Board Volume - How much margin?
Scott
I'm just getting back into the sport after 20 years of not
windsurfing. The gear has changed quite a bit since back then, and
I'm having a hard time trying to figure out what to buy. I'm not
expert by any stretch, but I can navigate pretty much wherever I want
to get to, and I'm able to gibe and tack with reasonable proficiency.
I can't reliably water start, and I'm not sure that there will always
be enough wind to do so anyways. I need a board that is big enough to
uphaul, but I'll also take it in higher winds and occasionally out on
the ocean and try and jump small waves.
I naively ordered a 180 liter board, and it showed up and looks like a
friggin island. It's obnoxiously fat (87 cm wide), and it looks like
it's not going to be fun to ride. I don't want to unwrap it and
suffer a restocking fee if I'm going to return it and replace it
anyways. I'm already going to suffer an expensive shipping fee.
So now I'm trying to be a little less naive and see what I should have
ordered instead. I don't want to over compensate in the other
direction and get something too small either.
Basically, I weigh 110 Kg (240 pounds), the boards weigh about 10 Kg,
I'll guestimate that the sail adds another 5 Kg. So Archimedes tells
me that 125 Kg of weight should be compensated by 125 liters of
displacement. Of course that's with the board mostly submerged and
probably not able to sail or balance very well. Obviously 125 liters
is too small for me. How much margin should I add?
I talked to some sales folks, and they have rules of the thumb like
"take your weight in pounds and subtract 60-80 for the number of
liters". It sounds like the kind of apples to oranges rules of thumb
that really only work when you're in the middle of the curve. For
instance, I don't doubt that this formula works for a 170 pound
person, but I know it's not a good formula for people outside of the
median. A 100 pound kid isn't going to do well on a 20-40 liter
board, and a 350 pound football player doesn't need a 270-290 liter
board to keep him afloat in zero wind. The real rule of thumb ought
to be something like "add <fill in the blank> percent", or "take your
weight and multiply by <fill in the blank> number".
Can someone give me a better estimate for what size board to get?
Thank you very much in advance!
Cheers,
-Scott
(PeteCresswell)
>Basically, I weigh 110 Kg (240 pounds), the boards weigh about 10 Kg,
>I'll guestimate that the sail adds another 5 Kg. So Archimedes tells
>me that 125 Kg of weight should be compensated by 125 liters of
>displacement. Of course that's with the board mostly submerged and
>probably not able to sail or balance very well. Obviously 125 liters
>is too small for me. How much margin should I add?
I'm about 220#. For me, 120 liters under a 7.5 has the deck
just about awash.
Uphauling ease comes from width and volume distribution as well
as raw volume. For instance, I have a RealWind custom that's
about 120, but relatively long/narrow (makes a good 5.0 and below
board for somebody who doesn't care for a stone sinker). With no
chop, I can uphaul that board if I'm not too tired and get a
little lucky. OTOH, the Carve 123 I used to have was wider with
a more uphaul-friendly volume distribution and I could uphaul
that thing in 2-3 foot chop, no problem. Same goes for my Aero
127.
I'd say 125 is about right for 6.0-on-down board at 240# - maybe
even a little large - bc 105 is about right for me.
My big board now is a 145 (JP Excite).
It's not the floatation. My Aero 127 is plenty floaty to uphaul
as was my Carve 123.
But the added planing area of the 145 makes it a really nice 7.5
board for me - and I'd think it would work pretty well for you
too.
Personally, I wouldn't go above 145. OTOH, that extra 20-25 lbs
is a good 10 liters..... OTOOH, with the 145, it's not the
volume.... it's the planing area.
Maybe somebody who weighs 240 can comment.
--
PeteCresswell
Josh S
Where will you do most of your sailing?
Charles Jutkins
good thing. It means they are more stable and plane up earlier go through
chop better . This means you can get away with 10 to 15 liters less than the
old style long narrow boards. I weight 220 and use a 115 liter Exocet Cross
for my big low wind planing board. I would think you need to be at around
120 to 140 liters for planing winds . If you are stuck with the 180 you can
use of for low wind sail handling practice.
"Scott" <xsc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a35ccc3-2fb1-4953...@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
Charles Jutkins
"Scott" <xsc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a35ccc3-2fb1-4953...@v16g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
>
AD.
