This thread is awesome…
I only made 2 boards so far… but these beauties are getting to me…
Don’t know if i could handle doing a “step deck”, “hull entry”, “full single concave” all at once haha… what blanks do u use for getting this thickness and kind of rocker?
cheers
Hey Jesus,
I was thinking of going with quads, too. But, I had a couple of lokbox boxes laying around and fins to fit them. I think I could still get another set in to quad it. I might do it. Mike
I hotwire my own blanks from 2 pound eps,I cut them to the exact rocker and thickness that I want the board to be.
quads go gooooood…!
If you don’t want to start hotwiring your own blanks you can also get in contact with someone in your area who does and ask if they have any end cuts that you might be able to take off their hands. The last stringerless mini I shaped was out of an end cut that was 3.5" thick and had 0 tail rocker and had about 3" nose rocker that started 18" back from the nose. I have also seen some minis pulled out of poly teccell 8’ blanks. But that is going to probably double the cost of your blank cutting one out of those larger blanks. The first mini that was posted on this thread was pulled out of a urethane USBlanks 6’8" RP. There is not much rocker in it so it’s pretty easy to get a 5’5"ish out of it.
What are the dims on that quad Rob?
I have a board to shape and some repairs to get done, but I’ve been mind shaping one of those for a while. Here’s what I’ve come up with playing around with templates:
I’m feeling the one on the left more.(no battail though, just playing there…) I used my LB template to draw it out, might be too much curve in the outline for a mini sims. Keels or quad?
Not sure on the exact dims I’m going to go for in the end.
thanks for the help guys…
hotwiring it seems a solution… but i don’t know if i can get EPS around here that easily :S… i’ll search some more…
imho “too much curve in the outline” doesn’t really matter with these boards. I see so many that are just straight, and while they clearly work, one has to wonder why the original big (Bob) Simmons has that hip…
there, I gave away the farm…
the quad’s dims are 5’6"x 17ish nose, x 22 1/2x 18 tail, and 14" block. I have to admit that I use those numbers as a rough guidline, and a lot of times they get discarded in pursuit of a good curve.
And why not do the bat tail? Remember, this is supposed to be fun, so if you want to do one, go for it!
weird tales for weird tails!
Nice!
Great boards Rob
How far up are you putting the quads. I’m thinking a quad setup but also want to try twin keels in the back set, but now sure it would work
Karl
same with any shape, theres alot of variation within fin set-ups but I am undecided to do some old school keels or a number of other fin options....I am leanin g towards doing something similar to Cuttlefishs round keels, can a few of the experienced mini-sim surfers give me their thoughts on diff fins and how they feel ? as a shaper I have a fair idea but never ridden one of these babies yet, just trying to get more info and make a clearer choice....I do alot of quads in my other shapes and could do a quad but leaning towards bit more traditional.....thanks in advance.....
I'm with you Pridmore ........
Love my quadiessss ( got 40 odd box's and fins in the mail coming from Robin for anyone that want some)
These are a traditional build, and I think the first one has to be your qualifier and invariable almost needs to be a "Keeler" .......after that I'd say, open slather and the quad set up gets a run (lol) At least at my place there'll be a stable full of quads to keep it company (lol)
It's hard to go past "ACE's and "Royal's" quad set up's and their experience on these babies would shorten the learning curve considerable
So get typing boy's and share some ride reports and of course some cluster / set up
W
Just got some fins for the board I posted previously on this Thread ( the Simster inspired one),
They are a set (two) of Twin fins , hope to try the board out in the next few days if I get time so intrigued to see how it goes as it is a pretty different shape to what im used to… Will surf it with a small trailer as pictured and try without as well,
Got a pic of the rocker/foil which shows the deck contours a bit better;
Just in case those enjoying this thread missed it here’s a link to an earlier Simmons thread which is very interesting…
http://www2.swaylocks.com/node/1029889
Sheds some light on the diversity found in those interpreting the shape.
Parrallels that of the fish in the variance of ride reports.
Ie some find them loose while others find them stiff.
Some doing them foiled out in the nose and tail whilst others keeping them thick.
I wonder if the mini-simmons will have any kind of influence on the shape of hybrid boards the way the fish has?
