board + rider flotation effect in steeper waves

General Discussion
21

" Fast is a relative term and if you say Fast is a relative term.It only means you need to lose weight and go faster "

 

heheh

 

hi Artz !

 

well, me ... I weigh 58kgs now  [that is well under 140lbs ... and at 5'10 .... that's skinny !! ]

 

 

...I think STRENGTH is what I need more of

 

 

 

re:  going fast / speed ...

 

 

 

I need to go at LEAST  fast enough [if not MORE !] , to match the waves' fastness / speed[S] ...

 

 

 ... to get good momentum going , right from the first paddle . THAT will help me get in early , and [? 9 times out of 10 ?] in some weird way get to my feet,  quicker. [without speed , it's all OVER !  .... ie: I get " left behind"  !]

 

 

I've noticed that the bad habit I have developed [from riding my 9'4 'too much']  is ... arching my back , and shifting my weight BACK on takeoff , to keep the nose up and prevent the nose / rail catching

 

 

 On a narrower , shorter , more rockered board , this of course does not go well for me ! [ Again , NO surprises there !]

 

 

I notice how far FORWARD my mate's weight is , on steep drops on their 5'10- 6'2 low volume thrusters ...like dropping into a half-pipe [in fact , a few of them are REALLY GOOD vert skaters, aged 21 to 45 years old]

 

 

 

 

 Also , the right length board for the conditions helps , too...my mate Rowan made the comment on  my wipeout sequence that [besides abilty ha] , I needed 'something smaller'  on that fast-breaking , hollow lil righthander I got flogged on .

 

  cheers

 

 ben

22

zressurf4simonsshotsoctober2012.jpg

zressurf6simonsshotsoctober2012.jpg

zressurf10simonsshotsoctober2012.jpg

zressurf11simonsshotsoctober2012.jpg

23

 explanation...

 In the two sequences just posted , 

 it seems my feet are a little close together , my weight on the back foot , and on the first sequence , I fartarsed around , delaying my bottom turn ['D'OH !"] .

 I think that I needed to have crouched , opened my stance [weighted FORWARD , not back] , and glided  [ /  ? 'pumped' even , perhaps ? ] into the section with more speed  .

 I needed more angle on the takeoff , and to have taken  a higher line , so I didn't lose speed / valuable time, in a shifting beachie.

 It would have  been interesting on a shorter board that I would have had to drive / 'pump' a bit more more , to have seen the difference ...

 

*** I need to get off longer boards / wider boards / 'too thick' / "too flat" boards , for a while ... especially in waves like these ! ***

 

 Sometimes I just have TOO MUCH board [width , or length , or thickness .... or too flat ! ] , for the conditions.

 

  Scarborough [my local beachy] goes from fat , to dredgy , to rippy , to backwashy , and back again , in the space of a few hours , sometimes .

 

The challenge is to be in position , paddle hard and fast , and 'try' to match the board to the conditions. [Which is certainly not always 'easy' , given those conditions !]

 

In the 'old' days , when I 'made do' with one single fin , it was me who had to adapt to the wave[s], and board.

 In some ways , the lack of choice made it easier ...as 'Wildy' once wisely said ...

 

 "don't you get CONFUSED,  with all those fins to choose from ?" 

 

 Yes. Yes , I DO at times , Greg !  [same goes for boards , as every board in the quiver is completely different . ]

 

 cheers

 

  ben

24

sorry , Ron , I hope the above 'musings' / photos have not been a sidetrack /  ? 'detour' ? to your original question ? , posted again here .....

 

 

" I'm hoping to clear something up:  the issue at hand addresses

the effect of paddling into a good wave on boards that have you floating higher or lower in the water.  

 

 [ I've noted some references to the issue in threads that concern themselves with float vs volume, etc.

 

 I am more interested in the practical effect that occurs when you are paddling into a good, steep swell on boards that either float you more or less. " ]

 

[brackets , mine]

 

 

I'm only questioning the effect in boards 5'10' to 6'3' * and have noted floatier, wider boards sometimes get hung up in the lip on steeper waves when very low volume boards, regardless of shape, get in easier. Could be the paddler, could be the board.  I've queried this and haven't gotten a consensus, although there must be a correct answer.

     Any thoughts? "

 

 

 Hi Ron !

 

can I ask , please ...

 

what kind / size of 'good waves' ,  are you mainly riding ?

what is your size ?

your age ? [are you 'young'  ? 'old' ? ]

 are you a 'good' paddler ?   An 'average' paddler [....whatever THAT means ? ha!]

 

board[s] ...

