Fast board for a fast paddler = Fast board for a slow paddler?

[FloridaWindSUP]

Larry Cain's recent detailed board test was interesting.

http://larrycain.blogspot.ca/2016/06/all-star-showdown-2016-14-x-25-all-star.html

One reason it was interesting was because of how incredibly fast his speeds were. 10.8 - 11.3 kph averages for the 3 minute tests, and 12.3 - 12.9 kph averages for the 30 second sprint tests. Hull speed for a 14' vessel is 9.29 kph, so Larry was doing 116% - 139% of hull speed in those tests.

I'm thinking that the features that make a board faster in the above-hull-speed range that pro racers paddle in could be very different from the features that make a board faster in the at-or-below-hull-speed range that amateur racers paddle in. If I was comparing two boards I'd want to see an effort vs. speed curve for both boards, and I'd choose the board that took less effort in the speed range that I'd realistically be at during the race.

Maybe there are certain shape features that make a board more efficient below hull speed, but less efficient above hull speed, or vice versa. Or maybe there are features that make a board faster above hull speed but have no effect below hull speed. Thoughts? Experiences?

[ukgm]

Larry Cain's recent detailed board test was interesting.

http://larrycain.blogspot.ca/2016/06/all-star-showdown-2016-14-x-25-all-star.html

One reason it was interesting was because of how incredibly fast his speeds were. 10.8 - 11.3 kph averages for the 3 minute tests, and 12.3 - 12.9 kph averages for the 30 second sprint tests. Hull speed for a 14' vessel is 9.29 kph, so Larry was doing 116% - 139% of hull speed in those tests.

I'm thinking that the features that make a board faster in the above-hull-speed range that pro racers paddle in could be very different from the features that make a board faster in the at-or-below-hull-speed range that amateur racers paddle in. If I was comparing two boards I'd want to see an effort vs. speed curve for both boards, and I'd choose the board that took less effort in the speed range that I'd realistically be at during the race.

Maybe there are certain shape features that make a board more efficient below hull speed, but less efficient above hull speed, or vice versa. Or maybe there are features that make a board faster above hull speed but have no effect below hull speed. Thoughts? Experiences?

Yes I have said exactly the same which is why I did a test to show exactly that. Read my board testing 101 thread and go to my testing article linked I that thread to see more.

[FloridaWindSUP]

I can't find the board testing 101 thread. Can you post a link to it? Thanks.

[ukgm]

I can't find the board testing 101 thread. Can you post a link to it? Thanks.

http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php/topic,30008.0.html

[Pierre]

Larry Cain's recent detailed board test was interesting.

http://larrycain.blogspot.ca/2016/06/all-star-showdown-2016-14-x-25-all-star.html

One reason it was interesting was because of how incredibly fast his speeds were. 10.8 - 11.3 kph averages for the 3 minute tests, and 12.3 - 12.9 kph averages for the 30 second sprint tests. Hull speed for a 14' vessel is 9.29 kph, so Larry was doing 116% - 139% of hull speed in those tests.

I'm thinking that the features that make a board faster in the above-hull-speed range that pro racers paddle in could be very different from the features that make a board faster in the at-or-below-hull-speed range that amateur racers paddle in. If I was comparing two boards I'd want to see an effort vs. speed curve for both boards, and I'd choose the board that took less effort in the speed range that I'd realistically be at during the race.

Maybe there are certain shape features that make a board more efficient below hull speed, but less efficient above hull speed, or vice versa. Or maybe there are features that make a board faster above hull speed but have no effect below hull speed. Thoughts? Experiences?

Fully agree, design for athletes may not work for an average paddler on a distance ride, those board are perfect for a high-powered paddler, may not work so easily on a displacement mode condition, where a lower wetted surface, (semi)displacement hull consumes less energy, that is totally obvious.

[Chilly]

I was thinking the same thing recently with my 2016 All Star. The deep concave that is design to channel water around the fin and cause lift IMO would require an elite paddler to take advantage of it. I can actually feel it in slick calm water but can’t sustain it for more than a quarter mile. Then it feels like an average flatwater board in term of speed once I start to fatigue.