> Can someone give me a better estimate for what size board to get?
It depends :)
If you are going to use large sails (eg 8m and up) in lighter winds
(and are going to be uphauling a lot), then your board would probably
be an OK size (depending on style etc). Especially if you haven't
sailed in decades.
Don't be fooled by how big it is - big modern boards CAN still be a
lot of fun. They are a lot faster and more responsive than BIG boards
used to be.
If you want to use smaller sails (eg below 7m) in windier conditions,
then yeah 180L is too big.
To get a more specific answer you'll need to tell us what model board
you bought, where you want to sail it and what the local conditions
are like.
--
Cheers
Anton
Scott
> Where will you do most of your sailing?
I live in Arizona, and am most likely to spend my time on one of the
lakes around Phoenix. (Yes, there is water in the desert :-) The
strong consistent winds happen mostly in the spring.
About once or twice a year, I go down to the beach in Mexico. The
wind is pretty good on the beach in Rocky Point.
Cheers,
-Scott
Scott
>
> To get a more specific answer you'll need to tell us what model board
> you bought, where you want to sail it and what the local conditions
> are like.
>
I bought a Mistral Malibu 180, and it is really awkwardly large. Even
though I hadn't sailed in 20 years, it came back pretty quickly, and I
definitely don't need or want this much of a beginner board.
Basically, I'd like to know what the smallest board is, for my weight,
that is I should be able to stand on and hold the sail up in zero wind
conditions without putting the thing underwater.
Cheers,
-Scott
Scott
>
> Personally, I wouldn't go above 145. OTOH, that extra 20-25 lbs
> is a good 10 liters..... OTOOH, with the 145, it's not the
> volume.... it's the planing area.
>
That seems reasonable. I hear what you're saying about the planing
area. Thank you for your reply.
Would you be able to stand on your Aero 127 and hold the sail up in
zero wind? Not that you would want to of course, and I'm not asking
if your balance is amazing or anything. I'm just curious if when it's
"awash" like that if it's difficult to stand on. I'm assuming on your
145, this would be easy?
Cheers,
-Scott
ovoga@vip.hr Seki
enough volume to uphaul if needed, same as you are searching for. Take into
consideration that wet rigs, particulary big ones 8m +, can weight up to 10
kg, and if you sail in winter wet suits, it also adds some weight. I notice
the difference when I sailed in winter time it was more difficult to uphaul,
but it is still managable, so i thing this is the right volume for me. Btw,
I use it with 8.4 and 6.4 sails, and have a smaller board for strong wind.
Add 5 kg (5 liters of volume) and that is your ideal volume. Watch out there
are some brands that sells board of "virtual volume" and real volume is
little bit different.
Cheers
--
----
"Scott" <xsc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7f1f4d25-b607-4c75...@2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com...
(PeteCresswell)
>Would you be able to stand on your Aero 127 and hold the sail up in
>zero wind? Not that you would want to of course, and I'm not asking
>if your balance is amazing or anything. I'm just curious if when it's
>"awash" like that if it's difficult to stand on. I'm assuming on your
>145, this would be easy?
Used to do it all the time on the Aero - which was my only board
before I caved into peer pressure and got the 145. Absolutely no
problem at all. The deck was awash on the RealWind, maybe a
little less than awash on the 123, but pretty much dry on the
127.
Sailing the 145 is starting to spoil me. It's so tolerant of
mis-steps that it takes few minutes to get re-dialed on the 105.
145 and 127, I can easily sail backwards - standing between the
mast and the bow. And I'm probably more clumsy than 97% of the
adult population.
--
PeteCresswell
(PeteCresswell)
>Basically, I'd like to know what the smallest board is, for my weight,
>that is I should be able to stand on and hold the sail up in zero wind
>conditions without putting the thing underwater.
From the other posts, it's sounding to me like that's somewhere
between 130 and 145.
One thing I'd add: "wood" construction.
JPs and StarBoards come in two builds: regular and "wood".
My experience is that wood adds so much stiffness that it's well
worth the extra cost. My Aero 127 and JP 145 are wood - as was
the Carve 140-something that proceeded the JP. I *really* wish
I'd gotten it on my 105.
Awhile ago, I traded boards back-and-forth with a guy who had the
same board (Carve 140-something) and a half-meter larger sail
except that my board was "wood" and his was "regular".
