have you got the dimmensions of your soon to be quad fin - if yes, what are they and why
interested
dorje
20 interesting statemente re quad v tri
Moderator: Moderator
-
Steeno
- Legend (Contribution Guru)
- Posts: 1168
- Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 4:09 pm
- Location: Illawarra
- Contact:
Classic, thanks geetee for the compliment 
twisting in a twisted night club......well, its all good and all straight, you know what kneelos are like, we are all twisted in our own ways and thats what makes us proudly kneelo's. Just ask my girlfriend of 20 years. when we go out we like to party
All night clubs are twisted
And i know that came from Bruce
Your first impression of me is correct.
twisting in a twisted night club......well, its all good and all straight, you know what kneelos are like, we are all twisted in our own ways and thats what makes us proudly kneelo's. Just ask my girlfriend of 20 years. when we go out we like to party
All night clubs are twistedAnd i know that came from Bruce
Your first impression of me is correct.
I found an interesting thing when putting pads on my new 6'3" stealth (I'll explain stealth later)
I lined up my 4 Flashpoints and inspected the knee dents and foot impressions (I've lent out my other boards).
The surf bumps on the top of my feet are in line with the tip of my rail fins.
My knees are the same width from the stringer, regardless of board ( 22" wide or 24" wide).
Measured from surf bump to knee. Measured the same from fin tip up on the new board.
Measured out from stringer.
X marked the spot.
After first surf i found that I was about 1cm forward of X. Probably because it's a long board and I'm kneeling too far forward. But I think I'll get right onto that X when I get the board worked out.
Be interesting to hear where quad riders rear weight is. My guess it's behind, but towards the stringer, of the rear fins.
I call the newie a stealth because it makes no noise in trim. Zero. No splashing, no hiss of water spraying off rails, no gurgle around the fins. Nothing. Except when put into a turn when a falling sheet of water makes a (big) noise. It's a little bizarre having a board run so quiet. I think it's because the water runs so clean under it.
I lined up my 4 Flashpoints and inspected the knee dents and foot impressions (I've lent out my other boards).
The surf bumps on the top of my feet are in line with the tip of my rail fins.
My knees are the same width from the stringer, regardless of board ( 22" wide or 24" wide).
Measured from surf bump to knee. Measured the same from fin tip up on the new board.
Measured out from stringer.
X marked the spot.
After first surf i found that I was about 1cm forward of X. Probably because it's a long board and I'm kneeling too far forward. But I think I'll get right onto that X when I get the board worked out.
Be interesting to hear where quad riders rear weight is. My guess it's behind, but towards the stringer, of the rear fins.
I call the newie a stealth because it makes no noise in trim. Zero. No splashing, no hiss of water spraying off rails, no gurgle around the fins. Nothing. Except when put into a turn when a falling sheet of water makes a (big) noise. It's a little bizarre having a board run so quiet. I think it's because the water runs so clean under it.
-
geetee
- Local (More than 25 post)
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:19 pm
- Location: Central Coast NSW Australia
Hey Steenos the compliment is deserved for all of you elite kneeboarders.
The actual fact I was trying to represent is that all new boards must have some different handling features and are never the same as the last board. This means we have to evolve to the new characteristics of the board to some degree whether we like it or not OR get another board if the feel is anywhere close to our individual liking.
You guys that are testing boards 2 fins, 3 fins, 4 fins and 5 fins are essential to the forward thinking of our beloved sport. In forums such as this where people like yourself and Hart pass on the differing characteristics of kneeboard design allows us to purchase our kneeboard every couple of years or so knowing that the shapes have been tested by our experts.
Now people like Headwax who also add the additional advice from his own theories increase the knowledge pool and the experimental thirst that drives kneeboarding. I have seen Headwax's 14mm concave and salute his energy in trying his own ideas. ( I think there was enough room in the concave to comfortably hide under the board in case of rain).