 

* [referring to above quote] ....are your boards  " 5'10 to 6'3 " , then ?

 If yes , out of those ... what is the main board that you would ride , in the conditions mentioned  [ " good waves " ] ?

 ...its length , width , thickness , nose and tail width , tail shape , and nose and tail rockers  ?

 

do[es]  YOUR board[s] " float [you] higher [or lower?] in the water "  ?  

 

fin[s]....

 

what setup[s] do you MAINLY use , in 'good waves' ?

 

( By the way ...

 I'm not being 'nosey' ,  I only ask these questions ,  just to give a clearer  idea /  some sort of a picture , of the specifics involved .... in your particular location , and your waves , and your situation . As what works for  you , in the waves you most of the time ride , is what matters , more than what works for others , yes ? )

 

 okay .... cheers in advance for any info , Ron !

 

  ben

25

[EDIT , because of 'double post'  ....oops !]

 

This was the same day as the other photos ...

 

And , surprisingly .....  this one went through to the keeper

 

[damn]

 

 But , that said , some waves look better , empty ! ...  [ it certainly looks better , without me cluttering it up , anyway  haha !  ]     By the way , here is a whole photo thread  on  waves , by 'Carve Nalu'  [ I add this , for the new arrivals here ].

 

I guess this would be called 'a good wave' , in my neck of the woods.

 And , it is VERY unusual for one of these to go through empty , I might add !... [ ESPECIALLY as it is school holidays , at the moment ]

 

zressurf2simonsshotsoctober2012.jpg

 photo by : SIMON  Chipper  [ / 'lazarus'  ! ]

26

"  I only ask these questions ,  just to give a clearer  idea /  some sort of a picture , of the specifics involved .... in your particular location , and your waves , and your situation . As what works for  you , in the waves you most of the time ride , is what matters , more than what works for others , yes ? )

 

 

 okay .... cheers in advance for any info , Ron ! "

 

or , option 2 .... ? a quicker way ? ....

 

  three or four photos would do the job , nicely...

 

1. a good wave at your beach , with a guy on it [for scale]

2. a shot of you , standing next to your board [showing the outline , and bottom [contours , fin setup[s] of your board]

3. a shot of the rocker and foil , board standing on tail

4. a shot showing the written dimensions [?on the stringer of the board?] eg : 12" x 6' 2" x 19 1/2" x 2 1/2" x 14 1/2" [ with a 5" rounded square pod]   5" nose rocker  , 2 1/4 - 2 1/2" " tail rocker     ...or ... whatever ...

 

  cheers Ron !

 

   ben , west oz

27

Hi Ron,

Your findings are right on.  Years ago we found the same thing happening: Some thin “sinky” shortboards paddled better than boards with more volume and it made no sense.  About that time I was working with a guy who owned fin system company and he was good friends with Al Merrick.  Turned out that Merrick was also seeing the same thing happening.  The guy I was working with was a good surfer, strong paddler, but a bigger guy, about 6’5" and 230 lbs at the time.  He said to me, “George, I’m a pretty good paddler, I’m getting older but, out at Rincon the other day little kids on tiny chip boards were out-paddling me up the point, I don’t get it…”

Long story short, we found that there is a “bad waterline” or “bad volume” where a board will do horribly in spite of more volume.  One EITHER side of this volume, the boards paddled well.  That is, a smaller board paddled better and a much larger board (of course) paddled better.  My friend got so into it that he tested several boards across short “courses” both in flat water and the ocean…

…the board that worked badly for him was one that his friend had shaped (because he thought, “I’m getting older, make a slightly bigger board,”) something similar to a “Speed Egg” which was gaining popularity at the time.  I shaped a few boards for him and we reduced the size but not quite down to his original shortboard before he got the egg, and sure enough, he paddled faster on most of them.  I concluded that there was both a “bad waterline” and a “good waterline.”  Problem was this waterline varied from one surfer to the other.  We hand-shaped mostly back then, so VOLUME was not a viable/reliable number to use yet, but we knew that a smaller board could get going quicker than some boards SLIGHTLY larger than it, and of course boards MUCH LARGER would do likewise.

In some ways back then, the “Speed Egg” was a death sentence.  I remember so many people going that direction and their surfing rarely improved what you would think it should.  I wonder how many had that choice (either by their own or by their shaper) become the unbeknownst reason they got worse and discouraged. Surfing can be so much about confidence.  The “Fun Board” really wasn’t for some I guess…

We never located the right waterline location in a good way, but the water surface kind of hit between the board and stomach/chest of the paddler when the boards did poorly.  You could “swim” a shorter board faster with the right engagment/technique.  Added to that, a smaller board can get through breaking waves much easier, but we just looked at the paddle and wave catching ability.

