Standup Zone Forum
Stand Up Paddle => Downwind and Racing => Topic started by: blueplanetsurf on November 09, 2010, 11:18:48 AM
-
This new topic continues the discussion from the "Heavier is Faster?" thread at:
http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45 (http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45)
You may want to read it first to understand the motivation for this experiment proposed by LaPerouseBay.
My weight is just under 200 pounds, the board itself weighs just over 30 lbs, I added 30 pounds on the deck for testing.
Here are the results of the 400 ft sprint test:
with 30# weight:
Run 1: 49 seconds
Run 2: 49 seconds
Run 3: 48 seconds
without extra weight:
Run 1: 45 seconds
Run 2: 45 seconds
The acclereation was noticeably faster with the lighter board and the 3-4 seconds difference is significant.
For the half mile test, the results were less pronounced but still significant- as follows (wind was light 2-5 knots):
with 30# extra: Upwind: 5:44, downwind: 5:29
without extra weight: upwind: 5:22, downwind: 5:16
Unfortunately the camera angle shifted and I did not get the GPS on video in the sprints.
I got some good video of the half mile runs, will post videos later for analysis, need to go to work now.
-
Thanks for taking the time to do this. Now, spread the weights out across the board to more accurately reflect weight distribution of a heavier SUP, and do it again. ;D
I'm also still very interested in deceleration of the weighted board vs un-weighted.. Which board glides further after a pedal stroke and which stops faster?
-
Good stuff. Thanks for proving a point.
Less than 9% difference in the sprint. And like 6% or 7% difference over the longer run.
Definitely a lot if your racing. But for those of us who are just out there for exercise or to have fun, a heavier, but more durable board will probably be just fine.
-
I know you guys are talking race boards but I have a really heavy sup surf board and it hauls ass down the line....just cant turn it without feeling like you'er gona blow out a knee. It drops in nice, even better than my lite board but couldn't turn it at the last minute if my life depended on it. Hope this helps at all.... I know nothing of race boards. Aloha!
-
Ideally the weight would be distributed evenly throughout the board but since that is not an option, putting it on top is the next best thing. I don't think spreading the weights over the deck will make a noticeable difference in the test results, as the weight will still be on top and not distributed evenly. I think the extra weight would be least noticable at the bottom of the board, like pdxmike suggested- putting sand in a hollow roto molded board as that should actually make the board more stable, like a keel on a sailboat.
Anyway, I will re-do the sprint tests and can try to spread the weight out to see if there is a difference. I will also let the board run without stroking at the end of the run to see how fast it decelerates with vs. without the extra weight.
The two videos I have of the half mile run that came out good with the speed on screen are really big files. I'm loading them on youtube now but it's taking forever.
Here is what I noticed watching the videos:
With the 30# extra weight it took me 7 seconds and 8 strokes to accelerate to 5 mph
Without the extra weight only 5 seconds and 6 strokes.
As my friend Scott pointed out, this can be the difference between getting into a bump vs. missing it in downwinders.
I also noticed that the weighted board has more of a wake and turbulence behind the tail and seemed to make more noise over the water.
-
Good stuff. Thanks for proving a point.
Less than 9% difference in the sprint. And like 6% or 7% difference over the longer run.
Definitely a lot if your racing. But for those of us who are just out there for exercise or to have fun, a heavier, but more durable board will probably be just fine.
Yes, the difference is significant but not that big and this is at double the weight.
Part of why I wanted to do this test:
The 12'6 Amundson board I used is available in AST construction for $1299 and carbon/kevlar for $1699. The weight difference is 4 lbs, so you pay $100 extra per pound saved.
Stiffness needs to be considered, too and might matter as much or more than weight. Stiffer is faster in a racing board and if a lighter board flexes more it could actually be slower.
-
Stiffness needs to be considered, too and might matter as much or more than weight. Stiffer is faster in a racing board and if a lighter board flexes more it could actually be slower.
After paddling a few epoxy SUPs this summer, I had a chance to go down a river with some very mellow currents. I was told there would be some rocks, so I rented an inflatable SUP for it.... a C4 I believe. The flex, or what I called the "taco effect" made the board considerably less stable for me, which meant I spent more effort concentrating on staying upright, and less effort on paddling.
After seeing the plastic SUPs that Imagine has released this year, specifically the RapidFire, but even some of the others, I am very interested in taking one out for a spin. Knowing the plastic boards are quite a bit heavier, I wondered how much slower they were. But I think that "taco effect" of the inflatables vs the weight of the plastic SUPs will make the two interesting to compare.
