164 posts
Hi thegreatsup.
In answer to your question about my current setup, it uses two reshaped 3.5" quad rears that are foiled on one side to create lift into the wave face, unlike centre fins that are foiled equally on both sides to aid in tracking. One of my main goals is to minimize the distance between the front pivot fins and any fins behind them, often referred to as shortening the fin cluster. Lengthening a fin cluster has the same effect on stiffening a board as putting in larger rear fins. You can feel this effect by moving a centre fin back and forth if you have a center US box like on your Spitfire. Moving the centre fin forward shortens the fin cluster and loosens the board, and moving the centre fin back increases the length of the fin cluster and aids in drive and tracking. My Futures centre fin-box, which doesn't allow any fin movement, is further back than my quad rear boxes so a centre fin would increase the length of the fin-cluster triangle and stiffen the board. Also, centre boxes always run straight forward which aids in tracking and resists turning. My quad rear boxes are just barely behind the front boxes, so close that the front of the rear box lines up with the back of the front box. This keeps the fin cluster very tight which aids turning and reduces tracking. Also, my quad rear boxes are toed in at the same angle as the front fins so they reinforce the turning power of toe-in and direct water flow between the fins.
In looking at the rear quad boxes on the Spitfire, they are completely different than the arrangement on Sunovas. The Spitfire rears are much further back which lengthens the fin cluster by a lot. There is a name for that quad setup but I can't think of it right now. In my view of the world, this long fin cluster would stiffen the board and create a lot of drive, compared to front and rear quads that are close together and work together to direct water flow.
I think your analysis was right. With the long fin cluster in the Spitfire quads, you would have to move your rear foot well behind the front fins for your foot to be over the center of the fin cluster. If your foot was back there, I think that quad setup would turn fine and have a ton of drive due to the long fin cluster. Of course, with the rears that far back, the size of the rears would have even more effect.
Hope that makes sense.
164 posts
Before someone busts me on using the word pivot to describe turning, I view turning in two categories; carving and pivoting. Carving is mostly about the rails and pivoting is mostly about the fins. With a longboard design, the long rails are fairly straight and do not facilitate carving short arcs, so for tight turns, the surfer usually steps back over the fin(s) to make tight pivot turns off the tail. Shortboard designs, which can include some SUPs up to 9' or more, have very curvy rail outlines that do facilitate carving short turns..
When carving, I think of driving forward to engage the whole rail at the start of bottom turns, but if I want to hook the end of the turn vertically back up to the lip, that end of the turn is much more pivotal and that is where I really feel the positive or negative affects of the fins. The same is true of cutbacks. If I want to fully carve a nice roundhouse, I think more of using the rails. If I want to make a real snappy cutback, that is more about the fins and how they are helping or hurting that tight pivot.
While there is often some blend of carving and pivoting in our turns, I think its useful to note the difference between the role of the fins and the role of the rails.
164 posts
I will add some thoughts, with the caveat that my fin experimentation is always an amateur work in progress.
Fin placement- My theory is that fin placement needs to be relative to where your rear foot is when you are surfing. Most of the fin commentaries are related to shortboards where the rear foot is right back against the kicker. For best turning performance on my SUPs, I like to feel that the pivot point of the board is right under my rear foot which is seldom against the kicker on my 8'10" and 9'1" Ghosts. I like to ride with my rear foot directly over the front fins and the wingers along the rail line which work together to create a pivot point. This works great due to Bert's idea of moving the fins and wingers forward to fit better on longer boards.
In a true thruster setup where all three fins are the same size, the pivot point is the center of the triangle which would be too far back on my boards. Using a smaller trailing fin moves the pivot point closer to the front fins but there is still going to be that triangle effect. In a twin fin setup on a shortboard, both fins are moved back to approximate the same pivot point as the center of the triangle of a thruster, but this requires having the rear foot right back against the kick pad, once again a no go for me on my length of boards. To get the twin fin pivot point under my rear foot, the front boxes on the Ghost are perfect so I would not want to use fins designed to move the turning point further back.
Now the challenge is how to keep the pivot point where it is, and create a little more drive and hold on larger/steeper waves, without going back to the triangle problem. This is where the quad rear boxes might come in. Some quads have the rear boxes back near where a thruster center fin would be, and fairly centered away from the rails like we see in the photos of the Smik Spitfire This would seem to create a triangle effect similar to a thruster, but with two trailing fins instead of one which works great as long as the rear foot is back over the center of the quads. The other quad design puts the rear boxes right behind the front boxes and out on the rail. In this design that Bert uses, the rears are intended to work in conjunction with the fronts without creating the triangle effect. When combined, this puts a lot of base area in one place, which is why quads are often thought of as being harder to go vertical. My theory is to go with tiny (3.5"?) rears to provide some drive without creating the triangle effect of pulling the pivot point back. As far as size, when running as a thruster or quad, I use 4.75", or even 4.5" fronts. For my current experiments, I am running the Sunova 105 5" fronts with NVS Album Fascination 3.95" quad rears which I have reshaped down to 3.5" along with shortening the chord and tip rake. These rears arrive with very little rake which helps to keep the pivot point up at the front fins in order to get close to that twin fin feel with a subtle hint of quad drive.
