I have an agreement to sell my SIC X 14 Pro on this Friday. I REALLY like that board. It is fast and responsive on flat water for me. I like the narrow 26 inch width, which suits my frame and stroke. However, there are a few traits that I don't like about it. Here they are in no particular order. The nose catches when drafting and does not allow for easy direction changes. Although OK, it is not as stable as I would like. Does not downwind as good as I would like. I think it needs a little more nose rocker and volume for that. Board trim balance is a bit too narrow and could be more forgiving. At my 200 lb weight, I think I may need a little bit more volume than 253 liters. When you listen to Mark Raphorst describe the FX 14, he addresses all of these concerns with the new design. The volume at 290 sounds a little higher than I would have expected and the narow 25 inch width is more narrow than I expected. The new flush deck kind of surprised me too, as cutouts usually help with stability and leverage. The rails are also 3/4 inch thicker at 7.75 for the FX. So, with my current favorite board being sold, I have a dilemma. Should I wait until I can test this board and maybe others in late April, or order an FX 14 now and have it arrive late January/early February? I have combed the web and have found VERY little feedback and no real evaluations. What you you think? Pull the trigger, or hurry up and wait?
Quote from: Rideordie on October 28, 2015, 07:39:04 AM
I have an agreement to sell my SIC X 14 Pro on this Friday. I REALLY like that board. It is fast and responsive on flat water for me. I like the narrow 26 inch width, which suits my frame and stroke. However, there are a few traits that I don't like about it. Here they are in no particular order. The nose catches when drafting and does not allow for easy direction changes. Although OK, it is not as stable as I would like. Does not downwind as good as I would like. I think it needs a little more nose rocker and volume for that. Board trim balance is a bit too narrow and could be more forgiving. At my 200 lb weight, I think I may need a little bit more volume than 253 liters. When you listen to Mark Raphorst describe the FX 14, he addresses all of these concerns with the new design. The volume at 290 sounds a little higher than I would have expected and the narow 25 inch width is more narrow than I expected. The new flush deck kind of surprised me too, as cutouts usually help with stability and leverage. The rails are also 3/4 inch thicker at 7.75 for the FX. So, with my current favorite board being sold, I have a dilemma. Should I wait until I can test this board and maybe others in late April, or order an FX 14 now and have it arrive late January/early February? I have combed the web and have found VERY little feedback and no real evaluations. What you you think? Pull the trigger, or hurry up and wait?
Wait and try. There are so many interesting boards coming this year. Even if you like the FX14, you will still have an itch of not having tried the others.
FX14
JL Rail
Bark Downwinder
Bark Vapor
Starboard 2016 Allstar in 27 :-)
Rogue Downwind
........
Cheers,
Luc
Quote from: Rideordie on October 28, 2015, 07:39:04 AM
I have combed the web and have found VERY little feedback and no real evaluations. What you you think? Pull the trigger, or hurry up and wait?
Here is a good link to get your first impression of the board:
https://vimeo.com/138431125
It shows that in fact, the board posses nice DW ability.
There will be more impressions coming early November if you can wait that long.
Also, just adding to Luc's list
I would look into Infinity Blackfish
There is a lot of info out there about the board and it seems
to check all the boxes you were talking about.
Over on seabreeze.com.au. Niels from SIC Denmark has written a great review on the SIC Fx14
Thanks. However, I am pretty sure the board in the video is the 12 6 and the one Niels reviewed is a pre-production model with different specs. It is 14 x 26 wide and has significantly less volume. Still, it looks really good. Starboard should make a 14 x 26 Allstar. There is a gap between 25 and 27. Naish should reduce their Javelin prices. Barks are interesting, but I am not sure if these boards are fast enough on flat water to suit me. The Blackfish looks really interesting and agree from my brief read that it is targeting what I am looking for. Price is right too. However, I don't know of any dealers in the SC/NC area. Novemeber is not too far away to wait for more reviews. Burchas, who are you expecting to review the FX 14 in November????
If it were me I'd be putting an order in for the new FX14.
Quote from: Rideordie on October 29, 2015, 04:37:18 AM
Burchas, who are you expecting to review the FX 14 in November????
I'll have my hands on a FX early Nov. and while it's a 12.6/27 it should
have similar volume to the 14' according to Mark.
As for stability, I should be able to give some notes as I have experience with both the Bullet 14 v2 and your x 14 pro. I hope that helps
here is a quick pic:
David, that's how I am currently leaning!! 8) Nice pics of your new board Burchas!! I am looking foward to your review!!
Quote from: Rideordie on October 29, 2015, 04:37:18 AM
... There is a gap between 25 and 27....
... Naish should reduce their Javelin prices...
...Barks are interesting...
...Blackfish looks really interesting ...
The stuff one learns here just keeps me coming back!
Quote from: Rideordie on October 29, 2015, 08:18:38 AM
Nice pics of your new board Burchas!! I am looking foward to your review!!
Well, if you find your self in NYC around that time, you can join in on the review ;)
Quote from: DavidJohn on October 29, 2015, 05:33:07 AM
If it were me I'd be putting an order in for the new FX14.
Me too.
You can't necessarily trust reviews, so there's no point waiting for them. If you have a chance to demo one, then that might be worth waiting for. But by the time that happens, who knows what availability will be: sourcing SUPs often turns into a crazy drawn-out procedure.
If it sounds like Mark Raaphorst has read your mind when he's describing the FX, then he probably has: he'll have many other people making the same points. For instance, as success in races these days becomes increasingly about drafting strategy, it is inevitable that the new breed of boards will be created with drafting ease in mind. And Mark Raaphorst is the distance board shaper I trust more than any other.
Life is short. I don't see anything obviously better out there, or in the way, for what you want, and you already know that you like MR's designs. So if you have no demo opportunities then maybe a leap of faith will have to suffice.
Quote from: Area 10 on October 29, 2015, 08:36:26 AM
Life is short. I don't see anything obviously better out there, or in the way, for what you want, and you already know that you like MR's designs. So if you have no demo opportunities then maybe a leap of faith will have to suffice.
I'm with A10 on that, dah... ::)
Quote from: Area 10 on October 29, 2015, 08:36:26 AM
So if you have no demo opportunities then maybe a leap of faith will have to suffice.
That is what I did for my Bark Downwinder. Well not quite as I relied on Area10 and Starman's review on this forum.
It worked out good for me and it is now my favorite board.
Hopefully it is the same for you and your soon to come FX14 is all the board you were looking for :-)
Cheers,
Luc
Thanks for the invitation Burchas, but no plans to head that way. I guess that it is self-evident that you pulled the trigger on an FX custom. DJ and Area 10 agree that I should go for it. Yes, I do trust Mark Raphorst designs. The Bullet 14 V2 is the standard by which other down wind boards are measured. The X Pro series boards have also proven to be very competitive on flat water. If Mark bowls a strike through the middle of these two, I should be a happy (and fast) camper. I am handing off my X Pro tomorrow, depositing the check and placing my order.
Just googled leap of faith and found this quote. Seems applicable and wise: "To succeed, jump as quickly at opportunities as you do at conclusions." - Benjamin Franklin
Thanks Luc. I am hoping it will be too!!
Quote from: Rideordie on October 29, 2015, 12:05:27 PM
I am handing off my X Pro tomorrow, depositing the check and placing my order.
Good for you :) Congrats!
I think I'll probably make the same leap of faith. No chance of a demo in the UK.
I think you have talked yourself into it Area10!! I ordered mine today!! Should arrive late January, early February. Something to look forward to. Guess I will get reacquainted with my X14 and V2 Glide until then. 8)
Nice choice... Nothing quite like the stoke of pulling the trigger... Life's too short to hum and ha about things that make you happy.. Also good to see you've hung onto your V2 Glide... 8). Anyways, keep us posted as soon as you get it..
Thanks Muskoka!! I am stoked and it feels good!! I don't think I will ever sell my Glide v2. That board has a soul.
Tick-tock, tick-tock....counting down time until my board ships out on the container ship in the next week or so. I have been riding the 28.5 inch wide x 14 SCC, since I sold my x 14 Pro two months ago. Feels like a barge. My pace is off and I am struggling a bit to to keep up with my training partners. Grrr.... Having race board withdrawl. On the upside, I have a new Speed Coach 2. Go Pro suction mount for it is on order. Got a new leash and a new set of side zip booties. I wonder how long it will take to ship from the Cobra factory to container delivery in the US? Two weeks or so? I am hoping for a mid-January or early February delivery. My birthday is Feb 5th. I am hoping for an early present!!
Any more info out there for the SIC FX 14?
I saw one in the store, FX 14, 26'' wide and 266L.
Seems like the production boards coming out next month are 25'' wide and 290L.
I am ready to get one - need some Zoner input. The 26'' looks great. Apart from this, is there a significant difference between the boards, and why the volume difference?
There is an interesting discussion on Seabreeze. Wondering if any of you had updates on 26'' or 25'', and reviews.
Quote from: Area 10 on October 30, 2015, 02:11:09 PM
I think I'll probably make the same leap of faith. No chance of a demo in the UK.
Do it.. :)
Quote from: Area 10 on October 30, 2015, 02:11:09 PM
I think I'll probably make the same leap of faith. No chance of a demo in the UK.
Call SIC EU in germany and get them to organise you one. They must be interested in the UK market. Just convince them that no-try = no-buy. It's hardly far!
Quote from: yugi on January 26, 2016, 05:30:51 AM
Quote from: Area 10 on October 30, 2015, 02:11:09 PM
I think I'll probably make the same leap of faith. No chance of a demo in the UK.
