Standup Zone Forum
Stand Up Paddle => Gear Talk => Sneak Peeks, Rumors, and Wish Lists => Topic started by: burchas on December 31, 2018, 12:42:03 PM
-
https://issuu.com/supnorte/docs/2019_sic_cat8.31_print
Notice the RS 14x21.5. They also seems to have a more attractive sup surf models.
-
I saw that a couple of months ago. I'm drooling over the Okeanos.
-
I saw that a couple of months ago. I'm drooling over the Okeanos.
Looking good indeed. Which one you're going for?
-
I'm still patiently waiting for my 16 x 24 RS 's to be finished in Maui. I guess they will be 2019's
-
I'm still patiently waiting for my 16 x 24 RS 's to be finished in Maui. I guess they will be 2019's
Hope you'll make it to the islands with boards on board ;) would be an awesome backdrop for the reveal.
They weren't kidding when they say they're slammed with work, I had to make my board elsewhere because
of the timeframe.
-
I saw that a couple of months ago. I'm drooling over the Okeanos.
Looking good indeed. Which one you're going for?
The big one. Looks like a great river cruiser. I don't know if I'm going to get one, but I want one!
-
I saw that a couple of months ago. I'm drooling over the Okeanos.
Looking good indeed. Which one you're going for?
The big one. Looks like a great river cruiser. I don't know if I'm going to get one, but I want one!
Maybe you'll finally retire the old NSP. This one would be much nicer for river downwinders by the looks of it.
-
SIC seems to have a fairly good line-up (if on the high volume side of boards). I also like the fairly minimalist approach of Naish - one board to do it all the Maliko :-) and one Touring board (not sure how goo it is) but their sup surf line-up is quite extensive.
-
SIC seems to have a fairly good line-up (if on the high volume side of boards). I also like the fairly minimalist approach of Naish - one board to do it all the Maliko :-) and one Touring board (not sure how goo it is) but their sup surf line-up is quite extensive.
+1
I wish SIC did some lower volume version of the RS. Some of the women I know who ride it say it's too much board, I feel the same way.
See you finally gave up your Bark. I guess the Maliko is too good to justify it.
-
See you finally gave up your Bark. I guess the Maliko is too good to justify it.
With mixed feelings :-)
The Vapor is a little bit more stable and relaxed in harsh side chop/side wind conditions but it is slower for general use.
Once I figured out how to downwind the Maliko in bigger conditions, there was really not enough differences overall to warrant keeping the two.
It is going to a good home, with a friend that retired on one of our island and there is a trade Naish Nalu plus cash going to me. So all good and keeping our SUP community with different boards for everybody.
-
They have huge volumes. Dunno why. My 12'6" 404 V3 - at a wiiide 26.5 - is only 227 liters or so.
I am a small guy. Can't imagine what it would be like to add a bizallion liters. Sloooowly I suspect.
-
I saw that a couple of months ago. I'm drooling over the Okeanos.
Looking good indeed. Which one you're going for?
The big one. Looks like a great river cruiser. I don't know if I'm going to get one, but I want one!
Maybe you'll finally retire the old NSP. This one would be much nicer for river downwinders by the looks of it.
I'd love to, Burchas. I don't see myself getting a $1.5K board any time soon, unfortunately. My new job is a hell of a lot less stressful, but the pay is lower. We also got into a big financial hole over the last year, so we're going to need to dig out.
-
...My new job is a hell of a lot less stressful...
Glad to hear that! 2019 might prove to bring some good Karma. If everything aligns, I can see something
coming your way...
-
I've put in plenty of Karma points, so maybe. I'm certainly drooling over the new models. I bit by the cruising bug after that 95 mile trip last year. I want to do MORE! I even got a lightweight tent, sleeping bag, and sleeping pad for Christmas. It would be great to cruise the Adirondacks on something new and shiny, but you gotta ride what you got.
-
SIC seems to have a fairly good line-up (if on the high volume side of boards). I also like the fairly minimalist approach of Naish - one board to do it all the Maliko :-) and one Touring board (not sure how goo it is) but their sup surf line-up is quite extensive.
+1
I wish SIC did some lower volume version of the RS. Some of the women I know who ride it say it's too much board, I feel the same way.
See you finally gave up your Bark. I guess the Maliko is too good to justify it.
The SIC RS is a rival for the All Star, and the All Star is hugely more volume than the RS. So I don’t understand this statement. The latest 14x26 All Star is 360L!!!!
If a person likes a low volume board then they can buy a Maliko or a Sidewinder. But some paddlers here on the zone (eg. ukgm) have actually complained that the SIC RS has too *little* volume. One advantage of higher volume boards is that they can take a wider weight range of paddler, and also quite often a full volume nose and tail can be pretty effective upwind. I paddled the RS and Maliko back to back in about 20 knots on a river and upwind the RS was noticeably faster. The All Star is very good upwind too. (With bigger upwind ocean bumps I suspect the Maliko would fare much better). So it just depends what you want out of your board, and how heavy you are. The average US Male weighs around 196lbs (89kgs). Carrying that weight, I suspect a mid-size (eg. 14x26) Maliko would not be very efficient in choppy water. Whereas a paddler of that weight on an All Star or RS 14x26 I suspect would have no problem.
-
SIC seems to have a fairly good line-up (if on the high volume side of boards). I also like the fairly minimalist approach of Naish - one board to do it all the Maliko :-) and one Touring board (not sure how goo it is) but their sup surf line-up is quite extensive.
+1
I wish SIC did some lower volume version of the RS. Some of the women I know who ride it say it's too much board, I feel the same way.
See you finally gave up your Bark. I guess the Maliko is too good to justify it.
