So what you guys are on about,is to make one fin that suits everyones style of surfing, or basically make everyone surf the same. Have’nt we produced enough clones out in the water, what happened to the days when surfers had their own idividual style, which they developed by riding boards shaped by surfers with different ideas and theories. l go down the beach these days and all the young guys surf the same, l’m sorry Tom but the likes of you and F.C.S have played a major part in this, l used to have my own templates and foils which l developed myself to complement my rockers, outlines and foils, now l am dictated by the media soaked wank that the kids beleive is correct, sorry again Tom but when you said that you decided to use the top shapers templates instead of using your own, any fool could have told you that you were not going to succeed using your own templates, it is only through the marketing of the top surfers that you guys are able to keep going and even that is a load of wank because quite a few of these “models”, the guy that there named after does’nt even use them. KR
KR- thank you for speaking the most enlightened words of truth and soul! Down with the clones! Kill the machine! “Have’nt we produced enough clones out in the water, what happened to the days when surfers had their own idividual style, which they developed by riding boards shaped by surfers with different ideas and theories.”
KR, But, is’nt what we’re talking about making a new independent science based fin foil? And, while I realize that our root geometry is a bit more sophiticated than what most shapers are willing to make by hand, we are not out there threatening lawsuits against people who try. We also have in the works a method for producing blanks that could be used for custom fins. As a matter of fact if you look at the latest issue of Happy there’s ashot of Adam Repolgo that has a modified set of Red X by Timmy Patterson. And, while I’m piling it on, the adjustability of our boxes and assortment of templates can only add to the range of options surfer have today. So, if I were you, I would consider all the additional options that are available today along with custom glass-ons that weren’t available before. But, yes I’ll give you that playing the marketing game (which Larry does very begrudgingly) does lead the less experienced towards specific options.
Ok let’s get rational: “High-performance fins (whatever that may be) need to be rationally designed and precisely made for best performance. The only way to make such a fin profile is with the application of a computer controlled machining process.” Above are Mark’s words. Ok Mr. Engineer put up or shut up. Quite flaming and go to work. What do you have to offer? Tom would like to see a meeting of the computer and the foiler. I see no harm in that. Rationally designed a professionally made – that would be Curtis Hasslegrave, George Greenough and few other top foilers who are no doubt out of my league and are few and far between. I’m more than willing to see how my work matches up but these guys are legends and are the best place to start IHMO. The bottom line is that I’ll put the experienced artistically devoted human hand up against any computer any time. Computers can make the pictures, draw charts and engineers can spout their theories but without the kind of wave and surfcraft knowledge that someone like Gerry Lopez or Dick Brewer have it’s doubtful that somthing can be produced which will take a surfboard at the edge of it’s top performance. I may be wrong but I doubt it buddy. All though they don’t work very well for me Rusty makes some nice looking series of fins of 4oz cloth called a Rusty flex. I wonder how they’re foiled. They look like they’re machine foiled to me. I wonder if the original was produced by hand. Does anyone know? This may shed some light on the picture. Someone like Rusty who has a huge amount of surfcraft knowlege can foil something and learn how it works pretty fast because he has great surfers as a primary resource and the they are the fin maker’s number one resource. Where the fin meets the wave is where we learn everything. We’re still learning where the computer fits into the picture it seems to me. Show someone like Adam Repogle or Laird Hamilton a fin set-up you’ve made and he’ll tell you right off is he’s willing to give it try or more likely if you’re not somebody he’ll just look at you, smile and be on his way. It’s surfers like these two and a few others that are really testing the edge of fin performance. We can bicker around and talk about what will work the best but until one can put what one makes through some actual big wave testing. It’s all just projection and so much bull. Mahalo, Rich
Boys, Maybe we could put brake lights in the back of the fins and call them spoilers, just like they do with cars. Lighten Up.
