REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
I do not miss traveling with glass ons! that dam giant foam block fin protectorsEdit: That said, you know I love and miss glass-ons.
GG would say the fin system provides the better hydrodynamics.What would GG have to say about all this?
What are your thoughts on putting the NVS Kraken set in the AO?I'll go this far, Malcolm prefers the glass-ons. For fin systems, he has to alter the bottom design slightly to accommodate. The best single fin boards I ever had all had glass ons. But on the other side of that equation, I have had boards that I thought were total dogs that had a box. And I changed out fins/moved fins and the board lit up. I shudder to think how many boards with glass-ons I probably rejected over the years that simply needed a fin adjustment.
I had twin recently that had glass ons. Keel fins with double foils. The board was a dog. Barely worked. I almost took a chainsaw to it. Instead, out of professional curiosity, (I couldn't understand how the board wasn't working) I had someone grind/knock the fins off and put boxes in. Slightly different position. Board went off. ymmv.
Actually what I see is that the water on the glass on is going more vertically up the fin. Remember that deflection I was talking about? What's missing in your test is the water that would be flowing fore/aft right above the fin root. I doubt the deflection has a noticeable effect.Better flow with glass on. Better adhesion. Probably translates to more hold/less release.
Putting boxes right where two concaves meet means sanding down the edges of the box and compromising sturctural intergrity. ven worse are channels. You cannot put a fin (in a box) right on the edge of a channel.He has said that the glass-ons are better suited to the design and that he adjusts the bottom contours for Futures/FCS.
admittedly my water flow test wasn’t ideal.Actually what I see is that the water on the glass on is going more vertically up the fin. Remember that deflection I was talking about? What's missing in your test is the water that would be flowing fore/aft right above the fin root. I doubt the deflection has a noticeable effect.
Sure you can…You cannot put a fin (in a box) right on the edge of a channel.
Do you see show the inside edge of the fin will be 1/2" away from the channel? Depending on the depth of the channel you carve away a sizeable chunk of the box/plugs = compromised structural integrity.
Pic is a little deceiving. I’ve seen this board in person with fins on it. The inside foil on 80/20 quad rears sits right on the channel edge.Do you see show the inside edge of the fin will be 1/2" away from the channel? Depending on the depth of the channel you carve away a sizeable chunk of the box/plugs = compromised structural integrity.
TBH, that first impression doesn’t surprise me. I could apply your description to the DAs I’ve had/tried- particularly “less attached“ (which is also how I’d articulate the difference between DA vs Varial carbon).…The board felt faster, looser, more squirrelly, less “attached” overall. It seemed to have less of that “bonzer feel”. Not saying this is good or bad, just different.
I haven’t ridden the ghost in any real waves. Also, the ghost is at my lower end for volume so it sinks in the water more. The Townsend works really good in solid surf but I do think a PU/PE version the same size might be better in some ways. I ride the Townsend like a shortboard and the extremely light weight of it helps with that.TBH, that first impression doesn’t surprise me. I could apply your description to the DAs I’ve had/tried- particularly “less attached“ (which is also how I’d articulate the difference between DA vs Varial carbon).
I like all that for small-weak-mushy waves. My DA superchunk feels like Marty McFly’s hovercraft skteboar, and is a blast.
But that would be my hesitation for a DA in more powerful / good waves.
I know you have DA townsend and ghost. How does the feel compare to AO? I imagine the extra weight of an added layer of glass (like the ghost) would make a difference in decent waves.
Next time you’re down in SD, we’ll have to surf them together and compare. For science!
yes. The fillet provides better flow. Water tends to "pile up" or "puddle" at the intersection of the boar and fin. The fillet is more hydrodynamic. And probably provides better holdProbably 20 years ago FCS came out with a fin set that had some sort of boot at the base of the fins to create the flow of glass ons. Only ever saw the marketing for them but never actually saw them in a shop.
Question though: Do we really want the flow of water from the bottom of the board climbing up the fins the way it does with glass ons?