I'm in the market for a freerace board. I owned a Goya Bolt and sold it, at a massive loss, because it easily sustained damage from the mast/mast extension hitting the deck. The problem was caused by the recessed deck and, indeed, seems to be commonplace with the board. Do all modern freerace boards suffer the same problem and has anyone found a good way to prevent it?
I still have my 2019 Bolt 135, have reviewed it here and what I did to deal with the recessed deck. Patrick makes a freerace board that has a flat deck. My solution was to use a 3/4" mast base shim (needed longer screw of course) and also added deck padding along the ridge. That solved that problem and several others, see my post under General for pics of the new paint job "Goya Bolt board Black to White" and what the deck pads did for me.
Thanks for your response. It's absolutely crazy that you had to go those lengths to stop the board getting damaged from normal use. If I buy a bike, I don't expect to have to fabricate protective bodges just so I can use the thing as advertised.
It's just another way board manufactures make sure that boards don't last long enough to become second hand
Well maybe it is called the Bolt Pro for a reason, they expect a pro level rider to use it and then they would not be letting the mast hit the board? Mine got a couple of small dents before I covered it up. But I was concerned that could be an issue and so asked the sales guy by email if the mast would dent the deck, never got a response. And when I got it I checked it in the living room using a mast extension and it seemed okay, problem is when the board is on the water and the sail/mast top is in the water while the board rocks on a wave. That can happen while positioning the board/sail when getting ready to get on the board, or when sitting on the board while taking a break out on the water, guess a pro would not do that!
Select to expand quotedohertpk said..
I'm in the market for a freerace board. I owned a Goya Bolt and sold it, at a massive loss, because it easily sustained damage from the mast/mast extension hitting the deck. The problem was caused by the recessed deck and, indeed, seems to be commonplace with the board. Do all modern freerace boards suffer the same problem and has anyone found a good way to prevent it?
There is nothing about a recessed deck that makes a board more fragile. The point of contact between mast and hull is still somewhere on the rails, flat or concave deck not withstanding. And if you had a (heavily) convex deck, you'd hit the deck and dent that! Anything will dent if the hit is strong enough (or maybe you brake the mast!), or the hull is not built to be hit by a mast after a catapult.
Anyway, If you catapult frequently get a Surfbent surfbent.de/home.html
Select to expand quoteduzzi said..dohertpk said..
I'm in the market for a freerace board. I owned a Goya Bolt and sold it, at a massive loss, because it easily sustained damage from the mast/mast extension hitting the deck. The problem was caused by the recessed deck and, indeed, seems to be commonplace with the board. Do all modern freerace boards suffer the same problem and has anyone found a good way to prevent it?
There is nothing about a recessed deck that makes a board more fragile. The point of contact between mast and hull is still somewhere on the rails. And rails will dent if the hit is strong enough or the hull is not built to be hit by a mast after a catapult.
If you catapult frequently get a Surfbent surfbent.de/home.html
The thing is not about catapulting the front of the board , it is the damage done opposite the mast track . When climbing onto a board to uphaul , a sunken deck puts much more pressure on the side rails when the sail is in the water . I've seen lots of boards suffer because of this . The manufacturers know its happening . Why don't they simply reinforce the area ? Problem solved .
Select to expand quoteImax1 said..duzzi said..dohertpk said..
I'm in the market for a freerace board. I owned a Goya Bolt and sold it, at a massive loss, because it easily sustained damage from the mast/mast extension hitting the deck. The problem was caused by the recessed deck and, indeed, seems to be commonplace with the board. Do all modern freerace boards suffer the same problem and has anyone found a good way to prevent it?
There is nothing about a recessed deck that makes a board more fragile. The point of contact between mast and hull is still somewhere on the rails. And rails will dent if the hit is strong enough or the hull is not built to be hit by a mast after a catapult.
If you catapult frequently get a Surfbent surfbent.de/home.html
The thing is not about catapulting the front of the board , it is the damage done opposite the mast track . When climbing onto a board to uphaul , a sunken deck puts much more pressure on the side rails when the sail is in the water . I've seen lots of boards suffer because of this . The manufacturers know its happening . Why don't they simply reinforce the area ? Problem solved .
I have, or have had, slalom boards with slightly convex, basically flat, or concave (i.e. scooped out) decks. To me it looks like the mast at rest in the water hits pretty much the same spot with all of them. Somewhere on the rail depending on mast orientation.
And I might be missing something but I am not sure how you can damage a board without a catapult or serious fall of sort that bring the hull in violent contact with the mast. Unless the board is not meant to be used by a beginner. The only board that ever suffered damage in my hands because of a minor hit has been a 6 Kg 270x72 Mike's Lab course slalom eggshell. Old style convex hull, single sandwich carbon layer top and bottom. (Incredible pick up in light air)
That surfbent does protect the board very well. The problem is the material around the tack of the sail (maybe neoprene on Serverne sails) gets ripped up quickly on contact with the surfbent. So pristine board but damaged sails makes it a difficult choice. One solution may be to keep the neoprene folded up and out of the way.