Nowadays I mostly machine my boards, and I get pretty accurate volume numbers.  For me, I seem to do well with 32L, but around the mid-high 30’s I bog a bit.  Higher than that like on my big cruisers and guns, I paddle very fast and fairly quickly.  

It got even more complicated than that, we found that some big wave guns would catch waves poorly, and this had to deal with volume distribution through the length of the board.  Thicker tails got “kicked up” by the wave giving a little “boost” to drop in with.  BUT in big waves a lot a tail volume can be a killer, which implies a balance.  In small waves we found the volume distribution was also important, same reason: not enough tail volume relative to middle volume can bog.  Paddler position could compensate a little but the right combo of volume and position went noticibly better.

I went through a TON of boards that year, over 60 for myself and quite a few for some other guys.

So, in my opinion a choice can be made.  Go even higher in volume to “get through the sound barrier” or reduce volume a bit and count on engaging in some rigorous (but productive) paddling.

 

Hope this helps,

George

28

wow , thanks very much for that , George ,

 

  that was a very informative and thought-provoking read ...

 

  would you have profile [rocker / foil] shots of the progression of your boards during those times you tested that you mentioned , please ?

 

and ...

 

" We never located the right waterline location in a good way, but the water surface kind of hit between the board and stomach/chest of the paddler when the boards did poorly "

 

  could you just clarify that part a little for me , please ? I "think" I "get" what you mean , but just wanted to be "sure" , mate ?

 

 Rowan's comment about needing 'less board' made sense to me , when I saw the wipeout in photos , and thought back to what [I 'think'] happened , on that wave ... sometimes for me , the rails and the rocker [or lack of ! ], and my body ,   just "don't fit the curve[s] of the wave 'right' "

 

  most informative , George !

 

  please keep posting here when you get a chace !

 

  cheers

 

  ben chipper , west oz  (formerly "chippy61" , among other ...er .... 'personalities ' )   [ "lol" , etc ]

 

 

29

wow , thanks very much for that , George !!

 

  that was a very informative , and thought-provoking , read ...

 

  would you have profile [rocker / foil] shots of the progression of your boards during those times [you tested ], that you mentioned , please ?

 

and ...

 

" We never located the right waterline location in a good way, but the water surface kind of hit between the board and stomach/chest of the paddler when the boards did poorly "

 

  ....could you just clarify that part a little for me , please ? I "think" I "get" what you mean , but just wanted to be "sure" , mate ?

 

 Rowan's comment about needing 'less board' made sense to me , when I saw the wipeout in photos , and thought back to what [I 'think'] happened , on that wave ... sometimes for me , the rails and the rocker [or lack of ! ], and my body ,   just "don't fit the curve[s] of the wave 'right' "

 

  most informative , George !

 

  please keep posting here when you get a chace !

 

  cheers

 

  ben chipper , west oz  (formerly "chippy61" , among other ...er .... 'personalities ' )   [ "lol" , etc ]

 

 

30

Hey Mark, good post, good info from George too, for sure. 

George's post dealt with the paddle-ability of boards in a certain mid-range, where there seems to be a dip in efficiency.  Tested with paddling trials for different shapes. 

But the original post, and your comments, add another factor: the face of the breaking wave.  I have ridden a couple of boards which paddle very well, or well enough anyway, but when catching a wave, feel "corky", and want to rise to the top of the crest, rather than slide down the face.  In both cases, the boards were hollow wood surfboards.  I don't know how or if being hollow adds to the equation, but it might be a factor.

There is no exact formula for optimum length or volume, or the converse, worst length or volume, but looking at Quiver, for example, we can note the amount of entries in the different size categories, foot by foot.  Between 5 feet 0 inches and 9 feet 11 inches, the biggest drop in entries occurs in the 8' to 8' 11" category, suggesting a defacto acceptance of a point where wave-catching ability declines with an increase in size, then rises again as size continues to increase. 

George's observations tie in with his assessment of the failure of many "speed-egg" midsized boards to really deliver when it comes to increased paddling ability and wave-count.  And I wonder exactly how the drop in efficiency is related to volume.  Is there a way to distribute an increase in volume to increase paddling ability, while avoiding the drop in wave-catching ability? 

Like you, I'm just throwing ideas out, because I think Ron (the o.p.) and George are onto something, and it would be good to explore the concept.

