This is the first time I have ever posted, so be easy with me.
My idea is this: add the spring of a snowboard carve to the hold of a surfboard carve. The materials are not thought out yet, but it will need to be something that will flex.
I taught snowboarding for 4 years and learned everything about a snowboard turn through out those years. One thing that I learned a bunch about was how the right board will create the perfect turn if you know how to let it. The reason for this is side cut and camber.
Sidecut: this makes it so that when on edge only two points of your edge are creating your turn while carving. The reason I think this will work is that the beginning and end of your rails are what define your turn, the rest of the rail is always soft and bulky. This also help to activate the camber of the board.
Camber: this is the punch in and out of every turn. When the two points of your edge are active the middle of the board should flex to create an turn that has a perfect radius. The camber will also kick you out of every turn like a spring.
I don’t think the board needs to look like a snowboard, but adding some of these elements I am sure would create some great performance. You ever notice that down rail works the best on the nose and tail?
The July ‘07 issue of Surfer features a 6’-0" with “side cut” in the Board Forum section in the back (p.180).
I have to admit that I chuckled when I first saw it, but I guess you never know till you give it a go.
Upon further investigation, if you go to the shaper’s web site (www.FGstuff.com), you can purchase said board for $600. Or, if you don’t have that kind of spare cash, you can purchase the $40 Utility Sledge Hammer… ?
this is one of those things that in theory would maybe work…there are some problems though
with such a material there would be so much flex (longitude, latitude, torisonal) that it would be tough to stand on without bindings…you would be bounced off
also…i would think there would have to be lots of work to be done with rockers as the board flex would increase rocker and start pushing water
if you could get it to work though…you may eliminate the need for fins as the “edges” of the board would now be able to keep the board from side slipping and initiate turns
I think you make a good point about too much flex and torsion. The material would actually need to be somewhat rigid, but be able to endure some flex. As the two points catch in a turn a great amount of pressure would be applied to the middle of the board. Everyone is always saying how one material or another creates great flex, like the parabolic stringers. Why not use that flex?
Sidecut: this makes it so that when on edge only two points of your edge are creating your turn while carving. The reason I think this will work is that the beginning and end of your rails are what define your turn, the rest of the rail is always soft and bulky. This also help to activate the camber of the board.
Camber: this is the punch in and out of every turn. When the two points of your edge are active the middle of the board should flex to create an turn that has a perfect radius. The camber will also kick you out of every turn like a spring.
Both are wrong assumptions IMHO.
The sidecut rail together with flex will ideally all pass trough the same point when you carve a turn. Look at the width of the track you make. The entire rail is engaged, not only the tip and tail. If you make a wide track, your tail is sliding and you are not using the rail to full effect. If only the tip an tail was engaged you’d loose grip mighty fast (which might actually be the case if you have a too stiff board with too much chamber and too much sidecut for your weight, stance, slope, speed and abilities. Been there, done that. The opposite is almost as much “fun”, too soft board where the ends try their best to grip, but the center just washes out. Somewhat easier to adjust to, but you have to ride might careful, not pushing anything.). It does in a way define the turn, but you have to keep in mind the center of the sidecut too. When the center touches ground, the flex stops. Ideally at that point all the rail is in contact with the snow and the sidecut in conjunction with the flex creates a perfect arc that will give you exactly the radial force to keep the weight of the rider balanced.
Chamber have two functions, main being to keep the nose and tail of the board on the snow at all times. If not, the nose and tail would vibrate as you go down the slope and the board would be very hard to control. Have a look at some of the beginners riding second hand or cheap foam core boards which has noodled out and you can see what I mean (or any board made in the 80s). The second reason for chamber is to preload the flex of the board, giving you a stiffer board with the same materials. Which you might say give you push out of the turn, but you load a snowboard well over the chamber during a turn.
This is of course on hardpack. In deep, fluffy snow you could ride a stiff plank with no flex, no sidecut as long as you have a setback stance(I have yet to prove this, but I will).
The thing is, this works well on a relatively flat surface. A wave is very seldom a flat surface. The ‘reverse sidecut’ of a surfboard fit much better in the curved face of a wave.
