I’ll write a proper post soon,
But for now take a look at these links, I think you might find them quite interesting as I did.
http://www.worldsurfleague.com/posts/119440/toledo-magic-board-2015-oi-rio-pro
http://www.surfermag.com/blogs/design-forum/rode-filipe-toledo/#jFRv2FjxFG7epi77.97
http://www.proctorsurf.com/Surf-Boards/Monsta (scroll down to see rocker tweaks)
LTM
Great STUFF!
Saw Filipe land that (on TV) buiders nightmare.
Knew he buckled it, HA!
Surfer blub
Thanks for the food!
Procter…
Nice, eh…
Gotta Salty Beard myself…
Lower rocker is valid…
See ya
Stay wet
Time for a break
Back shaping after finishing the next little batch of repairs. Low season, so time to think, which is nice.
Hey mattwho, you sound like you are a bit of a local legend in your area. I like your set-up.
Regarding the rails, yes I can see the shape from the photos, and indeed it does look like the HIC Gun style, so the rail kind of has 2 biting points? Positives /negatives? I guess if I’m going to pick a style similar to what I am doing it would be the Californian low, so no as exciting or different as you are doing, but my rails are a safe bet for me at this stage, and for anyone giving the board a feel, it will ‘fit in’ to what they think they know about how rails should feel. Not dismissing your rails if you say they give better performance for your boards I’m not doubting you, but to sell, rightly or wrongly I am playing it safe to ‘fit in’ with ‘normality’. I’d still be keen to hear about the performance and how your rails feel different while surfing.
Yes, lower rocker (nose rocker), it seems all the major shapers are jumping on the bandwagon these days, So I am coming closer to you as regards to overall numbers especially in nose rocker, I think a 1/4 inch reduction could be on the cards in the nose, for me, to take standard performance boards (working from a 6’0’’ template) to around the 4 1/2 - 4 3/4 for someting designed for high performance.
I have been researching everything that I can get my hands, or eyes on. I had a 6’ 0’’ CI cheese stick in for repair the other day, it had been previously snapped and repaired so the rocker measurements might not be 100% correct but nose was Nose 5 1/4 Tail 2 7/16. ‘Flat spot’ in stringer rocker central, or just towards tail very slightly.
Check out the Proctor Rocker on the Mosta, same kind of thing, a plaining area appears to be just the tiniest bit towards the tail in the center?
Unless my eyes are lying to me, Toledos magic board in the photo seems to have a bit of a planing area between the circuit sticker and the monster sticker? obviously without a rocker stick impossible to be sure. Nose Width 12.15’’ Wide !!! and width 18.25’‘, that says to me ‘straight outline’ in the center of the board for speed, narrow right at the tail to maintain bite and hold. Being a 5’8’’ I’d say if the board was scaled up to a 6’0’’ it wouldn’t be far off 5’’ nose rocker? That being said, we are not Felipe toledo, and we probably need to scale back to something slightly more user friendly, a 5’ 8’’ x 18 1/4 would not be the board of choice for us, but we can still learn things from what his equipment is capable of.
One last thing, changing the subject slightly, don’t you get sick of watching review videos of boards that don’t show any backhand surfing? In particular short wide boards can sometimes be really difficult to find videos of backhand surfing, In my opinion its because a lot of them don’t work well backhand.
Also probably getting contraversial here, but a major factor in my opinion is lack of double concave (On very short wide designs) I was taught that a double concave can split the board into two halves and make it ride like a much more narrow board, although the stringer may have to be level or raised sometimes.
Check out this board from Diverse and how well it goes backhand.
http://diversesurf.com.au/board-models-2/performance-shortboards/rm-racing-mullet/
I’d be interested to know your take on any of the above.
Still waiting for more detailed ride reports.
Keep going with the Stoke
LTM
Just jammed with work…
Good things but time consuming.
just ploting new rocker for shits and giggles.
More nose and tail rocker.