The SIC RS is a rival for the All Star, and the All Star is hugely more volume than the RS. So I don’t understand this statement. The latest 14x26 All Star is 360L!!!!
If a person likes a low volume board then they can buy a Maliko or a Sidewinder. But some paddlers here on the zone (eg. ukgm) have actually complained that the SIC RS has too *little* volume. One advantage of higher volume boards is that they can take a wider weight range of paddler, and also quite often a full volume nose and tail can be pretty effective upwind. I paddled the RS and Maliko back to back in about 20 knots on a river and upwind the RS was noticeably faster. The All Star is very good upwind too. (With bigger upwind ocean bumps I suspect the Maliko would fare much better). So it just depends what you want out of your board, and how heavy you are. The average US Male weighs around 196lbs (89kgs). Carrying that weight, I suspect a mid-size (eg. 14x26) Maliko would not be very efficient in choppy water. Whereas a paddler of that weight on an All Star or RS 14x26 I suspect would have no problem.
Personal opinion aside ( Yes, I would buy Maliko over RS ) Imagine women at 110-130 on that RS and you'll realize how it can be too much of a board.
This is exactly the impression I got from female paddlers I ride with. Shall I remind you what happened to our French friend on that Nelo board.
-
That's a fair statement. AllStar feels to me at 77kg like a barge. A friend of mine at the same weight got a 2018 14x26 (insurance claim replacement) and still live to regret it.
On the other hand, I could perfectly see myself getting a used 14x26 RS as my fast touring/flat water board. As much as I love the Ace-GT sometime it is a lot of board....
For playing in the bumps, the Maliko 26" is about right for my weight. I was wondering if there was any chance for me to pick-up a used Maliko 24" for the days I feel frisky and it is flat but the volume might simply not be enough based on the 26".
The beauty is that there are boards for everybody - lightweight like me and stockier/bigger 90 kg guys. Just pick-up the right brand and model.
-
That's a fair statement. AllStar feels to me at 77kg like a barge. A friend of mine at the same weight got a 2018 14x26 (insurance claim replacement) and still live to regret it.
On the other hand, I could perfectly see myself getting a used 14x26 RS as my fast touring/flat water board. As much as I love the Ace-GT sometime it is a lot of board....
For playing in the bumps, the Maliko 26" is about right for my weight. I was wondering if there was any chance for me to pick-up a used Maliko 24" for the days I feel frisky and it is flat but the volume might simply not be enough based on the 26".
The beauty is that there are boards for everybody - lightweight like me and stockier/bigger 90 kg guys. Just pick-up the right brand and model.
I tried a Maliko 14x24 in flat water and it was fine at my weight (I’m about the same as you). I think I’d struggle on it in choppy seas though, but my balance is not great, and somebody younger and whose weight is mainly in their lower rather than upper half would probably have no trouble at all.
I actually prefer low volume boards. My custom 16ft is only around 230L - I doubt you’ll find many 16ft boards that low. But that is because I don’t race (often). Low volume boards are much nicer to paddle in chop, wind, and confused waters. Which describes 90% of my paddling. But they are slower in some circumstances if you are racing, and are only rarely faster. My rule of thumb is: low volume for pleasure, high volume for competition. With low thin rails, inevitably there will be some occasions in chop when the rail digs in, the deck swamps, or the nose pokes or the tail dives. These little things all add up to take the edge off the average speed in mixed conditions. It’s not really noticeable however in pure flat water, as long as your waterline is good. And low volume boards can be easier to surf, and control in big bumps. So it’s not all bad news.
The other thing about medium or high volume boards vs. low volume ones is width.
Tje 14x24.5 RS is probably about the same stability as the 14x26 Maliko. So, would you prefer a lower volume board or a narrower one? The choice is yours.
So, IMO there’s a kind of sliding scale, with at one end a heavy keen racer (who will almost certainly want a high volume board), and at the other a light paddler who doesn’t race (who will want a low volume board). How likely you are to want either a high- or low-volume board probably depends where on this weight-competitive scale you are.
-
My rule of thumb is: low volume for pleasure, high volume for competition
For most people that means one board.
If you're a heavy keen racer get a custom, winning on a stock 14 in serious races? You're living in a pipe dream.
At the amateur level, people win races, not boards. You're most likely to win on the board you're most comfortable on.
-
My rule of thumb is: low volume for pleasure, high volume for competition
For most people that means one board.
If you're a heavy keen racer get a custom, winning on a stock 14 in serious races? You're living in a pipe dream.
At the amateur level, people win races, not boards. You're most likely to win on the board you're most comfortable on.
Yep, and a lot of people are more comfortable on higher volume boards.
You’d need to be a seriously big unit to sink the 2019 All Star.
But yes, if you own a Maliko and are heavy, don’t expect to be winning races, except perhaps big downwind ones on the 14x28 if you are good enough.
-
I think all three of us agree on one point:we all love a low volume board for down-winding in the bumps of 4x4ing in side chop :-) and it is reflected in our respective boards for such.
As neither of us seems to be racing in the traditional point of view then my only question is what volume board for of a relaxing but still fast distance paddle on flat . I would likely be very happy with a SIC RS 26" at the upper end of the volume scale 306L but would rather not go too narrow as it would defeat my purpose . the Sunova Allround 14x27 at 319L would be more into AllStar territory. Not sure what <27"> wide board under 300L would fit that bill. Maybe the old Javelin X28.
-
Big(gish) guys who don’t race should definitely take a look at the 2018 14x28 Maliko. I tried DJ’s in Melbourne and was really impressed with it. The stability was fantastic yet it still didn’t feel like a “big” board, and it did mild upwind/DW circuits in 15 knots or so very well indeed.
