I have a 85ltr skybrid but for next year i am considering going back to wider Skystyle.. I love to crank the board around corners and really stepping on the side of the board like a windsurfer to carve it around jibes. The lack of width makes me really have to curl my toes around the rail. Maybe the new straighter outlines just make the difference that I have an extra cm for cranking the rail... I personally feel that the ML advantage in getting up earlier is there but with good pumping skills and a gust it's very minimal. And 90% we are in the air. So what's the advantage then? So I am really curious about the new skybrids. I now have 85 liters with my 80kg weight. Maybe I should go for the 100 for really light wind fast takeoff. Some sales persons adviced that to me and another really good foiler said I should go for the 70... so much personal preferences
Select to expand quoteitsmark1974 said..
I have a 85ltr skybrid but for next year i am considering going back to wider Skystyle.. I love to crank the board around corners and really stepping on the side of the board like a windsurfer to carve it around jibes. The lack of width makes me really have to curl my toes around the rail. Maybe the new straighter outlines just make the difference that I have an extra cm for cranking the rail... I personally feel that the ML advantage in getting up earlier is there but with good pumping skills and a gust it's very minimal. And 90% we are in the air. So what's the advantage then? So I am really curious about the new skybrids. I now have 85 liters with my 80kg weight. Maybe I should go for the 100 for really light wind fast takeoff. Some sales persons adviced that to me and another really good foiler said I should go for the 70... so much personal preferences
I like the Skybrid but you cannot compare its efficiency in getting up with other ML shapes like Omen Emissary, KT Super K or Armstrong ML.
Select to expand quoteNikOnFoil said..itsmark1974 said..
I have a 85ltr skybrid but for next year i am considering going back to wider Skystyle.. I love to crank the board around corners and really stepping on the side of the board like a windsurfer to carve it around jibes. The lack of width makes me really have to curl my toes around the rail. Maybe the new straighter outlines just make the difference that I have an extra cm for cranking the rail... I personally feel that the ML advantage in getting up earlier is there but with good pumping skills and a gust it's very minimal. And 90% we are in the air. So what's the advantage then? So I am really curious about the new skybrids. I now have 85 liters with my 80kg weight. Maybe I should go for the 100 for really light wind fast takeoff. Some sales persons adviced that to me and another really good foiler said I should go for the 70... so much personal preferences
I like the Skybrid but you cannot compare its efficiency in getting up with other ML shapes like Omen Emissary, KT Super K or Armstrong ML.
Are these even faster in getting up? I am not super impressed with the skybrid getting up
Select to expand quoteitsmark1974 said..NikOnFoil said..
I like the Skybrid but you cannot compare its efficiency in getting up with other ML shapes like Omen Emissary, KT Super K or Armstrong ML.
Are these even faster in getting up? I am not super impressed with the skybrid getting up
Night and day. I like the Skybrid and it has its strengths, but as you said with good pumping skills the difference to a normal board in early going is not that big. However, with a good mid length shape like the boards I mentioned you go way earlier. Everything else feels sticky.
Select to expand quoteitsmark1974 said..
I have a 85ltr skybrid but for next year i am considering going back to wider Skystyle.. I love to crank the board around corners and really stepping on the side of the board like a windsurfer to carve it around jibes. The lack of width makes me really have to curl my toes around the rail. Maybe the new straighter outlines just make the difference that I have an extra cm for cranking the rail... I personally feel that the ML advantage in getting up earlier is there but with good pumping skills and a gust it's very minimal. And 90% we are in the air. So what's the advantage then? So I am really curious about the new skybrids. I now have 85 liters with my 80kg weight. Maybe I should go for the 100 for really light wind fast takeoff. Some sales persons adviced that to me and another really good foiler said I should go for the 70... so much personal preferences
I agree
am currently debating whether to go 5.5 or 6m hand wing, or get a ML eg 105 for light airs. Having said that in the N hemisphere windy season is coming!
Currently i ride a 70l rocket S and im 86kg + wetsuits & there are a few times a year i wish i was on a bigger board...but literally a handful.
