Funboard Iteration #2

Over the past 18 months with your help, I’ve built three boards. First was 7’6 funboard, the second, a 9’6 LB, and a 6’2" HPSB. The funboard floats and paddles me just right and works perfectly in the small mushy 2-4’ NJ summer waves, but sluggish in clean waves. The 9’6" is my true pride, as it’s super fast and turns gracefully. The 6’2", as you warned me, is on the shelf waiting for me get stronger and smarter in the water :slight_smile:

In hindsight, I realize that I really jumped around between these designs. Although i’ve learned a lot, I think I’ll learn even more by taking a closer look at board number one 7’6 funboard, and making an iteration. Specificallty, decide how to make a copy of it with very small changes so it performs well in clean waves compared to the original. I just "blueprinted the original and attached the PDF here. It’s fun to ride in sloppy waves because I can float it over white water and it’s  easy to to ride. But when i was out riding it this week in glassy 3-4’ waves, I realized it turns slow and lacks response, it feels boaty.

For my new build, my plan to make it work in clean waves is:

  1. Reduce rail profile thickness a lot

  2. Turn the 50/50 rails down to 60/40

3. Extend sharp rail edge at tail up towards middle.

4. Move rocker apex from center back towards tail slightly

  1. Add slight flip in nose

  2. Reduce tail width and nose width just a bit

  3. Reduce length by 3"

  4. Current bottom contour is fair amount of belly from nose to mid point, then flat all the way to tail. Change this to slight belly in nose > flat > concave > flat

  5. All of this will reduce volume overall, so add 1/2" width to keep it floating me the way I like

I’d apprecite any feedback. Thanks

 

As I understand your explanation, your longboard and 7-6 are already covering the small conditions, so now you want a board to fit the larger and faster conditions.   I think that’s a good plan - you’ve filling in the holes in your quiver.    

If you’re still working on your skills progression then it might be a good idea to establish an upper limit for the conditions you’ll paddle out in, both in terms of size and shape.   If you don’t intend to paddle out in double overhead conditions then you don’t need to try to build a board for that.   Your own abilities in terms of paddling, making the drop and turning and such will come into play as well.  And lastly, there’s the consideration of the point that if you can’t paddle fast enough in between sets then you’ll have to duckdive your way out - so learning how to duckdive a board and using a size that you can duckdive will be a consideration.  

So for example, lets say you decided that your upper limit in size is a couple feet overhead and a somewhat slow to moderate speed wave.  Not dumping.  You’ll want to figure out how much board you can duckdive or at least learn how to duckdive.  That will represent your upper limit in size.  Then figure out where you’ll stand and turn from on that length and what rockers will work for the conditions you’re attempting.   Then comes the fin setup. 

The pic you posted is more closely related to a longboard shape than a hybrid or funboard shape.   A more slimmed down version might be more functional in the larger/faster waves, obviously at the expense of glide on the small waves.   So for bigger conditions I might consider a template similar to one of the Bonzer eggs or an actual funboard type shape.  A little narrower overall and particularly in the nose and using a fin cluster instead of a single.  A thruster if you can actually pump a fin cluster from 5" forward of the tail block or a 2+1 or quad if you tend to stand more forward or surf more passively.  

Just to give you an idea, the Cambell Bros Bonzer is sometimes referred to by their fans as the Swiss army Knife of surfboards due to its versatility.  Moderate rocker and template and you could switch up the bottom and fin setup to suit.  You’d have to be a pretty good surfer for a board like this to be holding you back.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Another example to illustrate these ideas would be the McTavish Carver.  A board like this will also outsurf what a lot of surfers are capable of doing.  

If you want to go a little more aggressive the Rusty Yeti design in a 7-2 length comes in at 50 liters - that’s a lot of float.  

