Forums > Wing Foiling General

Strange design from Starboard, their Wingboard

Reply
Created by IanInca 2 months ago, 15 Nov 2020
IanInca
116 posts
15 Nov 2020 2:47AM
Thumbs Up

Some interesting design ideas in this board and some nice dimensions if you are a lighter rider. Anyone riden one? Thoughts on design?

Their lite tech would be one of the cheapest Wing boards on the market but heavier than the carbon rivals although similar to the Fanatic Sky . The carbon starboard is of coarse loads of money and one of the most expensive.

7x30 140L
6'7x28 115L
5'8x25 88L
4'6x25 69L

sup.star-board.com/wing-board/wingboard-foil/

Windbot
262 posts
15 Nov 2020 3:14AM
Thumbs Up

I wish that 115L board was at least a foot shorter. I feel like this shape is already obsolete, too bad too because they got the price point right and I like their Freewing.

Pacey
WA, 354 posts
15 Nov 2020 6:25AM
Thumbs Up

I agree that these boards are already obsolete. Starboard appears to be afraid of going thicker to get high volume in a small package, so their choices of length/width/thickness ratios are where Fanatic was 6 months ago.

One problem is that they believe that:

"Stability is also created by having the feet as close to the foil as possible. We do not want to foil with "High Heels", so the thinner a board is, the better it rides."

While board thickness does raise your centre of gravity and maybe destabilises you a bit in displacement mode, once you are flying it is no different to adding a little bit of length to your mast. I would gladly add 1" to the distance between the soles of my feet and my foil in exchange for an extra inch of board thickness.

by comparison, the Fanatic Sky Wing I am now riding is 6' long, 30" wide and 130 litres. If anything, I would have preferred it if Fanatic had carried the maximum thickness all the way to the tail like they did on their smaller sky wing boards. I also think they should have given the concave deck a miss, i dont think it adds any benefit and just reduces volume further

IanInca
116 posts
15 Nov 2020 7:12AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
Pacey said..
I agree that these boards are already obsolete. Starboard appears to be afraid of going thicker to get high volume in a small package, so their choices of length/width/thickness ratios are where Fanatic was 6 months ago.

One problem is that they believe that:

"Stability is also created by having the feet as close to the foil as possible. We do not want to foil with "High Heels", so the thinner a board is, the better it rides."

While board thickness does raise your centre of gravity and maybe destabilises you a bit in displacement mode, once you are flying it is no different to adding a little bit of length to your mast. I would gladly add 1" to the distance between the soles of my feet and my foil in exchange for an extra inch of board thickness.

by comparison, the Fanatic Sky Wing I am now riding is 6' long, 30" wide and 130 litres. If anything, I would have preferred it if Fanatic had carried the maximum thickness all the way to the tail like they did on their smaller sky wing boards. I also think they should have given the concave deck a miss, i dont think it adds any benefit and just reduces volume further



That's interesting and I agree.

What seems evident is that there is a massive difference in board design between manufacturers. If you looked at surf sups, short surfboards, Longboards etc.. there's subtle differences in design within each niche. With wing boards there's massively different approaches. What one manufacturer claims as being great for early take offs is completely contracticted by another. Theres loads of examples but one which I picked up with the Starboard offering..

Starboard have a fair bit of board behind the foil box and claim aids early take off, fanatic sky have a small amount of board behind the box to aid early take off.

Id loved to see a geeky scientist actually explain these boards because I think the consumer is the r & d.

warwickl
NSW, 1600 posts
15 Nov 2020 11:18AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
IanInca said..

Pacey said..
I agree that these boards are already obsolete. Starboard appears to be afraid of going thicker to get high volume in a small package, so their choices of length/width/thickness ratios are where Fanatic was 6 months ago.

One problem is that they believe that:

"Stability is also created by having the feet as close to the foil as possible. We do not want to foil with "High Heels", so the thinner a board is, the better it rides."

While board thickness does raise your centre of gravity and maybe destabilises you a bit in displacement mode, once you are flying it is no different to adding a little bit of length to your mast. I would gladly add 1" to the distance between the soles of my feet and my foil in exchange for an extra inch of board thickness.

by comparison, the Fanatic Sky Wing I am now riding is 6' long, 30" wide and 130 litres. If anything, I would have preferred it if Fanatic had carried the maximum thickness all the way to the tail like they did on their smaller sky wing boards. I also think they should have given the concave deck a miss, i dont think it adds any benefit and just reduces volume further




That's interesting and I agree.