He couldn't believe how quick and responsive my rig felt compared
to his.
There's wiggle room there for mast quality - which I could not
assess in that situation... but I'm sure a good part of what
wondered him so much was my board's "wood" construction.
--
PeteCresswell
Scott
135 or 140.
(I'm even more annoyed than before at the salesperson who told me that
if I got a 160 or smaller, I wouldn't be able to use it in anything
less than 25 MPH winds, and that I'd have to be able to water start
reliably.)
vgj...@embarqmail.com
I am also 240 lbs and my favorite board is my Madd 135. I can uphaul
it in any wind and no wind, sail a 9.5 in low wind (12mph) and 5.8 in
high winds although it gets bumpy over 20mph. I also sail my Madd165
in light winds which planes faster in light winds, over 17-18 mph I'm
moving down to the 135 though. I have a 112 techno E that I sink in
less then planning conditions but its nearly old technology now. If I
had to choose only one board to take for a questionable forecast it
would be the Madd135 since it would work in nearly any condition,
although not as well at the higher and lower extremes. I did have an
opportunity to sail the Madd125 in Bonaire and it was very nice in 5.2
conditions but never tried to up haul it. I might add that I am only
an intermediate sailor but I have found the Madd boards to be very
forgiving of my bad habits. Another hard learned lesson is the need
for larger fins for heavyweight like ourselves. When I put the 36cm
fins on the Madd135 that came with the 165 it was like a different
board. If fact I run 42's on the 165 in light winds. Just something
to consider when you feel like your board is too small to plane, it
just may need a little more fin to offset the extra weight.
Good luck, Vince
ovoga@vip.hr Seki
> Another hard learned lesson is the need
> for larger fins for heavyweight like ourselves. When I put the 36cm
> fins on the Madd135 that came with the 165 it was like a different
> board. If fact I run 42's on the 165 in light winds.
This is completely true, but I found my stock fin (46cm) on Tabou Rocket 125
big enough for 8.4 sail, even too much on overpower conditions. It is
because this freeride board is oriented more toward slalom, and it comes
with rather big finn. Hifly mad is a twin fin board so it is hard to compare
fin size.
wsurfn
This is something very near and dear to my heart. the post is only a
couple of days old, and you have had 15 posts already. I hope you get
a chance to read this...
On Aug 26, 4:28 pm, Scott <xsco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm just getting back into the sport after 20 years
Welcome back.....
> I naively ordered a 180 liter board, and it showed up and looks like a
> friggin island. It's obnoxiously fat (87 cm wide), and it looks like
> it's not going to be fun to ride. I don't want to unwrap it and
> suffer a restocking fee if I'm going to return it and replace it
> anyways. I'm already going to suffer an expensive shipping fee.
Send her back.....
> Basically, I weigh 110 Kg (240 pounds),
> median.
> Can someone give me a better estimate for what size board to get?
O.K. everything depends on where you sail, how good your skills are,
and how many boards you want to own, and finally what kind of sailing
you like to do.
Check?
I have not read all the previous posts, so forgive me, I am going to
be late for work....
I weigh #240 +/-, I am proud to say I hit #233 2 wks ago dehydrated,
240 is what I consider my sailing weight for boards. I am 6'6" and
pretty nimble. An advanced intermediate. Inland lakes and bays.
If you want to plane ASAP, formula gear is the ticket. BUT it feels
like a boat TO ME. I went that route to increase my TOW, but now I
don't mind to shlog and do lightwind freestyle to advance my skills.
I have 3 boards: 140, 117, 110.
For your skill set, inland freshwater, one board only 130-135. One
board with plan to add higher wind board in future, 140-145. Add
110-120 liter on future to compliment it.
Sail range 8.5 - 5.0 depends a lot on style. I am sailing mainly 7.5m2
down now.
In The Gorge, it is ridiculous how small you can ride. Not reality for
most of US. 110 is my big board there, I can go down to 95 in solid
wind, and sails in the 4's.
Sorry got to go. I have math, but I will save it. Real world
experience is better anyway.
HTH
sm...@fit.edu
You say you can jibe and tack, but not waterstart. But then that you
want to go in the ocean and work on jumping. I assume you mean
displacement jibes, not planing or carving jibes - big difference...