[Luc Benac]

As an average Joe, that seems to me to be the most relevant question and concept we have seen in the forum for some time :-)
I do like the idea of an efficiency curve for various boards,but if I remember correctly the discussion around the methodology of Bryce's testing, the challenge was to repeat such test to obtain reliable result in different sea conditions.
So far the test applies solely to flat water and there is a possibility that the ultra efficient race board on flat water become far less so in chop.
It would bring the question of whether an all-around board (i.e. Infinity Blackfish, 2016 AllStar, FX14, JL Sidewinder.....) could score high enough under different categories of sea conditions and be the overall "winner on points" when averaging.
Likewise it could explain why some paddlers are sold on the new Allstar but others are not i.e. if you cannot get the Connor effect on the board then this feature is not of interest to you and so the premium price associated with it.
Bryce please correct me if I misunderstood the second part of your testing methodology or misrepresented its relevance to the original question.

Cheers,
Luc

[ukgm]

As an average Joe, that seems to me to be the most relevant question and concept we have seen in the forum for some time :-)
I do like the idea of an efficiency curve for various boards,but if I remember correctly the discussion around the methodology of Bryce's testing, the challenge was to repeat such test to obtain reliable result in different sea conditions.
So far the test applies solely to flat water and there is a possibility that the ultra efficient race board on flat water become far less so in chop.
It would bring the question of whether an all-around board (i.e. Infinity Blackfish, 2016 AllStar, FX14, JL Sidewinder.....) could score high enough under different categories of sea conditions and be the overall "winner on points" when averaging.
Likewise it could explain why some paddlers are sold on the new Allstar but others are not i.e. if you cannot get the Connor effect on the board then this feature is not of interest to you and so the premium price associated with it.
Bryce please correct me if I misunderstood the second part of your testing methodology or misrepresented its relevance to the original question.

Cheers,
Luc

That is the major problem for me - most flatwater races people do are going to see some margin of chop (especially in the first 10 minutes) but creating a test whereby the constraints can't be standardised causes me great issues as a scientist as the test results then couldn't be repeated as they were never known (and the margins of error would be likely too great between well refined boards). Power meters might help improve this situation a bit but the reality is that most paddlers may well (I suspect) benefit from a board that can handle a wider range of water states but I haven't got a test protocol yet that would fully account for it that I'm happy with...... but I am working on it.

[Luc Benac]

We will leave it at a rhetorical question for now then :-) until science can separate the chaff from the grain, porpoises from true dolphins, and boards for Joe(s) from one trick ponies...
I can appreciate the challenges, even on a inlet with what seems like relatively calm water, the tide depending if paddled in the centre of the inlet or close to the shore can turn me into an exceptional paddler at 10 km/h+ or leave me back into the crowds at 8 km/h. I won't mention when going against the tide so as not to bruise my ego...... :-)
Throw more chop or some wind and you have an equation with so many variables that it is not even funny.

Good luck with the endeavour as it could be the ultimate measurement tools for unbiased technical review.

Cheers,
Luc

[Pierre]

No mistery and surprise, for up/side wind conditions, fastest board is one which is most comfortable to paddle on, the paddler make the difference excepted board shapes which make course keeping easier, all other shape design for speed are marginal.
When on flat water, lowest wetted surface and drag will be the climax for economical paddling, and semi-planing ability be a plus for sprint and elite, this takes more importance on shorter boards which need semi- planing ability to break out Froude barrier, on an UL the search for low friction and drag is to be privileged in most paddler's cases.
This is why speed differences between elites and crowds are higher on short crafts, elites( especially lightweight) taking advantage of power, making a huge difference between hull speed and some kind of semi-planing. hull resistance on ULs being more linear, the speed difference is less. 12'6'' are tools designed for elites, and especially lighweight elites.

[JP4]

This is interesting and something I've had some anecdotal experience with.
I've had a couple of fairly fast boards, most recently a 2014 Naish Javelin LE. There are a few guys in the Gorge here who really fly on that board downwind. I paddled one and liked it so I bought one. I really liked the way it paddled. It was super light, plenty stable, accelerated quickly, or so it felt.
Long story short, I paddled it all last season and was really slow going downwind on it.
Now granted, of the experienced paddlers around here, I'm one of the slower ones. My Viento PR is about 1:17, well off what anyone would call fast. There's probably a lot of reasons for that, but balance and stability isn't one of them. It's pretty rare for me to fall even on a big day.
I was frustrated on that board last year as it seemed I just couldn't make it go as fast as I thought I should. I would get smoked by a larger margin than usual when I was on that board.
One day late last year I paddled an SIC Bullet V2 for about ten minutes through the Wells express section of the Columbia. I was blown away by how much faster I was on that. I bought one and sold the Jav.
Well, I can't say I wasn't surprised that a dedicated downwind board would be fast going downwind, or that it was way more fun to ride (WAY more fun). The real a surprise was that when paddling the V2 in flat water this winter I was consistently .1-.2 MPH faster on the V2 than the LE. Weird.
I haven't figured out why I'm faster on the flats on a downwind board that's wider, heavier, and has more rocker than the super light LE. On a downwinder it's pretty obvious why it's faster. It takes less energy to "un-stick". It easily gets up and going on a bump. The LE seemed to have two gears, slow and fast with an abrupt transition. My theory is that due to my lack of fitness and great technique, I couldn't quite get it to that speed where it broke loose. Lots of guys had no problem going fast on that board, but I just could get there. I could be way off base here, but that's what it felt like.
JP

