I've a new question, in your opinion at my weight 72/73 kg what is better Pyro 83 or 79? At the Moment I've an Ultrakode 80l. For riding and float 79 is too small?
Select to expand quoteManawa said..
I've a new question, in your opinion at my weight 72/73 kg what is better Pyro 83 or 79? At the Moment I've an Ultrakode 80l. For riding and float 79 is too small?
Hi, this is always a difficult question to answer because some locations need extra 'float' to deal with the white water and unhelpful currents, whereas other places are simply easier places to plane on any board and maybe the wind is also more constant.
In Europe we have lots of 'difficult' beaches - and Klitmoeller and Sylt are well known examples of places on the PWA wave tour that get gnarly seas and where float is your friend. My favourite beach in west Hove where I live is the same, especially in winter.
So where I sail I tend to go for a floatier board than my weight would suggest, and for me that means +10 litres over my weight in kilos.
Right now I'm overweight (no wind, lockdown laziness etc) and so instead of 73kgs I'm nearer 78kgs. The Pyro 83 floats me but is not floaty enough for easy sailing when the white water and currents come - which is why I have the Pyro 93 as my marginal wind and float ride board.
It's worth adding here that the Pyro is a relatively short board - that short length makes it deeply rewarding on the wave face, but if you are not sure footed then a 230cms long FSW shape is always more forgiving in, say, gusty or white water conditions..
So, to answer your question, I'm guessing at 72kgs the Pyro 79 would be great as your main board, giving control for 5m wind and stronger, but not in marginal conditions or with bigger sails.
I guess a similar question might also be: Would the larger 83 Pyro be too big for you when it's 4m weather?
People often ask us which is the perfect 'one board' solution for them, and I always answer that keen wave sailors generally need at least two size boards. So the size you pick here might depend on what else you have in your board collection.
I'm using the 83 Pyro for sails of 5m down to 3.6m and I'll probably use my new 93 for 4.8m up to 5.2m - or even with a 5.6m if I had one. As it is, I don't need a 5.6m rig because I have the extra float of the 93.
Hope this rambling answer makes sense.
Thank a lot Basher I total agree with you. Do you think I will youse 83 in 3.7 conditions? I've a second board kode 86 for small Waves or Lake. I know is a difficult question at my weight I am in the middle between 79 and 83.
Select to expand quoteManawa said..
Thank a lot Basher I total agree with you. Do you think I will youse 83 in 3.7 conditions? I've a second board kode 86 for small Waves or Lake. I know is a difficult question at my weight I am in the middle between 79 and 83.
I guess ideally we need some comments from someone who has sailed the 79 Pyro.
Obviously for those in the Canaries, that will be a commonly used board, for when it's regularly 4m weather.
We have had little wind here, so i don't yet know if I will be happy with my 83 when it's 3.6 weather.
Select to expand quoteSomething to consider about float & ride Manawa.
The aim is not to blast around the break, it's being able to confidently slog about in little wind (+15-20 litres over body weight), get into position then make turns on the wave. The pyro is a get up and going design, to some degree it sits in the 'real world' wave category. Yes it can be a float and ride solution but if you have constant access to quality waves with regular light winds, personally I'd be going for something like a Mako, possibly the Nano2.
As the Bashman indicated, pretty tough to have a one board solution. Me = 90kegs and after decades chasing lumps of ocean I'm really happy with my current board stack
1. 107 reactor for float & ride, lighter winds // 5.0-5.7
2. 87 pyro for general blasting, smallish waves // 4.0-5.3
3. 94 JP Rad-quad for when it's on, say 1/2 mast+, 15knts+ // 4.0-5.3
Select to expand quoteBrent in Qld said..Something to consider about float & ride Manawa.
The aim is not to blast around the break, it's being able to confidently slog about in little wind (+15-20 litres over body weight), get into position then make turns on the wave. The pyro is a get up and going design, to some degree it sits in the 'real world' wave category. Yes it can be a float and ride solution but if you have constant access to quality waves with regular light winds, personally I'd be going for something like a Mako, possibly the Nano2.