31

I would never equate a speed egg with a " Fun Board"  If you want to know the difference then ask Mike Hynson, Dennis Murphy, Skip Frye, Bill Shrosbree, Donald Takayama ,just a few legends that have been working on and refining the egg for 30 plus years.

32

George,

Thanks for that informative post.

I’ve worked with volume numbers around 37+ liters in the past, and then moved to chase 32 liters with the same rocker and outline curves. I think that there has been no disadvantage in dropping the ±  5 liters because I also narrowed the board overall below what seems to be a critical number. I see from your post that the volume may have been important, too.

red

 

 

33

plusoneshaper ( george )

 

that was an amazing post

34

[this was sent to me ...]

 

 " One way that I look  at it is the shorter the board , then you make up for that by making it thicker.

  There must be a formula that lets you figure out , when changing dimensions , how you can keep the floatation volume the same

and

 

 if there is such a thing , I wish one of our rocket scientists on Sways would post it. "

 

....me , too !

 

 anyone ??

 

I sure hope so  ...that, after all these decades [?centuries?] of surfboard making , that someone has figured out some sort of guideline[s] / ?"formula[s] "? ,  in this important area .

 

And .... that it [hopefully !] can be put into easy-to-understand English , for the simple ones like me to be able to undersatnd ?

 

[I realise the stock standard answer / cop out is always "but there are just too many variables , chip ! " ...

 

.....but , SURELY , there 'must ' be something like ..." a board w long , x wide , y thick , with   z rocker  , in these type / size waves ,  will paddle , for a guy [n] size  , as well as a board  that is made b long x c wide x d thick , with e rocker ... yes ??? ]

 

  cheers !

 

  ben

35

Hey Ben - the computer programs for surfboard design give the volume for each shape.  For us old school guys, that shape by the seat of our pants, there is no exact formula for volume, just guesstimation.  You could probably have the board scanned and entered into the computer, to get the exact volume, but you would need access to a scanner.  I do think you probably have a good feel for the volumes that work best for you.

36

Ben,

Sorry to say bro but there are too many variables.  A lot is subjective.  A lot is “art.”  I liken your request to telling

someone to give the formula for how much salsa I will like on my fish taco…  Here is why.

First, the waterline level during paddling, where it “hits” along the board and along the paddler’s body, seemed

to be the most important factor.  Well, this begs the question, what shape? what person? how is their body

shaped? what is the paddling style? and the list goes on and on…  So formulas to get “it” is probably not the

way to go here.

Second, volume affects the waterline location.  Should be obvious, but there are formulas and ideas plus

intuitive “guesses.”

Third, volume distribution affects how a board drops in (and paddling efficiency.)  As I said before, distribution

that has a bit more float in the tail will (sometimes) “boost” a board into a wave, (as the wave comes, and lifts

the tail before the nose.)  If you combine this with the amount of resistance the nose flotation presents to the

boost, things get further complicated, and you get hung up in the lip or caught in the face.  So, it is not "the

answer" to look soley at a volume number.  That said, too much volume in the back of the board can hurt

(“getting” this is, “art.”)  Template and rocker can completely affect these behaviors.

 

Better at this point to look at the “bottom line” of what works.  For me, I like 32L in my shortboards, I’m 180lbs,

and this board is 5’11."  I’ve had this same basic board off my machine at 28L and it still paddled well but

needed late drops where the wave drops away.  I’ve had this same basic board at 34L and it “felt” like it took

more effort to paddle and more effort to catch a wave.  I’ve had this same board at 36L and it really paddled

well and at 41L and 6’0" it’s my bigger wave crowd handling beast.

 

And that’s just ONE genre of boards that I ride.  I ride everything, from my 4’10" to my 8’6" today,  and my 6’0"

just yesterday.

 

Art.  I’m at the point in approaching a board design where I just look at the guy, ask height, weight, shoe size,

etc. and what size board they like and go from there to conclude a design.  So maybe the synthesis is "seat

of the pants" but based upon a ton of boards, findings, failures, improvements, and tests.  Maybe I do run an

internal set of “formulas” as I am no stranger to them, I’m a Mechanical Engineer and spent quite a few years

designing and doing structural analysis on rockets in the U.S. Space Program…

 

I noticed that I tend to apply more of my “formulas” and “theoretical” background to the construction of the

boards.  In the hull designs I seem to apply broad (almost vague) concepts of fluid mechanics, hydrodynamics,

bending theory, etc.  It really is an art, even with using the machine.  It’s the art aspect that has taken decades

for me to kind of develop which I find the most satisfying and challenging.  Surfboards.  Have fun with it.

