New CI Tri-Plane close to official release ...

rgruber

Miki Dora status
May 30, 2004
3,627
1,365
113
Looks like they pivot around the fin more and go on rail less than the 2 +1 version. Turns are a bit flatter.
 

flyinraptr

Michael Peterson status
Dec 18, 2008
2,858
1,581
113
San Juan del Sur, Nicaragua
I read a comment somewhere ... can't remember where .... that one of the biggest adjustments with this design concept is with the deep concaves down the middle of the board .. all of the foam is pushed out to the rails making them bigger than what you may generally be accustomed to and it may take a while getting used to. But as mentioned earlier in this thread and from the video ... it looks like the concaves are not as aggressive as they appear in the photos .... pics can be deceiving sometimes.
 

flyinraptr

Michael Peterson status
Dec 18, 2008
2,858
1,581
113
San Juan del Sur, Nicaragua
I'll take my 6'6" tri plane into channel bottom twin for the win over those over-priced single fins. The tri plane doesn't show up due to the light and the flax bottom but it's there. Rails aren't bulky either.View attachment 133614View attachment 133615
Nice .... yeah i love my 6'10" channel bottom single .... has a single concave through the middle. Have not ridden a tri-plane ... would be interesting to feel the difference.
 

Retropete

Phil Edwards status
Jan 20, 2006
6,048
4,591
113
Sunny Coast Qld Australia
Beautiful board.

Who made this?
Local shaper (Hughies surfboards). Specialises in paulownia and cork builds that are mostly un-glassed. I've got 3 tri plane bottom boards from him and a flax Mini-Simmons tri plane from another shaper. The speed and lively feel under the front foot is their appeal for me.
All mine are twins (bar one quad) and have the tri plane further forward (traditional placement developed by Michael Cundith with his Stubby's) so different to the CI with just a single and its placement rearward which I assume is to make the single fin board spicier.Hughies twin pin.jpegHughies mid twin bottom.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Retropete

Phil Edwards status
Jan 20, 2006
6,048
4,591
113
Sunny Coast Qld Australia
Watching this confirmed my thoughts on it. CI placed the tri plane in the back half of the board as opposed to my boards from different shapers that have a tri plane through the middle-nose of the board. This means stand forward over the tri plane to generate speed and then transition weight to the tail more for control of the speed in turns. As the reviewer noted the board generated speed with the tri plane but then the problem comes in turning it at speed with the rearward tri plane placement.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Aruka

rgruber

Miki Dora status
May 30, 2004
3,627
1,365
113
The more footage I see of the tri-plane one, the more of an argument I think it makes for the standard vee bottom 2 + 1. Just so much smoother coming out of turns.

Also Mikey, please stop with the karate kick, it's the single worst aspect of your otherwise amazing surfing by a large margin.
 

Retropete

Phil Edwards status
Jan 20, 2006
6,048
4,591
113
Sunny Coast Qld Australia
Here's a Michael Cundith Stubbie 7'2" re-issue which features the tri plane bottom adapted from his mate, George Greenough's edge kneeboards to stand up surfboards, as he made them in the 60's.
IMG_0187.JPG
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: surfwhere