New Masts 2026 - what do you think?

Foils and Boards - Gear Talk
1

Lots of attention to masts lately and lots of new masts out/on their way with some big claims being tossed around…

thought we might have a mast thread (like the trash bag thread) to track and compare specs and experiences.

KT, Armie, Hydrocraft, F4, AFS, F-One, Naish, Cabrinha, (Code and Uni? Others?) all seem to have new or newish, often touted as low drag offerings, some with redesigned or all new designs in their connections/systems…let’s hear about what you are seeing, experiencing, liking/not…and what difference this next gen makes (aside from lightening our wallets)

4 Likes
2

Until recently, for SUP downwind I was almost only using Code foils on the Code 80 UHM mast, with wings from 600 up to 1075. My KT setup was mostly for parawing and prone downwind, mainly with the Nomad 830.

I recently received the KT Apex mast. First, I used it for parawing and prone downwind. With the Nomad 830, it completely opened up the foil compared to the One Ocean 84 SSS mast I was using before. The foil felt much freer, more alive, and less restricted.

Then, a few days ago, during a SUP downwind session, a friend wanted to try my Code setup. So I lent him my Code gear and took my KT setup instead. I put on the Atlas 790, a wing I owned but almost never used. I had originally bought it for learning parawing, hoping for a bit more glide, but in practice I always used the Nomad 830.

I had tried the Atlas 790 in downwind about a year ago when I first got it, and I didn’t have a great memory of it. I felt I had to work quite hard to keep it going, and I thought it lacked glide.

But with the Apex mast, it felt completely different.

The glide felt close to a Code 860. The speed range is not the same: the Atlas 790 tends to slow down and settle into a lower speed. But in terms of distance covered and ability to connect bumps, the glide felt very similar. I ended up having a really fun run, with the same ease of going downwind as on the Code, but with the extra playful feeling of the Atlas.

Since then, it’s summer here in the Mediterranean, so we mostly have smaller bump-style downwind conditions. And honestly, I have only been using the Atlas 790 because I’m having so much fun on it.

For me, this is a perfect example of how much difference a mast can make. The Atlas 790 is not really a pure downwind-specialized wing, but with the Apex mast it almost feels like it reaches the level of a dedicated downwind wing with a “meh mast”, while keeping its own fun and carving feeling.

Don’t get me wrong, in my opinion, the Code R wings are still among the best downwind wings available for most people. The performance/ease ratio is just the best.

But I don’t think the current Code mast is at the same level as the wings. And because of that, a brand with a very good mast can make its wings feel faster or more efficient, even if the wing itself is not necessarily better.

If Code releases a mast on the level of something like the KT Apex — and from the prototype photos it looks like they may be working on it — I think it could really move the whole Code setup up a level. You would keep the easy, powerful, high-performance feel of the Code wings, but with more speed, more glide and less drag from the mast.

I’m not saying it would suddenly become faster than something like an Axis Tempo setup, but I really think the mast alone could make a huge difference.

For reference, I also used Code wings with One Ocean masts:

  • One Ocean 78 SSS: a bit too soft for me with the 770 and 860, but good with the 680 and 600. Also okay with the 1075, because with bigger wings and cleaner/slower water there is less side load and less need for control.

  • One Ocean 78 SS: my best Code runs were with this mast. I was roughly 5 to 10 seconds per kilometer faster than with the Code 80 UHM mast.

  • One Ocean 84 SSS: a bit more control than the 78 SSS because of the longer chord. I used it for a while with the 770 and 860.

In the end, I went back to the Code 80 UHM mainly for safety and durability reasons. With adapters, especially ones that can corrode, I’m always a bit worried about failure during downwind. The Axis-to-Code adapter also uses small screws, which doesn’t give me full confidence offshore.

So yes, for me the mast is not just a small detail. It can completely change the foil.

3 Likes
3

For me, upgrading to a better mast is almost always a win, as long as it keeps enough stiffness and control.

The important point is not simply to get the thinnest mast possible. A thin mast that is too soft can actually be worse. I had this with the One Ocean 78 SSS: it was fast and efficient in theory, but with some wings it lacked control. In those cases, I preferred the 78 SS, which had a better balance of stiffness and drag.