Call SIC EU in germany and get them to organise you one. They must be interested in the UK market. Just convince them that no-try = no-buy. It's hardly far!
I wish that was a practical solution. But it would probably cost them more money to send one from Germany to the UK and back than they'd make profit on the board. Flow Sports (the SIC EU distributors) don't really have a strategy for the UK. The UK is very much in the grip of the windsurf brands with their superior distribution chains, and the volume of sales of upper-end SUPs doesn't make it an attractive option for someone to sign and exclusive deal to represent SIC in the UK market.
The impact of the fantastically high cost of these boards in the EU is possibly not fully understood if you live in e.g. the US. A SIC FX in the UK is going to cost around FOUR THOUSAND dollars US. A 17-4 Bullet will cost over 5000 US dollars. There are relatively few people in the UK who can or will spend that much on a SUP, which will be out of date in one season, and which you are very unlikely to be able to demo.
So the overwhelming number of sales in the UK are inflatables. They outnumber hard board sales about 10 to 1. A typical top-of-the-range all-round inflatable SUP might cost around 1200 US dollars, but you wouldn't lose too much of that if you sold it on, and it is indestructible and easy to store and transport, and safer for the kinds to play on.
So, with (a) the high cost of elite SUPs in the UK, plus (b) high transport costs (we are an island, whereas most of the rest of Europe is connected), and (c) a lack of a distribution network, plus (d) stiff competition from the windsurf brands, and (e) 4-6 months of the year that are cold, wet and windy (so few people want to be on the water), this means that a specialist SUP brand like SIC have an uphill battle in trying to establish a foothold in the UK. There are a couple of independent internet-type retailers here who will source a board for you, but no-one who is gong to be stocking a range of them and doing demos etc. You can buy direct yourself from Flow Sports, but you will pay full RRP (i.e. more than you would probably from a retailer) and if the board arrives after its travels across the water bust up (which is very likely) then you've got a problem on your hands.
So getting SIC EU to magic a board over for me to demo is just a wild fantasy, I'm afraid.
I think I'm going to have to give up on this quest for a FX, unfortunately. It's just too hard and too expensive to source one, and it is too risky for me to spend that much money on something that might prove not suited to me. I could get a Bark Vapour in the next couple of weeks (Surftech have a UK distributor), and it should be around 1500 US dollars cheaper. It won't be as light as the FX, and probably not quite as fast in the flats, but it should be more stable, and it looks like the kind of hybrid shape that might work in our windy choppy coastal conditions when it's fairly mild, and not be too tragically slow on pure flat water either if I decide to do a race or too this year (purely for fun). I think that if I was paying US prices for a FX then I might take a punt. But at 4000 dollars and no demo it seems just too risky to me. And it is possible that the Bark is a better board for me anyway, at 26" wide, 271 litres, and a more lowered deck for stability. 25" wide and 290L like the FX is apparently going to be sounds like it could be too much like "balancing on a log" for my feeble balance skills in the kinds of hell choppy conditions we get here.
So the FX is closer to the Vapor than the Bark Downwinder? I'm on the fence between the FX and All-star, but as you said, the Barks are cheaper.
Edit: Ahh, Vapor is 26" vs 28" for downwinder, more for racing
Quote from: TN_SUP on January 26, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
So the FX is closer to the Vapor than the Bark Downwinder? I'm on the fence between the FX and All-star, but as you said, the Barks are cheaper.
Edit: Ahh, Vapor is 26" vs 28" for downwinder, more for racing
I'll tell you when I get a Vapour, but there doesn't seem to be pretty much anything in common between the Bark Vapour and the Bark Downwinder, excepting length and some superficial graphics family resemblance. The Vapour and the FX are both aimed at the same people who might want an All Star, I think. A head-to-head between these three boards in a variety of conditions would be a fascinating comparison. Although I don't think SIC make a cheap construction FX (?) so comparing boards that are 1500 dollars apart might not be very fair. But maybe the hybrid construction All Star vs. the Bark Vapour would be a fairer comparison.
Here's a video review of the Bark Vapour so you can compare it with the FX. Unfortunately they only show it in flat water so it doesn't help a lot with knowing how it will be in the conditions most people would buy this board for. But you should be able to get the concept anyway - and the similarity to the FX in terms of being a hybrid raceboard.
http://youtu.be/SDSMAhnavH4
Quote from: Area 10 on January 26, 2016, 02:41:58 PM
Quote from: TN_SUP on January 26, 2016, 09:23:23 AM
So the FX is closer to the Vapor than the Bark Downwinder? I'm on the fence between the FX and All-star, but as you said, the Barks are cheaper.
Edit: Ahh, Vapor is 26" vs 28" for downwinder, more for racing
I'll tell you when I get a Vapour, but there doesn't seem to be pretty much anything in common between the Bark Vapour and the Bark Downwinder, excepting length and some superficial graphics family resemblance. The Vapour and the FX are both aimed at the same people who might want an All Star, I think. A head-to-head between these three boards in a variety of conditions would be a fascinating comparison. Although I don't think SIC make a cheap construction FX (?) so comparing boards that are 1500 dollars apart might not be very fair. But maybe the hybrid construction All Star vs. the Bark Vapour would be a fairer comparison.
Area10 do not do that. Last time you reviewed a board I bought it (no regrets there)......except that now in Canada the Vapor is $1,000 more than the Downwinder was. I have not seen pricing for the Allstar Hybrid construction yet.
I had the Fanatic Flatwater Falcon 14x24, 287 liters and hated it, think I was too light for it, hope these new high volume designs are big improvement.
Wow Luc - 1000 dollars more? Why? Prices here in the UK seem to have gone up no more than 10% this year. Is this a currency exchange thing? Our Australian friends are really suffering this year with the weak Aussie dollar.
Quote from: Area 10 on January 26, 2016, 02:55:55 PM
Wow Luc - 1000 dollars more? Why? Prices here in the UK seem to have gone up no more than 10% this year. Is this a currency exchange thing? Our Australian friends are really suffering this year with the weak Aussie dollar.
Looks like two factors:
1) FX the CAD has lost 30% to the USD +$700
2) Slight increase in new model price +$300
i.e.
Last year the D2 was $300 more than the Downwinder but this year they are about the same.
This year the Vapor is about $300 more than the D2 and $350 more than the Downwinder
Not sure why as construction is the same and actually volume of the D2 is lower than volume of the Downwinder and volume of Vapor is same as Downwinder. I guess it is a premium for a new product or maybe because of limited production for first run...
Quote from: TN_SUP on January 26, 2016, 02:54:44 PM
I had the Fanatic Flatwater Falcon 14x24, 287 liters and hated it, think I was too light for it, hope these new high volume designs are big improvement.
I don't think you were the only one with that feeling about that board, if you mean the big stubby nosed one. It was a optimistic concept to make a flatwater-specific board that did not have a long pointy nose. I'm guessing that they were trying to find a width/stability compromise.
Yep, that's the one with really thick edges. Dimensions do not a board make. Fast upwind, slow downbreezing and downriver, 6 months and I still could not figure it out. Great looks and only one review, that's why we need more data on these boards.
Well, from eyeing your quiver, it looks like you arrived at the two best production SUP raceboard shapers in the world (surely?): Joe Bark and Mark Raaphorst. I think that having your name so prominently displayed on a design tends to ensure that you pay just that little bit more attention to product development. Your name is the brand. Whereas if the designer of one of the latest Naish boards, for instance, came up with a totally useless design, no-one outside the business would be any the wiser about who was to blame. I've got a little better idea about who designs the Fanatics, but that brand seems often to go for extreme year-on-year changes in designs rather than steady refinement. I'm a bit suspicious of that: if a design is really good it would be hard to improve on year to year and you'd concentrate on refining the design and other aspects (cost, construction, looks etc). To me, big changes in design from year to year indicate that the design was not successful. So if you are changing them greatly every year, you aren't doing too well! Bark and Raaphorst take a course of progressive evolution, and I trust that more.
Quote from: Area 10 on January 26, 2016, 07:55:53 AM
The impact of the fantastically high cost of these boards in the EU is possibly not fully understood if you live in e.g. the US. A SIC FX in the UK is going to cost around FOUR THOUSAND dollars US. A 17-4 Bullet will cost over 5000 US dollars. There are relatively few people in the UK who can or will spend that much on a SUP, which will be out of date in one season, and which you are very unlikely to be able to demo.
I empathize A-10. This island stuff makes for crazy shipping issues, especially since shipping went nuts when fuel was expensive (I notice it hasn't come down since oil plunged). I wanted to buy a bunch of closed-cell polyfoam for a project, and tried to order it from the mainland. $150 bucks for the foam, $236 for the shipping. It's so illogical, I paid for shipping of 11 heavy boxes (with eBike motors) from China for $180, and shipping ONE to the mainland from here is $160.
On the plus side, I can drive to SIC in 15 minutes.
Quote from: TN_SUP on January 26, 2016, 05:28:11 PM
Yep, that's the one with really thick edges. Dimensions do not a board make. Fast upwind, slow downbreezing and downriver, 6 months and I still could not figure it out. Great looks and only one review, that's why we need more data on these boards.
And this is the hard part with all these boards. I love the Flatwater. It is exactly what I want. Once I got the right fin on it. Goes great upwind. Even in chop. Catches all the small runners downwind. Perfect for the buoy races I do. But I was looking for a 26" width with more than 300L. I suspect the true problem is that it really does have too much volume for most people. Most 100kg folks probably want more width.
