Kronos "Big Guy" Nano

[surfafrica]

I'm really excited for this upcoming project with Kronos.  We're going to work on a big guy version of the Nano shape for one of my buddies. 

Rider: 6'0, 245 lbs, low intermediate
Current board: 9'6 x 32, 165 L SUP Sports Stoke (which has been great for him)

I sent Kyle @ Kronos a video I put together of my friend to give him a good idea of his skill level, riding style and typical wave he surfs. I also sent him down a picture to scale with some of my thoughts on size (my initial thoughts are 9'0 x 31-32, 155-ish L).



The goal of my Nano was to come out with a board that had performance in its DNA, but had some tweaks to add some stability (similar goals as Creek had for his Sunova model). We're hoping to translate that goal here and allow my buddy to come down in size a bit but maintain stability.  I think he'll really benefit from the reduced weight too (my 7'4 came in at a feather weight 8.2 lbs).

Later this week, we'll jump on a call with Kyle to talk more about the goals and hear what his thoughts are.  Man, custom boards are fun!

[surfafrica]

We had our phone consult with Kyle @ Kronos yesterday and talked more about the goals we have in mind for this board as well as my friend's skill and riding style.  One non-surfing goal is that the board is easy to fly with.  Having a 9'0 board is much easier at check in than a 9'6 which is getting close to many airline limits once a bag and padding are factored in.  My friend is looking for a board that has some performance but won't stop him from catching waves due to over-challenge. I have more of a tolerance of having a challenging board that might mean a few more missed waves than my friend does.

We also talked about the different boards my friend has tried and what he liked and disliked about them.  Those being:

- Stoke: 9'6 x 32, 165 L
- Speeed: 9'2 x 30, 148 L
- L41 ST (SIMS): 8'6 x 31, 140 L
- Starboard Whopper: 10' x 34, 171 L

The Stoke really fit with his size, skill and style.  It's been a great board for him and he's really liked it.  The 140 L SIMS was a bit too challenging for where he is at (for a 1-board quiver....it'd be great if he had two boards).  He could ride it, but it was a little tougher than he'd like (especially in any crowds or choppy conditions). The Whopper was too big.  He only had a brief session on the Speeed so couldn't give too much of a review. He does prefer the aesthetics of a more traditional shape than the super blunt nose of the Speeed, but that wouldn't stop him from surfing a blunt-nosed board if it was the right shape for him.

Kyle mentioned that on his first pass on the design, he might take the Nano shape and make some tweaks so we can come down in size without sacrificing too much stability.  He mentioned aiming for 8'11 x 30-31.  Looking forward to seeing what he comes up with.

Here's a diagram to scale of the boards above along with a blown up version of my Nano scaled to 8'11 x 30.5....

[SlatchJim]

An interesting project.  I'm also on a stoke and personally prefer rounded pins over other styles of tail, but being that so much of this sport is touchy feely individual taste, every test case is worth it... for science of course.   

[anonsurfer]

It sounds like he would be happy with a slightly scaled down Stoke shape.    If his criteria is 9' max length and 155L I'd suggest looking at a high performance longboard shape, something with a fuller nose and rounded tail.  The Nano might not be the right shape for his requirements, it would have to be pretty thick and/or wide to get the required volume.

I'm interested to see what Kronos comes back with given the requirements.

[surfafrica]

It sounds like he would be happy with a slightly scaled down Stoke shape.    If his criteria is 9' max length and 155L I'd suggest looking at a high performance longboard shape, something with a fuller nose and rounded tail.  The Nano might not be the right shape for his requirements, it would have to be pretty thick and/or wide to get the required volume.

I'm interested to see what Kronos comes back with given the requirements.

Knowing my buddy's riding style, I'd like to keep him off a longboard shape (even a performance longboard).  Something closer to the Stoke really does fit well for him.

I agree...155 L with those dims may be pushing it.

My reasoning: The 8'10 x 32 Stoke comes in at 150 L.  And the Stokes tend to be a bit thinner at the nose and tail than what the Nano is (based on my Nano vs the Stokes I've seen).  I think a shape with some performance in its DNA with a little extra fullness in the nose and a little extra width maintained in the tail in the 9-ish x 31 range could be brought up to 155-ish litres without it being too thick for rider at 245 lbs.  Kronos is pretty good with volume distribution from what I've seen.  But, I also know he likes to go a little lower on volume and use surface area for stability.  So ya, it will be interesting to see what he comes up with.  I'm just a hack at this stuff.

