Select to expand quote
Pacey said..randomfoiler said..
so you are saying 4cm between your feet and the foil are going to feel exactly like 14cm between your feet and the foil?
More like 89cm versus 99cm between your feet and the foil (assuming an 85cm mast). Some difference, but not necessarily huge.
For SUP foil or wing boards with volume greater than your bodyweight, I personally think concave decks are overrated, the loss of volume is too great, so the board has to be bigger to compensate. I've owned two concave deck boards, the One recessed deck model and the Fanatic Sky Wing, and wasn't wild about the concave deck on either.
To clarify that I'm not bagging all concave deck boards, I don't think the above comments apply to sinker wing boards and prone boards, where static stability is not such an issue
So this is interesting.
I have never really noticed the concave on bigger boards either (simply because I wouldn't stand where it was most pronounced)
But I really like it now on on my 5' 2'' x 23'' with 65L where I can access it with my foot and it gives me a bit more control ...
Now, the reason I started this thread is because I am torn between the 4'4'' x 22" FROTH @45L and the PUMP 4'6''x20.5" @37L
I (75kg) currently use a 65L as my light-wind board and want the new one to replace my sinker.
My current sinker is too long with 5'6" x 20" x 2 1/8" 36L. I prefer using my 65L most of the time.
The 65L is 4.9 inches thick, which is > twice - but I don't "feel the foil" differently which I assumed to be lack of experience.
It was my understanding that thinner boards were better for pumping, and "closer to foil" meant more "performance" (or lack of effort required on my part)
So I was going to base my decision on which one to get on their thickness.
I favour the shorter one of the two, but with more volume it is going to be thicker...