We all know there are brands that survive by always bringing out new models and relying on people changing boards purely because they want the latest model. In the early days there are significant improvements and so the yearly upgrade route gave improvements you could see and feel (lightness, speed, robustness) but as the sport and technologies mature those advantages start to become cosmetic and we get into fashion. Just look at the test on the 2016 SB All Star vs the 2015. The 2015 seems faster in flat water.
So in a mature industry I'm with sticking with a designer who really knows their stuff. Bark and SIC have this. Their designs don't change much from year to year although materials and technology do. That makes buying a $5,000 well made board that will not date in 4 years and perform the same as a new board bought later a good investment compared to trading in a $3,000 board and buying new, 2 or 3 times in the same period.
That or stick to close out sales on last years models or nearly new 2nd hand boards is the way to go.
Pt, I liked the flat deck and cruising thru boat wakes, but I was looking for speed close to my Sprint on windy days. When stepping back the bow would get blown around. If I was heavier I could engage the fin and bow, better trim, and would have enjoyed it more. The Sprint was a lot faster except upwind. I'm inland and never tried it in ocean. Fanatic did immediately dump the design.
Must say the Bark Vapor looks really nice in the water. There’s a lot I like about it but the low sleek look comes out on top. As fickle as that sounds in watercraft I find it makes a huge difference. Bikes and boats need to look good.
(I even did a little bit of Naval Architecture and one of my professors was big on this principle. I must say it has grown on me over the years)
Yes: I would love to see a side by side test of SIC FX, Bark Vapour and Starboard Allstar. Also the Rogue 14x25 Downwind. Better yet, ride them side by side with good paddle buddies. Not so easy in Europe as you mention A10.
Of the 3 I imagine the Bark Vapor wins in cross wind and cross chop.
Anybody know the tail kick on the Bark Vapor? Other Bark boards seem pretty straight back there. SIC FX, SB Allstar and Rogue DW all have plenty.
Quote from: Off-Shore on January 27, 2016, 03:46:25 AM
We all know there are brands that survive by always bringing out new models and relying on people changing boards purely because they want the latest model. In the early days there are significant improvements and so the yearly upgrade route gave improvements you could see and feel (lightness, speed, robustness) but as the sport and technologies mature those advantages start to become cosmetic and we get into fashion. Just look at the test on the 2016 SB All Star vs the 2015. The 2015 seems faster in flat water.
So in a mature industry I'm with sticking with a designer who really knows their stuff. Bark and SIC have this. Their designs don't change much from year to year although materials and technology do. That makes buying a $5,000 well made board that will not date in 4 years and perform the same as a new board bought later a good investment compared to trading in a $3,000 board and buying new, 2 or 3 times in the same period.
That or stick to close out sales on last years models or nearly new 2nd hand boards is the way to go.
I would not call what's going on with the 2016 AllStar merely cosmetic. It actually makes a lot of sense that the 2015 is marginally faster in flat water with less overall rocker, and a much narrower and pronounced cutting bow. The difference from the accounts I have read is the 2016 is definitely more stable and better in a wider variety of conditions. Especially in ocean racing and down wind. So much so that people either have or are talking about going narrower because of the stability and overall performance. There is a lot going on with that board in the concaves underneath and going back to the rounded nose. It scored a lot higher for overall performance in that particular test than the 2015 AllStar. 49/50 I believe for the 2016 compared to 43.5 for the 2015.
Bark actually has changed the design quite a bit since the inception of the Vapour and slightly less so with the Downwinder. Compare the design now to just a couple years ago. Big difference. I would hardly call what's going on with the Vapour a minor evolution. Its a completely different design all together for Barks stand up line. His prone boards bear obvious similarities but the stand up line is much different. Much more pronounced displacement bows on the Dominator, Eliminator, etc compared to what is going on with the Vapour and Downwinder. Completely different boards. Sic has made quite a departure from the original X-14 and 12'6"designs to their new boards too. I see a huge difference between these models.
While were are talking about the '16 All Star, I'll post this recent review link again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnNyY70TlGE
Interesting conversation on design directions.
It begs the questions:
1) Is the trend towards Bulbous/rounded vs Fine entry based on superior performance or attempt at capturing an increased market share? Let's face it most of us want the latest and greatest, and the pros that help push these boards can excell on anything close to a decent design.
2)How many weekend warrior types have the power to weight ratio to squeeze out the maximum performance the top 2% can? Could an accomplished paddler that doesn't have the opportunity to be on the water nearly every day (and/or may be a few years past their peak) be faster on a different design? Maybe last years model?
3) How much of this perceived stability is in the board? It can be mathematically calculated if designers wanted to give a objective number to it...at least for flat water. I haven't seen anyone go there yet. They include that info on some high end kayak reviews. Every commercial sail & poweboat design has to go through that process.
4)How much is it paddlers spending more time on the water? How much of its just phycological? Any boardunder 28" was really narrow not too long ago...even here on the forum I now read some getting into 24"-23" wide boards. Similar to the "impossible to run 4 minute mile"...until someone did it. Then all the sudden multiple people broke that barrier.
5) Tying in the phycological aspect. How much of it is the excitement of getting a new board, which in turn motivates one to get out paddling more which gives more experience in a variety of conditions...which leads to better balance ....which leads to being comfortable on narrows boards...which makes the new model feel stable?
There is a lot of factors in play at the same time...to attribute it all to "bells and whistles" added to a design may be too generous.
TN_SUP - if you are going to try to argue that there has been equal or greater chopping and changing of models by SIC and Bark as has gone on at Starboard then I think you've got your work cut out for you. Starboard have surely been the market leaders in the "for one year only" raceboard model? Ace Pro, anyone? The Point 14-8 (a Mark Raaphorst design, sadly defunct)? The BOP? The early Race models? The Coastal Cruiser (or whatever it was called), the Open Ocean (or whatever it was called). Then there were several boards that were supposed to appear but never actually did, like the K14. Compared with that, the introduction by Bark and SIC of a couple of new models over a 5 year period, and mild evolutions of existing boards hardly seems like a headlong rush into instant obsolescence.
I truly appreciate refinement of boards rather than re-inventing, it helps re-sale value and owners perception of their favorite brands. I was frustrated when Starboard changed the Sprint so much from 2012 (avatar) to 2013, thinking I was stuck with junk I couldn't sell. But I love my Sprint and the speeds of my new SIC x-14 Pro Lite are almost identical, so much so that I'm spending hundreds to fix dings and the peeling clear coat on the Starboard before I make a final decision of which board to keep. I'm impressed that the 2013 Sprint still holds it own against new designs, although it's wider and less stable than the SIC. Stability to me is being able to paddle hard in cross chop without engaging a rail and my legs getting exhausted - that's what I'm looking for in the FX/Allstar/Vapor.
Quote from: TN_SUP on January 27, 2016, 10:20:49 AM
Stability to me is being able to paddle hard in cross chop without engaging a rail and my legs getting exhausted - that's what I'm looking for in the FX/Allstar/Vapor.
That is what I like the most on the Bark Downwinder and also why I have a favorable eye for the Vapor (except for the wallet)....
Quote from: Area 10 on January 27, 2016, 09:28:27 AM
TN_SUP - if you are going to try to argue that there has been equal or greater chopping and changing of models by SIC and Bark as has gone on at Starboard then I think you've got your work cut out for you. Starboard have surely been the market leaders in the "for one year only" raceboard model? Ace Pro, anyone? The Point 14-8 (a Mark Raaphorst design, sadly defunct)? The BOP? The early Race models? The Coastal Cruiser (or whatever it was called), the Open Ocean (or whatever it was called). Then there were several boards that were supposed to appear but never actually did, like the K14. Compared with that, the introduction by Bark and SIC of a couple of new models over a 5 year period, and mild evolutions of existing boards hardly seems like a headlong rush into instant obsolescence.
You might be referring to me. I'm not arguing that Starboard hasn't had more changes, because it's obvious they have. With that said, I'm stating that companies like Bark and SIC haven't had some gradual shift with hybrid models, because they haven't. Bark was pretty much straight on displacement shapes with defined cutting bows for several years and have only recently adopted more of a prone shape into their stand up line up. There was no gradual evolution between designs really with Bark. The same largely applies for SIC. It was basically either planing or displacement. The original X series isn't what I would call a hybrid shape. It was a shape that could handle some chop, but still a cutting/displacement design.
Having gradual changes year to year without complete redesigns is a bonus, but SB also has the production capabilities to change and market their designs as they see fit. I also agree with the disappointment in SB changing shapes so often, and the Race (I had one), Coastrunner and Open Ocean developed somewhat of a cult following and paddlers were looking for these shapes to undergo some adjustments, rather than be dropped completely. These were the first hybrid SUP boards on the market as far as I know, and SB has been tooling with the bulbous nose and hybrid shapes for awhile now.The irony is what we are seeing with the AllStar, is what should have happened with the original Race, Coast Runner and Open Ocean models among others in the line up. It can be argued that the Allstar introduction in 2014 or so, is the middle ground or the continuing evolution with what is happening now, as the original all-star is hard to categorize as a strict displacement design as there was more volume up front and the bow isn't quite what most would be described as a cutting bow that you see on true displacement designs. It should also be noted that the 14 X 28" All Star remained completely unchanged through 2014 and 2015 other than different deck pad and graphics. It seemed to be a popular size and shape that many liked. Starboard got one thing right I guess.
As far as stability goes in rough open ocean paddling, I much prefer these designs to traditional displacement shapes. Looking forward to seeing the Vapour and new SIC in the flesh.
