| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
akrausz
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 158
Location: FL
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:57 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| GURGLETROUSERS wrote: | | Perhaps weight makes a difference? |
Body weight is an important factor. It used to be common for a manufacturer to offer one wave/slalom board around 95 liters, and then the bigger boards were slalom. I remember distinctly saying, for a few years, gee it would be nice if they made that board in a bigger size. I remember my NeilPryde RAF 9.0 that was like sailing a spinnaker. You had to go with cambers in that size to get any kind of performance. Over the decades, being fortunate enough to be able to try all kinds of equipment, coupled with, in my opinion, the significant improvements, I've found gear that I really like.
Last edited by akrausz on Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:26 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gobigkahuna
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Eastern NC
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't recall ever discussing board volume during the "old days". I do remember when the first cambered sails started coming out and what a huge improvement they seemed to make.
It wasn't until I started getting back into windsurfing in San Diego (5 years ago?) that I learned how important "liters" and "centimeters" were.
Another thing I was introduced to in San Diego was the Hot Sails Maui Super Freak. I picked up a used 8.0 m. to use with my windSUP. As low tech as the sail was, I really enjoyed sailing it. No cambers to "pop over", gusts were literally absorbed by the sail, super user friendly.
I kept that SuperFreak 8.0 and am tempted to pick up a couple others (in smaller sizes of course). 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akrausz
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 158
Location: FL
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gobigkahuna wrote: | | I don't recall ever discussing board volume during the "old days". |
I remember there was longboard and nine-foot sinker. Oh you want something in between? Transition board. Then lots of options became available in the '90's for the majority. But in the "all purpose" 150-liter shortboard space, to me, continuing on through the no-nose years it seemed more like a prototype era. Then, by the time the 150 boards changed to 8-8.5 feet. post 2000, most of my old windsurf buddies, me included, had moved to kiting of just quit. It was kind of like Americas's first attempts at making compact cars in the early years. The sports cars were good, but the majority of the all-purpose compacts were mediocre at best.
Last edited by akrausz on Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:00 am; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cgoudie1
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 2599
Location: Killer Sturgeon Cove
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Don't mistake a Super Freak for a low tech sail. Bruce Peterson pioneered
building shape into a sail without having cambers and the Sailworks Retro was born.
Hot Super Freaks are of similar ilk, but designed to withstand wave action
(which the Retro definitely isn't). Personally I love soft feeling sails,
they make easy work of gusty conditions (if designed right), but there's
a lot of technology in a sail like the Super Freak that wasn't available in
1980.
If you're getting into light wind waves (or just light wind cruising) a Super
Freak is a good choice so consider yourself lucky, and go get some more ;*)
-Craig
| gobigkahuna wrote: | I do remember when the first cambered sails started coming out and what a huge improvement they seemed to make.
It wasn't until I started getting back into windsurfing in San Diego (5 years ago?) that I learned how important "liters" and "centimeters" were.
Another thing I was introduced to in San Diego was the Hot Sails Maui Super Freak. I picked up a used 8.0 m. to use with my windSUP. As low tech as the sail was, I really enjoyed sailing it. No cambers to "pop over", gusts were literally absorbed by the sail, super user friendly.
I kept that SuperFreak 8.0 and am tempted to pick up a couple others (in smaller sizes of course). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
akrausz
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 158
Location: FL
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cgoudie1 wrote: | Don't mistake a Super Freak for a low tech sail. Bruce Peterson pioneered
building shape into a sail without having cambers and the Sailworks Retro was born. |
Yes, I've owned both jumbo Retro and Cheetah sails. Powerful stable sails with a deep pocket like with cambers. I feel this category of sail was also quite inferior in the 90's boom years, while the smaller or cambered sails were fine.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gobigkahuna
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Eastern NC
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What about the Exocet WindSUP? The 10'2" model is 150 liters, roughly 31" wide, has foot strap inserts and uses a shallow fin. I'm riding a Starboard Avanti WindSUP right now, which is fun and floaty but won't plane and doesn't have footstrap inserts. This Exocet WindSUP 10'2" looks like it might work pretty well, plus I could take it out in small waves.
http://www.exocet-original.com/en/windsup-10-2.php
Thoughts?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dllee
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 5329
Location: East Bay
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Every board is good, depends what u want to do.
Slalom boards 4 go fast.
Rockered boards 4 high winds and big chop.
Lite wnd slalom 4 early planing.
What do u want?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jingebritsen
Joined: 21 Aug 2002
Posts: 3371
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gobigkahuna
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 144
Location: Eastern NC
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
What I'd really like is a good, all around board that will get up on a plane, can be used in a wide range of wind speeds (15 to 25 mph) and water conditions (flat water, chop and small surf, remember I'm 110 kg).
When I moved from Hawaii during the 80's I bought a Fanatic Bat (160 liters) and sailed it in just about every condition you can imagine.
Now I'm looking at more modern boards of similar volume, such as this Exocet Nano 155.
But the problem (please correct me if I'm wrong) with the more modern "wide" boards is how they handle chop and that they really aren't suitable for even small surf (knee sized).
So that makes me wonder if a planing WindSUP might work better for me, such as this Exocet WindSUP 10'2".
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
1001.17 KB |
| Viewed: |
11083 Time(s) |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dllee
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 5329
Location: East Bay
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
The theoritical. One board.
Basically for all your windsurfing...
Not good for anything, but usable in all conditions.
Good luck finding it and being satisfied with it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
