Hi all
Could someone explain why mini simmons boards less than 6’ have an S-deck or a step deck? What does the step deck do for the mini simmons board?
Why do you need a lot of foam in the nose?
Reduced swing weight/aesthetic/mystique/holdover from solid wood LBs
…also… the rocker flattens when you’re on the nose for better trim.
Let us not for get the holy grail
LOWER CENTER OF GRAVITAS
the “S” of deck leads to the
promised land of the green
beyond the doorway, or the
landing after flight.
“SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS”
is a great name for a deck
sounds like a speeding watercaft
without that sound
it migh well be a desk.
…ambrose…
excuse my enthusiasm
shaping a deck is
not only fun
but a way to say
pok you to the guys
that said it wont work
specially after it does.
Ha! I “invented” an “S-deck” by design…
I wanted a thick belly from the “true” apex, @ my throat, to my hips, but I wanted a thin nose and tail and rails, so I designed it that way, and when I was done cutting out my stringer (First step I do in making a blank) it looked a “S” deck… because it was. Also has “SK8” rails/step deck all the way around, i.e., max of 2" round rails then concave curve up to the 3.5" deck - which also has concave in the middle ala modern skateboard deck, for a little extra foot leverage… thinner on rails to get on them easier, plus a little V on the bottom in the front to help w/same.
And, it’s been a surfing revelation for me… paddles great, rides great…
i was wondering same thing myself when i saw the “casper” boards at a local shop. not much of an s-deck at all. however, it did have a definite step-deck to it. i really don’t think the rocker is going to flatten out like on a longboard spoon, and swing weight shouldn’t be much of an issue on that short of board as well…maybe it’s for the look…
Quote:
Ha! I “invented” an “S-deck” by design…
I wanted a thick belly from the “true” apex, @ my throat, to my hips, but I wanted a thin nose and tail and rails, so I designed it that way, and when I was done cutting out my stringer (First step I do in making a blank) it looked a “S” deck… because it was. Also has “SK8” rails/step deck all the way around, i.e., max of 2" round rails then concave curve up to the 3.5" deck - which also has concave in the middle ala modern skateboard deck, for a little extra foot leverage… thinner on rails to get on them easier, plus a little V on the bottom in the front to help w/same.
And, it’s been a surfing revelation for me… paddles great, rides great…
Well, dude! Come on! Show us some pics!
"LOWER CENTER OF GRAVITAS’’
That’s like just really hilarious, ambrose. Quote of the week, or maybe the month.
It’s a little early for quote of the year, but you’re off to a strong start…
Quote:
Hi all
Could someone explain why mini simmons boards less than 6’ have an S-deck or a step deck? What does the step deck do for the mini simmons board?
When I was 10 years old, my mom bought me a copy of Leonard Leuras book Surfing: The Ultimate Pleasure. It is from that book that I learned about who Robert Wilson Simmons was. I dreamed up a board label called KUMU surfboards, after the ceremonial Red Fish that is sacred to the Hawaiian culture and early board building. I had my sister search her school library for books on surfing, and she found another book in the Mishawaka High School public library that I talked her into checking out for me, that contained detailed plans for building a Tom Blake Hollow paddle board and a Malibu style board. Those were my first two attempts at board building. I would go over to the construction sites near my house and would pilfer wood that they had discarded, and I managed to get some nice long pieces of plywood and wood stock. I wasn’t allowed near the St. Joe River, so I had to build these boards when my parents were at work, clean the shit out of my dads shop, and then stash them under the pine tree in our back yard. When I finally completed their construction, I would drag them through Merrifield park, under the bridge, and would attach a ski-rope to the big tree down there, and I’d practice turning, back and forth being propelled by the strong currents and eddies of the St. Joe River. If my dad would ever have found out about that, he would have tanned my hide. I ended up stashing them up under the bridge, and eventually they were stolen. I made other boards, and even stashed one up beyond the coast guard house on the bluff in St. Joe, Michigan (Ursulas) but that was stolen as well. I sure wish I could track down one of those boards for nostalgia. I tried to emulate what I read about Simmons and went so far as to pack the hollow chambers full of foam from styrofoam coolers before nailing down the deck to the framing.