Summer sales are on and my capital is in inventory.
tryin’ to turn
a few public worthy test boards
retro fitted with rails that will sell!
LTM
I’ll get back in more detail
Here is a study of rocker, bite and release.
Aloha!
A bit more brain food.
http://www.surfermag.com/blogs/design-forum/what-he-rode-adriano-de-souza/#CIL1FUMWzBidUHJL.97
http://www.surfermag.com/blogs/design-forum/rode-mick-fanning/#hsAr2f5VUCDweBcr.97
http://www.surfermag.com/blogs/design-forum/what-he-rode-gabriel-medina-fiji/#dkJbhyb6sOeg2dei.97
What is surprising me is the Nose widths on these boards, wider up there than expected, I expected most to be under 12’’ - I guess a lot of it is paddle power and having a straight(ish) rail outline in the middle to help for popping airs.
LTM
WoW
Great stuff!!!
GABRIEL MEDINA
HEIGHT: 5’11″ (180 cm)
WEIGHT: 164 lbs (74.4 kg)
SHAPER: Johnny Cabianca
MODEL: DFK
LENGTH: 6’4″
WIDTH: 18 3/4″
THICKNESS: 2 3/8″
VOLUME: 31L
NOSE WIDTH: 12 3/8″
TAIL WIDTH: 13 5/8″
NOSE ROCKER: 5 5/8″
TAIL ROCKER: 2 7/16″
TAIL: Thumb
CONCAVE: Full single throughout
GLASSING: Single 4 oz. bottom, double 4 oz. deck (E-glass)
FINS: FCS Performer II
BASE: 4.48″ (114mm)
DEPTH: 4.67″ (118mm)
AREA: 15.58″² (10054mm²)
SWEEP: 33.7º
FOIL: Inside
Nice stuff,
Remember that is toe poo rocker
Damn heavy stuff.
Sit on the edge and hussel in
Make the drop.
E glass???
Sorry for my slow response
Just slammed at my day job.
Just a quick update my end.
I managed to get my hands on a couple of brand new boards from a highly sponsored local hotshot.
Concaves-super deep. It looks like im still a bit too mild in that department. He has a board with a super deep highly pronoinced double concave for smaller days. Rails absolutely razor sharp near the tail, he said that helps reduce stickyness while launching to the air-makes sense.
Not the usual thing that you see in the rack, but impressive stuff, and I dont think it would be too much for just a half decent surfer to control.
Learning all the time , getting there, I’m going to enjoy making my next few builds!
Eh,
Somethimes “fixing dings” pays off
with a little more that cash
got obe “hot shot” board in now,
part single, part double concave.
Thanks now I under stand.
How deep on the hypo concave.
Photo’s would be helpful…
Sorry, my Last Post… about as clear as mud, I just super stoked at the time. No Photos, No Measurements, Just eyeballing. I’m working with the guy, not for boardbuilding but for some other stuff, but nice to see his boards.
Now, taking some time to think and prepare new designs, and think clearly. Sorcing new blanks to make life easier.
More testing, it looks like my latest board is fast as hell in good waves, but a little sticky in small stuff, thats where a double concave can help, more lift. This one has single concave with the slightest of double, almost un-noticable and un-feelable, it might as well not be there.
In the small stuff paddling in is better than expected, no hang-ups, so thats comforting to know that the entry rocker is not messing too much with flow… but I feel I’m missing my double concave in the smaller stuff, it feels like I have less to push against. Mattwho, you don’t consider double concave for any of your boards? I remember Maurice Cole talking about some his single concaves having a pretty average 1st and 2nd gear, but having crazy speed and hold for 4th and 5th gear.
Don’t give away anything
But what is your story?
On blanks…
Lately I have gotten a lot of tryout of US blanks, here.
Besides being progressive, they will try to bend “outside the box”
Which helps a small timer get closer to those
“Proprietary” rockers the big guys have molds for.
Rocker is a balance
As you no doubt know.
