Information is everything

For reasons more painful than I care to discuss, I found myself surfing a 'soft surfboard', well at least it was a lot softer that anything I surf on a regular basis.

 

Information delayed is information lost...

 

For me the problem is information, the kind that's communicated to the rider, and in this case via the mechanical connection (interface?) between board and rider. There's a fairly well established relationship in physics, in this case the physics of mechanical waves, vibrations, etc. that says that the velocity of transverse* wave propagation through a medium is proportional to the square root of the tension in the medium divided by the mass per unit length of the medium. (Sounds pretty cryptic, but its not, see next paragraph.) Its that speed of propagation which carries the information both ways - from wave to rider, and rider to wave.

 

Think of it this way, if you tie a rope to a fence and start to oscillate the loose end, the shape and speed of the waves propagating down the rope (towards the tied end) will be a function of how tight or how much tension you have in the rope. It will also depend on the thickness of the rope, or what material the rope is actually made out of.

 

What you, make that what I want in a surfboard is one that would be equivalent to a fairly tight rope, which is not too thick or heavy, but not so light or weak as to break. That is, a surfboard capable of communicating information rapidly, and one which rapidly communicates information which I might give it -i.e. what surfers might generally refer to a being 'responsive.'

 

Sounds like something everyone might like, and to a large degree it likely is, but it seems, at least from surveying the products out there, that everyone might not agree on 'how tight the rope should be'. Of course conditions will matter, but I'm not convince they matter as much as personal preference, skill, and style.

 

… back to soft surfboards.

 

Actually, no. I've got nothing against them as flotation devices, but geez, what a horrible waste of money if purchased as a surfboard. Good for beginners? Really? Is the learning curve for surfing really that steep that there's a need for a special class of 'beginner' products? Naah, its just more crap thats going to find it's way into a landfill after passing through countless 'yard sales.'

 

But...

 

Beyond the extreme case of soft vs hard, the more subtle controversy of degrees of flex in surfboards continues. Personally, I'm one of those that prefers stiff, as is real stiff. I want my planing surfaces to obey my every command (-i.e. stay where I put them and not give an inch to forces which may oppose them or their shape), and I want them to readily communicate any goings on to my 'interface', that is toes, feet, ankles, joints in general, position sense (inner ear) etc.

 

Information is well everything when you think about it … even when you don't.

 

kc

 

*, a similar relationship exists for longitudinal waves, but given the point to be made here, lets just stick with the transverse kind.

[quote="$1"]

But...

 

Beyond the extreme case of soft vs hard, the more subtle controversy of degrees of flex in surfboards continues. Personally, I'm one of those that prefers stiff, as is real stiff. I want my planing surfaces to obey my every command (-i.e. stay where I put them and not give an inch to forces which may oppose them or their shape), and I want them to readily communicate any goings on to my 'interface', that is toes, feet, ankles, joints in general, position sense (inner ear) etc.

 

Information is well everything when you think about it … even when you don't.

 

kc 

[/quote]

Beautiful summation!      Logic and clarity  throughout.      (CAUTION:  Flex is the ''Sacred Cow'' of surfing)

Hey KC.

I think you’d really like a composite similar to what I build… They meet your wish list, sometimes too much so, which is something I’m constantly working on…

Have you tried a timberflex type of construction?? I’m sure you’d like it’s increase in responsiveness over standard construction…

checkout Surflight and Y’s Swizzle Nidacore stringer idea.

if the spine has enough snap like via a carbon fiber glassed XPS leaf spring core as they do in Surflights or Morey’s shaped solid Nida core stringer then you can still have the snap you want even though the eternal skin layer may still be soft.

Standard surfboard technology is to surround a soft core with a stiff  fiberglassed exoskeleton while snow ski tech and others have the spring built into the core and then build around that. 

that aluminized core surfboard is a step in that direction.

a shaped high density core seems to be a solution for the softies.

also when the weight is center massed versus on the skin i think you get better response and handling like those mid engine race cars.

Hey KC.

Check out     inCide  technology     developed by a fellow named  Dan Mann…

My composite skins have a similar effect,  although impact strength is a major factor as well…

The inCide tech puts the “leaf spring” closer to the neutral axis or center of the core as mentioned above by Oneula…While keeping the external core relatively simple to shape …

Wasn’t Bert Berger offering a tapered “springer” insert inside some of his boards a while ago?? Same concept really…

If you take a close look at the inCide glue up of the core,    I think you’ll see that the carbon/glass inlay is located just slightly below the neutral axis of the blank, with 2 sheets of eps glued up on either side most likely using a rocker table…

 Although the concept is nothing new really,   it’s goals are much greater than glueing 2 thin pieces of foam together to form a thicker core…

I like the fact that the spring layer is closer to the bottom half of the core and not the top… I  think this is a more controlable place to put it being the bottom of a board is generally flatter… I put my thickest skins on the bottom as I don’t want to overload the deck skin which is already stiffer due to the complex curves…

 

http://rideincide.com/#362270/About

 

what a horrible waste of money if purchased as a surfboard.

If I might offer a few words in the service of anarchy and at least teasing sacred cows...I would say that the (total) softboards currently available at least here in California are not designed or built as any kind of performance surfboards. I agree they aren't all that great as beginner boards either beyond just being safer materials than traditional boards.

