Ben Rasmussen of LBI, Wooden Board, and Riding a Thruster as a Twin + Trailer

I recently recovered a board my father bought for me when I was younger, a wooden 6’9"x19"x~2 5/8" (I don’t have calipers so guessing) thruster with heavy nose and tail rocker shaped by Ben Rasmussen of LBI, probably around 1999. Leaving aside for a second the unsuitability of a step-up thruster for the conditions and my skills then (& now, haha), I’m curious whether anyone knew Ben and has tales of his surfcraft to share.

Also wondering whether I could replace the thruster fins with twins (not keels) and a trailer, for more speed & glide-y flow. Or whether that would work against the board’s strengths & I should just keep it as it is, for times when there’s bigger swell if & when I become a thruster guy.

Thanks!

Do you have any more pics of the board?  Also, what’s the weight?    

Don’t ruin what is already a nice looking board that is obviously set up and designed for its intended purpose.  Buy a blank and shape what you think you want.  Leave on the wall until you can (ability) ride it in the waves it was made for.  Don’t know anything about the shaper, but I bet he would be pretty damned disappointed if you hacked up that board.  Sell it and buy something you can ride.  Don’t destroy it.  PS. The fin set up you are talking about wouldn’t do anything to improve speed or glide on that board.  It’s a speed shape and it’s wood.  Done

I don’t have more pics at the moment nor have i weighed it, but I will say it’s remarkably light for a wood board. I shaped an 8’ board through Grain that’s like 24 # and this… is far less.

Absolutely-- wouldn’t dream of hacking it up, just inquiring into switching out the existent fins (not the boxes). I’m attached to it as it’s a gift from my dad, plus I believe Ben passed in 2010-- so I’ll definitely hold onto it til the time comes to take it out in the waves it was made for.

What I would be concerned about is the plug install.  Twins have a LOT more surface area and are taller so they transmit a lot more lateral force to the plug install when the fin is loaded up.   It’s fairly common for side fins to rip a plug out in even the lightweight foam-core boards if the install is at all weak.   

You might be okay in this situation if the plug cavity was made directly into a solid section of wood or high density foam plug. 

Based on the one pic the bottom of that board looks quite a bit like a bookmatched wood panel or possibly even a veneer.  Those panels are ~4" wide whereas an actual wood board shaped from anything other than balsa would normally be using planks that are maybe 2" wide and then chambered to reduce weight.    If those are 1"8th or 1/16" thicnk planks por veneers then they’re probably laid over a foam core.    What we here on Sways would be referring to as a “compsand”, short for composite sandwich.   That’s why I was asking about the weight.  If the weight is under 10# then its probably not a wood or a hollow core.  If the board is reasonbly light and the plug install is also strong then you might not have a problem using twins.   Other than twins at 11" or more from the tail would normally be too far forward.    

As others already said, I think your best alternative is to work on your technique until you can surf the board in the manner and in the conditions for which it was designed.  

Gotcha-- thank you for taking the time to explain that so thoroughly. I appreciate it!

Also, I was able to read a few pages in Surfing Long Beach Island that describe Rasmussen’s buidling process-- sounds like he would use multiple stringers, 3/16" thick bottom planks, and cross pieces between the stringers to build the board. Pretty cool to have some of that oral history written down.

Okay, so that description fits a fishbone-stye hollow wood board, not a composite sandwhich like I had guessed.  

The board is a pocket rocket and fin changes won’t change that.   Keep that sweet looking stick hanging…one day your Dad will be gone and that board will mean a lot more than you think.

Ben was a friend of mine.  

He was a good, kind and generous soul.

Rest in Piece my friend.

 

Previous to meeting Ben in 2001, I  had gained some experience shaping glassing and sanding PU/PE boards, but little wordworking skills, much less how to build a hollow wood board.  I showed him what I knew, he recripocated sharing his experience, knowledge, tools, materials, and workspace. 

Your board is post 2002, no earlier than early 2003, Some time after that though. I cannot say exactly when, as I had left NJ 12/2002, and we did not stay in super close touch thereafter.  I will guess it is in the 2006/ 2007 time Range, but could be anywhere from mid 2003 up until his passing.

The full western red cedar construction was not implemented until mid 2002.

I am not sure if he changed his process for that board.  I helped him build a 9’6" longboard, then I built my first HWS board in his workshop in late fall 2002, using his method, but with my own OCD twist on it.  