As the Bashman indicated, pretty tough to have a one board solution. Me = 90kegs and after decades chasing lumps of ocean I'm really happy with my current board stack
1. 107 reactor for float & ride, lighter winds // 5.0-5.7
2. 87 pyro for general blasting, smallish waves // 4.0-5.3
3. 94 JP Rad-quad for when it's on, say 1/2 mast+, 15knts+ // 4.0-5.3
Thank, I've not constant access to quality waves, only on holidays in Mauritius, in my region I usually ride small wave, on shore and strong wind and yes sometime side shore conditions.
I bought the 79l at a glande looks that start more than 79, and the 83 looks a bit more. Again at a glance the 79 looks more suitable for my weight 72/73 kg.
Select to expand quoteManawa said..
I bought the 79l at a glande looks that start more than 79, and the 83 looks a bit more. Again at a glance the 79 looks more suitable for my weight 72/73 kg.
I think when you first see the Pyro you can be fooled, visually, by the extra width. In truth, they are quite short, so they seem wide, and maybe your eyes then assume they are big boards.
However, when I first got on my Pyro 83, on the water, I suddenly felt it was small for 83 litres, and that was because I had just got off a Dyno 85 which I had assumed would be a similar size and feel.
And of course the Dyno has more width and volume under the straps. I now find that the Dyno 85 is a significant step up in buoyancy and stability over the Pyro 83, but that's about volume distribution and board length. When the wind dies, both boards float me about the same.
I'm now completely happy with my Pyro 83, and it's just the change of shape that you adapt to.
I'm sure you'll love your 79 and it's only 1cm narrower than the 83. Cute, aren't they?
Select to expand quoteBasher said..Manawa said..
I bought the 79l at a glande looks that start more than 79, and the 83 looks a bit more. Again at a glance the 79 looks more suitable for my weight 72/73 kg.
I think when you first see the Pyro you can be fooled, visually, by the extra width. In truth, they are quite short, so they seem wide, and maybe your eyes then assume they are big boards.
However, when I first got on my Pyro 83, on the water, I suddenly felt it was small for 83 litres, and that was because I had just got off a Dyno 85 which I had assumed would be a similar size and feel.
And of course the Dyno has more width and volume under the straps. I now find that the Dyno 85 is a significant step up in buoyancy and stability over the Pyro 83, but that's about volume distribution and board length. When the wind dies, both boards float me about the same.
I'm now completely happy with my Pyro 83, and it's just the change of shape that you adapt to.
I'm sure you'll love your 79 and it's only 1cm narrower than the 83. Cute, aren't they?
Yess here some pics
Select to expand quoteGrantmac said..philn said..Grantmac said..philn said..
Had a slog and ride session with my 105 L at Davenport in CA yesterday. Smallish waves and long wait between sets plus jet lagged from flying so didn't catch many waves. Tried it with 18 cm Scorcher twin fins. Initially thought the fins were too slidey (unexpected because so big) but quickly adjusted to them and didn't have any problems sliding out after the first wave, so probably just lack of sleep brain. Had some really nice late hits off the lip, board felt nice and smooth off the lip.
Do you find the rake of the Scorcher works okay as a twin? I wasn't a huge fan of them in my Quattro quad either as a quad or twin, that board seems to prefer upright fins (Leon).
My other boards are slotbox and I hesitate to knock the pins off if they aren't going to play well.
I don't think the Scorcher suits me. I ended up using a more upright set of fins the rest of the trip and preferred them.
I think I'm going to modify the Leons to use in slotbox then sell the Scorchers. Maybe look at a set of Incinerators since they are quite upright.
The good old Stubby has been great as a twin for me though as well and it has moderate rake, but the tip is much higher area rather than having all the area in the base like the Scorcher.
I tried the Leon vs the Stubby and I preferred the Stubby. The Leon slid out a lot easier off the top, so for some people they will really like the Leon.
Select to expand quotephiln said..Grantmac said..philn said..Grantmac said..philn said..
Had a slog and ride session with my 105 L at Davenport in CA yesterday. Smallish waves and long wait between sets plus jet lagged from flying so didn't catch many waves. Tried it with 18 cm Scorcher twin fins. Initially thought the fins were too slidey (unexpected because so big) but quickly adjusted to them and didn't have any problems sliding out after the first wave, so probably just lack of sleep brain. Had some really nice late hits off the lip, board felt nice and smooth off the lip.
