Hi,
I have been doing a bit of research lately on S Decks, and have been having a hard time finding info.
From what I have gathered, it seems like they were popular in years past, especially on longer boards, but I have been seeing little Mini Simmons, eggs, etc. with an S curve in the top deck.
What purpose does this serve?
Here is an ad for Con Surfboards from 1970. Nice example of a S-deck:
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The purpose was/is to keep foam in the center part of the board for floatation while having a much thinner nose and tail for added manoeuvrability. At least that’s my take on it; Maybe others will chime in with a lot more knowledge.
Sorry for the hijack!
[quote="$1"] [img_assist|nid=1064593|title=Punta de Mire|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=0|height=0] I tried a little different method... cause I couldn't find 'thumbnail'. I'll try again. Thanks Huck! Les So I couldn't find 'thumbnail' but at the end of the url? It says width and height, I just multiplied those to get the pic bigger. Thanks! Les [/quote]
right click properties gives http://www2.swaylocks.com/files/images/2012/02/2012-02-16-12.08.32.thumbnail.jpg
if you click the picture icon and insert that, you get this:
remove "thumbnail" and it becomes http://www2.swaylocks.com/files/images/2012/02/2012-02-16-12.08.32.jpg
click the picture icon, and insert that, for this:
I guess my boards would qualify as 'S'decks. My goal in thinning the nose and tail is as Balsa says, to make the turning areas lighter. I'm old-school so like to knee paddle but like to turn easy so I thicken the mid and thin the ends. Most of my boards are 9 to 10'. (edit...why does it always come out small!?)
[img_assist|nid=1060577|title=OQB 9'2" w/ CCC3 Profile|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=0|height=0]
According to a very knowledgable friend who was involved in the pioneering of shortboards , the S-decks were no more than the by-product of making very short boards from longer , unsuitable blanks.....I realise that the "hull" guys are gonna jump down my throat for saying this !
According to a very knowledgable friend who was involved in the pioneering of shortboards , the S-decks were no more than the by-product of making very short boards from longer , unsuitable blanks.....I realise that the "hull" guys are gonna jump down my throat for saying this !
[quote="$1"]
I guess my boards would qualify as 'S'decks. My goal in thinning the nose and tail is as Balsa says, to make the turning areas lighter. I'm old-school so like to knee paddle but like to turn easy so I thicken the mid and thin the ends. Most of my boards are 9 to 10'.
[/quote]
Surfboard design was going through a phase where less rocker meant more speed and to de-rocker the blank, you had to flatten the bottom, thus pulling down the tail, if you thinned the bottom, you got rocker and lost the flatness. So the decks started getting sculpted, some flowing folis, while other were enormous blobs of foam behind center.
Another evolutionary branch that became an endangered species, 65 million years later, from the primordial ooze comes the son of “S”, the Micro Simmon’s
Thanks Huck! How'd you do that? Looks better now.
Les
I just right clicked on the picture, and got the url, then deleted the word "thumbnail" from the url, and re-posted.
If you edited your post, and clicked "simple editor" under "input format", you could do the same.
[img_assist|nid=1064593|title=Punta de Mire|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=0|height=0] I tried a little different method... cause I couldn't find 'thumbnail'. I'll try again. Thanks Huck! Les
[img_assist|nid=1064909|title=#27 SUP deck|desc=|link=none|align=left|width=400|height=300]
So I couldn’t find ‘thumbnail’ but at the end of the url? It says width and height, I just multiplied those to get the pic bigger.
Thanks!
Les
Hi Balsa did you also notice the boards in the Con ad have absolutly no tail rocker I seem to remember they worked pretty good at the time especialy when fitted with really long flexy single fins. Ah the good ol days .