In a cosmically weird way, building my hollow board lead to me stumbling onto Swaylock’s years later. My buddy, Ryan Gerard told me about Swaylock’s when I was living in Clairemont. I was always finding answers to questions. Then, a little further down the road, I was looking up pictures of Tom Blake boards on the net and saw Paul Jensen’s 5’10" hollow wood fish linked to Sawylocks. I freaked when I saw it (and I kicked myself in the arse for not thinking of it myself back in the 80s). I thought, wow! This guy is flipping brilliant! I was amazed that the concept worked on a modern board, and didn’t require the large chambers and box, and could still float. So I wound up buying his CD-Rom and some of his template kits.
I’ve been on Sways ever since, marveling at everyone’s talent and creativity.
Back in the 80’s and 90’s, I didn’t really get to study much more of Simmons because we didn’t really have the resources back then… no internet (no Swaylock’s)… not many books that contained information on him. It wasn’t until 2000 or 2001 that I really started to retrace his footsteps. I had just moved to the very place where Simmons lived, worked, surfed, and designed his opus to the world of surfing. I remember walking into the Marine Room for the first time and asking someone about the balsa board hanging there. When I realized it was a Simmons, I nearly choked on my drink. I must have spent an hour going over every little detail. I was in heaven. I never realized how small the surfing community really was, until I started surfing Tourmaline, PB Point, Hairmos, South and North Bird, Mission Beach, Bird Shit Rock, OB, Sunset Cliffs, La Jolla shores, La Jolla reefs, and Blacks. I met people who knew a lot about Simmons and I met people who actually knew him personally. San Diego was a hub of connections for me. I met people in both the Surfing and Music world who knew people and hooked me up with this and that here and there and the next thing I knew, I was telling myself that I’d never leave San Diego! That is until I moved to Carlsbad to have the opportunity to live in my own apartment without roommates! Yet, of all the waves I surfed in San Diego, I never once surfed Windansea. I surfed Big Rock before and Hospitals and places like that, but I never felt worthy enough to surf the same wave that Bob Simmons rode on. Plus, I never felt welcome enough to brave the stink-eye beyond the pump house. Maybe one day that’ll all change, but for now, the mystery is what keeps me guessing what that wave is like.
To help answer your question, rmoisio, this is what I know…
Because His noses were typically Scooped or “Spoon” hulls. I don’t think he did it for weight early on, because he was still in belief that the momentum was still a positive product of his designs back in the 1940s. Who knows… as eccentric as people say he was… I’m sure he knew exactly what he was doing. I know that after studying his boards over at the Marine Room and at the Surfing Heritage Foundation, I noticed a definite pattern in his design process. It seemed that all the boards I saw had that same hull thing going on which I have also found in Pat Curren’s boards… the high line in the nose, progressively falling to a complete low in the tail. After reading a quote where he said, “We’re really surfing on our rails,” I personally believe that the purpose behind his spoon/scooped nose (or the removal of the deck area… or as Velzy would put it – “Meat”) in that nose portion was to achieve a specific “Foil” in the portion of rail that would be in the water. It really makes sense when you look at the boards with the twin keels and the rounded bottom and concave. The portion that is trimming along in the wave face is one long planing surface. The fin all the way back added the stability that was needed to balance out the lift that the planing hull and the high to low rail was achieving, therefore adding to the momentum of his forward projection. Just look at how far out in front of the curling part of the wave that Simmons, Kenvin, and Jon are all getting in various photos that you can find on google. It is amazing, what he was doing at such an early period in surfing’s history. It was so far advanced for the time, that no one else really caught on to it until his shapes were really starting to be rediscovered and studied. He was to surfing as John Lennon was to music, or more precisely, what John Bonham or Buddy Rich were to drumming – Simmons started a rhythm that never stopped… it kept going, and is still being played upon in this new generation of surfers and shapers who have re-discovered the mystique of the stories of Simmons fabled 6’ styrofoam planing hulls that he would ride in the La Jolla shorebreak… and they’ve kinda created their own cultish following and their own takes on Simmons’ design theory… not just here in Southern California, but in France, and beyond. I bet Simmons is standing next to his iconic Igor, Buzzy Trent, looking down on us saying, “It’s about time you kooks learned how to build a board that works!”