 

George

 

P.S.  Man I wished I made some sort of video analysis of the boards way back over a decade ago.  Once we 

found the “fast” and “slow” boards we could have recorded paddlers from above (like from a pier) to study

the wakes, waterlines, etc. and try to find correlations.  There may be a lot to gain.

 

37

....a LOT of salsa on my  fish taco , thanks George !

 

  [ ....or as they said at the end of 'one' of those american sitcoms [?"modern family" , was it ?]  "a little song , a little dance , a little salsa down the pants "  :)  ]

 

  George , I guess there ARE others on here like you [are you one of the aforementioned "rocket scientists" of swaylocks ? !  ha] ... you are an interesting case [?studier?]

 

 

P.S.  Man I wished I made some sort of video analysis of the boards way back over a decade ago.  Once we 

found the "fast" and "slow" boards we could have recorded paddlers from above (like from a pier) to study

the wakes, waterlines, etc. and try to find correlations.  There may be a lot to gain.

 

...Yes , I couldn't agree MORE , George !

I think on that we are on the same wavelength   [ it's just that , if I write that , I get accusations like "photo slut" or "performing monkey" , and such similar negativity .  [I don't think people "get" that the recording of boards is NOT self-indulgence or ego , or whatever ... it's about seeing and learning what boards do / how they surf / having some kind of much CLEARER  and quantifiable evidence [ie" it's visible " , not spruiking theory .]

 

 .... it's about LEARNING [well, for ME  at least ?!]

 

when you mention the volumes ,

 

 because I , for one [others , too ?] i don't think in terms of computer files , how many cans / litres of beer [or whatever ] are displaced ... [I'm kinda backward , when it comes to THAT kind of thought ?!  ...]

   is there any chance you could translate that , in the boards you mentioned ,  into  good ol'  'feet' and 'inches' , please , mate ?   [ I DID  warn ya that  I was 'old school ' , hey ?!]

 

 " for example ...

 

  my ? " 34 litre board"  [or whatever 'litre-age' THIS example would REALLY equal ?? ...like I say , I have NO idea !! ]

 

 = 12" x 6' x 18 3/4"  x 2 1/4"  x 14 1/4" [with a  4" pod ]

 

tail and nose thickness =  [ ? at tail / 6" up / 12" up , etc ? ]

 

  the rail's  "deepest " thickness =

 

and compared with , say , 2" shorter in length of board ,

 

  "these dimensions " would vary by "this much" , to arrive at the same 'volume' ...

 

.....would you mind , please  ?

 

  that may be an easier form , for me to get my head around [understand]

 

 [?others, too ? ...or , am I the only one 'old school ' one , not thinking in litres in surfboards , here ?  I think not !]

 

 cheers , George !

 

I love your long-time research , and your dedication ...if in the end , it all leads to better surfing boards for the conditions = more fun in the water ...

 

...then ...

 

  COUNT me in ! , with the knowledge you share so freely

 

  thank you , mate !

 

 

[ sometimes , I wish I could do the same with my fins ....but .... I am an average [or below??] surfer , surfing in surf that is probably the same ,  to most ...if not WELL below , even ?!  .... THAT'S why I'd love to have some good surfers , in consistent good waves [indo / hawaii / south america ? / tahiti / fiji  , etc ]  surfing / trialling my fins ....]

 

cheers and keep up the great work !

 

  Speedneedle , huie , feral dave , other aussies ...

 

  I'd be very INTERESTED  to hear YOUR  findings , too, please ??

 

  ben

 

 

 

 

38

Interesting discussion.  In my purely subjective opinion - more heavily glassed boards get in a little easier.  I feel  this especially in strong offshore winds.

Very light boards seem to hang in the lip.  

39

Mike Hynson used weights in the nose of his boards for Pipe and Sunset. different weights for different conditions strong offshore winds and bumps in the surf and all that.   By the way when are fish Tacos being served Up?  These people here in Florida need some Fish Taco making lessions.

 

40

George makes some very interesting points, especially regarding some volume threshold where the board bogs, and when exceeded becomes a better paddler.  I took out my fatso 5’10" Sweet Potato (whopping almost 47L = possibly  morbidly obese) on steep shoulder high waves today and paid some attention to what was happening.  Catching them not much of a problem, and I noticed that the wide tail and narrower nose worked together to allow it to drop in nicely, easy to push the nose down into the face.  Riding was pretty squirrely for the most part due to the width and skatiness, but that’s another thing and those waves aren’t what that board is designed for.  Another data point for me to consider and consistent with what I’m learning from this thread.