100% it definitely takes more effort or i need to wait to get a gust to get up and if its marginal then no, but if you get a gust then once up from my ltd ML experience i much much prefer the riding feeling / waves on my 5'2 x 24 board 70 litre to a 6'4 x 20 100 liter board.
Select to expand quoteNikOnFoil said..itsmark1974 said..NikOnFoil said..
I like the Skybrid but you cannot compare its efficiency in getting up with other ML shapes like Omen Emissary, KT Super K or Armstrong ML.
Are these even faster in getting up? I am not super impressed with the skybrid getting up
Night and day. I like the Skybrid and it has its strengths, but as you said with good pumping skills the difference to a normal board in early going is not that big. However, with a good mid length shape like the boards I mentioned you go way earlier. Everything else feels sticky.
Yeah I have a hard time with boards being labeled "midlength" at 5'8"x22". The skybrid seems to be a commonly mentioned board when people say they weren't stoked on the midlength design.
Gotta do that math: BARG Factor: www.wouzel.com/post/calculating-your-barg-factor
The skybrid for you comes out to be 3.28 which low for midlength. I really think 3.5 is the bare minimum people should be at when getting into this style board and 3.75 is closer to ideal for really feeling the difference. Compare the 85l Skybrid vs the 85l Carver (5'10"x20") and the BARG Factor is 3.72. Same liters but that will be a night and day difference in performance.
My lowest calculated board right now is 3.22 and when it comes to winging, my buddy on a skystyle only needs about 1/2 meter more sail than I do in the same conditions. But if I'm on a 3.5 or higher board, I'm usually a full sail size smaller and on a 650 foil when hes using 850.
Parawinging shifts all the comparisons again.
eek - my F-one 70 liter Vs 105 ML in BARGF!
....but i still love the 70 (ignorance is bliss?)
Select to expand quotenorthy1 said..
eek - my F-one 70 liter Vs 105 ML in BARGF!
....but i still love the 70 (ignorance is bliss?)
ML is for sure not for everybody's riding style
Select to expand quotenorthy1 said..
eek - my F-one 70 liter Vs 105 ML in BARGF!
....but i still love the 70 (ignorance is bliss?)
You like what you like! BARGF gives you ease of takeoff info as well as insights into if you can size down foils and sails. It's not a calc to measure your board preference based on riding style.
Example:
For your 2.1 I would probably ride my 1050 and 3.5m sail most days.
For your 4.4 I would probably ride a 650 and 2.5m sail most days.
Different kinds of fun!
I agree with what some others have said - high volume midlength boards are brutal in messy conditions and don't gain you anything.
I'll also throw out my hot take on volume - Unless you are on a really narrow board (like sub 20", which wouldn't fit the parameters of the OP anyways), it takes more power to get onto foil than it does to get a lower volume board (-20-30) to the surface. Beyond the beginner or intermediate stage pumping volume into a board doesn't get you any benefit outside of unique circumstances. Ive owned and tried several neutral volume mids in the 6' range, and have a 6' -20 mid, and I vastly prefer the -20 board. It is more stable pre-takeoff, feels much better on foil and gets onto foil just as easily as the neutral volume boards. In my opinion lots of people get intimidated to go down in volume when it would benefit them. Manufacturers are pumping volume into these boards to make them more approachable and broaden their market to beginners and parawings, but I feel that it is counterproductive for winging.
Taxiing around on a lower volume board isn't ideal, but you can always slog on your knees.
Below ~ -30 liters is another story and does take more power and technique, but ~ -20 is still pretty approachable.
Im speaking specifically on winging. I do see some value in more volume for a parawing board when you are extending low end of the range.
Select to expand quoteVelocicraptor said..
I agree with what some others have said - high volume midlength boards are brutal in messy conditions and don't gain you anything.