Morey's boards today, they don't have much in common to his Morey-Doyle boards and all the more recent versions. Most modern softboards seem to have single vertical wood stringers just like regular foam boards, where the original Morey-Doyles had horizontal fiberglass stringers, kind of fiberglass mat style (not sure how wide they were). The Swizzles and One, that stuff...feels like very light contemporary boards. I'm curious how that microcell foam on the rails treats wetsuits in the long run, if anybody knows.

Frankly, I don't know but that the earlier Morey-Doyles might have been a fairly high point for that tech. It's been years since I rode one, but they were great at absorbing chop, did it like a board that weighed a hundred pound. Definitely didn't have that hard touch/feel aspect, but they had something else...which either never got explored or hit a dead end either in R&D or the showroom floor.

 

Hi all -

I have an old fiberglass stringer from a Morey-Doyle.  Not sure what generation it is but it is (was) vertically oriented - like a conventional stringer.  It has two little tabs for attaching the piece of  shit fin that came with it.  There wasn't any room for fin tweaks with those boards and that was a weak point.

There are a wide range of 'soft' boards.  IMO the Surftech Soft-tops with epoxy/fiberglass bottom and EVA foam decks are actually good shapes and ride OK.  Unlike many of the other soft boards on the market they have real fin boxes and allow quite a bit of tweaking via fin exchange and positioning.

Some of the soft boards with the 3"+ full length down rails and crappy plastic fins aren't much good for real surfing.  The construction is poor and you won't see many that have been used awhile that aren't starting to peel and delaminate.

Was it a Surflight or another type. I have used softboards since the original Morey/Doyle. Most are designed for safety for beginners. I haven’t tried the new “Y” designed boards, but I have tried the Surflight, and most of the others out there.

I too prefer stiff boards that have instant response, but I think there is a place for soft outer shell boards. Especially for someone like on blood thinners who bruises easily.

I have one of the newer versions of the Morey/Doyle type boards and it’s OK for beginners. It’s very floaty and paddles like a 10+ footer. They can be fun in really small waves. Good for beginners from getting hurt by the board or from hurting others. The others are basically epoxy boards with a soft spongy deck. They are also designed for beginners so they are a bit floaty for easy paddling and catching waves. 

The Surflight is an interesting board because it has a soft outer skin that you need to get used to. It is designed for performance, but I only used it once so I didn’t get to dial it in. I think that given some time you can figure it out and have the advantage of the soft outer shell which is easier on your body along with the unique flex designed into the board.

If you’re smart enough to feel the board and all the nuances of the flexing, you should be able to dial in the Surflight. The only negative things I found are that it doesn’t like heat, it will bubble up and it can be sliced by another board’s fins. The new ones use a different skin, so they may be tougher than the board I used. 

Wecome back, kc...

As you might imagine, we've done a lot of testing regarding flex and feel. Some constructions are too stiff, some are too flexible. Good is somewhere in between - get it right and the board feels connected to your feet.

If you think stiff is better from a dynamics point of view, you should look into why they banned flexible dynamic devices in F1 a few years ago.

 

One advantage in a decent quality softie is that beginners tend to be hard on boards. Whether due to ineptitude, or just no sense of board care. No point buying a kid a $600 PU/PE job that will be delammed and cracked to hell before he learns to turn it. I know a young kid who started on a BZ, and when mom and pop bought him a shiny new WRV swallowtail, he dragged it around like he did with his BZ. Needless to say, the WRV was a wreck in short order. The kid wasn’t ready for a real board, anyway. Still isn’t, five years later.

I have had two BZs. First one was an 8’ Doyle with a single FU box. Eventually, the bottom skin cracked and peeled. So, I got some skin material from a custom bodyboard builder in NJ, and re-did the bottom. Board is still in use. Second one was a 7’ BZ, bought maybe ten years ago. Still going strong though it has some cuts and leaks a bit.

The newer BZs seem really thick and blobby compared to my 7 footer. Rails are really fat and overall thickness is generous, to say the least. A guy I know bought a 9’ BZ last Summer and snapped it in 3’ windswell beachbreak. I think the quality has slipped.

We use softies at a local beach where they are the only thing allowed. It also happens to be one of the few accessible spots that can have rideable waves when all the main breaks are dead flat. So, why not get a softie and have a little Summer fun in some waist high shorebreak? Rather than sit on the beach, sweating and wishing it was 6’ and firing.

I forgot to mention that whenever anyone asks how my 7’ BZ rides, I tell them it floats like an 8 footer, and turns like a three-legged dog.

With all that flex, you have to exert a lot more energy to crank it around. Those little stubby gel fins don’t have a lot of hold, either. But, what do you want from an overgrown pool toy, anyway?

I have an old fiberglass stringer from a Morey-Doyle.  Not sure what generation it is but it is (was) vertically oriented - like a conventional stringer.  It has two little tabs for attaching the piece of  shit fin that came with it.  There wasn't any room for fin tweaks with those boards and that was a weak point

John - my Doyle board was from before slick skins (very soft top and bottom).  The thing is rotting away in the rafters even as I speak (a good Santa Ana rains little bitty blue plastic flakes down) - I guess I could go out and dig my finger in until I hit stringer and see. My memory of that goes off a copy of the repair sheet they sent me when the fin got laid sideways while stuck in sand after a wipeout. The fin fix (from memory again) was to drill in and run two screws sideways through the fin into the stringer. If the stringer was vertical...was it thick? I can't imagine that repair working if it was much like a conventional stringer. And it did work.