[surfshaver]

I'd consider a flyer/wing for your friend's board as a way to reduce the tail area.  I think this would work best given that the Nano, at least your version, is a squashtail rather than a rounded pin.  It's all about ease of rail to rail response.  Having a wing or hip is not necessary for your board given its narrow width, but for a larger board with an overall width greater than 29", especially if it's not a pin tail, I think a flyer can make a big difference.

Look at these performance shapes: Sunova Speeed, Acid, Rawson Pro-Mo, and Infinity B-Line.  They are all boards people rave about and despite totally different shapes, the one thing they all have in common is a hip/flyer.

[supthecreek]

Africa
I really like seeing this topic and the "start to finish" progress, done in real time on the Zone.... I believe it helps a lot of people who are searching for their next board.
You are doing this the same way I approached all my purchases over my SUP life..... I always scaled photos of boards I like in side by side, so I could ponder the pluses and minuses..... you see differences a lot clearer this way.

Not so sure that volume should be the sticking point here.... shape and surface area is a LOT more critical to stability.
I'd rather see him go a bit wider, slightly fuller nose,  than narrower and too thick.
I'm totally stoked the performance of my 32" wide board right now, and considering he'll be in a wetsuit, extra width will help.
I was 245 all during the "Maria" swell so I fully understand the challenge of a perfect 9' board.
Also agree with sShaver about the benefits of a hip/wing at that width.... it gives a nice pivot point as well as a tighter tail.

Interested to see what Kronos dreams up!

Thanks for posting this project!

[surfafrica]

Ya, I fully agree shape & surface area are the key factors for stability. From my experience on a SIMS and a cornice shape, width in the tail provides more stability than width in the center proportionally....but then how that effect surfability based on the rider's style is something you need to balance (some love SIMS, some really don't....to wing or not to wing....squash vs pin....parallel rails vs more curve....lots of variables).  I find my 7'5 x 26, 87 L cornice shape (wide tail) more stable than my 8'10 x 26.5, 84 L performance longboard.  If you asked me by looking at the boards beforehand, my money would have been on the longboard.

Volume is definitely something I pay attention to as well though--especially for those who don't surf often.  There's a comfort factor with having a certain level of float.  And in some respect, foam does help get into waves (along with glide and a bunch of other factors of course). You can really see people have their comfort spots when it comes to the volume/weight ratio.  For me, I've found my sweet spot to be 80-95 L (I'm 148 lbs) and now I play around with sizes & shapes in that range.  I have one friend who is a stronger surfer than me, but if he gets on boards with the same v/w ratio as I like (and I'm not super low), he doesn't like it as much (even with the same shaped boards). He likes more foam. So ya, I guess I do think a lot about finding people's sweet spot when it comes to volume.

I think we're pretty close on general length (ie, 8'11 or 9'0) and width (31-ish....but maybe up to 32....no lower than 30.5).  Volume is the unknown to me as far as what we'll see in the first design, along with the nuance of the shape (ie, tail shape, nose fullness, blunt nose, etc).  I'm guessing it'll have an intermediate rocker (just a guess) and a simple single concave or maybe a single to double (also just a guess at this point).

Kronos doesn't seem use wings much in his designs so I'd be surprised if one shows up here--but you never know.  He tends to use other methods to balance out stability vs surfability.  I'm sure if we requested one, he'd go with it, but I'll let him drive that stuff (he's won my trust).  But again, you never know....he does treat each custom as its own thing.

[anonsurfer]

I think we're pretty close on general length (ie, 8'11 or 9'0) and width (31-ish....but maybe up to 32....no lower than 30.5).  Volume is the unknown to me as far as what we'll see in the first design, along with the nuance of the shape (ie, tail shape, nose fullness, blunt nose, etc). 

I made a Nano in Shape 3D.   At 9' x 31.0" x 4.5" the volume is 142.6L.  My rails are a little tapered so you could fatten them up for more volume but not recommended.    The foil is 2.8" thick @ T+12" and 2.6" @ N+12".  You could fatten up the foil for more volume but I wouldn't do this too much.  The tail is not too bad at 20.8" @ 12".  Nose @ 12" is 18.5".

