The length of a board is often thought of as the most important factor contributing to manuverability, to those who know little about board design. If your average 20 something surfer wants a more manuverable board, the first thing they do is go down a few inches in board length on the next board they order… But something tells me there is a lot more to it than that. I would like to find out how I can add length and bulk to a board, but still make it as manuverable as possible, so can those with superiour knowledge please share their secrets to making a big board a manuverable board…
oops double post
The primary factor to make a surfboard more manuverable
is a rider who has become ambulatory IOW learn to walk.
Small steps,no shuffle,yes shuffling is not walking.
ride a giant board for a year and learn to gambol, strut,
and pimp walk with impunity and address the finer art
of weight displacement and access the true science of
trim.The evolution of short board alternatives has a
fixed stance modality that tends to favor a wide
survival stance sacrificing leverage for heavy footed
barrel quests and impact zone exits.
The ability to change center of mass displacement
makes a sensitive shape even more so.
The boards under 8 foot for a man of 6’plus
are still fixed stance boards and in my book still short boards.
A 6’+ man on a board under 7’ is an excelent swimmer and paddler
and is in need of displacement training for standing as well as paddling.
The distance covered on such boards can easily be trippled by adding 3’.
With dicipline and applied enthusiasm a 12’ board can more than broaden
a riders horizons,every foot in my mind is the next dimension in performance
and in training opening conceptual range to include higher forms of glide and
leverage.
As to the shape of these whale boards the best can be induced
to very close tolerance direction changes as well as long drawn out
tower and street connecting trajectories.
One wave per spot cross country surfing
is a higher form revealing a perspective to sharpen
skills and aleve social pressures stiffling to real growth of technique.
As to the bottom contours of boards of greater length and volume
the production standards of flat rail to rail bottoms
wether thin or thick are just plain 2 dimensional
and tail and nose rocker adjustments simply
invoke fin dependency without freeing up the
manuverability like a full contour bottom shape.
…ambrose…
to each his own.
blinders make the
horse pulling the milk wagon
pay attention to the regular
delivery route and not be
confused by periferal vision.
Eagles with their eyes
on the sides of their
heads have 360
degree vision.
would that we were circumspect
or is a narrow view more secure?
Hi Francois -
No offense is meant when I say it looks like you are big enough to be overpowering that board. If you take a careful look at your rail foil, rear outline and tail rocker you might find some clues on how to approach the issue. It may be an over generalization but a flat tail rocker coupled with a parallel tail outline and thin forward rails could easily result in a stiff board even in a shorter length.
On my own big longboards it's not unusual to have 4" +/- of tail rocker, curvy hips and the thickest part of the rail aft of center. I also sometimes place my widepoint and thick point aft of center. The longer the board, the more it makes sense to me to proportionately 'shorten the wheelbase' as it were. If you can take a longer board, make it ride from a neutral spot with less board in the water, you are approaching 'a' (not necessarily 'The') solution to what you want to accomplish. By being able to ride back a bit on the aft thickness and width, you are better set up to utilize the rear 1/3 of the board. Without that extra volume back there you will either stall or be forced to ride in a more forward position which generally results in longer, not shorter trajectories while on the wave. I like to thin my rails out at some point so that the rear rail can be buried on edge for control and for freeing more of the forward portion of the board.
In the shots of pro longboarders it is easy to see that they are pretty much riding mostly off the tail. The extra punch of Hawaiian waves helps a narrower tail plane but in slower waves, you must compensate with more volume or concaves to get the same kind of squirt effect out of your turns. Without that extra punch, you are likely going to over power your board and end with your rail really sunk. You can also see in those pics that the bulk in the mid/forward rail is enough to keep some of that forward rail free.
I've seen many boards with flat rocker and rail foil too bladed out to break loose and go vertical in every day waves at general surf spots. Some guys can pull it off but many bury the forward inside rail nearly to the stringer and end up with a whole lot of wetted area. The same bladed parallel rail can become a problem on 180 cutbacks. The best hull riders use a lot of finesse and look good but I don't think that type of design is a solution to what you describe.
None of these ideas begin to address the fin layouts which pretty much have been covered elsewhere.
This is not meant to discount or override anything that Resinhead or the others have posted... just my .02. I also realize that you are not suggesting that you want a longboard... I just suggest that some of the 'longer board' concepts apply.