Do you find the rake of the Scorcher works okay as a twin? I wasn't a huge fan of them in my Quattro quad either as a quad or twin, that board seems to prefer upright fins (Leon).
My other boards are slotbox and I hesitate to knock the pins off if they aren't going to play well.
I don't think the Scorcher suits me. I ended up using a more upright set of fins the rest of the trip and preferred them.
I think I'm going to modify the Leons to use in slotbox then sell the Scorchers. Maybe look at a set of Incinerators since they are quite upright.
The good old Stubby has been great as a twin for me though as well and it has moderate rake, but the tip is much higher area rather than having all the area in the base like the Scorcher.
I tried the Leon vs the Stubby and I preferred the Stubby. The Leon slid out a lot easier off the top, so for some people they will really like the Leon.
I will use my pyro 79 also in twin with 15,5 cm G10 Maui Ultrafin XTwin R I modifay them for slot box, they are in origin Us slotbox, but I do not know if is better cut the front piece of the two fins for better position in the box. Some advice?
Hi Manawa, been down this road many times with various fins.
First step is to knock out the pin in the US fins and use the fins with the front tab in place. In other words make sure the fins work before converting the base. If they work well, possibly no need to cut off the tab. This will allow you to put the pin back in if you want to use the fins in US mode again.
If you are happy but feel adjustment is necessary, cut off the tab.
Next I sometimes use a router/trimmer to create the rebate in the base side that allows the the fin to be held more firmly into place if there isn't the rebate already. 
Not really that necessary as I reckon doing up the box screws tends to seat into the fibreglass base. A simpiler solution is to lightly drill a 2-3mm recess for the slot box screws to locate & hold.
I'm finding my Pyro has many different characters when I play around with the fins, sizes and configurations. Got my hands on the same fins you are talking about & also converted them from US. Only used them once so far in 5.0 cross onshore. Worked well, felt fast maybe a bit stiff in the top turn/cutback but early days and conditions weren't the best.
All fun and games, best of luck with it mate.
Select to expand quotephiln said..Grantmac said..philn said..Grantmac said..philn said..
Had a slog and ride session with my 105 L at Davenport in CA yesterday. Smallish waves and long wait between sets plus jet lagged from flying so didn't catch many waves. Tried it with 18 cm Scorcher twin fins. Initially thought the fins were too slidey (unexpected because so big) but quickly adjusted to them and didn't have any problems sliding out after the first wave, so probably just lack of sleep brain. Had some really nice late hits off the lip, board felt nice and smooth off the lip.
Do you find the rake of the Scorcher works okay as a twin? I wasn't a huge fan of them in my Quattro quad either as a quad or twin, that board seems to prefer upright fins (Leon).
My other boards are slotbox and I hesitate to knock the pins off if they aren't going to play well.
I don't think the Scorcher suits me. I ended up using a more upright set of fins the rest of the trip and preferred them.
I think I'm going to modify the Leons to use in slotbox then sell the Scorchers. Maybe look at a set of Incinerators since they are quite upright.
The good old Stubby has been great as a twin for me though as well and it has moderate rake, but the tip is much higher area rather than having all the area in the base like the Scorcher.
I tried the Leon vs the Stubby and I preferred the Stubby. The Leon slid out a lot easier off the top, so for some people they will really like the Leon.
I think you're right, Leons feel half way to a twin when I run them as a quad: really slippery and easy to slide but needing quite a lot of speed to hook up.
The Scorchers are the other end of the spectrum and I've actually been happy with them as a twin on my 104L. Good for playing on small weak waves.
Stubbys seems to fit right between the two. More grip and low end than the Leons but not as directional as the Scorchers.
I've very curious about the asymmetric Incinerator fronts. Maybe faster than the Ezzys but still have that amazing grip when you need it.
Select to expand quoteBrent in Qld said..
Hi Manawa, been down this road many times with various fins.
First step is to knock out the pin in the US fins and use the fins with the front tab in place. In other words make sure the fins work before converting the base. If they work well, possibly no need to cut off the tab. This will allow you to put the pin back in if you want to use the fins in US mode again.
If you are happy but feel adjustment is necessary, cut off the tab.
Next I sometimes use a router/trimmer to create the rebate in the base side that allows the the fin to be held more firmly into place if there isn't the rebate already.
