What makes a midlength Parawing board design different from midlength Wing board? I noticed board designers are talking Parawing board with no information what's the difference. I like to get a one-board 80L midlength for both.
They are roughly the same. Ive seen some interesting commentary differentiating the lift from a wing vs the forward pull from a pwing, which dictates more nose volume distribution in a pwing board.
If anything I'd say a wing board can be lower volume and narrower vs a pwing board, but its splitting hairs and theres no reason you can't use one board for both.
I have a 60L, 6' x 21 and an 85L, 6'4" x 22 and use them both for pwing and wing (although the bigger one is more purpose built pwing).
I'm talking to crew who have been at it a while and they are saying aspects like a square short tail and a very simple flat - prone like bottom - and around 19-21 inches wide need some width kept in it. So depends on what midlength you are talking about but even the para boards are differentiating now . as per normal
If you want to make your journey into parawinging possible then you will quickly realize the requirements are very different.
Narrow is needed for giving you your best chance of getting on foil. The narrow requirement is good for winging also but not as essential.
Side to side stability is not such a big issue but front to back stability is the difference on the low end of maybe 3 or 4 knots. With a parawing you are standing in an ocean of bumps with not much to lean on so 6' is the minimum for mortals in my experience and even then you better have spent some time on a dw board for balance skills.
That extra little length while being narrow will allow you to use the bumps to get up. These boards at 5'6" don't give you that.
I am 65kg and about 40 odd sessions in and an army 75l mid is ridiculously more reliable to get up in the ocean bumps than the army 65l. My parawing board is excellent for winging but my 50l wing board is useless for parawing.
For heavy guys there is plenty of manufacturers with longer midlengths but they tend to get too wide. For the lighter guys the army was the only one I found that made sense with my experience. The super k is maybe a good shape but too short for their volumes in the smaller sizes.
I should add that even after all these years so many of the wing boards are **** at leaving the water surprisingly.
I should add that even after all these years so many of the wing boards are **** at leaving the water surprisingly.
yeh good point on length . we have found DW boards track far too much . for learning anyhow
lets start adding ideal dims if you have them:
for my 95kg- 6.2x20 (golden width) x??, 82-85L, like to have volume concentrated in the nose with a fuller tail for bump boost
I should add that even after all these years so many of the wing boards are **** at leaving the water surprisingly.
yeh good point on length . we have found DW boards track far too much . for learning anyhow
What do you mean by track too much? I started on my downwind board ( smik 8x20x128L) and I think it's the easiest option. The lines get caught on the long nose a bit but I don't think thats too much of an issue. Definitely the easiest for getting up and going reliably.
Yeah I should have mentioned I had all my early sessions on a V1 barracuda 7'8" X 18.5 92l and of course they want to head down wind and the nose will get in the way sometimes but you quickly lean how to manage that and its very easy. For for those first 10 sessions you will be a long way ahead with a dw board than something wider and less efficient. I would recommend 1.3 X your weight in volume with the narrow width of a dw board (21 or less) to get you off the water.
Ideal after that for me is +10l 20" wide and at least 6' in the lower volumes for the nimble and 6'5 or so for the bigger volumes. This is my opinion on minimal lengths and volumes for the mortals. Get use to the narrow widths or it will punish you ability to get up in the ideal wind range for your parawing.