futures boxes better stronger than fcs2


What is the real answer here?  The original fcs were good in one thing. You lost the fins before the boxes  got f…ed.  I see a lot of FCS 2 and futures boxes destroyed and pulled out.  So what desig is better for front and lateral heavy impcats? I supose that both are well installed in the same type of blank.

Can we discuss? Was the original H-bond to the deck better. I know some do similar install in futures and fcs 2 to get taht old benefit. 

If you’re going to compare the fin systems to each other then the method of install should be assumed the same for both.   An H-bond install or the use of a HD collar will improve all of them.   

Of course. Same blank and normal install. I was thinking in a strength test. Real results of front and lateral impacts. 

From my small experience, both are more or less same strengh. Nowadays I use most 1.5 eps for my build, with those plugs in standard way, glue in foam and cover with fiber, I have normal strengh expected for surfing. For far more strengh i connected them to the reinforced deck for kite board. I do same for foil boards no return yet. 2 tabs fins with fcs 1 well used (H patern and chanfrein under fiber skin) is the best system for me, under impact fins break, you loose it but board stay intact and not two hard if your body hit fins. 

Thank you. I think I wrote somewhere that that the straight shape of the futures boxes is worse for lateral loads than det  fusions / fcs2 but I can’t remember the whole thing. I can be wrong. Not sure about the strength og the materials of the futures vs FCS boxes. Guys who repair a lot of boards should have an idea.  I like making my fins so FCS is the easy way to go for me.

Personally, I favor the Fusion boxes for an FCS install.  But IMO, Gearbox is the best box on the market right now due to the top plate design and the extended tab length for the fin bases.   What I don’t like about the Future box is the width/length ratio, which IMO makes the box more prone to twisting and failing under a lateral load.    

FCS  And Futures eating other brands over the years. Even when the last ones sell a better product ( pro box, 4w, lok box and now gear box).  

All of them are plenty strong if properly installed.  Its just that simple.  If I could make one very slight improvement to FCSII it would be to  make the box 1/8th inch longer in front of each fin cut out so there is just a little more glass over the front lip of the box.  The biggest issue I’m seing is the proliferation of garbage chinese AliExpress counterfeit knock off FCS and Futures boxes making their way into production boards I see on the rack.

Fusions are certainly underrated.  Especially for multi fin setups of four to six fins.  Their weight is definitely an advantage on those types of installs.  They don’t fail any more often than their competitors and when they do it is  a fairly easy fix.  Installed right there is little difference between any of them.  Oh and PS;  cheap Chinese hard plastic knock offs are a problem and a waste.  So quit using 'em.

Here is what happens with your typical AliExpress Chinese knockoff FCSII boxes.  There is a reason why a thruster set of these boxes is only $7.  If you order a board and it comes in with these boxes or if you see these boxes in a board on the rack RUN!!! don’t walk…Just run.  If its a custom and you ordered it with FCSII and it comes in with these my advice would be to refuse it.  The plastic is very hard and the mechanism doesn’t work right so it takes a tremendous amount of force compared to genuine boxes to get fins in and out and you end up with this.



Very true and in looking at your example,  that box doesn’t appear to have glass over it.   Which would mean it is a post lam install.  Not what FCS had in mind for their FCSII box.  Easy and cheap to do though.  So what you have is a hard, plastic box installed after glass.  The box and the install smack of “Cheapo” poor quality.

Aloha Gents, 

My first job was professional ding repair (worked for my dad at the tender age of 13, lets see how much longer my lungs hold out). I’m a newbie on this site but have extensive knowledge of the durability of removable fin systems and…

These systems are built to mimic as close as possible the performance characteristics (not durability) of glass on fins. Until recently (like 2014) most of the pro’s I know on the north shore and the travelling pros that would come here for the winter would get glass on fins because of the way the feel is transmitted without any change directly into the riders feet. Now that they have no choice (I don’t know a single glass shop on the island that will do glass-ons since COVID) they’ve had to break off to their chosen fin sponsor.

The difference in durability is a joke, they both suck and if you’re a powersurfer the removal of foam in the tail will cause it to get cancerous and eventually collapse (within a year is what I’ve seen). If feel is what you’re going for, the closest I’ve been able to find is futures with the AM-1 carbon fin, but even then it’s not quite the same. The original FCS was a complete joke for stiffness, I have had dozens of plastic G5’s break on bottom turns and the performance of a plastic fin (vice carbon fiber or fiber glass) is not up to par either.

Long story short, if the fin is weak enough to break before the box you lose performance. I’m guessing that’s why they changed it.

Mahalo Nui Loa,