I don’t think that many people would need to go bigger than 14x26 in the RS. It’s recommended for people up to 240lbs. It is so unbelievably stable. I actually wish I’d bought the 24.5” wide one rather than the 26, and I’m just a wobbly old geezer who loves stability. The 14x28 RS should carry most of the biggest guys quickly and easily, and is recommended up to 275lbs. So if you are heavy, you could certainly race or tour on an RS. By contrast, I doubt if anyone much over 230lbs is going to have a lot of fun on a Maliko - even the biggest one.
-
I think all three of us agree on one point:we all love a low volume board for down-winding in the bumps of 4x4ing in side chop :-) and it is reflected in our respective boards for such.
As neither of us seems to be racing in the traditional point of view then my only question is what volume board for of a relaxing but still fast distance paddle on flat . I would likely be very happy with a SIC RS 26" at the upper end of the volume scale 306L but would rather not go too narrow as it would defeat my purpose . the Sunova Allround 14x27 at 319L would be more into AllStar territory. Not sure what <27"> wide board under 300L would fit that bill. Maybe the old Javelin X28.
If you really considering a 28" wide, the SIC Okeanos might fit the bill. 306L @ 28" wide doesn't seem excessive and this board seems to share some RS DNA. At $1600 or so it's more on the affordable side.
-
Right now it is more academic than anything else. Unless something too good comes my way in the local used market.
The Okeanos looks nice but it is fairly heavy (but I totally like the idea of expanding from the successful RS shape). The 26" RS might just be exactly the board for what I have in mind. Able to be fast but relaxing enough for distance, good glide to allow a slower cadence and stability to pick the daisies if you want to (and not a displacement nose). Sometime in the winter, specially when paddling alone, I like to be on a "relaxed" board. So far the Ace-GT has been the go to board for that but sometime I just long for less board :-)
-
I think all three of us agree on one point:we all love a low volume board for down-winding in the bumps of 4x4ing in side chop :-) and it is reflected in our respective boards for such.
As neither of us seems to be racing in the traditional point of view then my only question is what volume board for of a relaxing but still fast distance paddle on flat . I would likely be very happy with a SIC RS 26" at the upper end of the volume scale 306L but would rather not go too narrow as it would defeat my purpose . the Sunova Allround 14x27 at 319L would be more into AllStar territory. Not sure what <27"> wide board under 300L would fit that bill. Maybe the old Javelin X28.
If you really considering a 28" wide, the SIC Okeanos might fit the bill. 306L @ 28" wide doesn't seem excessive and this board seems to share some RS DNA. At $1600 or so it's more on the affordable side.
Luc doesn’t paddle 14 foot boards that weigh more than 26 pounds ;) On a more serious note, I have looked at two different 2019 SIC online product guides with differing information on the Okeanos. SUPviennas online information shows the Okeanos having 340 litres of volume, weighing 34 pounds, opposed to the link on this thread showing 306 litres at 32 pounds.
https://supvienna.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/2019_sic_catalog8-13.pdf
The production RS at 14 x 28 is 340 litres, which the Okeanos is based on, so what’s the right information?
-
Luc doesn’t paddle 14 foot boards that weigh more than 26 pounds ;)
Mel, be nice to the old and feeble little guys...... :-)
Actually I was very surprised as how well does the Maliko paddle, it be over 28 lbs - so there. I think that it just works with the shape and the purpose of the board, giving it additional stability in the chop. If I go for a flat water/touring board, I would like not to exceed that weight. After all the Ace-GT weight under 32 lbs.
-
I think all three of us agree on one point:we all love a low volume board for down-winding in the bumps of 4x4ing in side chop :-) and it is reflected in our respective boards for such.
As neither of us seems to be racing in the traditional point of view then my only question is what volume board for of a relaxing but still fast distance paddle on flat . I would likely be very happy with a SIC RS 26" at the upper end of the volume scale 306L but would rather not go too narrow as it would defeat my purpose . the Sunova Allround 14x27 at 319L would be more into AllStar territory. Not sure what <27"> wide board under 300L would fit that bill. Maybe the old Javelin X28.
If you really considering a 28" wide, the SIC Okeanos might fit the bill. 306L @ 28" wide doesn't seem excessive and this board seems to share some RS DNA. At $1600 or so it's more on the affordable side.
Luc doesn’t paddle 14 foot boards that weigh more than 26 pounds ;) On a more serious note, I have looked at two different 2019 SIC online product guides with differing information on the Okeanos. SUPviennas online information shows the Okeanos having 340 litres of volume, weighing 34 pounds, opposed to the link on this thread showing 306 litres at 32 pounds.
https://supvienna.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/2019_sic_catalog8-13.pdf
The production RS at 14 x 28 is 340 litres, which the Okeanos is based on, so what’s the right information?
SIC are notoriously known to fuckup their catalog specs so I wouldn't trust it blindly and ask before I buy.
The board on the catalog looks a lot slimmer an more inline with lower volume. board on your pdf seems way thicker,
more inline with 340.
That said, it could be neither. My wishful thinking goes with 306L, that's the one I'll want to cruise on.
It's a good question to our zoner supnorte who posted this catalog
-
That said, it could be neither. My wishful thinking goes with 306L, that's the one I'll want to cruise on.
306L and weight 29 lbs or less and I am with you.
-
The RS 14x26 is 306L and 26lbs.
The Okeanos 14x28 is probably around 340L (same as the RS 14x28) and 34lbs (a lot heavier than the 14x29 RS) as it says here:
https://sb3f1dcc8780460dc.jimcontent.com/download/version/1537881416/module/15201254224/name/2019_SIC_Catalog8.13.pdf
The 14x26 RS is certainly stable enough and well-behaved enough to use for touring, for the average paddler. It even has a deck cargo net fitted as standard.
