Select to expand quoteHydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
Select to expand quotethedrip said..Hydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
Fair call, and pretty much a given. If you want to get pedantic about what I said take context into account, I was talking about FINS. A crap set of fins or the wrong arrangement even in a good shape can make it a pig slug, change that up and it can completely transform a board. All other features are a consideration, not written off, but a consideration when selecting the right fins for the job.
Damn some of you boys can be totally literal when it suits you and completely obtuse when it doesn't. Heading of discussion is about fins, my two bobs worth was about fins.
If the core is good then fins can make a big difference, if it's crap. i.e something stupid like a reverse rocker, (and just so that it's clear to you that means the kook put the fin plugs on the deck) then pretty much any hull form will see some sort of improvement from selection of the right fins.
As for me humping a Cjet........ mmmmmmmm nice. My cheap bitch pig was worth every cent.
But for me a Webber Diamond or a SubX is sexier, I just can't afford those high class ones so I'll poke around with the "pig" that I can afford and put some lipstick on it ;-)
And I meant no disrespect to any legendary shapers or their work, I was simply trying to relay how much difference the fin combination changeout made to the Cjet, It was of such significance it makes one wonder just how much these so called hull form features do actually make a difference and how much is ego niche marketing? What a lot of pigs we must have ridden 20 to 30 years ago before all these amazing concepts were designed into the modern shapes that only the smartest and most intuitive shapers can understand and explain?
Sounds suspiciously like a lot of marketing guru shaper brain washing to me.
Maybe some brain washed twats need a reality check? Maybe you all been indoctrinated into the church of the guru shaper gods who hold the sacred knowledge and can only define it in esoteric terms beyond the understanding of us mere kook mortals?
Me, I'm a free agent mate. Not brain washed by the style masters or super shaper guru's, appreciate their knowledge and "wisdom" but not convinced that this is worth twice the coin.
Just saying....................... wait for it..........
Just waiting to hear the expletive hit the fan.
Select to expand quoteCuttlefish said..
This should work. Fin plugs not optimal for a twin but I can usually work around that to some extent with stance adjustments.
AMT twins and trailer.
AMT's are great. I run them in several configurations including the old Cuttlefish special (AMT front, Controller rears). The full AMT set turned my Tomo Nano into a small wave weapon.
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..thedrip said..Hydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
Fair call, and pretty much a given. If you want to get pedantic about what I said take context into account, I was talking about FINS. A crap set of fins or the wrong arrangement even in a good shape can make it a pig slug, change that up and it can completely transform a board. All other features are a consideration, not written off, but a consideration when selecting the right fins for the job.
Damn some of you boys can be totally literal when it suits you and completely obtuse when it doesn't. Heading of discussion is about fins, my two bobs worth was about fins.
If the core is good then fins can make a big difference, if it's crap. i.e something stupid like a reverse rocker, (and just so that it's clear to you that means the kook put the fin plugs on the deck) then pretty much any hull form will see some sort of improvement from selection of the right fins.
As for me humping a Cjet........ mmmmmmmm nice. My cheap bitch pig was worth every cent.
But for me a Webber Diamond or a SubX is sexier, I just can't afford those high class ones so I'll poke around with the "pig" that I can afford and put some lipstick on it ;-)
And I meant no disrespect to any legendary shapers or their work, I was simply trying to relay how much difference the fin combination changeout made to the Cjet, It was of such significance it makes one wonder just how much these so called hull form features do actually make a difference and how much is ego niche marketing? What a lot of pigs we must have ridden 20 to 30 years ago before all these amazing concepts were designed into the modern shapes that only the smartest and most intuitive shapers can understand and explain?
Sounds suspiciously like a lot of marketing guru shaper brain washing to me.
Maybe some brain washed twats need a reality check? Maybe you all been indoctrinated into the church of the guru shaper gods who hold the sacred knowledge and can only define it in esoteric terms beyond the understanding of us mere kook mortals?
