I recently ordered a 6’2"C and was wondering if anyone had experimented with tail designs when shaping fish type boards. Specifically big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of board?
I recently ordered a 6’2"C and was wondering if anyone had > experimented with tail designs when shaping fish type boards. Specifically > big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a > big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of > board?../…Kal,wide ended r.squares or diamond tails are nothing new.In the early 70s (B.F.=before the fish)they gained limited popularity( Hawaii 5-0s episode intitled “The Banzi” features a surfer with wide tailed twinnie.)my very first short board was a 5’-9" kinda gunny, flipped&chipped nosed, thick n’ wide-rounded square tailed twinnie, with small double foiled rakes. Most of the wide ended tails I see anymore are on Romanofski(sp?)kneeboards.You might want to look @ possibly trying a wide round tail or a rounder squash type.Remember the board will be very slippy/slidey so put the fins back abit.GOOD LUCK.Herb.
While on the subject…what are you looking for the wide swallow to give you in a wide planshape? I would think that with a wide planshape, the swallow reduces surface area in the tail, therefore adding to it’s turnability, but keeps the width for wave catching and a straighter outline for speed? What is the downside to a wide swallow? Also, I’m wondering what the main difference is between a quad fin setup or twinzer, to a thruster or twin. What are the smaller forward fins doing, adding to the stability of a twin setup? My friend Will says the twinzer is the fastest setup around, what do you think? And Dale brought up an interseting point with his thoughts on the single fin. I don’t see what the benefit’s of the single would be in junky surf? Where will the speed come from? I have been resourcing the Lis fishes, and other kneeboard designs looking for the optimum board for weak surf. I am unsure what fin setup would perform best in weaker, mushy conditions. Any help? Thanks to everyone for the help, and especially Dale who has gone out of his way to help me. Thanks guy’s- ryan
While on the subject…what are you looking for the wide swallow to give > you in a wide planshape? I would think that with a wide planshape, the > swallow reduces surface area in the tail, therefore adding to it’s > turnability, but keeps the width for wave catching and a straighter > outline for speed? What is the downside to a wide swallow? Also, I’m > wondering what the main difference is between a quad fin setup or twinzer, > to a thruster or twin. What are the smaller forward fins doing, adding to > the stability of a twin setup? My friend Will says the twinzer is the > fastest setup around, what do you think? And Dale brought up an > interseting point with his thoughts on the single fin. I don’t see what > the benefit’s of the single would be in junky surf? Where will the speed > come from? I have been resourcing the Lis fishes, and other kneeboard > designs looking for the optimum board for weak surf. I am unsure what fin > setup would perform best in weaker, mushy conditions. Any help? Thanks to > everyone for the help, and especially Dale who has gone out of his way to > help me. Thanks guy’s- ryan A fascinating, decades old (circa 1967-1969) experimental procedure that is labor intensive, but can teach many things, very rapidly: (1) Shape and glass a slightly thinner and narrower version of a design that you are comfortable and familiar with.(2) Mix a “dry” blend of microspheres and polyester resin and apply along the rails and bottom at least 1/2" thick.(3) Re-shape to original, “comfortable/familiar” specs. (4) Go surfing and take along sandpaper, rasp, etc. (5) Periodically return to the beach and remove/adjust rail, template and bottom contours as often as necessary (or curious) and then go back surfing. Of course, this method of contour research has its limitations (as all things do), and can also be applied to just the rails, or rear bottom surfaces, etc., but it is definitely able to provide real-time,“tuned” information when the conditions are right… much better than having to go back to the shop, hours later (by then, wondering what you actually felt) and going through the whole process of making a completely new board every time a new modification is introduced.
Specifically > big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a > big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of > board? Kel, If anybody wants to take a fresh look at the “big swallow” tail that Kel is referring to check out Tom Stern’s new “BIG FISH” in the boards showcase. He just added it. It’s linked below. But this is on topic: Can anyone elaborate as to what the concept behind a deep, big swallow is? I know this has been talked about before but this seems like the perfect place to go over it again. Tom, what were you thinking with the tail on your big fish? http://216.15.61.234/swaylocks/boards/db.cgi?db=default&uid=default&Validated=Yes&Category=funshape&view_records=1&nh=1&mh=1
Specifically>>> Kel,>>> If anybody wants to take a fresh look at the “big swallow” tail > that Kel is referring to check out Tom Stern’s new “BIG FISH” in > the boards showcase. He just added it. It’s linked below.>>> But this is on topic: Can anyone elaborate as to what the concept behind a > deep, big swallow is? I know this has been talked about before but this > seems like the perfect place to go over it again. Tom, what were you > thinking with the tail on your big fish? Big, deep swallowtails can generally be thought of as providing much of the same holding power and tracking potential as (crudely stated) “twin pintails”, with the additional benefit of a definitive and precise “punch” during direction changes (similar to a wide squaretail, but with more bite). Big, deep swallowtails can also share quite a bit of the fin(s) responsibility after initiating turns, and are able to sustain extremely high and fast trim lines. No wonder that, when surfers witnessed what Steve Lis was doing with his kneeboard (and also standup surfers such as Jeff Ching), fervent (almost cult-like), “Fish” disciples were born. Ironically, Steve Lis had a much more humble and utilitarian reason for his choice in first using the big, deep swallowtail. So, a fresh chapter in surfing`s history was written when this tail shape was mixed into the deceptively simple, “Lis Fish” design blend: short waterline, full template becoming progressively straighter toward the tail, thin, low-volume profile, minimal rocker, soft, low rails, overall flattened bottom and deck, long, shallow, dual keel fins (that were neutrally-placed, not toed-in), and then finally set free in (relatively uncrowded) waves that offered the kind of critical, high speed challenge this design enjoyed burning up…
I was trying to stretch the 6’2" that I ride. Really wasn’t sure what the outcome would be, the guy the 7’2" was made for weighs 225 lbs. and he is also very tall (6’7"). I’m 5’8" @ 155 lbs., to relate to his size was really difficult. This board came out of a 7’11" R with most of the length cut off the nose. I’ve always felt that a low entry rocker on the early fish design is a critical element to their performance. The big swallow performs alot like a pin tail in point break surf. Add this to the two swallow tips to turn off of plus the twin fins and you get a very unique combination of performance in a surfboard. A longboard and a fish actually compliment on another very nicely, my desert island would definitely have a fish on it. It is interesting that some 30 years later the same board design that impressed me so much is still at the core of my quiver. The first time I saw a fish shape was at Mantanchen Bay/San Blas, Mexico in 1969/70. The guy riding it was Jeff Ching. I feel certain that they weren’t the first using this design, they just refined it. tom>>> Specifically>>> Kel,>>> If anybody wants to take a fresh look at the “big swallow” tail > that Kel is referring to check out Tom Stern’s new “BIG FISH” in > the boards showcase. He just added it. It’s linked below.>>> But this is on topic: Can anyone elaborate as to what the concept behind a > deep, big swallow is? I know this has been talked about before but this > seems like the perfect place to go over it again. Tom, what were you > thinking with the tail on your big fish?
