Nick Carrolls' new Fat-Bat

General Discussion
1

Ok, I have shaped Nick a Fat-Bat a while ago so I could get some good feedback on a design that I was very confident with, but just wanted some expert criticism from a surfer who knows boards. Nick enjoyed the Fat-Bat and gave me some good feedback which helped me perfect the design....He recemtly was unable to bring the board back from Brazil due to excess baggage rules or something so he then contacted me so we could work on creating him a new Fat-Bat, a slightly modified version to suit the way he surfs and the waves he will use the board in...

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/DSCN1345.jpg[/IMG]

the pic above isnt Nicks original Fat-Bat but it is very similar....dims of his first one was 5'10" x 20 1/4" x 2 1/4"

Nick wanted his new bat to be able to turn a bit better, he liked the flow and the glide of the first one but just wanted a slighly smaller version to suit the slabby style beachies and reef waves he surfs mostly....

We adjusted the fins a bit, this was one of his main things he wanted from the board, the fins in off the rails a bit will hopefully allow the board to flow thru turns a bit better, we ended up with a positioning thats in between my standard Fat-Bat placement and the McKee placement, so the feedback from NC will be interesting to me as a shaper even though we tried plenty of fins and set ups while trying to get the design working at its best...the other mods we did were to reduce the size to 5'9" x 20" x 2 3/8", overall the volumes are very similar or perhaps the new one has a touch MORE due to me carrying the volume further back towards the tail, I did this to compensate the loss of a bit of volume when we reduced the area....The planshape in the tail was modified by adding a fair bit of curve, this is also to allow the board to turn tightly when up on rail and to be a bit MORE manouverable and responsive as NC wanted....

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/Nicks2ndFat-BatandAnthonys511008.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/Nicks2ndFat-BatandAnthonys511007.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/Nicks2ndFat-BatandAnthonys511006.jpg[/IMG]

Here are a few pics of it after it was shaped.....

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/NCsandAnthonysFat-Batsplusstockb-1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/NCsandAnthonysFat-Batsplusstockb-2.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/NCsandAnthonysFat-Batsplusstockb-3.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/NCsandAnthonysFat-Batsplusstockb-4.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp114/pridmore73/NCsandAnthonysFat-Batsplusstockbats.jpg[/IMG]

and this is the finished product...keen to hear any thoughts.....

 

2

you can see MORE Fat-Bats @ www.moresurfboards.com

3

nice planshape, concept seems practical for Sydney.

On cosmetic note:

Make a new logo! Aesthetic wise would top it off.

4

interesting comment, what logo do you mean ? for me it is MORE about the shape and performance of the board, than how cool the logo looks but always open to suggestions ???

5

Not saying your focus is not on the shape and performance,

 

just the centre logos with the 'fat bat' decal and whatever is on top of that...

i like the bottom ones, nice and stealthy!

6

I like it. Have you tried it as a tri-fin?

7

That old excuse…

8

have tried them as tri's but they didnt have the same drive or liveliness...the quad really suits this design IMO, more like a turbo charged twinny that has no squirrells...

 

 

9

Here is the feedback direct from Nick......

 

 

I had a chance to surf the new Bat a few times amid the board frenzy
and here's an early take

First off, the changes you've made pretty much free the board up to
do what I was hoping, ie turn more directly up the face and generally
allow more variety of turns. Can really feel the change in the back
end template and in the fin position, they reflect the experience I'm
having with other short quads atm -- fin position especially. Ie pull
the back set in closer and the board has more range and vertical
turning potential. I love that feeling with four fins, always
disliked the rail version's restrictive feel and it's great to get
both the cake (ie less drag) and eat it too (in turns)

Plus the overall volume of the board is perfectly fitted to me, at
least in a full wetsuit (might be a fraction too much volume in
boardies but that will be OK I'm sure)

Using the same AB type fin set, I might try a slightly smaller back
set at some point, but since the sets are both well up off the tail
and having to control a relatively wide back end then it's not a big
issue.

Most noticeable with the turn variety is a big step up in backside
surfing, I rode a lot of very quality lefts during one session and
felt like I could lean back and in and drive straight up with ease,
then place top turns in v steep sections and adjust to suit.

I also like the board's response in things like foam rebounds and
trim line changes where you've gotta kind of "set" a board
fractionally before the actual move, it really likes this sort of
thing a lot and always flies out of such moves in a very positive and
happy state, instead of doing the slightly troubling quad double-take.

I can also see room for further steps in the design: the tail outline
curve is focused a bit too much on the last few inches of rail and if
that curve was spread out a bit more, pulling in the outline slightly
from around the 24" mark, it feels as if you'd get even more hard and
positive response and a wider turning range. maybe giving up a bit of
surface area in the tail but there's plenty of that, it'd be worth
surrendering a square inch or three to go to the next level. Plus
maybe a slight change to the rail foil, pitching some of that back
end thickness further up, so the rail foils out a bit more as it
comes back to the fins.

But that would be down the track, for now it's fun to keep playing
with this version of the Bat! good job. I'll see if I can get some
footage of it in action for you to check

nc

10

Ah the difference quality and informed feedback from seasoned teat pilots makes to turning out better boards

Positive feedback old mate !!!!! ..... boards look good and obviously go good

Good stuffffffffff

W

 

11

and in the fin position, they reflect the experience I'm
having with other short quads atm -- fin position especially. Ie pull
the back set in closer and the board has more range and vertical
turning potential. I love that feeling with four fins, always
disliked the rail version's restrictive feel and it's great to get
both the cake (ie less drag) and eat it too (in turns)

Sounds like he's a happy customer!!.

 

The bit i've highlighted seems like you might have used a fin setup a bit closer to the Mckee setup for the bat??. Sounds good mate. With my limited quad experience i found them a bit tracky, super fast for sure, but a bit hard to start a turn, though once started, woah. Im guessing he means pull the back fins closer as in closer to the stringer??.

12

yeah, the fins did play their part in the improvements in Nicks board but there were several other modifications as well and I dont want them to be forgotten, alot of times if 4 or 5 things are adjusted and 1 is the fins, then all others are forgotten and all focus is on the fin changes...sooo many variables in a board design and they all play a very important role in making a board perform ( or not as well in some cases ).....  the little quads are hard to get spot on cause ther is so much going on especially in the tail area and to make a high performance samll wave design that really excels, there is alot to get right and no room for error.....IMHO......I'm forever learning and eveolving but this type of design has been my main focus for about 3 years now so all the trail and error is really paying off.......but as you can see the trial and error never finishes....and it is how it should be...no design should reamin the same and if it does, does that mean the shaper thinks it cant be improved ??? well he is just kidding IMO......