Looking at Curran’s “Red beauty” on the CI website made me think - where have I seen that recently?
There are some similarities between Bert’s shortboard outlines and the early thrusters (see pic below)-
I have some ideas about why they might be similar. Interested to read others think.
havent ridden one yet
but have something similar on the rack
i imagine that these sort of outlines
brings back loosenes and quicker rail to rail transitions for a wider tail
parralelll rails for speed
berts fin cluster is well forward though
hope it works for me
im hoping to get alot more speed from this outline
im 83 kg and the board is 6 2
20 wide
width and parralel profile for more volume (ie speed)
get rid of the wide boaty feeling by pulling in the tail
and reducing tail thickness
suits a flatish rocker
this time i have a single concave as well
still a bit unsure about fin cant and placement distance from the rail
and fingers crossed in the flex department
it was feeling a bit stiff …
next board will be a completely diiferent tech
as inspired by danb and benny
have left some more volume under front foot to compensate for club foot surfing style
I’ve got to follow this thread. I’ve been thinking about making my brother a shortboard. Silly, once again that board looks really nice. How did you do the graphics. They blend in nicely.
The similarity could be because they work.
I remember riding a borrowed ‘black beauty’ in Portugal and it went really well. Nothing unpredictable, just smooth, fast and turnable.
What most people want, no?
I still thin Simon’s second batch of original thrusters has never been improved on significantly. Floaty and loose. Thrusters still have that sticky feel though. I don’t think they will ever rid themselves of that, but they hold in so nice and remain fairly loose rail to rail.
Agreed Solo, I don’t like the tracking effect of split fin designs.
Yep… the outlines are similar… I guess it allows for greater wave catching/ planing ability cos it’s wider and more paralell but then a narrower tail allows easier rail to rail…
Hi everyone
I just finished my first sandwich board, second ever, and it’s just like pauls: 6’2"x20"x2". I’m 150 lbs + 6/4 wetsuit, usually. I made the board for the “good” days here, chest to a bit overhead. I adapted a Merrick board from the Essential Surfing book because I thought the flatter 80s rocker would work better on the waves here.
I surfed it twice, once in glassy waist-hi and once in sloppy waist-hi, it went great in both, responsive and it caught waves pretty good.
Thanks to everyone for the inspiration!
Hey WaveWrangler, nice board, you should put in the resources.
Say, I went to college in WI (Beloit) and in the four years I spent there, including numerous trips to various WI surf spots, I never saw a day as good as the one behind you in that picture where I wasn’t freeaing my nuts off. Where is that???
Sorry to hijack this thread but here are some lake waves I plan to surf with my new 80s outline thruster.
g day dan cheers for the compliment
the art is squares of japanese rice paper and a flower cut out with a craft knife
i wish i coud see a pro make a board, im really stepping on my own feet with some things.
i had a few bubbles under them.
in some ways this boad is reallly nice and a shoka in others
as long as it surfs good ,aye
i will also put some japanese graffiti on the board as well
pm me mate id love to talk pretreatment with you
wave wrangler, you lurker
that board looks awesome
you snuck that one out
beaudy mate
dan heres a fin done with the paper ,they look great
ps finally went and bought a surform
whew what a relief
anyway back to the topic
i tried a forward cluster like that and found it to be very skatey feeling
very sensitive… not quite right for the outline i used it for though.
Yeah in addition to the wide tail, I guess what else they’ve got in common is flat tail rocker. That’s about where the similarities end, cause compsand lets you exploit the advantages of that design without the disadvantages. The first thusters had big wide tails and vee. Then they discovered concave and tail kick which meant boards could be narrower and guys could go rail to rail better and surf in the pocket more. Those 80’s boards go great in low power situations but would get sketchy if you tried to surf them new school. With that outline and flat tail rocker a compsands will be loose and fast in low power situation but will hold in the pocket becuase of the flex. You look at Bert’s board and it looks funny next to the outlines of contemporary rockered out PU/PE boards. But what he’s doing is not that radical when you look at how the particular mix of design variables has been used in the past.
I’m wondering how big swallows would behave with perimeter stringers? Like if you didn’t make a big stiff tail block and cut a notch in it, but stopped the perimeter stringer at the points of the swallow and then ran a narrow strip of balsa between the skins back to the beginning of the butt crack.
thread on 80s thrusters
http://www.swaylocks.com/forum/gforum.cgi?post=202899;search_string=80s%20thruster;#202899
My 80’s thruster.
Wide tail, flat rocker. nice board going verticle. fun indeed. yet being a single fin man i admit to not being a fan of the thruster fin setup. too tracky.
goes best in top to bottom, higher tide decent size waves.
width and flat rocker is good!
How consistent is ridable waves in the great lakes? can you surf everyday?
Cheers.
curious josh.
assuming that you have the flex dialed in
im still having trouble
ive found the easiest way is in core thickness
however if you want more float .how do you compensate?
you can only go so wide
a longboards sweet
but under 7 ft, it gets tricky
i had a wide tailed board with channels .it was a rocket in sunshine coast beachies
also had a go of a widetailed homemade board with a 5 fin bonza and id have to say it was out of control loose and fast
almost unridable.
what about the forward cluster though how does that relate to a compsands flex etc
hey Paul,
wow man YOU are craftee!
That board looks sooo good…I can see the Napier artdeco influence there…you could leave it in the house as decor eh?
looks like your fin setup confusion is history…right? toein is pointed at the nose tip?
The only thing I’d suggest is having a removable exchangable center fin…but I could see why youre doing it that way.
The hips are more noticeable in those last pics too.
If its more speed youre after, I think youre gonna like it heaps.
BUT, how’bout a rocker pic? Dont leave us hanging!
I really like the pastel colored paper. Very subtle and compliments the wood so well.
http://www.swaylocks.com/forum/gforum.cgi?post=226884;search_string=Eighties;guest=4019453#226884
regards,
Håvard
Thanks Havaard - its all there in that thread
[=1]
[ 3]tail rockers are very 80s as well …
so its a blend of 80s tail rocker , 90s nose rocker , 80s plan shape and modern low rails and current volumes based on construction … [/]
For me the difference between a PU/PE with 80’s curves and a compsand with 80’s curves (I’ve surfed both recently) is the compsand feels more like a contemporary shortboard, it feels like its narrower and has more tail rocker. I assume it’s the flex and the way your shifts in weight are transfered through the harder deck to the rails. Also the extra bouyancy makes the weighted rail come up quicker when you unweight, which helps the rail to rail action. My compsand has thin rails and less volume than a PU/PE but the lower density core still has an effect.[/]