Newbalonie, I read below where you never had a description of what a spiral V really was. Here goes, the spiral “effect” happens when the elliptical curve of the outline crosses the plane of the V on its way to the tip of the stringer. The outline has created a sort of wire frame image as it dives down and crosses the board. V’s were much more pronounced during the era that ushered in the spiral V.
Newbalonie, I read below where you never had a description of what a > spiral V really was. Here goes, the spiral “effect” happens when > the elliptical curve of the outline crosses the plane of the V on its way > to the tip of the stringer. The outline has created a sort of wire frame > image as it dives down and crosses the board. V’s were much more > pronounced during the era that ushered in the spiral V. Spiral V is the intersection of the V panel with the outline???!!! Unless the apex of the V varies across the stringer or one panel is steeper than the other, what makes it spiral? Gracias Newbs
Spiral V is the intersection of the V panel with the outline???!!! Unless > the apex of the V varies across the stringer or one panel is steeper than > the other, what makes it spiral?>>> Gracias>>> Newbs There is no real spiral, but the visual effect of starting out low on the plane, at the rail and crossing upwards to the stringer makes it look so. The boards of this era had a lot of V, cut quickly near the end of the tail. The boards also had very little rocker down the center of the board, this was a time of anti rocker, one of the dark ages of advancement of design.
I can remember shaping single to double concave vees through the tail with a nearly flat tail rocker along the stringer. When viewed bottom down from the back, the bottom edge of the rail line swooped up with the vee and turned down at the end of the stringer - it was easy to imagine water “spiraling off” the tail through those concaves. I see similar designs all the time but they just call them dual concaves. The main difference is now they have side fins and a bit more tail rocker.
There is no real spiral, but the visual effect of starting out low on the > plane, at the rail and crossing upwards to the stringer makes it look so. > The boards of this era had a lot of V, cut quickly near the end of the > tail. The boards also had very little rocker down the center of the board, > this was a time of anti rocker, one of the dark ages of advancement of > design. Yeah, I used to ride Plastic Fantastics back in the days. So V and spiral V are the same thing? The anti rocker IMO, was just a dead end, not a dark age. McTavish was trying to increase the rail rocker to turn but keep the stringer rocker flat for speed. The suckers worked if you kept them on edge. But if you flattened them out, the V was an anchor. It didn’t help that everyone used plastic Greenough fins that flexed like noodles. If you tried one with the real stiff fiberglass fins, they worked pretty good. Anyway, the V’s in those days were a great example of “too much of a good thing” (in those days, that meant just about everything). Mark Richards just reduced the depth, moved them up to the belly and stuck two fins on them and validated the whole idea; quick and drivey but you have to keep 'em on edge. Thanks again, Newbs
Yeah, I used to ride Plastic Fantastics back in the days. So V and spiral > V are the same thing? The anti rocker IMO, was just a dead end, not a dark > age. McTavish was trying to increase the rail rocker to turn but keep the > stringer rocker flat for speed. The suckers worked if you kept them on > edge. But if you flattened them out, the V was an anchor. It didn’t help > that everyone used plastic Greenough fins that flexed like noodles. If you > tried one with the real stiff fiberglass fins, they worked pretty good. > Anyway, the V’s in those days were a great example of “too much of a > good thing” (in those days, that meant just about everything). Mark > Richards just reduced the depth, moved them up to the belly and stuck two > fins on them and validated the whole idea; quick and drivey but you have > to keep 'em on edge.>>> Thanks again, Newbs Newbalonie, I was surfing Rincon just a few days before Christmas 1967. I was with Denny Aberg and he was waiting for Kemp to arrive from LAX with Steve Bigler and Bob McTavish, they showed up with these really short (8’7") boards with thick, wide, Veed tails. The fin channel was a molded fiber glass slot about 16" long, Steve found a piece of paper on the ground, layed it across the channel and pushed his big single fin into it. Satisfied the fit was snug enough, he and Bob went out and at that moment I knew surfing would never be the same again. I was fortunate to have witnessed the first “shortboard” surfing in California that day. After my trip was over, I immediatelty started shaping those new fangled V bottoms on the east coast. I made a 8’1" with a Greenough 3 fin, it had flex, but would jet you out of a full on rail turn. Being in California or Hawaii had such an advantage for being exposed to new designs, with the delay in media back then, the rest of the surfing world was 6 months to a year behind.
“vee” and “spiral vee” are a bit different. Picture flat panel vee vs dual concave vee.
Newbalonie, I read below where you never had a description of what a > spiral V really was. Here goes, the spiral “effect” happens when > the elliptical curve of the outline crosses the plane of the V on its way > to the tip of the stringer. The outline has created a sort of wire frame > image as it dives down and crosses the board. V’s were much more > pronounced during the era that ushered in the spiral V. Jim, you hit it on the head. I knew exactly what you ment …only because I still have an old Channin/ Diffendefer 6’8" round pin w/ spiral “V” 1970 (or shotgun V as Tony Channin called it during a discussion). I’m seriously considering doing this on my nest short board. Emmulation is all I can hope for. How do you improve on perfection! JC