Thickness, the Myth uncovered ..
Inbox
x
Bert Burger Feb 3 (1 day ago) to me, Sunova Sorry to say , its all about surface area . These new designs have major surface area.. You only need adequate float .. More float than you need doesn't equate to better wave catching .. only equates to worse performance , and as counter intuitive as it sounds , worse wave catching .. Im taking 4 new boards to Sri Lanka , all potatoish designs . My normal literage on a short board is 36 liters .. Formula is 1 liter for every 3 kg of body weight . But that is only true if I have the correct surface area .. So I usually run between 2 ? and 2 ? to get float right , consider my weight , 108 kg/240lb .. I could run 3 ? thick in something with way less area , and never in a million years could I catch waves , because of the reduced surface area , even tho float would be the same . I am running extra volume in the test boards for Sri Lanka .. around 39 liters , just 10% more , plus slightly more surface area than my regular shortboard . Why more surface area ??? Simple law of physics .. The more area , the less speed needed to plane .. The less area , the more speed needed to plane .. A surfboard only functions when it is on the plane on the surface of the water.. You can plane on your bare feet if you are going fast enough .. Look at tow in boards ? how much area do they have ?? Water skis?? Kite and wake boards ?? The surface area is relavent to the operating speed .. Low speed small waves , and you need more area .. But consider where the area is .. When you make a board shorter and wider ,you place the area in a more concentrated location under you center of gravity .. So I could have a 10' x 12" board .. Or a 5' x 24" board , both having similar area , of coarse the short one will plane better because the surface area is directly underneath you , so its more effective .. All these new super chunky boat designs are a total ****ing myth .. I validated this one 15 years ago , with 2 identical outlines , both being the same length and width .. One at 3.5 " thick the other at 1 ? thick . The thinner one caught waves easier , was faster and more responsive .. Both boards were super wide at 6-4 x 23 .. Even tho the thin one actually had not enough volume and I sank past my chest while stationary , as soon as took a few strokes, all the surface area allowed me to be up on the plane and right back at the surface .. Why did the thin one catch waves easier and perform better ??? 3 factors . 1. A thicker board naturally comes with a thicker rail , so its harder to create a defined apex where the water releases , so as you take off the thicker one has more water wrapping the rail , slowing it down , along with more rail engaged in the face holding it back . 2.. the thick one , took way more effort to bury the rail especially on the first pump while attempting to get speed , so it was naturally slower to get going because it was less responsive. 3 . you completely **** up the flex in a thick board , the thick one relied on buoyancy off the first pump , I would have to bury the rail , then wait for it to float or cork out , as it did this I could then sink the opposite rail and start to pump .. The thin one could bury the rail immediately , as well as flex into the turn , then spring out with projection and I was away at lightning speed .. Just think about what that means in terms of a quick get away ,, flexing an object and springing out of a turn or sinking an object and waiting for it to float to the surface.. Yes the volume of your board is important . But the surface area is more important . You can have not enough volume and adequate or more surface area and the board will still function . You have adequate or more volume and not enough surface area and the board will not function . So whats more important ??? It comes down to education .. Unfortunately , when most boards designers are uneducated, what do you think they will pass on to there customers ??? I struggle to comprehend why so many board designers are following this current trend .. I can only think of 2 scenarios .. 1 they are clueless . 2 , they really do know , but just want to sell more boards to a demanding market and realize they will sell more later when crew figure it out. Stupidity or greed , take your pick .. The hard part for me is stating the facts , while trying not to sound condescending or like a know it all .. As long as we clearly state the functionality of our designs and can back it up with simple laws of physics and scientific principles that you cant argue against.. Then we make our point and stick to our guns .. **** man , if the world cant get it , does that mean I will blindly ignore the laws of the universe and follow the crowd .. Been there many times in the past on other areas of design , only to be proven correct years later when the majority start to agree. Lastly , why am I only putting 10% more volume in my small wave boards ,, there is a slight compromise there.. While you can go thinner if you increase surface area , its harder to convince someone if there already on the back foot and skeptical .. So , a slight increase in volume and obviously an increase in surface area and its an easier sell .. Plus the thickness increase is not enough to compromise the flex of the board or the ability to sink the rail . So yes , even im doing it for the sake of sales , but still staying within the realms of reality, hopefully crew wake up sooner than later and we can get back to making those magic morphing sling shots. Regards BERT Ps , you can post that if you want , Swaylocks , Surfer Forum , go public with it and stir up some controversy ..
Makes a lot of sense. I was gifted a custom 6'2" Al Merrick #4, stuck with standard dims but tried to blow it out to 38 l by adding thickness. Looked amazing but was one of the worst boards I've ever owned! Glad I didn't pay for it as I would've been pissed at the shaper for agreeing to my changes so readily!
Firewire used to have a nifty part of their website which allowed you to look at the surface area of the boards. Rather useful in conjuction with volume and board measurements at key points as well as a planshape comparison tool.
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
Good stuff! Thanks for sharing.
I wonder how he would translate to a downwind surfing board (in the markets that has the conditions for it).
Would be nice to see a proper downwind surfing board from Sunova (by Bert) rather than those fast downwind canoes they make right now. Something a little more specialized than the "Search".