Not really that necessary as I reckon doing up the box screws tends to seat into the fibreglass base. A simpiler solution is to lightly drill a 2-3mm recess for the slot box screws to locate & hold.
I'm finding my Pyro has many different characters when I play around with the fins, sizes and configurations. Got my hands on the same fins you are talking about & also converted them from US. Only used them once so far in 5.0 cross onshore. Worked well, felt fast maybe a bit stiff in the top turn/cutback but early days and conditions weren't the best.
All fun and games, best of luck with it mate.
Thank a lot Brent, we have the same twin fins ?? I will try the feeling before cut off the tab, as soon as possible I will send you a pics with my twinzer fit in the box. Thank again much appreciated. Giuseppe
I keep meaning to try my Pyros as a twin but they work just fine as supplied - and I'm using my 83 as a quad and my 93 set up as a tri fin.
I've enjoyed both set ups so I've not had any reason to change to two fins yet - and I notice that all the recent photos of Koster show him using his Pyros in quad set up.
I should perhaps add that I've now sailed my Pyro 93 quite a bit and it's proving to be more than just a float and ride board for me. We've had frontal wind and gusty breezes and the extra float of the 93 has been very useful these past few days.
We've also had unusually choppy water conditions with multiple swells and short wave periods, but the 93 litre board - which is big for me - hasn't been too bouncy and the handling remained OK even the I was stacked on my 4.4m.
I suspect the Dyno still gives a softer and easier ride when blasting over chop, but I haven't missed my Dynos. The early planing and top speed of the Pyro are very good and, despite some poor wave conditions here, the board can be cranked in any turn and it doesn't lose speed.
Select to expand quoteManawa said..
Cut of the tab or not? 
The trim is ok or not?
If you are sailing this as a twin with MUF X-Twns then I personally would cut off the US box tab. This will allow you to set the fins further forwards in the box if required.
If you aren't using thrusters (quad or tri fin set up) then you have already moved the centre of fin cluster area well back - so you may well want to move the twin pair forwards. And note the tuning lines printed on the box.
That said, I haven't yet tried this. I'm pretty sure it's the right answer, but I note that X-Twins are quite upright fins, for onshore conditions, rather than swept back ones for cross shore. So, I'd cut off the tabs and then I'd shift them around to see what works best. Further back for more drive and further forwards for more looseness.
I too have these fins but I have yet to try them in my Pyro, so let us know what you find.
Looks like your fins are in a similar position to my first go Manawa and I felt the 87 stiffened up. Your 78 might be different so my recommendation would be sail as is and take a hacksaw+file to the beach to attack the tab if necessary. Onsite R&D always gets the best results!
Also Basher, most of PKs latest images look like side, side-off although I think I saw a Pozo shot with quad setup too. I haven't sailed my 87 in cross-off yet but I'm finding in twinnie mode I can explode the tail out when carrying top speed into the top turn. This is fine to 'get rad' in average conditions but somewhat unpredictable if you are after controlled, comp winning moves or you're in real waves. For me, I've always loved twins so I'm concentrating on that set up knowing I've got the security of a quad when needed. Have tried Black Project 16.5+11.5 thruster setup with 4.0+4.5 & felt it slowed the 87 down. Awesome carves, nicely settled & got going fine but lesser top end speed compared to twin fins.
Thank Basher, thank Brant, much appreciated, I will try but forecast is not so good for the next few days. I will try also in 3fins mode but I need a central fin 
. thank again guys
Similar feedback to others...
Been through more than few sessions with my 93 now as well. Must agree, fin placement makes huge difference.
Moving the fins way back helps it get going easier with lower winds. Bringing em more forward as wind gets stronger. And if stormy can tame it by going quad, really sticks the board to the water. Good idea playing around with the fins to find what works for you.
A thing that took me few sessions to understand was mast foot placement. I had to move it pretty far back, way way over the middle point to be comfortable going for the jumps. Short board tall rider, could be something to do with all that...
Construction is all good and crisp.
Paint job, fin boxes, pads, straps, sorry to say but quite a lot to improve there.
It's a fun board, wasn't plug and play for me but once dialled in really enjoying it.
Hi guys!
Have anyone here tried both Pyro and Ultracode? I want to order Pyro 93 or Ultrakode 93, but can't find out which one would suit me better.
