Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
And yes, spell check cannot be corrected even with 3 attempts.
too bad brain check hasn't been invented yet
LeeD .... you said no boards ever have wide tails these days (ie evo dna) - and failed experiment etc ... and that you never ride a tail over 36 ... well - your not very well versed in modern shape details ...
Let's look at some ACTUAL facts about boards today .... Windsurf mag 2020 test
Fanatic Grip 86 - tail width 37.4 (this actually their narrow tail DTL board - stubby is the wide tail in the range!)
Goya custom pro 84 - tail width 36.4 (fully capable DTL board with good rocker )
Quatro cube 87 - tail 38.1 .....
Simmer flywave (quite a narrow gun like dtl shape ) - 1 ft off - 39 cm
Tabou da curve 88 - very long drawn out DTL looking shape - tail wdith 37.9 .... and length looks fairly long by todays standards - 230 ... before you shout photoshoot propaganda - Graham Ezzy would probably take something like this out to Jaws
And what was evo length back then 235 ish ?
You are getting things completely mixed up LeeD ... and shows yr ignorance on shape matters - Evo planshapes affected all future outlines to a certain extent .... No one rides 255 x 53's anymore ! ... You have FAILED to see that what maybe made evo so flowy and say mush orientated - was not only tail width - BUT FAIRLY SKATEY UNDER WATER CONTOURS - IE NOT MUCH VEE OR SINGLE CONCAVE DEPTHS ! ... That was an 'outlier' of shaping that maybe made it less locked in for dtl sailing .... you can have a wide tail - but lots of double concave or v and the board would track fine DTL - duh !
Also - have you EVER actually thought about the impacts of removing 5cm of pintail and turning into squash tail and how that impacts 1 ft off measurements - clearly you have NOT ! ... alot of these 'wide tail boards ' if you meassure at a standard point - ie back strap plug , and ignore 1ft off measurement - they are NOT ACTUALLY much different ... I have measured 2 examples accurately bearing this in mind - a starboard quad (you would say is wide tail ) , vs a you would assert - 'narrower' pintail of same overall width ... - widths at several points - strap plugs etc - are all virtually IDENTICAL .....
Again - you stating you've shaped boards - yet cant seemingly comprehend these differences ???? - shows a naiveness of critical thinking ...
What can be said - regardless of widths - if you remove length behind back strap - you remove some of the 'rudder like' bottom turn stability in bottom turns - that could be a general comment - yet mulitfins these days ADD some of that stability back ... (fins on rails etc)
and BTW , anyone who cant turn a board over 36 tail width is lets be honest a bit of a bagpuss LeeD ! , maybe knowing little of the technique to applying power to turns ... Im 76kgs , and can grind out solid turns on 40+ cm tails (1 ft off) if need be.... throwing spray etc , but I have a range of tail widths in my quiver - some days I take narrow , some days I wouldnt want to be on narrow tails - in fact - sailing narrow tail boards teach you nothing about power turns , if you can do proper power turns - you can do them on any width tail ... ! and Im not interested in turning boards that 'squirt' around a turn with little resistance ... you are never going to throw decent spray and feel that epic feeling of juddering power under your back foot ! ...
Narrower tails have their place/day (like all different design aspects) In my quiver .... on solid size days with powerful 15+ second period swell , and with slight side off winds ... But that is not real world stuff for most euro's / everyone else ... and Ive sailed all those spots up your coastline Lee'd , and most of the time they are not like that either !
short and wide with flattish rocker.
surfbunker.com/blog/the-most-fun-surfboard-is-a-mini-simmons
Most influential game changing thinkers on windsurf board design imo ...
Dissasio (strapper shaper to JP early 90's)
Mckercher - shorter wider concepts to the masses (mass production)
Seadi - shorter , multifins
KT/Quatro - little mentioned BUT .... KT was the shaper who actually transformed Kauli's ideas into workable shapes ...
And ... Mark Nelson - why I mention his name LeeD - knower of everything on surfboard design with attitude ? blow me away with your knowledge ...
Select to expand quoteseabreezer said..
LeeD .... you said no boards ever have wide tails these days (ie evo dna) - and failed experiment etc ... and that you never ride a tail over 36 ... well - your not very well versed in modern shape details ...
Let's look at some ACTUAL facts about boards today .... Windsurf mag 2020 test
Fanatic Grip 86 - tail width 37.4 (this actually their narrow tail DTL board - stubby is the wide tail in the range!)
Goya custom pro 84 - tail width 36.4 (fully capable DTL board with good rocker )
Quatro cube 87 - tail 38.1 .....
