Do you have a way to show diagram of your templates either by E-Mail or posting here? I’ve been trying to work out a template for a hybrid split tail long board similar to some of the boards shown recently on this site. I know the curves will be more parallel unless I go 24+ inches wide but wondered if you’d be interested in plotting something out if I give you some rough nose/wide point/tail dimensions?
Do you have a way to show diagram of your templates either by E-Mail or > posting here? I’ve been trying to work out a template for a hybrid split > tail long board similar to some of the boards shown recently on this site. > I know the curves will be more parallel unless I go 24+ inches wide but > wondered if you’d be interested in plotting something out if I give you > some rough nose/wide point/tail dimensions? Yeah, If you’ll post your E-Mail addy and some numbers I’ll pass some forms along in matrix and .jpg. My program hasn’t advanced far enough to provide inside swallowtail curves. You’ll see straight lines. You can make the swallow curves up with part of the nose template or some household object. Have you considered wings? They help to keep the rails parallel for carving, but provide a pitch pivot so you can back-weight and crank. When you do that, the swallows dig in. I’ve never ridden a long winged fish, but I’ve seen them and been intrigued. Oh, my design program doesn’t naturally do wings either. I would design an outline maybe 6" longer than your intended board, then cut off the back 14.5" of template and splice it 6" forward. I can probably program that pretty fast.
Noodle - Thanks! I have a 9’5" S blank an old roomate gave me. Again, with the length involved, I’m not too sure about the curves but wings may be an option. I know the typical old school fish design features a straight and relatively parallel tail outline. With a longboard variation, I’m thinking maybe a narrower split tail distance and more curve in the tail outline. Even the short versions could be a little tracky as I remember but I’m not sure if that was from the wide base fins or the straightness in the tail outline or both. I’d basically like to incorporate some extra width in the tail with the holding power of the split tail. I really like the overall look of Tom Sterne’s 2001 7’0" hybrid egg shown on the home page (nice board Tom!) I know it will be impossible to get those curves with a 9’ 2" but the nose looks good to me and I can live with some tail pull - maybe down to about 7 1/2" tail block width and 15 1/2" tail width. If we keep the nose about the same - say 17" and the width around 23" I think shifting the wide point position around may be the tricky part. I don’t know what is involved with your program but I’m hoping you could show me a couple of options and provide some of your own input. My E-Mail is . Thanks again Noodle.
Hey John, You’ve probably checked out boards 46 and 47 on the boards page but just in case, there’s a few more looks at some big swallow tails.
Scott W. - Thanks for the heads up. I really like all those split tails that Tom S. has dialed in. Tom - Would you consider posting details on the 8’ 10" split tail? The 7’0" hybrid on the home page has specifics like tip width, swallow depth, fin placement, etc. I’d be curious what you have for the 8’ 10". On the board I have “on the drawing board”, I’m thinking a wider tip width and deeper swallow than on your 8’ 10" but narrower than on your 7’0". I’ve been discussing specifics with Noodle and one concern is tail curvature with a wide split tail on a long board. I have suggested a 7 1/2" split width to Noodle as a starting point. I’m thinking of a board for smaller, junky waves that will still handle an occasional sneaker set. Any input you might have to offer would be appreciated!
Hey guys! Rainy and cold, blown out down here. I’ll get you the specs on the 8’10" later this afternoon. Been out doing dings and FCS plugs of and on all day. INHO- the 8’10" with the split was really just for visual appeal. I truly believe (and certainly could be proven wrong) that on the 8’10" , with its 6.5" tailblock?, there would be little difference between it and a square of the same width. John you are on the right track with the wider tailblock/swallow tips and a deeper swallow. The 7’2" is out on my ding repair rack right now, you may have missed the post earlier in the week describing my buddy’s Xterra rack failure. He lost the 6’8" Fish and the 7’2" BigFish when the racks failed. I’ve been taking a second look at these templates, some of my smaller ones and studying some of Steve Brom’s. One of the key elements to the deep split tail I feel is the parrallel planshape. Some compromise is O.K. but certainly keep it up on top of the key element list. My next boards in the 6’0" to 7’0" range are going to have deeper swallows. The 5-6" depths are going to go to 7" or so and perhaps open the swallow curve up more. See “Longboard Mag” May/June 2000. Back cover has a Skip Frye version that you may get some ideas from. It is a much wider template than what you are proposing but it may help somehow. Tom>>> Scott W. - Thanks for the heads up. I really like all those split tails > that Tom S. has dialed in.>>> Tom - Would you consider posting details on the 8’ 10" split tail? > The 7’0" hybrid on the home page has specifics like tip width, > swallow depth, fin placement, etc. I’d be curious what you have for the 8’ > 10". On the board I have “on the drawing board”, I’m > thinking a wider tip width and deeper swallow than on your 8’ 10" but > narrower than on your 7’0". I’ve been discussing specifics with > Noodle and one concern is tail curvature with a wide split tail on a long > board. I have suggested a 7 1/2" split width to Noodle as a starting > point. I’m thinking of a board for smaller, junky waves that will still > handle an occasional sneaker set. Any input you might have to offer would > be appreciated!
