Forums > Windsurfing Gear Reviews

Planing showdown: Atomiq vs Xcite ride and the Ah Shucks moment

Reply
Created by Hungrywave 2 months ago, 16 Apr 2018
Hungrywave
NSW, 11 posts
16 Apr 2018 7:31PM
Thumbs Up

Hi All
I've been riding an Xcite ride 110 for the last 18 months and recently bought an Atomiq 120 AST to help improve my gybes, go from flare to planing etc. I've really enjoyed, as a butcher's pencil built bloke of 60kg, being able go out in any wind on the new board and uphaul my way home. Last weekend I went for a sail at Manly Qld and found that even though there was some wind, the board felt really hard to get on the plane. I've only used it in weak winds since I got it, but am really wondering if I've ended up with a board that is slower to plane in spite of its resemblance to SLW style boards. One of the crew said that he thought the Atomiqs are tough to get planing without a pump or two and bearing off, Pity, as my technique leaves a lot to be desired. Definitely left an Ah shucks moment.

When I took a photo of the two, it added to my theory, the Xcite looks like it is designed to lift up, the Atomiq sits flatter. Would be very interested to hear your thoughts., which one planes easier.

Whatever the outcome, I reckon the Atom will be a keeper, great for ToW and I reckon could come in for small weak waves like a windsup and an easy cruise out to the line up, and maybe plane when it's windy. Can I get this board to plane like the Xcite and if so, how?
Image:

Sparky
WA, 722 posts
16 Apr 2018 6:40PM
Thumbs Up

Have you got a nice big slalom fin or just the generic one that comes with the board? Upright, 40-44 cm, costs more than $100? Preferably about $200? For example vector volt2? Fins can make a huge difference.

^^ this is the extreme example, but a fin choice tending towards larger, more upright and more refined (expensive) would be the way to go.

Hungrywave
NSW, 11 posts
16 Apr 2018 9:06PM
Thumbs Up

I've only been using it with the standard Drake fin which is pretty rakey and narrow . Even the freeride fin on the JP is far more vertical. I'll keep an eye out for a decent slalom fin and see if I can track down a vector volt. I'm in this far, I reckon it will be worth it if it increases the stoke. Cheers Sparky

JonesySail
QLD, 867 posts
16 Apr 2018 9:35PM
Thumbs Up

Answer is pilot error, and also way wrong size board for your size! I'm 30+% heavier than you and the board in the pic is 20lts less than yours , fin size 38cm/35/32 worked best.
trade both boards in on the smaller model Atom, it doesn't require any different skills to ride, ignore the nose rocker in the xcite ride has nothing to do with your problem, the Atom has a slalom board rocker so it's quick to plane. Not as quick as a slalom board due to the reduced volume in the tail.

I did ride a 'big' atom Once think it may have been 140/150? Was a pig, but in smaller sizes , one of the best boards and shapes ever, can't believe they dropped it!

the standard fin is ok, bit subject to being overloaded and spin out, they did work better with a firm racier style fin, i'd Suggest the black project type R in it.


LeeD
269 posts
17 Apr 2018 2:15AM
Thumbs Up

As above, gotta step back with flatter, wide tailed boards.

Hungrywave
NSW, 11 posts
17 Apr 2018 8:10PM
Thumbs Up

Thanks guys
I'll invest in or try out a good slalom fin first up, try and sail further back on the rig but stay close into the mast and see how I go. Send me an email anyone who is upgrading their slalom pointer fin to this year's model and you may have a buyer! The prospect of dumping the two boards for the 20 litre less volume board isn't the most appealing, but heck, if things don't change, maybe I'd better consider it. I've only ever tried the board with the mast track right in the middle. Don't know if adjusting it will make any difference. I'll take both boards with me next time I'm out and check that I'm not bagging the Atom 's planing (or my ability on it) unnecessarily. Will let you know. Roll on the weekend

JiberJohn
3 posts
17 Apr 2018 11:19PM
Thumbs Up

Dear Hungry Wave,

I have a 2016 Atomiq 114. I am a bit bigger than you, weighing 80 kg and standing 174 cm. I use the Atomiq with Ezzy Cheetah sails of 6.0 to 8.0, which is well within the range Starboard states (5.5 to 8.5). Prior to owning the Atomiq, I had an RRD Firemove 122. That board (the RRD 122 Firemove) planed VERY, VERY early. The Atomiq, on the other hand, if very hard to get planing. I am selling it the swap meet in two months. I wish I had kept the Firemove and not purchased the Atomiq.