All adds to the hearty debate but it also should be seen as what suits who as in individual needs (kneeds?)
Enough of my rambling
Geetee
The actual fact I was trying to represent is that all new boards must have some different handling features and are never the same as the last board. This means we have to evolve to the new characteristics of the board to some degree whether we like it or not OR get another board if the feel is anywhere close to our individual liking.
You guys that are testing boards 2 fins, 3 fins, 4 fins and 5 fins are essential to the forward thinking of our beloved sport. In forums such as this where people like yourself and Hart pass on the differing characteristics of kneeboard design allows us to purchase our kneeboard every couple of years or so knowing that the shapes have been tested by our experts.
Now people like Headwax who also add the additional advice from his own theories increase the knowledge pool and the experimental thirst that drives kneeboarding. I have seen Headwax's 14mm concave and salute his energy in trying his own ideas. ( I think there was enough room in the concave to comfortably hide under the board in case of rain).
All adds to the hearty debate but it also should be seen as what suits who as in individual needs (kneeds?)
Enough of my rambling
Geetee
Just surf
-
hart
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:46 pm
- Location: Dee Why, Sydney.
Entry
Hello Wax,
I've looked at those pics a number of times now..and I'm stoked you made the Final.
Between frames 3 and 4 but..I dont think your rail actually 'entered'. You have sunk it sure, because of your shoulder position..but it popped back out.
Probably at the same time you unweighted?
I think we are looking at foil in this pic..not about fins as such.
And rail thickness forward of widepoint..now you don't want to push the 'proverbial' up hill do ya?
Nor do I.
hart.
I've looked at those pics a number of times now..and I'm stoked you made the Final.
Between frames 3 and 4 but..I dont think your rail actually 'entered'. You have sunk it sure, because of your shoulder position..but it popped back out.
Probably at the same time you unweighted?
I think we are looking at foil in this pic..not about fins as such.
And rail thickness forward of widepoint..now you don't want to push the 'proverbial' up hill do ya?
Nor do I.
hart.
-
hart
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:46 pm
- Location: Dee Why, Sydney.
flight
I don't think spins look good at any time..and I think we now have determined that:headwax wrote:
In the cutback pic: you're perfectly right about the unweighting. But it happens also coming off the bottom and "flicking off". (A tri rider on a quad does a beautiful flat spin when flicking off the back of the wave: I always feel like "goose" in Top Gun)
1 We spin around in a cutback
2 We spin around off the bottom
3 We spin around off the top...if we ride the type of quads in question..umm
As I mentioned above, I reckon that it has a lot to do with foil..not necessarily fin configuration.
But of the quads you mention..no attention seems to be given to this. If it were, I believe quads would perform better than they do..because at least the rail would be giving something to counteract the negatives you have mentioned previously.
From what I've seen of the US quads, their rear fin placement would limit the 'spin'..but maybe limit manoeuvreability in other situations..like full face waves rather than top to bottom grinders.
And to foil?
Yes, if they are shaped like a wing they will generate lowpressure onto the deckline of your rail..and providing the volume of your rail (at the widepoint) is conducive to entry (not just a transient sink due to body positioning)..then you will allow the pressure to work for you.
In another thread, guys were talking about manoeuvres at the price of speed..I believe we should look to manoeuvres to GENERATE speed..that way we are rewarded for turning..not just turning because we think that's what we should do.
Refinement, foil and the elusive 'shoulderless' rail..the closer I get to these issues..the quicker things seem to be in the water.
Design is a game of inches..if we choose to stay moving forward.
PS
(Q) Where do I think a rail should begin..and ultimately end?
(A) It shouldn't..we should get rid of the deck and bottom first
Regards as always,
hart.
PPS
I have never seen Top Gun
-
hart
- Legend (Contribution King!)
