I built this 9’ fun gun for head high to maybe a bit bigger, nothin’ serious, just wanted a easy paddler solid shape for the little bit bigger days. I haven’t really spent much time with the board, but hoping to get it out in some south swell stuff soon. It’s a twin-gle fin, which I like so far. But thinking of adding quad capability, for comparison purposes. I got some of the new FCS 2 boxes. Any suggestions / advice on fin placement? Thanks in advance. - Huck
I put rear nearer stringer, parallèle to stringer without cant. With 50/50 fins it give a mix feel of thruster quad that some guys like more than quad on rails, even more in bigger waves.
I don’t have any measurements but I found this pic of a Stretch 9’ fun gun. Looks like a lot of toe-in!
Yes, seems like front fins !. I repair some quad guns and find all kind of setup. From return i have of my boards the no toe-in no cant work but other setup too.
Huck I built a longboard gun 8-6. I found that unless the fins were placed well forward of where you think they should be the board will be a dud. Mine is a 2+1 and the sides are at 17 inches. The board rocks for me.
All the best
I can’t contribute any exact measurements without taking a look at you board. But as Greg stated; on a gunnier shape you do want to move the whole set up forward a bit. In the Hawaiian Islands 17" was my normal side bite location. Whe I returned to Calif I moved them back to 16 or 16 1/2". If you get a chance to look at a thruster gun or semi-gun made for the HI; I think that you will see that the whole set up is an inch or so forward of what would be considered norm. Lowel
I agree with Greg and Lowel, the fin placement is moved forward due to the higher tail rocker on guns and also because many are pins with low volume tail sections. The 1" dimension from the rails on the diagram is close for most finboxes, I’d go 1-1/4".
OK, thanks everyone who responded!
I got the boxes set today. I went a little further forward than usual, as suggested, (using a 4" line as my reference) I went 8" from the tail to the rear of the back fins, and 16" to the rear of the front fins. The backs are toe’d 1/8", and the fronts are toe’d 3/16". Distance in from the rails: 1.25" in from the rails for the fronts, 5 degree cant, 2" for the rears, 3 degree cant.
I already like the twin-gle fin setup, so if the quads don’t work out its not a total loss, but there is a bit of cost and hassle involved in adding them, so naturally I’m hoping my measurements work. I have several quads and so far I like them all. The only one I didn’t like was the stubby I built, but I traded it before I had time to play with the options, but the one time I had it out it in small waves it really seemed to lack drive.
Eventually want to get a couple adapters for the single fin boxes, with the twin-gle setup they are spaced 2" center to center, so I can run a pair of quad rears in the slots with zero cant and zero toe in, just for an interesting option.
First time with the FCS 2 boxes, I’m sure my install was unorthodox, but hopefully adequate. I got glass over the boxes by adding a 4 oz. tail patch, filled a few pressure dings on the bottom, and with the rail channels added, the whole thing just needs a healthy sanding down to the finer grits, and it should be good to go. Oh yeah, and cut the masking/fiberglass off the fin boxes.
No swell showing on the forecast for my regular spot, and I won’t get any more work done on it until next weekend anyway, so nothing happening right away. But next go out I’ll have quad option as well as twin-gle, and I’ll have the rail channels, so I should enjoy the board even more.
I’ll have to research and see how the FCS 2 boxes work with the old school two tab fins, I don’t think I need a spacer but I know they sell one. Might also look into getting a set of the snap in quads, to see how those work.
Good work. Thinking it out. Lowel
8-8 layout?
IMHO on that shape?
3
Well, I thought it was the 8-8 layout, but turns out I was wrong! Ya see, with the new FCS II plugs, you have to set them about a half inch or more forward, because the fins have a big tab in front, and hang way over in the back. I didn’t realize this, until I just picked up some pop in fins this morning at FGH Ventura. So instead of 8" and 16", its more like 7.5" and 15.25" to the back of the fins.
(BTW, Steve Huerta is retired, I met his replacement Mike. He says Steve’s dad passed away and Steve got some land, and is working to make it income producing, whatever that means, so he quit FGH, but here’s the good news: he’s been shaping again!)
FCS, bless their hearts, saw fit to produce their composite affordable fins for the new boxes, so I got a set for a fraction of the cost of fiberglass fins. The color matches my board too, so I’m stoked about that. They are pretty tight, hard as heck to pop in, but I guess that’s good, so they don’t pop out too easy.
But lo and behold, they throw the fin placement way off, if you’re calculating based on the old two tab fins. Live and learn. So I could use the old two tabbers, they do have a threaded hole for fin screws, or I could use my pop ins and see how they work out at the different location. Fortunately the boxes are far enough forward that even with the new fins, they are still ahead of my standard placement.
Nice looking retrofits (deck channels and quads) Huck. The color of the boxes and fins makes them look like original equipment for that board.
Thank you J!
First run with the pop-in quads today. Small swell, lots of people out. No question on the rail channels, they make the board so much more comfortable to handle in the water.
As far as the quads, and the location being pushed back due to the FCS II tabs, jury is still out. Fin location was an educated guess anyway, so being a bit further back might be just as well. One session in small crowded waves not enough to tell much. I did get one lined up wave where I trimmed way into the bay, it was a fun one, but a point and go wave, not much turning. And several other brief rides cut short by snakes, close outs, etc.
On my dropping in and turning into the wave, I felt a little awkward. Getting used to a different board than what I’ve been riding (I go through this a lot - the learning curve that each board has, and I’m not a quick adapter like some people). But it wasn’t a total disaster, the board seems to have promise as a quad, based on my one good wave.
Thanks for the heads up Huck. I was under the impression that the rear tab was in the same place on both systems in regards to trailing edge positions and that the only change was to the front tab dimension. Educational.