I'll also throw out my hot take on volume - Unless you are on a really narrow board (like sub 20", which wouldn't fit the parameters of the OP anyways), it takes more power to get onto foil than it does to get a lower volume board (-20-30) to the surface. Beyond the beginner or intermediate stage pumping volume into a board doesn't get you any benefit outside of unique circumstances. Ive owned and tried several neutral volume mids in the 6' range, and have a 6' -20 mid, and I vastly prefer the -20 board. It is more stable pre-takeoff, feels much better on foil and gets onto foil just as easily as the neutral volume boards. In my opinion lots of people get intimidated to go down in volume when it would benefit them. Manufacturers are pumping volume into these boards to make them more approachable and broaden their market to beginners and parawings, but I feel that it is counterproductive for winging.
Taxiing around on a lower volume board isn't ideal, but you can always slog on your knees.
Below ~ -30 liters is another story and does take more power and technique, but ~ -20 is still pretty approachable.
Im speaking specifically on winging. I do see some value in more volume for a parawing board when you are extending low end of the range.
That's definitely a hot take!
Counter point might be that many people are intimidated to go down in wing and foil size when it would benefit them. That's where the neutral volume shines. It's just different preferences for different riding styles. Some people want a smaller board, some want a tiny foil, some want a smaller wing. Lots of recipes to suit different tastes.
I think the wing is developed enough to give tons of options to riders now. The parawing is more punishing on kit choices in light wind. Once there's great bumps and 25+ knots of wind I have a hard time telling the difference in board and foil sizes. I can ride the Silk 650 and the 1050 back to back and can't tell a difference in the low end because of the nature of the takeoff. Then you transfer those skills back to winging and you're even more efficient.
So many options. Good time to be in foiling!
Select to expand quoteBWalnut said..Velocicraptor said..
I agree with what some others have said - high volume midlength boards are brutal in messy conditions and don't gain you anything.
I'll also throw out my hot take on volume - Unless you are on a really narrow board (like sub 20", which wouldn't fit the parameters of the OP anyways), it takes more power to get onto foil than it does to get a lower volume board (-20-30) to the surface. Beyond the beginner or intermediate stage pumping volume into a board doesn't get you any benefit outside of unique circumstances. Ive owned and tried several neutral volume mids in the 6' range, and have a 6' -20 mid, and I vastly prefer the -20 board. It is more stable pre-takeoff, feels much better on foil and gets onto foil just as easily as the neutral volume boards. In my opinion lots of people get intimidated to go down in volume when it would benefit them. Manufacturers are pumping volume into these boards to make them more approachable and broaden their market to beginners and parawings, but I feel that it is counterproductive for winging.
Taxiing around on a lower volume board isn't ideal, but you can always slog on your knees.
Below ~ -30 liters is another story and does take more power and technique, but ~ -20 is still pretty approachable.
Im speaking specifically on winging. I do see some value in more volume for a parawing board when you are extending low end of the range.
That's definitely a hot take!
Counter point might be that many people are intimidated to go down in wing and foil size when it would benefit them. That's where the neutral volume shines. It's just different preferences for different riding styles. Some people want a smaller board, some want a tiny foil, some want a smaller wing. Lots of recipes to suit different tastes.
I think the wing is developed enough to give tons of options to riders now. The parawing is more punishing on kit choices in light wind. Once there's great bumps and 25+ knots of wind I have a hard time telling the difference in board and foil sizes. I can ride the Silk 650 and the 1050 back to back and can't tell a difference in the low end because of the nature of the takeoff. Then you transfer those skills back to winging and you're even more efficient.
So many options. Good time to be in foiling!
But if you want to use smaller foils, that only further exaggerates my point about taking more power to get onto foil than getting the board to the surface. Once the board is on the surface, the volume isn't really doing anything and it takes very little power to get it there. My experience is that volume doesn't really contribute to efficiency and you can make a low volume board that is just as efficient as a high volume board with similar L/W dims.
Agree more on the parawing - but as I improve (slowly) I am (slowly) coming to a similar opinion...
Select to expand quoteVelocicraptor said..BWalnut said..Velocicraptor said..