I have also owned at JP Magic Ride 104. So, I have experience with three of the short, wide, thin (top to bottom) free move boards. As i said, the Firemove was amazing. I could plane on it with a 7.5 in winds that would barely get me going on my Starboard Formula and 9.5. In fact, I got rid of the Formula and 9.5 because there was too much overlap in wind range between that set up and the Firemove 122, and the Firemove and 122 were a whole lot easier on the body. In contrast to the Firemove, the Atomiq seems too sticky (to the water). I can make it plane with a lot of effort, such as going deep off the wind, moving my weight back, and pumping my arse off. But it is not an easy or early planer like the Firemove was. The Magic Ride was about average in planing ability when compared to a conventional board. It was definitely not a super early planer.

The Firemove was also faster than the Atomiq. My top GPS speed on the Firemove was 24.42 knots. My top speed on the Atomiq was 20.3 knots. (I realize neither is great speed. For GPS speed sailing, I have a Fanatic Blast that I have gotten up to 27 knots. Still not great, but very thrilling.)

One thing I learned about this style of board (free move) is that the manufacturers overstate the maximum sail size. For example, the manufacturer says the Atomiq 114 will take an 8.5. It will, but the board won't plane any earlier than it will with a 7.5. The extra weight of a fully loaded sail (loaded with wind) pushes the thin (top to bottom) board down and makes planing more difficult. Similarly, the range on the Magic 104 was supposed to be 5.7 to 7.5, but 7.5 was too big for the board. It planed just as early with a 6.5. Finally, the range on the Firemove 122 was supposed to be 6.0 to 9.0. When I sailed it with my 8.5, my very large friend whom I use to gauge planing ability was planing much earlier than me. When I sailed it with a 7.5, I was planing much earlier than him. So try (as illogical as this sounds) a smaller sail and a bigger fin for early planing.

As far as the small sail of the range, I fear I would get injured sailing the Atomiq with a 5.5 or the Firemove with a 6.0. JP was much more realistic when it said the Magic 104 could go out in 5.7 conditions. My Magic worked just fine with a 5.5 and at a stretch a 4.7.

To sum up, move weight back, pump, and head off the wind. Try a smaller sail that does not push the board down into the water because the board is too thin top to bottom to handle your weight and the weight of a fully loaded sail.

By the way, the Atomiq is a jibing machine once you get it planing. I was amazed at how well it jibes.





jirvin4505
QLD, 910 posts
18 Apr 2018 9:37AM
Thumbs Up

Excellent summary jiberjohn

my 2c - 'keen beginner perspective'

I spent time with hungrywave on the beach at RQYS on sunday

I was responsible for suggesting his planing style needed a little more oomph and action

I came home and wondered about the choice of a larger 120 board over an already successfully planing 110 Xcite ride for a 60kg pencil. I think there was the mention of being easier to uphaul and reviews of gybe ability were factors

I had already been scarred and suffering from ptsd after trying to get Morgs larger 160 atomic going at Weyba the same day that Jonesy gave it a go - still recovering from the blow to my self esteem! "Trainer board???"

Not all beginner/intermediate boards are the same - per jiberjohn - especially the narrow tail "modern style". My recent poor experience on a large gecko vs success on fat tail boards and my mate trading a ghecko for a much more loved and successful futura reinforce this.

So 2c from a intermediate experience.....

If you have difficulty getting onto the plane you aren't 'in the hunt' to be practicing carve jibes. Sail the board that gives you the most planing time = excite ride?

If the xcite is unstable in the uphaul = work on waterstarts.

If there is enough wind to plane there is enough for water start = uphaul not really in the equation

Went looking for excite ride 110 pro specs - couldn't find them. Did find this interesting thread

www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/General/JP-Excite-Ride-110-versus-Jp-supersport-109?page=1

with a nice wello video from greg in conditions that were a little bigger than when you were out hungrywave. Discusses board size also features input from jonesy

Plus this thread leaves me thinking the 110 is already big so suitable for your learning curve...

www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Review/110-l-or-120-l-JP-x-cite-ride?page=1



Time on the water is too short to be frustrated not planing when it's obvious that everybody else is. Hence find boards and sail sizes that make it easy to get the job done.