 

Thanks for the reply. I should clarify that I also have an 8’2 narrow swallow tail 5 fin that I purchased for travel. I recently used it in El Salvador to surf 5-10’ 13sec period reef waves. That’s my current limit and the 8’2 also works for NJ winter when things start to curl a bit. I ride the 9’6 in large sloped waves. My 6’2 is right for fast curling or walled up waves, but Im not ready for that yet. I’ve tried quads and twins and don’t like the way they feel as much as single fins. Thrusters feel stiff and slower to me than single.

This new board targets 2-4’ clean/sloping waves that might curl a bit from light offshore breeze. My 7’6 fits into this pocket but won’t turn the way I like. The Bonzer egg looks like the correct solution regarding profile because the tail and nose are more narrow which should turn better. Do you think the observations made about rails thickness make sense?

Sexy, too aggressive. It’s going to be harder for me to paddle with nose and tail like that. But if I continue on this track, I hope to be able to handle it next year.

I like this square tail. It adds a bit of volume and the corners will dig in on the turn. 

I saw your comments about waist high conditions but extrapolated that to larger conditions - apparently a mistake on my part.  Apologies.  

With the board you posted that board should work fine in waist high and clean conditions.  You may just have to adjust your stance, trim and technique.  With singles you would move foreward a bit to trim and move back a bit to turn.  You’ll have more leverage for a turn if you have you rear foot directly over the fin and then muscle it.   The board will trim if you move forward whilst setting the rail.   This back-n-forth movement is not instinctual; most people will have to put some thought into it until it becomes habit.  And don’t forget, with singles less is more.  They don’t respond to thruster-style pumping.  You wanna make a deeper bottom turn and push off the bottom for your turns and and limit your pumping action to that hula motion when you want to go faster down the line.   With singles you’re working more off the rail line than the fin.   

In any case, you shouldn’t expect a board to turn the same way when there’s less energy as it does when there’s more energy to work with.  

OK, this all sounds good. Im jjust starting to get a hold of single fin footwork like you mentioned. Im also just getting to the point where I can feel subtle differences of board design. With that, I want to keep as many variables the same as I can. I want to feel the small calculated changes I make to board shape and rails without confusing things with fin setup.

One more thing about midlength singles is that flat rockers trim faster - if you can handle them in the conditions you’re surfing.  If I’m doing one of those for up to head high I never go more than 4" for the nose and ~2" in the tail.  And I normally favor nose rockers lower than that.  You’ve already got plenty of curve in your template.   

The rocker i illustrated on the 7’6 is as low as I can go currently that size. Anymore than that for the breaks I surf and I pearl. I hope to change that someday.

Greetings GDaddy,

After playing around fins yesterday, I decided to give thrusters another shot. I like how they hold dropping into a steeper wave, so this new build will use them. In preparation, I picked up a 7-3A blank from Greenlight while i was down there. Their stock is light for now so the options were limited. I know you suggested a low rocker and the 73A is a bit higher. However, I took a closer look at my 7’6 and saw too much belly and a round nose. Although that works for mushy waves I made it for, it makes it slow to paddle. Knowing I want to surf the new build on more sloping and curling waves, I’ve decided to go with a flat bottom, pointed nose, and thinner rails throughout, stay with 3" thickness. 

I can’t duckdive it. Do you think that even with the higher rocker, these changes would enable me to paddle fast enough to get outside? Summer waves here average 100-300 joules, 7-8 periods, usually one or two swells, sometimes three.

I chose the Mctavish Carver profile you suggested and overlaid both the 73A black rocker profile and a perfect mathematical radius for comparison. Looks like a fairly easy rocker to cut as I dont have to do too much to the blank except skin, then add a bit of tail flip starting about 6" from end. Interested to hear your thoughts. I

 

Personally, I never liked the stock rockers in the A-series.  And I strongly discourage novice surfers from using thrusters at all until they get the stance and pumping action down.  IMO MOST surfers of average or novice skill do better on a quad, and that includes me.   It’s the surfers who are really good who can do more with a thruster than a quad.    I’ve converted a number of thruster riders to quad riders be adding quad rears to their thrusters.  That’s the most direct comparison you can make, riding the same board with different setups.  So far that difference right when the quad takes off under them has always come as a shock.     