As I understand, the deep swallow is to help a short wide stump of a board to hold in better. I also think it affects wave cathcing a bit by making the board hang on the lip for a second, then woosh your off and running. I’m thinkin that on a big board the wave catching thing won’t be a factor, but a nice deep swallow may have you screeming the high line on those sneeker sets. Scott
Scott and John: Re: the deep split tail- Could be that each of those large tails act much like an independant pin tail at times, each with their own large surface area keel-type fin. Seems like serendipity that such an odd design even got noticed by standup surfers. From what I understand all Steve Lis was looking for was a place to put his duck feet to keep the drag at a minimum while kneeriding. Some of the earlier boards he rode were very narrow tailed, teardrop shaped single pins. **The 8’10" fin layout spoken of earlier: Single 10.5 center box Side FCS plugs- 14" trailing edge to tail tips, placed 1 3/8 from rail, .125 toe-in with a 4 degree cant. Didn’t document the tailblock, but 6.5" to 7" as the Tail width was 15" or so. TS>>> As I understand, the deep swallow is to help a short wide stump of a board > to hold in better. I also think it affects wave cathcing a bit by making > the board hang on the lip for a second, then woosh your off and running. > I’m thinkin that on a big board the wave catching thing won’t be a factor, > but a nice deep swallow may have you screeming the high line on those > sneeker sets. Scott
Thank you all very much for your input. Noodle - I received the diagram and really appreciate the measurements! I have a better idea where I’m headed with this now. Re: Lis Fishes… granted, he gets (and deserves) a lot of credit on the split tail twin fin design. Like so many other modern developments, a refinement of an old idea. Simmons and Velzy (to name a couple) were certainly doing twin fins a long time ago and Velzy had a cutaway tail block that to me looks like a precursor to the modern split tail. I think Skip Frye calls his version a “Fishsimmons”(?) no doubt in tribute to an early innovator.
Way back when I think I’ve heard the swallow called a twin pin. Anyway you label it, the deep wide swallow is a ride like no other!
Way back when I think I’ve heard the swallow called a twin pin. Anyway you > label it, the deep wide swallow is a ride like no other! Whassup, guys? Glad to hear that some of you are attempting a longer board with a deep swallow tail. I’ve seen a picture of a G&S 9’6" with a fish tail and was really curious as to how it would ride. Looked great. Keep us posted on riding characteristics.
Hey guys! Rainy and cold, blown out down here. I’ll get you the specs on > the 8’10" later this afternoon. Been out doing dings and FCS plugs of > and on all day. INHO- the 8’10" with the split was really just for > visual appeal. I truly believe (and certainly could be proven wrong) that > on the 8’10" , with its 6.5" tailblock?, there would be little > difference between it and a square of the same width. John you are on the > right track with the wider tailblock/swallow tips and a deeper swallow. > The 7’2" is out on my ding repair rack right now, you may have missed > the post earlier in the week describing my buddy’s Xterra rack failure. He > lost the 6’8" Fish and the 7’2" BigFish when the racks failed. > I’ve been taking a second look at these templates, some of my smaller ones > and studying some of Steve Brom’s. One of the key elements to the deep > split tail I feel is the parrallel planshape. Some compromise is O.K. but > certainly keep it up on top of the key element list. My next boards in the > 6’0" to 7’0" range are going to have deeper swallows. The > 5-6" depths are going to go to 7" or so and perhaps open the > swallow curve up more. See “Longboard Mag” May/June 2000. Back > cover has a Skip Frye version that you may get some ideas from. It is a > much wider template than what you are proposing but it may help somehow.>>> Tom As long as your having fun. Steve
As I understand, the deep swallow is to help a short wide stump of a board > to hold in better. I also think it affects wave cathcing a bit by making > the board hang on the lip for a second, then woosh your off and running. > I’m thinkin that on a big board the wave catching thing won’t be a factor, > but a nice deep swallow may have you screeming the high line on those > sneeker sets. Scott Looking in on your conversation got me to wonder: How do you think a swallow tail fish would respond if you plugged in a pair of sharkteeth at each end of the twin pin? Would it hold better? Would the responsiveness be impacted? Just wonderin’… Magoo
Looking in on your conversation got me to wonder: How do you think a > swallow tail fish would respond if you plugged in a pair of sharkteeth at > each end of the twin pin? Would it hold better? Would the responsiveness > be impacted? Just wonderin’… Magoo Magoo, The Beatty Rocket Fish can be ordered like you describe or retro fitted to his existing shape. I cant really say I have noticed any fantastic changes in my boards performance since I got the retro fit, but I am sure that it would hold better when it starts to get hollow. SteveA
Magoo, The Beatty Rocket Fish can be ordered like you describe or retro > fitted to his existing shape. I cant really say I have noticed any > fantastic changes in my boards performance since I got the retro fit, but > I am sure that it would hold better when it starts to get hollow. SteveA I have three fish from way back in the 70’s one is a 7’O" with wings and two of them are 8’3". None have very much rocker. I’d be glad take the specs off them if anyone is interested. They all hold in the barrell beautifully The first one was designed as a gun and work super it’s a rocket. The others are much more versitile and have full lines. I think a thruster set up with a larger center fin and small say 3 1/2" rail fins would work beautifully. That way you can tinker with things acorrding to the conditions and still got with at twin set up for the mush. Wings have a very positive affect on overall performance on small fish I’ve found. Best, Rich //Halcyon fins.