The Okeanos is going to be great for carrying loads (looks as if it has cargo bungees at the rear as well) and is hugely cheaper. If it also uses a 3-fin setup as the catalog shows, that is innovative. Most people reading this forum probably don’t need a board that big and heavy, but it would be good for multi-day trips, or as a budget race-tourer for a really big guy.
-
The RS 14x26 is 306L and 26lbs.
The 14x26 RS is certainly stable enough and well-behaved enough to use for touring, for the average paddler. It even has a deck cargo net fitted as standard.
Enough said. That would be a good winter board to complement the funky Maliko. An alternate to the Ace-GT.
Another year and they might start showing-up on the used market. Patience, patience.....
-
The RS 14x26 is 306L and 26lbs.
The Okeanos 14x28 is probably around 340L (same as the RS 14x28) and 34lbs (a lot heavier than the 14x29 RS) as it says here:
https://sb3f1dcc8780460dc.jimcontent.com/download/version/1537881416/module/15201254224/name/2019_SIC_Catalog8.13.pdf
The 14x26 RS is certainly stable enough and well-behaved enough to use for touring, for the average paddler. It even has a deck cargo net fitted as standard.
The Okeanos is going to be great for carrying loads (looks as if it has cargo bungees at the rear as well) and is hugely cheaper. If it also uses a 3-fin setup as the catalog shows, that is innovative. Most people reading this forum probably don’t need a board that big and heavy, but it would be good for multi-day trips, or as a budget race-tourer for a really big guy.
Browsing that catalog made me want a Saber 11.6.
The Okeanos is interesting. A couple of other reasons a smaller guy would want a giant SUP are offshore fishing and carrying a passenger and gear sometimes, like crossing over to an island with only water access and an uncrowded beach. This is in addition to hauling gear for multi-day trips. I am not sold on the idea of most of the fishing SUPs handling the open ocean well if things get rough before you make it to shore. Maybe I am wrong and another reason to paddle one is peace of mind for the paranoid. :D
-
Ha! That’s funny, RidetheGlide: I’m currently fighting a battle with myself to try to resist buying a Saber 11-6. I’m not sure I’m winning though... the urge is strong :)
The Saber is a really good combination of things if you are a small wave surfer and general ocean recreational paddler: 30” width (rather than stupidly wide), multi-use rockerline, superb handle, 2+1 fin setup, thinned out nose and tail, Innegra-reinforced rails, double leash plugs (I think), camera attachment, cargo net, multistage deck pad etc - it’s a long list of very useful features in a board size that will be a lot of fun for a lot of activities.
So much of the SIC stuff is well thought-out like that; you can really tell that they are designed by people who actually SUP a lot, so know how important the details become, day-to-day, and which of those are the most important things to have.
-
Ha! That’s funny, RidetheGlide: I’m currently fighting a battle with myself to try to resist buying a Saber 11-6. I’m not sure I’m winning though... the urge is strong :)
The Saber is a really good combination of things if you are a small wave surfer and general ocean recreational paddler: 30” width (rather than stupidly wide), multi-use rockerline, superb handle, 2+1 fin setup, thinned out nose and tail, Innegra-reinforced rails, double leash plugs (I think), camera attachment, cargo net, multistage deck pad etc - it’s a long list of very useful features in a board size that will be a lot of fun for a lot of activities.
So much of the SIC stuff is well thought-out like that; you can really tell that they are designed by people who actually SUP a lot, so know how important the details become, day-to-day, and which of those are the most important things to have.
The other somewhat similar ones on my "currently just daydreaming" list are the 11' 4" Nalu and One World 11' 1" x 30" x 5" model. Neither of those are as well equipped or designed as much for use outside the surf zone but might be better surfers. I really don't see surfing becoming my focus but would enjoy catching a few small waves every now and then.
-
I think all three of us agree on one point:we all love a low volume board for down-winding in the bumps of 4x4ing in side chop :-) and it is reflected in our respective boards for such.
As neither of us seems to be racing in the traditional point of view then my only question is what volume board for of a relaxing but still fast distance paddle on flat . I would likely be very happy with a SIC RS 26" at the upper end of the volume scale 306L but would rather not go too narrow as it would defeat my purpose . the Sunova Allround 14x27 at 319L would be more into AllStar territory. Not sure what <27"> wide board under 300L would fit that bill. Maybe the old Javelin X28.
If you really considering a 28" wide, the SIC Okeanos might fit the bill. 306L @ 28" wide doesn't seem excessive and this board seems to share some RS DNA. At $1600 or so it's more on the affordable side.
Luc doesn’t paddle 14 foot boards that weigh more than 26 pounds ;) On a more serious note, I have looked at two different 2019 SIC online product guides with differing information on the Okeanos. SUPviennas online information shows the Okeanos having 340 litres of volume, weighing 34 pounds, opposed to the link on this thread showing 306 litres at 32 pounds.
https://supvienna.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/2019_sic_catalog8-13.pdf
The production RS at 14 x 28 is 340 litres, which the Okeanos is based on, so what’s the right information?
SIC are notoriously known to fuckup their catalog specs so I wouldn't trust it blindly and ask before I buy.
The board on the catalog looks a lot slimmer an more inline with lower volume. board on your pdf seems way thicker,
more inline with 340.
That said, it could be neither. My wishful thinking goes with 306L, that's the one I'll want to cruise on.