I glassed his 9’6 and my 6’8"  and another friend’s 6’9" at the same time in his dad’s Garage in Loveladies in December with dropcloth walls,  and space heaters, using System 3 Clear Coat epoxy.  My first time laminating with epoxy.  3.7 oz e cloth, one layer each side.

The method then, was 5 parallel stringers, 3.5 inches apart. Tuckerton lumber had quite the selection of beautiful lightweight western red cedar to choose from.  I did not realize how good the selection was, until trying to find clear or better elsewhere.

I later tried 3 stringers further apart with the interior panels glassed and shared this with him, but I don’t know if he also tried the same for your board.

On the deck you will see 5 parallel glue lines, 3.5 inches apart.  These glue lines are epoxy thickened with wood flour, they are not wood glue.  The edge of each deck plank rested atop 1/2 of the 3/16" wide stringer, bridging two stringers.  If he used my 3 stringer/ interior glassing method the glue lines on the deck will be much thinner and only the center glue line will be atop  the center stringer.

  The rails are cut from a 1x10 then hand planed, tapered then stacked square.  The rail stack is anywhere from 1/2 to 1.5 inch wide.

 

The cross pieces also 3/16" thick, joining the stringers at mostly right angles, The cross pieces are more numerous and closer together in the foot stop areas, about 3 to 4 inches apart, and wider apart elsewhere.  A stud finder works to find stringers and cross piece locations.  Interior symmetry of cross pieces was not paramount.  Fairly Close, but not mirror imaged.

Where the fin plugs were to go, solid blocks of cedar were placed, that reached to the tops of the stringers.  The deck panel would rest right on these solid blocks of cedar.  The blocks of cedar would sandwich the center stringer, for the center fin, of the stringer and also touching the rail stack on the rail fins.

  The cedar blocks for receiving the fins,  were often way larger than needed.

If, after glassing when drilling for the fcs plugs, if air space was hit, then it would be difficult to set the the plug properly, and it  would be weak. Often the fin placement was not precisely  decided upon after it was all shaped, so larger than needed, stronger than needed, heavier than needed,  interior finblock structure was employed, as it was simpler and faster too. 

I do not think there is enough wood on the interior to drill two new plugs for properly located twin fins though, farther back and farther from the rail.  If you really want to do that, a stud finder should show you where the cedar fin blocks inside end, but I’d not get closer than 1/4 inch to the edge of the interior cedar block

The original FCS 1 plugs,  recessed into cedar, will have zero issues handling the stress of a twin fin. I’ve used giant twins in my plugs and I weigh 220Lbs, and push hard, often.  The only issue I have had with fcs plugs in Cedar is not the plugs themselves, but where the rear of the fin would puncture the glass if I did not remove it skillfully.  The cedar turns grey then black when it gets wet.  You can shine a light into the clear epoxy adjacent to the plugs and see inside the blocks of cedar, but there might be tons of microbubbles if the plugs were not sealed after drilling/before filling.  

 I do not recall if he decided to do the glassing and plugging himself after I left, or if he hired it out, I’d guess the latter, and I do not think his glasser would try to use  black/ brown pigment in the epoxy. 

If you decide to ride this HWS often, the weak spots will be where the deck panel meets the rail on the deck, anywhere from in front of the fins to where one grabs the rails duckdiving are the main problem areas. 

I’d recommend stripping the wax often and looking for splits along the grain of the cedar.  The fiberglass will look a bit white and one can press their fingers and see soft spots developing.

 

If caught in time,  one can get away with pulling another layer or 2 of cloth tightly across the soft spot, bridge rail to stringer and cross pieces, before and aft of the soft spot. But bigger punctures require the wood be cut out, the structure inside dried reinforced and curshed/split cedar replaced.

 

A well placed heel or Knee can also split the cedar inbetween interior supports. My  main issues are my knee smashing the deck on my pop up or awkwardly kicking out. My feet rarely have caused issues on the deck.

Do be vigilant to prevent water entry or catch it soon after it occurs, and Always loosen the plug immediately on exiting the water, especialy in warmer weather.

While the interior cedar  is not devoid of protection from moisture ingress, Ben did not like to add any additional weight, use more epoxy and time,  by insuring that the wood was well sealed on the interior, before adding the deck planks.  A quick wipe with an epoxy soaked sponge was all they got whan adding the hull planks, and many spots were not completely saturated as one is racing the clock in this stage of the build,  and some parts of cross pieces or stringer or deck or hull plank could easily remain dry and are then hidden, and forgotten.