Simmer flywave (quite a narrow gun like dtl shape ) - 1 ft off - 39 cm
Tabou da curve 88 - very long drawn out DTL looking shape - tail wdith 37.9 .... and length looks fairly long by todays standards - 230 ... before you shout photoshoot propaganda - Graham Ezzy would probably take something like this out to Jaws
And what was evo length back then 235 ish ?
You are getting things completely mixed up LeeD ... and shows yr ignorance on shape matters - Evo planshapes affected all future outlines to a certain extent .... No one rides 255 x 53's anymore ! ... You have FAILED to see that what maybe made evo so flowy and say mush orientated - was not only tail width - BUT FAIRLY SKATEY UNDER WATER CONTOURS - IE NOT MUCH VEE OR SINGLE CONCAVE DEPTHS ! ... That was an 'outlier' of shaping that maybe made it less locked in for dtl sailing .... you can have a wide tail - but lots of double concave or v and the board would track fine DTL - duh !
Also - have you EVER actually thought about the impacts of removing 5cm of pintail and turning into squash tail and how that impacts 1 ft off measurements - clearly you have NOT ! ... alot of these 'wide tail boards ' if you meassure at a standard point - ie back strap plug , and ignore 1ft off measurement - they are NOT ACTUALLY much different ... I have measured 2 examples accurately bearing this in mind - a starboard quad (you would say is wide tail ) , vs a you would assert - 'narrower' pintail of same overall width ... - widths at several points - strap plugs etc - are all virtually IDENTICAL .....
Again - you stating you've shaped boards - yet cant seemingly comprehend these differences ???? - shows a naiveness of critical thinking ...
What can be said - regardless of widths - if you remove length behind back strap - you remove some of the 'rudder like' bottom turn stability in bottom turns - that could be a general comment - yet mulitfins these days ADD some of that stability back ... (fins on rails etc)
and BTW , anyone who cant turn a board over 36 tail width is lets be honest a bit of a bagpuss LeeD ! , maybe knowing little of the technique to applying power to turns ... Im 76kgs , and can grind out solid turns on 40+ cm tails (1 ft off) if need be.... throwing spray etc , but I have a range of tail widths in my quiver - some days I take narrow , some days I wouldnt want to be on narrow tails - in fact - sailing narrow tail boards teach you nothing about power turns , if you can do proper power turns - you can do them on any width tail ... ! and Im not interested in turning boards that 'squirt' around a turn with little resistance ... you are never going to throw decent spray and feel that epic feeling of juddering power under your back foot ! ...
Narrower tails have their place/day (like all different design aspects) In my quiver .... on solid size days with powerful 15+ second period swell , and with slight side off winds ... But that is not real world stuff for most euro's / everyone else ... and Ive sailed all those spots up your coastline Lee'd , and most of the time they are not like that either !
Great post! With some very good facts.
Can I assUme you guys actually lay down hard bottom turns into snappy otl cutbacks?
Yip .... I regularly feel the harness lines hit and drag on my lay down bottom turns when a smooth face and hyper extended / driving ... If the wave is chopped up - I go to other bottom turn styles ... is that enough of an answer for you LeeD ? Dude - you don't want to get in a battle here of calling out everyones ability - I doubt thats a winning strategy on yr part trust me ...
So answer the question LeeD - why did I mention Mark Nelson .... ?
Here you go LeeD - laydown bottom turn on solid wave - harness line dragging ... sometimes boom arm grabs ... Enough rail engaged for you LeeD ?
possibly into a 360 , taka , aerial , or hack .... why don't you post some shots yourself ? . I bet most of the dudes on here could sail you into the ground ...
Btw - when I went around the world 2003 for a year - I weighed 82 kgs ... The 2 boards I took (my go-to's ) were .... (cant believe this myself now in hindsight ...)
63 litre !!! (19 ltrs below my weight wtf !!!!!) 248 x 51.5 , with 31.5 tail .....
74 ltr (8 ltrs below my weight) , 254 x 53.5 ..... with a 32.5 tail ...
So my 5.3 float board was 8 ltrs below my weight ! ...
that was the sort of Meth everyone was smoking back then ... stuck on overpowering single fins that demanded narrow tails .... its good that times have changed and we can all ride more volume , get more waves , and have more fun without sinking to knees and ridiculous work-out ... and we owe alot of that to Mulitifins (kauli/KT) on shorter / wider platforms (Scott M and Kauli ) .... my 75 ltr for instance now is 228 x 55.5 x 34 ish tail .... Even evo at 235 etc doesnt look that short vs wide anymore - were all riding 210's /225's / 228's etc - Widths in relation to lengths have gone up even since EVO ... some wider tails , some not - whats the big deal ...