Just for another perspective on this foot over fin area concept, on my wavesailing boards which are all around 7'5", I have my rear footstrap right back against the kicker about 6" off the tail, and I run an 8" fin right under the rear half of the strap, with 3.5" side-bites near the front of the strap in a very tight triangle so the pivot point is directly under my rear foot which, along with fin area and cluster spread, I think is key for all fin setups.
164 posts
I have been playing with a different route towards the same goal. If I run my Ghost as a twin, it is nice and loose but can get a little squirrelly in bigger surf. Putting in a trailing fin helps with that, but sometimes stiffens the board up more than I want, even with a small 3.5 inch. I think this is more noticeable because the center box is well behind the front fins with no way to slide it forward.
My idea is to use twin front fins, with tiny rear fins set up as a quad. Quads are often thought of as being fast but sometimes stiffer, but if we make the rear fins small enough, (3.5"?), that should loosen the quads up a lot. Having the quad rear boxes further forward than the center box should make it easier to turn around those front fins. I like the idea of having those two fins right on the rail when dropping in across the top of a steep hollow wave where a small center fin may not be in the water.
As always, this is still a work in progress as I gradually sand down the rear quads, but so far I am liking it.
164 posts
Great report. Fin experimentation is so much fun, and at times confusing as the conditions change.
164 posts
I agree with thegreatsup. If you are looking to get a new board, I think there are some much better options out there, like the two he mentioned. I have a similar background to you; 75yo, 75kg, first surfed in 1959, surfed regularly since the early 70s, and got into SUP surf about 12 years ago. My first board was the Fanatic Allwave 8'11" and then quickly moved to the 8'6" Allwave you have. You are correct about the boxy rails being a big part of the performance limitations of the old Allwaves. While the 2013 Allwaves did have thinner rails, Fanatic still designed it as a beginner/low intermediate board. With your surfing experience, I think you would gain a lot more by going to more high-performance designs that still offer the stability you are looking for. I have owned six different boards since the Allwaves and all of them were big step ups in performance. After the six boards I progressed through, and after demoing many more, my current favorite is the Sunova Ghost that thegreatsup mentioned. For my age and background, the 8'10" x 31.5" @ 137.8lts is a perfect blend of performance and ease of use.
164 posts
Something to keep in mind if you do end up cutting the mast. Masts are reinforced at the bottom and at the boom area. If your boom height puts you outside that reinforced area after you cut the mast, be prepared for a quickly broken mast. If your cut puts the base in an unreinforced area, same concern.
164 posts
Never heard of the brand, so that might be a gamble. The specs sound like what you are looking for, the description of the construction sounds reasonable if it is true, and the price is right if you are willing to gamble on the brand and shaper.
164 posts
I agree with Mark and would try again at getting the base out. My first suggestion would be to clamp a boom tightly onto the usual boom reinforcement area to use as a long lever arm for twisting. Then set up some sort of twisting lever arm for the base. If your base has the two push-pin system, get a long posi-drive screwdriver and insert it through the two holes so you can use one hand on each end of the screw driver. You could then try to add some penetrating lubricant like WD-40. Don't try to pull the base out at first until you have used the lever arms to twist it free. Worth a try before you move on to cutting the mast.
164 posts
My favorite quad rears are the Album Fascination rears from NVS. The are just under 4 inches, but importantly they have less rake than almost any other rears, so you don't get too much fin area behind your fronts. The guys at NVS are very helpful so they will send you any mixed sets or parts of sets you like. Very good quality fins made out or G10 material.
164 posts
Yes, a shorter board will turn much easier on a wave, and when you are trying to position for a wave. You are smart to shop for a used board for now while you develop your skills and figure out exactly what you are looking for in your SUP riding.
Based on what you wrote, I think you might look for something around 9' to 9'3" X 31.5" to 32" wide. A common tool is to figure out the liters by using the 'Guild factor' which uses your weight in kg times a number corresponding to your skill level. According to Whitney Guild who developed this commonly accepted system, a beginner would use a Guild factor of 2 which would put you at 172 liters like your current board. Guild suggested a factor of 1.7 for intermediates which would put you at 146 liters. I think something between 145 and 160 liters might be a good next step for you. You could go lower or higher depending on how glassy or choppy the conditions you ride in.
If you are looking for glide in smaller waves, look for a board that does not have too much rocker and has hard rails in the rear. Just for a reference, something like the Sunova Ghost in a 9'1" X 32" @150 liters might be pretty ideal for you since it is designed for maximum speed and glide in small to medium surf.