If you’re coming at it from using longboards then a 2+1 might fit your stance and style better.   You won’t have as much of a learning curve as you will with a thruster.  

For a midlength funboard type arrangement, I personally favor the 7-4 SP.  But, if you’re committed to a thruster then maybe the 7-3A is the better choice for you.  

I’m overly opinionated and some people here will disagree with all of the above.  There’s more than one way to approach it, and there’s no substitute for trying your own ideas out for yourself, so I encourage you to do that.    

I came here looking for opinions, so thank you. I’ve ridden 2+1 in head-high sloping waves and liked it. In the smaller NJ waves and this board, may they’ll make a great transition to thurster, thanks for the idea. I could run a 7" single at first, then a 6" single plus 2" side bites, then when I’m ready 4.5" thrusters. Interesting to see that you didnt like the A series rocker. I suppose you dont like the McTavish setup the either, as its very close to that. I would have shopped around more, but inventory has dried up, so I’ll have to make do with what I have. Maybe I should just go in between whats in the rocker and the lower numbers you use. The board I have my original pic isnt pearling at 7’6" at the breaks I frequent, so the only reason to go moderate rocker is to turn a bit easier and drop in later which I’ve been trying with some success. Either way, because I stil so new at this, going with a higher rocker and some thickness would be a better starting point, because I always go back and strip the bottom off and cut a lower rocker. Going the other way sounds like a bad idea. What happeened to Reverb? I was expecting him to show up already and rank on me. 

The 7-3A has a ton of rocker up front and is going to plow a bit when paddling. Gdaddy is correct about the A series, too much nose rocker, I use those blanks but I’m making a much shorter board and end up cutting that crazy flip in the nose off.

The SP series has a really nice rocker, the best board I’ve ever made was from an 8-3 (Clark blank the the SP’s are based off of) that was originally a mini mal that I reshaped into a 7-0 simmons type design single fin. Paddles like crazy and catches everything and goes real well in the conditions you described that we have here, I’m in NJ as well. It’s has a hull ish design, belly up front to flat, to a double concve to vee out the back, pretty foiled out, slight S deck, pinched 60/40 rails, “up” in the nose and down hard in the tail with the hard edge pretty far up from the tail.

For ease of paddling, wave catching and zipping around on those fun, small, clean days I’d make an egg type shape out of the 7-4 SP if you can get a hold of one. 6’-6" or so, 2 plus 1 fin setup, make it wide so it’s stable but short enough to fit in those waves with the rails and foil I described above.

Good to know. Im stuck with the 73A though. Ive gotten pretty good moving foam around, do you think I can still make a regular continous rocker with this blank, or is it a major mistake to try?

If you’re already committed to the 7-3A then it doesn’t matter what our opinions might be - you’ve got to work with what you’ve got.  Maybe McDing or a couple of the other pros will chip in and suggest a design that will work well with that rocker.   The point being, keep your options open for a bit and gather some other opinions before making any decisions.   

Normally, you would want include your blank options in the beginning of your design process, not as an afterthought.  Figure out in advance which blank and which rocker you want and then go from there.   Call for avaibility or place an order in advance; that way you won’t be under the gun to settle for what they have on hand at the moment just because you made the trip there.  .    

I hear you and I agree with proper design process

It was the only PU blank they had left under 8’

I can’t belive Greenlight is that low on blanks, that’s where I get mine from. 

I made a 5-8 mini simmons out of a 6-10 A just to get the width and rocker I needed. I ended up taking some rocker out of the bottom to get where I needed. That blank is a beast, super thick so it can be done, you just need to plan out what you need to do, take your time and a lot of measurements.

Thanks for the encouragement, here we go. 

They’re very low on PU blanks and the epoxy I usually use. How can they not be, anyone selling anything is struggling to produce right now