Is there anyone who would like to discuss the performance qualities of a long board twin fin verses the standard long board 2+1
Sure do.
I had a 9’ Kym Thompson performance longboard that came with an 8’ hatchet and two sidebites. It was pretty good in this configuration and I rode
it for about 3 months that way.
Next I tried it as a thruster and again it was OK, a little too much drag though. Next configuration was using an MR twin with a trailer. Pretty good but still too much drag.
Final I tried it with two keels. The board was really transformed with these fins. Fantastic (for a 9’ longboard) turns off the top and off the bottom
and I could really pump it down the line and get some speed.
Big drops were a problem though, it would go all sqirrely as took the drop and wouldn’t settle down until I had a rail engaged. I solved this by putting the
small MR trailer in the box with an FCS adaptor.
Th board was so good with that configuration. Numerous times I would go in in the middle of a surf and put in the MR twins or the hatchet and side bites, but each time I would change it back again as the performance was always disappointing.
I concluded it was the low profile of the keels that provided less drag than the upright twins, combined with the larger area of the keels.
I recently sold the 9’er and got a 9’6 Kym Thompson (9’ wasn’t big enough to take waves from all the 10’ planks that infest the lineups where I surf). Currently its set up as a thruster but you’ve prompted me try it as a twin, although its a much bigger board and this may have an impact .
Dave
Dave. I am curious as to the width of the tail on your 9’ board. I just tried a twin fin this last weekend and found it to be all over the place at first, however by the end of the day I Ieft with the feeling that this design has a lot of potential. It rode just like you said, fast rail to rail and good down the line speed. Very maneuverable, much more so than my 2+1. I can best describe the feeling as a long board with similar short board performance characteristics. The waves were small so I am anxious to see how it would perform on something head high and bigger.
No chance to change fins as the board I borrowed has glassed on fins. Probably because the the tail was so thin.
For specifics the twin has a 13-1/2 inch tail pulled to a very narrow and thin 4" tail block. The 2+1 has a 14-1/4 tail to a 5-1/2" tail block
I’m sure Steve will see this and comment
THANKS for the pic Skip-
I have spent Thirty one years of my surfing the twinfish concept - I have spent many hours testing and refined the concept along the way with ALAN Mcray-Blast Knee bords Hawaii-Pat Rawson- Rennie Yater-Clyde Beatty-Wayne Rich-Steve Brom- Twenty per cent of my surfing is done in sloppy conditions seventy in perfection the boards I surf work in both. I currently ride a 6’4" Rocket Fish-6’10"Rocket and 9’1" King Fish Iam one of Clyde Beatty’s team riders if you want the real Rocket fish or King Fish please e-mail MAHALO
chicolini,
The board has a 14" pin tail, the complete antithesis of what you would expect to work as a twin fin,
dave
epac,
thats about the fin configuration of my 9’er. Have you tried it as a quad? In my experience a quad set up (4.75 leading, 3" trailing) is even better than a keel.
dave
Type of fin and placement is important but I have found that square and pintails load way to much water up under the tail and fins -vee and a deep swallow displaces that water correctly.
When you say that square and pintails load way to much water up under the tail and fins, what are the symptoms of what you describe? What style of surfing do you enjoy the most and how does the board you ride enable you to do that compared to more traditional 2+1’s?
Why are 2+1’s so popular when ther are so many alternatives?
when you said the board was all over the place, that is water loading up under the back of your fins - thats why a trailer fin corrects that problem- I have already tested that concept ten years ago. it works but not as well as the fin set up Iam riding now .
THE bottom rocker has to be correct too- to much nose rocker and the long board won’t nose ride but it will take on larger waves.the first three boards we built had way to much nose rocker the next had lower nose rocker but a concave was added - what a disaster that was - the miniute you crossed stepped to the nose the fins released and the board went spining. the same blank and natural rocker was used again except it had a square tail and a quad set up same problem- same blank new bord back to natural rocker deep swallow and vee plus fish fins set up - extra FCS plugs - quad set up and side bites which Clyde and I called Tiger Paws- Bingo ! Steve Brom shaped the last one- it nose rides and it rail turns .Check out the pictures that skip sent- If you are intrested in getting one let me know.
Steve Boehne of Infinity Surfboards has done twin-fin-with-trailer longboards for years under his “Cluster-V” model. I’ve owned five from 7-10 to 10-0. What I found was that they have plenty of drive and are very responsive but the tail tends to pull out on committed noserides. I’ve found quad LBs are even more drivey and hold better on steep faces, but have similar (but not as bad) tail pull-out problems while noseriding. IMHO single-fin LB are by far the best for noseriding, but, of course, in general aren’t as responsive as multi-fins (the 9” True Ames L-Flex is pretty dang loose for a single-fin). In my experience the tried-and-true 2+1 offers the best of both worlds. You can vary the size and template of the center fin to accommodate your mood…longer/wider for Noseriding emphasis, shorter/narrower for more of a turning emphasis. Unfortunately, only O’Fish’l offers a choice of side-bite templates. So if you want to change these on a 2+1 with FCS, LokBox, etc. you have to DIY, but then that’s what we Swaylockians do…