The reason I pose this question is that the mini-simmons may prove to be a more beachbreak friendly shape than the fish so will designs aspects of it be incorporated into hybrids making them even better.
Or will McCoy wide tail nuggets sales go through the roof?
hello all,
my 2C is as follows, but contrary what everyone has said, I’m just playing with ideas like the rest of you. So, don’t take anything I say as gospel…
Twin keels are indeed super fun, and may be the best starting place if you want to do a traditional one first to get the feel for the design. I came straight out of left field with my 1st one - which was a bonzer fish inspired twinzer-keel conglomeration. It actually worked pretty well, so I stayed with that for a while. I only made my 1st “traditional” Slimmons earlier this year, which is 6’0" x 22ish and has an 80/20 foiled keel, based on Geppy’s big template. Again, not completely faithful to the design, but it works great, and because it is a tad narrower, it allows more people to have a go on it.
A lot of folks like the fat railed versions of the board - some call it the original Simmons rail. I don’t disagree, but much prefer a slimmed down version for allowing me to ride the board is sucky/hollow waves. I also tend to foil my boards out a lot more than others. Again, that’s just personal preference, and my recipe for my kind of surfing. Like someone said, there is plenty of room to play with this idea, just like the fish. And, because the basic principle works within its own parameters, there’s a good chance even the most basic ones will work just fine.
The quads seem a natural evolution, followed very closely by a twinzer based set up. They work the same as adding a quad set up to a fish, with exactly the same feel, pros/cons etc… I based my placements similarly as well, and so far so good!
I tend to place my keels further forward than the normal 2-3" off the tail as I find it makes the board feel more alive, and fish like. But, that’s just me and other people love them further back.
I do think(hope) all the hype and stuff dies down a little about the design, but also think it will crossover to the mainstream very soon, and we will see all the major brands offering some version of it. Lost is already doing it’s Plank model with rave reviews, so it won’t take long for the other big boys to see if there’s money in it.
Of course, there are plenty of other things to dabble with as well, so lets all just say its a great time to be a surfer!
I reckon they are the new fish, they'll be everywhere next summer here in Oz I think....and if Dane is in a few mags riding his ones, then boom, all the ' I ride em to be cool ' crew will want one...but for now, its the guys like all of us who just love surfing and experiencing what different boards can do, happy days...and ya right, theres an infinite amount of stuff to play with out there...if only I had the money to make all the things floating around in my foggy head....thanks for thoughts and info on fins.....
My probox keels just arrived.I was originally going to place my trailing shapers dot 5" up from the tail and 1 1/4" in from the rail with 1/8" tow in in case I want to go quad later.The base of the keels is way longer than a standard fin so it leaves the trailing edge of the keel closer to the tail and closer to the rail,heres some pics to give you an idea.
This is where they would set if I adjusted the boxes for the trailing edge of the keel to set 5" up from the tail and 1 1/4" from the rail.
I’m having trouble deciding but am leaning toward the first setup so I can quad it in the future if needed,what do you guys think?
I knew I’d tease out a good succint response with my vague rambling.
For those who haven’t seen it here’s the footage of the Lost “Uber plank” being punted all over the place…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYFbdsBM47k
and Lost have done their own interpretation of the nugget as well so my quip about wide tailed nuggets must have been from seeing that before.
Mark,
look forward to seeing you’re “dim sim” in action.
Hey Jesus,
can’t offer you any advice re fin position but look forward to seeing the board finished.
Here it is ready to surf,400 wetsand finish with little shiny spots evrywhere haha.5’5"x23"x3" with a 16" wide tail.I set the fin boxes using the rear shapers dot 4 7/8" up from the tail 1 1/4" in from the rail with 1/8" tow so I can quad it later if needed.I have 4 degree cant inserts,the board has a 3/8" deep concave that runs from tail to nose about 10" wide.When I poured the resin for the hard edge at the tail there was some drainage on the front half so there was a little bladed chanel that tapered off to the hard edge towards the tail,I like it so I left it like that and plan on riding the board finless as well,figured it may give me some rail traction.Wiht my keels in this fin setup the trailing edge of the fin is 3" up from the tail and 3/4" in from the rail,cant wait to try it out.
Heres some pics…
Littlerail channel
finless…
The outline…
Heres the keels and a concave shot
