Hello All,
An interesting thing I noticed today.
my new board, a Starboard Ace GT 17'4 arrived a couple of days ago and I love it, fast compared to my Naish 17 But I found it more tippy which surprised me as the Starboard is quite a bit wider. The size stated by Starboard is 17'4 x 28" but it felt narrower so on measuring the width at the widest point I found it to be a touch under 26 1/2".
This is not a problem for me and probably helps explain the boards speed but how can Starboard actually get away with such a discrepancy?
Rene
A couple of points - while the website and catalogue lists the board at 28" wide, you will find that on the deck and hull of the board, it says 27.5". However Aces have never been particularly accurate in width. I think this is in part because no-one knows where or how Starboard is measuring the width and as a result, the Aces always seem to measure narrower than advertised. But the other issue is in construction - my understanding is there is no complete mould for the Ace so each board has to be individually shaped to some extent, which causes vagaries in sizing. I had one of the first 14' x 25" carbon Aces and it was maybe 24" wide at most, and super fast. I will measure my GT tonight and let you know what I find.
Select to expand quoteRR said..
Funny enough, unlike yours mine states 17'4 x 28
That's very strange.
Select to expand quoteArea10 said..
Are both your boards actually 17-4 long?
Length of mine is accurate within half an inch but I agree with RR, the width is around 26.5" tops.
That's actually terrible that they write a
Dimension on the board, advertise that dimension, have shops sell u a board believing it's that dimension but it's not and not by a country mile..
If your idea of an inch is a mile, I've got some property you might be interested in.
I see that their online catalogue has changed the width of the Ace GT to 27"......cheeky
I'm certainly loving mine I need the stability of a 28 and was happy with the stability, now I guess I understand why it it is quick as well.
It's always great to learn something new about a board :-)
But the main thing is how it paddles.
Shame I got a broken collar bone and can't use it for another three weeks :-(
Select to expand quoteIan Grose said..
I'm certainly loving mine I need the stability of a 28 and was happy with the stability, now I guess I understand why it it is quick as well.
It's always great to learn something new about a board :-)
But the main thing is how it paddles.
Shame I got a broken collar bone and can't use it for another three weeks :-(
I'm with you Ian …. it certainly feels as stable as a 28" wide board and I am kind of glad to hear it is more like 26.5" wide.
Compared to the 27" Ace it is more stable and definitely quicker in flat to moderate conditions.
For any 85kg to 110kg paddler looking for an all-round board - training, flat water, bumps and moderate downwind conditions, I reckon its hard to go past.
It could do with a few handles and of course you need to store it somewhere !
Hmmmmmmm. That's strange. Felt more stable than my 17'4" bullet by comparison.
I paddled both back to back on a cranking Gerroa DW run.
Piece of cake storing it when you get used to surf ski's!
Hey Kieran, wondering how it feels compared to a 17'4 bullet in terms of not having the steering? Does it have the steering ability of the 14 Aces, you know how they react so quickly to foot pressure - more weight on the left foot, goes right.
Planning on one for 2016 !!
As the industry leader, publishing misinformation is corporate policy and not happenstance. Starboard likes to keep secrets and they do not want their competitors to copy their boards from pre-release catalogs and specifications. The boards are CAD designed and shaped, and they are finished to very close tolerances. It's no mistake, the Cobra factory put the numbers on the board they are told to.
My 2013 12'6" x 26" All Star is much wider at 27.25" wide and that's a big difference. My 2014 14" x 26.5" All Star is narrower at 26". Not an Apple but an Orange, but my old 12'6" x 30" Astro Touring was a fatty at 32" wide. I have to believe that the volume numbers are incorrect as well.
I made an inquiry on the Starboard forum regarding the 2014 race board constructions and what the fancy "Starboard Speak" words actually meant. Scotty McKercher was absolutely frank when he told me that "the names were put in place to ensure that our good competing brands could not simply copy our lay ups right away by reading our marketing :)". As a conspiracy theorist, it's no great leap to see that this probably extends to mis-painted dimensions on boards and mistaken catalog specifications.
Select to expand quotebaddog said...
As the industry leader, publishing misinformation is corporate policy and not happenstance. Starboard likes to keep secrets and they do not want their competitors to copy their boards from pre-release catalogs and specifications. The boards are CAD designed and shaped, and they are finished to very close tolerances. It's no mistake, the Cobra factory put the numbers on the board they are told to.
