How Much Consideration Do You Give To Board Thickness?

[PaddleCrazy]

Hey all . . . noobie here who completely "lucked out", when purchasing my latest board. The darn thing works so well for me, that even after just the very first time out with it, I knew I had stumbled onto something special.

The reason I say "stumbled" is that I went out tested several boards from 8'10" to 10'0" once I decided to move shorter in size from my 10'6" x 32" x 4-1/2" starter board, and pretty much just looked at length and width, but never really gave the thickness any thought.  Just to fill in all the holes, I'm 6'1", 215lbs, and 52 years old.

So with that in mind, here are the board sizes that I demoed:
1.)  10'0" x 31-1/2" x 4-1/2".........most stable of all of the demoed boards.

2.)  8'10" x 31-1/2" x 4-5/8"........least stable of them all, but mostly due to the shortness in length that I kept having to deal with; as much front-to-back instability as side-to-side.

3.)  9'6" x 32" x 4-5/8"........more stable than the 8'10", but still not as stable as the 10'0", even though it was wider and thicker, and only 6" shorter.

4.)  9'2" x 31" x 4-3/4"........not bad in the side-to-side stability, but the front-to-back was still a bit sketchy for me.

5.)  9'6" x 29-3/8" x 4-5/8".......the most unstable of them all.  This one was given the most chances to perform (ie. I rode this one the most) and it was never something that I could get comfortable on.

6.)  9'7" x 30-3/8" x 4-5/8".......very similar in ride to the 9'6" x 32" x 4-5/8 mentioned above.

As far as actually "surfing" them once on a wave, the order of ease and maneuverability was, #5, #4, #3, #1&6 (felt about the same), and #2 I never really got "comfortably" on a wave enough to give it a fair judgement (IOWs, got frustrated from being in the water so much, that I probably threw in the towel too early).  All were set-up as "tris" in the fin configuration, although the 10'0" was ridden a couple times with just the sidebites to try to "loosen" it up a bit (good try, but it "slid" more than it "turned" IMO).

After all of that month or so of "testing", being that I really didn't want to have to work that hard during all of the down time waiting for waves, I choose to go with more of the stability of the board vs. the in wave maneuverability of the board (I'm not planning on winning any contest, just wanna maybe bottom turn the thing and then turn it back up and ride it down the line for a little fun).

So went back to the shaper I bought my 10'6" from, as he was the same guy that shaped the 10'0" and was gonna make my purchase.  Once there, he showed me a couple of new 9'6"s that he just got in and after long deliberation and discussion with him, I decided to walk out with the "less aggressive" one of the two.  Here's where we finally get to my thoughts/question . . .

Once I got it home, I then discovered that is was only(?) 4-1/4" thick (9'6" x 31 x 4-1/4") and was a bit worried at that moment, that it might not float me (thus be as stable) as the previous boards I'd tried, as they were all a 1/2" to 5/8" thicker, and roughly the same width and length as this board, give or take some here and there in their differences.

When I took this board out, it was incredible to say the least.  More stable than ALL of the others I'd tried, and by the end of the fourth session with it, I was not only able to bottom turn it, but actually take it back up the face, and then right back down numerous times as I went down the line.  Nothing really "snappy" or "aggressive" mind you, but at least I was turning, when and where I wanted to, for the first time on any board I've been on . . . in my very short, three month SUS "career".   

Sorry, really stoked about how lucky and how well things have turned out that I digress . . . back to my topic/question.....

So, with this board compared to all of the thicker ones I was on; I find myself much "deeper" in the water when standing/paddling/waiting.....most of the time, I have water at or around my feet; where in comparison, unless it was sort of rough conditions out there, my feet were "dry" and well above the water line.

To finally land this airplane (and "thank you" if you've actually made it this far) . . . do any of you find that being lower "in the water" makes you more stable, than more or less "bobbing" on top of it?  Sunday when I was out at Sano, there was a pretty good amount of side swell and wind chop . . . and I pretty much just stood there with some paddle help, as through all of it just sort of passed right over the top of the board (and my feet) . . . instead of under it, as in the past, where I seemed to get tossed around a lot when "bobbing" on top of it.

Sorry for the long explanation/story, but I thought that it might shed some light on how I arrived at my "theory".

