I am looking at getting a a second board, a smaller one and I have my eye on a 132x40.5 the other size I am thinking about is 130x39, I am about 88 Kg, when you get the measuring tool out 2cm is nothing......
Will the extra 1.5 cm get me up and going that much quicker than the 39, the only reason I can see the 40.5 would be better if I got boots and or I got rid of my 138 but I think I am going to hold onto it for the lighter wind days or when the wind is just between kite sizes?
132 X 40.5 dosen't sound much bigger but overall its got a lot more volume so will get up and going way quicker and be better in the lulls,i have a 129 x 37.5 ,130 x 40,and a 133 x 41 all three boards are vastly different to ride,on the gustier days with a 6.5 or 8 i'll go for the 133 to carry through the lulls, if its nuking then the 129 and the 130 is the average day all rounder.
Also depends if the two boards your looking at are the same design ,wide tips/ narrow tips make a huge difference to early planing,my 133 has wide tips so real quick to plane,the 130 would be average and the 129 ultra narrow in the tips so a balls out board.
Give the Cardboards Fr a try 4 channel ,rides soft and rails like its on tracks,awesome board.
channels ( I mean concaves**Thanks DM) displace water hence softer landings.
Cardboards footpads are rubbish. Try them for yourself if you dont believe me. I have rode all the cardboards current models. 'tempo' is good. Others not so good.
Demo all boards until you find what your looking for.
My favorites are the NHP 2011 and I now ride a wainman blunt 130 2011. Both different boards and good in different ways. Also another favorite is the jaime from North. A very nice board indeed!
I'll be adding an NHP to this season as I was impressed with it towards the end of last season.
Hi Addikt,
I weigh about the same as your good self and always rode 132's. I've since changed and started riding 135's, it does make a difference, not so much in feel, but in spray to the face. A 132 x 40ish would be as small as I'd go if I were you, otherwise you have to ride too lit all the time and there's no real gain.
Channels do not soften landings. They help direct water along the length of the board and tend to align the board on landings prior to the fins locking in.
Concaves which Radman is talking about, do part the water and make for a softer landing and also a help direct water. There seems to be some confusion as to the difference between channels and multi concaves.
Personally I like the Cardboard Footstraps on my Tempo and have found no need to change them. I also really like the FR. The new CB straps (mid season release) were better for smaller feet.
Different boards features suit different riders, even similar sized riders so demo before you buy. What works for one, does not always work for the other.
DM
A few designers who should know what they are talking about have suggested to me that a rough rule of thumb is that 1cm in width = about 5cms in length.
Hence the move to shorter wider boards the past 2 seasons.
You are in WA so you can demo the Shinn & Nobile range anytime you like from Woodys.
We should have the new Slingshot range in for demo soon too.
Definitely need a longer board for boots - or should I say - most who ride boots prefer longer boards.
Lots of demos have come back agreeing with RPM - the NHP is an awesome board.
Love the Fr and found the straps were fine but i have changed to a thicker softer pad due to a knee injury,awesome toeside board ,concaves make the board stick like glue ,also really soft on the landings due to the displacement from the concaves,try one for yourself well worth the demo.
Also no friggin spray,prob the driest board i've ridden.
width is key! (132x39 example)
1 extra cm in width on board , ie 132x40 = +132cm2 Surface Area.
1 extra cm in length on board, ie 133x39 = + only 39cm2 Surface Area.
Sure, there are many variables at play here that will change the way a board rides (concave, rocker, channels, fins, etc) but in very simple terms:
Length = how big the board feels
Width = how big the board rides
Having a longer board can be good until your powered up and then you've gotta deal with all of that length whilst attempting to hold a solid rail.
Having a wider board when powered up is irrelevant as not even half of the board is in contact with the water.
As for landings, assuming you land with a slight tail heavy bias, a wider board will have harder landings due to the increased amount of water it attempts to displace on landing... but all of that pales into insignificance when you start looking at the other more important variables. More rocker and more flex make for softer landings but results in a board that rides like a wet noodle (i've ridden a few... but won't name them). A stiffer and faster planing (less rocker) board will be perfect for freestyle but will ride very rough on knees and ankles (Nobile '09 NHP). It's all a compromise.
I'm ~82kg & 6'3" and ride a 134x42 2010 Nobile NHP and haven't found anything that i'd seriously consider replacing it with.
Does 2cm make a difference? I'd say yes, but as i've never ridden two identical width boards with different lengths (and i doubt many if any on here would have) it's difficult to quantify the difference. What i can say is that i can't stand boards narrower than ~41cm, but that i'm happy riding on anything from 128-142 in length. Personal preference, riding style and what you're used to will probably dictate what you feel most comfortable riding and what you can use most efficiently.