I agree with what some others have said - high volume midlength boards are brutal in messy conditions and don't gain you anything.
I'll also throw out my hot take on volume - Unless you are on a really narrow board (like sub 20", which wouldn't fit the parameters of the OP anyways), it takes more power to get onto foil than it does to get a lower volume board (-20-30) to the surface. Beyond the beginner or intermediate stage pumping volume into a board doesn't get you any benefit outside of unique circumstances. Ive owned and tried several neutral volume mids in the 6' range, and have a 6' -20 mid, and I vastly prefer the -20 board. It is more stable pre-takeoff, feels much better on foil and gets onto foil just as easily as the neutral volume boards. In my opinion lots of people get intimidated to go down in volume when it would benefit them. Manufacturers are pumping volume into these boards to make them more approachable and broaden their market to beginners and parawings, but I feel that it is counterproductive for winging.
Taxiing around on a lower volume board isn't ideal, but you can always slog on your knees.
Below ~ -30 liters is another story and does take more power and technique, but ~ -20 is still pretty approachable.
Im speaking specifically on winging. I do see some value in more volume for a parawing board when you are extending low end of the range.
That's definitely a hot take!
Counter point might be that many people are intimidated to go down in wing and foil size when it would benefit them. That's where the neutral volume shines. It's just different preferences for different riding styles. Some people want a smaller board, some want a tiny foil, some want a smaller wing. Lots of recipes to suit different tastes.
I think the wing is developed enough to give tons of options to riders now. The parawing is more punishing on kit choices in light wind. Once there's great bumps and 25+ knots of wind I have a hard time telling the difference in board and foil sizes. I can ride the Silk 650 and the 1050 back to back and can't tell a difference in the low end because of the nature of the takeoff. Then you transfer those skills back to winging and you're even more efficient.
So many options. Good time to be in foiling!
But if you want to use smaller foils, that only further exaggerates my point about taking more power to get onto foil than getting the board to the surface. Once the board is on the surface, the volume isn't really doing anything and it takes very little power to get it there. My experience is that volume doesn't really contribute to efficiency and you can make a low volume board that is just as efficient as a high volume board with similar L/W dims.
Agree more on the parawing - but as I improve (slowly) I am (slowly) coming to a similar opinion...
The volume keeps you at the surface so that a higher % of your power stroke is going towards activating the foil. For low end, which is what the OP is about, the ability to be standing on your board for slogging and pump timing is critical to getting up in a gust. I don't see a good result coming from a 90kg rider dropping from 115l to 70l when hunting for 16 knot gusts. Yes, good shapes help get low volume boards to the surface quickly but they are still going to sink and will never glide as far as a neutral or positive buoyancy board. A -20l board at the surface still splits the power stroke of the wing between keeping the board up and activating the foil.
You're talented at -20l which is great and I respect that because it's a lot of peoples preference but I think that saying that volume doesn't contribute to efficiency is kind of extreme, especially for people pursuing low end efficiency.
Every board: Short sinker, neutral midlength, positive DW, they all have nuances to learn. Anyone who commits to one will get really good with it and discover that they all need different wing and foil setups to maximize their potential. Again, nobody is wrong here, it's just different recipes for different tastes and none of us are masters of every imaginable setup. We all gotta try to learn from and understand why others prefer certain setups so we can decide if we want to pursue what they are talking about.
New Skybrid might be a good option. Was doubting to change to Skystyle but new skybrid is worth the try. It adressed some of my points. They widened the standing area and lowered overall width. That makes a lot of sense. and it's a bit lighter so less swing weight. maybe now it will be the quick starter .. can't wait to try them
Volume matters a lot when dealing with short duration gusts. The time it takes getting a sinker to the surface is likely to be all you get before the next lull.
That said I'll take a thin long board over a corky one.
I just had delivered the Smik stokr + (6,3 x 22"x 99l) to use as my first midlength, lightwind/parawing learning board. I also have a 85 skywing soap bar but need something bigger and more stable for the lighter days. I am 80kg.
