No… it’s the foam. When we were doing “in-water” testing of different materials at Hydro Epic, any amount of foam, anywhere within the board, dampened the feel of the board noticeably. This included, but wasn’t limited to, using foam in the skin, as a core, for stringer(s), perimeter rails, as reinforcements (strips, bars, etc). The guitar comparison is a good one. If you have an acoustic guitar that really resonates, take a small peice of foam and tape it to the top… can you feel the difference in how much the guitar resonates? What would happen if you filled your guitar with foam? Now try it with air… did it make as big a difference?
That’s interesting Kendall, that you could actually feel the difference in resonance while surfing.
I have fun with my boards using them as a drum, the pitch changes as it gets beaten in a different place, and there is always an area which resonates the most, a sweet spot indicator ?
By the way apparently paulownia is prized for its resonant quality in musical instruments, and I haver noticed that if a palownia tree or log is truck with the hand it gives a really resonant ringing note, quite surprising for a big solid standing tree to do that.
cheers
L x W x V will give you your fabric depending on how many layers required . For resin work back on the cloth weight to get the amount required . As to light boards there are a few ways to make light boards. Disolve core but also put in place stringers when building ,the other is to use close mould techniques and inside of hollow board use honeycomb where stress accurs . Problem with carbon is its getting harder to get the right fabrics ,and needs to be UV stable .Making hollow composite board is ok . Respect to the woodys …
Some people like feeling the board resonating, and others are put off by it. The “slash and burn” shredders like the extra liveliness, and the traditional “old school” drop-knee types get too much feedback from the boards. Paddling is really trippy, because your entire body is right there, on top of the board where you feel everything. Even little ripples transmit big vibrations.
I went through a period with my guitar when I would just play by myself. I totally got into the feeling of the guitar vibrating… to the point where the music became almost secondary.
I spend a lot of time checking out walls of guitars in music shops - I’m kind of obsessive about guitars (like surfboards). Over the last forty-some-odd years I’ve owned around 500 of them. If you walk down the line and strum the strings as you go, you’ll notice some guitars have much more volume and sustain. Others are dead and the sound barely projects. If you put your hand on the guitars as you strum, you can feel that the louder ones vibrate much more. Master luthiers will “tap tune” the woods for the top and backs so they resonate at the same frequency.
It’s just one more aspect of surfboard design that I think is worth investigating. Surfers have known the importance of template, thickness, and rocker dimensions for a long time, but we’re just starting to think about weight, flex, and resonance.
One of the beautiful things about surfing is there is no absolute right or wrong. It’s personal preference. What is hard for me to understand is how - as a group of “free thinkers” - we are so resistant to different technology or design concepts. You would think we would want to explore the boundries of what’s possible. Riding only PU/PE thrusters is like traveling to the world’s best restaraunts and only ordering the club sandwich. Personally, I don’t need Chinese club sandwiches… I want to see what else is on the menu. Let’s eat.
the vibrations you feel when you tap the board will have very little to do with the ‘resonance’ in the water. how the board vibrates (the modal deflections) is entirely dependant on how it is supported. a board in shaping stands will be supported at these two points, the heavier the board, the greater the resistance to (vetical) movement at these points. these suppressions of the vibration will then effect the mode shape of the entire board. well that is unless they are carefully placed at the nodes.
the other reson is that in the water a board will be damped heavily by the water, which to complicate things also acts as the support.
about the most you could say from this is ‘board A resonates more than board B’
i think the crux of this is much as kendall says, some people like it, some people dont. in board design there are so many factors that surely the easiest way to develop is not to try and quantify each and every one, but to test and experiment in real conditions. yup, go and surf!
Quote:
Small point of order: Light boards suck, and calling a 9 pound board a failure is ridiculous, 9 pounds is an improvement on 4 pounds by approximately 25 Newtons of thrust, and a lower centre of effort and gravity.
Talking about light boards being the way ahead is like being stuck in the dark ages, or wearing your wetsuit back to front, ok if you are into it I suppose.
<
they are the way forwards in some respects. for those who want to do kelly slater esque whips etc the low swing weight will be a positive boon!
but anyway, onto heavy boards. one major factor is momentum, this is both your friend when you want to maintain speed, and your enemy as higher mass comes hand in hand with higher inertia, or resistance to movement. that is in the words of my NVH lecturer, heavy things just dont want to move!
i can see the merit of your calculations if the board was dropped out of a plane where it would only be subject to gravitational acceleration, however i doubt this is how many people surf. a good deal of the energy comes from the wave itself, thus a lighter board having a lower inertia is easier to move and so faster accelerating. however in steeper waves you will notice more of the gravitational effect…
so this is surely a balance, other factors such as chipfish has mentioned about too light a board being hard to take off in strong offshore winds, must be taken into account.