It's a good question to our zoner supnorte who posted this catalog
A 306 litre model would likely be the faster cruising option but it would make sense that the Okeanos would probably mirror the RS 14 x 28 for volume specs. I have also been checking out the NSP 14 x 30 coco performance touring board as my next barge among others. Paddleboard specialists have it listed at around 29.5 pounds I believe. So, definitely lighter by a couple pounds at a minimum, and closer to 5 pounds if the weight on the SIC is 34 pounds.. The NSP has more options for tie down points up front, but I would add NSI loops regardless. Price is almost the same from what I have read on here.
I guess my question would be about cruising speed and stability. It's nice to have a bit more real estate on the deck for touring at a wider width, but if the narrower profile of the Okeanos is faster and just as stable, then that makes the choice interesting.. Not easy to tell what shape would do better in conditions, but the shape the Okeanos is based on was well rated for rough waters.
https://www.paddleboardspecialists.com/14-x-30-Coco-Performance-Touring-Natural-2018/productinfo/NSP18CCPT1430/
-
I guess my question would be about cruising speed and stability. It's nice to have a bit more real estate on the deck for touring at a wider width, but if the narrower profile of the Okeanos is faster and just as stable, then that makes the choice interesting.. Not easy to tell what shape would do better in conditions, but the shape the Okeanos is based on was well rated for rough waters.
Having ridden all 14' models of the RS and looking at the shape of the Okeanos knowing it's sharing the same DNA of the RS I would look favorably at this model for touring purposes, 306 or 340.
Haven't tried the NSP so can't speak to it, but looking at the Okeanos in comparison, based on my knowledge of the RS, adding a wider tail, a more parallel outline, widest point further up
at 28" wide I would deem it a barge. If I'm to compare it with the NSP based on shape on paper alone I would think it would be as stable and faster but less maneuverable.
As for the weight, if that's actually what it says in the catalog, I would hope it goes towards durability. If that is the case, not a bad attribute to have in such a board where you might carry
boat load of stuff anyway while touring. That's how I would approach it based on my needs.
-
Yes a distinction should be made between "Touring expedition" as carrying loads of equipment (Mel style) and maybe "Fast cruising" which is what I have in mind i.e. flattish water conditions, paddling fast to cover distance but not racing or down-winding, medium cadence so needs glide, no weight on the board outside of a small lunch, extra clothes and water :-)
Just on paper and accounts from forum members, the Okeanos should cover the "Touring" aspect and the RS 26" should cover the "Fats cruising" aspect very well.
-
Yes a distinction should be made between "Touring expedition" as carrying loads of equipment (Mel style) and maybe "Fast cruising" which is what I have in mind i.e. flattish water conditions, paddling fast to cover distance but not racing or down-winding, medium cadence so needs glide, no weight on the board outside of a small lunch, extra clothes and water :-)
Just on paper and accounts from forum members, the Okeanos should cover the "Touring" aspect and the RS 26" should cover the "Fats cruising" aspect very well.
Right now, the big load I’m carrying is my own body and a gigantic board isn’t a need, but nice to have for expediton type paddling. I get by with my Glide but a more specific touring board with a bit more volume would be good.
-
Right now, the big load I’m carrying is my own body and a gigantic board isn’t a need, but nice to have for expediton type paddling. I get by with my Glide but a more specific touring board with a bit more volume would be good.
You deserve it :-)
-
A 306 litre model would likely be the faster cruising option but it would make sense that the Okeanos would probably mirror the RS 14 x 28 for volume specs. I have also been checking out the NSP 14 x 30 coco performance touring board as my next barge among others. Paddleboard specialists have it listed at around 29.5 pounds I believe. So, definitely lighter by a couple pounds at a minimum, and closer to 5 pounds if the weight on the SIC is 34 pounds.. The NSP has more options for tie down points up front, but I would add NSI loops regardless. Price is almost the same from what I have read on here.
I guess my question would be about cruising speed and stability. It's nice to have a bit more real estate on the deck for touring at a wider width, but if the narrower profile of the Okeanos is faster and just as stable, then that makes the choice interesting.. Not easy to tell what shape would do better in conditions, but the shape the Okeanos is based on was well rated for rough waters.
https://www.paddleboardspecialists.com/14-x-30-Coco-Performance-Touring-Natural-2018/productinfo/NSP18CCPT1430/
I wish there was some objective way to rate the performance of boards. IMO, with touring boards, it isn't max speed that's the concern as much as how much effort is required to maintain a given speed. And for the boards you are comparing and my similar sized Glide (virtually same specs as the NSP) there is also the question of conditions - is it slowed by chop? The worst case scenario where stability comes into play is impossible to gauge accurately/fairly - how rough can it be before it starts to substantially affect your pace?
-
I wish there was some objective way to rate the performance of boards. IMO, with touring boards, it isn't max speed that's the concern as much as how much effort is required to maintain a given speed. And for the boards you are comparing and my similar sized Glide (virtually same specs as the NSP) there is also the question of conditions - is it slowed by chop? The worst case scenario where stability comes into play is impossible to gauge accurately/fairly - how rough can it be before it starts to substantially affect your pace?
That is why we have Area10 and Burchas to report on open water performance of a board (for average size) and UGKM to report on river/lake and racing (for big guys) :-)
-
I wish there was some objective way to rate the performance of boards. IMO, with touring boards, it isn't max speed that's the concern as much as how much effort is required to maintain a given speed. And for the boards you are comparing and my similar sized Glide (virtually same specs as the NSP) there is also the question of conditions - is it slowed by chop? The worst case scenario where stability comes into play is impossible to gauge accurately/fairly - how rough can it be before it starts to substantially affect your pace?