I would be interested in the specs on your boards. Of particular interest would be the tip widths, swallow depth, tail width (12" up) and tail rocker but the overall dimensions would be nice too. Hey thanks!
I have three fish from way back in the 70’s one is a 7’O" with wings > and two of them are 8’3". None have very much rocker. I’d be glad > take the specs off them if anyone is interested. They all hold in the > barrell beautifully The first one was designed as a gun and work super > it’s a rocket. The others are much more versitile and have full lines.>>> I think a thruster set up with a larger center fin and small say 3 > 1/2" rail fins would work beautifully. That way you can tinker with > things acorrding to the conditions and still got with at twin set up for > the mush. Wings have a very positive affect on overall performance on > small fish I’ve found.>>> Best, Rich //Halcyon fins. Rich, I would be very interested in all of the templates and specs. I’m not familiar with Halcyon fins, care to enlighten me? Thanks, Magoo
Rich, I would be very interested in all of the templates and specs. I’m > not familiar with Halcyon fins, care to enlighten me? Thanks, Magoo Magoo, I’ll post the specs for the 3 fish that I’ve referred too as soon as I get some time away from the the push at work. Halcyon fins? That is me. I developed a fin template after a dolphin’s pectoral fin back in the early 70’s That I put on my fish. Back then we didn’t have all the great materials we have now so I’ve I’m in the middle of rebirthing the ideas. Currently I’m using them on my speed platter that’s a thruster and building some sets for some hot shot friends of mine. I won’t go into allot of details only say that the new ones have carbon spines in high density foam in an epoxy glass shell with decrative cloth layup for cosmentics. I’m still working on some of the details. I’m home based and can make too much because of other responsiblities but I’m pretty sure I’m on to something.They wiegh less than half of what a standard glass fin does and are plenty strong.
I would be interested in the specs on your boards. Of particular interest > would be the tip widths, swallow depth, tail width (12" up) and tail > rocker but the overall dimensions would be nice too. Hey thanks! Hi John, Sorry it took so long. Things have calmed down a little so here are the specks on the first board built. I’ll send you the info on the others a little later. 8’3"x13"x20"x11.25"x2.5" Meat of board carried well into nose. Down rails slightly harder in nose than in the middle that taper to a hard departure-- flat entry to subtle tail vee-- 3.5" kick, 1.5 rocker-- wide point 6"forward of center-- swallows finish 2.5" into tail-- Halcyon 8.5" Single Fin base leading edge 12.5" from tail.(my first fin) Board trims with weight farther forward than most-- guess it’s about styles-- It’s pretty light, with a gloss and polish bottom, deck was laminated and glossed and wasn’t sanded, left out sanding coat to keep it light.I does have a deck patch for strength though it has a light green resin tint. It’s easily the fastest board I have. (It needs some juice, River Mouth and Mitchells is where it works the best) Thinking about adding some small (3.5") rail fins to increase turning performance. What do you think and where would you place them? After the gun I went to the same length but to a wider meater board I’ll send the specks for it as soon as I can. Best, Rich
Hey Rich - Thanks for those numbers. Re: adding side fins to your board - is the existing fin a glass-on or box type fin? My experience with the side bites is that they work good as a 2+1 set up. However with the narrow swallow tail you describe, I’m thinking your present fin (without knowing the length of the base or rake angle) might be too much with side bites of the size you mention. You also say the board works best in bigger waves so maybe you already have enough fin.(?) If you have a center box now, and you use 3.5" side bites, you may want to consider switching to a smaller center fin - maybe something 5-6" high. One last thing - you didn’t say if the side bite plan involved glass-on or box/plug type fins but with the box/plug you could really play around.