  We often disagreed on the necessity of sealing the interior.  I wanted a board to live forever, Ounce of prevention bla bla bla,  He was more concerned with reducing the already considerable time required to build a single board, and said if it got too wet/heavy/soft he’d just build another.

 

My first 6’8" HWS, that I built in his workshop, actually the second bedroom in the apartment he was renting from another friend, has seen TONS of use in the subsequent 18 years, but also has a lot of rather involved repairs.

The latest HWS that I finished a few years back, has all sorts of improvements in the accuracy, precision  and strength departments. The original 5 stringer method/process highly modified from the Ben’s original method, but I never got the weight down where the average joe would not complain.  But I build them for myself, and can’t be bothered by Joe’s opinions anyway.

 

Ben taught a lot of others, besides myself, his method. Skilled craftsmen who all added an improvement to the process.

Many beautiful and well perfoming boards  built with Ben’s method, spent a lot of time in the barrel on LBI, and elsewhere, and likely still do.

They feel heavier underarm, than underfoot. That highly rockered 6’9" round pintail needs no less than a chest high juicy Jersey wave, so while you can play with the fins, and take it out in lesser conditions, it will not come alive until it is headhigh+ and hollow. They work great in the hard offshores.

Ben would be stoked if you rode it, often, onthose juicy good days, as opposed to saving it for wallhanger duty.

It was designed, and built, to be ridden, the beauty is secondary.

But,

It can do both.

 

Amen!  My sentiment as well.  That’s a sweet stick.

That’s one of the best posts I’ve read on Sways.  Thanks for the back story.  Lowel 

what a lovely board…like the bookmatch - specially the knot and grain pattern … a shame to tamper with what looks to be a well made surfboard.

Thank you & agreed-- the bookmatch & grain are gorgeous. No tampering here! As mentioned above, I was just curious about plausability of switching out fins with the extant boxes.

@wrcsixeight,

Beautiful. Thank you for this tribute to and scoop on Ben’s craftsmanship-- I deeply appreciate it. (From the generous deep-dive on board-building technique to the local places-- just hearing the mention of Tuckerton Lumber is taking me back down the shore.) Thanks for your help with dating it-- I know I was definitely still in high school so at the latest it would be 2003.

Look forward to honoring Ben & this board in the juicy waves it was designed to ride! Only wallhanging it in the interim :wink:

And wow, check out your beautiful HWBs! Incredible. (Not to derail my own thread but I’m curious about the unusual design of those single fins!)

Thank you again for taking the time to share this with us.

If your Dad bought it in 2003, Ben must have made it shortly after I left NJ in December 2002.

 

I had not yet tried internal glassing or 3 stringers at that point.  I did See Ben briefly in 2005 or 6, He’d bought a house in Brick, and inside, he had a fish with just two 3.5 wide planks on the deck. Meaning same 5 parallel stringer method, 3.5 inches apart. I did not try the 3 stringer and internal glassing method, until mid to late 2004.

 

One of the things I did when I built my first board in his shop in late '02, was sanding all interior wood, stringers and cross pieces, to 220 grit before assembling the pieces.  Ripping the wood into planks would leave saw marks and the cedar rough, which would then soak up more epoxy when one tried to seal the interior at the same stage as when one added the deck planks. I think Ben adopted this practice on future builds, and yours might be the first on which he did so.

The finplugs in Ben’s board are more than strong enough to handle the lateral stress of a twin fin. If you really want to try it, but it really is a board designed for the hollow stuff, not weaker fishy type waves.

 

I think it’s OK for the OP to derail their own thread, but will edit the following out, if you wish.

The Tubercle fins in question are designed and built/3d printed by MrMik, who has more than one thread here on Sways about his method.

The smaller center fin on my 6’11" in foreground is one of his G-whale fins, that I basically cut in half and used the top half and made it fit probox fin system.  The Singlefin in the  far 6’8" is his deaweeder fin, which was an attempt to keep the tip vortex smaller and not drag seaweed/kelp as the higher aspect ratio Gwhale fins do. The Deaweeder is the fin used in my avatar photo, dragging a camera behind the fin.

The ‘sharky’ template railfins on my 6’11" are my own design, trying higher aspect on my Shortboard. More upright, Less base but more overall area, narrow tips.  Experimenting still.  They are fast and loose, but less stable.  A bit twitchy, very tight turning radius, a bit weird. 