Select to expand quotescott mckerc said..
I agree with Lee D
The Evo was a complete marketing hoax
this thread is has been my favourite thing in 2020 sofar .
Just read over the whole thing . Omg- The gift that keeps on giving . Thanks leed lol
btw clearly the board is a modified surfski. Scott did a good job of handpainting the evo graphics in the bushes of hookipa . Don't tell anyone. bye
Maybe we should start a LeeD appreciation thread so he can be free to impart his wisdom on us and show us all the wrongness of our ways.
In this thread he can share all his magazine covers and video footage of his illustrious windsurfing career.
I can't wait, it's gonna be awesome!
Select to expand quoteDunkO said..Brent in Qld said..LeeD said..
10 dungers out of the first 30 is actually pretty good!
Out of those 1st 30 included 6' x 22" what became"bunker" boards, 7' x 17" what became "Hanalei miniguns", 9'7" x 19 7/8 full gun, an actual "normal at the time 6'4" x 20 single with 4" sidebites, and a 5'8" twin with 6.5" fins.
Ist board was ridden in 1967. 5th was ridden by summer '67.
By the time I joined the Army in '70, had shaped 112 boards.
Shaped over 200 more after discharge, took up motocross in '77.
One picture is worth a thousand words. Here's how it works LeeD
I once earnt a living building boards for a nice bloke in Western Oz in the early 90's. Here is a picture of one being finished. 
If you don't have any images, please just tell us & let us all move on. Thanks
That's a filth looking board!
They were great boards back in the day mate (board pic is probably a 93' - approx 8'2" X 21" x 12.5-13" tail, a twinnie @-6kg). Nearly 30yrs ago now and one of many evolutionary steps to what we now ride.
BTW had a look at the Nano2 & Mako range in Jan, categorically filthy.
Select to expand quotewilliam said..scott mckerc said..
I agree with Lee D
The Evo was a complete marketing hoax
this thread is has been my favourite thing in 2020 sofar . Just read over the whole thing . Omg- The gift that keeps on giving . Thanks leed lol
btw clearly the board is a modified surfski. Scott did a good job of handpainting the evo graphics in the bushes of hookipa . Don't tell anyone. bye
I'm loving it, this is my go to thread for a chuckle.
Lee D for president!!! Move over Donald T
Select to expand quotehoop said..
Maybe we should start a LeeD appreciation thread so he can be free to impart his wisdom on us and show us all the wrongness of our ways.
In this thread he can share all his magazine covers and video footage of his illustrious windsurfing career.
I can't wait, it's gonna be awesome!
I think your going to be dissappointed Hoops
Select to expand quoteDcharlton said..
Had the time of my life this weekend sailing logo high waves in the US, all made possible by my Goya Custom 114Ltr board. The thing is just magic, it floats my 205llb body, gives me the ability to time the wave and is incredibly controlled even when the wind picks up.
I'm really thankful to Goya for making it as it has made all the difference. What I just don't understand, is why is it so hard to find a windsurf wave board that goes over 99ltrs? The industry is really missing out on a big segment of big riders who want to ride waves...
DC
92 kgs is not that big.
simple remark
wide, narrow, long, short, V, concave, single, twin, thruster, quad.
I'm with you riding a wave (can't wait for lock down to be over) wins.
you've created a monster 6 pages of high performance.
Lots and lots of super hot sailers exist.
I hope from it all boards can also be designed to suit those who just sail waves.
??
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Obviously, that pic is not an Evo by Starboard.
LOTS were sold, I know that.
Lots of Hypersonics were sold too.
But would you care to go back to either?
I've had both, the EVO I think 84. Not impressed, board was beyond me, most likely.
i ve had 2 Hypersonic's, both 105. 15 years apart. I liked it a lot.
sold both, deeply regretted 1st, jury's out in the 2 nd. Too many boards ,too sick, and not enough time.
the Hypersonic , I have enough but intriguing stick.
A lot of really good makes have big volume (ie over 100 litre some as high as 116 litre or more) wave boards in their lines. For example Goya, Naish, RRD, Quatro, Exocet, Tabou and Severne. If you want one new you probably have to order it ensure you get it. There are many boards available secondhand too.
Select to expand quoteLeeD said..
Ratz, you Aussies are always bragging how great your waves are.
I will admit, Oz has great surfers.
Remember Nat Youngs 24" wide V bottoms?
Never worked at Pipe or Sunset because it was too wide! Honolua Bay waves wrap in from the NW and lose a lot of their punch, so those wide tubs worked.
Sorry but if your under 95kgs you should even be making comments here...You have no idea!