Havent had it up on foil yet, but hopefully tommorrow (day in the photo was too light) will use with my 4.2m wing and 3.2m parawing.
Board is courtesy of Kite Republic in VIC, did me a great deal 
Select to expand quotedieseagull said..
Ok thanks again everyone for the advice, I really appreciate the perspectives!
I've tried to synthesise recommendations varying from max volume = weight + board + foil, to bodyweight + 10, to just bodyweight (from my shop).
I've decided to pull the trigger on a 90L Super K 2. Rationale being:
1) I'm currently losing a bit of weight to get back to an ideal of about 86-ish kgs.
2) 86 kgs + board + foil = just over 90, complying with all advice except the over-sizing advice.
3) Wanting to avoid corkiness that might come from oversizing.
4) More motivation to continue dropping the kgs (not that I've really been struggling, but everything helps).
5) Kinda want a 1 board quiver.
Hopefully I'll be able to provide an update when the board arrives November-ish on whether it's awesome or whether I've made a huge mistake!
After many months of patient waiting I finally got my 90L Super K 2 and have had a chance to use it twice for a total of about 80km on foil. Both times in powered (or overpowered) conditions, so no chance to try it in light conditions yet. And only used it in moderate chop - both times the wind was cross offshore so it was relatively flat.
But oh my god what a (sorry but I'm going to use that word) gamechanger! Everything is a direct improvement/upgrade compared to my old board except stability on the water, so I'll cover that first.
Stability on the water was the part I was most nervous about: would I actually be able to use the board or would I fall off every time I got to my knees? It's below neutral for my 90 kgs + gear, but it isn't too unstable on the water, and actually some things are better. It's less stable than my learner board, particularly in roll, but it's more stable in pitch (front to back) so as other people have said, as a beginner/intermediate changing from a learner board you definitely notice more stability front to back and only have to worry about side to side. Old board sometimes (especially in chop) felt like trying to balance in all 4 directions, but this one you primarily just worry about roll, and when standing with the wing powered that's easy. Another benefit is because the board is narrower, I can hold the wing in the water by the front handle with the strut parallel to the board, and my front hand is only slightly off to the side, as opposed to the older wider board where the front hand was far enough offset that I had to lean a bit for it, which reduced stability.
Once on your feet it's only upside. The board builds speed while in the water in a way that feels amazing. The hull speed of the board is easily higher than the stall speed of my big foil, so the board transitions directly from displacement to flying. Because of the much reduced drag, hitting chop etc (or touching down) doesn't result in as much deceleration, which used to make me go over the front. This board just cuts through with almost no deceleration. Touchdowns are no big deal for the same reason, and the board feels much less sticky when it does touch the water. Due to the narrower width and rail shape, I'm also less likely to catch an edge, and when that happens it's easier to recover as well.
Lastly, something that I really didn't expect, but the board feels more reactive when on foil. Maybe I should have expected this as it's a bit lighter and narrower (so not as affected by wind?) but I feel like I can feel the foil better. I also feel over-corrections are more likely due to the reactivity which maybe isn't ideal for a beginner, but for me it's no problem and I haven't crashed because of it.
Keen to get more km on it and particularly to try it in light wind, but so far this board has been a massive upgrade and I'm very happy I pulled the trigger.
I was a bit nervous about the narrower board, because I'd often struggled in bigger chop and high wind on my learner board, and because of reviews where people had said things like how the Super K 2 is on the narrower/less stable end of the midlength spectrum, but for anyone who is a high-ish beginner (say maybe someone who is able to make their gybes 20-30% of the time and improving, and is able to do a bit of toeside riding), I feel like it wouldn't be too early to get a midlength.
When I got my 90 litre custom mid, I had the exact same reaction and experience. Everything was better, except stability at rest. But, even the stability was better than expected and was easy do adapt to after a couple of sessions.