Me, I'm a free agent mate. Not brain washed by the style masters or super shaper guru's, appreciate their knowledge and "wisdom" but not convinced that this is worth twice the coin.
Just saying....................... wait for it..........
Just waiting to hear the expletive hit the fan.
Aren't all surfboards hulls? Either planning or displacement.
Merrick developed the tri plane hull and it won more titles than any other so probs not just a marketing spiel. 
Also been copied by nearly every shaper so probably consider him a guru shaper God that changed the way boards are made. Haven't seen anyone making pop outs in China develop anything close to that.
Or I might just be a brain washed moron.. 
Select to expand quoteToobz said..Cuttlefish said..
This should work. Fin plugs not optimal for a twin but I can usually work around that to some extent with stance adjustments.
AMT twins and trailer.
AMT's are great. I run them in several configurations including the old Cuttlefish special (AMT front, Controller rears). The full AMT set turned my Tomo Nano into a small wave weapon.
I was just talking to a surfing mate of mine who rides the same size and type of boards I do about how I wished I could find a cherry nano on gumtree one day. That board was epic and especially with the AMT/controller set up.
Select to expand quoteSP said..Hydromann said..thedrip said..Hydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
Fair call, and pretty much a given. If you want to get pedantic about what I said take context into account, I was talking about FINS. A crap set of fins or the wrong arrangement even in a good shape can make it a pig slug, change that up and it can completely transform a board. All other features are a consideration, not written off, but a consideration when selecting the right fins for the job.
Damn some of you boys can be totally literal when it suits you and completely obtuse when it doesn't. Heading of discussion is about fins, my two bobs worth was about fins.
If the core is good then fins can make a big difference, if it's crap. i.e something stupid like a reverse rocker, (and just so that it's clear to you that means the kook put the fin plugs on the deck) then pretty much any hull form will see some sort of improvement from selection of the right fins.
As for me humping a Cjet........ mmmmmmmm nice. My cheap bitch pig was worth every cent.
But for me a Webber Diamond or a SubX is sexier, I just can't afford those high class ones so I'll poke around with the "pig" that I can afford and put some lipstick on it ;-)
And I meant no disrespect to any legendary shapers or their work, I was simply trying to relay how much difference the fin combination changeout made to the Cjet, It was of such significance it makes one wonder just how much these so called hull form features do actually make a difference and how much is ego niche marketing? What a lot of pigs we must have ridden 20 to 30 years ago before all these amazing concepts were designed into the modern shapes that only the smartest and most intuitive shapers can understand and explain?
Sounds suspiciously like a lot of marketing guru shaper brain washing to me.
Maybe some brain washed twats need a reality check? Maybe you all been indoctrinated into the church of the guru shaper gods who hold the sacred knowledge and can only define it in esoteric terms beyond the understanding of us mere kook mortals?
Me, I'm a free agent mate. Not brain washed by the style masters or super shaper guru's, appreciate their knowledge and "wisdom" but not convinced that this is worth twice the coin.
Just saying....................... wait for it..........
Just waiting to hear the expletive hit the fan.
Aren't all surfboards hulls? Either planning or displacement.
Merrick developed the tri plane hull and it won more titles than any other so probs not just a marketing spiel.
Also been copied by nearly every shaper so probably consider him a guru shaper God that changed the way boards are made. Haven't seen anyone making pop outs in China develop anything close to that.
Or I might just be a brain washed moron..
Any hull form is both. Below a certain speed they are displacement. Once they achieve sufficient velocity they transition from displacement to planing.
Merrick used well known hydrodynamic principals and theories that resulted in a better hull form. Derived either through education, innovation or intuition.
I was not having a crack at well respected shapers who's designs have proven themselves. I was having a poke at how gullible and easily convinced people can be by cleaver marketing of often intangible and complex engineering and hydrodynamic principles because of a so called brand name or a supposed reputation.