The big swallow performs alot like a pin tail in point break > surf. Hence the larger side fins… Makes me wonder how big can they go - the side fins I mean?
Hence the larger side fins…>>> Makes me wonder how big can they go - the side fins I mean? I have repeatedly faced two generalized problems regarding your question: the larger the side fins, regardless of their placement or overall area, the greater the tendancy for unwanted tracking to occur and the slower the board`s high-end speed and reaction time will be. Personally, for a given purpose and operating range, it seems far better for the fin(s) size to be limited as much as possible, sharing and harmonizing their potential holding power, speed and quickness with the rail contour, template shape, thickness flow and bottom configuration.
I recently ordered a 6’2"C and was wondering if anyone had > experimented with tail designs when shaping fish type boards. Specifically > big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a > big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of > board? Well I have a concept that is proven to work from shaper Greg Loehr. It works with a huge swallow tail. The board is just strictly a twin fin and now here is where I come in we place our MVG’s which are little stick on finlets you can get them at www.gosurfgear.com and we put them at the tips of the tail making it so your board is loose but with still some grab on those hard turns! Believe me it works when I was in Melbourne beach everyone was talking about it. So if you are interestead in the concept or just want to swap ideas feel free to email me.
I recently ordered a 6’2"C and was wondering if anyone had > experimented with tail designs when shaping fish type boards. Specifically > big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a > big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of > board? Nobody out there riding a twin fin like me ,you all trying to copy me!you don’t have the blank dont have the fins dont glass them right dont have the right rocker or temps.i surf everywhere an i have a quad an a few twins.Everyday i see want ta be fishes…kook sticks like those kook stingers made in the 70’s an most that ride these gross fish designs are kooks.Too thin ,Too narrow.wrong fins ,surfer that doesn’t know how to shake a surfboard…a surfer that thinks ridin a fish is standing on the tail,i could answer all you questions but iam tired of all of you tring to copy ME!Go copy Ben Aipa for christ sakes…Even the originals have lost touch…cuz they don;t ride what they shape!!!Don’t paddle what they shape…on an on…you see on the beach you know who iam you all do in O.C.been doin it for 25 years…though all you fads an gimmicks…if you know me you know who’s writting this …an to all you want to be fish builders an riders Go Home an copy someone else,Iam the king of fish riders an the only one that can steer you in the right direction…cuz i earned it …not like the rest of you johnny come todays…or yesterdays but don;t ride the designs you helped refine…I rip all of you an you all try to rip me off…good luck better start from scratch…that includes the blanks dens.an stringers an glass…you can’t ride em cuz your too old!
Shaped a Fish for a guy whos is putting little twinny fin plugs just in case…the tail width from point to point is 10". I can’t remember the butt crack depth but it is pronounced. I put a little more rocker that the original Lis Fish, and I made it 6’6". Coming oout of the glass shop this Friday. Let you guys know how it rides in a week or two. Point being, a 10" tip to tip is about standard. Had to chop it out of an egg blank I believe.
Qit clownin Herb. You’re scarin’ us!
Qit clownin Herb. You’re scarin’ us!..I guess I could have let it go, and made you think that i’m a “Christopher Walken” type,and maybe I am …but I DIDN’T WRITE THE RAYJO POST! besides if I wanted to scare someone(which I have no desire to do)I could do a much better job of it being that a majority of my medical work has been in state hospitals,and prisons.I have seen people go from sane to insane in under 4 seconds my friend,So that’s why I CHERISH EVERYDAY.Probably just one of my fans acting out again like the notes on my car(dead sharks on my bumper).Their are family friends that don’t take this as simple pranks,and have govt. eyes on me,and my family due to my past Hx.Herb.
ray is herb’s mental brother, go back to the Harbour site kook!
ray is herb’s mental brother, go back to the Harbour site kook! AGAIN,I know for a fact it wasn’t my brothers Ray or Bob,maybe you HUH? It will be interesting to witness your outcome.Can you say F.C.D.?
Thank you for the grat responses and new picture of a diamond tailed twin. You guys have no idea how much you help the amateur shaper.>>> I recently ordered a 6’2"C and was wondering if anyone had > experimented with tail designs when shaping fish type boards. Specifically > big squashes and diamond tails, like some Rodstoker shapes, instead of a > big swallow. Any comments concerning other tail types for this style of > board?