l am sorry Tom but l have tried all the systems out there because of guys being told that they need to have removable fins because the pro’s use them. They all have their disadvantages, from having to pay ridiculous prices for the fins and the setup equipment, poor longevity through water sepage causing colapsed decks to the fact that they just look downright ugly. The fins used to be the cheapest item involved with making boards now their the most expensive. There have been moments in time when surfboard inovations have taken us to the next level ie; MR with his twinfins, Simon Anderson with his thruster but if it was’nt for the fact of these guys being able to tear it up, aswell as shape to hone what they are feeling out in the surf we would have advanced at a much slower rate, l dont know if anybody else has noticed this but the surfboard has’nt progressed that much in the last 10 years and l feel that this is mainly because the pro’s are not shaping their own boards, most of them don’t even know how wide their tails are 12" up, so how is it going to progress unlees these guys get into it more and get their hands dusty. When the great inovation of removable fins came in l did not see any improvement in the pro surfers ablilty, only a large improvement to the clever marketers bank account. KR
I don’t know KR, I do see a marked improvement in the quality of today’s pros. Whether that has to do with fin systems is certainly arguable. But this is not, before fin systems the knowledge about what a fins actually did was limited… very limited. There is no way of knowing what a fin does if you can’t objectively compare, and there is NO way of reasonably doing this with glass ons. IMHO fins have as much to do with the performance of a surfboard as any other component. Not knowing what different options are available is ludicrous and this is precisely what we had during the glass on era. The future of fin technology is with the fin systems and we are just now beginning to see movement there. The systems have finally paid off their start up costs and are now putting some of that money you are speaking so begrudgingly about, into R&D programs that MAY lead us further along a desirable performance path. The fact that there are numerous systems can only lead to competition over the performance aspects of each and that leads us forward. I personally don’t feel that the way to progress is through cheaper product. If that’s the case then we should all just cast our eyes to Asia right now and forget this whole mess.
Greg,l did not say anything about cheapening my product and like Halycon, l beleive that my fin product is as good as any removable fin system, what l am saying is that for the sake of losing more and more of my ever decreasing profit l would rather make the whole board that l developed and beleive in, rather than give it to some marketing giant to sprout his name on my product saying say that the board works better because it has Kelly Slater fins in it. To me THAT says lets stop shaping and creating our own ideas and give it to the Asian manufactures. KR
Mark and Tom, get that root geometry together and let’s go! What you say about diversity Greg & RD is a most critical part of fin development and the competitive part of the open market has the sort of fuel that feeds the fires of change. One fin that can do it all will never exist because there are just too many different kinds of dolphin in the sea. One the other hand cheap labor is nothing new to the international economic scene. Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think the Chinese invented it. It seems more a result of what we ended up with and now call free enterprise as America evolved from the feudal system, which not too curiously or coincidentally was abolished in medievil Europe in 1789 just after the American Revolution. In any case it remains to this day just one step from slavery. Carnegie proved that some time ago where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers join to form the Ohio River in the polluted pit we now know as steel town. We can complain about economic treads and exploitation all we like but Nike will keep making shoes and surftech will keep making surfboards. The petty particular interest groups will continue to grow and the little pockets of nostalgia will continue to reek of regression. I feel it best that I do my small part and not waste my time caterwauling. If one is in love with modern imported sailboard technology surf-craft or fins that have Kelly Slater’s autograph on them great. They can have 'em. They’re just more throw away items and aren’t worth much in my book because no matter what anyone says, nothing compares in charm and performance to a custom shaped, resin tinted, pin-lined, hand crafted, signature surfboard built by a true professional with a custom fin set-up. One can get a board any weight these days just by choosing between an epoxy or a polyester fiberglass lamination. It’s really quite simple and actually costs less than an imported pop-out. I.E.Resource # 552 here at Swaylocks is a custom Freeline shaped from super green Clark foam and it’s lighter than any surftech of equal volume and a hell of a lot easier to repair when it gets dinged. Mahalo, Rich
