Hoping to get some feedback on the following.
I'm thinking about buying a 2019 Slingshot Wizard 103L. Just wondering how much more agile the 103L wizard will be than my 120L Hover Crossover. I'm using 2020 Naish Jet Foil with 1050 and 1250 front wings and 320 stabilizer on my hover co which i will also be using on the wizard 103L if i buy one.
I was also thinking: What would be more agile, responsive etc. The 103 wizard with naish jet foil with 1050 and 1250 front wings and 320 stabilizer OR:
My 120L Hover Co with (if i was to buy) Naish Jet High Aspect 1200 or 1400 front wing with 280 High Aspect Stabilizer.
Has anyone ridden an 019, 103L Wizard ? What are they like? I'm currently using my 1050 front wing on my hover co with a 3.3 rigged super flat in 20 - 25 knts, or thereabouts. I have to move my foot straps all the way forward so don't have the response i'd like to have from my back foot. Board feels a bit planky sometimes, like i want it to take off faster, turn faster and be more agile and responsive. Also overpowered at times and don't always have the controll i'd like to have. I weigh 83kgs.
I'm wondering which of the above board, foil combinations would best sort me out? Any feedback / comments would be appreciated.
I have been using the Wizard 103L for about 18 months and really like it. The short length gives you more of a flying sensation and I think it's more controllable in strong winds and waves. If you need to lift or sink the nose quickly it responds better than any other board I've tried.
The only downside is uphauling in chop with a sail of 6m or above is tricky. I'm 80 kg and I'm normally fine uphauling smaller sails unless the wind drops right off. I need a few knots of wind after uphauling to pull the nose of the board off the wind - otherwise I fall in.
The first hour or so on the Wizard 103 was hell though until I got the hang of handling it off foil. You've got to get your head round not using mast foot pressure and really weighting up your back leg.
Smaller dedicated windfoil board would be more manoeuverable but it's probably less of a difference then you think. Those Naish jet HA foils are massive, not whatI'd associate with manoeuverability windfoiling in strong winds.
You'd be better off getting a Naish micro hover if you wanted something more manoeuver oriented. Mainly because I suspect you will have some tuning issues trying to get the Naish foil to work well with the wizard, especially as the wizard I'm pretty sure is Tuttle box, and the Naish out of the box doesn't have shims for tuning the rear stab. You should try stick to a board with tracks.
The Naish runs the foil mast quite close to the front wing compared to most other brands, so usually if you are running a Naish in other brands gear you will have to move your footstraps back and have the foil mounted forward in the tracks to make it balanced.
Forum post of someone dealing with the opposite of what you are looking to do, but having tracks gives them tuning options you won't have.
www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Foiling/Slingshot-76-and-Hover-122-Questions-after-first-flight?page=1
Photo of Naish vs fanatic as an example.
Select to expand quotesimonp123 said..
I have been using the Wizard 103L for about 18 months and really like it. The short length gives you more of a flying sensation and I think it's more controllable in strong winds and waves. If you need to lift or sink the nose quickly it responds better than any other board I've tried.
The only downside is uphauling in chop with a sail of 6m or above is tricky. I'm 80 kg and I'm normally fine uphauling smaller sails unless the wind drops right off. I need a few knots of wind after uphauling to pull the nose of the board off the wind - otherwise I fall in.
The first hour or so on the Wizard 103 was hell though until I got the hang of handling it off foil. You've got to get your head round not using mast foot pressure and really weighting up your back leg.
What wind range do you use it in? What sail sizes? (BTW, it's interesting that its replacement model is 90l and much narrower).