But if the mast is stiff enough, then less thickness and less chord usually means free performance: more glide, more speed, less drag, and a more lively foil. The main downside is the price.

That is why I see a good mast as an easier upgrade than changing front wings. With a smaller or more high-performance wing, you can gain speed but lose takeoff, glide, stability or ease of use. I had this with Axis Tempo wings: they are very high-performance, but for me they were more demanding than my Code wings, so I preferred the easier performance of the Codes.

With a mast, the trade-off is simpler. If the construction is good enough to keep stiffness — better carbon, better layup, smarter profile — then the gain is almost always there.

The same logic applies to fuselages and connections (mast to fuselage or stabilizer). A stiffer titanium or carbon fuselage can bring a real gain, but it costs much more. Is a 1000€ titanium fuselage four times better than a 250€ aluminium one? No. But can it be better? Yes.

So for me, these upgrades are not magic, but they are obvious performance gains when done properly: better mast, stiffer fuselage, cleaner connections. The only real limit is price.

3 Likes
4

Lots of great comments…on this one, it was interesting to hear the guys from Hydrocraft talk about their new/unique connection and how it allowed not only a thinner fuse but fewer bolts…and that they have protos setup with screw connections for front foil and stab and that riding those back to back with the finished mono front and rear versions without all the screws they can definitely feel the difference and invite others to give it a go…

It seems as if we are getting to the level that these setups are efficient enough elsewhere that the screw heads make a difference and it will be a game of finding the last bits of efficiency in the system.

Back to masts…from my armchair and laptop, it seems like everyone is trying to catch up to F4, and they likely are/will soon. The advancement in this industry is fun to watch!

2 Likes
5

I’ve been on the original Code 80 mast (not the +) for 3 seasons now. It’s banged to shit, got chips out of it where I’ve hit it repeatedly with the tool tightening the track screws. I take it on long open ocean downwinders, laps of Rufus & hatch, winging in waves, and surfing in ankle high up to overhead. I still love it and feel no need to change.

Maybe if the new upcoming Code mast is a reasonable price, it might tempt me to swap. But for now I think I’ll be riding this one until there’s something seriously structurally wrong with it.

PS: you should see my 142AR tail…

2 Likes
6

I’ve been lucky enough to be testing the F4 SR 80cm mast, which is still underdevelopment. Not sure how I lucked out in the testing role - I guess they wanted an average joe’s feedback for upwind/downwind parawing in current enhanced bay swell (not just DW race scenarios, which I believe was the design intent). I have yet to do a back to back test with my 85cm AX mast, but initial testing with the 800/685 Orca and 635 Manta is very eye opening.

Much like mentioned above, a stiffer and more efficient mast essentially upgrades a foil’s characteristics. With the Manta, I was finding with the longer 85cm AX mast, the DW conditions needed to a 7/10 or higher to be fun. I feel like the SR lowered that rating requirement to a 5/10 due to the increased glide, speed, and pump. On the other end of the spectrum, the increased speed is a different beast for the Orcas. It makes them a hair less chill / surfy and bumps up the adrenaline, but super fun. It seriously feels like efficiency has been increased by 10-20% or something crazy. If you stay high, it hits a warp speed that I was not getting with the 85cm AX (although likely rode that much lower in the water on average).

The reason I switched from Armstrong was in search of a more efficient setup and the F4’s have certainly met that target. Had the Armie performance masts come out sooner, I may have given them a go, as their front wings are pretty good!

I’m still trying to get a sense for the main takeaways jumping from a good mast, to a great mast, to a sci-fi mast, as it is difficult to describe the feelings you get on the water. I guess you could say that the aperture increases a bit, allowing new lines to be drawn. I mean, look at older gear, your DW lines were pretty limited - now it is just a huge canvas. Pumping into the wind, fading cutbacks, sinking the mast to try and kill speed at the top of a swell, S-turns on repeat and leg burning G carves are all now a thing. The more efficient masts just adjust that slider in the right direction.

