If all other specs. (rocker, concave, fins, rail shape, adjusted volume, etc.), are equal, but with the tail outline made fuller, I think the general consensus is that the wider tailed board is more maneuverable (looser), with the trade off being the board is less drivey, more slidey, with the increased possibility of spin outs on a steep wave. Anyone disagree?
What I would like to know is if there is a common agreement, on SWAYLOCKS, that the wider that the tail outline is shaped, the faster the board will run thru turns, and go down the line, all other dimensions equal? (Except possibly volume, which could be taken from the nose and middle thickness’.)
What about the overall length wide points, is wider faster? Thank you for any opinions.
If all other specs. (rocker, concave, fins, rail shape, adjusted volume, etc.), are equal, but with the tail outline made fuller, I think the general consensus is that the wider tailed board is more maneuverable (looser), with the trade off being the board is less drivey, more slidey, with the increased possibility of spin outs on a steep wave. Anyone disagree?
What I would like to know is if there is a common agreement, on SWAYLOCKS, that the wider that the tail outline is shaped, the faster the board will run thru turns, and go down the line, all other dimensions equal? (Except possibly volume, which could be taken from the nose and middle thickness’.)
What about the overall length wide points, is wider faster? Thank you for any opinions. Sickdog
I have never had a problem with a wide tail outline as long as the rest of the broad is in proportion. Faster isn’t what I am looking for.
When the board is wide in the nose and very narrow in the tail it is able to be narrow when going fast and wide when going slowly. . . . . the board will naturally ride on the narrow tail as it speeds up because the nose produces more lift as it accelerates and then lifts itself out of the water.
The best of all worlds, and another reason why relatively parallel planshapes are ummm, not my thing
LeeDD, Your above statement is correct, as you know. On the other hand, Roy's (aka Tom Bloke) statement is not.
Well, if we get going again, at least it’ll be clear who started it this time.
By the way Bill, it’s not sufficient to just pronounce from the heavens what is correct and what is not. You’ll need to post something, be it physics or be it examples of specific surfboards and how they act, to support those pronouncements. Hell, even Roy always gives that his best shot, while all you ever do is say, “no, you’re wrong.”
FWIW, What Roy said matches pretty closely to my experience with surfboards. Not many of us (none of us?) have boards that are at the extremes of the design as Roy’s, but heck, anyone who has a narrow tailed longboard (mine is 13 1/2") will have experienced what he is saying: On slow waves we naturally must surf the board more forward where the width is there, but on faster waves we ride from the tail effortlessly. The front of the board is being held out of the water, both by our weight on the tail and the wind under the nose.
In response to your statement / assumptions: (“wider tailed board is more maneuverable (looser), with the trade off being the board is less drivey, more slidey, with the increased possibility of spin outs on a steep wave. Anyone disagree?”… is if there is a common agreement, on SWAYLOCKS, that the wider that the tail outline is shaped, the faster the board will run thru turns, and go down the line, all other dimensions equal?")
My thoughts are… it all depends on what you mean? Does the board have a flat or rolled bottom? Are the rails down, soft, round, hard? It all adds up to an answer. A 15" tail pulled into a 3" or 4" tail block, with wide hips up through the first 1/3+ of the board with wide point back of center, and a narrow 16 1/2" nose, with a rounded hull bottom, and soft 50/50 rails, will pivot turn on a dime, be fast in small waves, and nose ride with the best of them (most mid 60s style / shaped boards). Throw in a flat bottom, more rocker, and a down rail, and every thing relating to your questions/ assumptions begins to change.
So in my opinion, no, there is no one general concensus answer. Depends on the other aspects of the board beyond the tail width and it depends on the wave you are riding the board on.
If all other specs. (rocker, concave, fins, rail shape, adjusted volume, etc.), are equal, but with the tail outline made fuller, I think the general consensus is that the wider tailed board is more maneuverable (looser), with the trade off being the board is less drivey, more slidey, with the increased possibility of spin outs on a steep wave. Anyone disagree?
What I would like to know is if there is a common agreement, on SWAYLOCKS, that the wider that the tail outline is shaped, the faster the board will run thru turns, and go down the line, all other dimensions equal? (Except possibly volume, which could be taken from the nose and middle thickness’.)
What about the overall length wide points, is wider faster? Thank you for any opinions. Sickdog
I have never had a problem with a wide tail outline as long as the rest of the broad is in proportion. Faster isn’t what I am looking for. ============================================================================================== SORRY I thought he said BROAD!
And why one Bloke likes very wide boards with very narrow tails: The best of both worlds. . . .
Roy, just out of curiosity - have you tried stand-up paddling any of your larger models, if only to see how they behave in that mode? Your Starboard, Dragonboard, and probably some of the other designs appear likely candidates…
My comment was made to validate the statement of LeeDD. Go back and read his prior post. Carefully. Now, if Roy’s and your belief were generally true, then the ‘‘best of both worlds’’ would be a full blown Waimea gun. Sadly, it is not. So perhaps a little more thought, and better reading comprehension on your part, would be in order before being critical of my comment. My experience of 51yrs of surfing, and 48yrs of shaping, is the basis for my comments and contributions. If that sticks in your craw, I’m happy for you. If you take issue with my “pronouncements”, don’t read them. As to your assertion that all I ever say is ‘‘No you’re wrong’’,…as it turns out, you’re wrong.
If the reading of Roy’s response to LeeDD does not reveal the error to you, then I am content to have you both continue in your fundamental misunderstanding. The answer is in the text. I’m just not inclined to enlighten either of you. You have addressed your issue re: Pipe, to the wrong person. I made no mention of the Pipeline.
