If you test different front wing shape but same sinze with a GPS and a hand wing. You feel some are more slippery than other…but if you look at your number on a gps for same day, same condition, same wind, your top 2-5 second top speeds are often very close together regardless the foil, well in my case. The average speed for the day is however different, thinner profile seems to accelerate faster and decelerate slower. Is mast the same? If you have different thickness but same surface area…would it gives you very close same top speed when you push…but acceleration and deceleration would be different? This is so obvious with just a stabilizer. Take a thin stab vs a thick same size stab…gps will provide almost same top speed…but when you release the wing and flag and just glide…it’s so radically different…you feel the drag right away on thicker stab.
What is very difficult for PC vs ML…is PC has a requirement to do a mast for all size of rider for all discipline for all size of front wing.
So then…
Has anything actually been resolved here? We have a formula but even the experts can’t agree on which numbers to plug into it.
I finally purchased the Lift X2 for my 110 and 150X after demo-ing. Retired my Axis 19mm alu w/ FP adapter. According to the chart above they are at opposite ends of the stiffness scale and I can tell little difference, in fact I’m faster through chop on the X2 due to its “ride” characteristics. Can’t tell any dif in drag but their specs are close anyway. No dif in the speeds via Hoolan.
Nord Roi makes a good point there regarding stab difs. A stab is tiny compared to the amount of mast generally in the water. Just dropping to a 129cm2 stab from the 143 made at least 1mph dif.
Matt, good question about the 11.7mm mast. How is this possible while maintaining any useable stiffness. Didn’t Kai Lenny use this mast in this years M to M for fifth place? In the same race the portly X2 took second place.
To answer the main question of this discussion, in my experience, the new No Limitz V2 is on par with the new F-One HM mast. I spent a few days riding them back to back a few weeks ago and I could barely notice any speed/drag difference. I actually think the No Limitz V2 may even be stiffer in real world feels. They both are amazing masts. So let’s put that one to bed.
On the second point, in my experience, the No Limitz mast is miles faster than the Cedrus mast. I’ve done countless hours back to back with these 2 masts and it’s not even close. And that was with the No Limitz V1 - the V2 is even faster and stiffer!
Last but not least, in my experience, a thin mast is always going to be faster than a thicker mast. Once again I’ve down countless hours of testing this by putting the exact same front wings and stabs on different masts using modified connections. Even thinner masts with wider chords, they are always faster than the thicker masts. The thinner mast always feels slipperier and more efficient through the water across multiple brands.
All these CFD analysis and graphs and charts on speed vs drag etc - please just take these with a grain of salt as they usually don’t match a real world scenario - while it might work for air foil simulation with planes, just remember foils are underwater and a computer simulation doesn’t take into account wave/wind swell energy (from multiple directions at once), reverb off rocks, the reef or sandbar or water movement from currents/rips etc - there are so many variables compared to a tank with perfectly still water or a computer running flow analysis with no other variables.
I’ve worked with some of the best foil designers in the world and their CFD analysis definitely sets a baseline and it’s very important in the initial design phase, but in my experience, it is usually different in a real world scenario.
See my comment below mate. I paid for my Cedrus and paid for my No limitz initially and compared them back to back. I sold my Cedrus and chose to continue to ride No Limitz because it’s way faster and as stiff if not stiffer. Like you said, the proof is in the riding and people buy based on feeling and not on physics. This is a perfect example.
really people also buy based on what a friend raves about. or buy something and convince themselves it’s awesome so they don’t have to spend more time/$/effort. Those are actually all pretty valid reasons though.
have you had a chance to try the mikeslab mast (and foils)? how does it rate? I have a ML, but wondering about additional options for different scenarios.
Yeh for sure, all valid reasons. I’ve found that giving a friend a go on what I consider a good setup is all they need. It’s the feeling they get. They literally have one go and their current foil is on marketplace that day and they’ve bought the new foil. Happened to all my crew in Byron with cabrinha + no limitz masts and now F-One. You can do as much marketing as you want, but if you can give someone a go of the gear and it’s good, that’s all you need.
I have the ML 600, 800 and 1100.
Prob one of the most stable setups I’ve ridden and definitely the thinnest stiffest mast, but it wasn’t any good for surf foiling - it didn’t turn at all, the 600 and 800 had a crazy high stall speed and any tips breaches was game over. So many deal breakers for surf foiling.
I can see why the wing foil and kite foil guys like them. It goes in a straight line very well and it handles speed so well. But in terms of performance, it’s no where near any of the current good surf foils on the market.
Very good info misterbennetts. Thanks for adding to what must now be the most comprehensive collection of mast drag information on the interwebs . Since changing to a smaller stab or front foil (of the same design) makes such a noticeable difference, mast drag differences should follow suit.