I'm looking for a board that will perform well in small to medium sized waves (wind swell) and in bump'n'jump conditions (river). Early planing is important as this will be my biggest board since i've sold my 100L FS board. I had a go on Ultracode 93 and i was pleased with its turning potential and comfy ride, and a bit disappointed by its weight (wood construction). How does Pyro 93 compare to Starboard?
Select to expand quotekosmita said..
Hi guys!
Have anyone here tried both Pyro and Ultracode? I want to order Pyro 93 or Ultrakode 93, but can't find out which one would suit me better.
I'm looking for a board that will perform well in small to medium sized waves (wind swell) and in bump'n'jump conditions (river). Early planing is important as this will be my biggest board since i've sold my 100L FS board. I had a go on Ultracode 93 and i was pleased with its turning potential and comfy ride, and a bit disappointed by its weight (wood construction). How does Pyro 93 compare to Starboard?
I suspect that's a difficult question to answer. Do you mean the 2022 Ultrakode?
I have the Pyro 93 but the last Ultrakode I sailed was an 80litre, and that was from 2019.
Comparing measurements for the current models, the Pyro 93 is 3cms longer and 1cm narrower than the 93 Ultrakode.
The Pyro probably has the flatter and faster rocker, but Starboard also claim a fast rocker.
The standard Pyro build is very lightweight, but you'd need to get the more expensive 'ultra carbon' construction in the Ultrakode for a board of similar weight.
I have a sailing friend who has last year's Ultrakode 86, and a Pyro 105. He likes the Pyro so much that he is about to order a second Pyro in the 87 litre size to replace the Ultrakode. But that's partly because the Pyros suit our local water and wave conditions.
Select to expand quoteManawa said..
Thank a lot Basher I total agree with you. Do you think I will youse 83 in 3.7 conditions? I've a second board kode 86 for small Waves or Lake. I know is a difficult question at my weight I am in the middle between 79 and 83.
We have had a lot of wind here recently and I've been bonding with both my Pyros as I get to know them better.
I can now tell you that the 83 works just fine with a 3.6m rig. I started on my 4m S1 yesterday afternoon but the wind got stronger and stronger and the 3.6m S1 was much more comfortable. The gusts were still brutal but we also had holes in the wind, and the 83 Pyro was a good size for that. It never felt too bouncy with the 3.6m rig, maybe helped by some smoother water conditions between the waves.
I'm still using the 83 as a quad, as supplied, although I suspect I could go slightly smaller with the fin area, especially when using these smaller rigs.
The Pyros are quite short boards, and yesterday I found I had better control when I shifted the mast foot forward a touch - which seems to help when using 4m and 3.6m rigs.
That positioning is still centre track though, or just a centimetre ahead of the centre point.
(This sort of fine tuning will also relate to your chosen fin positions. But experimentation is good. )
Select to expand quoteBasher said..kosmita said..
Hi guys!
Have anyone here tried both Pyro and Ultracode? I want to order Pyro 93 or Ultrakode 93, but can't find out which one would suit me better.
I'm looking for a board that will perform well in small to medium sized waves (wind swell) and in bump'n'jump conditions (river). Early planing is important as this will be my biggest board since i've sold my 100L FS board. I had a go on Ultracode 93 and i was pleased with its turning potential and comfy ride, and a bit disappointed by its weight (wood construction). How does Pyro 93 compare to Starboard?
I suspect that's a difficult question to answer. Do you mean the 2022 Ultrakode?
I have the Pyro 93 but the last Ultrakode I sailed was an 80litre, and that was from 2019.
Comparing measurements for the current models, the Pyro 93 is 3cms longer and 1cm narrower than the 93 Ultrakode.
The Pyro probably has the flatter and faster rocker, but Starboard also claim a fast rocker.
The standard Pyro build is very lightweight, but you'd need to get the more expensive 'ultra carbon' construction in the Ultrakode for a board of similar weight.
I have a sailing friend who has last year's Ultrakode 86, and a Pyro 105. He likes the Pyro so much that he is about to order a second Pyro in the 87 litre size to replace the Ultrakode. But that's partly because the Pyros suit our local water and wave conditions.
Yes, it's difficult question, otherwise i wouldn't ask ;)
I mean Ultrakode 2022. From what i see on SB website 2022 and 2021 Ultrakodes have same shapes. For 2022 there's only carbon reflex version and suprisingly it's a bit cheaper than Pyro. I like SB specs more, but it would be nice to hear some feedback from someone who sailed both models.