So yeah, I’d agree that upgrading the mast is a huge win, so long as you don’t sacrifice control due to flex. I’m only 148lbs / 68kgs, so it’s hard for me to get in those scenarios (minus the time 5+ years ago when I took a 100cm v1 Armstrong mast on my first big DW wing send with a 1325 front foil - that was the worst foiling experience of my life, but I made it :laughing:)

SR testing:

6 Likes
7

as soon as you can comment on it, can you compare the stiffness feeling of the AX vs. the SR you are testing? I know different lengths, but still would be helpful to know. My F4 AX is pretty soft in comparison with the most stiff options out there. I compare directly to AFS UHM and the difference is quite obvious.

3 Likes
8

Same here. Standard Code 75 for everything from 1725s down to 720s. At 73kg, Iʻm good. For prone, Iʻm mostly trying to find ways to gain drag while up and riding. I think these new masts are going to be mostly for the downwind, powered, and heavy guys. That said, Iʻd love to demo and be proven wrong.

9

+1 !

Although I wonder how much of the feel relates to the damping in the titanium lower section on the SR rather than outright stiffness. In the bike industry titanium is praised for its ride quality, but this is hard to quantify.

Anecdotally I rode a code 1250 on a 19mm axis alu mast (which seems to be regarded as stiff): This setup felt extremely wobbly in torsion, I wonder if this is less about outright stiffness - it felt like the alu mast wobble was undamped / at a frequency that was hard to counter.

A personal example: I do some arborist work for friends in my spare time. Being 60ft up a tree feels chill before you top it. But once you take all the branches off - the tree feels extremely unstable/sketchy because the flex in the trunk is no longer damped by the branches (even though the trunk stiffness is unchanged).

4 Likes
10

I think that feeling is more about the slop inherent in that mast/connection system

11

To be clear, I was perfectly happy with my older masts for a long time.

Actually, I’ve only had one really bad mast experience: the Allure 75, one of the early 13 mm carbon masts. For my 95 kg, using it in downwind with a Kujira 1440 at the time, it was just way too soft.

But once you get used to something that really glides, it’s hard to go back. And honestly, I think you often feel the difference even more when you go back to a slower setup than when you first upgrade.

It reminds me a bit of carbon booms or 100% carbon masts in windsurfing. The only people saying aluminium or 75% carbon is “just as good” are usually the ones who haven’t really tried the better gear.

Now, is the performance difference proportional to the price difference? Definitely not.

And regarding the new Code mast, my guess would be around €2000. That seems to be more or less the standard price for skinny UHM masts now.

And to add one thing to Gibbon’s post: I agree that the differences will probably be more noticeable in some disciplines than others.

A good mast will usually matter more in downwind than in surf, and probably more in surf than in winging. Of course there are nuances within each discipline, depending on conditions, wing size, rider weight, speed, and riding style.

But in general, the more you rely on glide, efficiency and connecting bumps, the more the mast makes a difference.

5 Likes
12

Understand that is a race mast, but what does “SR” stand for?

13

I believe it pays homage to the SR-71 Blackbird, which is still the world’s fastest crewed, air-breathing jet aircraft. That jet had a bunch of similar grade titanium in it as well.

4 Likes
14

“I recently received the KT Apex mast. First, I used it for parawing and prone downwind. With the Nomad 830, it completely opened up the foil compared to the One Ocean 84 SSS mast I was using before. The foil felt much freer, more alive, and less restricted.”

Kezia,

Were you using a KT foil with the OOS 78 sss mast? Seems like a very inefficient adapter would be required.

15

Hi Kezia

Im interested in you finding the ONE 78SSS to flexy on your wings like the 770 and 860 as it should handle those wings no worries at all. I ride it on my 1273 span wing all the time and have no issues at all so definitely surprised you find it to flexible. Please if you can shoot me a message on jacko@oneoceansports.com with the serial number and I can see if there might have been something off. Really it should be as stiff as the 84SSS.

Also not to surprised that the new KT mast is faster than the old 84SSS as that mast is now maybe 3 years old with only a new updated 84SSS only release in the last few weeks which is also much faster than the old 84.

