say around 150lbs. I’ve just seen a cheap one
It would certainly allow you to catch the waves and plane faster but I would think that you would have more of a problem putting it on edge in critical situations. Rail to rail it would be more difficult for a lighter person to put a 22" board on edge than a somewhat longer 19" board.
Thats just my opinion and its not an expert one by any means. Maybe one of the guru’s will agree with me or put me straight. Terry
T-bones is correct, of course.
But that may actually depend on what you like in a surfboards performance criteria. If you like thick rails, have no need for duckdiving, can handle the board NOT banking over on command, and really only need paddling and wave catching, then it might work.
Mostly tho, for DOH, it’s better to go longer and narrower/thinner, so you get the paddle speed, and also the control when you are actually up and riding.
Say typical 6’8" x 19" x 2.75 with a 14" tail.
I’ve actually had some really nice medium size wave boards of those dimensions, but mostly with narrower tails, at my 140 lbs. Of course, that was before duckdiving was invented.
For small Pipe boards, I’ve never gone over 12" on the tail width.
Yeah, like leeDD says, also pends on wave type. If the large waves you wanna surf are big fat dumpers with less wall and little vert, it’s probably fine. Like I’ve seen guys ride 12 foot middles at steamer lane on classic longboards. East coast storm surf can get this way. But if you need to turn on a wall at all or get it going in the bottom turn, might want to get a narrower tail. Also look down the rocker and rails. If you see any kind of abrupt change, like hips or accelerated rocker in the tail, it might tend to catch at higher speeds. you want smooth flow.
big guy shortie is relative…
You “could” potentially ride it if the surf is not too steep or too fast. For you, it may plane as fast as a funboard depending on rocker and width. Proceed with caution.
I would think it would be hard to pump down the line on a thicker, wider board.
But, hey, if it’s in good condition and cheap, why not? I figure that if you can sell it for close to or more than you paid, then you have nothing to lose.
Of course, are there big waves in the future where you live?
I’ll tell you what. Having a bigger board in bigger waves is really for paddling. If you can commit a smaller board to a bigger wave, you’ll enjoy more performace. Once riding, it feels great to have that smaller board.
Put it this way, if you showed up at Rincon, and the waves were 12 foot on the face, most guys would be bringing out bigger boards. Not the pros. They would be out on 6,2’s and RIPPING up and down that wave. They have learned to paddle efficiently so that their small boards are like our bigger boards (for paddling), but once up they can go anywhere they want on the wave without getting hungup.
well that was an impressive lineup of responses…
ill agree with everything said by everyone, except maybe leedd id lose 1/4" of thickness on that 6’-8" …
a big guys small wave board will really be a smaller guys smaller wave board…
planeing area is relative to , speed and the weight your putting on it…
the faster you go the less area you want , if you have to much area at high speeds , you get stuck on top of the water…
so if your into riding hovercrafts , then it sounds like a good buy…
its only a good choice if your into smaller soft waves…
regards
BERT
Bert said it right, you will be way on top of the water if this board is a typical big guy tri. Many of these boards are up to and over 3"thick!! I rode a Merrick for a while and at 200lbs the board was way too floaty. Great in smaller surf (room for a little trimming) but a pig when the water gets big and steep. Stewart and a couple of others are making some pretty good ones now. Stewart in particular has a board that is in the 7’4" range with a lot of rocker, killer rails, and single to double concave that makes it paddel long and ride short.
I think at 150 a big guy tri sounds like too much board, but as someone else said, buy it if you can sell it for around the same price.
Have fun either way bro!
ok that’s terrible of me not to give some dimensions. It’s 6’7 x 20 x 2.5 squash. I usually ride a 6’3 x 19 x 2.5.
Might as well give nose and (esp.) tail measurements if you have them, and/or a description of the rails, tail shape and outline, rocker, and any notable features such as bumps, wings, bottom contour…
The problem with reccomending how a board rides is you have to keep it pretty general, because all of these factors, plus all the various rider-input issues, can have pretty profound effects…
That being said, the more info you give, the more the list members will be able to tell you about your board’s performance characteristics.
Also, giving lots of measurements increases the chances that a few senior members will begin to argue about their effects, and spin the thread off into a convoluted discussion about fluid dynamics, advanced composite materials engineering, and string theory, which is often very enlightening and entertaining (grin).
Wells
I don’t think we’ve brought string theory in yet.
Although there are some who keep bringing up the speed of light, to which I almost responded that they were overlooking the curvature of space-time (but, I restrained myself).
Ok string theorists, fire away:
(JUST KIDDING PLEASE DON’T!)
Back on the real topic – I think going up to a 1 inch wider, 4 inch longer board of the same thickness is perfectly reasonable…if its cheap, grab it and see.
Don’t listen to Kieth. He wants to tow in at four foot Swamis.
No I don’t want to surf at Swami’s, too many Kooks there Fairmont.
(I do have a tow-in board though.)
Width would hurt more than thickness.
I’ve ridden 4.5" thick 9’ gun boards.
Easily 3" thick 6’8" x 19 all around boards.
Even some 3" thick 5’6" twinfins.
But for DOH, any tail width approaching 15" is pretty wide to bank over at speed.
Yeah, Cheyne rode the McCoy with that tail (Wiamea), but his riding was pretty butt ugly.