@misterbennetts thanks for jumping in here! Just to confirm as I think it isn’t clear, you are comparing one of the original Cedrus masts, not the new unreleased one? I think most had accepted that the old Cedrus wasn’t optimal for prone.
While we’ve got you, I think probably useful to understand your brand affiliation if you could share? It seems from your videos that you ride everything, you buy a lot of stuff, but from what you describe and in the past you have some informal brand relationships which should be expected. I think the point being, how objective is your opinion in relation to brands? I’ve always thought “more than most”, but hearing some level of detail would instil trust which honestly I think is more valuable than being a team rider!
(I enjoy your clips, I take notice of what you ride, I get whatsapps when you ride something different, people notice )
Couldn’t agree more. Look at what Mikes Lab can do. 11-12mm thick and stiffer than anything. It’s possible and sure it might be more expensive, but I bet everyone on this forum would pay an extra $500 for a rock solid mast.
Look at axis, those things can’t even be kept in stock. A batch of 30 rock up at a local foil shop and they are gone 24 hours later. They are super stiff and people want that. They aren’t any good for surf foiling (slow and ventilation issues), but perfect for going straight on a wing foil if that’s what you’re into. They are super stable.
There’s no reason why these brands can’t offer a super thin, super stiff mast. The demand is there, so I vote they do it!
Yeh I’m talking about the current cedrus mast, not the new mystical one that’s meant to be better than everything
Besides Fliteboard efoils, I don’t have any brand affiliation, that’s why I ride everything. If you go through my Insta feed or YouTube, you can see what I like riding, because it’s what I’m posting. If I like it and it goes good and I feel like I’m riding good, I’ll post it. Like you said, the proof is in the riding.
Yeh in my opinion (for prone/surfing), the ML 600 is not even comparable to the Lift 90. The 90 does everything better than the ML. It’s like a completely different sport
Cheers thanks for explaining. I don’t either have a brand affiliation and ride what I like and retain the ability to be objective. I also don’t have the bucks to ride more than one thing at a time and am a dead average punter
Thanks for chiming in Kane and Mister Bennets. I was getting burnt out on models of reality (equations, simulations, etc) being used as proof that the empirical experience of riders’, including top end guys, is wrong. Empirical data is never wrong, often misinterpreted, sometimes unrepresentative, but never wrong.
Not that I get the equation based arguments being put forward either. Cd is a tiny number so changes in it are less significant than changes in wetted surface area?? The whole drag model being referenced is linear with respect to both Cd and wetted surface area, drop either by 5% and drag drops by 5%. It matters not at all how big or small the number was in the first place, only that it drops by 5%. These terms are exactly equal in significance in this model.
I also don’t see how dilution of the drag reduction of one component by total system drag is a reason to dismiss the drag reduction. So what if 5% on the mast is only 2% for the system as a whole? 2% total reduction from board aero and 2% from the stab and 2% from the foil and 2% from the fuse and you end up with a dramatically more efficient system.
The interplay between thickness, Cd, and wetted surface also seems to be getting lost. A section Cd value is good for that specific section, which means a fixed thickness to length ratio, not a fixed thickness. Keep the same section, but at 15mm instead of 17mm, and the Cd stays the same, but the wetted surface drops significantly as the chord length just dropped by the same proportion as the thickness, over 11% in this case. So even if the argument is that wetted surface area is somehow more important than thickness (don’t agree but thats by the by for this point), once you find a magic low Cd and ventilation resistant section with a high moment of area implementing it in the minimum thickness that satisfies other constraints is always going to give the lowest drag.
And then you are back to just trading off stiffness, drag, and cost, as always.
In conclusion, thickness remains an excellent proxy for mast drag. Absolutely definitely not the only consideration going just for drag, never mind total system performance, but still an excellent proxy.
Well put Silas,
I had to read it twice but makes sense
I may have mentioned this further up but I did measure a Mikes Lab 600 the other day of an unknown era and the mast was 14mm x 120 (at a ridiculous 100cm length too). The guy was winging it too so I’m assuming it’s less than two years old. More interestingly the front foil was 2mm thicker than my 110 HA X. ML also has a super thin fuselage section which probably makes a big dif when it’s not traveling perfectly straight through the water. So does F-one.
Correct me here but what I’m getting from all this is that a lower drag mast is most important for (descending order);
Prone
Downwind SUP
Winging
I was very impressed with the NL V2 winging it (mainly the weight) but wasn’t able to try it back to back with different foils. That said, I didn’t notice that it was any stiffer than the Lift X2 at roughly the same length and the lift foils did out glide the NL setup (can’t fault the NL of course. Real world feel is everything and when it’s averaging 40 and gusting to 60-80mph, a little more drag is way down the list of worries
. Since changing to a smaller stab or front foil (of the same design) makes such a noticeable difference, mast drag differences should follow suit.
)
