(REALLY!)… Can anyone explain…definitively…why some boards become “dead” (their riding characteristics, that is) after a period of time?! Is it the compression of the foam/change of foam properties within the shell?..Change in flex?..Also, have any of you noticed a correlation between blanks you may have skinned a little deeper than you’d have liked - and the speeding up of these properties. I have also noticed that some boards I’ve ridden for a long time have - miraculously - retained their spring and life - in spite of their being really “overworked”, let’s say. Thanks for your (collective) input - in advance. Tom.
I have always heard and felt that it is the relationship between the laminated layers of fiberglass and the blank itself, and how that relates to the flex of the board. If you think about a shaped blank, it has X amount of flex. Then glass that blank, and you have changed that flex to Y. Now consider a rider transfering his or her weight on that board over a period of time. For a while the flex may still be at Y, but over time the rider will put stress on the board and the relationship (whether it be the bond of glass to foam, tensile strength, structural integrity of the glass, or what ever) changes and your flex changes to say Z. It is an evolving process whether good or bad. In my opinion this is why the magic board is so elusive. You can have a board that you totally love and when it comes time to make another one, you can measure rocker, foil, fin placement, on and on. But how do you copy the flex pattern of that board, knowing that flex will change over time? Not only that, but think about how you or the rider in question changes in time. Do you surf the same that you did a year ago? A month ago? Let alone how your shaping techniques change over time. With all of these variables it is amazing that any of us get that magic board more than just a few times in our surfing lives.
Is it easier to replicate a magic board that was made with epoxy? Does flex on epoxy boards change more or less?
Is it easier to replicate a magic board that was made with epoxy? Does > flex on epoxy boards change more or less? Peter Rijk or noodle would have more experience than I with epoxy boards. I have ridden several epoxy boards and from what I have experienced and heard is that they are more rigid. But they will change over time. Maybe the amount maybe minimal compared to poly, but it will change. Maybe you will change before the epoxy will? Another factor going against the magic board is that every blank is different (poly or epoxy or styrofoam). I don’t mean to sound negative, but it seems that there are windows where you are surfing a certain way, shaping a board a certain way, your board is performing a certain way. To get those things to all blend together truely is Magic.
(REALLY!)… Can anyone explain…definitively…why some boards become > “dead” (their riding characteristics, that is) after a period of > time?! I am of the opinion that much of this is myth. If a board is undamaged and free of water, it should surf much the same as it did when it was built. Not withstanding a board that is simply warn out and the physical properties are failing. Older boards that have dings in the bottom and/or rails may have a distorted hydrofoil – the more dings, repairs, wax, barnacles, algae, etc. on the bottom or rails, the more performance problems you may notice. Did you hear the one about the guy who got drunk, paassed out, and someone stole his kidneys in Cabo? shine http://users.leading.net/~shine
(REALLY!)… Can anyone explain…definitively…why some boards become > “dead” (their riding characteristics, that is) after a period of > time?! Is it the compression of the foam/change of foam properties within > the shell?..Change in flex?..Also, have any of you noticed a correlation > between blanks you may have skinned a little deeper than you’d have liked > - and the speeding up of these properties. I have also noticed that some > boards I’ve ridden for a long time have - miraculously - retained their > spring and life - in spite of their being really “overworked”, > let’s say. Thanks for your (collective) input - in advance. Tom. The initial properties of foam/fiberglass, especially as used in conventional surfboards and fins, simply get “tired” over time… everything eventually breaks down. Exposure to heat and sunlight, the stresses imposed by the rider, damage to the exterior surfaces, as well as from the impacts of waves themselves, all contribute to a gradual reduction in whatever their original condition might have been. Individuals who prefer heavier and/or rigid-structured surfboards and fins will experience the least of these effects, while those who use lighter designs, with increasing degrees of torque and flex, will generally be aware of these changing factors much sooner. Those initmately familiar with other flexible, load bearing structures such as certain kneeboards, snowboards, wakeboards, skateboard decks, skimboards, fly rods, kite spars, masts, archery bows, sail battens, composite bicycle frames, pole vaulting poles, exercise equipment, etc., know all about these things eventually feeling different and “tired”… all object lessons within the law of diminishing returns.
Some boards start of dead!!!Herb.
Some boards start of dead!!!Herb…THAT’S ,“Some boards start OFF dead!!!” sheeesh! Herb.
The initial properties of foam/fiberglass, especially as used in > conventional surfboards and fins, simply get “tired” over > time… everything eventually breaks down. Exposure to heat and sunlight, > the stresses imposed by the rider, damage to the exterior surfaces, as > well as from the impacts of waves themselves, all contribute to a gradual > reduction in whatever their original condition might have been.>>> Individuals who prefer heavier and/or rigid-structured surfboards and fins > will experience the least of these effects, while those who use lighter > designs, with increasing degrees of torque and flex, will generally be > aware of these changing factors much sooner.>>> Those initmately familiar with other flexible, load bearing structures > such as certain kneeboards, snowboards, wakeboards, skateboard decks, > skimboards, fly rods, kite spars, masts, archery bows, sail battens, > composite bicycle frames, pole vaulting poles, exercise equipment, etc., > know all about these things eventually feeling different and > “tired”… all object lessons within the law of diminishing > returns. Greg Loher wrote an article on this several years ago, on how a board is limited to a fixed number of flex cycles and after reaching this level starts on its way to decay in the way it rides. This is why I have always prefered multiple stringer combinations, keep it stiff for as long as possible. http://www.JimtheGenius@aol.com
I just built a “dead” board for my friend Craig Carroll at the Cocoa Beach Surfing School. It works great in 2 foot waves, but wouldn’t go anywhere in last weeks hurricane swell. It was shaped from a 9’4"B with dropped nose rocker and an extra 3/8" tail, I think the extra tail rocker is keeping it from having any drive in the larger waves. On a small wave it fits in the face better. http://www.JimtheGenius@aol.com
Greg Loher wrote an article on this several years ago, on how a board is > limited to a fixed number of flex cycles and after reaching this level > starts on its way to decay in the way it rides. This is why I have always > prefered multiple stringer combinations, keep it stiff for as long as > possible. Jim, Thanks for the intel! Greg
s article sounds like one that I need to read. The whole issue of designed flex in surfcraft can truly be a Pandora
s Box… but, not to say that there arent some satisfying answers by virtue of a lot of meticulous, long-term, hard work. If rigidity in a surfboard is one
s preferance, it is far better in the long run to incorporate as much stiffness into a design as possible. It pays to be thoughtful about little details like slightly crowned decks, choice of core material and its thickness, additional offset grain stringers, choice of stringer material, choice of lamination material/fiber and resin, higher glass to resin ratios in lamination, stringer/fin box installation, etc. can all combine to make a big difference in regards to overall stiffness and strength without adding a lot of extra weight. Of course, if the intended goal is stiffness AND a measure of weight gain, provided by the total combination of surfboard materials, the problem of structural decay by way of flexation becomes irrelevant, except under the most extreme of circumstances.
The control of flex has been a topic of interest to me for some time. Since you all appear knowledgable on the topic, I was wondering what you think of the Surflight boards. Basically, they are a core similar to a snowboard surrounded by foam and covered with a hard urethane finish. As with snowboards the flex of the inner core is controlled. If you go to their site, they do a much better job of describing the process. It is www.surflight.com Greatly enjoy Swaylocks. Thanks. Patrick