- Posts: 928
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:46 pm
- Location: Dee Why, Sydney.
flight
I don't think spins look good at any time..and I think we now have determined that:headwax wrote:
In the cutback pic: you're perfectly right about the unweighting. But it happens also coming off the bottom and "flicking off". (A tri rider on a quad does a beautiful flat spin when flicking off the back of the wave: I always feel like "goose" in Top Gun)
1 We spin around in a cutback
2 We spin around off the bottom
3 We spin around off the top...if we ride the type of quads in question..umm
As I mentioned above, I reckon that it has a lot to do with foil..not necessarily fin configuration.
But of the quads you mention..no attention seems to be given to this. If it were, I believe quads would perform better than they do..because at least the rail would be giving something to counteract the negatives you have mentioned previously.
From what I've seen of the US quads, their rear fin placement would limit the 'spin'..but maybe limit manoeuvreability in other situations..like full face waves rather than top to bottom grinders.
And to foil?
Yes, if they are shaped like a wing they will generate lowpressure onto the deckline of your rail..and providing the volume of your rail (at the widepoint) is conducive to entry (not just a transient sink due to body positioning)..then you will allow the pressure to work for you.
In another thread, guys were talking about manoeuvres at the price of speed..I believe we should look to manoeuvres to GENERATE speed..that way we are rewarded for turning..not just turning because we think that's what we should do.
Refinement, foil and the elusive 'shoulderless' rail..the closer I get to these issues..the quicker things seem to be in the water.
Design is a game of inches..if we choose to stay moving forward.
PS
(Q) Where do I think a rail should begin..and ultimately end?
(A) It shouldn't..we should get rid of the deck and bottom first
Regards as always,
hart.
PPS
I have never seen Top Gun
Hart says
Remember John Mayall's "Blues without drums" ?*
The foiled rails give lift (and speed!) without splash.
This is happening on a moderate concave board (6mm or so) and on a full v-bottom board, so it could well be a general principle.
The lift is always toward the nose of the board when a rail is committed so the boards are constantly accelerating through turns (leaving the hapless pilot (i.e. me) trying to think fast enough to keep up)
*(In 1969 John caused somewhat of a stir with the release of a drummerless acoustic live album entitled "The Turning Point", from which his song "Room To Move" was destined to become a rock classic)
Read about stealth in post above.Refinement, foil and the elusive 'shoulderless' rail..the closer I get to these issues..the quicker things seem to be in the water.
Remember John Mayall's "Blues without drums" ?*
The foiled rails give lift (and speed!) without splash.
This is happening on a moderate concave board (6mm or so) and on a full v-bottom board, so it could well be a general principle.
The lift is always toward the nose of the board when a rail is committed so the boards are constantly accelerating through turns (leaving the hapless pilot (i.e. me) trying to think fast enough to keep up)
*(In 1969 John caused somewhat of a stir with the release of a drummerless acoustic live album entitled "The Turning Point", from which his song "Room To Move" was destined to become a rock classic)
Last edited by red on Mon Jun 07, 2004 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lovin the rap lads
but whats foil?
Hart - your question and answer spiel in above post sounds like the physical equivalent to the metaphysical debate in the spiritual surfing thread on beginning and endings-
Mick Malthouse who coaches Collingwood in the AFL keeps a note book by his bed as he dreams of ideas, wakes, jots them down.
Design or innovation ideas in any field sometimes comes from both experience and inspiration - do you ever dream of things that relate to your design ideas
this is my yellow house, Jungian, or Russian parlor Bohemian question
[/quote]
but whats foil?
Hart - your question and answer spiel in above post sounds like the physical equivalent to the metaphysical debate in the spiritual surfing thread on beginning and endings-
Mick Malthouse who coaches Collingwood in the AFL keeps a note book by his bed as he dreams of ideas, wakes, jots them down.
Design or innovation ideas in any field sometimes comes from both experience and inspiration - do you ever dream of things that relate to your design ideas
this is my yellow house, Jungian, or Russian parlor Bohemian question
[/quote]
merely labled