I’m sure something like this has been tried in the past, looking for some input and feedback on the design.
I’m thinking something in a short and stubby mini-simesque kind of outline, but with the bonzer single-to-double bottom. For fins I’d glass on bonzer runners in the regular locations. lnstead of a center fin, though, I’d put some boxes in generally the same location as a twinnie, but rurther inboard. The idea would be that all the base would provide drive, while still being fairly loose. The side fins could approximately divide the area from a normal bonzer center fin, but out to the rails.
Anyone ever tried anything like this? I know it’s similar to the eaton zinger concept… Actually it might be easier to just emulate that. But I think this could be fun too. Let me know what folks have tried, what works, what doesn’t, etc…
if no one tried new designs we would all be riding finless planks carved out of a single piece of wood...not that theres anything wrong with that...go for it
Cool, very similar to what I was thinking of in terms of outline. If the zinger was your design initially, then due credit of course.
I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on my idea of a variation. Have you experiemented with using the smaller bonzer runners in conjunction with larger twin-sized trailers rather than having the fin area more evenly divided as in the case of your example? I have some halcyon cutaway twins I got in trade, I was thinking they might be a very nice complement to all that base area of the runners.
If you mean smaller fins in front with larger fins in rear and more centered on board, kinda where the back fins are, on the Six Shooters, yes i have tried it. Feel more like a single fin, noseride really good on longboards. I like the twin fin feel. There is a really old one at the shop with some of my early cutaway fins in it I will try and get some pictures.
Yeah, that's exactly what I was talking about, the small runners like you see on a "normal" campbel bros bonzer, with some cutaway twin fins back and inboard of those.
If you can get some pics I'd love to check them out.
About 3 years ago Nick Palandrani (Sourcer Surfboards) and I collaborated on a 9’3" that is this very design. Tail rocker was done a little extreme which slows the paddling down. The nose rocker is relaxed to aid nose riding performance. The board comes off the bottom like nothing else I’ve ever surfed. It has bonzer type runners ahead of large 5 3/4" main fins We called it a Twonger… More resently we did a 6’8" eggy affair that can be seen on NIck’s website (http://www.sourcesurfboards.com/) under “Alternatives”. The photo of the board in action is of Kevin Miske at Clouds. We called this one the Translator because it is a marriage of a hull entry and a spiral vee tail ~ New with old> I haven’t taken any photos of the Twonger buy I have lots of stuff that I"ve yet to photograph. The design if approached properly ( could hardly have a better coach than Ace) is a grand high performance one. A board like this will keep up with the most racey waves you’ll surf. Persue this project it’s a worthy one IMHO.
Jarrod, someone (GWS maybe) posted a pic of one of those on the erBB, but it was more of a big guy shorty shape. It was basically a Bonzer 6 fin setup though.
Thanks halcyon, I'm actually getting excited about this. The hull-to-spiral vee sounds like an awesome challenge to shape, should be really fun. On the one you colaborated on, were the rails really bladed out and "hully" as well? I'd love to see some pics of the fin setup if you can muster them, that would be great.
Thanks Janklow, I'll see if I can dig that up. I think I remember it vaguely...
Thats where I thought you were heading. I set up a few that way, Worked really good on bigger waves, very predictable, no suprises. I have gone to slight roll, hull, midsection to “V” off the tail. This combo seems to lead the fins into turns allowing the boards to get up on rail. I do not use any noticable concaves through the fins. The fins have become the “channels”. When you start to visualize em that way it gets interesting.
What would you recommend for fin placements? What about the rails, really bladey like a hull? I usually like my rails down and hard, but this is all an experiment to me so I'm up for whatever.
Ok, What I used to do when I was figuring all this stuff out is use some adjustable box’s that allow fore and aft movement. The lead fins can be set in the board or ?. The other four can be swapped and slided around as necessary. I used to have some custom templates with Lok Box. They worked good for this. Also it looks like Pro box can be moved back and forth. The big main fins do not have to be much bigger than 4 3/4" tall. One thing I see is people using fins that look too big and far back in some of the “Bonzer” style boards. We used to ride really small fins so they were slidey. The thing about rails is making a rail that likes to be “on edge”, has some verticale in it not pinched. They liked to be surfed rail to rail not “swiveled” around from the tail. The “V” becomes very important especially in wider tailed oulines.