To get to 150L at 9' length the board was 31.8" wide and 4.6" thick.

[anonsurfer]

Here's a rough draft of a Nano at 150L to give you an idea of how the dimensions will come out.   

[surfafrica]

My talents end with blowing up pictures to scale!  Love the reverse engineering anon.

My friend tried paddling my other friend's 8'6 x 31, 140 L Stoke.  He found it quite challenging--too challenging.  I guess that isn't too much of a surprise, and I think the sweet spot is where we are zeroing in on--something more challenging than the 9'6 x 32, 165 L Stoke, but a more forgiving than the 8'6 x 31, 140 L version.

When I'm working on a board for myself, I like to get it right (but do have some risk tolerance).  When I'm helping a friend with one, I really don't want to screw up and recommend something that they struggle on!  Man, I would dread seeing my friend head out psyched for a new board and then really struggle. This is going to be a one board quiver and will be used in Canadian winters with a 5/4 as well as spring break trips to tropical waters south.  He'd rather sacrifice some performance if it means a few extra waves in a session.  He only surfs once a month tops (plus a week or two on vacation). We're designing this with 245 lbs in mind, but there will be weight fluctuation with him surfing some sessions closer to 255 lbs (plus full winter rubber).  Creek, I think your recommendation of sticking closer to 32 wide is a good call. 

Here's a another nerdy image showing some versions of my Nano blown up between the two Stokes he's tried (this is just me playing around--I'm guessing the final shape we go with won't just be my board blown up).  The v/w ratios here don't include wetsuits.

[SUP Sports ®]

Aloha surfafrica,
I need to point out a couple of discrepancies...

Your text refers to my 8'6" x 31" WD as a Stoke...but, it's a WD...the WD Series has a different rocker line than the Stoke Series SUPs...
You also have the graphic showing it's dims as 8'6" x32"...which should be corrected to 8'6" x 31"...volume is correct...
You may be confusing my 8'10" x 32" WD...which Starboard originally put into production as one of the boards in the "Wide Point" series...also, my name...

For the record, I do have a "WD Stoke" SUP design...which has a modified rocker transitioning between the WD and Stoke...these are custom boards...
The boards that you show are my production boards...the 9'2" x 32" @ 158 liter WD did become a very popular production board...the custom versions were more thinned out and had less volume...

The pic shows the 8'10" x 32" WD next to a 9' x 31" WD Stoke...
I normally build these boards at 9' and 9'2" lengths...29" - 33" widths...depending on target volume...they, are quite popular as a bread & butter boards for more serious surf...and, for traveling...

Lots of action pics and videos here:

http://supsports.com/standup-paddle-boards/wd-series-sup

http://supsports.com/standup-paddle-boards/stoke-series

[surfafrica]

Oh sorry Wardog, my bad... yes, he tried the 8'6 x 31, 140 L WD (not a Stoke).

Also important to note, that if I didn't have such a good relationship with Kronos built on my past few projects , we'd probably go with an 8'11 or 9'0 Stoke or WD here in a custom carbon.  We're aiming for light light light with this one.  His 9'6 Stoke really worked well for him.

Updated width in the image:

[TallDude]

I'm 245 and my bottom limit, almost 90% of the board sunk is about 128 liters (9'2 x 28 x 3-7/8") . The problem with lower and lower volume boards is you have to really be in the right spot at the right time to catch waves. With no glide you can't chase after a wave from outside. You'll be sitting (and I mean sitting) inside with the short boarders. Lighter people look at a big 150 liter boards like they are tanks, but they aren't big guys. Growing up surfing, I've always had this feeling that anything over 22" wide was a tank. It's hard for me to wrap my mind around a 32" wide  or wider performance board, but I've reluctantly accepted it.
Not only is it harder catching waves with a lower volume board, if the waves aren't big enough you won't be able to maintain any speed.  You need more energy to push it. So there is the catch 22. Your friend should not think of selling his Stoke. He'll need it as his daily rider. Trust me. Been there.

[surfafrica]

Great post TallDude.

My buddy is 100% going to keep his Stoke....but it's dying a slow death and has taken on a lot of water, so it might not see many more sessions out in the surf.  We're really aiming for this project to be his one-board quiver so we really want to make sure he's comfortable enough on it in most of the conditions we might face.  He's ready for something a little smaller than his 9'6, but we don't want to push it too much (I don't think).