Select to expand quoteSnapfigure said..
PatriK Opinion 1:45:20
I guess to get a stubby for wavesailing right, it needs a lot of work and overthinking the concept. It seems that Patrik stopped somewhere and canceled any further development.
The Goya guys claim they'd never done so many prototypes untill the shape for their Nitro worked like they expected. So it seems it was a long way to go to the new Nitro stubby shape.
But for sure a brand must be willing to go this long way to develop a "working" stubby shape.
for that reduced area behind the back strap and yet some rail length conundrum mentioned: a classic, fat fishtail?
Commercially they probably don't do well, but on the water pretty okay in mushy onshore
However, i've moved back from very compact shapes to more length and 220-230 length is vastly more comfortable+ nowadays same carving capabilities in the higher volumes + the feel/reality that you can plow more sail power into them when outbound.
It is a good thing that quatro goya introduced this shape after a long time of experiment and not immediately years ago when many did following the trend. It is not easy to handle tail widths 43 - 45+ sometimes a lot of foot pressure is needed but Their shapes for sure are ahead. However, imo compact shapes 219 - 225 could handle many cond very well including those that very compact shapes excel in.
One thing I am wondering about is the weight of a 98 + board. We got almost 6.8 kg for 84 kg C4 Any feedback for those big boards?
Funny PD says about the lack of drive ..... errr .... if you have an 18cm trifin set-up - with biggish (for me 10's) TOED and ASSY fronts - there's all the drive you could ever need .... To me also - NITRO looks very close to fanatics stubby .... Im not saying these stub shapes are a 1 board quiver .... but they have their place . Ive sailed a spot here - sideshore - low tide - very weird triangular and wedgy swell lines pushing into the reef - and on any other wakeboards it feels awful - ... but on a stubby88 - head hi - Im flying around linking sections , using all these weird little angular wedge lines in the wave - with so much speed gives you so many different lines to take or weave around and get the line you need - and then hitting a lip 12oclock vert - was so much fun , and allowed me to sail this low tide spot with few rocks - whereas the reef further up the bay has random stuff popping up trying to rip boxes out - but works ok with normal waveboards .... Also , at another spot sideshore - so much speed and flow on a wave , upto half-mast - the 82 blew me away - felt like a little speedy go-cart .... and sometimes - I jump back on a narrow tail - and you always feel you want more from the wave (ie really demanding of wave quality/power ) .... Also - Ive had situations on a stubby88 and 99 , sailing very light sideshore - but really good size swell - and a normal narrow tail you would even be struggling to get back up the face with any speed - stubby - its giving so much extra drive off the bottom you are flying back up a big face as if the winds 5knts stronger , and making so much nicer top turn .... (again - drive a plenty - don't know what PD is talking about with chopped tails / lack of drive) ... In very light winds good swell sometimes that extra gear of speed/flow is a godsend .,..
Btw - that comment where PD is trashing a previous team rider - tricked him by giving back the same board but sanded paint job off - and the team rider loved the 'new' board , just maybe ? he sanded a mm or 2 extra concave by mistake OR rounded the rail tuck more with the sanding - or the fins went back in a slightly different place - anything could have happened in that process - so I think you can take some of his views with a pinch of salt ?! ... for instance I sanded / softened a rail by literally a mm or so extra tuck on a production board once - and the board reacted more spontaneously in the bottom turn .... less suddenly gripping , then slipping etc much more 'flowy' , so tiny details change things alot at speed -
Select to expand quoteSnapfigure said..
It is a good thing that quatro goya introduced this shape after a long time of experiment and not immediately years ago when many did following the trend. It is not easy to handle tail widths 43 - 45+ sometimes a lot of foot pressure is needed but Their shapes for sure are ahead. However, imo compact shapes 219 - 225 could handle many cond very well including those that very compact shapes excel in.
One thing I am wondering about is the weight of a 98 + board. We got almost 6.8 kg for 84 kg C4 Any feedback for those big boards?