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[Eagle]

ukgm - the paddler balance aspect may be a big variable question to factor into your test prrotocols.

Yesterday my wife and I paddled in the afternoon.  I was on the AS and she was on the Bullet.  We did our standard 2 mi out and back.  I wanted to see the speed difference compared to before.  We love that run because it requires no travel and no shuttle - and we get everything done in less than an hour.  When we shuttle to Squamish - that takes a few hours back and forth easily.

My balance and power now is getting to be around 95% + on the 23.  She has complete balance on the Bullet - so her speed is normalized.  She said I was easily pulling away from her compared to before on the Dom.  The 23 feels very fast now and just motors upwind and DB compared to any other board we have.  This confirms my time trial data.  And I expect my times to drop quite a bit further now.

I have been using our trusty Gladiator Elite.  So that likely has had a big effect on my progression.  This in keeping with the bigger fin may be faster link you posted.  I believe you need full balance before you can put full power down.  So a bigger fin helps to accomplish this.  Especially when getting familiar with a new narrower board.  That or any other big fin will help and is like SUP training wheels.  It is a fantastic fin for that - but does feel draggy and is slow to turn.  Even so - still posted my fastest time with it because it helps me stay on the board - and allowed me to keep near full power down.  Next up is to now switch to the OEM fin and start this fun all over again.  Haha.  Then a smaller fin after that!

These types of variables are very important and are intangible in a way because everyone is different.  So if you can address these variables in your protocols in some standardized way - that may yield more representative results for the end user.  In static mode - a simple strain gauge drag test would probably work enough.  Now factor in dynamic balance nerves and fatigue somehow.  These factors do impact the paddler over race distances - when distance waves wind and current etc impact times.

And yes - the top pros can make the board do things that the average joe cannot.  So do not expect a fast time for you - because Connor or Kai or Travis wins a race - on the same board you have.  You may in fact get the complete opposite!  So get a board that you can balance on.  And save your money!  Buy something used or end of season - and save a bundle.  Race boards especially depreciate very rapidly.  As noted many times before - tune up your engine first - improve your balance and stamina - and improve your strength to weight ratio.   

[Eagle]

Well, I can't say I wasn't surprised that a dedicated downwind board would be fast going downwind, or that it was way more fun to ride (WAY more fun). The real a surprise was that when paddling the V2 in flat water this winter I was consistently .1-.2 MPH faster on the V2 than the LE. Weird.

Haha - that Bullet 14V2 is such a nice little board.  Perfect for small waves - but a handful in big steep ones.  Simply loves small waves and huge wind.  And for that - that board is THE bomb!  Holy smokes - that thing just planes with complete ease and control.  Crazy stable with the panel vee at the tail - and pops up fast with the single concave.  Fantastic DW board that Bullet.

JP4 - interestingly last year I raced a younger fitter guy than me upwind for a bit.  Me on the Dominator and him on the Bullet.  We were neck and neck.  The Bullet is fast upwind - but the nose does splash forward quite a bit.  It may be you are better balanced on the Bullet vs the LE so you can put more consistent power down.  Just a thought.  But if you are faster now - all the better!   

[ukgm]

ukgm - the paddler balance aspect may be a big variable question to factor into your test prrotocols.

It doesn't need to be factored in as I stated in the article that all results are relative to each paddler. The protocols themselves are easily achievable by anyone but the results will vary based on the paddlers ability and technique.

[Eagle]

Ah - "relative to each paddler".  Ok that makes more sense.  For some reason was thinking this was a test to directly compare two boards at the same time under the same conditions.  But maybe was thinking about something else.

Would your test protocols include race distances and variable conditions?