Fellow Swayaholics: Does anyone have any experience with Nigel Beckham’s Revolutwiin design. I found a small blurb in an old (5 year old) Australian longboard magazine for his twin fin longboard designs and went to sleep on it. This morning after a couple of fun sessions I had a chance to ride one of Steve Boehne’s Infinity “cluster fin” shapes. The owner had removed the center fin and replaced the side fins with some larger twins. Interesting ride for small wave hotdog surfing. The Beckham plan looks like a 9’0 N-18" W-22" T-13.75" with what appears to be 7" twins placed about 8-9" off a very pronounced diamond (almost pintail). Presumably the diamond edges are used to break the water flow off the rear rail behind the fin. I’d be interested to hear from anyone riding one of the Revolutwiins or even the Cluster arrangement on the Infinity. tom
Fellow Swayaholics:>>> Does anyone have any experience with Nigel Beckham’s Revolutwiin design. I > found a small blurb in an old (5 year old) Australian longboard magazine > for his twin fin longboard designs and went to sleep on it. This morning > after a couple of fun sessions I had a chance to ride one of Steve > Boehne’s Infinity “cluster fin” shapes. The owner had removed > the center fin and replaced the side fins with some larger twins. > Interesting ride for small wave hotdog surfing. The Beckham plan looks > like a 9’0 N-18" W-22" T-13.75" with what appears to be > 7" twins placed about 8-9" off a very pronounced diamond (almost > pintail). Presumably the diamond edges are used to break the water flow > off the rear rail behind the fin. I’d be interested to hear from anyone > riding one of the Revolutwiins or even the Cluster arrangement on the > Infinity.>>> tom In regards to the Infinity: what did it perform like -eg, was it loose,drievy etc and why did the owner swap the fins out?
Matt: The guy felt the 3 fin cluster on the Infinity felt very sluggish coming out of turns as opposed to the normal trifin “burst” as water squeezed through the fins and across the bottom. I didn’t get to see the center fin he had been using only the side fins which were smaller than Merrick twins, less base and shorter. I’ve not studied the Cluster setup closely but what struck me as odd is that the side fins had the versatility inherant in the LokBox (some fore and aft movement) but the center was a standard O’fishl with no adjustment fore and aft. The placement of the O’fishl seemed too far up, in other words the center fin would overlap considerably the trailing edges of the side fins. As I said though,I don’t know much about this Steve Boehne design. I’ve always respected his boards and the attention to chines and bottom contours that he features. I wonder if there was a modification made to the orignal fin/box in this board. The twin fin ride was loose as you would expect, but dissapointing on the forward drive side. More fin area would have been welcome I think. I might scan this Nigel Beckham photo and see what comes of the discussion. If you were building a trifin setup on a 9’0" with a 13.5" tail what would the fin layout look like? (all three fins are of about the same size on what I’m thinking of here, not a 2+1 setup) Tom>>> In regards to the Infinity: what did it perform like -eg, was it > loose,drievy etc and why did the owner swap the fins out?
Matt:>>> The guy felt the 3 fin cluster on the Infinity felt very sluggish coming > out of turns as opposed to the normal trifin “burst” as water > squeezed through the fins and across the bottom. I didn’t get to see the > center fin he had been using only the side fins which were smaller than > Merrick twins, less base and shorter. I’ve not studied the Cluster setup > closely but what struck me as odd is that the side fins had the > versatility inherant in the LokBox (some fore and aft movement) but the > center was a standard O’fishl with no adjustment fore and aft. The > placement of the O’fishl seemed too far up, in other words the center fin > would overlap considerably the trailing edges of the side fins. As I said > though,I don’t know much about this Steve Boehne design. I’ve always > respected his boards and the attention to chines and bottom contours that > he features. I wonder if there was a modification made to the orignal > fin/box in this board. The twin fin ride was loose as you would expect, > but dissapointing on the forward drive side. More fin area would have been > welcome I think. I might scan this Nigel Beckham photo and see what comes > of the discussion.>>> If you were building a trifin setup on a 9’0" with a 13.5" tail > what would the fin layout look like? (all three fins are of about the same > size on what I’m thinking of here, not a 2+1 setup)>>> Tom In the early 80’s, when longboards were again getting acceptance, I made a 9’6’ twin fin. The immediate feeling I got from riding the board was that the water was being compressed between the fins and causing the tail to lift in turns. In a turn the board would instantly roll up on a rail and stay there. Once on the rail, the board would plane out on the side of the fin and want to stay like that. I took the board back to the factory and added another standard box to the center and had a regular thruster set up. After that, it became one of my favorite boards and went on to be a regular trophy winner in every contest it was in. Many boards can be changed with the fin systems and placement, had it continued to be a dog, then fins couldn’t be blamed.