While speed is addictive -> stability often matters more to the average Joe. Will be interesting to see how much traction the FX and Vapor get. For us -> displacement and planing shapes cover all bases already.
For flatter ocean -> displacement is nice. For big DW -> planing is nice. For long distance -> more stability is nice. For general everything -> maybe a custom 27 FX or Vapor. For a one board ocean race -> then maybe a spec FX or Vapor.
Overall the evolution from all manufacturers is generally positive since boards have become narrower and faster with reasonable stability. The big negative though is the high list price and quick depreciation. This can however have a side benefit -> some that wait can get very lightly used boards or end-of-season stock for really reasonable prices. ;)
Not much to add to what Robon said. I had a Coast Runner, and would still have it if I had been prescient enough to get the carbon version. Area 10 is right too. SB abandoned perfectly good designs chasing the flavour of the day. As far as I can see, the new AllStar DW is a direct evolution of the CR, and the smaller Races of the same vintage.... 5 years after the fact. What goes around, comes around. I've given up on STarBoard. Naish for that matter too. They had a great design in the 2012 Glide (last of the Harold Iggy shapes) but like SB, chased the racers with the next generation Glides. I'm hanging on to my Glide, it's a keeper, but my future purchases will see my money going to companies that have evolved their proven designs, like SIC, and Jimmy Lewis.
You are dead right. Naish have thrown away some great designs. The Glide Mk2 was a great all-rounder that worked astonishingly well. It just needed a slight tweak to help it cope better with really messy conditions and then it would have been the perfect all-conditions board. It is still faster DW than pretty much any of the production DW 14s currently on sale by anyone.
They then compounded this error by essentially throwing away the Glide Mk3 design by making too few in the construction most people would want (GX) and then the next year only making it in the crazy-heavy GS construction. What they should have done IMO is refine the design slightly, and produce a slimmed-down version for serious racers, and promoted a sensible medium-weight and medium-cost construction. But I suspect that they were worried that a high performance version of the Mk3 Glide would take sales from the Javelin. They probably would, because it was a superior board. So essentially they binned a great design and went with a high-concept all-new Jav instead.
Arguably, Fanatic have gone backwards a couple of times too. The early Fanatic raceboards were really rather good. The carbon Mk1 Falcon 12-6x30.5" was great (I even won a race on it, beating many people on narrow 14s who were half my age). Then the Mk2 (I think), "red rocket" 12-6x27 was a really great board, and the 14s that accompanied it (cutting bows) were pretty good too, not far from a slimmed down Bark Dominator. But instead of working with these designs, Fanatic have produced too many extreme designs since, like the original bulbous-nose Falcon (nice in big downwind but tragic in flat water), the recent snub-nosed flatwater board, and probably even the current flatwater Strike, which I suspect will depart soon, relatively unloved. We can only hope that Fanatic have learned their lesson, which is why the current refinement of the Falcon is a good thing, although IMO the latest 12-6 could still do with a bit of work.
So Starboard may be the chief offender in the one-year-only, who-cares-if-it-was-good-let's-ditch-it-anyway design approach, but they are certainly not the only ones. The original Mistral M1 was also a great board that just needed some tweaks, but instead they went too extreme with the next iteration IMO, and turned the M1 into a barge (renamed) aimed at day trippers with ice boxes. These brands probably had it within their reach to ensure that production SICs, and other brands, never got real traction in the marketplace. But by pursuing extreme and stupid designs (step forward eg. the naval architects designed Coreban "bat-board") they have allowed SIC to flourish, and now often take them to the cleaners in international competitions. You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can't keep indefinitely throwing away good designs for poor ones and not see it as a gift to your competitors.
And........ My three fave boards are all 4-5 years old or more.
SB is a cash machine more than anything else.
The story is shocking. They basically own all the other brands (Almost) too.
I think Naish lost so much of its soul and direction with the passing of H.I.
Imagine the next generation Glide, or Javelins, had he been here to tweak his ahead of the game shapes. The original Jav is still probably as fast, or faster than anything current.. And that shape dates back to 2010/11. Which brings up another notch in Harolds belt, the 17' Javelin. It too was waaaay ahead of its time. (Another 2010 shape). I think it was a collaboration with D.K., (who Naish also lost), but either way, one only has to look at the latest SIC Bullet 17-4 V3 to see the striking similarities. So sad... What could have been........ :'(
I almost scooped up a Jav 17 recently, for a great price - it's brand new, but has a major repair done on the nose that got crumpled in shipping to the store.. It looks not bad, but not perfect either. So I balked... And instead pulled the trigger on a SIC Bullet 17 (2016) Very spendy, but proven, and with the new steering and fixed fin option. So there. My $ to SIC. Note also, that the current production Bullet 17-4 is the V1 version, which dates back to, yup, you guessed it, 2010 or so. ;)
This discussion thread and the opinions being voiced are right on point. I have had the same thoughts. The manufacturers would do well to read our threads and learn from them. I totally agree with the thoughts on the Harold Iggy designed Glide (V2). That was a great and classic board. I will not sell mine. Only wish I had gotten the GX instead of GS. Yes, a few small tweaks could have perfected it. I feel like Mark Raaphorst has read my mind in describing how he has designed this FX 14 board. The design direction and tweaks (from the X-14 Pro) that have been made are what I would have asked for.
My business is product development for major brands, and all I can say is that the most successful brands get the right balance of what I call "fashion" which is cosmetic, and innovation which is structural and technical. Few brands or companies manage to get this right, but those that do succeed in the long term. I thought SB had this and was a SB junkie for a while.. now I am not so sure. I think SIC and Bark and interestingly RedPaddle (as a iSUP-only) brand have this.
Rideordie, when you're ready to sell your FX (because you'll be so stoked by it you'll move to the very slightly tweaked FX14v2 ;)) in a year or two, I'm calling first dibs. I'll gladly make the drive to SC to get it, and to get some winter paddling in... ;D
Muskoka, you are probably right on that call. I love the smell of a fresh board!! Last a loong drive, but you are welcome!!
Quote from: Off-Shore on January 28, 2016, 07:16:45 AM
My business is product development for major brands, and all I can say is that the most successful brands get the right balance of what I call "fashion" which is cosmetic, and innovation which is structural and technical. Few brands or companies manage to get this right, but those that do succeed in the long term. I thought SB had this and was a SB junkie for a while.. now I am not so sure. I think SIC and Bark and interestingly RedPaddle (as a iSUP-only) brand have this.
In my books Surftech (Bark) still needs to improve a bit on the quality of the Pro-Elite construction starting with the paint layer. As far as design are concerned after the Downwinder I would by a Vapor with my eyes closed if it was not for the construction that make me wonder on durability in the long run. It seems that SIC and Bark are providing the longer lasting designs.
I think it is the Cobra factory rather than Surftech that need to up their game. A friend bought a Bark Downwinder last year and it's bombproof - he says it is more durable than his JL M14 was. So I don't think this fragility is inherent to the construction/layup. I think it is just poor factory workmanship (or poor supplies) and perhaps a lack of QC. Most of the brands made there have had similar problems with some boards recently. I think it is luck of the draw. The problem is that paint-type issues may not be apparent until after the period where a warranty claim would be straightforward. Which is how I've ended up with a Naish that chips if a gnat lands on it. Thank you very much, Cobra.
Quote from: Area 10 on January 28, 2016, 09:39:13 AM
I think it is the Cobra factory rather than Surftech that need to up their game. A friend bought a Bark Downwinder last year and it's bombproof - he says it is more durable than his JL M14 was. So I don't think this fragility is inherent to the construction/layup. I think it is just poor factory workmanship (or poor supplies) and perhaps a lack of QC. Most of the brands made there have had similar problems with some boards recently. I think it is luck of the draw. The problem is that paint-type issues may not be apparent until after the period where a warranty claim would be straightforward. Which is how I've ended up with a Naish that chips if a gnat lands on it. Thank you very much, Cobra.
Fair comment. I only had that issue with two Bark Downwinder so put it to this but I am sure that it is more widespread.
I sure would love mine (warranty replacement) to be bombproof but the paint goes in a blink and while the bottom is way stronger than the first it is still pretty "flexible".
Still love the board though....
Just sold my 2015 pro elite Bark and won't buy another without proof of durability, paddled it twice, each time required a $150 repair. First board out of a dozen I've owned to crumble.
Yeah, a friend of mine has a Surtech he says is a bit fragile. This is a pretty relevant discussion for me now since I have a Surftech Bark on the way, but haven't paid for it yet. So the question is, how do you tell if it's a lemon *before* you hand over your cash? And once you have bought it, how can you prove that the board is too fragile rather than it being you that is too careless?
Of course, some of the owners of the Cobra factory also own Surftech now. So if they can't get boards well made in their own factory, then what is the hope for the other brands?
Good point area10. If I were worried about the quality of a boards build, and want to minimize the odds of a lemon, I'd be inclined to buy a Jimmy Lewis. YMMV.
But yeah, I guess if you want a particular board that much, then it's always a bit of a gamble.
^ can't fault that statement.
Speaking of JL how about the new Ocean Racer coming out? Saw some pics of it recently on his Facetube page.
Does anyone know if Bark and SIC are going to offer widths in these new boards in anything wider than 25 or 26 inches? I'm also wondering about construction options. Straight up carbon or is there options? The shapes look great, but I'm thinking 27 or 28" wide being the magic number for 200 pound+ paddlers looking to cover long distances. I'm kinda limited to a one board quiver right now, so trying to tick as many boxes as possible.
