Board design concepts: an overview
Moderator: Moderator
Board design concepts: an overview
While I know that there are as many permutations of design as there are riders, it seems to me that successful design has gravitated towards one particular solution.
This solution uses aggressive (positive, drivey) aspects, most often in the rocker and tail and softens it (loosens the board) by subtly changing the outline and fin setup. Let's look at 2 examples:
Baden's boards are full-on pin tails with flat rocker (via huge concave). They are very aggressive shapes designed for control and speed. But, instead of a conventional 4 fin setup he has extreme cant. This lifts the tail of the board and frees it up, making the board loose. The cant seems to retain drive in rail turns, too. The downside to the concave meeting at the rails is a hard edge that takes some controlling at times.
Kyle retains the aggressive tail and keeps rail length for drive, but he moves the wide point back to get the board to point vertical more easily. He shrinks the fin cluster (brings the rear fin forward) to loosen up the tail. This compromise does make the tail inclined to drift at times, so he has to control through turns.
I won't talk about Gavin's and Matt's boards (Bruce?), but they seem to be designed along similar principles - aggressive tails and fin setups tempered with balance in outline and loose bottom contours.
Rob Slater can better discuss the Simpson boards, but to my eye the aggression is in the (rail) fin setup and rocker, with the tails rounder for looseness and speed.
There are other subtleties that I haven't got into here, like changes in rail and adjustments to the bottom contours, that can be used to finesse handling characteristics.
Sure fatties have their place, but the players seem to be congregating around tempering drive for looseness, rather than adding drive to skim boards. Is it a function of follow the leader, success breeding copies, or the evolution towards high performance knee boarding in marginal conditions?
This solution uses aggressive (positive, drivey) aspects, most often in the rocker and tail and softens it (loosens the board) by subtly changing the outline and fin setup. Let's look at 2 examples:
Baden's boards are full-on pin tails with flat rocker (via huge concave). They are very aggressive shapes designed for control and speed. But, instead of a conventional 4 fin setup he has extreme cant. This lifts the tail of the board and frees it up, making the board loose. The cant seems to retain drive in rail turns, too. The downside to the concave meeting at the rails is a hard edge that takes some controlling at times.
Kyle retains the aggressive tail and keeps rail length for drive, but he moves the wide point back to get the board to point vertical more easily. He shrinks the fin cluster (brings the rear fin forward) to loosen up the tail. This compromise does make the tail inclined to drift at times, so he has to control through turns.
I won't talk about Gavin's and Matt's boards (Bruce?), but they seem to be designed along similar principles - aggressive tails and fin setups tempered with balance in outline and loose bottom contours.
Rob Slater can better discuss the Simpson boards, but to my eye the aggression is in the (rail) fin setup and rocker, with the tails rounder for looseness and speed.
There are other subtleties that I haven't got into here, like changes in rail and adjustments to the bottom contours, that can be used to finesse handling characteristics.
Sure fatties have their place, but the players seem to be congregating around tempering drive for looseness, rather than adding drive to skim boards. Is it a function of follow the leader, success breeding copies, or the evolution towards high performance knee boarding in marginal conditions?
Good stuff!
I have noticed lately that many of the young standups are riding smaller and smaller boards in small surf and the kneeriders are riding longer and longer boards.
I saw a Channel Islands ad in the newest American surfing magazines showing Rob Machado ripping on a 5"1". At the same time, Baden was telling whoever would listen at the World Contest to go longer and move the fins up.
Any thoughts?
I have noticed lately that many of the young standups are riding smaller and smaller boards in small surf and the kneeriders are riding longer and longer boards.
I saw a Channel Islands ad in the newest American surfing magazines showing Rob Machado ripping on a 5"1". At the same time, Baden was telling whoever would listen at the World Contest to go longer and move the fins up.
Any thoughts?
Baden's on the money - he's been preaching that for years. Everyone whose listened hasn't regretted it. Rail length for paddle, projection and speed - fins forward for looseness.
You can ride the 5'0" when you've got constant access to perfect waves, have superb timing and absurd levels of fitness. At other times you're better off with the concept of paddle, drive and looseness.
You can ride the 5'0" when you've got constant access to perfect waves, have superb timing and absurd levels of fitness. At other times you're better off with the concept of paddle, drive and looseness.
good to see you stirring the pot Dr Red
how about board concepts divided into the male and female?
male
eg
flat rocker, hard edges, down rails, max concave, thinness, narrowness, flattish outline, pintails, stiff rake, fins with no cant or toe in
female- the opposite (and wilier)
banana rocker, soft edges, egg rails, super vee, thickness, width, rounded outline, big square tails, cant, toe in, flex
but what about rake - where does that belong?
best board is combo of both
but where to put the female (apart from the kitchen?) and where to put the male (apart from the pub)
that is the question
not to get all self reflexive or anything, or even to relate back to one of your earlier threads:
paradigm
how about board concepts divided into the male and female?
male
eg
flat rocker, hard edges, down rails, max concave, thinness, narrowness, flattish outline, pintails, stiff rake, fins with no cant or toe in
female- the opposite (and wilier)
banana rocker, soft edges, egg rails, super vee, thickness, width, rounded outline, big square tails, cant, toe in, flex
but what about rake - where does that belong?
best board is combo of both
but where to put the female (apart from the kitchen?) and where to put the male (apart from the pub)
that is the question
not to get all self reflexive or anything, or even to relate back to one of your earlier threads:
paradigm
just a small paradigmmmamma from meA paradigm (pronounced PEHR-uh-daim, from Greek paradeiknyai - to show side by side) is a pattern or an example of something. The word also connotes the ideas of a mental picture and pattern of thought. Thomas Kuhn uses the word to mean the model that scientists hold about a particular area of knowledge. Kuhn's famous book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, is his view of the stages through which a science goes in getting from one paradigm to the next.
was that a "little girl" in all of us.... or a little 'girl' in all of us
as long as the opposite is not true
speaking about inner knowledge.... did you mention the fact that a guy who is so flexable he can turn himself inside out isn't necessarily riding the board that a normal man would ride (or normal little girl would ride)?
as long as the opposite is not true
speaking about inner knowledge.... did you mention the fact that a guy who is so flexable he can turn himself inside out isn't necessarily riding the board that a normal man would ride (or normal little girl would ride)?
- Smokin Rock
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 12:20 am
- Location: downtown Kapaau
so this is what you guys talk about in these so called design threads.
i was going to insist that fish tails be put in the "manly" side of the equasion but even that can be seriously misconstrued.
thanks for making me look at my boards in a new and perverse way.
you two are sick puppies.

i was going to insist that fish tails be put in the "manly" side of the equasion but even that can be seriously misconstrued.
thanks for making me look at my boards in a new and perverse way.
you two are sick puppies.
"This sucks more than anything that has ever sucked before." Butt-head
Headwax. wrote:
flat rocker, hard edges, down rails, max concave, thinness, narrowness, flattish outline, pintails, stiff rake, fins with no cant or toe in
kneelos are so old fashioned
wax im sure after watching a bit of the Acadamies, that you male outline best suits some "female" hollywood starlites or super models
yet viva le voluptous....in babes and boards
a fish has to be female
- Smokin Rock
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 12:20 am
- Location: downtown Kapaau
-
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 1873
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 9:02 pm