In regards to double concaves.
Took a stab at it as soon as Merrick started the double with chines late in the single fin era.
Lost it as soon as the MR’s twins showed.
Back to it later, much later.
As I quit in 81 and jumped back in in 05.
Started and did nothing but doubles.
Long, short all kinda stuff.
As my head was not influenced by anyone
(Didn’t know of YouTube or Sway’s in those days!!!)
But me,
And again it was flow.
Never did the single first
then double
Which I believe is what goes on.
What I shaped, worked.
How they worked with the rail was my all.
Then, I saw how fast the tow in guys were moving
This led to MC and the “Crook Shack”.
However,
and it is funny, (to me) but, at this moment I am thinking the same as you.
sllight Dbl out to single…
Only on a “less depth”, as.
I have had unreal success with
“Mush busters” here, with totally flat bottoms.
So for my local conditions I will vary
The depth
Of concaves to fit certain conditions.
A “quiver” is required.
Over….
Interesting stuff Mattwho,
Thinking back to a time without tinternet, respect to you guys that were doing your thing and making your boards work with limited outside information.
Now we can see a lot online, choose a board to study, see the concaves and shape specs, then watch a video of some pro ripping on it, those guys can ride anything, but you can still see where the board excells and where it may have limitations.
So in a lot of ways its easier now, but sometimes I suffer from ‘data overload’ haha
New blanks is more a business decision than anything else, Im generally pretty confident about tweaking rocker and hitting the right numbers these days from a limited range of blanks. I have been buying Bennett foam from a local surfshop and then selling them back finished boards. I just need more sizes of blanks to make life easier. So I will be also using millennium foam as well to fill in the gaps, the time saving will offset the extra cost. I have no complaints about Bennett foam, although millennium does look whiter (although I don’t have any problem with the whiteness of Bennett foam)
It will be good to see if there is a difference on how they ride also if there is a difference in flex properties.
Also I’m going to be experimenting with carbon and nylextra, if I’m completely honest its equally for cosmetic purposes as performance, as carbon in certain places can look kinda cool and can sell.
Gotta run for now, I’ll check back in later and I’ll get back to design
LTM
Ok,
I’m back
The Double Concaves, I’m kind of glad that you are now considering them.
To be honest my experience with single concaves is fairly limited, as I mentioned in another post i was raised on double concaves and stuck with them when I started shaping. I have had a few true single concaves that I liked, but from the boards that I have ridden, the doubles still have it for me, (for basic all round shortboard) well, single to double.
the single concaves that I really liked (I think) were all on narrow boards around 18 - 18 1/4 wide (these days I don’t ride anything under 18 3/4 wide.
I’m slightly surprised that my latest board that I made for myself did’nt go better in smaller waves, in bigger, better quality waves its fast as hell, but in smaller mushier surf it feels lacking speed and ‘skim’. So, back to the doubles again for most boards designed for average surf. That board is supposed to be an all-rounder.
Agreed MC’s single concaves look extremely fast with good rail control at those speeds. But on smaller waves where speed needs to be generated by the rider, I’m just not sure.
At the moment I’m taking a week out of the workshop, only 1 pending order, and waiting for the deposit to be paid. So trying to get my sh*t in order for next high season. I’m just a very small player in the surfboard business but looking to go (a bit) bigger.
You mentioned good results for Gutless Mush grovelling with Flat bottoms. I’d be interesed to know what kind of rails you are using for these- are you using hard rails, or do you soften them up for these kind of boards? I’m interested to know more about this. In fact at the moment I’m designing a board like this. the difficult bit is making these boards work backhand.
One thing I’m sure about (my opinion) is that single concaves don’t work on these kinds of boards. Single concaves on those kind of boards in my experience just don’t work backhand- not enough drive. I’m planning on putting deepish double, with the stringer about level with the rail line, obviously low rocker. the double concave will run almost all the way to the nose. i will report back when its been tested,
So, as we move into different boards for better and better conditions the double can decrease, and the single can increase, that is the plan, and of course its nothing new. The difficult bit is getting the right amount, and where to start and stop and blend the concaves.