I guess that with the Surftech Bark boards I hope that even if the outside shell isn't as durable as some, at least the core is quality. I've seen the cores of some of the high end boards (including SB, Coreban, SIC) and I was quite shocked at how much the core resembled the cheapest kind of packing foam you can get. I guess that if you want light then a cheap way of achieving that is to have lots of air, and that means big beads with air between them, maybe?
To my untrained eye, this does look a lot better quality than most of the cores I've seen from other brands:
http://youtu.be/UYaaN2ryvZY
But I'm no expert.
Been looking at both the vapor and the new jimmy lewis sidewinder. Both look great shape but not sure which one. Which is most durable make. Would the darker board have issue in heat.
Quote from: kelvinpumba on January 28, 2016, 01:37:52 PM
Been looking at both the vapor and the new jimmy lewis sidewinder. Both look great shape but not sure which one. Which is most durable make. Would the darker board have issue in heat.
All brands produce the odd lemon, but generally speaking the Jimmy Lewis boards are probably better made than possibly any other similarly-priced board. They are made in a different factory from most of the others.
Best to keep any board out of direct sunlight if you live in a hot place. Yes, darker boards get a lot hotter than light colour ones.
That sidewinder is a lovely looking board. But I've got a Coreban Dart in carbon that is a similar exposed carbon and so is black. After 20 mins in the summer sun I can boil an egg on it. It is literally too hot to touch. Fortunately I live in a cold country and it doesn't get sunny often, so it doesn't matter too much to me. But you'd better buy a board bag or cover for that Sidewinder if you live somewhere with lots of sun, I reckon. It's great to see that it will come in wider widths than eg. the FX or Vapor though.
Quote from: Area 10 on January 28, 2016, 10:22:07 AM
So the question is, how do you tell if it's a lemon *before* you hand over your cash? And once you have bought it, how can you prove that the board is too fragile rather than it being you that is too careless?
Maybe ask them if it *should* pressure dent under "normal" use. If they say no -> then ask them to try themselves *before* shipping it out to you.
After you buy it -> do your own thumb test before fully unwrapping it.
Our Pro-Elite Dominator dents far too easily compared to any other brand. And would not buy another Pro-Elite unless that issue has been rectified. >:(
Good idea Eagle. Even better would be (if possible) to purchase ones boards from a local dealer.. And have them check it with a thumb test before you even pay up.. Any store should have confidence in the product they're selling, and as well, welcome your spending the$ locally to support them.
Quote from: Area 10 on January 28, 2016, 01:28:22 PM
I guess that with the Surftech Bark boards I hope that even if the outside shell isn't as durable as some, at least the core is quality. I've seen the cores of some of the high end boards (including SB, Coreban, SIC) and I was quite shocked at how much the core resembled the cheapest kind of packing foam you can get. I guess that if you want light then a cheap way of achieving that is to have lots of air, and that means big beads with air between them, maybe?
To my untrained eye, this does look a lot better quality than most of the cores I've seen from other brands:
http://youtu.be/UYaaN2ryvZY
But I'm no expert.
The problem is not an inert super fused bit of EPS soaking up water. When it's encased with fibreglass/carbon, airtight, with a pressure differential, and being used, it will act like a suction pump, and take in water when dinged as it flexes. More tightly fused EPS beads is better, but it will still take on water.
Sure, but at least it's better, right? And I'd hope that using a good quality core would bring other benefits in the construction process too (for instance greater precision in the builds, maybe easier to get a good bond between foam and glass). But again, I'm no expert.
The problem is that premium brand boards are so damn expensive these days that you want them to last. You want a tried-and-tested design that will perform well against the opposition even in a couple of years time, and you want to to be built to last. Gone are the days of changing your board every season for most people (unless you are DJ!). They are just too expensive and the resale values are too shaky (principally because the major windsurf brands keep flooding the market with "one-year wonders" that are obsolete 6 months after purchase).
In this context it is a disaster if you board takes on a lot of water. It will likely never be the same. A friend of mine bought an All Star. Within 12 weeks of normal use it had taken on 3 litres of water through small construction imperfections around the scupper holes. It took many weeks to get the water out and the board was never going to be the same. Now "rubbing is racing" as we know, thanks to the aggressive antics of Connor and Kai etc (who don't have to pay for their boards), and so anyone who races often and seriously can expect to pick up plenty of dings. If when you do, you are going to take in a lot of water, then this constitutes a serious financial risk. I can't afford to pay 4000 dollars US for a board that is almost a write-off under normal use after 12 weeks!
So I want a board that is a well thought-out and carefully developed design that has longevity, and for the board to be built with long term ownership in mind. Well, at least 2 or 3 seasons, anyway. The current construction of many of these boards seems to me to barely fit for purpose. If you buy a board that is advertised as a race-board and race it normally, then it should be able to stay in one piece, unless an extraordinary event occurs.
I was downwinding a while back, and a local shaper was loading his board on his van when a gust of wind blew it off the roof. It flew some distance and landed on Tarmac, tail-first. We all gasped but the shaper didn't seem particularly bothered. When he picked up his board we saw why - it barely had a scratch on it! By contrast, if I even lay my premium-brand carbon DW boards down on a stoney beach without great caution I end up with either a compression dent or a hole that if I don't notice it, could lead to the board being a write-off.
So, I think we need to be sending a message loud and clear to the brands. If you are going to charge us these extremely high prices, then you'd better make sure that the board is going to last, both design-wise and construction-wise. I believe it can be done, it's just that they are not sufficiently motivated by the customers (i.e. us) to do it.
On that note, and pertinent to the OP, note that SIC has taken a step in the right direction by introducing the use of Innegra in their board range - to reinforce the nose, tail and rails. Whether this is preemptive, or a reaction to too many warrantee claims - or both, is arguable. Either way, it's a great start. Looks like Rideordies soon to arrive FX14, and my not soon enough (May) Bullet 17 will both be less of a gamble and more of a sure bet as far as trustworthy construction goes... 8)
Wow - MR is reading my mind again!
I didn't know about the additions of innegra for 2016. I'd swear that SIC have the conversations between me and my buddies bugged. Great idea, well done SIC!
Not sure if it's the exact same thing but I was buying closed cell eps all the way back to the late 80's from Doug Wright in Tomahawk Industrial Park in Indiatlatic Fl. Just down the way from Resin research. I used it for my windsurf surf shapes. It was a good compromise for smaller boards. Closed cell (didn't absorb water), it was blown with a special technique that gave it a "grain" to it so it was more compression resistant from pressure exerted from the deck and bottom (very resistant to pressure dings), didn't require a divinycell wrap. Held fin box/mast track/ foots trap plugs well without having to inlay higher density foam for them.
Density was 2.5 lbs cu/ft if I rember right. If I wanted max performance I would go with a full divinycell wrap over 1lbs. Open Cell EPS. It would come out about 4-5 lbs lighter than the closed cell. The closed cell foam was also a lot harder to work with.
But again for surf shapes in the 70-100 liter range it was tough and cheaper to build being able to just glass it with 2 layers of 6oz S2 glass and a 6 oz deck patch rather than the time and expense of divinycell wrap and vacuum bagging.
If they are using that type foam now they must have made some major strides in reducing the weight of the foam while still keeping the strength because a board of 250-300 liters would weigh 30-35+ lbs easy using the stuff I had.
It's been a long time ago.I believe Dow Chemical was making it, but stopped when wide spread acceptance didn't happen. Or that was what I was told later when I could no longer get it from Doug. Greg L. was building a lot of really tough boards out of the stuff at the time.
Another kudos to SIC for their great handles, great for carrying and they allow you to easily lock the board.
Quote from: Off-Shore on January 28, 2016, 07:16:45 AM
My business is product development for major brands, and all I can say is that the most successful brands get the right balance of what I call "fashion" which is cosmetic, and innovation which is structural and technical. Few brands or companies manage to get this right, but those that do succeed in the long term. I thought SB had this and was a SB junkie for a while.. now I am not so sure. I think SIC and Bark and interestingly RedPaddle (as a iSUP-only) brand have this.
Just reading this now - hopping back in the thread a bit...
Just to add some perspective on Starboard - I now own the Ace and the Sprint. This is 2/3 of their current race board lineup. Both those boards have seen only slight design modifications over the past several years.
The Sprint goes back to 2013. They added more volume to the rear side walls in 2014 (significant improvement), then made the board narrower in 2015. The 2016 has no changes at all. It's a focused flat water speed design and for that purpose, really delivers.
The Ace goes back even further to about 2010 - called the New back then. There have been only very minor changes over the years and the board is essentially the same as it was back then other than the small tweaks that have been made. For those that can ride it well, it's the fastest 14' downwind board in 25mph or less. It's also one of the fastest boards in mixed chop and upwind.
It seems to me that when Starboard has a great design, they're smart enough (in most cases) to stick with it.
The All Star, on the other hand has seen 2 major redesigns since its inception in 2013. The 2013 was more suited for mixed conditions, the 2014-2015s were flat water focused, and the 2016 goes back to more of an all-water board. However, in my opinion, the All Star has never quite nailed its design mandate as well as the Ace and Sprint, so I can see why Starboard has been messing with the design. The 2016 All Star looks promising though.
The 2015 Race seemed to be an unnecessary board and it was a god move to blend the positive features of the Race into the 2016 All Star.
Quote from: Muskoka SUP on January 29, 2016, 05:03:49 AM
On that note, and pertinent to the OP, note that SIC has taken a step in the right direction by introducing the use of Innegra in their board range - to reinforce the nose, tail and rails. Whether this is preemptive, or a reaction to too many warrantee claims - or both, is arguable. Either way, it's a great start. Looks like Rideordies soon to arrive FX14, and my not soon enough (May) Bullet 17 will both be less of a gamble and more of a sure bet as far as trustworthy construction goes... 8)
Muskoka, when you get that board, I might be tempted to drive up to your lake and give it a try on a windy day! Or you can bring it down to Lake Ontario.