The fins will make a huge difference in how a board turns on a wave and how easily it pivots to position for a wave. You might try 4.75" to 5" front fins and around 4" in the rear to make turning and pivoting easier.
You might already know this, but here are some hints for turning to position for a wave. If you are standing in a side-by-side stance, it will be very hard to pivot the board around. For quicker pivoting, switch into more of a surf stance with your back foot reaching back towards the tail which you can use to drive the tail around quickly to line up for a wave. The wider you can sweep the paddle out will help a lot. Developing a cross-bow stroke is also a great skill for quickly maneuvering around the line-up.
Hope this helps.
164 posts
A solution I have found works great is to use the u-shaped strips designed to fit around car doors to prevent dinging other vehicles parked next to them. I have been using this for about 10 years and have not seen any serious paddle marks on my boards. I had tried the electical tape, but the door guards offer much better protection and last forever. I could see an argument against using this on race paddles, but I have used this on paddles for surf and for downwinding without feeling any compromise. As Colas pointed out, this also prevents deck damage when using the paddle as a standing aid and prevents any paddle blade damage from shallow ocks or reefs.
164 posts
Hi London, I am not sure how much relevant advice I can offer since I only weigh 75 kg. My stability issues relate to being 75 years-old, multiple joint replacements, multiple concussions, and double vision due to a shattered eye socket from a surfing injury in Costa Rica.
I get to surf about 15 days a month in waist to head-high+ surf. Big wind chop or a lot of cross-rollers mess with my balance and ability to get back to my feet which motivated me to get a bigger board for rougher conditions. Since I love the Ghost so much, I just added the next size up.
My 8'10" Ghost is my favorite board from the dozen+ boards I have owned or ridden. My new 9'1" gives me just enough extra stability to handle more wind chop when I need to. I would guess you would experience a similar relationship between the 9'1" and the 9'3". If you are looking for more performance in good quality surf, I think I would encourage you to go with the 9'1". If you are looking to just enjoy yourself in 1-3' mushy surf, the 9'3" might make that easier.
For more and better advice on which size Ghost to get, I would suggest contacting Rick Weeks (supthecreek) on Seabreeze. He is closer to your weight, and helped design the Ghosts and owns many sizes. He loves to do deep dives in helping people figure out what board might be the best fit for them. I think Rick gives better "real world" advice compared to younger stronger surfers who seem to always advise smaller boards than many people should own.
Happy surfing.
164 posts
For the past year, I have been loving my 8'10"Ghost which I bought at age 74 to replace my beloved 8'8" SP25, which a few years ago replaced my beloved 8'7" Flow V1. As I get older with more injuries and replacement parts, I find that I like to add a little volume every few years to keep the wave count and enjoyment level up. On the really wonky days on the 8'10" Ghost with big chop and cross-rollers, I sometimes have to give up when friends my age on bigger boards are able to hang in there. That motivated me to buy a 9'1" Ghost just to be able to stay out longer on those wonky days. After a couple of weeks of comparisons, here are the differences I have found between those two sizes of the Ghost, none of which are very surprising.
1. The 8'10 is a faster paddler due to being narrower. The width of the 9'1" pushes more water which slows it down and makes paddling more work. When riding a non-breaking roller into the beach, the 9'1" will drop off the plane sooner when it starts to slow down and push more water. 2. When in wonky water conditions, the 8'10" requires a lot of leg twitches and paddle action when standing still, when the 9'1" feels stable as a dock which means it accomplishes my goal of getting it to stay out longer on wonky days. 3. Both are excellent wave catchers, even on the tiniest one foot waves. More similar than I expected. 4. Once planing, the 9'1" is faster and more fun on knee high waves due to the wider tail providing more sustained speed while staying back on the tail for maneuvers. The 8'10" is faster and a lot more reactive on waist high or bigger waves which makes it a lot more fun in that size and up. 5. In chest high or bigger, the 8'10" handles later drops a lot better. The 9'1" prefers to catch waves earlier which it is good at. 6. Both boards will crank impressive bottom turns, but the 8'10" feels quicker and snappier. Cutbacks on the 9'1" feel sluggish compared to the quick response of the 8'10". The 8'10" generates a lot more speed from pumping down the line. 7. The biggest surprise was going out through whitewater or pitching waves. For this, I prefer boards with narrower noses that will punch through the wave rather than wanting to climb sharply up and over. The SP25 was great at this because of the very pointy nose. The 8'10" does a decent job of punching through, but the 9'1" lurches up and over everything which throws me off the board going out over whitewater or pitching waves that would be no problem on my other boards (the 9'1" is the biggest boards I have ever owned.)
The bottom line is that my new 9'1" is now my preferred board for knee-high surf or wonky conditions. The 8'10" wins in all other situations due to much quicker and more reactive performance on the wave, and faster/easier paddling speed. As I said, no big surprises (other than the problem with paddling the 9'1" out through whitewater or pitching waves which woud probably be less of an issue if I had more weight to hold the board from flying up in the air.)