Just another brainstorm on my direction, feel free to chip in or disagree.
What’s up your end? Current projects?.
This thread is my current favorite. I love a decent thought-provoking conversation without all the evasiveness, posturing, ego stroking etc. that tends to water down the focus. Thanks Matty and LiveTheMoment. At first I didn’t get why this thread was started in E& B, but now I do.
Eh,
Huck!
Welcome, ya see something constructive can exist in the Sin Bid.
All, (as in prior post) are welcome to contribute ONLY positive comments or knowledge.
As sinners will be cursed with “continual drop in” for 7 years.
And a big Mahalo for chiming in…
LTM
Although the distance
And conditions, we are of (eh, somewhat) the same mind.
As I understand you.
Your concaves are starting as single transitioning to double, yeah?
Last “cuttin’ edge” board I fondled
Was double to single.
And that is where two heads are better than one!
And again the similarities are scary.
My shop 80% R&D and 20% custom and shop consignments.
So the funds flow like the tide.
It is summer here and sales are just starting to hit.
And all monies will be spent on the next batch.
I’m really hammering on the Groveler
And this next batch some will have dbl to single.
Maybe a little deeper on a couple.
A coupl’a things
The “Mush Buster” for me was given up by Greg Griffin.
Of whom I feel is wise and respect.
Shit he earned it.
GG’s “Felix” became the base of a Mini Sim Killer
here is a build treat of the first “Fangs”
http://www.swaylocks.com/forums/gg-inspired-fang
And they work unreal, I mean it…
BTW, don’t think I’ll live long enough or be lucky enough to get a CNC machine!
Check out www.mattysurfboards.com
Under short boards got some pix and video.
Sorry the “Fang” video was poor GoPro quality.
Oh last of 3 tuned for a little more that mush.
Maybe worth a look.
Made a board for “The Spring Board Challenge” SBC
“The Contender” a 7-0 mini LB
Single concave quad.
A ripper!
And last.
I have used Millennium foam.
For me I loved the consistancy
The foam I used was “blue” my stupid option?
Very, Very nice high quality.
I prefer the US stuff as I use the lightest (orange)
For 6-4 under, eh, they won’t blow beyond that, yet!
Funny how the Clark guys fell.
Ha! Kinda like the German scientists at the end of WWII.
Kinda thinkin’ if you can get Millennium
US should follow suit.
Eh just sayin’
I can order on Monday pick up on Thursday
and yep I am damn lucky!
Over.
Great stuff,
And Inspirational as always. And your page is getting better and better- I know it takes a surprisingly high amount of work and time to get a decent webpage up and running with videos etc.
The Fang looks great, and very marketable too.
Yes, for me the Single to Double Concave has always been as standard. i have heard of boards having this ‘exhaust pipe’ that you speak of (double to single). I can’t remember where I saw it now, perhaps you could PM me and tell me of what board you saw it on so I can check it out. In your opinion how do they ride and handle compared to the traditional single to double, I’m really interested to know.
Millennium foam, yes, i’m looking forward to getting my hands of some, but for the surfshop I need to mostly keep using their blanks, part of the deal. US Blanks are here, but too expensive, but from what I have heard I should be more than happy with millennium.
I heard that rather than falling, Clark Foam just stopped production and walked away, after business was made difficult by health and safety regulations etc. I remember at the time the big increases in surfboard prices due to the shortage of Blanks.
I have 4 days of ‘product testing’ , and I have some crazy ideas for the testing process, its pretty unconventional, I’ll update you on this if it works as intended. If not I will probably just not mention it again and pretend I never said anything. - haha
LTM
Oh my!
What a revelation!
I am an old fool!
Yeah don’t know what I was feelin’.
No excuses, I am flat ass wrong.
Grateful.
I don’t have any foam around
Or, I could have really screwed up.