Recently saw a video with Kai Lenny, employing some similar template fins in his Nazare tow board, Lending some credence to the ‘sharky’  template.

My 6’11" that I  built, is my last, and likely final HWS build,  or any board for that matter, and my interests and future efforts will now lay only in fin design and experimentation on my own HWS platforms.

2020 was written off, but I hope my interest is rekindled in 2021.

 

 

So rad-- very much appreciate the fin info & the opportunity to learn from you more generally & honor Ben’s work & memory.

@wrcsixeight,

Quick query on getting her watertight and ready after […x…] years of questionable storage in my family’s barn, addressing the following:

  1. There are two little bubbles in the glass on the bottom of the board (see photo) where it’s gray underneath. I’m afraid that’s where the wood somehow got wet along the way.

  2. Similarly, by the tail you’ll see some light whiteness/texture that seems to be degradation of the glass (maybe yikes from teenage ignorance about rinsing the board). I’m not sure whether that needs repairing or not.

Do you have thoughts on the best way to repair these issues, if repair is necessary? There’s a few scuffs I’d like to address too if you can advise on the proper resin for it.

Thanks in advance.

 

The one gray spot near the ‘glueline’ is from a hole.  That hole was caused by a small brad nail driven through the plank into the waxpapered table below.  That brad was used to hold the planks together when edge gluing them to make the hull panel.  Again the ‘edge glue’ was epoxy thickened with wood flour, not wood glue like titebond or gorilla glue.  The wood flour we used was actually purchased from System3 resins, but later on I used what would collect in a belt sander’s dust bag, and mix in milled glass fibers when maximum strength was desirable.  The finer the grit the more smooth the thickened epoxy would spread, and the color of it, sanding different wood, could be manipulated too, but not always as one expected.

 

I cant tell if those white spots near the ‘knot’ are reflections of light, or they are white spots from the fiberglass being sucked dry during the lamination process.  Once the board was shaped and final sanded, the board would be sealed with epoxy.  This stage was rewarding as the colors of the cedar would pop, but the exact amount of epoxy needed for one side was always guesswork.  Some areas of the cedar would be much thirstier than others, and usually the areas near the knots/ burl would be the thirstiest.  Ben hated to waste both Epoxy and Mixing cups, and once epoxy starts thickening one needs to stop trying to work it, or adding more atop it.   Dry spots could remain dry enough to still suck epoxy from the fiberglass during lamination.

It is possible to skip the sealing stage and go right to lamination, and while this eliminates secondary bonding issues, it can cause issues when the thirsty cedar sucks the fiberglass dry.

 

I Don’t know if Ben laminated this board himself or had someone else do it, but I think it might be the first or second board he made after I left NJ and showed him how to laminate.

 

Repairing of damage of these boards can be taken to extremes.  Once the wood gets wet there is no removing the gray spots that form in the cedar.  

My personal strategy, when I notice areas turning gray, is to scrape the entire deck of wax with an old credit card or similar, and then use sawdust to get all the wax off, then wipe the whole board with Isppropyl alcohol ‘IPA’ until the white paper towel shows no more residue.  Then I bust  out the strong headlamp and some reading glasses( I do not yet require reading glasses for reading)  and walk around the board inspecting from all angles any potential leaking areas. Once found I rip off a small piece of tape, mark it, and keep going.

After finding each and every potential leaking area, I remove the marking piece of tape then confine the area of the damage with more masking tape in a parallelogram/trapezoid type of shape, and then with a precision sanding tool or a dremel, sand within the tape with 220 grit sandpaper to make some mechanical tooth.  Often the tape gets damaged. I remove it and replace it before the next step.

I’ll use q tips wetted with IPA and clean the sanded area.  Any tape residue within will repel the epoxy, leaving ‘fisheyes’ which are a bit infuriating as they defeat the whole process of trying to reseal the board as they can often form right above the crack in the glass, and often as there is a contaminant pushed inside he crack which repels the epoxy. It behooves one to insure one eliminates all sources of contamination through each and every step.

 

So once the suspect area is confined, sanded to 220 grit and denuded of contaminants, I mix the epoxy and paint it over the confined area, a thin layer, and then remove the tape while it is still uncured.