Sure. I'll probably bring it down for a visit to TO, Argosi. It will be at home in Lake O and Georgian Bay... I want to be able to be able to step off a plane onto the same board seamlessly next trip to Maui... That, and be able to do some tours in Georgian Bay...
I am about to lose my patience. Dealer says another delay in delivery. Now expects to receive shipment by March 11. Then another week or two before I get my board. Beyond frustrating. Arrrrrgh!
Quote from: Rideordie on March 02, 2016, 09:14:14 AM
IDealer says another delay in delivery...
Some things never change 8)
Hard luck Rideordie - but yes, this is an all to familiar scenario unfortunately. A friend of mine expected her board on week and it eventually turned up a full 6 months later! Mind you, that is a bit extreme. But I don't think I've ever had a board turn up when I first expected it to. It is infuriating for sure.
I'm really looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the board when it does turn up.
If Donald Trump were president he'd make boards turn up on time. He'd "make a deal" and say "believe me" so many times that the rest of the world would just fall into line :)
Probably still a little while before anyone gets their hands on the new SIC FX 14x25 (290L), but a review of it would be great.
Also, comparing it to the pre-production FX 14x26 (266L) - if anyone is lucky to ride both.
Thanks
Quote from: Rakky on March 02, 2016, 02:53:59 PM
Probably still a little while before anyone gets their hands on the new SIC FX 14x25 (290L), but a review of it would be great.
Also, comparing it to the pre-production FX 14x26 (266L) - if anyone is lucky to ride both.
Thanks
I was able to briefly paddle a pre-production FX 14 a few weeks ago on flat water. Jumped off my Bullet V2 onto the FX for comparison. Slightly more tippy and slightly less secondary stability as far as I could tell. Maybe slightly faster accelerating. No surprises, but not enough time on it to reach any conclusion. Looks like it might be great for downwinding in less than nuking conditions.
JP
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Well, I just got another update from my dealer saying that they have a 20 foot container on the way to them on Monday. Not sure of the contents, but thinks it may be the SIC boards!! Let's hope so.
Yowza! Niiice. Betcha time slows down for you this w-end.. Like watching a kettle boil.. ;D
Quote from: Area 10 on March 02, 2016, 09:42:22 AM
Hard luck Rideordie - but yes, this is an all to familiar scenario unfortunately. A friend of mine expected her board on week and it eventually turned up a full 6 months later! Mind you, that is a bit extreme. But I don't think I've ever had a board turn up when I first expected it to. It is infuriating for sure.
I'm really looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the board when it does turn up.
If Donald Trump were president he'd make boards turn up on time. He'd "make a deal" and say "believe me" so many times that the rest of the world would just fall into line :)
My Bullet 17v2 arrived on the very day it was due and it didn't take long either! I was expecting a few month delay but the whole delivery took only a few weeks..
Yeah, but your Bullet 17 is a custom. It will completely different buying straight from SIC in Maui to buying a production board made in Thailand by someone who is not a SiC employee, then shipped to Flow Sports (European SIC Distributor, along with many other types of sports equipment) in Germany, then shipped to order to a retailer in the UK, and then sold to you.
In the first purchase (custom) there is a clear line of responsibility. With the second, you have responsibility diffused over many more stages.
A10, your comment made me almost double over in laughter. You can't use the words "responsible" and "Maui" in the same sentence (though I have to admit we've had some contractors here at the house recently that defied that convention). The guys at SIC are remarkable craftsmen, and the boards they build are works of art as well as fine composite engineering. But getting a board on time from them is a fantasy, especially when the channel race season hits and every hot shoe in the world needs a new SIC board.
Glad you had a laugh, but of course I didn't say that SIC were "responsible", did I? I said that you'd be abłe to know where the fault lies if there was a hold up with your board. But with production boards from eg. Thailand or China the problem might lie with the factory, or the myriad of logistics or customs people involved between the factory or the distributor or between the distributor and retailer, and retailer and customer. They will all lie to you, so you never know what is going on.
But I imagine that living where you do, and having the money that you do, you probably haven't had to buy many production boards so you might not realise how lucky you are having access to one of the finest custom board builders in the world, even if they do get busy sometimes.
Update: The board is being shipped to me from the dealer today. Should have it within a week. Review will follow.
Haha! You are as bad as I am :)
Keep us up to date with the delivery. I've got my fingers crossed for you, and actually feel quite excited about you getting this even though I don't know you, and will never see the board. Your stoke is infectious.
My dealer will post a a short video review of the board later today. I will re-post the link when I see it.
Here is a first look from Big Winds at the production FX14 and Starboard All Star
https://vimeo.com/158262770
Might as well get another head to head review in the same thread.
http://www.101surfsports.com/index.php/about-us/blog/295-which-is-faster-the-sic-fx-or-starboard-all-star
Quote from: Area 10 on March 07, 2016, 12:20:51 AM
But I imagine that living where you do, and having the money that you do, you probably haven't had to buy many production boards so you might not realise how lucky you are having access to one of the finest custom board builders in the world, even if they do get busy sometimes.
I'm thrilled with the kind of access I have, though I haven't actually bought a new board in a long time. It's not just SIC. Between Maui and Hood River a guy can get incredibly spoiled. I did a downwinder today with Jimmy Lewis, surfed a few days ago with Bill Foote, Mark Raaphorst, Dave Peterson and Dave Kalama. Dropped in at Nelson Boardworks a few days ago and shot the shit with Mark. Haven't stopped in to see Matt Kazuma Kinoshita, or Sean Ordonez, or Jeff Timpone in a while, but they are all literally ten minutes from my house.
So yeah, we all get a little jaded here, and it's kind of nutty, but that's Maui. Kind of like SoCal but much more concentrated.
FWIW, My goto quiver-killer surfboard is a production Bill Foote. The only custom board I have in Hood River is my L41. Lots to be said for production boards.
Oh, and I really like the FX14. If I was going to get an 14 that would be the guy, though I'd have to try some of Jimmy's boards too. They're looking pretty slick.
Pleeeeease don't start a discussion on volumes and rider weights lol!
Quote from: coldsup on March 11, 2016, 12:24:25 AM
Pleeeeease don't start a discussion on volumes and rider weights lol!
Already been brought up more than once earlier in this thread. No need to revisit:)
So, what do you think is the ideal weight range for the FX at 290L? :) :) :)
Quote from: Area 10 on March 11, 2016, 10:56:18 AM
So, what do you think is the ideal weight range for the FX at 290L? :) :) :)
Due to friction and proven twitchiness calculations, I have concluded the ideal weight is 188.7 pounds.
We got both of our FXs today. Heading out tomorrow to test them. As has been noted, quite a lot of volume. Slight concave bottom with very, very sharp rails running from tail through middle section. Thats where the stability is going to come from. The bottom shape on these boards actually reminds me of a 2015 board, the Focus Bluefin, which is also exceptionally stable. The Bluefin carries the rails further forwards and has more volume in the nose, but overall is similar in many respects.
Quote from: robon on March 11, 2016, 11:38:13 AM
Quote from: Area 10 on March 11, 2016, 10:56:18 AM
So, what do you think is the ideal weight range for the FX at 290L? :) :) :)
Due to friction and proven twitchiness calculations, I have concluded the ideal weight is 188.7 pounds.
Thank you for that. Sounds about right. I wish they made a left-handed one though.
Quote from: Area 10 on March 11, 2016, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: robon on March 11, 2016, 11:38:13 AM
Quote from: Area 10 on March 11, 2016, 10:56:18 AM
So, what do you think is the ideal weight range for the FX at 290L? :) :) :)
Due to friction and proven twitchiness calculations, I have concluded the ideal weight is 188.7 pounds.
Thank you for that. Sounds about right. I wish they made a left-handed one though.
I heard they are considering making one, called the SIC FX Port. They were thinking of making a right-handed version but just couldn't get past the name.
Raf, I will be watching for your review. With interest. I should have my 14 on Tuesday, if the delivery goes as planned.
PDX, that's actually the 400L version and it's the FX14 Portly. I suggested Husky, but they thought that name was a dog.
Quote from: raf on March 11, 2016, 12:54:34 PM
We got both of our FXs today. Heading out tomorrow to test them. As has been noted, quite a lot of volume. Slight concave bottom with very, very sharp rails running from tail through middle section. Thats where the stability is going to come from. The bottom shape on these boards actually reminds me of a 2015 board, the Focus Bluefin, which is also exceptionally stable. The Bluefin carries the rails further forwards and has more volume in the nose, but overall is similar in many respects.
Raf, how about an FX14 VS. Bluefin 14 comparison?
Had the board out today in about 18 mph winds, dying to 10 by end of the 5.5 mile run. Although we had what seemed like very ridable bumps leaving, we were also battling a strong ebb tide, which makes everything worse.
Like many of you, I was hoping this board would be a quiver killer. But as a retailer, I guess I'm happy to report that its probably not.
First, the board in carbon is very light, like all SIC carbons. Well worth the extra $, imo. The new paint jobs with white rails along the middle where your paddle can scrape is a good idea to keep the boards looking better longer.
The board is VERY stable. I was expecting it to be, but was still surprised. The deck is not completely flat, with enough of a raised edge to keep you from stepping off the board. Not that you will need to move all that much...the board is that stable.