Check this link out http://www.robertssurf.com/el-tormentor.html
Maybe just what the DR. ordered.
And no worries! Roberts has more than paid his dues.
Just doesn’t give up too much info, so i feel we are safe snooping.
Tell me your take on depth (of concaves) and rocker.
BTW,
“How the Clark guys fell”
Was alluding to how they wound up at Millennium, US and etc.
Ahh, yes. The Clark crew- I heard that they didn’t let their knowledge go to waste after the doors closed. All going on in your neck of the woods, so you must have heard a lot more of what was going on than me.
Well, no worries. I think Tomo is doing quad concaves now, another shaper I think has done/doing triple concaves, I can’t remember who, Possibly Diverse surfboards? I remember the term exhast pipe that was used somewhere for describing the water flow out the back. On a side note ‘Feral Daves’ boards are some of the best in the world IMO, I rode some of his boards in OZ and Indo, fantastic boards- Excelled in everything I surfed.
Perhaps some interesting news, I guess that I’m going to sound pretty weird when this is read, I couldnt help thinking how the test board (the latest board that I keep talking about) would go with a double concave, so, what i did was put a bead of wax down the stringerline, and then moulded it into a double concave ridge, smoothed it as best i could and then covered it with some stickers to give a smoother finish. (the stringer level is still under the rail line)
Hey presto - Double concave and slight vee added to the tail… well ok I know it couldnt be any cruder, and I tried to mess with the rocker as little as possible.
Genius, or utter stupidity?- you decide. I feel kinda stupid and open to getting shot-down talking about this stuff.
BUT…
After a test ride, the board is riding different, no turbo lag at low speeds, zips along much better on flat or slow sections, and feels more responsive. I wanted to take the double concave further up the board, but I ran out of stickers! I’ll extend it further tomorrow. OK, I understand that its a ridiculously crude way of doing it, but its testing two different types of concaves on the exact same board has some merit IMO,. Jeez I feel ridiculous talking about this on a public website, but now its out there. I plan to experiment with some rail bumps too using this ‘method’ . Maybe I need to get out more.
On another note, I will change the rocker slightly on my next board, I am nit-picking now, but I am moving closer to your tail rocker of more kick in the tail which means very slightly less curve further up. The reason being that I don’t want that back area for planing purposes, I want that for turning, and it felt like I was planing a bit too much back there which is great for speed, but less good for quick direction changes, trying to get the balance right.
Concaves, I think nothing wrong with going deep, as mentioned previously, I had always played it safe with shallow concaves- less to ponentially go wrong, but that attitude wont take me to the next level. Loads of top shapers are going pretty deep these days. I still don’t have this figured out how far to take it, and more experimenting needed.
Also Rocker, I feel my overall nose and tail numbers are working ok, Obviously it changes dependant on board length, but these are what I generally work from for a performance shortboard. but i am still trying to work out the very best way to get to those numbers.
Ok, I’ll sign off for now, i have been posting a lot here lately and I don’t want to wear out my welcome.
But, I’ll check back in soon.
LTM
LTM - note this fin designers methodology…
Shear genius!
Funny, as I have been considering “Bondo” or body filler to tune a failure I made.
Loaned it to some wakeboarders who reported “worked great”
Ah once they pushed forward.
#2, from 2013 and parabolic.
#1 charcoal tint
#3 grey w/ color
Dug it out this morning after reading your post.
Hilarious!
Single to Dbl!#
I can feel the faults,
Gonna use filler coat and flow it out.
Thanks for the inspiration!
Now deep…
How deep?
Weber (photo)?
No one out here is going that far.
I gave up on deep as#3 worked well.
Maybe JUST maybe HA!
I’m the dipshit that failed
Reconsidering big to time!
Over.
https://swaylocks7stage.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/#1%20(1)_3.jpg
https://swaylocks7stage.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/#2.jpg
https://swaylocks7stage.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/#3.jpg