Select to expand quoteBasher said..Manawa said..
Thank a lot Basher I total agree with you. Do you think I will youse 83 in 3.7 conditions? I've a second board kode 86 for small Waves or Lake. I know is a difficult question at my weight I am in the middle between 79 and 83.
We have had a lot of wind here recently and I've been bonding with both my Pyros as I get to know them better.
I can now tell you that the 83 works just fine with a 3.6m rig. I started on my 4m S1 yesterday afternoon but the wind got stronger and stronger and the 3.6m S1 was much more comfortable. The gusts were still brutal but we also had holes in the wind, and the 83 Pyro was a good size for that. It never felt too bouncy with the 3.6m rig, maybe helped by some smoother water conditions between the waves.
I'm still using the 83 as a quad, as supplied, although I suspect I could go slightly smaller with the fin area, especially when using these smaller rigs.
The Pyros are quite short boards, and yesterday I found I had better control when I shifted the mast foot forward a touch - which seems to help when using 4m and 3.6m rigs.
That positioning is still centre track though, or just a centimetre ahead of the centre point.
(This sort of fine tuning will also relate to your chosen fin positions. But experimentation is good. )
I Basher Today I have and my first session with my Puro79 quad set up. 3.6 4.2 and 4.4 I total agree with you about mast base position. I've used the board in o shore condition, what impressed me was the cutback and the easy jibe. About th bottom I need a little bit more power for short radius compared to my old ultrakode. I felt the board perfect also in 4.4, looks perfect for my weight 72 kg, at least a little bit big but never small. One of my friend 80kg try my board, he said that this board is amazing. Hope to try it again
Big day with my Pyro Severne 79
Side onshore 3.6 overpowered, quad mode, all was perfect. Total control in the way out, and also in the surfing. I try to do my best surfing in the biggest set early mornimg, the board is always in control more big more grip, cut back always super powerfull. Crossing the shore break is very easy with this board.
I don't want to gush too much about my Pyro 83 but I have sailed it a lot now - and it's the perfect size for me at my home spot, with maybe 7 litres of float over my current 76kgs. I should weigh more like 73kgs, but that would still work, I think.
I guess if you wear a thick wetsuit or have a heavy rig then you'll sink more, but my Severne S1 rigs are OK for weight. I'm in a 4/3mm wetsuit now, for our mid season.
We go to 5/3 or 5/4 wetsuits in January here. And maybe in winter we eat more food.
We are currently having autumn winds here in the UK's south coast, and it gusted to 40knots this morning, with rain passing through.
I sailed the sunnier afternoon, after the tide and wind were dropping, and my 4.0m rig and then a 4.4m were the right sizes for me.
The frontal wind was really gusty but the Pyro deals with gusts and lulls well, and I find the 83 is stable in lulls when you stop you planing. Then a gust comes and a bit of pumping gets you going and out of trouble in any waves. This is a board that gets going early and then keeps its speed until really challenged. I'm still using the 83 set as a quad, and see no reason to change that.
I'm also pretty sure this 83 is the right size board for me to take to Cape Town this winter - where 4.5m rigs down to 4.0m (or even 3.6m for me) are the norm - and with the 83 providing positive float for the often gusty conditions but not too much buoyancy on choppy wave faces.
If we get lighter wave conditions then the Pyro 83 will happily take a 5m rig too.
I guess we have bonded now. When a board match works, it's a bit like owning a dog, isn't it?
Anyway. This is how our beach looked today after the tide dropped away and I was packing up. Pretty dramatic sky, huh?
Then it rained so hard this evening. And the wind will be offshore by morning.
This thread may already have outrun its lifespan, but people asked earlier what water and wave conditions I sail in.
So, with our autumn waves finally back, here's picture I took today.
It's not me, obviously because I'm behind the camera, and my mate Mike is on a Nano here, not a Pyro.
Hopefully we'll soon get bigger waves than this - and with a much longer wave period, haha.
I remember seeing beaches like that on the South coast of England when I was a kid, Big rocks everywhere (as a kid I thought they were big) and those wooden pier fence things, I thought maybe they are to stop erosion.