Webber has incredible intuition when it comes to hull forms built on decades of experience, Miller is the same, tonnes of intuition. If you look at the Webber Diamond and the Miller SubX you will see a similarity of design concept outcomes. In other words two completely seperate and intelligent shapers have derived near parallel solutions in isolation of each other.
Not copying each other but building on the years of accumulated shaping knowledge passed on to them and also derived through others.
As for China pop outs. Webbers boards are Asian pop outs. He freely states this in some of his vids. He also states that the quality is second to none now after some rough earlier results.
I would not right off the quality that can be produced. Yes there are cheap and dodgy pop outs that are slugs. But based on what I have seen at a factory direct outlet vs. racked up boards there is very little difference in not just quality but the adoption of well proven hull form and hydrodynamic design concepts which result in boards that would have been considered cutting edge custom designs only 5 years ago.
I have been engineering and designing rotating hydrodynamic equipment for decades (industrial pumps). And I have been manufacturing my designs in China for over 15 years now.
When I started doing this there where problems, too many to list. But with persistence and effort these where sorted, a relationship with a trusted and proven factory was established and the quality improved to match and in many cases exceed what could be done here in Oz at a fraction of the capital or investment cost.
So regardless of anyone's bias, resentments, experiences or whatever when it comes to products from China I know first hand that when done right they can be as good and sometimes better than first world.
If you are in the camp of design masters good on you. If you are believing the biggoted, biased or brainwashing marketing based on a self proclaimed shaping guru that has an axe to grind then re-evaluate and reassess.
Yeah I get that they are feeling the pressure of imports, that always has been and will be the case. Not helped by a gov that has signed up to free trade and no tarrifs to protect them. Not helped by the economies of scale and cost reduction of offshore made. Not helped by the pressure on household budgets that drives the demand for consumers to seek lower cost purchase.
There is a lot more going on than a narrow perspective of once a pig always a pig. And the simple reality is that not all self proclaimed custom shapers provide the absolute best solution. Yes they might design you a specific shape that can perform amazingly for your current level of skill and fitness for the predominant local conditions you will ride. And yes that snapshot of a design may perform 5 or even 10 percent setter hydrodynamically.
Truth is that unless conditionsyou are at an elite level you likely will not notice a difference. Variables of conditions on the day, wave selection, physical endurance (hangover) can and will have a greater impact.
And this is the intangible nature of this sport. The variables that define the outcomes all meet in once place. The interface where our feet glide across the face of the wave and the raw emotion of that.
I don't care what name design anyone rides. I don't care about branding or marketing BS used to entice the gullible with more money than sense. I don't care about skill level or appearances on the water.
As long as the person riding alongside me is feeling the Stoke and grinning their head off I'm stoked for them. They could be riding an Esky lid for all I care.
The friggin eletism of I ride this brand, or I'm a longboarder purist, or I'm a shortboard warrior mentality sucks. As long as someone is having a crack at it, smiling their dial off, and obeying surf eticate, then I don't give a toss what they ride or where it came from.
I'm stoked that they are out there and engaged with the elements and primal forces of that.
Stay stoked everyone.
Select to expand quoteCuttlefish said..Toobz said..Cuttlefish said..
This should work. Fin plugs not optimal for a twin but I can usually work around that to some extent with stance adjustments.
AMT twins and trailer.
AMT's are great. I run them in several configurations including the old Cuttlefish special (AMT front, Controller rears). The full AMT set turned my Tomo Nano into a small wave weapon.
I was just talking to a surfing mate of mine who rides the same size and type of boards I do about how I wished I could find a cherry nano on gumtree one day. That board was epic and especially with the AMT/controller set up.
I see a few come up from time to time. They really are epic. Mine sits in the rack most of the time then all of a sudden I'll grab it and do the best surfing I've done in ages. The thing just works.
I haven't been following the thread too closely but here's a couple of 7' - 8' channel bottom twinnies I've done recently. The owners love them but I unfortunately haven't had a ride.
Select to expand quotethedrip said..Hydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
"If one side of the board has different fins to the other side, it will be like two different boards when turning right or left. Asymmetric mixes are another way to ultra fine tuning a board for point break conditions."
