Recently got this board in exceptional shape. My searches on here and the web in general haven’t produced too many models from G&S that are twinnies. This model looks closer to many of the MR's. The dims are 6"1"x20.5"x3". The signature reads JH and what appears like D, JHD. My guess from what i read is John Holly, but not sure about the D. serial # is 6'1 ~ 7147. I also read that the serial #'s are tough to derive info from because of the inconsistencies. Again, my guess is 1971, 47 board shaped that year. First generation (i think) G&S star fin system. 6 channel. I greatly appreciate any feedback on the model type or name, era, and shaper. Thanks for any feedback.
Chilly,
That is quite a beautiful aquisition you have there. I can't help much on deciphering the serial number, but it appears to me to be more of a late 70's design, somewhere between '78-'80. Most twins in the early 70s had fuller outlines with really wide squared off tails. If I'm not mistaken, the Star System was also developed by G&S when the popularity of twins (MR type twins) and later thrusters became the standard. Let us know how it rides.
Not '71
Re serial #'s: Don’t know about later, but one of my jobs from '69 to '72 or '73 was to order and pick up the order cards with pre printed pre sequenced serial #s. I can tell you that there was no rhyme or reason to the serial #'s on G&S boards during that time. Sometimes the shaper’s inititials would be on the board and sometimes not.
My guess is the serial # on your board means absolutely nothing.
The best way to date boards is to get an expert on the era to estimate the date your board was made using knowledge of various types: fin box, shape, size, color style etc,
wow that’s a beaut!
Foamdust,
I agree with your dates for the above board.
[quote="$1"]
... This model looks closer to many of the MR's. The dims are 6"1"x20.5"x3". .. [/quote]
Mark Richards was still champion of the world in 1982.
I was a big fan of MR, Martin Potter and Derek Hynd who all used twinnies at approximately that time. I used to really like the twin fin and continued to ride them into the late 80s although most my contemporaries had given up on them by then.
Could you measure the distance from the back of the fin box slot to the end of the tail (tip of the swallow) please? all my good ones had a distance of 10 1/2" so I'd like to compare.
Mr.J it measures 10 1/4". here is a better angle for the channels and the tail. pretty prounounced channel on the outside running out at the bump.
foamdust do you remember when that particular design/style/brand of leash plugs started showing up in the market. I realize it won’t date the board, it could have been installed later - I’m just curious.
kc
I would date the board some time in the early 80’s . Most likely the paint job was done by Tommy Curtis. There where 2 guys painting at G&S around that time, TC and Sam Cody. Even though the spray is kinda stock, it looks like TC’s work.
I agree. Late 70s or early 80s. Most (younger) people don’t realize that the practice of putting a sig and dimensions on a board was not common back then.
As to leash plugs… The first ones I recall seeing were around late 1973/early 74. My first board with a plug was a Tom Overlin that I bought in Spring of 74.
KC
The leash cup started showing up here in Hawaii around '74-'75. Besides the cup, there were these plastic glue on loops that were an option. Fin boxes were kinda of rare too prior to '74, set fins being the norm.
Maybe where you were, at the time…
I had a Surfboards Hawaii 6’8" roundtail in 1971, and it had an FU box exactly like those in use today. Boxes like WAVESET were common in 1967. FU started around the same time.
WAVESET and the FU fin system (there were even a smattering of Guidance Systems here and there) were available here in Hawaii back then for sure...but from my experiences most of the boards coming from the mainland featured some kind of fin system while the major island labels, Surfline, Lightning Bolt and Town and Country, among others had mostly set fins. It was'nt until like '75, when the FU box became the industry standard here. It is amazing how long the FU box has lasted...it is a rather good design. Why fix it if it ain't broke.
interesting about the fin boxes, which reminds me..
This board has G&S star fin boxes. I fitted Star Fin twin fin boxes into a self-built twinnie in 1982, I think at that time the boxes were "modern" but I don't know when they came out and when they went out of vogue. Also in 1982 I put the Multi-Fin Mark Warren twin fin set into another self-built twinnie. The Mark Warren fins were deep raked and translucent red and had fore/aft movement in the boxes with a a screw and nut at the front.
In contrast the Star fins were shaped like a sharks fin with a fairly upright trailing edge. I think the base stretched the full length of the box slot, so the fins were both shorter and with a wider base than the Mark Warren fins (I think).