Just wait until you try it in lighter winds and learn to use the glide to get up. You will not believe the difference compared with your old board when it comes to efficiency. One big benefit, in my book, of a mid length is that it allows to to use a smaller, more efficient foil and small wing as well (if you are into wing foiling, as I am). I also agree with your observation that once you can gybe a bit and are stable on foil, you can go midlength for sure.
I have stayed with the mid concept and added an Axis Blast 65 and KT Super K 2 60 to my quiver since (they are close in size on purpose, one used at home, on stored in the summer house). I am 82 kgs.
Select to expand quotedieseagull said..dieseagull said..
Ok thanks again everyone for the advice, I really appreciate the perspectives!
I've tried to synthesise recommendations varying from max volume = weight + board + foil, to bodyweight + 10, to just bodyweight (from my shop).
I've decided to pull the trigger on a 90L Super K 2. Rationale being:
1) I'm currently losing a bit of weight to get back to an ideal of about 86-ish kgs.
2) 86 kgs + board + foil = just over 90, complying with all advice except the over-sizing advice.
3) Wanting to avoid corkiness that might come from oversizing.
4) More motivation to continue dropping the kgs (not that I've really been struggling, but everything helps).
5) Kinda want a 1 board quiver.
Hopefully I'll be able to provide an update when the board arrives November-ish on whether it's awesome or whether I've made a huge mistake!
After many months of patient waiting I finally got my 90L Super K 2 and have had a chance to use it twice for a total of about 80km on foil. Both times in powered (or overpowered) conditions, so no chance to try it in light conditions yet. And only used it in moderate chop - both times the wind was cross offshore so it was relatively flat.
But oh my god what a (sorry but I'm going to use that word) gamechanger! Everything is a direct improvement/upgrade compared to my old board except stability on the water, so I'll cover that first.
Stability on the water was the part I was most nervous about: would I actually be able to use the board or would I fall off every time I got to my knees? It's below neutral for my 90 kgs + gear, but it isn't too unstable on the water, and actually some things are better. It's less stable than my learner board, particularly in roll, but it's more stable in pitch (front to back) so as other people have said, as a beginner/intermediate changing from a learner board you definitely notice more stability front to back and only have to worry about side to side. Old board sometimes (especially in chop) felt like trying to balance in all 4 directions, but this one you primarily just worry about roll, and when standing with the wing powered that's easy. Another benefit is because the board is narrower, I can hold the wing in the water by the front handle with the strut parallel to the board, and my front hand is only slightly off to the side, as opposed to the older wider board where the front hand was far enough offset that I had to lean a bit for it, which reduced stability.
Once on your feet it's only upside. The board builds speed while in the water in a way that feels amazing. The hull speed of the board is easily higher than the stall speed of my big foil, so the board transitions directly from displacement to flying. Because of the much reduced drag, hitting chop etc (or touching down) doesn't result in as much deceleration, which used to make me go over the front. This board just cuts through with almost no deceleration. Touchdowns are no big deal for the same reason, and the board feels much less sticky when it does touch the water. Due to the narrower width and rail shape, I'm also less likely to catch an edge, and when that happens it's easier to recover as well.
Lastly, something that I really didn't expect, but the board feels more reactive when on foil. Maybe I should have expected this as it's a bit lighter and narrower (so not as affected by wind?) but I feel like I can feel the foil better. I also feel over-corrections are more likely due to the reactivity which maybe isn't ideal for a beginner, but for me it's no problem and I haven't crashed because of it.
Keen to get more km on it and particularly to try it in light wind, but so far this board has been a massive upgrade and I'm very happy I pulled the trigger.
I was a bit nervous about the narrower board, because I'd often struggled in bigger chop and high wind on my learner board, and because of reviews where people had said things like how the Super K 2 is on the narrower/less stable end of the midlength spectrum, but for anyone who is a high-ish beginner (say maybe someone who is able to make their gybes 20-30% of the time and improving, and is able to do a bit of toeside riding), I feel like it wouldn't be too early to get a midlength.
This is my exact experience too. 70kg on a 96l armstrong 6'8 dw board. That's like +30% volume.
