Submitted by Goomba. Many thanks for submitting this record. http://216.15.61.234/swaylocks/boards/db.cgi?db=default&uid=default&Swaylocks_Board_Number=101&view_records=1&nh=1&mh=1
Submitted by Goomba. Many thanks for submitting this record. John, Bob will be stoked… many thanks for sharing the real stuff! Dale
John,>>> Bob will be stoked… many thanks for sharing the real stuff!>>> Dale I’m just wondering if there is any info of the performance of this board. Whoever submitted the Pic…do you own this and if so tell us about how it rides etc. Nuances regarding the feel, speed, turning (particularly how the edges effect the turning) JC
there was an earlier thread that described, and discussed the merits of a flat bevel rail. re: this new (to the boards page) ‘wilderness’, would that be called a concave bevel? if so, does anyone know if it performs significantly different from the flat bevel? i’m curious because i’m mulling over the idea of shaping a wide-tailed, thick shortboard, and trying a bevel out to see if it imparts a thinner, more reactive feel. i’ll try to attach a link below to the archived ‘bevel rail’ thread. http://www.swaylocks.com/discussion/archive/index.cgi?read=2668
Submitted by Goomba. Many thanks for submitting this record. Nice board!Great photo showing the bottom too.I have surfed a stubbie 7’0" edge board, without the concaves, and it flies!I have also surfed a 6’10" stubbie edge board with the concaves with a single fin.That board was very loose but didn’t have down the line projection.As a tri-fin it performs a whole lot better.I personally haven’t ridden a tri-fin but the pool guy has a couple of them and rips on them, so hopefully he catches this messge and can give you better input.One final note, this bottom with a single fin would be a blast in beach break!
Nice board!Great photo showing the bottom too.I have surfed a stubbie > 7’0" edge board, without the concaves, and it flies!I have also > surfed a 6’10" stubbie edge board with the concaves with a single > fin.That board was very loose but didn’t have down the line projection.As > a tri-fin it performs a whole lot better.I personally haven’t ridden a > tri-fin but the pool guy has a couple of them and rips on them, so > hopefully he catches this messge and can give you better input.One final > note, this bottom with a single fin would be a blast in beach break! The creator of this board is Bob Duncan, the owner and shaper of Wilderness Surfboards in Santa Barbara… interpreting and creating Greenough-inspired designs for 30+ years.
I had tried to explain it in an earlier post (pasted here) but a picture is worth a thousand words. It rides great - it’s a basic gun design if you remove the edge and concaves. With the narrow tail, it goes best in steep walls which also allows the edges to come into play. I feel that the concaves give improved hydro-planing characteristics on the flats and the edge treatment gives more rail sensitivity when hanging high on a speedy wall. It may also keep the rail from burying too deep as it directs the water flow through that slot where the edge is formed. Thanks to all for your interest!
Uh… that would be pasted HERE! Re: the “edge” board I have - the bottom is the most complicated I’ve ever seen on a board. The bottom in the nose is flat at the tip fading to a 3/16 belly about 4" back. This is where the “edge” starts fading in (the retemplated area starts about 1" in from the outer template at this point. The retemplated area follows the general outline of the board to the mid section where it is about 1 1/2" in from the outer template. It fades back out in the tail about 4" up from the tip and extends right out to the outer template at this point. The contours of the bottom start slightly bellied in the nose (3/16") and extend back about 2’ where a slight single concave is present. The dual concaves start about 3 1/2’ back and are about 1/4" deep at the deepest point roughly at mid point. The dual concaves extend back through the forward fins which have their trailing edge set 13" up. Behind the front fins, the bottom fades to a slight flat vee. I would highly recommend that if you want a board like this that you should contact Wilderness Surfboards or perhaps Dave Johnson Surfboards (I hear he makes 'em too.) The templates and specialized shaping tools were probably tough to work out. I think it would be very difficult to pull a shape like this off and glassing one would be a bitch. Clyde Beatty Jr has a great reputation as a glasser and did a nice job on this one. Glassing the edge and sanding around it would likely be disasterous for most of us at this site.
Uh… that would be pasted HERE! Re: the “edge” board I have - > the bottom is the most complicated I’ve ever seen on a board. The bottom > in the nose is flat at the tip fading to a 3/16 belly about 4" back. > This is where the “edge” starts fading in (the retemplated area > starts about 1" in from the outer template at this point. The > retemplated area follows the general outline of the board to the mid > section where it is about 1 1/2" in from the outer template. It fades > back out in the tail about 4" up from the tip and extends right out > to the outer template at this point. The contours of the bottom start > slightly bellied in the nose (3/16") and extend back about 2’ where a > slight single concave is present. The dual concaves start about 3 1/2’ > back and are about 1/4" deep at the deepest point roughly at mid > point. The dual concaves extend back through the forward fins which have > their trailing edge set 13" up. Behind the front fins, the bottom > fades to a slight flat vee. I would highly recommend that if you want a > board like this that you should contact Wilderness Surfboards or perhaps > Dave Johnson Surfboards (I hear he makes 'em too.) The templates and > specialized shaping tools were probably tough to work out. I think it > would be very difficult to pull a shape like this off and glassing one > would be a bitch. Clyde Beatty Jr has a great reputation as a glasser and > did a nice job on this one. Glassing the edge and sanding around it would > likely be disasterous for most of us at this site. An interesting comparison can be found between my 1984 red triplane bodyboard in Swaylock`s “experimental” board archive and this Bob Duncan/George Greenough “edge board” design. Of note are the positioning of the chines and the strakes dividing the bottom surfaces. Both incorporate breakaway edges, panels and concaves that focus speed and control on the primary position of the rider in optimum waves. Although they also involve a fair degree of testing refinement, accuracy and labor to successfully create, the results are always worth the time and effort.