What seems evident is that there is a massive difference in board design between manufacturers. If you looked at surf sups, short surfboards, Longboards etc.. there's subtle differences in design within each niche. With wing boards there's massively different approaches. What one manufacturer claims as being great for early take offs is completely contracticted by another. Theres loads of examples but one which I picked up with the Starboard offering..

Starboard have a fair bit of board behind the foil box and claim aids early take off, fanatic sky have a small amount of board behind the box to aid early take off.

Id loved to see a geeky scientist actually explain these boards because I think the consumer is the r & d.


Maybe one is relying on board speed to foil and the other pumping skills.

Pacey
WA, 354 posts
15 Nov 2020 8:19AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
IanInca said..

That's interesting and I agree.

What seems evident is that there is a massive difference in board design between manufacturers. If you looked at surf sups, short surfboards, Longboards etc.. there's subtle differences in design within each niche. With wing boards there's massively different approaches. What one manufacturer claims as being great for early take offs is completely contracticted by another. Theres loads of examples but one which I picked up with the Starboard offering..

Starboard have a fair bit of board behind the foil box and claim aids early take off, fanatic sky have a small amount of board behind the box to aid early take off.

Id loved to see a geeky scientist actually explain these boards because I think the consumer is the r & d.


I think there are a couple of factors here. Firstly, companies such as Starboard and Fanatic have realised that Foil SUP and wing boards have different requirements and have finally produced separate ranges of boards for each niche, rather than lumping them together. Unfortunately they haven't yet agreed on what those requirements are.

Fanatic has realised that shorter, wider and thicker is good, while Starboard have realised that for winging (other than for very small boards) there are advantages to having the foil and rider further forward on the board, rather than right at the tail, and keeping some volume at the back of the board. Fanatic have got a lot of things right with my 6' Sky Wing, but an annoying number of things wrong as well in terms of foil and footstrap placement, as well as volume distribution.

I suspect that these requirements will converge pretty quickly in the next generation of boards, but you'll see it earliest from the smaller companies, such as SMIK, which can rapidly iterate on design improvements.

JohnnoKeys
WA, 531 posts
15 Nov 2020 9:46AM
Thumbs Up

On the 6ft fanatic sky wing put mast in center of foil track and foot straps forward then all straps in perfect location - I have my straps as loose and wide as possible also when getting up to foil on the board don't put back foot in strap - just float it in front of strap to get board in perfect trim to get up on foil then put back in strap to get 50% more control and up wind angle at speed - winging requires a lot very subtle technique's compared to other wind/ water sports as the wing power has a shallow power band

a tip to get up foiling in super light wind with straps - when pumping wing on gusts pull up on straps with feet to unweight board which helps to get it up on foil.

I like the board a lot - light - super stable - enough volume to easily slog home when wind dies to 5 knots and you are 1km off beach in deep dark ocean.

simonp
192 posts
15 Nov 2020 10:02AM
Thumbs Up

Wide point is very far forward and then it narrows quite markedly towards the tail in the smaller boards. I can't see the logic in that.

Pacey
WA, 354 posts
15 Nov 2020 10:18AM
Thumbs Up

Select to expand quote
JohnnoKeys said..
On the 6ft fanatic sky wing put mast in center of foil track and foot straps forward then all straps in perfect location - I have my straps as loose and wide as possible also when getting up to foil on the board don't put back foot in strap - just float it in front of strap to get board in perfect trim to get up on foil then put back in strap to get 50% more control and up wind angle at speed - winging requires a lot very subtle technique's compared to other wind/ water sports as the wing power has a shallow power band

a tip to get up foiling in super light wind with straps - when pumping wing on gusts pull up on straps with feet to unweight board which helps to get it up on foil.

I like the board a lot - light - super stable - enough volume to easily slog home when wind dies to 5 knots and you are 1km off beach in deep dark ocean.



Hi Johnno, I've got my front straps right forward, and my foil is in the right position to make it pretty balanced between my feet (I.e. not front foot or back foot heavy). My issue is more to do with volume in the tail when slogging. I'm 4-5 kilos heavier than you and I think that is just enough for the tail to sink unless I bring my rear foot right forward at low speed.

I may put some strap inserts just forward of the current ones to see if that fixes the problem, but would like to ride the board strapless for a little while first to see whether it's ok riding it a bit forward of the current position.

anyway, my point was that Fanatic would have been better off keeping thickness all the way back like they did on their small boards, would have added useful volume for virtually no weight penalty.

And don't get me wrong about the board in general, once on your feet with enough breeze, it is awesome. Short, light, low swing weight, gets up on the foil nicely, doesn't stick or want to change direction when splashing down.