Personally I'd chose durable & stable over portable any day..... assuming speed wasn't that big a difference.
-
blueplanetsurf--thanks for doing that--very interesting.
I think I came the closest with my guess, out of the two people who committed to percentages. I'm going to use some of my prize money to go to Hawaii someday and try surfing and downwinders. I'm using another portion to set up a gear fund. Maybe some more will go to StrandLeper's HWPA fund...
-
pdxmike, yes, your guess was closest, so you win.
I forgot to mention that the prize has no cash value and you have to come to Oahu to collect it ;D
When you do come here to visit you can use any of our SUP demo boards at no charge while you are here, plus I'll take you on some downwinders, how is that?
I'm still waiting for the second video to upload to youtube and will hopefully post them soon.
-
If you added 30 pounds added approx 4 seconds, I guess if you only had added 5 pound, the difference is only 0.6 of a second. This probally puts a more real perspective as I am guessing the weight differences between boards is about 5 pounds generally?? Good test, results look real.
-
Ideally the weight would be distributed evenly throughout the board but since that is not an option, putting it on top is the next best thing. I don't think spreading the weights over the deck will make a noticeable difference in the test results, as the weight will still be on top and not distributed evenly. I think the extra weight would be least noticable at the bottom of the board, like pdxmike suggested- putting sand in a hollow roto molded board as that should actually make the board more stable, like a keel on a sailboat.
Anyway, I will re-do the sprint tests and can try to spread the weight out to see if there is a difference. I will also let the board run without stroking at the end of the run to see how fast it decelerates with vs. without the extra weight.
The two videos I have of the half mile run that came out good with the speed on screen are really big files. I'm loading them on youtube now but it's taking forever.
Here is what I noticed watching the videos:
With the 30# extra weight it took me 7 seconds and 8 strokes to accelerate to 5 mph
Without the extra weight only 5 seconds and 6 strokes.
As my friend Scott pointed out, this can be the difference between getting into a bump vs. missing it in downwinders.
I also noticed that the weighted board has more of a wake and turbulence behind the tail and seemed to make more noise over the water.
Cool stuff. The only thing I wonder about is that you doubled the weight of the board, but the weight is concentrated in one area. Would this not cause a central area of more friction in one area of the SUP as compared to spreading the weights over the length of the board? I agree that there probably won't be much of a difference at all, but I've gone into geek mode with this experiment. Imo, putting 30 extra pounds right in the middle of the board is akin to throwing a bag in the middle or more reflective of the effect a heavier rider has and not as much as a heavier board itself. I realize that it is nearly impossible to cover all the variables, but I'm just throwing this out there.
-
Great test, thanks for going to the trouble.
I suspect everyone will find their own form of vindication in the results. For me, I feel that this proves board weight is essentially irrelevant, given that the differences are far less than the doubling of weight in this example. This is especially true for downwinders and for anyone considering the Naish Glide 14' or the Starboard Surf Race 14' and in particular, choosing between carbon and AST. Clearly the substantial cost differential does not appear to pay off in performance, so as DJ has said, it's all about lifting the board on and off your car.
On the other hand, the test has also proven the point for those arguing that heavier riders are disadvantaged on a limited class board. By the way, you didn't mention what board you used for the test. I wonder if a longer and more buoyant board would make much of a difference with additional weighting.
-
pdxmike, yes, your guess was closest, so you win.
I forgot to mention that the prize has no cash value and you have to come to Oahu to collect it ;D
When you do come here to visit you can use any of our SUP demo boards at no charge while you are here, plus I'll take you on some downwinders, how is that?
I'm still waiting for the second video to upload to youtube and will hopefully post them soon.
Robert--that's really generous. I am definitely going to get to Hawaii one of these days!
-
Durn. I thought my guess was pretty good until I checked out the weight limit on one of those 12'6's (well, another brand, but 29 inches wide). Oy. Those things can hold guys 250 lbs?! Yikes!!!
I thought he'd have that thing buried with 30 lbs added. I was hoping for video of just the nose sticking out of the water. Heh. Oh well...That was no fun. :D
Sheriously, though, Thanks again for doing this, BluePlanet. Great stuff!
-
Save your self money on a lighter board just loose an extra 10 pounds and then you will be lighter. Its amazing how much we critique just a few pounds difference on a board verse actually rider weight which is going to make the biggest difference. Don't care how light your board is if your riders are 50lbs difference in weight board weight won't make that big a difference. Now if the races were by rider weight class which would be nice than having a lighter board would give you an edge. Having a lighter board does help cut down on overall weight making it paddle quicker guess it just depends on where your level of paddling is. If your at that point where you are pro top shape and advanced technique where a few less pounds of boards will make a difference or still rookie to intermediate level where the extra money is just a waste. Just saying big mistake a lot of rookies make board weight isn't going to win a race alone compared to fitness and technique, the best isn't always the answer.