I think the first time someone saw a ski that was not straight they thought it was crap also. Now people are really moving on parabolic skis. I guess I was not very informed about what is going on out there, because my idea is actually someone elses idea. Happy to see others are making the same connections that I am. Now I feel kind of silly posting my design sketches.
Thanks for pointing the flaw in my sidecut rant. You are very right about the middle of your edges becoming fully used when in the extension of a turn. I should have pointed out that the nose and tail initiate your turns, and the sidecut and camber create your turning radius. Too rigid a board and you get chatter, too much noodle in the board and your turns don’t pop. I am sure this won’t work in all conditions, just like a 6 channel board. But I welcome the critism and hope it lights some kind of fire.
Good one Haarvard! One thing to think about is that in effect, surfing the water provides some flex; soft flex true but it moves out of your way then comes back with some pressure.
I know guys who’ve tried riding snowboards behind wakeboard boats that say they worked suprisingly well. A few years back, one of the wakeboarding mags had an article with photos of a guy getting towed around icebergs on a snowboard.
Water is what the idea for me is all about. I love the way a snowboard throws you out of a turn if you are carving dynamically, and I think it could be much inproved upon with a surfboard. It would be great to have a board that generates energy like a snowboard, but has the great holding ability of water. I always think it is everyones dream to come up with a shortboard idea that will generate speed in mushy days. On a perfect day I can be on any board and have a great time.
I love the way a snowboard throws you out of a turn if you are carving dynamically, and I think it could be much inproved upon with a surfboard. It would be great to have a board that generates energy like a snowboard, but has the great holding ability of water.
You need to check out the marketing hype around dynamically flexing surfboards… first by me at Hydro Epic, then by Aviso, Firewire, Surftech, and everyone else who thinks it will help sales. Hype aside… dynamic flex is critical to how a board rides.
When I was at Hydro Epic I told everyone that the boards would load-up and spring you out of turns “like a snowboard”. OK… maybe I wasn’t the first person to talk about flex in surfboards (Greenough… Tinker… Bert… Greg Lohr… ) but I was the first to compare them to snowboards.
Read through some of the previous posts on the subject here on swaylocks. Here’s one that skews to my way of thinking, but there is tons of stuff in the archives:
The board in Surfer had me scratching my head as well. Right now ski technology geared towards powder is actually moving in the direction of surf boards and water skis. Reversed sidecut and camber are becoming more common and absolutely rule in soft snow conditions or chopped up snow. If you apply sidecut to surf boards you would need an extremely flexible board to make the effective edge length work for you. It seems like a very backwards move to make a surfboard this way seen how the sidecut we’re accustomed to is really only effective on hard snow. Last time I checked water wasn’t that hard unless you’re really moving. Maybe a tow in board would have enough forces on to benefit from flex and sidecut?
I had a conversation a few months back with Geoff Rasche (of M10 surfboards) about just this. I wanted to know why surfboards didn’t have sidecut to them, as it works so well for snowboards and skis. He convinced me that it wouldn’t be a good idea for two reasons: 1) the shape of a sidecut surfboard would not do well in decent waves. That is the convex rails of surfboards are crucial to fitting properly into waves with any kind of shape to them. Sidecut boards might handle decently in mushburgers though. 2) Rasche was adamant about the fact that the amount of flex a surfboard would need for sidecut to work, would render it useless- water is very soft compared to packed snow.
Fun idea. You should go ahead and build a couple and let us know how they ride!
I have ridden wood-core flexible kiteboards with sidecut. They ripped. They sank, but they ripped. They were fantastic for laying down high speed turns through bumpy water as well as for killing off speed by overflexing the tail.
My surfboards and blanks are all built from wood these days. A few are from single logs but most of them are chambered vertical laminates, just like a snowboard (not the chambered part). Although the common knowledge seems to be that chambered wood boards don’t flex, I have found that the flex on our boards has a lot more to do with the shape and layup than the core material.
So, let us know how these flexible-wood-backwards-looking-little-rippers go. I look forward to hearing about it.