Matt’s champing at the bit! Go Matt! Get on it!
nope.just reporting what i have seen.nothing more, nothing less.
You and EPac gonna paddle out tandem and try one?
Hi rmoisio
I’ve never seen any of the mini Simmons boards. But, If I were to guess what they were like I’d say they are probably like a hull.
The hulls I make have “S†decks because the nose and entry rocker are low. To get the profile of the foil with the proper thickness distribution the deck line drops from the shoulder area of the outline a short distance before turning back up and following through to the nose tip.
So the deck line rises from the tail to its high point into the shoulder area then drops and rises again into the nose creating an S line. The decks are also heavily crowned from rail to rail from the tail through the shoulder area, then flatten out into the nose. Because of the low rocker these boards need to be thinned toward the nose from the deck. Contemporary foils are thinned from the bottom which create more rocker curve into the nose.
The benefit of the increased deck area from the S and crown gives you lift. Especially noticed on take off when your board is submerged. As soon as the board starts to slide down a wave face it lifts and squirts out of the water. As well when you are behind the breaking wave line… in white water, the board will continue to race toward green water if weighted properly. In other words it doesn’t bog in the soup.
D.R.
Increased deck area and that S-deck look giving RK a major lift.
Thanks for the insights! Makes a lot of sense.
Dennis,
Would you agree that there is a definite Step/S/Spoon/Scoop going on here?
If you look at the stringer for the frame, it looks like a pronounced dip was taken out when cutting in the centerline profile. I would like to know what Paul has to say about the design principles behind doing this on a 5’6"… maybe that would explain rmoisio’s question a lot better than my attempt…
“Interpreting the Simmons Board” from www.legendarysurfers.com
In John Elwell’s detailed study of the contributions Bob Simmons made to surfing, published in a 1994 edition of The Surfer’s Journal, he wrote an analysis of the Simmons board:
"The Simmons surfboard is as strange an apparition today as it was when it first appeared. In its time it broke all the rules of the day. It represents a shift from heavy displacement to light displacement along with the application of scientific theory. It was a radical departure, far ahead of its time, like the designer, and misunderstandings hindered its full acceptance. Bob Simmons disregarded criticism and just went surfing, which was his great love; his surfing proved the validity of his boards along with their use by a small cadre of followers.
"From what he said and the body of research he had in his possession, along with a visual appraisal, one can get an idea of what he was pursuing. He was an erodynamicist and a mathematician. That viewpoint must be kept in mind.
"The boards had maximum width. Width was favored for the least resistance. Width plays a key role in delivering kinetic energy to the airfoil rail, the leading edge, that gives deflection. All planing hulls are deflectors. The airfoil is a special shape that is calculated. Width divided into length, is aspect ratio, giving a magic number related to lift. Width also allows the hull to leave a clean wake. An impressive example of the value of width is the bodyboard.
"The wide, unusually cambered, uplifted noses created a lot of criticism. The unknowing critics said they were pushing water, but they were in fact working, spreading the water, momentarily, to the high pressure rails before take off. In a tough spot, where the nose comes in contact with the water, in a steep takeoff or large chop, they lifted. Changing the noses was not a big deal to him, saying they stick out when we surf. He rejected points as too fragile and dangerous. Some of his early boards had points. Constant form, flat noses are perfectly acceptable in smooth water. Simmons opted for camber, because sea conditions can change rapidly due to weather changes.
“The outlines were fair parallelism, contiguous rails, fared-in near the tail for clean stable running. Non-uniform outline shapes were rejected, because of eddy flow resistance that increases with planing speed. This occurs at 10” in width. He is on record that trying to modify paddleboard shapes into surfboards was wrong; destroying the wide tail reduced early lift and clean resistance wakes. Those forms pulled the rail away from the wave and required a single fin, partly corrected with a tri-fin today, which undoubtedly would have been rejected, because of increased appendage drag. Rocker was rejected for reasons made obvious by his theory. ‘Ya just don’t need it!’