That is why we have Area10 and Burchas to report on open water performance of a board (for average size) and UGKM to report on river/lake and racing (for big guys) :-)
With all due respect to them, there will still be some subjectivity and it won't be comprehensive.
Even if you demo the boats yourself it will be hard to know. Flat water racers would be a lot easier; assuming it's a reasonably calm day, I could just jump on and see how fast I go on board A, B and C.
For example, I demoed a Glide like the one I ended up buying. It was on a lake back in June. I took my little day bag that had Strava tracking because I was paddling my little iSUP. I paddled at a little over 4 mph when I was trying to do a good touring pace and paddled over 6 mph in beast mode, which I could not sustain long. At the time, I didn't know I would be considering buying one at the end of the year. So when I ended up considering it, I knew I won't hate it in flat water, which is good, but I still had to take the description of open ocean performance largely on faith even though that's one of the primary reasons for getting it. I did go bash through some surf and bob up and down on swells last weekend and was happy with it.
So I feel like I know it wasn't a bad decision, but I don't know how much of a trade off I made versus that NSP or the Okeanos. The 30" Glide has a slimmer 29" sister that by all accounts is still plenty stable and a bit faster. All of those alternatives were substantially more money; knowing that most people prefer them isn't enough to know how much of a trade off I was making, if any. I say "if any" because stability is really important to me; I need it more than I used to. It would be nice to have some kind of objective scores for speed and stability in flat, chop, breaking waves and SHTF.
Pipe dream...
-
If you want stability and ease of paddling for touring over long periods then forget 14ft boards and get an unlimited class one instead. It’s so much less tiring to paddle narrower boards, and UL class boards can give you the same stability as a wide 14 but much narrower.
The main problem is that few companies make them, unfortunately. The 17ft SIC Bullets (or F16) won’t work as tourers because they are made (usually) in a heavy double-carbon layup, and have too much rocker for flat water touring. Maybe the Bayonet if you had good balance, but again, it is pretty heavy. The Sunova and ONE boards will be too narrow for comfortable touring for most. And deep dugouts are a love-them-or-hate-them proposition (I’m in the latter category). This niche was what the Ace GT was designed to address -the UL class race/tourer. It’s a shame there aren’t more in that category. 14ft isn’t really long enough IMO to give people of average skills a board that is stable enough for all conditions (especially loaded up with gear) in a narrow enough width to make long distance paddles effortless.
-
If you want stability and ease of paddling for touring over long periods then forget 14ft boards and get an unlimited class one instead. It’s so much less tiring to paddle narrower boards, and UL class boards can give you the same stability as a wide 14 but much narrower.
The main problem is that few companies make them, unfortunately. The 17ft SIC Bullets (or F16) won’t work as tourers because they are made (usually) in a heavy double-carbon layup, and have too much rocker for flat water touring. Maybe the Bayonet if you had good balance, but again, it is pretty heavy. The Sunova and ONE boards will be too narrow for comfortable touring for most. And deep dugouts are a love-them-or-hate-them proposition (I’m in the latter category). This niche was what the Ace GT was designed to address -the UL class race/tourer. It’s a shame there aren’t more in that category. 14ft isn’t really long enough IMO to give people of average skills a board that is stable enough for all conditions (especially loaded up with gear) in a narrow enough width to make long distance paddles effortless.
With an unlimited budget and unlimited storage space, this would be something I would consider. Unfortunately I have neither.
I think I have decent paddling skills; I paddled my little 9'9" iSUP over 10 miles at a time several times last year, averaging around 3.4 mph and it glides like a tennis ball, plus I was using the lousy generic aluminum shaft paddle. But my balance is only okay. It used to be great. I am 60, so I don't expect it to get better but staying active I hope any further decline will be slow.
My point was that when I decided that this board seems like it will do what I want and is within my budget, I would have liked some metrics instead of just a gut feel about how it compared to other alternatives.
The sort of metrics I am talking about are things like how fast that Ace GT would go in swells if I paddled steadily with the same effort as paddling the Glide at 4 mph. I have no idea how to measure stability; there is more to it than falling or not.
-
Beyond rather trivial lab-based tests, it’s not possible to provide an objective measure that would be of much help, for what you want. The experience that an individual has with a board is an interaction between board, rider, and conditions in such a way that the measure would end up less accurate as a guide than demoing the board yourself, and it would be difficult and expensive to do.
Very often, what creates the feeling of stability is the *predictability* of handling of a board. This is where the interaction comes in. Very many designs over the years (including for instance the V1 and V2 Glides) have been 95% quite predictable, but in a particular combination of conditions have become squirrely and awkward, and you’d find yourself falling unexpectedly, without quite knowing why. Capturing that experience in a scientific metric that anyone could understand or use would be extremely difficult, and in any case would vary greatly from person to person.
So, what you are stuck with is this: (1) demo a board yourself, in the conditions you intend to use it. (2) Know yourself, your abilities, and what suits you best. Paddle lots of boards at every opportunity in as many conditions as you can, and build up a mental database of what dimensions and styles work for you, and how this differs from other people. (3) Pretty much ignore the opinions of people who have a conflict of interest in what they say (eg. anyone who has a financial interest in your purchases, or in a brand). People tell the most outrageous untruths as soon as money or status is involved, and one person’s experience of a board may in any case be very different from yours. (4) listen to the majority opinions given by independent observers, if you can find them. But remember that your experience of a board will be a very personal interaction between you, the equipment, and the conditions. (5) Get to know particular designers who produce boards that suit you because they have the same priorities that you do, and understand your needs and conditions. (6) Accept that sometimes, despite all of the above, you will still get it wrong. So buy wisely and think about resale value.