I'll let you type that into Google and figure out who said it.
Fins can transform and change a dog, pig, bitch, *unt board into something totally different. Not just the actual fins, but placement, cant, toe, flex etc. All play a much larger part in board performance outcomes than people give them credit for.
You could stick some bonza fins on a 3MF and carve that bitch, bugger, bastard to shore ;-)
Select to expand quoteP co said..
I haven't been following the thread too closely but here's a couple of 7' - 8' channel bottom twinnies I've done recently. The owners love them but I unfortunately haven't had a ride.
Ducks nuts mate, they look narrow though? Ever thought of doing them in a M4 Quattro www.mckeesurf.com/?page_id=267 or maybe a Twinzer quad setup?
Some of the best boards I've ever surfed and owned had glassed in fins.
Maybee I was just lucky that my shapers knew what fins to put on ??
I'm still trying to get my head around this "over 50%" statement.
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..P co said..
I haven't been following the thread too closely but here's a couple of 7' - 8' channel bottom twinnies I've done recently. The owners love them but I unfortunately haven't had a ride.
Ducks nuts mate, they look narrow though? Ever thought of doing them in a M4 Quattro www.mckeesurf.com/?page_id=267 or maybe a Twinzer quad setup?
Have done. There's this one.
Select to expand quoteCuttlefish said..
The Soars are a whole different feel and I will say on one of the very good beachbreak days I was surfing my tajen with the Soar twins and red nubster trailer I swapped boards with a mate. He got a couple of waves and on giving me the board back said he thought the board would go better as a thruster. He is more of a conventional surfer with the lines he chooses on a wave compared to me.
Having said that the planshape is a copy of a hypto which he has owned but that was a while ago and the board doesn't mind being surfed with your feet forward more than a typical wide point behind centre thruster.
The soars are like having a nice flex single fin like a Greenough 4a on the rail of your board.
If you want a set of twins that will still go well in more powerful waves but release off the top and have great drive due to a wide base I would first buy a set of Channel islands AMT twins over the Modiis. The PC core is stiff enough to handle some juice.
I wouldn't buy the black plastic edition of the AMTs.
The AMT pc cores are a favourite fin of mine and go great with small trailers in the quad plugs on wide tailed boards.
The Modii twins are a thin fin. That's something you don't see on a website and so find out when they turn up in your mailbox. Lots of flex so good in smaller waves but that will lose some control when you surf them in more powerful waves.
Buy a set of AMTs from a website that does afterpay or zip pay. Then you can pay them off over a couple of months. When you sign up with Surfstitch you usually get an introductory voucher to save $s and they have sales on fins from time to time.
Do you recon if I got the Sanctum MODII and ran them in a setup as a Twinzer or Quad arrangement that they would do better? Or should I hold out for the Soars or the AMT's?
Can't stop wet dreaming about the Soars, and now you got me all excited about the Tajen in 6'6".
Dang, just need to stop thinking and go surfing.
Select to expand quoteP co said..Hydromann said..P co said..
I haven't been following the thread too closely but here's a couple of 7' - 8' channel bottom twinnies I've done recently. The owners love them but I unfortunately haven't had a ride.
Ducks nuts mate, they look narrow though? Ever thought of doing them in a M4 Quattro www.mckeesurf.com/?page_id=267 or maybe a Twinzer quad setup?
Have done. There's this one.
Wow, impressive work. That pin would be quick with the quads, designed for what conditions? I'm thinking too much nose volume for a big wave gun but would give good paddle speed.
Select to expand quoteRabbs said..Some of the best boards I've ever surfed and owned had glassed in fins.
Maybee I was just lucky that my shapers knew what fins to put on ??
I'm still trying to get my head around this "over 50%" statement.
Yeah what kook would claim that?
BTW shapers use formulas to set up fin placement, not luck. I recon you got a good shaper and glasser who knew their stuff.