The big boards on offer while maybe limited but they have change the game for us bigger sailors. I've had both very good and bad board but the fact that someone is willing to give a relatively small market a go at production level is just celebrated by someone such as myself.
Custom was originally where I went with OES to get the boards I need with anything from 127 to 112 and it was game changing for me and got me seriously hooked on Wavesailing as everything finally started to work. I'm an avid fan of wide tail boards for the bigger sailor, it adds float where I need it. The bigger the board the more rider input is required, They behave extremely well but you do need to be aggressive. Stay tuned for something that may hopefully be very special...
???? J
Select to expand quoteGestalt said..
looking very flywavish jason...
Mums the word but yes Flywave is the inspiration.
One think I know, unless my memory play me a trick(it happens a lot btw), a production board over 80L was not turning well and were not popular in the past. The evo was the turning point of that era isn't it?
Select to expand quoteNordRoi said..scott mckerc said..LeeD said..
Obviously, that pic is not an Evo by Starboard.
LOTS were sold, I know that.
Lots of Hypersonics were sold too.
But would you care to go back to either?
yeah. we never used production boards in hawaii for the photoshoots. 
Interesting! Photoshoot were in April/May, but they were releasing the board in January back then.?
I'm not saying the production board were not good, but it is really possible that you were using a custom painted as a evo and that would be find, they still do it now with many brands. Could be a prototype that would be used for the official version as well. If shape and dimension were similar, why not?
I played the same trick on the missus.
gave here what looked like a production Easter egg. But was actually a custom potato.
^^^ Sorry, I skipped past the text and went straight to the photo.
I thought LeeD had finally shown a pic of one of his boards. Then I realise it's just a potato.
My bad
Come on guys. Stop ganging up on the poor fellow. I'm sure he's a really nice person if you got to know him. ONLY JOKING !!!!!!!!!
I have no pity for anyone who can't see the error of his ways.
Select to expand quoteAl1 said..LeeD said..
And yes, spell check cannot be corrected even with 3 attempts.
too bad brain check hasn't been invented yet
When was it invented ?
Select to expand quotehoop said..
^^^ Sorry, I skipped past the text and went straight to the photo.
I thought LeeD had finally shown a pic of one of his boards. Then I realise it's just a potato.
My bad
It's not just a potato, it's an Easter potato! Unfortunately with a bad rocker line and too wide a tail
Big boards for my weight now I'm prioritising thruster set-up ... I feel they offer
1) extra pivot vs quad - ie crank a tighter turn ,
2) you can ride them stance further back vs quad , and therefore turn off the tail a bit more
3) reduce the length of rail in turns etc and unstick as much as possible ... Bigger rear in middle pitches nose up more
4) and thruster for me hold the rail better when dealing with volume ... (ie bigger backfin can take more committed bottom turn power before getting skittish on the rail in chop vs quad
5) And I can have a faster rocker with thruster and still tap into as much looseness because of extra pivot ...
This above is all based on faster rockers (which for yr big board is obviously good) ... If your on a big design with lots tail kick - maybe quad in that case works better ... ?? there's a few production examples where this might be true ...
WHats everyone else liking as their big board ? ... .quad or thruster ?
Select to expand quotestonny said..
Come on guys. Stop ganging up on the poor fellow. I'm sure he's a really nice person if you got to know him. ONLY JOKING !!!!!!!!!
I have no pity for anyone who can't see the error of his ways.
If you take LeeD's point that basically a narrower tail is nicer for solid conditions - no one can argue too much with that .... (if I was LeeD's defence lawyer and representing him in court !) ... There's obvious some advantages to narrower tails - precision - control fast waves etc
The problem I think everyone has is when LeeD starts dismissing a wider tailed waveboard from 10 years ago as ...... a 'failed experiment' and flash in the pan .... no one adopted it-.... etc pushing a bad product etc etc - when evo pretty much changed planshapes going forward ... and now all of todays waveboards have wider tails than 10 years ago average ... Production Evo's pretty much forced the market to start tinkering with compact shapes - then Mistral bought out the syncro , tabou pocket waves , rrd wave swallows etc etc ... And they were all different from evo - they had he same wider tails , some had more v / concave / drive etc .... And when these planshapes combined a few years later with mutlifins we saw a REVOLUTION in weaker waves / side on spots and / or lighter winds ... Frontside riding in side on used to look a bit **** - now anyone can and does have a punt DTL ... as a result of more speed and ease of compact shapes ...
He needs to leave out the abusive comments , and the insinuation that anyone who disagree's with him is a **** sailor ... and think a bit more about the history of waveboard design - and how we got to current day ....
Come on LeeD - enlighten me why Mark Nelson was a 'quiet' innovator ...