You also mention that you'll be sailing in wind where you probably
won't be able to waterstart. That to me means light wind.
Are you sailing in the harness? In the foot straps?
Why the insistance on getting a small board that barely floats you?
It sounds to me like you're a large intermediate sailor who generally
sails in light wind. A wide board sounds like it's right up your
alley. In flat water or small chop, these boards are a blast.
They'll get you planing sooner than any other type of board which is
critical because you have to be planing before you can work on
footstraps and jibing.
If I had to guess, I would say that 20 years ago, someone convinced
you that you need to be on a small board to have fun. Small boards
without a doubt still have their place, but that type of mentality
caused a lot of windsurfers to leave the sport. A lot has changed in
20 years, wide boards being one of the most significant technological
advances. I guess what I'm getting at is that the board you bought
may actually be quite appropriate for you.
sm
AD.
> I bought a Mistral Malibu 180, and it is really awkwardly large. Even
> though I hadn't sailed in 20 years, it came back pretty quickly, and I
> definitely don't need or want this much of a beginner board.
Yeah that board sounds too basic for you. Its a beginner/family board
and probably won't be fast or agile enough.
>
> Basically, I'd like to know what the smallest board is, for my weight,
> that is I should be able to stand on and hold the sail up in zero wind
> conditions without putting the thing underwater.
I reckon you are better off choosing the right style of board for the
kind of sailing you want to do first before choosing the size.
Different style boards will have different volume sweet spots for your
weight and conditions. Some styles will concentrate on speed and/or
upwind/downwind performance, some will concentrate on user
friendliness, while others might concentrate on turning and jumping
etc. And there will be all round boards that offer a less specialised
mix of all those things.
I'm a bit out of date with what available these days though, so I
can't offer any specific recommendations.
But as another (non representative for you) data point - I'm 95kg and
live in a pretty windy area and my boarda are a 93L Freestyle Wave and
a 76L Wave board. My sails range from 6.2 down to 4.0 and are wave
sails.
But from what you've said so far, I wouldn't recommend you get
anything under about 130L. Depending on what style you go for,
something from 135L up to maybe 150L should work well for you.
--
Cheers
Anton
AD.
> (I'm even more annoyed than before at the salesperson who told me that
> if I got a 160 or smaller, I wouldn't be able to use it in anything
> less than 25 MPH winds, and that I'd have to be able to water start
> reliably.)
Well 20yrs ago salespeople would make the opposite mistake by selling
people into boards that were too small, and cause them to give up in
frustration :)
--
Cheers
Anton
(PeteCresswell)
>Thank you all for your replies! It sounds like I'll probably get a
>135 or 140.
Based on my own experience, I'd go high. 140 or 145.
--
PeteCresswell
(PeteCresswell)
>For your skill set, inland freshwater, one board only 130-135. One
>board with plan to add higher wind board in future, 140-145. Add
>110-120 liter on future to compliment it.
That's pretty much what I was thinking - albeit better
articulated.
I'd say odds are that you'll eventually want at least one more
board - which argues for the 140-145.
--
PeteCresswell
sm...@seattletimes.com
Most windsurfers arrive at their board and sail choice after a series
of trial-and-error situations, and usually wind up with a logical
combination. Arizona isn't one of your typical hotspots so it's a bit
difficult to know what to recommend. The shop was being conservative,
and I don't think you would have no fun with the board they sold you.
It's a question of how much more work you're ready to put into the
sport. Optimally, everyone wants to sail little boards with little
sails, but most people don't live in such windy places.
Paxi
to follow up this thread in any case...
I tend use the following formulas as rule of thumb:
1st board (beginner/inland retro): Own weight (Kg) + 80 litres
(centerboard)
2nd board (learning freerider/inland activist): Own weight (Kg) +
30-50 litres
3rd board (activist/1 board): Own weight (Kg) + 25 litres
+xtra board (= 2 boards): Own weight (Kg) + 0-15 litres
Of course there are different variations depending on skill, place,
sail and wishes etc. but so far this has been working very well:-)
For the rigs its more complicated because every board doesn't carry
every sail but taking the 1-3's it's been quite easy to say that the
most fun big sail is your own weight (Kg) divided by 10 and the second
sail is 1,0-1,5 m2 smaller (for sails from 6m2 up) depending on the
type of sail chosen.
