We started off wide, then went short, now going long and skinny. Do you think the trend will head somewhere around the middle? But still narrow while maintaining some volume? Say 7’x18.5’’x110L? Not going to paddle as easy as a 8’ board but gains in pump and carve.
Trying to shed weight up the front with light foam density or light glassing could further the performance again.
Looking for people thoughts on this and potential new trends? Longer? Shorter? Kalama tail or narrow kayak tail? All opinions welcome!
I am currently riding 6’6’’x25’’x114. I definitely am thinking min 7’ and 19.5 widest at no less than 110L.
I’m going 8’6x~18.5", recessed deck. Will maybe chop off a foot of the tail at a later stage as I progress. We have big open ocean swell, so maybe need to ride faster foils. I don’t know.
I currently have 6’4 x 20 - 87L and 7’6 x 18 - 87L
My new one coming up soon is 6’8 x 19 - 90L , I should have gone a little more volume 95L but it should be fine.
It all depends on you paddle technique and balance ability. Also it depends a lot on where you live. Swell is not moving at the same speed everywhere, bumps are differents also.
So for me, from my experience, I don’t need the 7’6 and the 6’4 feels sometimes too short when using a small foil with big long bumps (open ocean dw).
I have no background in hydrodynamics or boat/board design but Ive been studying the designs recently and I find the evolution and differing interpretations very interesting. Here are a few observations and theories that I have - with zero qualifications or authority on the topic:
I feel like looking at hull design in relation to buoyancy (volume in proportion to weight) is very important. A hull that is efficient at some level of buoyancy may not be efficient for others. Some boards may be better suited to a high waterline while others may be better suited to a low waterline. Where the chine sits in the water seems like an important factor. I think this is more important on hard chine designs, with displacement hulls having a wider margin of error.
The efficiency of a displacement hulls is universally accepted, but I’ve heard the argument that they don’t work well for a foil board application because they are “sticky”. My theory is that this is a misapplication of science and that this hull design can be very efficient for this application - as long as you design the tail to release. Yes, water will “stick to” the waterline of a displacement hull if point of release is also rounded in profile - this is proven. But water flow is only going to stick to the hull in the direction of the apparent flow - ie the tail. As long as there is a clean pintail feature in back (which most/all designs incorporating a displacement hull incorporate) there should be no stickiness or negative impact on release. Displacement features on the chines shouldn’t “stick” since the water isn’t moving across them. The reason people are incorporating the hard chines (Barracuda) is to compromise and add stability. If the stability works then a displacement hull would likely be more efficient.
Take this all with a grain of salt. I’m totally open to someone more qualified to tell me why I’m wrong - I would appreciate the dialogue.
I wonder what is most important … board speed or water release?
I just received an Armstrong 7’7" DW board last week - 121L, 21" wide. Could barely stand on it the first time out in bumps, but second time out made much improvement. Haven’t gotten it up on foil yet (newbie), but this thing is much faster/efficient to paddle than my 29" wide regular SUP foil board. It’s really remarkable.
Because the goal is to get the foil up to speed to catch the bump, speed might be most important and hence the advantage of the long/skinny design.
My current board is 6’6’’x26’’ 114L. I think a little more length will help with glide and but a significant reduction in width will make the big difference. Also tail shape will reduce drag too.
I’m leaning towards a DC harpoon or blade at 7’2’’x19.5x110L I would like a dash narrower but the 110L is a minimum for me at 90kg using axis aluminum foil. I also want the board to be able to fit in the back of my car for convenience/ leaving it in there full time.
I can see a case for DW sups continue going longer and narrower. Eg 8-9 feet, 17-19" wide, thickness to create the desired volume.
I’m currently riding 7’8 X 19"1/4 with the Art999 in average conditions.
Setup max speed 36kmh.
I just want to go faster and have more glide, break into the +40kmh range.
The new 2023 downwind foils seem to be in the 11-13 aspect ratio range. +40kmh is achievable.
To keep paddling up new, faster, higher aspect ratio foils, with higher lift off speeds, we are going to need boards that even paddle faster again.
Longer hull = more speed.
So keep pushing longer, sleeker design. Volume forward to prevent nose dives. Excellent release.
Foil design is being driven by rider demand- more speed, more glide.
Therefore board design is driven by foil design.
I think Axis is leading the way with their 8’6 X 19" board…
*This is for downwind sup foiling in open ocean, not bays.
If youre in open ocean and want to paddle up really fast, small new HA foils, jump to the new prone/sup. 7’6 X 18". I went from 6’10 X 23" to 7’8 X 19"1/4, balance was about the same. Hull speed totally different
I just got a Kalama proto 8’4" x 18" 108ish L. I was able to paddle it up flatwater first try with Axis 1300. I did spend 10 sessions before that trying on a wider lower volume board which helped my technique. I think I will try the 1099 next. The paddling board speed I can achieve is crazy fast. It isn’t tippy in flatwater with the 1300 underneath. Boxes start 22" from tail. Weighs under 10lbs.