JohnnoKeys
WA, 531 posts
15 Nov 2020 3:01PM
Thumbs Up

I agree but try taking foot out of back strap to center between straps and pump from there - I think cut out at rear is allow board to pop up at rear to get on foil

Jeroensurf
412 posts
15 Nov 2020 3:19PM
Thumbs Up

I,m 95kg and tried 3 times winging before I sold my windsurf foil set and bought begin October my own wing quiver. I was lucky that I could demo the Fanatic Skywing5.8 and Starboard 6.7 at the same day and even switch on the water with the shop owner. Now that is service I,m a decent wavesailor and sup-er but with winging an absolute newby and from that perspective there was a lot to like in the Starboard6.7: It is a LOT more stable as the fanatic when getting on the board! Learning is a lot of swimming and in chop the fanatic 5.8 has a tendency to roll and flip over whenever it see's a change. The starboard doesnt do that as much. Due the foot extra length its easier to sit on on your knees in short period waves where the fanatic kicks me off and easier to get from your knees to standing. The lateral stability helps a lot with slogging when not flying. I can see the benefits of it as a light wind board next to a more highwind/small board. Important for beginners: the extra length helps with gliding to get going but also easier touch downs with learning to jibe.
Bonus: On the Starboard I can paddle out with a foil and catch a wave while with the Fanatic5.8 is simply to short for that and too much ploughing to catch a wave. So overall I think the Starboard would be great for beginners or a save light wind platform next to a more high wind orientated board......but still bought the Fanatic 5.8.

Main reasons: With the Starboard I wished I could step further to the back, but that could also due to the type of foil,I gambled that I can learn quick enough to benefit of the shorter length when flying because I don,t want to buy kit that I outgrow in half a year. 3th: I have some serious issues with my feet and the deck of the fanatic was for me a lot more comfortable to stand on and that is for me really important because you when it hurts it takes away the fun.Bonus: I can put the Fanatic in my car behind the driver seat when the roofrack is all ready loaded with SUP and wavesail gear. Great for holidays! and I guess that is the only part where it length comes to play for me personal.




Goofcat
16 posts
17 Nov 2020 5:40AM
Thumbs Up

I'm one of the first to get a Wingboard on Maui. I'm a total newbie to any wind sports. Been a Sup surfer for years. The raise of foil boards reminds me of the early days of SUP. At first people copied existing shapes, be it huge long boards (Larid) or huge surf boards (almost everyone else). Starboard was one of the first ones to venture off into SUP specific shapes and much more dynamic bottoms. I see them doing the same thing with the Wing Board and Hyper Foil lines.

As I see the foil board market today, I'm seeing a similar trend. Right now we basically have huge bogie boards or super thick skim boards. Some are starting to play with the bottom shapes, but most are still in the large bogie board area. I call then Toast or Pebble shapes.

People forget it was Starboard's hyper-nut line that got the squared off shape into the SUP world. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt when they move away from the squared off nose to the rounded nose.

I see with their WingBoard line they are chasing two paths, with the shorter boards they are going after the short bogie board shape, where as the longer boards are more for stability for new riders. For me as a newbie I went with Starboard for the stability, ease of knee riding, paddling, tracking and ultimately purchase and resale value.

Here is a video of Zane riding the much shorter WingBoard and doing jumps.

Jeroensurf
412 posts
18 Nov 2020 3:27PM
Thumbs Up

Although I Like most of the stuff Starboard makes you give them too much credit.The first I was aware of with more sophisticated bottoms in SUP are C4 and PSH and it wasn't Starboard the that came with the short nose, that were the Minions from Deep in Kanagroo land and Gong in Europe .IMO Starboard inst an very revolutionary brand, but they do build a lot of stuff that work very well on a lot of places, making it a relative safe bet to buy gear from.

DB2
61 posts
20 Nov 2020 5:40PM
Thumbs Up


I really like the Starboard stuff, but there are some design issues with the wing-boards I do not get. Why are the higher volume boards so long? Just because I am heavier than Zane, I don't feel why I should use a longboard. That bottom looks really wild and I already have a problem understanding cut-outs on a wing-board, but those big channels and cuts and stuff? And on the other hand they have a rounded edge on the back? And then there is the handle. Really guys? A handle that fits three fingers?

emmafoils
255 posts
20 Nov 2020 8:47PM
Thumbs Up

Way too long



Subscribe
Reply

Forums > Wing Foiling General


"Strange design from Starboard, their Wingboard" started by IanInca