I have (had) boards that work well toe-side (front side), and work well heel-side(back side). BUT, I have had boards that worked very well heel-side, especially for tube riding, and did not work well toe-side (although they worked well off the toes for snaps/cutbacks going back side, and were ok for cutbacks going front side). The boards that work well both ways seem to be narrower and thinner in the tails. The boards that worked so well off the heel-side were wider-thicker tailed boxier railed boards. I am using the toe/heel side analogy from snowboarding as I feel it relates to the relative strength I have to control the board.
My supposition: I don’t have the toe-side strength to put the wider-thicker-tailed-boxier-railed boards on rail and then control it, but I do on the heel-side.
My question: Why does the wider-thicker-tailed-boxier-railed board seem to ride the tube so much better on the heel side?
Thanks for sharing any questions, comments, concerns, and/or burning desires you may have. Peace to all, Taylor E. Olson.
well, given that the board is symmetrical…it isn’t so much how the board rides the tube as it is how you ride the board. i don’t know for certain, but as pure speculation i would imagine that it has something to do with the range of motion to have from being able to bend your knee off your back foot so much more when you are riding front side than you do backside. when turning off your toe, you probably lean into it more and are actually pushing the board away and down with your back foot as you turn…whereas when you are riding backside, you should have more of a tendency to turn off the rail rather than really digging into it.
as for why the narrower boards let you go both ways easily with nice, smooth cutbacks and whatnot…less surface area generally translates to more maneuverability.
(just a theory…i’m probably wrong)
Brandon - thanks for replying. What I am trying to get at is, I ride both boards the same, as much as is possible, but the one rides/works/stalls-holds much better back side in the tube than the other, and I am hoping those with more understanding than myself might have some hydrodynamic explanation that I am missing; such as box rails suck in better with the heavy heel pressure, etc. Thanks, Taylor
You have more power off your heels, so you can control the boxier floatier board better, and with your toes its easier to sink a thinner rail.
Deathfrog - thanks for the reply. Why do you think, or do you think, boxier rails are better for tube riding, providing one can apply the neccessary force to sink and hold the rail? Taylor
Quote:
Brandon - thanks for replying. What I am trying to get at is, I ride both boards the same, as much as is possible, but the one rides/works/stalls-holds much better back side in the tube than the other, and I am hoping those with more understanding than myself might have some hydrodynamic explanation that I am missing; such as box rails suck in better with the heavy heel pressure, etc. Thanks, Taylor
You’re focussing on the rails…
Why not give a complete pic of the boards. Planshape differences, rocker differences, tail shapes, fin positions, and some better idea of the rail shape than “boxy” vs “thinner”?
Part of the problem is I don’t remember one of the boards to well, as it was stolen 20 years ago. It was a wide tail @ 14-15", not to much rocker, double winger swallow tail, I have no idea if the bottom had any contours beyond V in the tail, and the best way I can describe the rails is - think early 80’s twin/tri say 80/20, 90/10, and around 2 3/4" thick. But the other is a single fin, back of fin @ 7" from tail, with deep channels and big 1 1/2" wings which the channels came out of creating 1/2" deep “bites” - The board was about 3 3/4" thick with @ 20/80 beveled rails.
I guess I am wondering if I had two boards where all things were equal, but one was thicker through the tail, about 3/8" with @ 25/75 rails, and not much “edge” - say the other was 15/85 in the tail w/sharp edges, and the 3/8" thinner - would the thicker “softer” board ride the tube better back side? I don’t know exactly where I am going, without thinking about asymmetry, but the thread the other day is leading me away from that discussion. I am trying to see if anyone feels there is (are) a key ingredient(s) to better backside tube riding boards. Sorry for the rambling post. Trying to think things out before I commit it to foam and glass… Alas, if I had more resources, I’d just try out different designs, but… Well, I am sure many of you can relate.
Thanks for the time and consideration - Taylor