Plug ins and their plugs also use formula to figure best location, but this does nothing to ensure that the right fins are used or fitted.
Just look at the marketing hype of all the latest and greatest fin shapes around, all claiming a great advantage to your boards and ultimately your performance.
So yeah maybe an exaggeration on the 50%, more of a gut feel on the difference I encountered on my ride with some fin fiddling. Likely a statement I'm never gonna escape from around here.
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..Rabbs said..Some of the best boards I've ever surfed and owned had glassed in fins.
Maybee I was just lucky that my shapers knew what fins to put on ??
I'm still trying to get my head around this
So yeah maybe an exaggeration on the 50%, more of a gut feel on the difference I encountered on my ride with some fin fiddling. Likely a statement I'm never gonna escape from around here.
That's not the only one
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..thedrip said..Hydromann said..
Whilst shape, features, rocker and volume are very mindful considerations, fins apparently can contribute to over 50 percent on the boards performance.
You can take something that performs and handles like a slug and completely transform it into a dream ride with the right fins.
You are dreaming.
Fins are important, but can't fix a crap outline, dodgy foil, useless rocker, or poorly designed bottom.
If it was that easy then the legendary shapers with serious career longevity wouldn't be anymore special than the work experience kid shaping his tenth board.
"If one side of the board has different fins to the other side, it will be like two different boards when turning right or left. Asymmetric mixes are another way to ultra fine tuning a board for point break conditions."
I'll let you type that into Google and figure out who said it.
Fins can transform and change a dog, pig, bitch, *unt board into something totally different. Not just the actual fins, but placement, cant, toe, flex etc. All play a much larger part in board performance outcomes than people give them credit for.
You could stick some bonza fins on a 3MF and carve that bitch, bugger, bastard to shore ;-)
Nah.
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..Rabbs said..Some of the best boards I've ever surfed and owned had glassed in fins.
Maybee I was just lucky that my shapers knew what fins to put on ??
I'm still trying to get my head around this "over 50%" statement.
Yeah what kook would claim that?
BTW shapers use formulas to set up fin placement, not luck. I recon you got a good shaper and glasser who knew their stuff.
Plug ins and their plugs also use formula to figure best location, but this does nothing to ensure that the right fins are used or fitted.
Just look at the marketing hype of all the latest and greatest fin shapes around, all claiming a great advantage to your boards and ultimately your performance.
So yeah maybe an exaggeration on the 50%, more of a gut feel on the difference I encountered on my ride with some fin fiddling. Likely a statement I'm never gonna escape from around here.
In my experience, there is nothing like a common formula for fin placement.
Ive found most shapers have set measements for fin placements
.
If its a different kind of board that may cause a rethink for them
Select to expand quotelaceys lane said..
Ive found most shapers have set measements for fin placements
.
If its a different kind of board that may cause a rethink for them
Exactly, there are set ratios of toe in, cant, fin size and placement relative to overall size and shape that just work.
Most shapers have their own templates that they use based on the overall shape they are working on.
Select to expand quotelaceys lane said..
Ive found most shapers have set measements for fin placements
.
If its a different kind of board that may cause a rethink for them
Yep, but it varies from shaper to shaper and, sometimes, from model to model within their range.
Select to expand quotethedrip said..laceys lane said..
Ive found most shapers have set measements for fin placements
.
If its a different kind of board that may cause a rethink for them
Yep, but it varies from shaper to shaper and, sometimes, from model to model within their range.
Agree
Select to expand quotethedrip said..laceys lane said..
Ive found most shapers have set measements for fin placements
.
If its a different kind of board that may cause a rethink for them
Yep, but it varies from shaper to shaper and, sometimes, from model to model within their range.
They will also alter their fin placements in a model after receiving feedback. DHD did this on his twin.
After all, as Chuck likes to say, "You could have the best board in the world shaped for you but, if the fins are off, it won't go- the thing just won't work the way it should."
Chuck Ames, three decades of shaping and fin making.