[Waterline]

I think that's why many of the race boards now have sunken decks and some shapers have played around with concave decks on SUS boards. It lowers your center of gravity and makes you more stable. I've definitly seen other people comment on preferring a more submerged board in choppy conditions over a corky board, floating high. Not sure if this is only about COG or if there is something else important about being more below the surface when dealing with the energy in the surface chop. If you've ever gone scuba diving, it can be rough on the surface and then I'm always amazed at how calm it can be underwater.

Nice to see you've put some real thought and obsession into it! I know the feeling. Been designing my next board in my head.

[808]

From my experience width and thickness seam to effect performance more than length in surfing sups. I think you shaper made the right call with a thinner board.

[raf]

Well, 2 boards could be the same length, width and thickness, but have very different volumes depending on the rail shape.  I hardly pay any attention to "thickness", because thats just measured at the center of the board.  I do like a low volume board though.  I think the biggest reason for going custom is most production boards are over-volumed. 

[PaddleCrazy]

Thanks for your replies gentlemen, appreciate the excellent information.

This is where my "noobieness" showed quite quickly when looking for my first board, and then my second, as I was more concerned about length and secondly the width (since most all boards that I was looking at seemed to be between 4-1/2" to 4-3/4" in thickness.  That   1/4" difference just didn't seem like it would make take big of a deal.

"Waterline", none of the boards I tried and any concave in the decks, but a couple of the boards I rode, did have some "dome", or convex deck to them . . . something that I never got comfortable with. 

As "raf" points out, that difference in shape . . . I think had a lot to due with why I didn't feel all that stable on those that carried more thickness in the center and thinner at the rails (convex decks).  While the overall volume may be there, but its distribution is significantly different than one that is flat and distributed more evenly though the entire width of the board . . . just thinking out loud here so I could be way off with all of that.

I would have never thought that sitting lower/deeper in the water would make it so much easier for me to balance . . . but what also puzzles me it that it "seems" faster and glides through the water much better than my 10'6", but that might have a lot to do with the significant weight difference between the two . . . again, only a "WAG" on my part.

Just an FYI, this is still a "production" board made overseas like so many are, but I am really happy with how the shaper went about creating things on this one, for the CNC machine to copy . . . especially the "thickness" aspect of it all.

[SUPerstitious]

PaddleCrazy,
Could you share which board and which shop this is at?

I am interested in a 9'4" - 9'6"ish board, and you have me drooling over your description. I am in So Cal., so would be interested to drop in (no pun) on the shop you are talking about to have a look at this wonder board.

Thanks!

[J-Bird]

I've surfed quite a few paddleboards.  I prefer a thinner boards for just the reasons mentioned above, they just seem more stable and don't feel like your standing on a cork and about to get tossed by every little piece of chop you encounter.  IMO, thin is the way to go.

[MB]

@SUPerstitious - My guess is this: http://www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Stand-Up-Paddle/Review/2012-JP-Australia-Surf-SUP-96-x-31/

[AJR]

My guess was that it's a Joe Blair board...

[PaddleCrazy]

PaddleCrazy,
Could you share which board and which shop this is at?

I am interested in a 9'4" - 9'6"ish board, and you have me drooling over your description. I am in So Cal., so would be interested to drop in (no pun) on the shop you are talking about to have a look at this wonder board.

Thanks!

Well, since you asked . . . it's a board shaped by Rod Greenup (27+ years shaping custom surfboards), that he sells at his shop in Laguna Beach under that name of CA Surfboards (formerly Costa Azul Surfboards).

His prices are just about unbeatable (at least IMO) . . . for the board, traction pad, fins (2+1), leash, and paddle . . . was $795!!  For a few extra bucks, he'll upgrade the paddle to a pretty nice carbon fiber one.  

He sells direct from his shop only, eliminating the "middle man".





He also has a more aggressive "surf" 9'6" model, with a more pulled in nose and tail, with a little more rocker than the one shown above has.

[robcasey]

I used to think thicker boards would be less stable than a thinner one, but a shapes changed my mind. The Surftech Universal series are 5" thick yet super stable.  I'm 6-5 and usually can't comfortably even stand on flat water on a 9' board. But their 9' was solid. I've found the same with the Naish Nalu line which are 5" thick as well.  Thus as others have said above, rail shape is a big factor as well as width, thus making overall thickness less important in some boards. 

race boards are now being scooped out - check out Starboard's SurfRace series.  the downside is preventing water from pooling in the lowered decks.