penalty for ultimate performance being the cost of two boards versus one board.

Yeh i tend to agree with you. it reminds me of the "all round" kite days where the kite didn't do anything particularly well.

"Mid length" is a marketing term for a longer and narrower board than was been the norm 18 months ago when short and fat ruled. I have been riding a 6 2 x 20 for the last year which replaced a 5 4 x 26 and it is chalk and cheese. The 6 2 gets up easier, turns better and feels connected to the foil due to being thinner.
I would suggest get the narrowest board you can and still get up easily and it is a one board quiver. I will paraphrase that with I only ride waves, freestyle folk may need smaller boards. My next board will be similar size but thinner so better feel.

I've gone from a 5'4 x f....ing fat 95l to a 7'x 20inch x 6inch 115L(ish) board . I love my 7' board. I can't see any downside to it. It carves really well, turns quick, gets off the water well, feels really solid in high winds. I don't jump or do tricks -just pretty basic winging & flagging out. What am I missing out on by not having a small /thin board? There's talk about not feeling connected to the foil with a thick board - what difference does that make? How good do you have to be to notice the difference?

Select to expand quote

Microsurfer said..
I've gone from a 5'4 x f....ing fat 95l to a 7'x 20inch x 6inch 115L(ish) board . I love my 7' board. I can't see any downside to it. It carves really well, turns quick, gets off the water well, feels really solid in high winds. I don't jump or do tricks -just pretty basic winging & flagging out. What am I missing out on by not having a small /thin board? There's talk about not feeling connected to the foil with a thick board - what difference does that make? How good do you have to be to notice the difference?

They do feel better for riding waves. Like a shorter mast.

Select to expand quote

Microsurfer said..
I've gone from a 5'4 x f....ing fat 95l to a 7'x 20inch x 6inch 115L(ish) board . I love my 7' board. I can't see any downside to it. It carves really well, turns quick, gets off the water well, feels really solid in high winds. I don't jump or do tricks -just pretty basic winging & flagging out. What am I missing out on by not having a small /thin board? There's talk about not feeling connected to the foil with a thick board - what difference does that make? How good do you have to be to notice the difference?

You could compare it to rinding a smaller foil: everything becomes more lively.

If the distance from your feet to the foil is the same, does it make any difference to "feel" of thick board / shorter mast vs thin board / longer mast?

Select to expand quote

Microsurfer said..
I've gone from a 5'4 x f....ing fat 95l to a 7'x 20inch x 6inch 115L(ish) board . I love my 7' board. I can't see any downside to it. It carves really well, turns quick, gets off the water well, feels really solid in high winds. I don't jump or do tricks -just pretty basic winging & flagging out. What am I missing out on by not having a small /thin board? There's talk about not feeling connected to the foil with a thick board - what difference does that make? How good do you have to be to notice the difference?

I've tried not many but a very few dw boards. If you have a flexy mast or a flexy construction under your feet..mast box is not as solid...riding a dw boards with the narrowness and the thickness become an solid issue for a deal breaker. If everything is solide, GEEEE a smaller dw board is a dream(I do have a 104L)!!!!Mid-Length for me is an advanced "old man" board where you need the performance of a narrow boards where you feel a lot the foil as a smaller board, but you don't need to bust your shoulder with a high cadence pumping the wing and foil to get up and go....and even can take a smaller wing for the same day. That board is usually an easy board to ride...could float you if you want...you can schlog it back in little wind...so around -10 to your weight....could go over your weight also...but I would prefer a longboard over a mid-length for that criteria.