Select to expand quoteImax1 said..duzzi said..dohertpk said..
I'm in the market for a freerace board. I owned a Goya Bolt and sold it, at a massive loss, because it easily sustained damage from the mast/mast extension hitting the deck. The problem was caused by the recessed deck and, indeed, seems to be commonplace with the board. Do all modern freerace boards suffer the same problem and has anyone found a good way to prevent it?
There is nothing about a recessed deck that makes a board more fragile. The point of contact between mast and hull is still somewhere on the rails. And rails will dent if the hit is strong enough or the hull is not built to be hit by a mast after a catapult.
If you catapult frequently get a Surfbent surfbent.de/home.html
The thing is not about catapulting the front of the board , it is the damage done opposite the mast track . When climbing onto a board to uphaul , a sunken deck puts much more pressure on the side rails when the sail is in the water . I've seen lots of boards suffer because of this . The manufacturers know its happening . Why don't they simply reinforce the area ? Problem solved .
Most of them do !
If the deck is recessed around the mast track, then the mast is bound to hit the edge earlier.
The 1st 2 posts were Goya boards, I have seen this on Fanatics, but there are more Fanatic boards around here.
Something else to check is the thickness of the mast pad on the sail. Some look really thin to me.
Is there a pinlock on the extension collar which might damage the board?
If you sail on flat water then you are unlikely to get an issue. If you have to launch in a shorebreak, sit on your board for a rest on choppy seas, you are more likely to get this damage.
On their 2020 Carve, Starboard had their "Anti Gravity System". Basically the mast track was sunk into the board in a very small diameter recess. They dropped this for 2021, and now have the scooped out deck. This is on an intermediate's board. Surely a flat deck is easier for them. 55 seconds into the video.
A friend has a similar recess on his Tabou foilboard, and the corners of the recess split. He thinks it was because of the handle on his Duotone winch extension hitting it.
Would a higher mast base help? some mast bases(tendons) are a lot shorter than in the past.
Never had this problem with any Goya Bolt I had, of course when you are catapulted you need to take care not to crash into the board, which can damage any board. Suggest if anyone is concerned they need one of these, "Peter Pads" ( think named after Peter Cabrinha in the 80s) but even then boom impacts can damage the board so there is no real cure all and it is just a hazard of use: www.surfsailaustralia.com.au/product/chinook-mast-base-pad
^^^ agreed, there seems to be a bit of brand bashing here when this board has no more exposure to the mast (due to shape) than other freeride-slalom etc boards, and I doubt the construction is much different.
My experience of Goya wave and FSW is much better construction than many. And like Hoops says, most manufacturers do put a patch along that ridge. I very much doubt they made a crap freeride board.
The problem is perhaps those who are going from a battleship heavy build learner or first freeride with AST / ABS blah blah skin, and getting first proper lightweight hi performance board and they're whinging about damage.
You will damage your boards. That's it. Accept it. Now if you're getting heel dents in 6mths with one brand and not on others.... that's worth whining about. Or fin boxes crack with normal use, or delam in a year, etc etc.
As to the bike analogy that's ridiculous. If you rode a bike and periodically banged it with a stick, the Kmart one would be fine. The carbon one at some stage would not be fine.
A F1 car is buggered in 1000km. Your car goes 300,000km.
BTW I'm not associated with Goya, I just get to see the insides. I also like to tryand speak the voice of reason, one guy here has pushed a barrow re: the ridges denting and now its a thing...."known issue" the OP says.... due to the one guy here who sooked about it repeatedly? hmmmmmm
Gestalt is correct.
Contrary to what IMAX says, none of the brands make boards with inbuilt obsolescence.
The damage to boards with concave decks as opposed to flat decks is pretty much bugger all. Cheers, Hoops
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
My experience of Goya wave and FSW is much better construction than many. And like Hoops says, most manufacturers do put a patch along that ridge. I very much doubt they made a crap freeride board.
BTW I'm not associated with Goya, I just get to see the insides. I also like to tryand speak the voice of reason, one guy here has pushed a barrow re: the ridges denting and now its a thing...."known issue" the OP says.... due to the one guy here who sooked about it repeatedly? hmmmmmm
I first noticed dents in the ridge a few years ago when recessed decks became a thing. They werent present on all boards, maybe some owners were a bit harder on kit than others. It was I havent really looked at recent boards, but maybe the brands have listened to feedback ( I certainly discussed it with a local rep) and beefed up that area.
I'm thinking of replacing my mid sized board, and the Goya Carrera is currently top of the wish list. I briefly had a Goya One and the construction seemed fine. Pads were a bit hard though.