I am very familiar with both the Bullet V2 and the X-14/12 boards. I would put this board somewhere in between the 2. It does not downwind as well as the V2. I missed bumps I felt I would have caught with the V2. On the other hand, I did the entire run without falling once, which I haven't managed to do before. On the X-14 I would have been falling every 5 minutes. The FX made it very easy, comfortable, and fast. Because the board is so narrow and stable, you can paddle naturally without tiring.
In confused ocean racing conditions, this board should be faster than the X-14 simply because of the stability. 99% of your focus is on paddling better, rather than wasting resources on maintaining balance.
I need to spend some time paddling the board in a non-downwind situation to really be able to give a proper review. I had a minor love affair with the x-12 for ocean paddling last summer once I learned to relax on the board. I suspect the FX-12 will be faster than the X-12 about half the time.
If you can only have 1 board, The FX is going to be a great compromise between the V2 and the X-Series. But it is a compromise, and will only be the best option some of the time.
disclosure: I am not a great downwind paddler and its very possible that in more skilled hands this board will behave differently. I'm guessing the board will feel more slippery in 25 plus mph.
Raf
PS. if you have specific questions, feel free to PM me.
Thanks Raf. Appreciate the great insights. Looking forwards to your follow up review in calmer conditions and overall impression as an "all water race board". Curious as to what your weight is , as it relates to the board stability. I am about 200 lbs.
I'm about 165 lbs. When I say X-14 I meant the X-14 Pro. The regular X-14 is really a board for people closer to 200lbs.
At your weight I think you will be close to maxxing out on the FX, but it should still be doable. The rails are pretty vertical throughout, so sinking another 1/2" of board shouldn't change the way the board works.
On the Big Winds video, they commented on the boards rocker, and compared it to the less-rockered All-Star. To my eye the rocker profile on the FX is just about identical to the X-14; aggressive tail rocker, but very flat from the handle forwards. I think Starboards use a more continuous rocker. The big difference between the FX and the X-14 is rail shape along the bottom edge (sharp vs rolled), and nose entry (full vs hollow). In plan and profile, the boards are very similar. The FX is much more comfortable to paddle, however.
A fairer comparison would be the X Pro-Lite vs the FX.
Quote from: Rideordie on March 14, 2016, 05:35:55 AM
Thanks Raf. Appreciate the great insights. Looking forwards to your follow up review in calmer conditions and overall impression as an "all water race board". Curious as to what your weight is , as it relates to the board stability. I am about 200 lbs.
Rideordie, I'll be very surprised if you'll have any stability issues on your FX14. I've been using the FX12'6 (about 270 litter) for a while now and even with full winter gear, at 190+, stability was never an issue. Can't wait to read your review when you get the board.
Quote from: raf on March 14, 2016, 06:19:14 AM
I'm about 165 lbs. When I say X-14 I meant the X-14 Pro. The regular X-14 is really a board for people closer to 200lbs.
At your weight I think you will be close to maxxing out on the FX, but it should still be doable. The rails are pretty vertical throughout, so sinking another 1/2" of board shouldn't change the way the board works.
On the Big Winds video, they commented on the boards rocker, and compared it to the less-rockered All-Star. To my eye the rocker profile on the FX is just about identical to the X-14; aggressive tail rocker, but very flat from the handle forwards. I think Starboards use a more continuous rocker. The big difference between the FX and the X-14 is rail shape along the bottom edge (sharp vs rolled), and nose entry (full vs hollow). In plan and profile, the boards are very similar. The FX is much more comfortable to paddle, however.
A fairer comparison would be the X Pro-Lite vs the FX.
I did a Viento run on an X14 Pro, I can tell you that 235 pounds of balance-challenged geezer is not what the board was designed for. I do better on my 12'2" X 26" Starboard. Easy to catch bumps, but hard to stay vertical.
Big old geezer downwinding on a board meant for small young experts in flat water... What could possibly go wrong? :)
What were you thinking, haha!???
Raf,
I received my board last night. It's a beauty!! Got her cleaned up and put on some XL Rail Saver Pro tape. One question about your comments: You said "slight concave on the bottom". I did not see that at all. I see a slight vee shape in the front 20% or so of the board, moving toward flat for the entire middle portion, then to a vee on the rear third through to the tail. These things are subtle and difficult to see with the naked eye. I used a metal broom stick across it, which helped. I checked each side of the vee to see if perhaps there was a double concave and there was none. Anyway, I will be taking it out later today for a shakedown run. Will provide some thoughts.
Grats on the board! Let us know what you think asap.
You are right about the bottom shape. Initially I just glanced at it and ran my hand along the bottom and I thought it had a slight concave in middle to double concave in tail, but after putting a straight edge on it it is indeed flat in middle with V in the tail.
I think Mark is allergic to double concave. I think for most shapes and sizes it's slower than flat. I'm sure there are shapers that will tell me I'm nuts.
Hey! Rideordie... waaaSUUUP?? So, was it difficult to convince your S.O. that the FX was spending the night in your bed? ;D
Talk story brah.. And pics too please.
Here is a review I also posted on Seabreeze :
Here is a quick review. A few photos will follow. Just to be clear, my board is 14 x 25 290 liters. Check. The rails, as measured at the handle are 6.25 inches thick. To put that into perspective, I measured my X 14 SCC (not the PRO) rails at the handle and got 5 and 1/2 inches. So the rails are full. It is 7.75 at the thickest point of the board foward of the standing area. Construction, fit and finish are excellent. Did have some sort of minor compression damage on the bottom. No paint damage. Not that bad, but enough for me to mention. Not sure if it was a quality control thing or shipping damage. Waiting for a response from the dealer. Have not weighed it but assume 24 lbs is about right. I added Rail Saver Pro XL, which added a bit of weight. I installed the beach start handle to provide an anchor point for my Speed Coach, but the suction cup mount would not adhere to the flat paint. Guess we will have to go the adhesive route later. Slight V in the rockered nose, rides with about only 3- 4 linear inches out of the water when flat. The shape quickly goes to flat throughout the board and all the way out to the very sharp rails, which begin around midpoint and continue through the tail. The back third of the board has a very slight Vee forming slowing and increasing slightly toward the tail. Very interesting. Stepping onto the board, my first impression was that this feels a little tall and tippy, as I have been recent mounting a lower 28.5 in X-14 (barn door). However, this feeling quickly diminished and I immediately became confident in the stability. The wind was a steady 12 mph, but we were on the upwind side of the lake, so the waves did not have time to mount. Notice that more narrow width allowed me to have a more natural and upright stroke. The tall rails, kept the board very dry even when sideways to the wind/waves. The soft nose and soft from rails make it very easy to change directions or spin around. However, the tracking of this board is perhaps the best I have encountered. It does not get blown around in the wind. It is easy to make course corrections in the wind. I did get to point it downwind a bit and it seemed fast and comfortable, as verified by GPS. I was paddling with my friend on his 17 6 unlimited and was actually leading him most of the time. The board floats me very well at 205 lbs and it seemed like it could have handled an even larger rider easily. The board accelerates very quickly from a stop, glide is excellent. It seems to be easy to maintain a high speed and requires less effort in rough water. Due to conditions and time constraints, I did not get a chance to paddle on flat water or any significant downwind. Looking forward to that and want to get in a "typical" 6 mile training run and compare to what I used to do on my X 14 Pro. Oh, I really like the flat deck and feel like I have more room on it than I did on the X 14 or x 14 Pro. There are very slightly raised edges on the rails and pad, so you can feel yourself getting to the edge of the board. Stock fin seems fine to me. I have always liked the 8.3 weedless. Others might like a different shape. Overall impression so far: Well made, a little tall, handles great in the rough and wind, excellent tracking, acceleration and glide. Going to be great over long runs. Seems like it will be wonderful on downwind and good on flats too, but not verified yet. Any questions?
Congrats Rideordie! glad to read your Leap of Faith did not disappoint.
Wait until you get it into open ocean/rough waters, this is where the board really shines.
Do you feel you'll need to extend your paddle length?
Burchas, I did not feel out of balance with it yesterday. I was more focused on the wind and the board than I was on my stroke and my paddle may have been a little tall to start. I will be able to focus more on that one a flatter day. My expectation is that I may make a small adjustment of 1/2 inch or less, but we will see. That's just me wanting to dial it in because I have an adjustable Ke Nalu, rather than a need to do thing. My friend said that I was sinking close to half of the rail when I was on it, it felt like less than that to me.
Quote from: Rideordie on March 16, 2016, 07:17:05 AM
Burchas, I did not feel out of balance with it yesterday. I was more focused on the wind and the board than I was on my stroke and my paddle may have been a little tall to start. I will be able to focus more on that one a flatter day. My expectation is that I may make a small adjustment of 1/2 inch or less, but we will see. That's just me wanting to dial it in because I have an adjustable Ke Nalu, rather than a need to do thing. My friend said that I was sinking close to half of the rail when I was on it, it felt like less than that to me.
A 290L board will take a load of over 600lbs to sink it. So if you are 200lbs there is probably around 2/3rds of the volume of the board above the waterline when you are standing on it.
Quote from: Rideordie on March 16, 2016, 07:17:05 AM
My expectation is that I may make a small adjustment of 1/2 inch or less, but we will see. That's just me wanting to dial it in because I have an adjustable Ke Nalu, rather than a need to do thing.
I had no doubt you'll feel very stable. That side to side rolling feeling that you had when first going on the board is actually the besting about the board when in rough and confused waters. It allows my balance to recover from angles I could never do on other boards.