My Nitro 106 weighs 7,24 kg naked. Spec is 7,17 kg. So i'm fine with it.
AlexF how does the Nitro sail in onshore wave conditions lightly powered up. I have not found any test reports for this board. Thanks in advance.
The Nitro is impressive in onshore wave conditions. Planing and speed a notch worse than the One 105 i had before, but it turns much tighter than the One and keeps the speed through bottom turns amazingly.
Control in chop is really good too, since the board has a lot of rolled V on the bottom.
I use the board about 2/3 of my wave sessions now, everytime when the waves lack a bit of punch and power for my C3 98 (also in side/sideoff conditions).
Where the Nitro reaches its limits is in strong side/sideoff conditions with choppy wavefaces, the fat rails on the middle to front of the board start to get bouncy then. In these conditions the C3 has a clear advantage.
Select to expand quoteSnapfigure said..
PatriK Opinion 1:45:20
That was a really good video to watch, I agree with so many things he said and he also said heaps of interesting info. I like how he thinks he sounds like a really genuine down to earth nice person. Thanks for putting that up.
Interesting review!
And what s your thoughts about the 3 types of onshore outlines:
- narrow like mamba, stubby, cube (approx 57cm for 85l)
- mediumly wide like the stocked, quantex... (59cm for 85l)
- super wide like the happy/reactor/Blackbox (62cm for 85l)
That s some pretty big differences for boards all aiming at maximising surfing in the poor side on to onshore conditions...
Being short is the constant though
Btw - figured out PD's lack of drive comment - and it is true - IF - you chop the tail (literally saw 8-10cm off) but keep everything the same .... I did it on one of my boards - and the board lost alot of drive .... If you chop the tail - you have to get some drive back somehow - either widening tail , or concaves - or fin setups ....
Select to expand quoteseabreezer said..
Btw - figured out PD's lack of drive comment - and it is true - IF - you chop the tail (literally saw 8-10cm off) but keep everything the same .... I did it on one of my boards - and the board lost alot of drive .... If you chop the tail - you have to get some drive back somehow - either widening tail , or concaves - or fin setups ....
Widening the tail is typically not a good idea, at least not the first one to go for. The absolute major thing with a shorter tail is that produces much less drag in a tight turning radius and hence can be more easily turned tighter. The natural "compensator", if you want it, is less tail rocker. In some senses, a short tail is like have a huge amount of tail rocker, but without the drag. Another compensation I found out I had to do early in my short tail era (after the first proto in fact) was to decrease outline curvature in the tail to regain on rail stability in hard carving top turns. I tend to keep my rear fins a bit closer to the rail on short tail boards too. With such compensations you can get all the drive you need. What I think is the most serious downside of a short tail design is pumping onto a plane in ultralight offshore conditions with bigger waves. It seems here, an extended tail kind of helps lift the board up behind you slightly, which give a subtle advantage. For superlight wind short period stuff I think a short tail is so much better though, exactly because you get ultra quick acceleration due to being able to use low drag designs, but still very tight turning.By the way, regarding an earlier comment in the thread. It is completely meaningless to measure tail width by one foot off or by "looks". You should just look at the width at the back strap. On stubbies, the tail tends to look wide and have a huge ofo measurement, but often the tail is in fact narrower than on typical pintail boards. It also makes no sense to think in terms of "how close is the back strap to the tail", like if the strap has been moved back. What instead makes huge sense it to think about the tail length behind the strap. When you already have a rather fast tailed board, tail length in this sense is a super effective tuning variable when shaping, that you can use with no other compensation to just tighten the turn up a bit.
Select to expand quoteNicko29 said..
Interesting review!
And what s your thoughts about the 3 types of onshore outlines:
- narrow like mamba, stubby, cube (approx 57cm for 85l)
- mediumly wide like the stocked, quantex... (59cm for 85l)
- super wide like the happy/reactor/Blackbox (62cm for 85l)
That s some pretty big differences for boards all aiming at maximising surfing in the poor side on to onshore conditions...