Duncan in the same conditions last Sunday 70+kg was comfortably planing with 120l futura and 8.1m Severne turbo. Just a data point.

Similarity my son 60kg was planing on Bic techno 293 with 7.8 race sail. Maybe you needed more horsepower?

cheers Jeff








John340
QLD, 1791 posts
18 Apr 2018 5:41PM
Thumbs Up

I've not ridden the Atomic, so I can't comment on its comparative planning ability.
While board design contributes to early planning, setup and technique also have a significant effect as well. So before you throw the baby out with the bath water, consider what you can do to maximise the early planing ability on your Atomic. Things to try:
- tune your sail to maximise power, eg optimise downhaul, outhaul and batten tension
- try a bigger fin
- try raising your boom
- try moving your mast base back
- try bearing away down the face of chop/waves when trying to get on the plane
- try pumping onto the plane

Hungrywave
NSW, 11 posts
18 Apr 2018 7:47PM
Thumbs Up

Hi All
Thanks for the encouragement. I did wonder if a bit more horsepower would have done the trick but am sure that the tuning tweaks, and the techniques that have been outlined will make a big difference. interesting to read the more is less argument on wide thin boards, too much can slow things down. On this set up though, I reckon I could easily go 7.8, or just over 8m. While I recognise that the board is a bit of a bus for my size, I'm loathe to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet. The board was funded by not drinking beer over God knows how long. I get thirsty just looking at it! I'm going to chase down that fin asap - even in the differing opinions in this thread, no one disagrees on the fin. I did spend time thinking about a Firemove - may get one yet, AFTER I've dealt with my Atomiq's pilot shortcomings. In spite of the frustrations, and the Ah Shucks, I'm hungry to get in the water and try the tips, may take both boards in the car to compare! I'll keep you posted.

Imax1
VIC, 1225 posts
19 Apr 2018 12:14PM
Thumbs Up

Im a heavy guy and always chasing the planing threshold . Im not sure if short wide boards are the answer. My 78 wide xcite ride planes far earlier than my 90 wide starboard go or my 85 wide starboard go ( 170 , 155 ) they are however faster.
I believe a longer straighter outline ( rockers being equal ) is better for planing. The rounded outside shape of the shorter wider boards seem to grab the water. It makes for a fast stable board that can also turn but bogs through the water pre planing.

Big fin , mast back ???

John340
QLD, 1791 posts
19 Apr 2018 1:03PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Big fin , mast back ???



They, along with raising boom height, create lift, which in turn aids early planing

jirvin4505
QLD, 910 posts
19 Apr 2018 6:53PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Imax1 said..
Im a heavy guy and always chasing the planing threshold . Im not sure if short wide boards are the answer. My 78 wide xcite ride planes far earlier than my 90 wide starboard go or my 85 wide starboard go ( 170 , 155 ) they are however faster.
I believe a longer straighter outline ( rockers being equal ) is better for planing. The rounded outside shape of the shorter wider boards seem to grab the water. It makes for a fast stable board that can also turn but bogs through the water pre planing.

Big fin , mast back ???


Out of interest what years are the starboard GOs.?

Us sandstone mob love the older GOs for early planing - after my disappointment with a modern GO 2015 150 we recon starboard have messed up a good thing.

@hungrywave just wondering where you are at with water starting. Trying to understand need for a bigger board


Cheers Jeff

Hungrywave
NSW, 11 posts
19 Apr 2018 8:32PM
Thumbs Up

Hi All, thanks for the continued interest and comments
Now Jeff, good question. Close to 2 years ago I got back into windsurfing and posted the question to Seabreeze about what I should buy in my situation. The response was as follows: www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Review/Gear-advise-for-returning-windsurfer-Ballina?page=1
Long story short, the suggestion was get a freemove board around 100 litres. It was time to plan my purchases. With my wife hooting with derision in the background about my forthcoming expensive five minute fad, I decided to save face and get set up for around a grand, and bought an Xcite ride from a mate, which I can waterstart fine, provided there's enough wind to lift the sail. In the back of my mind in all that time, I kept thinking 'if only I'd bought the freemove to help the gybes' '. I also liked the idea of a sup like board that I could use any time irrespective of the breeze, no more struggling when the wind drops too low to waterstart. Maximun ToW, which it does, if somewhat adhesively at present .
Anyway, with all of this interest, you'll be pleased to hear, I am not resting on my laurels, Simon has made a sale today. My G10 slalom fin is in the mail.
Hungrywave

Imax1
VIC, 1225 posts
19 Apr 2018 9:20PM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
jirvin4505 said..