Once it is cured, I usually come in with a razor blade and scrap the very edges of the repair, and call it sealed.  When I have accumulated many many of these small spots, I will come back with some 220 grit on a flat sanding block and wet sand them totally flat with the rest of the board, then 320 and 400 and on upto as high as 1500 grit with gloved hands.  Once rinsed and dried I will mix a small amount of epoxy , about 10ML or less and use a small pore sponge cleaned rinsed and dry, and smear a light coat of resin across the whole hull.  The epoxy dries super glossy and I simply leave this as my gloss coat, although it cannot compare to a polyester resin gloss coat that is polished.  Epoxy resin does not polish up as nicely as polyester, though one can try and some certainly achieve excellent results.  If one wants to polish up epoxy I would recommend waiting 2 weeks before using any chemical such as a polishing compound or car wax atop the epoxy.  On my second HWS I achieved an amazing gloss coat, only to have it turn cloudy several days after finishing.

How far you want to take any resealing/repair efforts is upto you.  I just want the potential water sucking crack in the lamination sealed. I do not expect it to be perfectly smooth and as undetectable as possible. Once I accumulate many many of these small repairs only then do I sand them flat and do the ‘smearcoat’ of epoxy.

As far as what Epoxy to use, well, Any really.  There are a whole bunch of epoxies available that I have no experience with.  I have been using Apex epoxy lately, which is inexpensive as epoxies go, but it is prone to fisheyeing.  My favorite resin for laminating, is system 3 clear coat resin, and then filling the weave with system 3 SB-112 resin, but these formulations are now 20 years old, and SB-112 is not easy to acquire.  The Sb-112 was marketed as a ‘tie-coat’  in that polyester resin will both cure and bond to it.  It was not prone to fisheyes and was marketed as having UV inhibitors in it. For years I only had experience with system 3 resins, and a little bit of west systems( hated).  When I tried Apex epoxy, I then realized how much easier System 3 was to work with regarding resistance to fisheyes and contaminants and curing during high humidity or at temperatures well outside ideal.

I have not tried most of the other epoxy forumulations available, and have no basis for comparison, and would just recomment that you expend all efforts to introduce no contamination that will induce fisheyes, do your work in a temperature controlled environment, on days with low humidity.

Epoxy also requires precision mixing of the ratios, and in small batches is hard to mix precisely by volume. i highly recommend using a digital scale to get the 100:44 ratio, or whatever the specific epoxy you acquire dictates.  Make sure it is thoroughly mixed in its precise ratio.

 

If you have suspected leaking areas and do not have time to do a proper sealing, then superglue can seal small cracks, but I would consider it only a temporary fix.  I also like Nashua flexfix 555 tape, but perhaps not when the blues are running.

There are hundreds of ways to fix/seal any damage.  It can be taken to extremes trying to make dings disappear, or just covered with tape until one has time to seal it properly.

My personal goals are to primarily simply prevent further water intrusion. My repairs can be seen and felt, and only once a lot of them have accumulated will expend the effort to flatten them, and then do another ‘smearcoat’ of the whole hull or deck, or both.  I try to rely on the gloss of the cured epoxy rather than trying to later polish the epoxy to a glossy finish.  

 

More recently, I’ve bought a rattle can of some 2 part automotive clearcoat to use as a gloss coat, but have not yet tried it, and might never, as I have no intentions of building any new HWS’s, nor seeking glossy perfection on existing HWS’s, as such efforts can be considered a waste of time and effort and materials, and those who might be attracted to such perfection are precisely those whose opinions mean absolutely nothing to me anymore.

 

 

Thanks for this generous and clear description.

I just want the potential water sucking crack in the lamination sealed. I do not expect it to be perfectly smooth and as undetectable as possible.

I’m with you here-- my aim is to prevent any further damage and keep the board seaworthy.

Two additional questions:

!) the little bubble over the gray area by the knot then, being likely caused by the bradnail, is not an area for concern then, if I’m following you?

  1. what if anything do you make of the tiny little white dots toward the tail? They’re like tiny white flecks on the surface of the board. At first I thought it was ‘barn schmutz’ that I just needed to wipe off, but it is not as I’ve wiped down the board and it remains. Whatever it is, it sounds like it’d only be an issue if it compromises the watertightness of the board (& I don’t know if it does)-- in which case would I want to sand lightly and proceed as you outlined above with a thin ‘smearcoat’ over the area?

Thanks again for your help. I’m happy with a little patina, just want to honor and respect the board now that I’m grown and get her back out in the water to enjoy.