130 posts
Wanted to start a separate thread on this topic, as there are a number of threads on these newer board designs, and some scattered comments on how thick many of them are...for instance, the Amos Sultan Wing is 6-1/8" thick, even for a 5'5", 75L board.
Some people say they don't like the feel...to disconnected from the foil. Others seem to suggest they don't like the position (not sure whether it is simply the added height, and/or stability/corkiness in the water).
I'm curious about both the design rationale, and what it means for how the board rides, as I think my next board will be something in this category...that is boards like the Amos Sultan Wing, Sunova Carver, and the inevitable additional models soon to be released...
WA
2463 posts
If you reduce the width of a board but want the same volume, you have to increase the length and/or the thickness. So unless you make boards very long, they have to get thicker.
The same thing happened to high-volume boards when the design imperative was to make them short. I've winged on a 130 l board that was more than a foot shorter than my 140 l board, and much thicker. I really did not care for that at all, I much prefer the longer, thinner board, even though it's also a lot heavier. So I can certainly understand that some do not like the added thickness of narrow shapes.
The catch-22 comes if narrow boards are designed for early takeoff, as they usually are. That requires enough volume so the top of the board is above water even at very low speeds - typically at least +10 l. If the board is fully submerged at low speeds, you loose a lot of the advantages a narrow shape offers.
22 posts
To me, ideally, that should depend on board construction design rather than just board thickness. Taking a simplified view of the mechanics, it should make no difference to the feel on foil if you have the same stiffness/ rigidity of connection to the mast regardless of board thickness. I'm sure that can be achieved with top and bottom surfaces being locally tied rigidly together around the foil area. Some board construction attempt to do this with higher density foam stringers and reinforcement in the foil area for example, how successfully for a given thickness I dont know.
That being said, if most boards are made with the same construction or even in the same factory they will most will likely be comparable to each other and if that connection to foil is not optimal a thicker board is likely to exhibit a less direct feel. Board construction should be considered though when comparing to see if there are any differences other than just looking at thickness alone.
103 posts
I don't think the feel is due to flex in the board, most builders have figured that out by now... I think it's that you are closer to the water on a thinner board, on a pump tray your feet are practically on the water when you touch down, on a DW board you are 6-7" above the water when you touch down... Prone and wing boards are in between those extremes but the same concept applies.
I think there are 3 or 4 basic approaches to these new style longer narrower wing boards:
1. Shrunken DW boards with full displacement hulls, very narrow and thick, pointy nose, round or big chine bottom, narrow tail (Amos etc)
2. Chopped off DW boards with semi displacement hulls, moderately narrow, thick to semi-thick, pointy-ish nose, rounded or big chine bottom, wide tail (Carver, Omen)
3. Mashup Wing/DW boards, full planing, moderately narrow, moderately thick, wider nose, flat or concave bottom, hard rails, moderate narrow tail (Ken Adgate, my board)
4. Stretched out prone boards, semi-planing thinner, moderate narrow, moderate outline (Portal/Unifoil)
It will be super interesting to see how these different concepts shake out, I've been surprised that mine goes quite well prone and I have the feeling that the planing bottom and hard rails promote a lot of stability during launch phase. I initially went that direction for splashdown performance (jumping and I do a lot of "grasshops" to clear weed) but it seems like it might have other advantages.
22 posts
ok maybe I misunderstood, I was talking about when on foil. When off foil and on water its a whole different dynamic at play
47 posts
I had two thicker wing boards. 6.5 and 6 inches thick and it was very noticeable and I really didn't care for them being that thick for whatever reason. Thick boards suck IMO.