My 2013 12'6" x 26" All Star is much wider at 27.25" wide and that's a big difference. My 2014 14" x 26.5" All Star is narrower at 26". Not an Apple but an Orange, but my old 12'6" x 30" Astro Touring was a fatty at 32" wide. I have to believe that the volume numbers are incorrect as well.
I made an inquiry on the Starboard forum regarding the 2014 race board constructions and what the fancy "Starboard Speak" words actually meant. Scotty McKercher was absolutely frank when he told me that "the names were put in place to ensure that our good competing brands could not simply copy our lay ups right away by reading our marketing :)". As a conspiracy theorist, it's no great leap to see that this probably extends to mis-painted dimensions on boards and mistaken catalog specifications.
Hmm, well, if this is an accurate explanation for the situation, then here's just a couple of thoughts:
1. Have we EVER seen a design (especially a 17-4 one as extraordinary as the Ace GT) directly copied by a "good competing brand" let alone so closely that misinformation within an inch or so would matter?
2. Would Starboard really admit to deliberately lying about dimensions? If you let it be known that you deliberately lie about things like that, then why would people believe anything you say? (And I'm thinking of the Starboard airbrushing scandal of past years)? Then they'd wonder e.g. If maybe Starboard "carbon" boards actually aren't carbon. If you will deliberately lie about dimensions then how can anyone be sure that construction descriptions aren't also used to throw competitors off the scent too? It would be a slippery slope to a complete loss of customer faith in the brand.
3. If being truthful about dimensions is so fatal to a business model, then how is it that other brands can tell the truth and still stay in business?
4. SIC published width information about the X14 that was inaccurate by 0.75". They said "oops, sorry that was a mistake" and corrected it in the marketing literature (to within 0.25"). Whereas it is odd that Starboard still aren't publishing accurate data about the Ace GT, even now the board is out.
5. Deliberate misinformation can't explain why there are identical boards out there that have different widths marked on them. That seems more like random than deliberate, since putting different dimensions on different boards will create problems for the customer in resale etc.
The numbers are put on by a chick.....hence the monthly changes......surprisingly she's getting the length right....perhaps we could learn something from this.....
pretty poor really, how many stores have floor stock and how many indent order these larger boards, pretty hard to invest a large chunk of cash into these when they aren't getting their catalogs right. or even the printed dimensions on the board right.
And as someone else said, if they can't get their dimensions right, what else aren't they doing right, maybe a bit more merit in those warranty claims that pop up on here from time to time
Maybe the mythical quality of the cobra factory is just that... a myth
Controversial I know but I’ve measured a couple of big brand-name manufactured boards recently, very accurately. None of them were right on the money…….go figure.
Select to expand quoteGrenfell said...
Controversial I know but I’ve measured a couple of big brand-name manufactured boards recently, very accurately. None of them were right on the money…….go figure.
How far out were they? It seems pretty common that brands round to the nearest 0.5" or even sometimes 1" in their marketing literature. Some of the issues maybe because of uses of both metric and imperial measurements by different brands -translate a width designed in centimetres to a width described in inches for the US market and the result is unlikely to be a round number. And there will always be differences due to manufacturing. But here Starboard have apparently produced a board that is a full 1.5" narrower than what is written on it, and that is a whopping difference. At 28" I'd personally buy this board. At 26.5" I won't. And that's maybe the reason why it doesn't read 26.5"...
Select to expand quoteJonathanC said..
Piece of cake storing it when you get used to surf ski's!
Hey Kieran, wondering how it feels compared to a 17'4 bullet in terms of not having the steering? Does it have the steering ability of the 14 Aces, you know how they react so quickly to foot pressure - more weight on the left foot, goes right.
Planning on one for 2016 !!
Hi Jonathan,
I found the big Ace very good once I got the feel for it. I found it steered well from rail pressure if I moved back a bit.
It was'nt quite as responsive as the 14 but it's alot more user friendly and predictable. (I have a 2015 14 x 25" Ace)
I doubt you'll find an unlimited as responsive as a 14, but that's not really what unlimiteds are all about.
My comment about the stability was related to the fact that as soon as you stand on the Ace it's just planted whereas the Bullet is a little twitchier, if that makes sense? I was completely surprised by the Ace, I loved it.
I think PM02's comment above about the all around versatility for larger paddlers is spot on.
From my experience with the big unlimited boards you can't paddle them the same as a 14; you need to relax much more and really pick your runs and when to paddle. When you get that combination and timing geling together you start to really fly without much effort compared to a 14 because your average speed stays up.