Hope this helps. Sometimes things are so complex that one simple number, no matter how scientifically derived, can never describe it well.
-
If you want stability and ease of paddling for touring over long periods then forget 14ft boards and get an unlimited class one instead. It’s so much less tiring to paddle narrower boards, and UL class boards can give you the same stability as a wide 14 but much narrower.
The main problem is that few companies make them, unfortunately. The 17ft SIC Bullets (or F16) won’t work as tourers because they are made (usually) in a heavy double-carbon layup, and have too much rocker for flat water touring. Maybe the Bayonet if you had good balance, but again, it is pretty heavy. The Sunova and ONE boards will be too narrow for comfortable touring for most. And deep dugouts are a love-them-or-hate-them proposition (I’m in the latter category). This niche was what the Ace GT was designed to address -the UL class race/tourer. It’s a shame there aren’t more in that category. 14ft isn’t really long enough IMO to give people of average skills a board that is stable enough for all conditions (especially loaded up with gear) in a narrow enough width to make long distance paddles effortless.
I did 95 miles on a 12'6" last summer, loaded with gear. I don't know about which speed you're looking for, but the board handled well. It wasn't super fast, but you shouldn't expect a lot of speed loaded with gear. Your goal when camping/touring should be manageable distances so you can have fun/explore/camp.
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
@Ichabod Spoonbill - I agree. Nearly any board that can carry a load and can be paddled at a decent clip works. I read somewhere that most touring is done at between 3 and 4 mph. I think Area 10's comments were about the most optimal way to cover a lot of ground when I insist on doing it in what may sometimes be rough conditions.
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
There is still no way around educating yourself how different shapes works for YOU in your quest to understand how it all works together.
Once you have that and you still feel the need to over analyze, you can do like I do and feed all these metrics into a 3D shaping program.
I built all my favorite shapes in 3D and now I can spend countless hours over analyzing each shape and its metrics and even come up with
my own shapes. Life is good again :)
-
Every time I find a new interest, I want immediate expertise. Is that too much to ask? ::) :D
-
Every time I find a new interest, I want immediate expertise. Is that too much to ask? ::) :D
I feel your pain. What do you think we're doing here if not group therapy ;D
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
There is still no way around educating yourself how different shapes works for YOU in your quest to understand how it all works together.
Once you have that and you still feel the need to over analyze, you can do like I do and feed all these metrics into a 3D shaping program.
I built all my favorite shapes in 3D and now I can spend countless hours over analyzing each shape and its metrics and even come up with
my own shapes. Life is good again :)
Most of us do not have as much time on our hands! :D
-
It would be nice if a 3D web interface like this:
https://emersya.com/en/home
was available for personal use. that's what Naish is using at their site.
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
There is still no way around educating yourself how different shapes works for YOU in your quest to understand how it all works together.
Once you have that and you still feel the need to over analyze, you can do like I do and feed all these metrics into a 3D shaping program.
I built all my favorite shapes in 3D and now I can spend countless hours over analyzing each shape and its metrics and even come up with
my own shapes. Life is good again :)
Most of us do not have as much time on our hands! :D
No worries. I willing to take one for the team and test all the new boards out there ;D
-
It would be nice if a 3D web interface like this:
https://emersya.com/en/home
was available for personal use. that's what Naish is using at their site.
Look at this: https://www.shape3d.com/Default.aspx
and a quick introduction on how to use is by our own zoner TallDude:
https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php/topic,27553.0.html
-
No worries. I willing to take one for the team and test all the new boards out there ;D
That could be a double edged sword...
"This proved to be a poor design. I buried the nose and skipped off the board before it ran me over in wind driven swells and got crushed in the surf coming in."
-
The RS 14x26 is 306L and 26lbs.
The 14x26 RS is certainly stable enough and well-behaved enough to use for touring, for the average paddler. It even has a deck cargo net fitted as standard.
Enough said. That would be a good winter board to complement the funky Maliko. An alternate to the Ace-GT.
Another year and they might start showing-up on the used market. Patience, patience.....
Also thinking that the Sunova Allround EcoTec 14x27 could be a candidate and I should be able to try one (at least in 28.5 if not 27). Less racy than the SIC RS......
-
I have no idea how to measure stability; there is more to it than falling or not.
You can certainly get a snapshot of it by using the internal accelometers of an iPhone and looking at the roll & pitch data afterwards. The problem is that this data would likely get swamped in your post review by the water state and to be honest, if you ride boards enough, you won't need the numbers to know which board is the best one for you. The real issue is getting the boards for long enough to be able to build a robust argument for yourself in the first place.
The bottom line is that what you're after could be tested in wave tanks and lab tests but this is not accessible or feasible for pretty much most people. You need the next best thing and realistically, that's you logging some hard yards.
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
Yes, you're right: you're wrong. Too many factors. including a whole bundle of personal ones including how you react to a destabilizing force from various directions, including compound ones, where you stand on the board, the condition of your joints and the precision of your proprioception. The board factors run off the chart too. They can be generalized and even measured in various conditions with stable weight, but ultimately they are no more predictive of your experience than just width, length and tail design would be.
I other words I could spend some time with a board and tell you how unstable it is, then you get on it and wonder what my problem was. It's not even an indication of skill or experience, it's basic differences in a loosely coupled set of systems so complex that it's almost chaotic.
You have to try them.
-
@Area 10 - I get what you are saying, but it does seem like there could be some useful metrics to give you some general feel about stability - how much does it tip as you move a given amount of weight from the center towards the rail? What's the shape of the graph when you test that (looking for primary versus secondary stability)? Lengthwise, what % of buoyancy is in each quarter (3.5' section for a 14' board)? Effectiveness of bow shape and rocker might still involve some voodoo/opinions, but there could probably be some objective numbers - the rise of the bow and the tail (measured on a hard surface). I suspect that these numbers, take with the length, weight and volume, would show a fair amount of consistency for existing designs that there is a consensus about. Or I could be wrong. I tend to over analyze.
