I’m not bagging the design , but I can see no advantage in having the width right at the tip of the board…I can see distinct disadvantages ,though…any thoughts ?
Without the width in the nose you wouldn’t be able to keep the parralel plan shape/usable rail line at such short Lengths, I don’t feel any disadvantage riding this over a normal style shortboard, the lack of swing weight and added manoeuvrability are drastically noticeable to me.
There is no major advantage in having a parallel planshape forward of the w/p…to have that width at the tip , it would need to be compensated in the design to prevent pearling…the best way IMO , to do this , is to reduce the area of the nose , by bringing both rail lines to meet at the nose…also,the fwd area ,when glassed would do no favours for the swingweight that I can see…unless the board was desined to ride and plane from either end like a wakeboard…just my thoughts…
This is the first explanation that makes any sense to me for the kitboard outlines. Parallel lines on a short shape. Add some quantum inspired neon lights. OK, I’'m being a smart ass on the last sentence. Mike
kayu,
so you’re bascially saying the wakeboard atyle boards would be better if they didn’t have the parralell planshape and had a pointy nose like a conventional hpsb?
an you’d want to keep the short lengths doing this? or just add it back up to 5’10"-6’0"?
parallel planshape forward of the wp allows for surface area and volume to be maintained for such a short board.
I don’t think the pearling issue that you mention, is as severe as you think, because these are ridden 12 inches shorter than a regular board, there simply is no nose to catch. same with the swing weight.
Basically ,Oddonein , thats what I’m saying yes…once the board is on the plane , the .less nose area the better …the rail line pulled in and meeting at the tip assists greatly to allow this to happen more efficiently , and has a positive effect on swing weight…generally speaking , at higher speeds ,added rail line forward of the widest point has little to offer in performance…my take ,anyway.(until convinced otherwise …lol )
…double post !
The fact that the issue exists is enough to question why the extra area is there at all…I think extra planing area on a board that short could be placed better than right at the tip of the nose…even more so considering the sensitivity of extremely lightweight HP shorties…1 or 2 ounces is significant in anything sub 5lb…would you say Thommo surf better on these boards than a more proven design ?..I don’t know
I think you’re really missing something kayu, either that or you’re looking at these boards in a traditional shortboard type way, which they are not,
given my board is 5’0"x171/4" it really needs that parralel rail line to work, it works very well, for me at least,as the design intended.
It’s funny how people are so adverse to a change in ‘high performance’ surfboards, I’m laughing inside(sometimes outside too) after every surf on the tiny wrongly designed wakeboard.
Id suggest that maybe you try one before saying they shouldn’t be how they are 
IMO.
Well ,I’m certainly not opposed to change …lol…probably a bit skeptical because of the endless procession of “claimed breakthroughs” we get…exposure does not allways equate with validity…only time can do that…if you enjoy riding the board , it’s all good.
I am not a ripper by any means, but I had a Nano (one of the 1st Gen MPH designs) and it made me surf better. The dims were much smaller than anything else I had ever ridden and I didn’t experience any of these so-called “small board problems”
Also, I am a 190-195 lb’er so its not like I’m some flyweight grom either
The element I’m not feeling on this design trend is the curve. Relative to the lengths involved I think that too much curve is a pain in the ass and too little curve is a pain in the ass.
I thought the original design concept of simply chopping off portions of the nose and tail was interesting in that the original curve through the center of the template and rocker remained. Going narrower overall enabled the slightly narrower tail block, too. Wakeboards seem to be designed to do big carves under power whereas performance surfing is more about pivoting and snapping - it seems to me like the much wider tailblocks and straighter templates would work against that.
Gemini comes to mind Looking at some of Tomo’s no-nose / wakeboard boards.
Wow, I’m glad the bitching and bullshit has stopped! (What’s wrong with you people?)
These shapes/designs are very interesting and clearly work. Familiarity breeds contempt. Just because it looks different
doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. After 28 years on “modern” thrusters I’ve
taken to riding a mini-simmons style board. I would not have been seen
dead with one in my former years but it really works and I love surfing
it. It feels different and it looks different, but it works well. If
Tomo
is shaping boards based on his experience with this kind of design,
based on Bob Simmons (etc) calculations and theories, then that’s evolution.
The way he is talking about engineering, hydrodynamics etc is difficult
due to his audience. How many of us REALLY understand what is happening
under our feet when we surf. Most of it is a mystery to me at least. If
he’s taking engineering principles and building a board around that, and
the board WORKS, that’s fantastic. It’s evolution. I initially scoffed
at the cut-off nose and nose channels, but now it makes a bit more
sense. Parallel rails require it unless you want a pointy nose for
aesthetics? The reduced swing weight and overall length help to keep the
fast rail design manoeuvrable IMO. I’m not qualified to comment too
much as I’ve not ridden one but I’m just saying lets not be too hasty in
disregarding Daniel’s shapes because he’s trying to come at them from
an engineering perspective. I can’t wait to see where his boards evolve
to in the next few years! Perhaps there’s a level of self promotion going on (which shaper or board manufacture isn’t into that?!) but it seems he’s just looking at the whole process a different way.
Props to Daniel Thompson!
…man, you do not understand nothing what s going on with this thread; please, go back and re read all again.
this is all i really care about,
the (tomo)board i ride is a LOT more pivoty(?) and snappy than any 5’11/6’0 i’ve ever ridden, incredibly high performance surfing orientated, very different to a traditional shortboard, but you can still do the nice slow turns they do if that’s what floats your boat,
the biggest difference i found and one that almost everyone doesn’t seem to grasp from the numerous video clips on the net, is the lack of effort it takes from the rider in comparison to a shortboard,ease of use?
Sorry?!!! I’m giving my opinion like everybody else!
Hmmmm…
My only thought about the supper short wide nose thing is - you may be able to avoid digging/pearling because the nose is so close to your center. I haven’t tried one, but I know I’ve burried wider noses on longer, 7’+ boards.
As for ambrose… If you talk with him, you’ll find a straight forward, down to earth guy. Haole, yes. Burned out, no. As for small islands… Ha! Most the surfers I’ve talked to on Kauai don’t know him. People tend to be a bit self centered… Ain’t that life…