Differences CJ Nelson (Long) Boards?

I read a lot (and watched everything I could get) about CJ Nelson Longboard Design. I build a longboard out of wood in the style of the Model “The Haven”, where I assumed a bottom contour as front concave, flat, vee in the tail with concaves. Building in wood is sometimes a compromise, so the objective was not to copy a “The Haven”, but getting a board with similar performance.

As far as I can judge, my surfing capabilities are limited, the board works more than pretty well (I just returend from a 14 days Portugal Surf Vacation, where I rode it solely.

Since this board works so well for me, I’m getting hungry building something differently. According to the information received, a board featuring the “Parallax” and/or the “NeoClassic” would be a nice addition to my quiver.

So lets talk Parallax first (which I would prefer): it seems to be a “hullish” board; rounded belly at the front, the tail rather flat with a hard edge, but how is the middle? still slightly hull (like the outlier), or already flat. Lots of volume. should give a decent glider, fast, loose, but still a turning machine, less a nose rider. Like the outlier, no concave, only convex, but “normalized” not a real hull?

Anybody there with more details, or better photographs of the bottom, best with a ruler to recognize the basic concept? 

And what about the NeoClassic, you can find just blurb about the board, I found some info which I would interpret as concave front, flat tail, but there is  suppossed to be some convex???

The problem is always, what is marketing and what is real, finally there are all boards…

Some pics of my favorite longboard…



I have a 9’3" I’ll get some pics for you

Jimi 

Nose

@ 24 inches

Middle of board

Behind center

Tail in front of fin

Hopefully these give you an idea of the bottom 

 

Thank you very very much! (I have seen your PM prior than opening than the thread) :slight_smile:

These are not the same model but I think illustrate interesting bottom contour transitions.  It kind of makes sense - rock back on the tail rocker and bank it on the roll.  More or less rail engagement depending on how far forward you’re leaning.  I think the general configuration follows pics already posted, just a different view.


An off topic question;  Are some board builders still using Lok Box and FCS Plugs??

If that question is directed towards me(?) I’ll have to take a pass.  I have no idea.  Those are old pics I have on file from somewhere.  I always liked the way they show the bottom transitions on some designs… the edge, tail kick and forward roll are clearly shown.