Being short is the constant though
Hey Ola .... have you got any insights on the above ... for Nicko29 - just noticed it was unanswered ,,,,
Im thinking about it also - rocker etc makes a big difference in the above say , eg blackbhox has a super even flow/curve .... and more rocker than say stubby ... so stubby has bit more drive to get going / keep going
super wides maybe break out of arcs off the top quicker ? (+ / - points) ..... stubby I love - incredible upwind , holds carves off the top longer harder .... I love stubby also because of that straighter rail , for me really good for upwind / shakas / pushing upwind into backloops / chopbackloops , etc in small waves , and the rails bit more normal for finishing rotations (whereas pinched blackbox rails in rear pull the rail down in wave tricks etc ) - but this is my gripes with the type of sailing I do ...
havnt sailed quantex
Its funny - I have boards that are midway between my DTL (narrow tail boards) , and stubby ..... And I thought the 'middleground' would be the 'everyday' go to when I dont want to make a decision and get most use - YET - I always seem to be on one extreme or the other - ie very narrow tail DTL shape with very tapered rail - OR - im going Stubby for slack sideshore / small / lightwinds / side on etc .... interesting ...
Select to expand quoteseabreezer said..
Btw - figured out PD's lack of drive comment - and it is true - IF - you chop the tail (literally saw 8-10cm off) but keep everything the same .... I did it on one of my boards - and the board lost alot of drive .... If you chop the tail - you have to get some drive back somehow - either widening tail , or concaves - or fin setups ....
Yes, I agree. And basically you cant get the drive back in another way but moving the straps forward. Time and again I notice people dont realise how important strap position is and/or they have the wrong idea of what result moving straps has.Select to expand quoteOla H said..
Widening the tail is typically not a good idea, at least not the first one to go for. The absolute major thing with a shorter tail is that produces much less drag in a tight turning radius and hence can be more easily turned tighter. The natural "compensator", if you want it, is less tail rocker. In some senses, a short tail is like have a huge amount of tail rocker, but without the drag.
That is only the case if you are driving off the sail so the sail delivers mast foot pressure and thus keeps the board flat. The thing is that if you go DTL, you lose a lot of wind in the sail. If you have 20 knots of wind and you go with 20 knots of speed (when perfect side shore), you have no wind in the sail at all, so no MFP. In order to keep drive, the straps need to be more forward and with the straps forward, in order to turn, you need rocker. And when turning on the rail, rocker actually has less drag. With my flex tail, you actually feel the acceleration in a tight turn because the pressure of the water on the tail is pointing more forward. A bit like swim fins that provide forward propulsion because they bend.
There are 3 factors at play to make a board turn:
1. Outline curvature or tail taper. (a bigger difference between max width and tail width). This is especially helpful in initiating a turn but can also make a board twitchy, which is not what you want in bigger waves. A board with more tail taper has a bigger wind range as you have a wider part that helps getting planing when winds are lighter but a narrower tail offers more control when powered up at speed.
2. Rocker. Once on the rail, the more rocker gives less drag and turns better whilst keeping control. The downside is a narrower wind range, you need more wind to get going and once at speed there is less longitudinal stability. Rocker creates that there is more water pressure under the board in the front shoulder than in the tail, causing the board to turn, the nose gets pushed into the turn (front wheel turning like a car) and lets the tail slip out (back wheel turning like a fork lift).
3. Force/weight. The more you place your weight to the back, the more you will push the tail out hence the tighter you will turn but you are forcing the board and when having a lot of rail in the water, this will cause drag and in DTL conditions with less MFP, it gets more tecnical to keep drive. On a surf board, to keep speed you move forward but on a wave board you are stuck to the straps.
A shaper can use a mix of these 3 factors in order to create a board for different conditions.Select to expand quoteOla H said..