This is me on my tiny lil ol 6’5". Something tells me when we compare the two pictures, we both have the same amount of board in the water. (I might have a little more.)
So, is the back half of a big board the most important factor in turning here or am I totally confused?
Well I did buy the secondhand 6’8" as a shortboard, but it seems like there must be something else at play here since it is not as maneuverable as some BIGGER boards I’ve ridden. I think it has something to do with the rocker low point and the rail thickness ect…
The only reason I don’t have the 8fter yet is I still need to get the money to pay for the thing.
Also, on the big guy thing. Ever heard of this dude called Jordy Smith. He’s from here and he is only about two inches shorter than me.
Oh, and I’m 6’4", my smallest board is 6’5" (which I got when I was 6’2" and 15kg lighter.) and I have another one that is 6’8". I only used the boards I already have as reference points, as I have never surfed a gun, nor a longboard.
Everyone is listing things that have an effect, but I still don’t have a clear picture of what could be done to make a board that is 1ft 4inches bigger than my current biggest board AT LEAST as maneuverable as the 6’8". Those longboards in the pictures come to mind. As only the back 1/2 of the board is actually making contact with the water, it would make sense to say that the most important factor contributing to maneuverability is the back half of the board. This would explain why my 6’8" is less maneuverable than I want it, as the rails in the back half is THICK, the tails is much wider than my other board, and it has less tail rocker. So, would it make sense to say if I add 1’4" to the board, add a heap of tail rocker, pull in the tail, make the rails a bit thinner, and use tiny fins, it would make the board quite maneuverable… Correct me if I’m thinking out of my arse here.
Francois,
My tip is to look at rocker low point, wide point and foil. Typically people push the wide point ahead of centre on guns to aid projection. I have found that keeping the wide point at centre and making it coincident with rocker low point is a good way to keep the board loose. BUT the key is in keeping volume forward so that the board still “pulls” itself into waves. This means that the thickest part of the rail is forward of wide point. That entails funky top rocker shape that takes a while to get right…
dubble post
Who said placing the fins further apart makes a board more maneuverable? I think it’s the opposite- increasing the spread (the fore aft distance) makes a board more drivey but less maneuverable.
Also one thing I’ve learned about finsthat relates to gunny boards is that the bigger the waves are the faster you go…and the less fin area you need. Unless you’re dealing with wind chop…
Oh, and another thing I’ve learned- listen to Resinhead- especially when it comes to big waves and big surfers…and well, pretty much anything about composite construction…and seals…
all Right FRanCois....don't make me fly out to SA and Kick your ass...all 6'5" of you. You left this question way too open ended
You never said what kind of waves you wanted, or what kind of big board. So you want a gun gun that peforms well in bigger heavy surf.. it's all coming back to me, I remember you, we had this discussion about 5 months ago. We told you to get a 7- 8ft board....and your still surfing that 6 ft nothing pump and squirt.
For god sakes man, you are 6'5"...your short board should be 6'8". Your twice the size of Kelly Slater, and even a so called big guy "Parko" you about 7 inches tall than him. . Big guys do better at Football (and not that silly game you play with your feet...I mean real football) not at surfing....you got to manage your equalized volume, you need to equate the foam "someone like Slater has" to your big ol Dutch ass. I struggled with your problem for years. I finally decided that my short board was going to be 7'2" Anyhow. You should try a well made 7'6" for a few months. You'd be amazed how well the float and stuff.
I learned a long time ago..it not the board, but the surfer that can sink the rail.
But being big helps too. You can sink a big thick rail too.
Look at Bongo here on a 2ft nothing wave?
Template
Curves of the rails
Rocker
Fin Toe In
Fin Cant
Fin placement
Fin size and shape
That's like saying how can I make my stock chevy 350cid go faster? The first thing I look at is swing weight...make a lighter more responsive board. Then I look a thickness. Thinner boards are twitcher boards. Then i look at tail rocker, and overall rocker. Then the last 1/3 of the board is a performance shape...not a huge, thick, square clunk.
Take a look at a high performance long board, you'll notice they are thin, light, and have a good tail kick, and the last 1/3 of the board looks like a modern short board.
Tha't all i got for you.
I would also say define “manuverable.” One mans manuverable may be another mans achelies heel.