and lastly, please please please dont talk about thrust! thrust is defined as a reaction force to the ejection of a mass. recoil of a gun for instance is a good example. its how rockets etc work, conservation of momentum, action causing an equal and opposite reaction and all that. not surfboards! unless you put an outboard motor on…
well i surf in strong offshore all the time
of all the things that make a board hard to catch waves
like low volume, exagerated rocker,low surface area, overly flexible etc,and the wind
weight has the least to do with how a board catches waves
until someone actually builds and surfs a variety of light weight boards
then they have no basis of experience
Quote:
they are the way forwards in some respects. for those who want to do kelly slater esque whips etc the low swing weight will be a positive boon!
but anyway, onto heavy boards. one major factor is momentum, this is both your friend when you want to maintain speed, and your enemy as higher mass comes hand in hand with higher inertia, or resistance to movement. that is in the words of my NVH lecturer, heavy things just dont want to move!
i can see the merit of your calculations if the board was dropped out of a plane where it would only be subject to gravitational acceleration, however i doubt this is how many people surf. a good deal of the energy comes from the wave itself, thus a lighter board having a lower inertia is easier to move and so faster accelerating. however in steeper waves you will notice more of the gravitational effect…
In fact the force which makes a surfboard and rider move is entirely due to gravity and muscular input from the rider, two exceptions to this being when the rider is on the forward pitching lip, or surfing with a following wind.
The power of the wave drives the surfer and board indirectly by lifting and thus imparting gravitational potential energy to the board and rider, this is the case even when the surfer is not losing altitude, as the wave is then replacing gravitational energy at the same rate that it is being converted into kinetic energy via a downwards glide path.
The amount of energy available due to muscular input from the rider is less than 10% of the total, and is much less efficiently converted into kinetic energy than is the force of gravitational attraction, thus the vast majority of the force driving the board is due to gravity, and as you know gravitational potential energy is proportional to mass.
Quote:
And lastly, please please please dont talk about thrust! thrust is defined as a reaction force to the ejection of a mass. recoil of a gun for instance is a good example. its how rockets etc work, conservation of momentum, action causing an equal and opposite reaction and all that. not surfboards! unless you put an outboard motor on…
Thrust and the force of gravitational attraction are both measured in Newtons, however we can avoid the term when discussing surfboard movement . . . . provided that you get universal agreement from the surfing community to stop calling their tri fins ‘Thrusters’ !
Thrust is a useful term because it is less wordy than ‘the force of gravitational attraction’. . . . and the net result, measured in Newtons, will be the same no matter what handle you give to the force involved. . . … if you like I can refer to force/drag ratios rather than thrust/drag ratios, but the answers will be the same.
!
Quote:
well i surf in strong offshore all the time
of all the things that make a board hard to catch waves
like low volume, exagerated rocker,low surface area, overly flexible etc,and the wind
weight has the least to do with how a board catches waves
until someone actually builds and surfs a variety of light weight boards
then they have no basis of experience
That argument is likely to come back and bite you Silly. … . I surfed lightweight boards for the first 29 years of my surfing life, and have spent the last 11 years on heavy boards, so it’s safe to say that I have experienced a wide range of surfboard weights (from 6 pounds up to 70 pounds) and know what I’m talking about.
Regarding the catching of waves and offshores, I can’t say how you came by your opinion that greater weight has little to offer, but I suspect that the weight range you are working with is very narrow, and thus a ‘heavy’ board to you is possibly only a couple of pounds greater in weight, which isn’y going to be very noticeable.
Also, I wonder if you are surfing alongside well designed boards of great weight, say in the 40 to 50 pound category ? If you were you would find that they have a massive (!) advantage in strong offshore conditions.
On the day pictured below (40 knot offfshores) , my 70 pound board was the only board able to catch the wave in time to make it, out of a competent crew of 20 or so on lightweight equipment. . . . and that wasn’t because I was getting in with high paddle speed either, it was a mattter of swing around, drop the nose and go, with time for only a few paddlestrokes.
okok, i feel a bit bad for bringing the thrust point up as a see totally where you’re coming from. though i think its important for people to see that the ‘thrust’ (lets call it that for arguements/simplicitys sake) isnt from water ejected from the back of the board to push the board forwards… ie the physical definition of thrust.
i also agree roy that in your persuit of speed a high mass is the way to go, higher kinetic energy and momentum is going to be effected less by wind chop etc. however my point about the higher inertia still stands. different people want boards for different types of surfing. any way you look at it there is no ‘this board rules and all the rest suck’
back to the wind thing, i’ve always found that in an offshore wind i have to push the front of a ligher board down more to stop it getting blown back in my face. the woes of being a light little chap!
Roy,
My opinion is, that the difference between a 2 kilo board and a 3 kilo board is substantial wrt manoeuvreability in the pocket, 180+ degree snaps etc, but is not so pronounced wrt wave catching ability.
I think thats what Paul was referring to also.
You’re right, only a few pounds of difference.
Maybe the ultralights don’t catch waves as well, I can’t say i’ve had any problems myself though.
What I do notice is the effortlessness that you can throw them around. If that means a slight decrease in wave catching ability, I’ll take that compromise any day!
As you say, when your talking really large weights, the difference would be much more pronounced.
And in high wind, for sure!
Everythings a trade-off, and my personal choice is light and manoeuvreable over other attributes.