To make it extreme and cover as much as you can, I ride 120 litres
having 7,8 as my bigger sail and 6,0 as my smaller. I count myself as
intermediate, at least every second time I go to water. This kit
serves me the 80+ % of days I can get into water from family and work
and for the days I need smaller gear I have a 92 litres with 5,3 and
4,7. And I weight...uh...too much :-)
Scott
> Why the insistance on getting a small board that barely floats you?
You misunderstood my question. I don't intend to buy the smallest
board that I possibly can. I bought a board that was too large, and I
don't want to make the opposite mistake in getting one that is too
small either. I wanted to know where the limits are, and I'll add
some margin from there.
> If I had to guess, I would say that 20 years ago, someone convinced
> you that you need to be on a small board to have fun. [...]
> I guess what I'm getting at is that the board you bought
> may actually be quite appropriate for you.
Trust me, a 180 liter board is way too big.
mckee
Scott,
My recommendation would be to look at all designs in the 145 to 165
size and find the exact fit for your conditions and style/ skill. Then
as many have suggested pick up a high wind board later if you still
think it necessary.
On Labor day we had approximately 80 to 100 people at the Dike in
Texas City. There were many sailers ripping and it was great fun. One
of the guys was riding his Madd 165 W/ 7.5 (sail) he was faster than
most and didn't have to work as hard as the guys with smaller boards,
the board had plenty of voulme for his size (220lbs). It was very
interesting to watch how well it worked in all aspects. I am
considering one my self.
I don't believe a smaller displacement board is worth the extra couple
knots of top speed at the expense of not having fun in less than
perfect conditions.
Paul S.
the principal
I agree with Paul. The Madd 165 is a great board for heavy weights.
Board volume can work in your favour, not so with a new Malibu in your
case.
It is so easy to go very fast and loose on a Madd 165, .
Madd 135 is great to if your local conditions are better. Malibu, It's
a big board for
for light folks with no power. It could be set up with a 9.5 to be
great for you in light air
but would be very one dimensional.
At 240 zero wind, some chop and the need to uphaul and maybe plane you
back to the beach.
These boards meet that requirement F2 Powerglide 130 Madd 135 Naish
Titan 140(?) all proven
big fella boards all with huge range. Want to sail a lot more and
always be perfect with a couple
rigs 8.5, 6.7 both are totally sweet spots on a Madd 165. You could be
single sail 8.0/7.8 and Madd 165.
I haven't found a 7.5 that could do it and I've tried. 7.5 Sailworld
Blast was close but Tushingham 7.8
is the only one that did it. Lots of 8.0's work as a single rig board
combo. Honestly, single sail with a
Madd 165 isn't really sensible as there is twice as much range
available in the board.
Then later get an older small board 120/115 for $100 and a tighter
leach 5.4
If you want to stay in the family Madd 135/125 Or Hifly Fee 125 with
6.7 (both awesome)
then down to a 5.8 or so.
As a big guy you would have no issues with overlap between having both
Madd 165 and 135
but the 135 would be too big on some great days, not wind dependent
but wave dependent.
The Free 125 would be better in that situation. With the stock fins it
is behaved and stays groovy.
The Madd 135 can fly out in bigger wind and chop.
sm...@fit.edu
sounds like you want a board that can do everything...light wind lake
sailing as well as sailing in the ocean waves. That's a pretty hefty
requirement. You can't waterstart, and there may not consistantly
have enough wind to do so. You can jibe and tack, I assum non-
planing. Do you sail in the foot straps? In the harness? You want
to work on jumping?
I think the recommendation for the Madd 165 is probably a pretty good
one. Those are very versatile boards. But be aware that virtually
every modern board is considerably wider than boards from 20 years
ago, so they'll probably all look like "islands". That is not a bad
thing - arguably the most hi-tech racing boards are 100cm wide formula
boards. If you were to say that 90% of your sailing was going to be
done on an inland lake in wind 15mph or less, you'd probably do well
to consider a free-ride version of a formula board.
To answer your specific question, the amount of flotation required is
simple physics- the volume in liters represents the number of kg of
water that the board can support (including it's own weight). So the
sum of the number of pounds of the board, rig, and yourself divided by
2.2 will give you the minimum number of liters required to float. But
a board at that volume will be very "sinky".
sm
Scott
> It is so easy to go very fast and loose on a Madd 165, .