Thinner, as well as lighter, are another two things that are problematic to change. The deal is, I want to have a board that can at the same time ride really big waves, and do really big turns. I currently have two boards as reference points. The one is a 6’5", it’s thin, narrow, and overall quite small to me. (I’m 6’3"-6’4", and weigh 90kg.) It turns on a dime, but lacks the volume and length to follow through on the maneuvers. I’ll do a fast, slashing cutback, but I’ll lose so much momentum that on a wave that lacks some punch, I’ll just get left behind, making it pointless. The board has a very flowing outline, similar to a semi-gun. (It was actually shaped as sort of an step-up all rounder at the time, as I was 17, and weighed only 75kg when having the board shaped, and I wanted something that will get me into bigger waves than I usually surfed. At about that time my growth in length slowed dramatically, to make way for growth in muscle. Testosterone combined with working out made be gain 15kg since I got the board shaped…) The rails are fairly thin, and it has a good tail rocker, with the wide point slightly forward from the middle.
My other board is only 3 inches longer, a 6’8", but it is thicker, with the thickness carried to the rails, making them quite boxy. It is also wider, with the wide point much further backwards, in between my feet. It has less tail rocker, and more nose rocker, with the rocker apex being more forward than my 6’5". It paddles like a dream and can catch big waves far easier than my 6’5". The problem is, it turns pathetically. With much smaller fins than my 6’5", it still takes all my strength just to do a decent cutback, a re-entry takes lots of luck, and a layback is impossible. The board just does not lend itself to any form of performance surfing.
Now, I want to get a 8ft semi-gun, but I don’t want to paddle out on a 6ft-8ft day, and not be able to do cutbacks, re-entries, floaters, and all the other things that I like to do on any wave up to two and a half times my height, and the days that quality 3x - 4x head high waves break in or near my home town are not frequent enough to validate getting an unmaneuverable board that only starts to become the board of choice when the waves are too big to care about turns. I can only budget for 1 board a year, and I cannot get a board that I am only going to use a few times a month, but at the same time, I cannot get a board that won’t be able to get me into the biggest waves I’m willing to ride, safely and reliably. The fact that I cannot get two boards, and the conflicting needs of doing more radical turns on my average surf sessions, and the fact that if I can expect the same evolution in the size of waves I ride that I experienced in 2011, which went FAR above my expectations, I’m going to need something to get me into those waves safely. I understand I cannot paddle out into 12ft waves on a 6’5" shred stick and expect to have a relaxed session, nor can I expect to do an layback-360-tailslide-spinout combo on a 11ft Waimea gun. Where do I find the balance?
What you describe wanting to do, in the above post, can easily be done with a board in the 7' 10 '' to 8' 4'' range. Major variable is rider skill level. Fin shape, entry angle, surface area, foil, and placement play an important role. Trust me, I've been there, done that!
You want your home and security,
You want to live like a sailor at sea.
Beautiful loser,
How you’re going to fall,
When you realize
You just can’t have it all,
You just can’t have it all.
Those are lyrics of an old song you surely won’t remember. But the messsage is relevant. Surfboards are always a compromise. you cannot have it all. You have to decide which aspects of the board’s performance are most important to you and then design the board in response. Then you ride it and the next one you make adjustments. It’s a never ending process. I’m like you in that I only have time to make one, maybe two boards a year and so this design/build/test/redesign/build process is extremely slow. And then when I think I’m getting things dialed in my body changes (but unlike you I’m on the downward slide).
My short answer to your original question would be to make sure your board has a good amount of curve in the tail and a good amount of tail rocker. That will keep the tail loose. The length should get you into waves OK.
As I know many of you has been there and has done it, I come here…
Now, I understand placing the fins farther apart makes a board more maneuverable, as I have gathered in other topics, but please elaborate on fin foils ect…
Also, resinhead mentioned that thin boards are more twitchy. I do not want twitchy, on the contrary. I want something that will transfer from rail to rail like a dream, but I don’t want twitchy.
Please explain how I can tweak certain elements in the boards design that doesn’t sacrifice volume, to create a board that can hold it’s own from the moment it is overhead till the biggest wave I can imagine myself surfing in the next two years.
Pulling in the tail will have significant effects on rail-to-rail transitions, as will fin placement. I’ve gone to Probox to give me some fore/aft adjustability as well as cant adjustability. As far as reducing tail width, keep in mind you’ll loose planing surface… which you may want to keep in boards designed for smaller or weaker surf.