Yeah watched a video or read somewhere a few years ago of Burt explaining about volume/surface area. Always great value to get his input on board design
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
hey phil, surface area also gets lift from below (the waves upward and foward momentum). volume stops a board sinking too low in the water and thus needed to be paddled up out of the water and on to the 'plane' , but i find thats not as much of an advantage as being a good paddler and getting surface area into play. d
I've been riding older boards for the exact reasons outlined above. I'm not afraid to go against trends and in the line up I've been told to step up to latest designs but I've never enjoyed riding them. One thing I'd like to question is the lack of mention of waterline length when the board is in contact with the wave face and the effect it has on speed. Not just planing area but rather what is buried into the surface of the water.
I've always like Berts take on surfboards and design.
He doesn't mind helping out those with less knowledge and experience.
Its good that he's not afraid to tell it how it is even though that's not the PC approach these days
This Surf splendour podcast with Bert Burger. Is really good.
surfsplendorpodcast.com/291-bert-burger/
This Surf splendour podcast with Bert Burger. Is really good.
surfsplendorpodcast.com/291-bert-burger/
that one is such a goldmine , thats the definitive..
also spreaker podcasts, more a history of bert - bert berger (mis-spelled last name to search ;) )
www.spreaker.com/user/wax_radio/ep-102-bert-berge-of-sunova-surfboards
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
hey phil, surface area also gets lift from below (the waves upward and foward momentum). volume stops a board sinking too low in the water and thus needed to be paddled up out of the water and on to the 'plane' , but i find thats not as much of an advantage as being a good paddler and getting surface area into play. d
Thanks man, I'm looking at a new board at the moment, both same model, length and width but one is 2.5" (31.9l) and the other 2 9/16" (32.6l) - this extra foam should
really make minimal difference in catching waves then? I guess it will make a little difference on the wave, the extra foam in the rail will make it a bit more Corky in the turns?
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
hey phil, surface area also gets lift from below (the waves upward and foward momentum). volume stops a board sinking too low in the water and thus needed to be paddled up out of the water and on to the 'plane' , but i find thats not as much of an advantage as being a good paddler and getting surface area into play. d
Thanks man, I'm looking at a new board at the moment, both same model, length and width but one is 2.5" (31.9l) and the other 2 9/16" (32.6l) - this extra foam should
really make minimal difference in catching waves then? I guess it will make a little difference on the wave, the extra foam in the rail will make it a bit more Corky in the turns?
Yeah you definitely don't want that extra 0.7l. It will make burying a rail and doing a decent turn impossible, while making minimal difference to catching a wave.
or you could just have a swig if water before going for a surf, gain half a kilo from the water and make up for the extra foam.
Seriously, unless you are a professional that is going to make almost no difference in your turns, and even then it's minimal.
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
Go to a shaper and talk to them.
Cool, thanks drip - that helps dude..
No worries. I was showing someone earlier this week a 7'2" gun and an 8' gun by the same shaper. Both came in at 43 litres.
Volume is only one tiny part of it. Don't get too hung up on it.
Foil, outline and rocker are way more significant. Haven't even mentioned bottom contours or fins. Out of all those, volume (unless you have added ten litres or something) is the least important.
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
hey phil, surface area also gets lift from below (the waves upward and foward momentum). volume stops a board sinking too low in the water and thus needed to be paddled up out of the water and on to the 'plane' , but i find thats not as much of an advantage as being a good paddler and getting surface area into play. d
Thanks man, I'm looking at a new board at the moment, both same model, length and width but one is 2.5" (31.9l) and the other 2 9/16" (32.6l) - this extra foam should
really make minimal difference in catching waves then? I guess it will make a little difference on the wave, the extra foam in the rail will make it a bit more Corky in the turns?
1/2 l unless you are a super pro is nothing..NOTHING. i surf berts old boards at my 69kg vs his 105kg and all it does is let me catch more waves. sure my turns are a bee's more buttery but the wsl judging panel aren't looking.
Thanks for the post - makes sense, once you're up to speed and moving . The extra foam would still help you initially get up to speed as your more above the water line though?..
I ordered a shorter, same width (albeit with slightly less rocker) with more volume than my current board - thought it might be better in smaller waves but that was not the case, sold it for an annoyingly big loss.
I guess there are so many factors to consider with surface area - length, width throughout board and rocker - it's a fine art!
hey phil, surface area also gets lift from below (the waves upward and foward momentum). volume stops a board sinking too low in the water and thus needed to be paddled up out of the water and on to the 'plane' , but i find thats not as much of an advantage as being a good paddler and getting surface area into play. d
Thanks man, I'm looking at a new board at the moment, both same model, length and width but one is 2.5" (31.9l) and the other 2 9/16" (32.6l) - this extra foam should
really make minimal difference in catching waves then? I guess it will make a little difference on the wave, the extra foam in the rail will make it a bit more Corky in the turns?
Yeah you definitely don't want that extra 0.7l. It will make burying a rail and doing a decent turn impossible, while making minimal difference to catching a wave.
or you could just have a swig if water before going for a surf, gain half a kilo from the water and make up for the extra foam.
Seriously, unless you are a professional that is going to make almost no difference in your turns, and even then it's minimal.
i was worried .. untill i got to the punchline haha