T-Belly Generation 2

[soulglider]

sit on the peak. that will fix its wave catching ability.

[GeoffreyLevens]

sit on the peak. that will fix its wave catching ability.

Not so easy to do in a crowd or in shifty beach break that requires chase to catch...

[soulglider]

actually crowds and shiftyness is more of a personality issue. it can be solved, if they sit deep, i can sit deeper, if the peak shifts around dont be that chase the peak guy, wait and itll come back to you. and always remember, dont be afraid to go. and see the video of wave hog peepo riders, kroosher put up on the wave topoic dealeo.

[GeoffreyLevens]

actually crowds and shiftyness is more of a personality issue. it can be solved, if they sit deep, i can sit deeper, if the peak shifts around dont be that chase the peak guy, wait and itll come back to you. and always remember, dont be afraid to go. and see the video of wave hog peepo riders, kroosher put up on the wave topoic dealeo.

You can sit deep, but then you will be taking off earlier and need a better/faster paddling board. Back to the same issue!

[GeoffreyLevens]

And yeah, personality definitely an issue. When lot of interpersonal aggression and/or rail banging etc is required, I am on the beach/done. Takes all the joy out of it for me. I would rather drive far and ride crappy waves and surf solitude than put up with that

[soulglider]

then you can have that peak all to yourself. paddle harder!

[GeoffreyLevens]

then you can have that peak all to yourself. paddle harder!

Somehow seems to have drifted from the real consideration of how to increase paddling/wave catching "ability" of the board...

[nomastomas]

Gosh, sit on the peak and paddle harder...hadn't thought of that...

[rodndtube]

My personal weight shifts in about a 30 lb range from year(s) to year(s) on my 5'10" frame. I've ridden one basic plan shape the past 10 years or so -- the consistent factor has been a 50" length and between 20 to 20-1/4 inch width. The variable factor has been the thickness, 2 inches vs. 2-1/2 inches. The thicker board has been ridden in a wide range of waves and done fine. The thinner board isn't as good on weaker waves, both in catching and riding, but the thinner board is a helluva lot more fun in good to excellent waves and in those waves catching the wave is not a factor compared to the thicker board. This is across my own personal weight spectrum. Now I keep, or take, the thicker board down to Florida because I just can't get into the weaker waves with the thinner board unless it is real punchy, top to bottom tubelets.

For practical reasons -- mostly airline travel -- wider boards are in-play due to board bag constraints and airline policies on bag sizes, so a 22 to 23 in. wide board will not be on my option list. Not sure it would be anyway since in the good stuff I enjoy my 19-7/8" wide board. One caveat is my new Bonzer board which maxes out at 20-3/8 and it wider in the tail (which presents a challenge for many board bags).

P.S. The idea of catching a wave with 2 strokes or less is my kind of wave!!!

[nomastomas]

By my reckoning, a 50" x 20" x 2" Austin shape is about 23L (+/-.5L if I got the rail shape wrong). Lacking the tool to determine the exact surface area of both, my guess would be that, despite the similarity in volume, the Austin plan shape has a little more planing area than the 44" x22" x 2" TBG3. Personally, I'm just not comfortable on that length. To me the longer shapes aren't as responsive. I come to this conclusion from personal experience and after watching a ton of videos of bodyboarders, paipo riders and belly boarders. But I think the plan shape choice is analogous to shortboard vs. gun, where at certain size, paddling speed and control trump responsiveness (setting aside those crazy boggie boarders at Pipe). Or, longboard vs shortboard, where in weak conditions there's no substitute for planing area and volume. Given all the inherent trade-offs in surfcraft design, its probably no more complicated than riding what your comfortable on. That's the "best" prone board design; the one you feel most comfortable on and have the most fun on.

[krusher74]

I have been riding a old faithful bodyboard I call the log in our knee to wait high 6sec onshore welsh summer waves. I took a pic for comparison of it, my good wave bodyboard an my paipo.

Log is the white boar at the back. (it isnt thicker than a normal bodyboard)

So is it planning area, of extra nose width and forward wide point that make this board such a wave catcher?

The bodyboards are 42" and the paipo 44", but with a blunt nose the paipo is easily a 42", so how whould we really measure length of should we also a planning area in with the new volume standards.

[GeoffreyLevens]

So is it planning area, of extra nose width and forward wide point that make this board such a wave catcher?

Complex interaction of all that plus rocker amount and distribution (those make a huge difference), maybe other subtle factors as well...

[nomastomas]

...yes, and rail thickness, crown vs flat deck, so many variables, and so many variables we can't even measure. Trying to make "good" better is often not as easy as it sounds....

BTW, I spend much more time talking design when there's no waves to ride.

[Canyon]

...yes, and rail thickness, crown vs flat deck, so many variables, and so many variables we can't even measure. Trying to make "good" better is often not as easy as it sounds....