Just like tow-in boards I 'spose, as soon as they stopped having to paddle into a wave, they didn’t have to compromise their boards shape anymore, so now they make them how they want them.
Kit
Funny you say that, Kit. As I handed Wells a 1/2" thick kiteboard blank yesterday, his comment was, “I guess this is about what surfboards would look like, if we didn’t have to paddle them.”
As a longboarder…that never occured to me. I like some space to stroll around.
Well Ben,
Now’s your chance to make a longboard kiteboard. That would be so cool. I want to see the faces of the SUP guys as you come screaming down some unbroken swells 10 toes on the tip while holding on your kite!! Haha.
Cheers,
Rio
let me rephrase that
in a boards of similar dimensions, weight has little bearing on how good or bad a board will catch waves
surface area seems to me to be the a more influential design parameter for catching waves
then rocker
then volume
if i was to take a 5 pound board
and a 8 pound board of the same shape and dimensions
the wave catching difference would be negligible
even if the winds are 25 to 30 knots offshore
ability and arm/upper body strength are the main tools you need for catching waves
I’ve had 9lb 9’1"s out in howling offshore Hookepa - one of the windiest waves on the planet and the world’s best windsurfing spot. Sure… wind is a factor, but with a little bit of adjustment and a positive attitude, a lightweight board isn’t a problem. You just have to be up on the nose to drop in, and shift back before you get to the bottom. Strong offshore winds hold the wave from breaking too quickly and give you more time to drop, so that more than compensates.
Take off super late… get the nose down… be quick on your feet… use your body weight to hold the board down. I’ts not as windy inside the tube;)
Kendall you are definitely one of the "most remarkable men in your country ! and that’s saying something because America is full of most remarkable men in their country 
One thing is certain though, you haven’t ever been out with a 70 pound redwood 13’9" Dragonboard in howling offshore conditions, if you had you would have discovered the difference. . . . the difference is that the longer heavier board can get in to the waves earlier and accelerate faster. . . . and that means it can take off deeper . . . the net result being that in some situations ( for example on the day in the picture I posted) the Dragonboard can make the wave when none of the lightweight foam boards can.
Having to climb up onto the nose and then move back again during the drop takes time and puts the rider at a disadvantage. . . I have seen that technique before and it’s a bit of a lame dysfunctional drama compared with just driving down the face behind 30 pounds of torpedo shaped nose. . . . once the nose drops on that big board you are going down and there’s nothing that can be done about it, no effort required.
We get wind here in New Zealand too btw, it’s not just a Hawaiian phenomenon
!
While I haven’t ridden one of your 13’9" Dragonboards (if I’m ever your way, I’ll hit you up to try one), I have ridden 100lb 12’ wooden tankers. I’ve ridden lots of stuff. I try to have fun all everything.
You’re right about being able to get in earlier and faster. You can also take off deeper and more effeciently. It’s the part about that being a disadvantage where we part ways.
I like the “lame dysfunctional drama” part. I like to make (or not) super late, critical drops. I like making swoopy-doopy turns. I like putting the effort into my rides. I want to generate some serious g-forces. I want to be spent when I get to the end of my ride. I want to be sore after a session. That stuff makes me happy.
When I ride big heavy boards I get the sense that I’m watching a movie of surfing. I can’t feel anything. It’s just point and shoot. Like an instamatic camera. I like fiddling with the knobs.
Seems a bit odd replying to myself but so many have contributed to this topic I’m not sure who to reply to!!
Lots of great stuff but not quite what I was after! I hear the theories about weight and thrust and droopy curves and stuff but ANYBODY GOT MORE REAL NUMBERS?? Maybe I’ll just let this die, I’m not sure what I’d do with them anyway.
Have fun
Rikds,
I’d say Silly and specifically Craftee, gave you the ball park about a week ago; though a 4 lb compsand is extreme. I have logs of composite component wt factors taken to the miligram in a box in the back of the shop. I havent reviewed it since 2001. Controlling (reducing) wt. once seemed important to a point …until a little more wt. gives better, more secure feel especially in bigger boards and surf. It comes down to what you can pull off in your builds and with your surfing. What do you have time and money for. I’ve always been core oriented builder, the additive process seemed more tradtional and practical. Any time I tried reductive builds , cutting out cores ,skins or lams…eventually your back to adding to compensate for trivial savings. You burn time and increase odd ball variables which tend to be hurdles instead of break throughs.
-Peter
Cheers to you Peter!
I had to think about that earlier post a bit, for the purpose of relating some useful valuable info.
Any appreciation?
Nah.
I guess kids’ still looking for that exotic answer.
Its safe to say that around here, facts are boring.
Its much more interesting to speculate, theorize and opinionate.
Youre right 4 pounds is doable but risky.
For some, superduper light boards have their shortcomings.
Lots of design work goes towards adding control.
Weight is a control design element.
I work within a certain weight range, and everyone has to find their own.
Im confident that the theoretical “zero” weight board is not it (Aerogel anyone?)
But thanks for your keen observations Peter.
Sounds like you know your stuff.