Armstrong Pump foil

1 Like

I wonder if it’s closer to PNG or ART Pro from the Axis line, from the impossible to stall line it sounds like PNG which is an interesting move as that is a pretty dated foil but I guess still relevant

Here is a video, seems like they used the crisp_og tail designer

1 Like

Spoken to chris, he said the design brief was a foil with very low stall speed, ease to pump basically designed for dock starting, flat water paddle-ups, and entry level down winding with an aim to keep it manoeuvrable for small wave surfing. He said there are design aspects from his 381 tail. I’ve had a go dock starting it and it is significantly easier than the 1850 with his 333 tail

1 Like

I tested one of the APF foils a few weeks back, the 1675 I believe, while prone surfing my 6’3” DW board in some small, yet kinda punchy surf. I was surprised by the foil as it sort of gets in this automated rhythmic groove where pumping is very easy. Regarding stall speed, at one point I pulled a u turn at the shoreline and thought for sure it was going to stall, but it kept going and I was able to grave dig from a literal stand still - on a giant 86L board. I’ve got one on order for learning flat water pop ups, beach starts, DW trainer, dock starts etc.

I would estimate the I was getting double the foiling time compared to the 1125 I was on just prior. I also didn’t have the mast position right at all.

1 Like

I tested the 1675 in a downwind the other day, and It was excellent. It turns quite well, and this stall speed makes so easy to connect waves. It has so much early lift that it wants to lift even without paddling, crazy. I wonder if these foils require to move the mast back in the track compered with other Armstrongs, because it felt like a lot of front foot pressure.

1 Like

They have such a low stall speed, you almost forget that you need to keep forward speed to stay on foil. You’ll stop moving forward all together, then drop. It’s the excessive camber that creates this, if I have my aero/fluid dynamics correct. Cool thing, and also challenging, is that the high camber creates a super low max speed of the wing. Not cool if you want to go fast. But, for beginners, very helpful that you can turn into the most critical section of the bump, draw a speed line down the face, and have confidence you won’t go all shooting-star and overfoil based on speed. Crazy cool compared to other wings that will go a lot faster (if put in the right spot) and quickly work themselves out of their useful speed range when overpowered

Yes, it is an interesting foil. My top speed was 30 km/h so not that bad, but it feels limited at the top. It is not for big fast swell, but works well for average low fetch locations.
It’s seems like the pump 202 (what I tested) tail has also a big effect in increasing lift, as other are not reporting that much front foot pressure.
It is a challenge to keep the board in the water when you don’t want to take off. ;).
One set ordered.

1 Like

Had a chance to ride the 1675, dockstarting. Super low stall speed, very user friendly. board barely had to be moving and you could pump it around, np. EASY dockstarting foil!

1 Like

Hi Guys, after doing quite a lot of research, but not finding exactly what I’m looking for to help me make a decision, I came across this useful post and was hoping that I could get some advice.
I predominantly wake foil on a WKT109 with a HS1850 front wing behind the boat and pump around to all the different wakes further back. Also busy learning to dock start. I’m 75kg and my son is 85kg.

I’m looking at getting the new APF but I want to make sure that I make the right decision on whether to get the 1880 or the 1675 - They aren’t cheap so I’m trying my best to make the right decision.

I’m leaning toward getting the 1880 because in my mind I’m thinking that it might just be better than the 1675, make things easier and therefore more enjoyable, but I have no idea if this is the case.

Has anyone tried out both of these wings that could maybe give me some thoughts or advice.

Comparison to my current 1850 would also be welcomed if anyone has tried both.

Thanks in advance

I’ve tested and tried the APF1675 a few times.
It is all you need if less than 90kg. It has so much lift for its size. Do not get the 1880. The square areas and spans are just numbers these days. Very hard to compare to the old Gen stuff. the foil tech and profiles being used on the foils are changing what we once knew.

I have both HS1850 and APF1675. Have not tried the 1880 though. Im 76kg. 1675 has a lot more lift at slow speed and pumps with much less effort than the HS1850. I use the 1675 for dockstart and micro waves surfing prone. It turns ok for its size. I dont think you would need 1880 for riding behind a boat.

Thank you for both the replies and advice. Before I read these replies I was 90% going for the 1880, but now i’m 99.9% going for the 1675 - That tiny little 0.1% that’s sitting there still is just my initial thought that the 1880 is the top of the range APF and would make things even easier and more efficient than even the 1675 to pump around.

My main goal is to make pumping around the river as easy and effortless as possible… But from the above replies it sounds as though my though process isn’t exactly right.

I’m definitely excited to hear that the APF is way better than the 1850 since that is what I’m used to and can therefore only expect better.

Thanks again for the advice and if any there are other thoughts on 1880 vs 1675 it’s always welcome since i’ll most likely pull the trigger within the next day or so.

I’ve got a lot of time across the Armstrong range, and the 1675 is my total lifesaver. It got me (75kg) to be able to ace my first 5+ mile downwind runs, has been my go-to foil to learn flatwater popup (I’m now at ~95% success rate, 30-45 second rides), and I’ve pumped it 30 seconds dockstart (~5% success rate).

What do you mean by this - dock start onto a river? Pulled up behind a bridge? Sup-foil down river waves? The APF feels so much better than the 1850 … which just feels draggy without that low-end torque pushing you up. But for something like wake-foiling way way back, I wonder if the 1750 might be better.

Hi, I have the APF1675, at 79 kg and I’m very happy with it, there is no need for me to go for the 1800.
My only advice is get the 202 pump tail, some people are reporting better performance with this tail.

What I mean by this is dock start, and also leave the wake of the boat to pump around to different wakes further back, hijack other boats wakes and have some good push on the rollers as far back behind the wake as I can go.

From what you are saying and what the others are saying, the 1675 is the way to go over the 1880.

1 Like

I was actually going to ask about the 202 pump tail so thanks for covering that - I currently have a 232 and 300, and was going to ask if either of those would pair ok with the APF, especially the 300 since I’ve never ever used it and thought maybe this would be a chance.

I’m about to place my order for a complete APF 1675 kit, but I’m going to ask one last question that may be a simple one to answer, or it might be useless question based on all the advice already given.

Considering all that’s been discussed above, is there anything that the 1880 would be able to achieve for me better than what the 1675 would be able to?

The APF was built for pumping / dockstart… so the 1880 just gives even more low end to allow you to extend into those multi-minute journeys through flats. On one hand, the span is maybe less of an issue on a tow rope- on the other hand its just an insane amount of lift behind a boat.

Even with the 1675, its a huge wing- span and section height. The 1880 behind a boat- all that whitewash/aerated whitewater while being launched upward sounds like a handfull!!

Thanks again for all the input from everyone. I’ve listened to all the advice and placed an order for the 1675. Can’t wait.

2 Likes