There has to be a fusion of design, where the fins allow for the very best from the rigid design of a shape in the dynamic and variable environment of the ocean. Reacting to variable inputs and interaction from various riders and styles.
The only constant in that equation is the shape and the fins, and that has become a variable that eludes and confuses so many people with every shaper trying and vying for a unique edge. Be it double concave, parabolic rails, tail design, thickness distribution, modern materials, fin placement and design...... the list goes on.
What a good shaper will do is to define the clients needs versus his wants. They will assess the users style,, mass, surfing preferences, strengths and weaknesses, the conditions that the board will predominantly used in etc. And than based on their expertise apply all of these variables to formulate an almost intuitive solution based on their understanding of what different essential design consideration will do, how those designs will interact with the user and the elements in which the user will apply it.
I happen to know what I wanted from a board, I knew the volume I wanted, I knew the general outline and shape I wanted, I knew what range of conditions I would use it in, I knew my fitness and my skill level was rusty.
And I chose a solution that gave me a good compromise of features that I wanted outside of being able to afford a custom. And one of the main considerations was fins, what combinations could I run and experiment with.
On the weekend I surfed with a twiny setup in the Cjet, not a true twin because I don't have a set of twins to use, so I simply used the larger thruster fins with no trailers or stabiliser.
And for the conditions that presented of only 1 - 2' beach peaks in pack out conditions it was a ripper. No it didn't carve them to shreds, not enough power for even the mal guys to get a decent length ride. But it did allow me nearly as early paddle in as the mals, and a nice loose tail to engage the inside fin and rail quickly on drop in with the need for speed across the face.
And that pretty much sums up why I ride a pop out that came close to my wish list. It allows me to adjust it to suit a myriad of conditions and to fine tun it into a setup that I like for all of them. The core design is sound, their are no gaping design flaws that people would try to make out, yeah sure it's not specifically designed for a point break, or a rolling mushy foam face, or a cyclone swell beach break.
It's an all rounder one board quiver.
So whilst everyone else is ummming and arrghing about what board to use I simply chop and change fins to suit and can ride in pretty much whatever comes my way.
Currently that's twinning and I'm inspired to push them in my board to larger waves once I get some proper real twins under her, look out MODII here I come.
These would be better for your carbon jet. Run them as a twin or twin with either a centre trailer or with small trailers in the quad plugs.
They will have less flex than the Modii's and a more area in the tips.
www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/burleigh-heads/surfing/surfboard-fins-akila-aipa-twin-fins-fcs/1235082334
Trailers for sale here:
www.sanctumsurf.com.au/stablizer-fcs
Select to expand quoteCuttlefish said..
These would be better for your carbon jet. Run them as a twin or twin with either a centre trailer or with small trailers in the quad plugs.
They will have less flex than the Modii's and a more area in the tips.
www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/burleigh-heads/surfing/surfboard-fins-akila-aipa-twin-fins-fcs/1235082334
Trailers for sale here:
www.sanctumsurf.com.au/stablizer-fcs
Thanks Cfish, looked at those. Something of a gimmick I recon.
Dimples do change the surface contact flow from laminar to turbulent. Which would help with stall angle but only when the flow is generally uniformed around the object with sufficient velocity. That never quite happens with a surfboard, there are too many disruptors of the laminar flow stream, non uniformed velocity, turbulence, aeration etc. All of which affects the surface tension and laminar flow.
For the most part I think the flex in a fin, its size and placement would be much more noticeable than the effects of surface flow.
I'm keen to try the Soars, but only have a budget for the MODII unless I can find similar used.
Also like the idea of fibreglass over a injection moulded. I can easily refoil the MODII if I don't like them back to a Soar shape. Can also stiffen them up a little with a layer of carbon fibre if needed. All fairly easy to do.
Select to expand quoteCuttlefish said..
These would be better for your carbon jet. Run them as a twin or twin with either a centre trailer or with small trailers in the quad plugs.