As for the paddle, that's about what I did, 1/2 an inch taller.
Quote from: Area 10 on March 16, 2016, 07:37:11 AM
A 290L board will take a load of over 600lbs to sink it. So if you are 200lbs there is probably around 2/3rds of the volume of the board above the waterline when you are standing on it.
A10, you're right on the money. With my 270 litters and my 180LBR I have about 2/3 above the waterline
Congrats Rideordie! Looking forward to pics as well. Odd about that small dent though - if you still have the packing box maybe you can rule in - or rule out - the freight company.
Had a board shipped - and damage to the box can definitely be a good indicator. ;)
Yeah, box looked OK to me. Chicken or egg. Hard to say. Board did have a quality assurance sticker on it with a name for what it is worth.
All my boards have been shipped. About half arrive with dings. If it's minor you've been lucky. IMO try to get the price reduced a little and then move on. You can induce pressure dents without leaving a mark on packaging and you'll never get to the bottom of how it happened, unfortunately.
It means you'll be less worried the next time you rest the board on a stone and it gets another one... Perfect boards make me anxious - I'm just waiting for the first mishap!
Area 10, I agree with everything you said. That has been my experience too. Dealer called and they are presenting a claim to the shipping coimpany and advised me what they have asked for. We will see. I am just happy that there was no ding that requires a repair.
Quote from: Area 10 on March 16, 2016, 11:39:36 AM
It means you'll be less worried the next time you rest the board on a stone and it gets another one... Perfect boards make me anxious - I'm just waiting for the first mishap!
Perfectly said Area 10 and exactly why I prefer to buy used cars, used bikes used boards...
Quote from: Area 10 on March 16, 2016, 11:39:36 AM
...About half arrive with dings.
50/50 sounds about right. My new Sunova received a shot peening treatment in the back of the DHL truck. There were 6, 7, maybe 8, 20 gallon barrels loose, just rolling around, into and on top of my board box. Found one small indentation, maybe the shot peening, maybe a factor flaw, who knows. Scum bag driver is about all I can say.
The board we had shipped clearly was noted "Please No Forklifts" - "Hand Carry Only" - but sure enough there were 2 puncture holes crunched in the bottom of the box where the forklift picked up the board. Just missed the board and bag by a inch - so no waste of time and hassle with a claim etc. Was double boxed so that helped for sure.
Hopefully the Dealer will resolve the matter to your satisfaction.
As the discussion has been ding related, how does the SCC construction feel? Is it like Barks earlier layup where you could compress it with thumb pressure? Or is it at least what should be expected given the $? Just wondering, especially given the shipping damage.. :'(
We have had no issues with the SCC construction and have moved many boards out the door. We had a manufacturing issue with a glass board a couple years back, and have had some hairline cracks in the paint with a couple early shapes, which seemed to be a common problem with Cobra built white painted boards 3-4 years ago. Overall, I would say the SCC boards are very tough.
I currently own 3 SCC SICs. They have all been pretty durable. Obviously, they are just one layer of carbon, so you'd hardly expect it to fare well against rocks etc, and the skin is wafer thin (probably not more than one millimetre or so) but they are as durable as you'd reasonably hope for boards so light. Tougher than my carbon Ace, for sure.
My Bark Vapor seems very tough. It's also heavier than the older Pro-Elite models. So I suspect that Bark were stung by early comments about pressure dings and beefed up their construction for later years. My friends together have Pro-Elite Barks from just about every year since they first came out, and they have all held up remarkably well. Even the early "light and soft" Pro-Elites have actually proved quite durable. They look better than eg. Starboards of similar vintage, and some Fanatics too.
Our SCC has been good - provided you are careful. Our ex-demo Bullet does not pressure dent but the gloss finish can peel. It also came with a star paint crack from someone whacking the rail. Basically the board looks the same now as when we got it - and we use it a fair amount.
Our used Bark Pro-Elite continues to hip dent but still performs like a champ. Our used Jimmy Lewis I-Beam does dent if whacked and does chip a bit - but generally is pretty solid. The best has been our ex- demo SB Touring Carbon - only some minor paint fading with zero dents and zero paint chips. Built like a tank. At one point was going to buy a very light Sprint Carbon - until we noticed a split in the carbon - which we then gave a prompt pass.
All our boards have faired quite well - with pretty much only minor cosmetic damage. When we transport them we use non-slip D-locks and snug them down pretty tight - and so far zero rail damage as well. So overall - we have been quite satisfied with quality and durability.
So, our dealer here in Melbourne tells me that "our ship is coming in" (sic) on April 1.
Yep, April 1...
Just in time for the summer paddling season.
Oh wait, it's autumn already...
I'll be in Anaheim & Vancouver for a couple of weeks, so hopefully they don't sell my board from under me!
Swimming pool is down to 26c, Area 10!
Quote from: Helmy on March 20, 2016, 11:27:59 PM
So, our dealer here in Melbourne tells me that "our ship is coming in" (sic) on April 1.
Yep, April 1...
Just in time for the summer paddling season.
Oh wait, it's autumn already...
I'll be in Anaheim & Vancouver for a couple of weeks, so hopefully they don't sell my board from under me!
Swimming pool is down to 26c, Area 10!
26? Thanks for that. But at least it is the first day of a Spring for us today.
April 1st? What could possibly go wrong?
Quote from: Area 10 on March 21, 2016, 12:07:43 AM
Quote from: Helmy on March 20, 2016, 11:27:59 PM
So, our dealer here in Melbourne tells me that "our ship is coming in" (sic) on April 1.
Yep, April 1...
Just in time for the summer paddling season.
Oh wait, it's autumn already...
I'll be in Anaheim & Vancouver for a couple of weeks, so hopefully they don't sell my board from under me!
Swimming pool is down to 26c, Area 10!
26? Thanks for that. But at least it is the first day of a Spring for us today.
April 1st? What could possibly go wrong?
....it could end up being some sort of SIC joke....
Raf let me demo a FX-14 over the weekend. I took it out two mornings when it was about 25°F with winds of 10-15kph. I can't give a proper review yet but here are my initial impressions. I've spent the last two years using a Coreban Dart as my go to board. The Dart's fun because its so stable. One of the smoothest ocean rides out there, no matter how chaotic and crazy. This is great on the Maine coast were there is a lot of wind, rocky shore/ledges, and big tides which makes for some messy, complex conditions. My only complaint about the Dart is that it takes a lot of power to move it along and its got very little glide and so I longed for a quick/glidey board that could cut it in these conditions. I took out a Bullet V2 last summer and found that it was almost as stable as the Dart and much quicker but felt I could stretch a bit more and grow into something quicker. I tried a X-14 pro and quickly found that I was in over my head. On paper, the FX-14 was it.
No surprise that the Dart and FX-14 are very different boards with very different shapes but check out how different they look from the front (see pic).
The FX-14 is not as stable as the V2 and requires more focus to balance than the wider boards I've used. It is much more stable than the X-14 pro and after acclimating for a few minutes to a board that was 5" skinnier than what I'm used to, I was able to put almost all of my energy and focus into moving the board forward and paddling well. I was out for a combined 1.5 hours and didn't fall in. Upwind it was quick and fun, cuts through chop without slowing down. For me, this is important because having a good time paddling upwind means more days on the water. I was able to go faster upwind on the FX-14 than no wind on the Dart and with less energy. Downwind it was stable and quick. Side chop, no problem. Swell/chop from multiple directions and swell broken up by reefs was tricky and I had to focus a lot of attention and energy on balance.
In calm/low wind conditions I bet this board will be a blast. I don't have a lot of downwind experience and so would probably still use the Dart for anything 25kph plus.
Overall, I had so much fun paddling it the first day that I was back out the next morning paddling into 15kph wind in 25°F, feels like 12°F weather and am buying the board. My sense is that it will be plenty stable for 80% of the conditions out there for ocean racing/touring and that for the other 20% of the time when there is swell splash back, swell versus tide, etc. it will take some practice but that will time that it will be my go to ocean race/tour board. It definitely has me stoked for summer.
Congratulations! Wicked insta-quiver you now have.. 8)
I have had my board out three times now and I have paddled it about 20 miles. Yesterday, I was in steady 15 mph winds. The stability of this board inspires confidence to the point that it almost disappears from thought and allows you to focus on your stroke. I agree that it is not as stable as the Bullet V2 and that it is a little more twitchy in confused chop, but it is worlds better than the X Pro. I am sure that the FX would drop the Bullet V 2 like a stone on flats.
I think the FX is much more similar to the X Pro than the Bullet. I think that the glide of the FX is incredible and I have been studying the GPS graphs comparing the X Pro to the FX. It is clear to me that they have very different glide characteristics. From what I see, the X Pro falls of trim slightly in the recovery phase and as you switch paddling sides, but the FX maintains its speed. It seems to even glide upwind!! The glide and stability translate into a very enjoyable and less taxing paddling experience. I believe that will pay big dividends on longer runs. I find that my stroke placement is less hurried as compared to the X Pro. As I reflect, I think I was hurrying my stroke on the X Pro in the recovery phase to minimize the loss in trim and speed. I feel like I paddle more smoothly and with better technique on the FX and expend less energy. It is a joy to paddle!!
I have not had a no wind flat day yet, but that will be interesting. The FX is very fast on flats. I know that Mark says that the X-Pro is supposed to be faster on flats and that the displacement hull should be faster than the planning hull. However, I suspect that the FX will be equally as fast for me. We will see. I know this for a fact, I enjoy paddling the FX much more in any condition. This is great board!! Maine SUP you will love it!!