by Big H » Mon Apr 11, 2016 1:40 am
Poked around and found this from a shaper and his take on the subject.....thought provoking....
ron wrote:
I'm hoping to clear something up: the issue at hand addresses the effect of paddling into a good wave on boards that have you floating higher or lower in the water. I've noted some references to the issue in threads that concern themselves with float vs volume, etc. I am more interested in the practical effect that occurs when you are paddling into a good, steep swell on boards that either float you more or less.
I'm only questioning the effect in boards 5'10' to 6'3' and have noted floatier, wider boards sometimes get hung up in the lip on steeper waves when very low volume boards, regardless of shape, get in easier. Could be the paddler, could be the board. I've queried this and haven't gotten a consensus, although there must be a correct answer.
Any thoughts?
Hi Ron,
Your findings are right on. Years ago we found the same thing happening: Some thin "sinky" shortboards paddled better than boards with more volume and it made no sense. About that time I was working with a guy who owned fin system company and he was good friends with Al Merrick. Turned out that Merrick was also seeing the same thing happening. The guy I was working with was a good surfer, strong paddler, but a bigger guy, about 6'5" and 230 lbs at the time. He said to me, "George, I'm a pretty good paddler, I'm getting older but, out at Rincon the other day little kids on tiny chip boards were out-paddling me up the point, I don't get it..."
Long story short, we found that there is a "bad waterline" or "bad volume" where a board will do horribly in spite of more volume. One EITHER side of this volume, the boards paddled well. That is, a smaller board paddled better and a much larger board (of course) paddled better. My friend got so into it that he tested several boards across short "courses" both in flat water and the ocean...
...the board that worked badly for him was one that his friend had shaped (because he thought, "I'm getting older, make a slightly bigger board,") something similar to a "Speed Egg" which was gaining popularity at the time. I shaped a few boards for him and we reduced the size but not quite down to his original shortboard before he got the egg, and sure enough, he paddled faster on most of them. I concluded that there was both a "bad waterline" and a "good waterline." Problem was this waterline varied from one surfer to the other. We hand-shaped mostly back then, so VOLUME was not a viable/reliable number to use yet, but we knew that a smaller board could get going quicker than some boards SLIGHTLY larger than it, and of course boards MUCH LARGER would do likewise.
In some ways back then, the "Speed Egg" was a death sentence. I remember so many people going that direction and their surfing rarely improved what you would think it should. I wonder how many had that choice (either by their own or by their shaper) become the unbeknownst reason they got worse and discouraged. Surfing can be so much about confidence. The "Fun Board" really wasn't for some I guess...
We never located the right waterline location in a good way, but the water surface kind of hit between the board and stomach/chest of the paddler when the boards did poorly. You could "swim" a shorter board faster with the right engagment/technique. Added to that, a smaller board can get through breaking waves much easier, but we just looked at the paddle and wave catching ability.
Nowadays I mostly machine my boards, and I get pretty accurate volume numbers. For me, I seem to do well with 32L, but around the mid-high 30's I bog a bit. Higher than that like on my big cruisers and guns, I paddle very fast and fairly quickly.
It got even more complicated than that, we found that some big wave guns would catch waves poorly, and this had to deal with volume distribution through the length of the board. Thicker tails got "kicked up" by the wave giving a little "boost" to drop in with. BUT in big waves a lot a tail volume can be a killer, which implies a balance. In small waves we found the volume distribution was also important, same reason: not enough tail volume relative to middle volume can bog. Paddler position could compensate a little but the right combo of volume and position went noticibly better.
I went through a TON of boards that year, over 60 for myself and quite a few for some other guys.
So, in my opinion a choice can be made. Go even higher in volume to "get through the sound barrier" or reduce volume a bit and count on engaging in some rigorous (but productive) paddling.
Hope this helps,
George
George continues:
Sorry to say bro but there are too many variables. A lot is subjective. A lot is "art." I liken your request to telling
someone to give the formula for how much salsa I will like on my fish taco... Here is why.
First, the waterline level during paddling, where it "hits" along the board and along the paddler's body, seemed
to be the most important factor. Well, this begs the question, what shape? what person? how is their body
shaped? what is the paddling style? and the list goes on and on... So formulas to get "it" is probably not the
way to go here.
Second, volume affects the waterline location. Should be obvious, but there are formulas and ideas plus
intuitive "guesses."
Third, volume distribution affects how a board drops in (and paddling efficiency.) As I said before, distribution
that has a bit more float in the tail will (sometimes) "boost" a board into a wave, (as the wave comes, and lifts
the tail before the nose.) If you combine this with the amount of resistance the nose flotation presents to the
boost, things get further complicated, and you get hung up in the lip or caught in the face. So, it is not "the
answer" to look soley at a volume number. That said, too much volume in the back of the board can hurt
("getting" this is, "art.") Template and rocker can completely affect these behaviors.
Better at this point to look at the "bottom line" of what works. For me, I like 32L in my shortboards, I'm 180lbs,
and this board is 5'11." I've had this same basic board off my machine at 28L and it still paddled well but
needed late drops where the wave drops away. I've had this same basic board at 34L and it "felt" like it took
more effort to paddle and more effort to catch a wave. I've had this same board at 36L and it really paddled
well and at 41L and 6'0" it's my bigger wave crowd handling beast.
And that's just ONE genre of boards that I ride. I ride everything, from my 4'10" to my 8'6" today, and my 6'0"
just yesterday.
Art. I'm at the point in approaching a board design where I just look at the guy, ask height, weight, shoe size,
etc. and what size board they like and go from there to conclude a design. So maybe the synthesis is "seat
of the pants" but based upon a ton of boards, findings, failures, improvements, and tests. Maybe I do run an
internal set of "formulas" as I am no stranger to them, I'm a Mechanical Engineer and spent quite a few years
designing and doing structural analysis on rockets in the U.S. Space Program...
I noticed that I tend to apply more of my "formulas" and "theoretical" background to the construction of the
boards. In the hull designs I seem to apply broad (almost vague) concepts of fluid mechanics, hydrodynamics,
bending theory, etc. It really is an art, even with using the machine. It's the art aspect that has taken decades
for me to kind of develop which I find the most satisfying and challenging. Surfboards. Have fun with it.
George
P.S. Man I wished I made some sort of video analysis of the boards way back over a decade ago. Once we
found the "fast" and "slow" boards we could have recorded paddlers from above (like from a pier) to study
the wakes, waterlines, etc. and try to find correlations. There may be a lot to gain.