"He rejected the notion that wide tails were the cause of ‘spin out,’ and considered it a fin problem. He moved a small fin to each outboard rail at the end and towed them in to 10º. This is because the water is moving the fastest at these points as it leaves the hull. A single centered fin is in the low pressure area of the board and away from the wave. He simply expressed, you need more fin at low speeds and less at high speeds. Simmons and his ‘test pilots’ never spun out with dual fins, surfing the biggest and hardest breaking surf. However, he warned that non-uniform hull shapes could ‘spin out.’ This is because uneven side pressures build up, inducing a possible sudden yaw. These shapes require a deeper fin, increasing appendage resistance as the board surfs forward and sideways. He noted with criticism that narrow tails, give a tubing, sucking wake. Anything that has eddy flow resistance, was a ‘disaster’ and ‘not the way to go!’
"The rail and fins had a ‘chord value’ percentage dimension, to allow a smooth release of water flow, allowing the least amount of cavitation. An illustration was contained in a text he had. He dismissed this with a cackle by saying, ‘Generally just lead round, end thin, and that is good enough.’ A true planing hull adjusts itself with speed, where it eventually works itself to a minimum in the aft inside section of a surfboard, unless as Simmons and others found out, it leaves the water in a launch and a skip. He dumped ultralight to keep the boards in the water. Due to the extreme thinness in the nose and tail, he recommended two coats of glass, and even a coat of marine fiberglass paint to protect the board from the destructive rays of the sun, ‘… if you want to keep it.’ He added, ‘the extra weight doesn’t make that much difference.’
"The center of gravity, was precisely placed on these boards. Load has to be forward of lift, a commonly known fact in aerodynamics and naval architecture. Most of his boards would balance on a sawhorse in the middle or slightly forward. The decks were domed smoothly into the rails, shedding water rapidly off the airfoil, this concept greatly reduced unneeded weight. A density calculation was done of materials to get an exact flotation for the weight of load, to barely support the rider. Some surfers, skeptical of this, asked for more flotation and he complied reluctantly.
"A very few of his boards had concave bottoms. Simmons said he did this to get air into them briefly, reducing the suction. The center of the hull has a low pressure flow down the center area anyway. He reduced it even more with a concave. But his concentration was focused on what was happening out on the rail.
"Simmons had piles of computations in advanced math. (All of these are apparently lost, along with test models.) His boards were a complex creation. His efforts were the result of a comprehensive scientific approach using experimentation and Newtonian mechanics. However, planing hulls suffer a penalty at low speed, struggling to get over the hump. Resistance points can be identified where water breaks away in small waves. Simmons attempted to solve this by flow slotting aft of the nose, and spoiler slots in the tail. Only a few boards had this feature. It was very difficult to do correctly. Each of these boards had to be surfed without glassing, with a tack coat of resin. This was applied ‘boomerang science;’ throw and adjust to desired performance. He was also checking the desired attack angle; the immersed, thin-wide tail had to be between 15-20º. This was the secret for quick and early lift for gaining position. Strategically, Simmons wanted to be in the wave first and as soon as possible, for the right-of-way, second he wanted speed, to cover distance for long rides. Big waves and long rides were his criteria for performance. Everything else was folly! He was successful at this. It was commonly said in his day, ‘No one has ever gone as fast on a surfboard!’ It was noted by contemporaries the he usually got the best rides.
“Length plays a role in speed, to a point. Appropriate length captures the maximum principle of resurgence, as water is pushed away, it rebounds and assists the hull. The only way a non-contiguous narrow shaped form can come close to a wide hull is to increase length, but it will never lose its lateral instability. He settled for a 10’6” for bigger surf and 8’ for quick, hard breaking inside breaks."
“Simmons was the most objective surfer I ever met” – Dempsey Holder
“Pat Curren referred to us as Simmons’ test pilots” – John Elwell “Simmons had such good wave knowledge, that I would watch him instead of waves. When he started moving out, I followed him” – Phil Edwards
Yes Kawika, I agree Paul has ‘S’ deck on the board pictured. That board is really nice looking isn’t it…?
D.R.
Very nice…
I know Paul said he made it for a prone board, but I’d like to hear a repoert of how it rides like a normal stand up surfboard.