I do understand the historical significance of the shaper. And what innovation he has giving to the lifestyle and hobbie that so many do enjoy. I do also know that these board are somewhat rare. What I would like to do with the board.is make it surfable not for every day use however I don’t believe in wall hangers that never see the water. I think we are doing the designer shaper name and innovater a disservice.
Now I did try to upload a photo however file to large.To discribe this board total delaminating to the point fiberglass bubbling. Rails intact. Nose and tail Intact. Stringer straight. Major foam shrinkage 1"+ on the deck. 50+ years of sun damage.
Now, I would like to know your personal opinions on the matter. In the San Diego area, And I do know there are restorers (Randy Rarick) and the like. I would like to know if anyone is local to Southern California willing to travel to LA
Also considering Is it possible to do a glass off restoration with adding foam sheets to make up for the shrinkage using the stringer as a guide for width and shape
Any information that you could provide would be most helpful.
In the local area, Jim (The Genius) Phillips, has done restoration work FOR Joe Quigg, on one or more of his boards. Jimmy is who I would contact, for such a project. Like me, Jim is old enough to have lived what some now call ‘‘Surfing History.’’ He has a wealth of knowledge, backed up with highly skilled craftsmanship. He frequently checks in here, on Swaylock’s. Check him out.
Will do and thank you for the reply… I was suggested to talk to Brian at Ding King and he could get a hold of Jim… He (Jim) is truly an artist of his own.
My son and I are truly enjoying respecting embracing and learning about those who have come before us…
What Bill said. If anyone will do this board right it is Jim. The real question is, how much are you willing to spend? The board looks pretty toasted and it will take a lot of work to bring it back to life. There comes a point where you have to accept that a board must be put out to pasture.
Think you could post a pic of any identifying mark, signature, logo or lam? Board’s pretty brown. Don’t know who’s foam Quigg would have been using in 1960, but most likely not Clark or Walker. Maybe Dave Sweet Poly foam or possibly very early Foss? By 61 or 62 Dave Sweet had an exstenive “surf team” riding Dave’s Polyurethane foam boards with and without wooden stringers. The foam was really good for that day and time, but it turned brown pretty darned fast. I had an old Dave Sweet from prior 1965 and have seen others. I think you could call them “root beer” colored. Some were so brown you almost can’t see that famous Dave Sweet logo. An attempt to redo that board might result in something totally different than what it was or is now. If that were the case; it would not be worth doing. Making that board look like new would be an injustice to its character. The only way would be if you had a photo of the original board and put it back “as new”. My ideal would be to have someone recreate the board with a new blank. Then patch and repair the existing board. You would have two boards. One as it was orignally(a recreation). The other being the genuine historical board.
Okay, I see there is a pic on the Swaylocks Home page of the logo. Didn’t realize you had pics there. That is actually a nice, visable logo. I didn’t doubt that it was a Quigg. Just wanted to see how clearly the lam logo could be made out. I stand by my comments about “two” boards though.
The fiberglass fin makes me wonder if the original fin might have been replaced at some time or another. I would have expected an early style wooden fin on that board. Bot then again guys like Quigg and Kivlin were pretty basic when it came to features on their boards. More concerned about ride than the “bells and whistles” that only added to cosmetics.
Haven’t really dove into this board yet… it maybe a wood fin that has been painted. I do agree to change this board would be doing Joe Quigg a disservice.
Just my humble opinion: That board is more valuable to me in its current state than it ever could be if restored. In my eyes its not even worth half as much if you peel it and make it look like a new board. But that’s just me. Fluke glass off restorations.
Paraphrasing the words of Indiana Jones;This board belongs in a museum.
Here’s the thing; by the time you finish doing a skin-off ‘restoration’, with new foam sheeting and whatever else, even in the hands of somebody like Jim Phillips, it’s not gonna be the original board. I kinda doubt it would be possible to get enough information from what’s left to bring it back to what it was. Guesswork at best.
The foam is shot, the glass has delammed to where it would only be a good guess to the original shape. It’s probably warped in every dimension. There’s no ‘there’ there.
What would I do? If I wanted to spend a lot of money, instead of having this board redone like the USS Constellation and it’s so called restoration (look it up), I’d ask Jim or somebody with his skills to take that board and try to make a copy. of it completely from scratch.
If you really want to surf it. It’s a 1960 board. The world has moved on.
They might take it; but it won’t be displayed, especially in that condition. Just stuffed upstairs and never seen again. They did a Quigg exhibition about 6 years ago. Highly unlikely they’ll do another.
