Beveled rails- like or hate?

Funnily enough my other blue planet 8'4 x 28 x 101 l board has that! Hah. So got to experiment with both! Although quite different designs. The blue planet ninja star has a lot more volume in the nose and flatter tail rocker (use a wafer thin tail and tail to hold) where the f-one board has a Chunk of volume in the middle with a narrow now and tail.

Unfortunate by-product of foil boards. They try to achieve the 'look' that is expected by the consumer..........if it looks new AND PROGRESSIVE IT MUST BE GOOD
and its going to not work on a normal board.

So would these be similar to 'step down' rails found on the new flow? It looks like yours are underneath the board opposed to being on top like the flow?

It's to liven up response time on a wave, on a wider than desired board.
If all you want is stability, make the rail full square and blocky.
Just one solution to one problem.

I would think ANY solution would raise other problems.
Bevel thinking is to allow wide standing deck and increased rail to rail ease.
It creates instability for some folks, but also ease in response for others. Who's it for?
Riding a wave or trying to static balance?

I had a talk with George Panton Here on the picture who did chine rails in the early 70' and then gives me on some FB pages some prescriptions about that I want to apply to the SUP shapes. The purpose to follow George's knowledge was to adapt its concept fitting wide boards as SUP can be. The difference with the bevelled rail recently used by Quique or Dabadie is that the bottom shape and rocker shaped by George Panton in end 60' is FLAT compare of the actual SUP rockers. And my conclusion would be that there is more issues coming from rocker rather than rails shape itself. So I think that flat rocker would add some paddling stability and glide while surfing when bevelled rails would add more advantages than issues as does explain George below.

So I paste here what he wrote about and keeping it on a note to design it from, later on Shape3D...

note the flying Saucer its an RPT 6, ' 6 " x 23 x 3 and a single fin .that board allowed me in 1972.to do aerials off the lip about 3 ft high and return to redrop in and continue the wave..really had me stoked grunt less, yet no one even understood my riding crazy style ..so go wide and enjoy the ride..but not at Pipeline or Waimea..fun surf up to 8 ft calif size..coincidently the size most surfers like.

Chine rails..from the flow point of the nose (@15" back to the same point @ 15 " up from the tail and 3/4 " at the widest point of the chine's centre point.) It works on all widths of boards up to 23 " wide..then a softer hard rail works better because the waves those really wide boards ride are 6ft and smaller( great for beginners).

what happens is you make it 3 " thick and 21 wide because the chine reduces the bottom width to 19 1/2 and the actual board thickness to 2 1/2 ..ain't that cool? Watch my video on the chine rail pintail winger done shaping at Ricky T s factory in cocoa by my son Goofyfootgeorge on U tube..where I explain it..you can see the foil, and rocker tail 1 " and nose 2 1/2..bottom fast and flat. at 6,7" add a little of each for larger boards. p.s no 3 fins are necessary. long box far back as possible 8 " fibre filled speed fin to adjust ..board weight should be medium after finished @ 12 lbs..too light is just too scary for even good surfers because it turns so easily that you'll spin out or just fly out of the wave if you do make the turn..also after the turn acceleration is amazing and you'll fall backwards..3 waves and you are supermans.

So my guess of the chine rail making my 28" wide board feel like only 26" wide is accurate! Haha

Haha put it this way.. the board is already an unstable beast with thin nose, thin tail and lots of rocker. Add that to only 28" max width (on the top) and 99l. The chines make it about 25.5" wide on the bottom, with vee in the tail and constantly wanting to roll on to tail (also domed deck). It's got less volume than my 7'2 x 28 hypernut despite being 8'4!

This has certainly been an interesting read. Right on time, as I've been looking over the Hypr Hawaii board bottom design, and wondering about how it all works.

As I remember from SeaBreezer's posts about the TC, TC has a bunch of rockers and a convex double concave all along from Nose to tail... can be that bottom shape and high rocker which make the tippy behaviour, tippy effect is probably not coming mainly from the chines...

I'm kind of intrigued why they'd put them on an 8'4 rockered, thin tailed and heavy concaved 99l board then as it doesn't really fit the 'big wide board, needs help turning' approach.
Kind of used to it now but first session was bloody tippy and I'm a well season supper at 70kg

It would be quite interesting to compare boards with the same shape but the same stability, one being narrow and the other wider but with bevels. In other words: are bevels the better stability/performance compromise?

My - unproven - gut feeling is that it depends on the board speed. As basically water forces are proportional to the square of the water speed, when speed increases the ability for a board for going rail to rail will be much hampered by each extra inch of width, that is moreover far from center and thus with a lot of (counter) leverage, bevelled or not.

This could explain with you see bevels only on slow-moving surfboards, like longboards, and always never on performance boards: at speed reducing the width could be much more productive than bevels. And it may be the opposite on noseriders.