When you are effortlessly tapping along at 15km/hr + linking bump to bump surfing the tail of a big board that's the magic of the unlimiteds. :)
Obviously you don't have that instant direction change that you get from a ruddered board, but then again in my opinion there are very few paddlers(myself included) that can really use the rudder to its full potential for maintaining speed and staying with runs.
Jeremy Riggs, Livio Menelau & Dave Kalama are the best at it I reckon, most mere mortals just complicate things for themselves by playing with it too much.
I find myself faster if I'm standing back from the rudder on my Bullet, and just rail and paddle steering. I only use the rudder if I come off a run and need a quick direction change in between bumps or I'm paddling cross wind.
I would highly reccommend anyone try one if they get a chance.
Select to expand quoteKieranr said..
JonathanC said..
Piece of cake storing it when you get used to surf ski's!
Hey Kieran, wondering how it feels compared to a 17'4 bullet in terms of not having the steering? Does it have the steering ability of the 14 Aces, you know how they react so quickly to foot pressure - more weight on the left foot, goes right.
Planning on one for 2016 !!
Hi Jonathan,
I found the big Ace very good once I got the feel for it. I found it steered well from rail pressure if I moved back a bit.
It was'nt quite as responsive as the 14 but it's alot more user friendly and predictable. (I have a 2015 14 x 25" Ace)
I doubt you'll find an unlimited as responsive as a 14, but that's not really what unlimiteds are all about.
My comment about the stability was related to the fact that as soon as you stand on the Ace it's just planted whereas the Bullet is a little twitchier, if that makes sense? I was completely surprised by the Ace, I loved it.
I think PM02's comment above about the all around versatility for larger paddlers is spot on.
From my experience with the big unlimited boards you can't paddle them the same as a 14; you need to relax much more and really pick your runs and when to paddle. When you get that combination and timing geling together you start to really fly without much effort compared to a 14 because your average speed stays up.
When you are effortlessly tapping along at 15km/hr + linking bump to bump surfing the tail of a big board that's the magic of the unlimiteds. :)
Obviously you don't have that instant direction change that you get from a ruddered board, but then again in my opinion there are very few paddlers(myself included) that can really use the rudder to its full potential for maintaining speed and staying with runs.
Jeremy Riggs, Livio Menelau & Dave Kalama are the best at it I reckon, most mere mortals just complicate things for themselves by playing with it too much.
I find myself faster if I'm standing back from the rudder on my Bullet, and just rail and paddle steering. I only use the rudder if I come off a run and need a quick direction change in between bumps or I'm paddling cross wind.
I would highly reccommend anyone try one if they get a chance.
over or wrong use of a rudder can definitely slow you down.
I was paddling up Currumbin ck one time with 2 guys on unlimited prone boards while I was on a 15'6 standard fin set up sup.
when we hit a bend in the ck they had to use their rudders. their drop off in speed was really surprising and gave me something to think about
there's no excuse as far as I can see the blanks and mould's will be cnc'd to with in a 1mm or so and they should be getting exact replicas each time to with in 1-2mm if its hand layed up and far less if its out of a mold. They ether know what they are ether doing it on purpose or they have very poor quality control. Like mentioned I have measured boards other big brands with around .75" larger than stated, there's no way that sort of amount could be lost in conversions let alone 1.5"!! but then they have been doing this sort of thing with volumes on windsurf boards for year so it doesn't surprise me im sure its just all part of there marketing strategy. State a board is wider and people will be amazed at its speed state a board is narrower and the will be amazed at its stability but why not just state the actual facts!
This topic inspired me to go and measure my board. Interesting it seems to have been on a diet and is a good inch narrower than I thought it was!
Select to expand quoteArea10 said..
Have we EVER seen a design (especially a 17-4 one as extraordinary as the Ace GT) directly copied by a "good competing brand" let alone so closely that misinformation within an inch or so would matter?
I've personally witnessed someone measuring up a Starboard Ace with the intention of designing and building a competing product. That board was released, albeit with significant changes. By the time it reached the market, the Ace had already been out for over a year. If someone aiming to borrow some design cues has to wait for the first board to appear in shops, then he or she has missed the boat. But if you could get everything you needed from a promotional catalogue or website, that could save up to 6 months of lead time.
Imagine if coles and woolies took the same approach to their catalogs..
www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/buying-products-and-services/advertising-and-pricing
Rode one of these on the weekend… Oh dear, that could prove expensive. It just seemed very 'right' for my size and also my 'style' - there's no style - of paddling. Liked the narrower feel too, i've gotten very used to the Glide on flat water and loved the tippiness of the narrow board, felt like the next step of evolution for me.
Shame about the price though...