I have two goya slalom boards proton and proton pro. I have only had them for one season and no problems yet. I don't uphaul much. Mostly I worry about slamming the mast on the nose when I flip my race sail when water starting (no damage yet).
I would be bummed if my new board was suffering damage for what I thought was benign use, though.
Select to expand quoteMr Hooper said..
Gestalt is correct.
Contrary to what IMAX says, none of the brands make boards with inbuilt obsolescence.
The damage to boards with concave decks as opposed to flat decks is pretty much bugger all. Cheers, Hoops
To be fair to the manufacturers , I don't believe they have a built in time bomb to self destruct after warranty . It just seems that way . I definitely have noticed newer boards are not built for long life . I am not a board builder but I have fixed many and can say that newer boards fail in all areas more than older ones mainly due to weight saving and dodgy build . I tend to see more board fails compared to crash damage repairs ratio , the newer the boards . I only deal with what goes wrong with boards and am probably developing a grumpy old man syndrome , not a fair representation to what are nice boards . I really shouldn't blame the manufacturers because it's the consumer that wants the lightest product at the expense of long life . It's these customers who pay their hard earned money and they should get what they want . I suppose I'm old fashioned and I like to see a board last so it can be a , "hand me down ", to someone who can't afford a new board .
It is a forum , and only my opinion.
At times , you just have to ignore me ,
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
You will damage your boards. That's it. Accept it.
Yep, every dent scrape and hole are badges of honour. If you sail hard and sail often your gear will look like crap. It's a good thing. My boards look like garbage. 
A mast pad will prevent rail dents. www.surfsailaustralia.com.au/product/chinook-mast-base-pad
Select to expand quotethedoor said..
I have two goya slalom boards proton and proton pro. I have only had them for one season and no problems yet. I don't uphaul much. Mostly I worry about slamming the mast on the nose when I flip my race sail when water starting (no damage yet).
I would be bummed if my new board was suffering damage for what I thought was benign use, though.
the damage to the ridge running around the Goya Bolt 135 deck is not obvious because when the mast hits it the eps underneath gets crushed BUT due to the outward curved cross section of the ridge the carbon deck pops back out leaving a gap between the deck and the eps underneath. Take it out on a hot day and after letting the sun hit the deck for 20 min. start pressing gently around the ridge, parallel to the rails, and then see if you feel the dents, they will only be 1/2" wide and 1-3" long.
Shimming the mast base 3/4-1" will get the mast to hit the board along a fairly flat section between the ridge and rail.
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.
Select to expand quoteSparky said..
Don't hit the mast on the board.
Thank you.
Been thinking this since thread started
Select to expand quotemob dog said..
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.
You recently posted that 28 knots was top speed. In order to fly the fin and reduce drag lower mast base is required. Concave deck makes sense
Select to expand quoteMr Keen said..mob dog said..
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.
You recently posted that 28 knots was top speed. In order to fly the fin and reduce drag lower mast base is required. Concave deck makes sense
I get lower mast base makes sense but not the concave. Why can't the board just be a bit thinner and flat wouldn't that just be the same? The mast base would still be the same height
Select to expand quotemob dog said..Mr Keen said..mob dog said..
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.
You recently posted that 28 knots was top speed. In order to fly the fin and reduce drag lower mast base is required. Concave deck makes sense
I get lower mast base makes sense but not the concave. Why can't the board just be a bit thinner and flat wouldn't that just be the same? The mast base would still be the same height
A thing called volume.
Select to expand quoteMr Keen said..mob dog said..
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.
You recently posted that 28 knots was top speed. In order to fly the fin and reduce drag lower mast base is required. Concave deck makes sense
How did we ever get over 28 knots before?
Boards became wider and shorter, wider, also and thicker at the rear for early planing. Cutouts added. Rocker lines changed, outlines also.
Then they ran out of things to change, so opted for a recessed deck to get the centre of effort lower. It aides control so they say. That might be fine for top flight sailors, but how many freeride/freerace sailors have ever though I need the mast base lower, or could tell the difference.
I had a go on one and the boom was too low, so had to raise it. A higher boom makes water starting in light winds a little harder.
Then tacking and racking the sail back, the sail caught on the footstraps. So you would need to add 2-4cm extension and rig the sail higher on the mast. I'm getting nearer the max extension setting on 1 sail already and dont like the idea of less extension up the mast.
Its easier to stand on a flat deck for tacking and uphauling as well.
To me it seems to create more problems than it solves. Starboard are doing this on their intermediate freeride boards now. Thankfully, others aren't doing the same.
I agree with you Phil. I reckon there's a fair bit of cognitive bias going on. Maybe there is technically a benefit from a recessed deck, but 95% won't really detect an on the water performance improvement. We'll swear black and blue it makes a big difference though because we spent big $$$ on our shiny new toy.
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)