Imax1 said..
Im a heavy guy and always chasing the planing threshold . Im not sure if short wide boards are the answer. My 78 wide xcite ride planes far earlier than my 90 wide starboard go or my 85 wide starboard go ( 170 , 155 ) they are however faster.
I believe a longer straighter outline ( rockers being equal ) is better for planing. The rounded outside shape of the shorter wider boards seem to grab the water. It makes for a fast stable board that can also turn but bogs through the water pre planing.

Big fin , mast back ???



Out of interest what years are the starboard GOs.?

Us sandstone mob love the older GOs for early planing - after my disappointment with a modern GO 2015 150 we recon starboard have messed up a good thing.

@hungrywave just wondering where you are at with water starting. Trying to understand need for a bigger board


Cheers Jeff


The older style starboards. They are good boards , quite fast and can handle rough water . But the older style Xcite ride 160 planes a lot earlier . But not the newer xcite ride plus 160 , they are harder to plane than the older ones . The newer xcite is shorter and about the same width and is fatter. It has less straight rocker and has about 5 mm rear rocker where the old one is flat. It did turn a little better , but that's not what a big early planing board is about. I didn't like the new one and sold it. Newer is not always better.
I haven't ridden a new go.
I made a board with the old xcite ride rocker and plan shape ( a little smaller all round ) and the concaves of the go and it's a ripper.

Faff
VIC, 586 posts
3 May 2018 7:47PM
Thumbs Up

Agree with Jibejohn regarding wide free moves and big sails - they can take them, but they don't benefit from them. I had a Tabou Rocket Wide 108 and used it with a 7.5 Turbo and 7.5 NCX. Both sails were too big for the board. I don't think I got going any earlier than with a 6.7. The Rocket felt too "thin" and not corky enough for the big sails.

I think board thickness and weight matter just as much width for early planing. IOTW, get a slalom board. My slalom board of the same volume (measured vs Rocket's stated) gets going earlier and can take the big sails without issue. It is much lighter and only a bit narrower (69 vs 73), but a lot thicker throughout and especially in the tail. The thick tail actually makes it easier to get in the back strap than the Rocket Wide because it sits higher off the water and also lifts on the fin quicker.

Also slalom boards entered into the PWA are actually measured. My 113L is actually 108L. You have no idea what the real volume of your free ride is. There is a thread on the Fanatic forum where one guy says his old 89L RRD planes up earlier than a new 105L Fanatic. The reply was: "... most of our tests on RRD boards have shown the volume is very often far, far higher than what is written on the board, similar to other brands - this gives the feeling that the board is planing earlier compared to the same volume from brands like ours where the cnc volume is easily calculated..."

For the OP - @60kg, he would get going earlier with a 100L slalom than the 120L Atom. Slalom boards have their downsides - not easy to gybe, and being so ridiculously light they are quite fragile. So I would not get one if still catapulting.

Shifu
QLD, 771 posts
4 May 2018 7:53AM
Thumbs Up

I would have thoughy the excite ride was already perfect for your weight as your first board. You probably will never want a sail bigger than 6.5 or 7 too. Just keep pracising with the excite ride. The likelihood is that after another season you will be wanting a smaller board and you wont be thinking about large boards at all.

ducati
QLD, 397 posts
4 May 2018 10:50AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Shifu said..
I would have thoughy the excite ride was already perfect for your weight




^^^ Yes what he said, plus the fact that your x-cite ride Pro only weighs in at a svelte 6.8kg
compared with your Atomiq 120 AST weighing in at a massive 9.5 kg,
you would prolly need a 8m sail and a 44 fin to get the Atom going in light winds

Shifu
QLD, 771 posts
4 May 2018 8:06PM
Thumbs Up

This thin n wide stuff is a passing fad anyway. The advertised benefits just aren't there.



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > Windsurfing Gear Reviews


"Planing showdown: Atomiq vs Xcite ride and the Ah Shucks moment" started by Hungrywave