They will have less flex than the Modii's and a more area in the tips.
www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/burleigh-heads/surfing/surfboard-fins-akila-aipa-twin-fins-fcs/1235082334
Trailers for sale here:
www.sanctumsurf.com.au/stablizer-fcs
These look interesting....
Not twins as such but maybe a nice option for rears in a quad?
www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/grafton/surfing/fcs-fins-with-venturi-channels-and-winglets/1228665911
Reminds me of Roy Stuart's fin designs www.roystuart.biz/ mixed with some Fin Sciences design concepts finsciences.com/surfboard-fin-science/
Fin sciences is interesting, he uses a lot of "tech" talk to try and explain why "modern" wing design is better than bio-mimicry, but what he fails to recognise or tell people is that modern solutions where developed to deal with modern supersonic problems. From a sub sonic perspective the difference in velocity and the loss based on tip turbulence is negligible. 90% of surfboard fins etc are simply not going fast enough for tip velocity to make such a significant difference to 85% of surfers who will never notice.
The bigger performance compromise would be to do with stall, the angle at which a wing looses it lift capacity. For a fin this would be the angle at which the fin breaks hold of the water and shears.
That's where Roy's messing about with tubercles on leading edges is interesting, whilst he has a very limited scientific understanding he has an amazing intuitive comprehension, that is the ability of the brain to envisage dynamic concepts and interactions.
The tubercles break the laminar flow into a mix of smaller pockets of turbulent and laminar flow streams. This naturally causes a slight drag loss but overcomes the stall issues of the wing. Without them a humpback would not be able to make the tight turns it needs to in order to round up and catch it's food. It would stall through a turn and shear until it corrected the attack angle.
The venturi channel fins whilst not exactly tubercles would essentially have a similar effect, but they would also have the effect of creating higher lift for the foil shape due to greater drag over the longer surface.
And then there's the latest fins from Cheyne Horan which have some merrit as well www.cheynehoran.com.au/fins/
If you took the shape of Cheyne's fins and designed in the venturi channels and winglet then I think that would be an optimised fin design.
For my two cents worth I think the future of surfing will be found in fin design and placement, FCS, Futures and others have done some great work on fitment systems, composite materials for flex control etc. But I think you will see them experiment more with some of the concepts that Roy has pioneered.
And shapers will have a whole new field of designs to consider the dynamic effect of in the whole of the surfboard design.
And these dynamics look crazy.
www.fynsurf.com/store/newfish
Adaptive angle of attack to counter stall angle using inherent material flexibility and a torsional base linkage.
Very clever adaptation of materials and mechanical engineering principles.
How it would work in the real world I have no idea?
Select to expand quoteHydromann said..Cuttlefish said..
These would be better for your carbon jet. Run them as a twin or twin with either a centre trailer or with small trailers in the quad plugs.
They will have less flex than the Modii's and a more area in the tips.
www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/burleigh-heads/surfing/surfboard-fins-akila-aipa-twin-fins-fcs/1235082334
Trailers for sale here:
www.sanctumsurf.com.au/stablizer-fcs
Thanks Cfish, looked at those. Something of a gimmick I recon.
Dimples do change the surface contact flow from laminar to turbulent. Which would help with stall angle but only when the flow is generally uniformed around the object with sufficient velocity. That never quite happens with a surfboard, there are too many disruptors of the laminar flow stream, non uniformed velocity, turbulence, aeration etc. All of which affects the surface tension and laminar flow.
For the most part I think the flex in a fin, its size and placement would be much more noticeable than the effects of surface flow.
I'm keen to try the Soars, but only have a budget for the MODII unless I can find similar used.
Also like the idea of fibreglass over a injection moulded. I can easily refoil the MODII if I don't like them back to a Soar shape. Can also stiffen them up a little with a layer of carbon fibre if needed. All fairly easy to do.
The Soars and the Modiis side by side. Cant see how it would be simple to re-template a Modii into a Soar.
Dimples on the 3D fins I'm not even thinking about more the positive of the Akila Aipa template in fibreglass for a budget price.