BTW, I spend much more time talking design when there's no waves to ride.

Time to start a Generation 3 build thread?

[nomastomas]

Yes, my thinking exactly.

[nomastomas]

I've been messing around with fins on the G2 and here's a couple of "trials". On the first I used longboard side bites from True Ames. For placement, I put the 3.7"Dx3.5"B in the front position and the 3.25"Dx3.25"B in the rear. Result: speed equal to bonzer side runners, but with better hold and quicker turning. Next, I used the front fins from a "split-keel" quad set by Shaper's Fins (Aus). (Note: Rich Pavel developed the "split-keel" fin design while working on a modern fish. His idea was to take the traditional low-aspect fish keel twin fin, split it into two high-aspect fins, and place in a quad-fin arrangement. This set-up yielded tremendous gains in responsiveness and speed. Became known as "Speed Dialer" fins) I was concerned that at the full quad set would be too much fin for the chest-high, beach-break conditions, so I added only the front fin (4.92"Dx3.9"B) and placed it in the front-fin box. Result: Super hold, with quick, pivoty turns. Came away thinking "this is the fin". I'll add the rear fin this winter, when things get interesting....

[rodndtube]

The True Ames and Speed Dialer fins all appear to be Hexcore (glass and foam). Can those be modified in size?

Also, many of the front speed dialer fins I saw on web images appear to be very canted. Do the fins come pre-canted as the Bonzer Runners are or is the cant from something else?

[nomastomas]

True Ames has gone to the Resin Transfer Method (RTM) for producing most of their shortboard fins and the Bonzer center-fin. RTM fins feature a honeycomb foam-and-fiberglass core ("Hexcore"), with fiberglass overlay to achieve a fin with a flex pattern similar to solid glass, but nearly 50% lighter. Other fin companies use a honeycomb core alone, or in combination with other laminates, such as carbon fiber, to vary flex characteristics. The Shaper's fins above are a good example of that technology. Unfortunately, these "high-tech" fins cannot be successfully altered, like the good ol' solid glass fins, due to the nature of their construction. I re-examined my TA Bonzer side-runners very carefully yesterday, and as before I found only a 1/8" bead of solid glass before encountering the foam core. Your quest for smaller bonzer side-runners is at an impasse I'm afraid.

As for the cant of Speed Dialer fins, and fins in general, you can't just go by the fin's cant alone. There's a bit of educated guess work involved here. First, most side fins are slightly canted 2* to 3*, with center fins having no cant. But then you must add additional cant if bottom has V where fins are located, or subtract cant if bottom is concave where fins are located. Most fin boxes can be acquired with different degrees of built-in cant. For FCS that's zero cant (center fin box), 5* cant or 9* cant. The shaper has to have all this in mind when he specifies which fin boxes to be installed. I used the 5* FCS boxes when I was planning the TBG2 prototype, knowing that the TA bonzer fins are canted 19* out-of-the-box, and that the bottom would be flat where the fin boxes would be located. Five deg plus 19* = 24* which was close enough to the 27* total cant typically seen with Bonzer side-runners. As for "Speed Dialer", they don't have nearly the extreme cant out-of-the-box that the Bonzer fins have, but probably not more cant than typical side fins either. The photo below is of my Mandala Speed Dialer Fish. Keep in mind that this fish has a single concave exiting the tail, which may account for the apparent lack of cant in the rear fins. Also, conventional wisdom among shapers is to have a little more cant in front fins than in rear fins. On quads, I usually go with 5* front box and 3* rear if rear fin closer to rail, or 0* if rear fin closer to stringer.

[krusher74]

Sounds awesome, there is nothing better than getting a board that you realize can make section you never made before!!

[SJB]

This morning I was out for a test drive at C Street in Ventura with nomastomas. I rode both the white... and the red/white TBG2s discussed in this thread.
I was most curious as my go to board is standard Austin and I wanted to check out this Epoxy experiment of Thomas Patrick.
Conditions were not ideal but I got some fun rides on both boards. Here are my very preliminary take aways.
As much as I like my Austin I found these G2s to be equally if not more nimble.
Seven inches shorter and a couple of inches wider than the Austin....plenty of float for me at 167 lbs. give or take.
Tried the white board first.....liked it. Bit more float than I need. I suspect perfect for someone north of 180 lbs.
Next tried the slimmer red/white G2....just right for me. I bought it on the spot.
Look forward to giving it a more thorough work out in better surf.
I will not be putting the Austin out to pasture....but am very encouraged about the potential performance of the G2. Maybe the excitement of a new toy....but I suspect the G2 may prove to be the more nimble of the two boards. I am already confident that it is less likely to pearl and easier to duck dive than the Austin.
Almost makes me feel disloyal to my trusty Austin just suggesting that. Both boards are winners.
More to follow after further experimentation.
Thanks Thomas.