Had a Yater 9’10" surftech with a “2+1” set-up. In general (i.e. small to medium) surf, it felt like it was pivoting off the big fin and I could not seem to get it up on the rail. Swapped the 8" center fin for a 4 3/4" center fin with the back of the base (the part that fits in the box) cut away so it could be positioned beyond the back of the box more like a regular thruster with a big trailing fin. Turned it into a real ripper!
Thanks guys, that’s the kind of feedback I’m looking for. I have been a die hard fan of single fin longboards and don’t feel that I’ve really given the multi-fin setup a chance on my longboards. I have am 8’6" Surfboards Hawaii that Hank Byzak shaped, labelled a noserider. I has a 10" center box with O’fishl sides. I’ve spent countless hours riding that board and finally found the 3 fin combo that works best (7" center and standard rail biters). The key was in the center fin area and the spacing between the fin cluster. It never was a noserider but it is a fun board when conditions are right. **Could either you or John suggest a starting point for a tri-fin setup on a 9’0" N-18 M-22 T-13.75. Rather than a 2+1 setup I’m looking at something with 3 similar sized thruster type fins.>>> In the early 80’s, when longboards were again getting acceptance, I made a > 9’6’ twin fin. The immediate feeling I got from riding the board was that > the water was being compressed between the fins and causing the tail to > lift in turns. In a turn the board would instantly roll up on a rail and > stay there. Once on the rail, the board would plane out on the side of the > fin and want to stay like that. I took the board back to the factory and > added another standard box to the center and had a regular thruster set > up. After that, it became one of my favorite boards and went on to be a > regular trophy winner in every contest it was in. Many boards can be > changed with the fin systems and placement, had it continued to be a dog, > then fins couldn’t be blamed.
You’ve got a couple of nice looking boards posted! I’ve used F/U and FCS but I believe there are some other good systems around. I’ve seen some fin system manufacturers come and go, so I’ve learned to stick with the long time leaders. Both F/U and FCS have good fin selections. For the type of board you describe (you didn’t mention the conditions it would be ridden in) I’m going to stick my neck out and recommend a 4 1/2" side fin (GRX by FCS?) - I’d try the leading edge at the base about 14" up from tail. I’d go with a F/U long box installed as far back as possible - even shaving it down a bit to fit a thin tail. Again, sticking my neck out, try a 4 1/2" - 4 3/4" fin (I cut away the back of the part that fits in the box) as far back in the box as possible - trailing edge at the base maybe 4" - 5" up. To be on the safe side, get a couple of bigger trailing fins ranging from 6" - 10" and you’ll be covered even in bigger surf. You could even go single fin if you don’t like it. A couple of notable surfer/designers (Phil Edwards and George Greenough) have stressed the importance of fins. P.E. told me once “the fin is one of the most important aspects of surfboard design - if you don’t believe it, try riding your board without one.” G.G. has been reported to say that modern pros should be spending $40,000 a year on fin research and development.
Thanks John, Without a doubt the fin system is a major factor in whether a board works or not. Jim’s comment above is right on, poor first impressions of a board design might be best addressed by tuning the fin setup. TS>>> You’ve got a couple of nice looking boards posted! I’ve used F/U and FCS > but I believe there are some other good systems around. I’ve seen some fin > system manufacturers come and go, so I’ve learned to stick with the long > time leaders. Both F/U and FCS have good fin selections. For the type of > board you describe (you didn’t mention the conditions it would be ridden > in) I’m going to stick my neck out and recommend a 4 1/2" side fin > (GRX by FCS?) - I’d try the leading edge at the base about 14" up > from tail. I’d go with a F/U long box installed as far back as possible - > even shaving it down a bit to fit a thin tail. Again, sticking my neck > out, try a 4 1/2" - 4 3/4" fin (I cut away the back of the part > that fits in the box) as far back in the box as possible - trailing edge > at the base maybe 4" - 5" up. To be on the safe side, get a > couple of bigger trailing fins ranging from 6" - 10" and you’ll > be covered even in bigger surf. You could even go single fin if you don’t > like it. A couple of notable surfer/designers (Phil Edwards and George > Greenough) have stressed the importance of fins. P.E. told me once > “the fin is one of the most important aspects of surfboard design - > if you don’t believe it, try riding your board without one.” G.G. has > been reported to say that modern pros should be spending $40,000 a year on > fin research and development.
Sheesh - I meant to type the TRAILING edge of the forward fins 14" up! Sorry about that.
Hey! I already drilled the holes! Just kidding, I caught that and underlined it for followup. I’ve used similar numbers on longboards with 2+1 setups including a long center box and FCS or O’fishl side fins. I think I’m going to make myself a longboard with either multiple plugs or better yet several boxes and spend the winter trying fin configs. Do you have any experience with the Fins Unlimited Lok-Box? Tom>>> Sheesh - I meant to type the TRAILING edge of the forward fins 14" > up! Sorry about that.
Haven’t tried the lock box set up. Once you assemble an assortment of fins it’s tough to abandon the plan and start from scratch.