> Madd 135 is great to if your local conditions are better.
> Honestly, single sail with a Madd 165 isn't really sensible
Thanks for all of the helpful suggestions. I'm not trying to find a
one size fits all sail, but I appreciate your input on that.
Cheers,
-Scott
Scott
> I still don't see a clear indication of what your skills are and it
> sounds like you want a board that can do everything...light wind lake
> sailing as well as sailing in the ocean waves. That's a pretty hefty
> requirement. You can't waterstart, and there may not consistantly
> have enough wind to do so. You can jibe and tack, I assum non-
> planing. Do you sail in the foot straps? In the harness? You want
> to work on jumping?
>
I'm a beginner who can get where I want to go in a range of conditions
from light to moderate winds on a flat lake. I haven't had much
experience in big winds (a couple of storms when I was much younger
and more stupid). I've been on the ocean (small rolling waves) a few
times, and was able to get around with more difficulty. I've already
got an old school 12 foot beginner board, and I'm looking for
something more agile and fun.
I can't do a planing jibe, but that's the kind of thing I'd like to
work on.
I use the foot straps some times, and I haven't used a harness.
By jumping I mean hitting small waves and hoping to get the tail of
the board out of the water, not the acrobatic stuff you see the pros
doing.
> I think the recommendation for the Madd 165 is probably a pretty good
> one. Those are very versatile boards. But be aware that virtually
> every modern board is considerably wider than boards from 20 years
> ago, so they'll probably all look like "islands".
Fair enough. The Mistral Malibu 180 is probably a good board for
someone who is just getting started, or perhaps if you'd like to ride
double with a friend and maybe her dog. It wasn't what I'm looking
for, but I didn't want to go too small either...
> That is not a bad
> thing - arguably the most hi-tech racing boards are 100cm wide formula
> boards. If you were to say that 90% of your sailing was going to be
> done on an inland lake in wind 15mph or less, you'd probably do well
> to consider a free-ride version of a formula board.
>
Yup, the formula racing guys look like they're having a pretty good
time. I'll give those a look. Regardless of the style, I'd still
have to decide what volume to get.
> To answer your specific question, the amount of flotation required is
> simple physics- the volume in liters represents the number of kg of
> water that the board can support (including it's own weight). So the
> sum of the number of pounds of the board, rig, and yourself divided by
> 2.2 will give you the minimum number of liters required to float. But
> a board at that volume will be very "sinky".
>
I understand Archimedes principle, and said as much in my first post.
The key thing I was looking for was how much margin (percentage) to
add so that the board doesn't feel too "sinky".
I've gotten some very helpful answers. Thank you to everyone who
responded, but I don't intend to reply to any more messages in this
thread, and I'm going to go back to lurking for a while.
Cheers,
-Scott
the principal
Better definition,
`The Madd 165 still fits like a dream, in light air you can litteraly
"wave sail" it on a break
when combined with a a powerwave 7.+ or so. Which is definitely
something that would be kookie/ corkie
on a Malibu even for the most skilled. But pretend for a minute you
were on your lake and had a 9.0.
100% carbon rig, That Malibu would not be bad at all, even under/
poorly finned with the stock one; as most
stock fins are.
Power and performance compared to many years ago is very fin
dependent.
Folks used to "make do" with non planing fins or great day fins that
cost $30.
Narrow shapes and baggy tight leached sails are not as fin dependent.
To hit the 80% of the good windsurfing planing days 12->25 knots
today, fins are a huge component and can make a
board like the Malibu very sensible for a big guy. All said, After
tons of experince with "those types"
of boards they are a compromise and not shaped to fit big folks, they
always lack. Rails too soft for early planing
rocker/scoop, too short/shallow. Thats why a proven "big guy" modern
shape like I mentioned can take two sails
a couple fins and cover a huge range. OR lots of folks make RETRO gear
cover a huge range as well. The point being wide/volume alone is not
sll there is to this. I know a guy who rides a Bic veloce 310 one step
down from the biggest one.
He weighs about 170lbs and considers his 7.0 HUGE. He has a good fins
and can out plane me when I'm on a 10.4. The same guy will be on a
custom slalom hardrailed 105 and 5.4 combo in about 15. Undeliveable.