No screws, just a slot in the front of the base of the fin which allowed the notched front bit to flex and clip onto a moulded plastic bar in the box. Difficult to get in and out and required a cloth to be wrapped around the fin to avoid cutting hands. Does that sound like the boxes you have Chilly? I didn't realise there was more than one generation of Star fin boxes. Anyone know which ones were mine?
[quote="$1"]
Mr.J it measures 10 1/4" {fin position}. here is a better angle for the channels and the tail. pretty prounounced channel on the outside running out at the bump.
[/quote]
Thanks.
The boards I mentioned in my last post with the Star fins and Multi fins were 5' 4" and 5' 6" respectively. Built from the same home made template. I ended up surfing the 5' 4" star finned board and my brother the 5' 6". Tail width was 14 3/4" (I think). The shorter board had shallow rounded channels that faded before the tail ended. The longer one was flat bottomed. I don't think the channels did anything for me.
Circa 1984 I made myself 2 more twin fins which I used for years into the late 80s. These boards were 5' 10" and 5' 11 1/2". I'm fairly sure I gave both these a tail width of 14 1/2". I used both boards interchangeably and eventually decided the 5' 10" one was the better one.
All boards about 20" wide.
I've posted before that one of the US surfing magazines published an article giving the board dimensions and fin positions of some of the top pros of the early 80s. That page went up on the wall of the shaping room of the little surfshop that I did summertime work in, this was in the UK so it was like the shopowner and I had found treasure. So I think some of the measurements I've given were reprasentative of boards of that time. The last two boards had fixed fins so I can only assume that I must have been confident of fin position by that time.
I am interested in comparing the tail width I arrived at of 14 1/2". Chilly, I have another request, could you measure tail width of your board please? 1 foot up from the end of the board ie the end of the swallow tips.
I love these threads, and the conjecture that goes into the What Where and When of these sweet older board finds! …this reminds me I have a friend who recently bought an older G&S single fin for some incredibly cheap price ($50 canadian or something) at a garage sale, some dings and not in perfect shape or anything but a sweet old board. We called it the pickle as it is a pretty gnarly green blotchy colour job. Next time he brings it out I’ll have to see if I can get some pics and start one of these threads on it, I’m sure he’d be stoked to know more about it’s history…
That’s a sweet find man!
[quote="$1"]
Mr J, the tail width is 15 3/4".... [/quote]
cheers, I think your board was made for a reasonably big person at 20 1/2" wide and 3" thick. I'm small so its reasonable I would have liked something narrower, although even so thats a proportionally wider tail.
I've done some searching on the internet for star fins and come up with these fantastic sites.
This one has a selection of twin fins at the bottom of the page which can be clicked on and gives dimensions. One or two of them even give fin positions.
http://www.surfresearch.com.au/0000h_Twin_Fin.html
eg this MR model has measurements similar to my preferences:
http://www.surfresearch.com.au/00000040.html
this one seems impossibly narrow:
http://www.surfresearch.com.au/00000165.html
and there is this great thread from a hobbyist forum, which describes making fins for the star fin boxes. It seems the ones I had with no screw are MK1 late 70s - so if I fitted them in 1982 then I must have been sold old stock! My memory in my earlier post was wrong about the position of the slot - its at the rear not the front. The poster says that design tended to fall out - although I found the opposite - needed a lot of force to pop them out, but they were rather neat I thought with no screws. As you can see they have a triangular profile unlike yours which are more raked. Well thats fantastic you still have the fins - I assumed from the finless pics at the start of this thread that they were lost.
http://magicseaweed.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=14325
and then there is the official gordon and smith site, no pics of star fins but on the historic ads section page 4 there is an ad with a channelled twin fin, possibly similar shape to yours, but no date given. The early 80s was the crossover time from twins to thrusters and I think there was some narrow nosed thruster influence in this g&s shape. So if you have the second gen boxes perhaps your board is looking more like early 80s?
I wasn't going to ask for a nose measurement because I can't remember what I used. I do know that a narrow nosed twinnie I made before the ones I mentioned in this thread didn't work well. Narrow noses tend to make a board pivot around the tail rather than drive forward and the twinnie is an already pivoty design due to the narrow fin base - wider base than thruster, but much narrow than keels. For this reason I concluded the narrow tails were better too ie have a combo of wide nose and narrow tail. However the surfresearch website does give nose measurements for late 70s twinnies - it seems 14" is typical. From the angle that your pics are taken at and looking at the G&S ad, I'm guessing your board has a narrower nose than 14"?
so another request, could you measure the nose please?