Yes, you're right: you're wrong. Too many factors. including a whole bundle of personal ones including how you react to a destabilizing force from various directions, including compound ones, where you stand on the board, the condition of your joints and the precision of your proprioception. The board factors run off the chart too. They can be generalized and even measured in various conditions with stable weight, but ultimately they are no more predictive of your experience than just width, length and tail design would be.
I other words I could spend some time with a board and tell you how unstable it is, then you get on it and wonder what my problem was. It's not even an indication of skill or experience, it's basic differences in a loosely coupled set of systems so complex that it's almost chaotic.
You have to try them.
Nice! I love it when I have to google and learn a new word that means the state of my internal gyroscope. ;D Supposedly that might keep me from becoming demented too quickly. Might...
I used to call myself a weeble, but now when I wobble sometimes I do fall down. I can usually manage to land on the board, but regretted that when I dislocated a finger.
Last weekend's surf launch/landing and swell paddling practice made me feel like the board is quite capable of doing what I want and that I will have to improve a bit before I regret how much overkill I went with, if I ever do. There will be a very different set of parameters this summer when I load up with gear and lots of ice to keep the giant fish I paddle back in with fresh.
-
Before you go on to the more advanced stuff, I'm afraid you missed the first lesson in SUP: Learning how to fall!!!
What is your main take away from the dislocated finger fall incident?
-
Before you go on to the more advanced stuff, I'm afraid you missed the first lesson in SUP: Learning how to fall!!!
What is your main take away from the dislocated finger fall incident?
That's a tough one. I was on a river and in places there were rocks not far below the surface. I did have on a helmet and knee pads. But I am not sure that going into the water would have been the best choice unless I were able to do the proper fall the guy I was with was trying to teach me - land sitting with feet out front if possible. But if I am going to fall on the board, maybe a body blow would be better than putting my hands out (which also results in placing the paddle shaft where your forehead will hit - DAMHIKT).
ETA - That is not my cheap iSUP. When you post what you are thinking about on a local SUP group, sometimes there are some nice SUP paddlers who feel compelled to keep you from killing yourself. He loaned me a Hala Atcha (I think that was the model), a good paddle and gave me some excellent instruction. When I went winter paddling, he made me a heck of a deal on a wet suit he had lying around (he is much bigger than me, so it really was just lying around).
-
I did have on a helmet and knee pads. But I am not sure that going into the water would have been the best choice unless I were able to do the proper fall the guy I was with was trying to teach me
What was he trying to teach that you didn't feel like following his instruction? Landing on your board is NOT a good idea.
Landing flat on the water away from your board is the standard procedure.
-
I did have on a helmet and knee pads. But I am not sure that going into the water would have been the best choice unless I were able to do the proper fall the guy I was with was trying to teach me
What was he trying to teach that you didn't feel like following his instruction? Landing on your board is NOT a good idea.
Landing flat on the water away from your board is the standard procedure.
Yes, that was the lesson with the addition that when possible the best orientation to land in whitewater is on your backside with feet downstream. I did do that some of the time but in other cases I tried to recover for too long and lost my feet as well as the ability to control where I landed.
With whitewater one of my biggest problems was experience. I was a professional raft guide out west in the 80s and kayaked the Grand Canyon. I started the day convinced that little class I/II rapids would be no big deal.
When I fell in the surf I was swept off and had time to gather enough wits to go under and come up after the wave had passed.
-
I did have on a helmet and knee pads. But I am not sure that going into the water would have been the best choice unless I were able to do the proper fall the guy I was with was trying to teach me
What was he trying to teach that you didn't feel like following his instruction? Landing on your board is NOT a good idea.
Landing flat on the water away from your board is the standard procedure.
Yes, that was the lesson with the addition that when possible the best orientation to land in whitewater is on your backside with feet downstream. I did do that some of the time but in other cases I tried to recover for too long and lost my feet as well as the ability to control where I landed.
With whitewater one of my biggest problems was experience. I was a professional raft guide out west in the 80s and kayaked the Grand Canyon. I started the day convinced that little class I/II rapids would be no big deal.
When I fell in the surf I was swept off and had time to gather enough wits to go under and come up after the wave had passed.
Whitewater is tricky for sure. The Slocan river out here has a fun section that is class III during the run off season and following rain events. During peak flows it certainly looks more dangerous, and arguably is. You have a bit more time to make quick decisions when it's running lower, but those shallow water injuries become more likely. Catch 22 scenario, but I prefer when the water is running a bit higher.
-
Finally got some pictures of my 16 x 24 RS's and they look great. Unfortunately I'm in the southern Bahamas till May or June so they're going to sit in crates in Maui till I get back to Florida. I guess I'll just have to make do with my 14 x 24.5 RS or one of the 14 X 24.5 Allstars. I can also jump on one of the Bullets if it gets windy.
If I can get some one to help me figure out how to post pictures I'll post some pictures.
-
Finally got some pictures of my 16 x 24 RS's and they look great. Unfortunately I'm in the southern Bahamas till May or June so they're going to sit in crates in Maui till I get back to Florida. I guess I'll just have to make do with my 14 x 24.5 RS or one of the 14 X 24.5 Allstars. I can also jump on one of the Bullets if it gets windy.
If I can get some one to help me figure out how to post pictures I'll post some pictures.
We cannot help you make us suffer..... :-) Thou shalt not covet.....