Wow the new mast looks crazy ! Does someone have information about how thin the mast is ? What’s the chord at the lowest point ?
Has anyone else had stiffness concerns about the V1 KT mast? Cause I know a LOT of people riding that kit in the gorge and I’ve never heard a peep, but this thread lately has been 50% posts from the same dude that is really bent outta shape about it.
9 Likes
1 Like
This is a great read. (sorry this is off topic for this thread)
I have owned and surf foiled on
no Limitz v278
Lift classic 28 32 36
Lift m2 32
Code uhm 80+
Afs uhm 80, 85
Afs uhm 75s
Flitelab uhm 80
Of course used with different wings and the only one I was able to standardize with adapters was the NLv2 (with lift, code and afs).
The slowest (to the point of desolate frustration 
) was the no Limitz, code pretty close second.
Fastest and hands down best is the afs uhm 75. Flitelab feels good too. Of course these aren’t direct comparisons but feels are just that. Feels.
There is definitely something to be said for these designs… common factor being they are thinner.
5 Likes
I’m gonna let it go, guess it’s just me. Mast is up for sale
The “mast thickness doesn’t matter“ claim seems to contradict the designer’s thoughts on that. Look at 05:17
1 Like
Fml, not this mast thickness doesn’t matter stuff again. For a structural expert who has dumped repeatedly on others for the limits of their structures expertise, Kyle needs to stop being a hypocrite and take his own advice on the hydrodynamics front. Not his field, not a correct assertion at all.
2 Likes
Just talking in simplified terms, by thinner I refer to both thickness and chord.
The article does have great factually correct data and good points about airfoil, total drag, and effect of spray and thickness to chord but in my opinion he makes some flawed arguments. Instead of trying to figure out what people are feeling and liking about thinner masts, he digs in his heels and argues everyone else is wrong. he also didn’t mention the effect of trailing edge thickness which is pretty significant and is a weakness of the cedrus drag-wise. Despite this I like his goal of a universal mast and his commitment towards a data-supported position, even though it lacks nuance.
The main thing I think is missed in the article is most brands advertise low thickness but also reduce chord. Few only change thickness and keep chord constant.
I’ll use an even more extreme example than mast thickness to show why even though the difference in mast drag is small, it makes a large difference in overall speed:
Why do 2 wings of the same design, one stiffer and one softer feel so different in speed and efficiency? In CFD they show identical performance, but riding them back to back it’s obvious.
The answer actually relates to the mast! The stiffer wing is easier to naturally ride higher on the mast, resulting in less mast submerged on average and way less drag. The same thing happens with thinner (chord and thickness) masts; riding through a wave pulls you down less leading to a higher average ride height and more control, resulting in more speed than the predicted drag would suggest.
Even though a bit thicker and shorter chord is faster at high speed, other tradeoffs are made using this approach. Designers may run a thin mast with longer chord and make some compromises in airfoil drag for stability and ventilation resistance while still reducing submerged and spray drag or optimize the airfoil for lower reynolds numbers. Designers may use different taper distributions along the mast to change turning feel, flex position, drag at different depths etc. masts that look or measure totally different probably have different goals or unique advantages over the other.
Another factor is that modern foils are getting really efficient meaning small changes in drag are a larger percentage of total drag. A few newtons difference is a lot when your front wing is only making 25N of drag and has a L/d ratio of 40 and the drag is on the end of a long lever so the feel is amplified.
I guess the point I want to make is there are a lot of really smart designers in foiling who put a lot of time and testing into their products and may have different approaches and goals for their product. Before claiming someone else is doing it wrong, try and understand their approach and the advantages it has. Designing is as much about studying user preference as it is about hydrodynamic optimization. If the users like it and it doesn’t align with your theory, it’s your job to figure out why.
Thickness is not a good measure to compare masts, just like area, span, AR etc are not good way to compare wings. They are one piece of the pie and a simple way to give the customer an idea of the feel of the product.
38 Likes
this was a very interesting insight, and also why racing is cool, it creates a testing ground for stuff like this to emerge.
Also +1 to the idea that design isn’t just numerical optimisation, it’s a wildly dynamic challenge where ultimately all that matters is that it feels good to ride (and performs well in the odd race…)
3 Likes
Try a Cedrus Forged for $750
What are the pros/cons of the Solus compared to the Atlas line? Any info?
Haven’t used the Solus.
But it’s a different program from what I’ve heard in some videos of users of prototypes - Solus it’s a race DW oriented foil, so better speed and glide I expect it to be higher AR. Focus here seems to be performance and control at higher speed and maintaining excellent avg speed per km. Can configure a bigger foil that goes faster.
ATLAS it’s more of a glider all-rounder, focused IMO more on grunt and maximizing lift per size, so you can select a smaller foil hence can get the benefits of better rolling since it’s smaller with tons of low stall speed but not the fastest one.
I’ve been using atlas 790 for DW and it covers a range where with most other brands I would have to configure a 900 or bigger in terms of low end, and still can handle some big bumps but won’t break the 38km/h (at least my case and weight). The benefit being a really good foil that can go fast enough and be super easy to recover when I make a mistake selecting bumps, or go into hard to read bumps zone or crossed currents. Also can carve/surf really nice on the steeper slower bumps when really windy and not so “swellie”
To complement that I would consider the 650 Solus for the bigger faster swells that having low stall speed it’s not a priority.
3 Likes
Im a surfer new to this. I have some equipment options but not sure what is best. Im 165 LBS I reside in Puerto Rico, No surf here in the summer. My heart was set on a trench board, and the Hp motor and then I really wanted a Cedrus Mast to try different foils. but as a beginner, maybe that is all pie in the sky at the beginning. My goal is to carve turn and ride surf style at some point as i learn. What is my best option of these two and or what suggestion can you offer. Super super excited to get started.
System one, $6,000 used from a friend.
Foil drive motor ( not HP ) max battery. 60 Liter Board Wing craft 4’ 8” | 24” x 4”, Integrated Foil Drive 19 mm / 795 Aluminum Axis mast at 82 CM, lift wing Hi Aspect 170. Motor mounted at 20cm.
System 2
$1,200 Trench board 40 Liters, lift 30 inch mast carbon, 150 surf foil and trailer 28 included, and I have to buy the Foil Drive at $6,000 ish….
Both are very nice…… if anyone wants to buy the one on the right please let me know!!!
It’s mine. I bought it full price. Average joe foil demographic. Just gotta ask the right person.
Hey, this new foil looks amazing. Glad to test it asap!
One question about the mast, why does thickness decrease with a longer mast? It is to reduce the chord?
77 13.3mm
85 13.2mm
95 12.9mm
I guess it’s also related to the discipline each mast is designed for.
The 77 is more for downwind and surf, where you want maximum stiffness because there is more pumping and more load on the mast.
The 85 is more of a crossover size for surf, bigger waves / tow-in, and winging, so you can probably accept a little less rigidity in exchange for better glide.
The 95 is more aimed at wing freeride or race, where you generally pump less and may benefit more from reduced drag. In some situations, you may also want to lean the mast over more.
And yes, I think the reduced thickness is probably linked to a smaller chord as well. There is likely an optimal chord-to-thickness ratio depending on the discipline and the balance they want between stiffness, glide, and handling.
1 Like
Sorry for this comment, but the sound is very good 
Yeah! It does sound and feels good too!
That is incorrect,
77- 13.0 Mm
85 12.5 mm
95 12.2 mm
The difference is the airfoils, purpose, and chord which all change between sizes. The 77 needs to handle pumping on huge span while the 95 is mostly used with small span wings.
6 Likes