>>>Whether it's a gain or not should be the real debate - shouldn't it? Yeah, Thats what I thought I was talking about... If you take a chunk of duct tape across the forks, is that going to affect the performance? You could also put a piece of fibre glass across it too... but I thought that duct tape would be less permanent. Carl
Yes- a wider nose effectively extends rails, offers better planning , more rail line longer projections. But less material= better turning? No- not necessarily -just keep the area solid but very thin (nose would be squared or rounded) and it's even possible to duplicate via a concave the touted "channeling benefits" of having two points. Everthing desirable could be accomplished by thinning and contouring. BUT this I suspect is not their goal. Their goal is to have something different to market that looks bad ass.
For what it's worth, I surfed the North Shore with a guy today who had a Converter, and he was absolutely shredding. I asked him about it and he said it is the best board he has ever owned. I'm looking to pick one up now.
I know this thread has been dormant for a while, but I'm interested to understand the hydrodynamics of this channel in the HIC converter. It seems to me that to create lift, the wide point should be at the front of the board and the narrowing under the front foot (to create lift, reducing friction and increasing speed) continuing out the tail or into a vee or widening again slightly forward of the front fins. I can't see the reason for the reverse of this except for the theory of creating additional rails and incorporating a convex vee hull with a concave running down it's midline? The Gemini and KS's Manta seem to follow the racing catamaran hull theory of squeezing water to create lift and drive. I'm not sure how going from narrow to wide while maintainfing channel depth reduces friction and therefore increases speed??? However, it seems that the guys whop ride these boards are blown away..