He has a huge head, ala the movie "My Son Married an Axe Murderer" hee
hee "Head, Move'it, Sputnik" so I conside him a freak. Narrow, bad
sails silky smooth, fast. Obviously dedicated, never touches modern
gear, except probaly when he gets invited to Magazine gear tests. ha
ha. this is an example, maybe as a seguee that the person is the
definition of the gear
So I can give a specific example.....
I demoed a Hifly Madd 135/6.4 Remedy (power wave/slalom unisail) combo
in Hateras in steady 20 knots flat water but it would have been
perfect in Great Lakes moguls as well. That day to me has been the
definition of what a perfect combo should be. Before lunch it was
unispired but that was a couple years ago and once I took the 'More
downhaul" corrective measure, things changed. I was a heavy downhaul
guy by then, I had a couple Gaastra Nitros III anyways, The Remedy
came alive on a shitty mast and boom and the board was amazing. For
two years that Madd 135 was elusive at a discount and was basically
always $2000.I matched dimensions/shape all I could "see" and got a
Bic Blast 140L, a wicked fast board with good build for $700. I could
make that boad sing, on rare occasion, by the time I was on that board
it was out of it's useful range for me, simply because once I could
power it up with the perfect sail the seastate didn't match the board.
I loan it to a friend at 200 lbs it can't stop planinng, carving and
going fast on less sail. He's out there with too little wind and too
much chop and owning it. Crazy stuff. Subtle shaper things, I had fins
rigs and all kinds of thing to throw at it and Naish could have made
it work anywhere, but skill/weight conditons were all working against
me. My friend had the same "it's good" moment I had had on the Madd
135. Result was Blast 140 SOLD (not to my buddy), but with good karma
to a less skilled guy at about 190lbs. Every confidence it will be a
grand board for him, especially cause he is a river guy and it had a
good slalom rocker tail for gust effieciency.
So What's the point??!!
If you only get out only twice a year in 18 knots, I'd take the
Malibu.
And not care if it was too big. I'd set it up to cruise with oversized
sail and fins to kick ass in 14 knots and smile
with the tweaks what normally transforms that kind of board into a
Towncar ride; those "mass target" boards loaded down with a Brudda and
lots off power often become the best accessible option. I'll go back
a long way and bring up the original GO.
An ankle breaker for someone who weighs 190, But a planing powerhouse
compared to the huge Xantos 320? (I can't remember the exact 65cm
model, cool red/white/blue awesome board) The original Go was a real
world lake slalom board for a guy 250lbs. outrageously wide at the
time. Original Start with an 85 cm fin, light and tiffl, still
earliest planning board shape ever with a shitty deck and footstrap
location, Thommen XL/Allstar70 with a 7.0, or maybe a Realwind, a 130
Gorge board!!!! yeah right This is just for group interest more than
your original question but the point is continuous; how a Volume
question with respect to a gentleman with size 14 feet, 6'6" 250lbs
needs to vary from the industry norm at times. Especially at first
board returning board level.
So, lets say it again
Me 270lbs
Madd 165, 29cm weed fins, 9.0 two cam 12->17 knots, lacks upwind
ability, need bigger fins but that's only money, can definitely rip
through the 12 knot lulls with authority. most lulls to 10knots are
transferable. Can handle up to 20 knots but because the fins are small
I can't take the board into pure upwind mode and not get sail
rotated(slamed) while avoiding spinout. Downwinders are huge fun, a 20
knot gusts with this soft board and small fins combined with chop
covered swell. Feel like a kiter, Huge grins, speed and ease.
Madd 165, 29cm weed fins, 7.8 two cam 13->20 knots, (most used) could
also use bigger fins most times.
Madd 165, 29cm weed fins, 7.0 powerwave 20_>22 knots, (useless and
thus retired, nice ride but not worth keeping in the rotation)
Madd 165, 29cm weed fins, 6.7 powerwave 20->25 compared to the 7.0
this is a tossable sail much more fun, rather take the 7.8 until the
6.7 is the choice
Madd 165, 29cm weed fins, powerful 5.6 single cam 23->up, it works
good if it is flat water with holes in the wind, balances nice but
rarely a preffered choice.
That is a good day(s) windsurfing. Of course I got 6 other boards some
have only gotten wet once this year, that Madd 165 is choice and I run
only those Orca 29cm weed fins.