The relationship of how these fins all work together is very important. If the board is hard to turn things are too far back. If the board tracks and locks in to high on the wave face and will not release, too far forward. Even with the six fin ones there sould be no “finney” feel. Fast loose and smooth. One last thing these boards like to SLAMED into turns. No slow down needed.
I have the board shaped, glassed, hotcoated, ready for fins. I’m doing all probox, with the bonzer runners at the standard 10.5" from tail positions. 6’-21.5-2.625 single to deep double with e-wings ending at 10.5" from tail. I wound up going away from my original intent to do the simmons outline.
What I’m looking for is input on placement of the primary twin fins. I’ll be getting a set from Halcyon, but have some other twinny fins that I’ll also try. These will be probox as well, so there’s some room for adjustment, but it would be cool to get close to good first try.
So, where would you put the main twins? Distance from tail, rail?
I'm sure something like this has been tried in the past, looking for some input and feedback on the design.
I'm thinking something in a short and stubby mini-simesque kind of outline, but with the bonzer single-to-double bottom. For fins I'd glass on bonzer runners in the regular locations. lnstead of a center fin, though, I'd put some boxes in generally the same location as a twinnie, but rurther inboard. The idea would be that all the base would provide drive, while still being fairly loose. The side fins could approximately divide the area from a normal bonzer center fin, but out to the rails.
Anyone ever tried anything like this? I know it's similar to the eaton zinger concept... Actually it might be easier to just emulate that. But I think this could be fun too. Let me know what folks have tried, what works, what doesn't, etc..
[/quote]
Maybe a cross between these 2 concepts 5 fin Bing to a 7 fin Barry Vandermeulen.
Finboxes setting now. Went with standard 10.5 placement on the bonzer runners, with the main twins at 6.5 and 1.75 off the rail.
here’s a shaped photo, hopefully the curve in the e-wing will loosen it up since the rails are so parallel back to that point. it’s definitely an experiement from nose to tail, so god only knows if it will work, and if so which components are doing what.
Ace is the man to give you fin placement for this board, Hell he’s the one that stretched Wil Jobson’s Idea in the first place.
I’ve been chatting with Wil lately. He’s quite a guy if you can keep up with the fricassee of technical jargon that he runs at you. He’s most willing to share his ideas, but man is he hard to keep up with. I feel like I’m in a doctorate lecture on fluid mechanics when he gets going, though I invariably learn something.
For my part 6.5" off the tail seems well aft of what i would call for. I suspect this will make the board quite stiff and it will not change direction smoothly or maneuver well.
With this said consider that I tend to let shapers make the final decision on fin placement, but for Twinzer set-up 9.0" off the tail is about as far back as they go.Usually 10.0" is more the call. The lead fins (canards) on a twinzer are set very close to the main fins. In this case they are bonzer runners and should be set close as well IMHO. The relative distance can be seen in the photo of the Source Translator posted above in this thread.
If you’re going to do Bonzer runners I don’t see a need for two; one good sized one will do the job IMHO.
Bonzer runners do not provide much energy for directional change of directional stability. They are there to provide a channeling effect to get the board hydroplaning and ridding high in the water. They help channel water under the board ithrough the concaves. This is what Wil would call the Velocity Attuned Window. The placement of your main drive fins is critical to how the board will surf.
Do get as much input as possible before you place your fin boxes.
shweet hmmm i wonder how that board would go if it was further shaped fish-like, with a slight quarter-moon cut off the tail with just enough setback for the center fin box…
Ok I am back…Been working on heading to S.A. for the winter. I went over this stuff before http://www2.swaylocks.com/node/1020924 hopefully gets you there. I use my “Findicator” on ALL my boards. It is something I developed over the years so I do not have to measure every board. I view Bonzer/Zinger/twinzer etc. AS A UNIT that slides around on boards depending on length tail width rocker and a few other variables. I do not place one fin than randomly place another. The relationship between fins is extremly important in how they interact. I PLACE THE UNIT WHERE I WANT IT. It is really hard for me to "see’ where i would place the fins on your board. If I had it in front of me I could make a pretty good guestimate. from the pictures it is hard for me to get the right “scale”. After i lay it all out I still have to step back and make sure “it looks right” that is something hard to measure. Chances are you might not get it right the first time. That just opens the door to “fixing it”. That is how I have always done it.