It’s not to bad as well that the ONE masts are maybe also half the price of most of the new high performance masts coming out​:grin::grin:

KT looks like good gear also and designed by Kane so definitely going to be right up there on performance.

My opinion on masts is they can make a huge difference and a good mast is so nice to ride. The key though is the mast to fuse join has to be tight with zero movement. This is important on small wings but even more so with wider wing spans as the smallest movement just makes the best mast feel very average. Keeping them tight is such an easy process and definitely well worth it.

2 Likes
16

IMG_7246
IMG_7246700×700 63.2 KB

5 Likes
17

I’m using it with a custom fuselage, not the adapter and the KT fuselage.

So everything is streamlined

1 Like
18

First, I want to say that the One mast is, in my opinion, one of the best masts on the market. When you factor in the price, it becomes almost unbelievable value. I would put it up against masts like the AFS UHM, Axis Pro, or KT Apex, yet it costs 2–3 times less.

For comparison, I find the 78 SSS both stiffer and faster than the AFS UHM Skinny 75 and 80. It’s not a perfect comparison since I wasn’t using the exact same wings, but that’s my overall impression.

The Axis Pro (which costs around €3000!) sits somewhere between the One SS and SSS. To me, it’s actually the best compromise: the SSS is slightly faster but also a bit softer, while the SS is about as stiff but not quite as slippery through the water.

I personally prefer both One masts over the Code UHM. My only complaint is having to use an adapter. I’ve never had any issues with it despite many sessions, but it does corrode fairly quickly.

The only mast where I felt a truly significant performance gain was the KT Apex. However, it’s roughly twice the price, and probably there is some magic and matching with the KT foils happening. The Apex only appeared in 2026, whereas I’ve been riding the One for about 18 months already.

The SSS is perfectly usable with 770 and 860 front wings. I simply prefer the SS because it gives me noticeably more control.

One last point: I weigh 95 kg and I think I can put quite a lot of load into the foil when pumping. The speed range I use for a given wing is significantly higher than what lighter riders typically achieve, so the loads on both the wings and the mast are correspondingly higher.

To give an example, I can run the 860 at around a 2:00–2:10 min/km pace, whereas some of my lighter friends are closer to 2:40-3:00 min/km. My point is that mast loading is not only about rider weight. It’s also about the speeds and conditions you ride in. A heavier rider often ends up using the equipment in more demanding conditions than a typical 75 kg rider.

Most of my downwind partners weigh around 70–75 kg and have no stiffness issues with the One 78 SSS with wings up to roughly 110 cm span. Some even use the mast for dock starts with very large wings such as the Code 1540. That said, I don’t think dock starting is directly comparable to downwinding. In downwind conditions, the foil is constantly being loaded from multiple directions by bumps, acceleration, and changing energy in the water, which places very different demands on the mast.

5 Likes
19

great topic, my own exploring here has lead me to feel that for prone surfing in broken up waves the benefits are minimal, but I haven’t tried the latest masts (still on AFS UHM 80cm), so I’m interested to be proven wrong

Yes I think sacrifice is pretty real if you think that cost/performance/flex are all varyingly related, and gains on 1 of those points comes from either of the other 2.

If you ride bigger foils, marginal benefits on the slipperier masts I’d imagine. But if you ride small foils, huge opportunities.

The 19mm is not good in torsion, maybe it’s the doodad as said above. Here is a video illustrating the wobble the last time the topic came up

20

I disagree - the connections on the mast I rode felt tight. According to this blog the 19mm is torsional superior to the fancy Axis pro carbon: Mast Flex: Setting the Record Straight – Foil Cedrus

The point I was trying to make is that the natural resonant frequency / damping of a mast may matter as much as the stiffness. If flex in a mast resonates around the 2-8 hz range this aligns well with pumping/perturbations from waves etc, which might cause a positive feedback loop which is hard to counter.

Aluminum has little damping, whereas carbons matrix of epoxy / fiber helps calm oscillations. Material also likely affects the natural resonant frequency. Just a hypothesis though…

1 Like