This comment may also assist in answering John’s original question about what is a high or low aspect ratio. The comments I made with respect to the lift-curve slope and sweep were essentially in respect of fins of moderate to large aspect ratio. (Yes, somewhat airy fairy) The sweep effect is lessened for fins with lower aspect ratios. As the aspect ratio is reduced, the flow around the fin is more progressively influenced by the root, tip and taper than it is by the sweep. The tip flow effects of low aspect ratio fins could be moderating the tip stalling tendency of sweep. If this is so, then it needs to be clearly demonstrated. I would like to refer you to NACA Technical Note 1491 and Figure 2. The print quality of the drawing is poor, but it contains important information. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1947/naca-tn-1491/ You won’t need computers or mathematics to work out the influence of taper, sweep and aspect ratio on the lift-curve slope of conventional (linearly swept and rigid) fins. Please read “fin” for “wing” in the following quote, shown on page 11. “Examination of Figure 2, reveals certain general trends with respect to the effect of wing planform on wing lift-curve slope. For wings of high aspect ratio, the angle of sweep has a marked effect on the lift-curve slope with the maximum effect occurring for wings of infinite aspect ratio when the lift-slope curve is a direct function of the angle of sweep. As the aspect ratio approaches very low values the lift-curve slope for the unswept wing is reduced and the effect of sweep becomes small except for very large angles of sweep. Also it can be seen that at very large angles of sweep, the effects of aspect ratio variation on lift-curve slope become small.” Note: A clear representation of Figure 2 can be also be found in NACA Technical Report 921 – Figure 4. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1948/naca-report-921/ Other suggested reading. 1. Aero-hydrodynamics of Sailing, 2nd edition by C.A. Marchaj. Refer to “Sweep angle effects and Low Aspect Ratio Foils” from page 447 . 2. The DATCOM Formula – Section 4,USAF Stability and Control DATCOM,McDonnell Douglas Corporation,USAF Flight Dynamics Laboratory (1960, rev 1976) This data compendium is only if you are very serious … and wear pocket protectors. The following is quoted from http://www.faqs.org/faqs/aviation/flight-simulators/ The book is intended to be used for preliminary design purposes before the acquisition of test data. … there are many cases where the Datcom can be used to advantage in conjunction with test data. For instance, if the lift-curve slope of a wing-body combination is desired, the Datcom recommends that the lift-curve slopes of the isolated wing and body, respectively, be estimated by methods presented and that appropriate wing-body interference factors (also presented) be applied. If wing-alone test data are available, it is obvious that these test data should be substituted in place of the estimated wing-alone characteristics …" The Datcom has nine sections:1)Guide to Datcom and Methods Summary, 2)General Information(notation, parameters of wing, body, section, and platform), 3)Effects of External Stores, 4)CHARACTERISTICS AT ANGLE OF ATTACK, 5)Characteristics in Sideslip, 6) Characteristics of High-Lift and Control Devices, 7) Dynamic Derivatives, 8) Mass and Inertia, 9)Characteristics of VTOL-STOL Aircraft. The methods are a mixture of theoretical and empirical equations.Each section starts with a description of the aerodynamics that contribute to the derivative as appropriate to the configuration. The methods are then discussed with sample problems following. Next are the references, the tables showing accuracy of the methods, and finally, the charts. You’ll probably recognize these – several authors use them liberally in their texts. It costs about $175. It’s distributed in four binders and is 3,200 pages long. Wow.
this is good stuff.i am curious to see what the final result is, one reason being i have a 30+ year old fin design with an updated foil based on some aerodynamic principles, and have a suspicion that it may be very close to what the computer kicks out…
Matt, I agree, it’s a channel that’s certainly worth tuning in to. There are lot’s of lead-ins and interesting come-ons and one cannot help but wonder what the full-feature program will look like. Mahalo, Rich
And Rich is one guy that proves the point of fin systems. Here is a guy who is making fins that fit the systems. This too opens the door for more progression within the fins themselves. Companies that can work within the framework of the fin box companies like we did in the Fins Unltd. days. What I’m driving at here is progression of the equipment. I don’t think anyone here will disagree that the fins, in the basic 3 fin design, have changed little in over 20 years. And for almost all of that time glass ons have been the order of the day. We are still basicly following along the same lines Simon put down in '81. Now, more recently, we are finally seeing some movement and it is coming directly from R&D within the fin boxes framework. I don’t feel that going back to glass ons is a futuristic view, that’s all. And somehow we have to be forward thinking enough to get past trying to simply, “make them cheaper”, and begin to truly make the effort to make them better which was Rich’s #552 reference. As an industry we are failing to convey a progressive message to our customers because we haven’t done our homework in regards to giving them a better product. And we use the “low profit margins” as an excuse. Who here thinks they make the BEST board they can possibly make? Or do you think that you are making the best board you can make at a consumer price? Are we an industry that gives the customer it’s very best or are we an indusry that gives just what we think they’ll pay? Interestingly, Randy French has found that they are willing to pay more for more. The fin systems are beginning to find the same thing. $50 fin sets. Would you pay $50 to surf better? I would. Who wouldn’t? So how about us? Why can’t we cash in on making and selling better product? Simply, we can. But we have to give our customers more. We have to initiate a new progessive attitude within this industry. We have to stop putting down new ideas without even trying them out of fear or envy and convey to the media and the market this new attitude.