What I think is the most serious downside of a short tail design is pumping onto a plane in ultralight offshore conditions with bigger waves. It seems here, an extended tail kind of helps lift the board up behind you slightly, which give a subtle advantage.
I think that the main benefit of a longer tail is the drive on the wave. It helps to get on a wave earlier and to keep speed as well when there is less or no MFP.Select to expand quoteOla H said..
For superlight wind short period stuff I think a short tail is so much better though, exactly because you get ultra quick acceleration due to being able to use low drag designs, but still very tight turning.By the way, regarding an earlier comment in the thread. It is completely meaningless to measure tail width by one foot off or by "looks". You should just look at the width at the back strap. On stubbies, the tail tends to look wide and have a huge ofo measurement, but often the tail is in fact narrower than on typical pintail boards. It also makes no sense to think in terms of "how close is the back strap to the tail", like if the strap has been moved back. What instead makes huge sense it to think about the tail length behind the strap. When you already have a rather fast tailed board, tail length in this sense is a super effective tuning variable when shaping, that you can use with no other compensation to just tighten the turn up a bit.
Yes, agree with all that.
I have a quiver of pretty modern quads and tri-fins waveboards - but still bust out a '09 84L Mistral Twinzer and it's still the best all round waveboard I've ever had! In 2009 I went from Starboard Evos to the Mistral and was blown way by the speed, early planing, up wind angles, and insane looseness and surfy feeling for riding waves. I put 16cm K4 Flex fins in it and it went even faster and looser! I was going to sell it but she's a keeper.
Select to expand quoteStev0 said..
I have a quiver of pretty modern quads and tri-fins waveboards - but still bust out a '09 84L Mistral Twinzer and it's still the best all round waveboard I've ever had! In 2009 I went from Starboard Evos to the Mistral and was blown way by the speed, early planing, up wind angles, and insane looseness and surfy feeling for riding waves. I put 16cm K4 Flex fins in it and it went even faster and looser! I was going to sell it but she's a keeper.
That's what I heard too. The quattro tempo twin also awesome all around.
Hah, those pinky Twinzers.
Had both the 84 and 92. A gamechanging quiver somewhere 2011-12.
Especially the 84 was a magic crayon for writing on midsize walls and general throw about. Met her limits only in gusty on/off launches with a strong side current (pearling) and in long period masthigh swells where it became a hair-raising instable bottom turn rocket. Also plugged the yellow flexyfins with good results.
The 92 was more Syncro like, a bliss in lightwind/mushy waves. Being 63 wide, but turning on a dime.
Testament to what a twin with loads of V in the back-ample railrocker/kick can bring indeed. (Nelson/Brawzinho)
However, i feel my current customs largely do the same things without the drawbacks..but indeed, never should have sold it. icon.
Select to expand quoteStev0 said..
I have a quiver of pretty modern quads and tri-fins waveboards - but still bust out a '09 84L Mistral Twinzer and it's still the best all round waveboard I've ever had! In 2009 I went from Starboard Evos to the Mistral and was blown way by the speed, early planing, up wind angles, and insane looseness and surfy feeling for riding waves. I put 16cm K4 Flex fins in it and it went even faster and looser! I was going to sell it but she's a keeper.
Yes, that board had a good amount of tail taper = big wind range and loose (like described earlier). And an average rocker. All in all, a very good alround board. Quite the opposite of a paralel railed stubby type of shape. The down side comes with bigger or choppier waves and the twin fin does not help to keep control either. At the time a customer from Lanzarote had one but when it got bigger or lumpier, he had control problems in the bottom turn. So he asked if I can turn it into a trifin. Sure, that would mean adding 3 boxes and covering 2 plus a set of 3 fins is 400?. Uff and how much would it cost to make it into a quad? That means adding 2 boxes and 2 side fins, which costs 180?. So that is what we did. With toe off course. He said it felt a bit slower (because of the added fins) but turning was the same or better with more control and better up wind. So even with a quad more was gained than lost.