Wow… very wise words! Thanks again, Greg.
So, reading between the lines, what is stated is that: A swept fin drifts through turns, the degree directly related to the amount of sweep. They also spin out (or stall) easier, related to the amount of sweep. Fins without sweep have higher lift coefficients, therefore more drive and better hold but with less forgiving handling charateristics. The higher the aspect ratio, the more effect the sweep curve has (longer leading edge?). There are other aspects that also effect the overall performance such as, speed, momentum, weight and size of rider, wave size and shape, body (board) shape etc. Seems what is being said is that there will be no single perfect fin shape for everyone(what a surprise!). Just wanted to simplify and relate it to our equipment.
Progression, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder, atleast thats what l believe. Where l live they have basically torn down fine homes to put up massive high-rises for the sake of progress (they recon). Now in my eyes it looked and was a lot better the way it was, but no we have to progress, hence the saying “nothing good lasts for ever”. To me, progression with surfboards had stopped when shapers started to hire “ghost shapers”. At the beginning of ghost shaping they hired guys who atleast had experience and they payed them what they were worth for attempting to recreate their style of surfboard, now they are employing young inexperienced guys because they are cheap labour. They only know how to turn rails (and alot of them dont do that very well)and that is because the shaper doesn’t want them to learn and is reluctent to teach them for the fear of themselves becoming redundent, YEP THATS PROGRESS FOR YA, with progress like this in the industry, shit we will be doing 20 foot airs in 2 foot surf in no time, JUST ANOTHER GREEDY EYESORE IF YOU ASK ME.
Swaylockians, In order to make things better in the surfing world we have but one choice and Mr. Loerh said it perfectly, “Initiate a new progessive attitude within this industry.” Progress in the U.S.A. has become a tainted word. KR alludes to putting up high rise in the interest of progress when in fact this sort of activity is about dealing with overpopulation and moving forward in the face of it. The march of overpopulation is a regratable circumstance to be sure and we suffer it’s consequences everytime we paddle out into the line-up. However there is another part of progress which some attend to in the development of surfcraft. It’s the other and more important nuance of the word. Those that participate call it work. It’s the work in which we gradually develop new ways to move forward toward a goal. That goal is the next best cutting edge of surfcraft performance. Part of this development is about education. Some longtime craftsmen take in aprentices; some of those with experience are willing to mentor those with genuine interest, and we are all better off the this. Some just move forward mindlessly cutting as many corners and burning as many bridges as they can as they go with personal gain and a monetary growth as their principle motive and we all suffer as a result. The play between these two elements of progress is the rub. Mahalo, Rich
Yep thats great but if we dont even try to stamp out greed the world will end even quicker than we expect and you cant tell me that most people these days are not getting greedier. All l’m trying to do is shut down or put a stop to the greedy pricks in my industry that are only in it for the monetry gain and as l said there is more and more of these crew jumping on the band wagon. KR
l,m 40 now, and am glad that l was born when l was but l would have liked to have been born another 10 years earlier so that l would have had more time to surf in peace. If you guys like the way surfing has gone you can have it, l’m outa here. KR
KR, many of us have had the feeling that we should have been born earlier so that we could have enjoyed the more pure days of surfing minus the marketing, mass media, commercialization, b.s., hype, etc. etc… There are still empty beautiful waves in this overcrowded and over-hyped world (and I’m writing from California) where surfing can be whatever you want it to be on whatever surf vehicle (or bodysurfing) that you choose. Don’t lose the stoke man and don’t sell all your board building stuff you’ll regret it and the evolution of the whole thing will be changed/lost. Like Doc Paskowitz say’s “Keep surfing and surfing will keep you.”