Its like all the guys big fat guys you see buying carbon fiber parts for their bike or race car to shave a few pounds when they could loose 100lbs themselves ironic LOL
Cool test though thanks for the info :)
-
pdxmike, you are a funny guy and I'm looking forward to meeting you in person.
I uploaded two videos to youtube, they are the half mile downwind leg with 30lbs weights and without. I'm planning to do the sprint test again tomorrow and will try to satisfy robon by testing if spreading the weights out over the deck makes a difference and will let the board run after I stop paddling to see how much longer the heavier weight will travel on momentum alone.
I could read the speed on the HD video replay off the camera but just realized that you can't make it out on the youtube replay, so I will try to mount the camera closer to the GPS and at a better angle.
Any other ideas or requests for things I should try?
Here is the video of the run without weights. You really just need to watch the first 30 seconds or so of each video to see the difference:
no weight down.MP4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsJ2yWtw-ek#)
Here is the video with weights:
30# down test.MP4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rw0x1k-I2PM#)
Here is what I noticed watching the videos:
With the 30# extra weight it took me 7 seconds and 8 strokes to accelerate to 5 mph
Without the extra weight only 5 seconds and 6 strokes.
As my friend Scott pointed out, this can be the difference between getting into a bump vs. missing it in downwinders.
I also noticed that the weighted board has more of a wake and turbulence behind the tail and seemed to make more noise over the water.
-
For me, I feel that this proves board weight is essentially irrelevant/ snip / This is especially true for downwinders.../ snip / ...so as DJ has said, it's all about lifting the board on and off your car.
In my humble opinion, this is may be true for some, but certainly not in my neck of the woods. I'm very fortunate to be in a place where there is a great market for used downwind boards. It's very easy to sell a board and upgrade to a new SIC custom.
My latest downwind board is identical to the previoius one, yet is 25% lighter. The difference in performance is astonishing.
Ironically, I find it much more difficult to load on the truck. The board is deceptively easy to handle until the wind gets it. In an instant it's twisting or diving, nearly smashing into something. A 21 foot canoe is easier to handle in the wind. YMMV
-
I gotta agree with LaPerouseBay
I tried a 40 lb board and could not catch anything. Then jumped on a 24 lb board and could catch a lot. I know....there are other factors besides weight. But the difference in performance and feeling is Ginormous!
And I think an important thing to remember is bigger folks will feel less of a difference with the same weight change because it represents a smaller percentage of their body weight. 30 lbs to a guy at 225 is 13% of his weight. 30 lbs to a guy 150 lbs is 20%. It's also an individual strength thing.
I tried a board recently that was obviously heavy (noticeable carrying it, and hard to accelerate) but could still catch bumps because, I figure, it's really narrow and has little rocker. I'm probably going to have one made almost same shape, but as light as can be. It's gonna FLY! (Well...as fast as I can go...maybe not flying...maybe a really good trot)
-
Its like all the guys big fat guys you see buying carbon fiber parts for their bike or race car to shave a few pounds when they could loose 100lbs themselves ironic LOL
Cool test though thanks for the info :)
Hey, I resemble that remark. Actually if you're a smart race car owner you spend money on making things light where they count. I can take five pounds off the unsprung weight of my car and make a huge difference. Ten pounds taken off up high, or at the ends makes a big difference. Ten pounds down low or near the center of rotation doesn't do much. My ass is down low and in the middle of the car, if I could take ten pounds off my head that might be good.
At the peak of the sport everyone is skinny and small. Power to weight.
Thanks for doing this test. Nice job.
I don't think it's very important to evenly distribute the weght. There isn't that much weight carried at the ends of board--narrow in width, thin in cross section, and relatively pointed. Most weight is near the balance point.
-
Downwinders are a series of hard accelerations to catch the bumps, and easy strokes to maintain a bump once you are riding it. Since the extra weight in Robert's tests was very noticeable in accelerating from a dead stop to full speed, its pretty easy to see how the extra weight makes a difference in downwind conditions.
-
I love how this experiment is making all kinds of answers fall into place--why it's logical that board lightness is a big advantage for downwinders, why heavier racers are at a disadvantage, etc.
In regard to whether distributing the weights on the board makes a difference, to me logic says it should make little or no difference at all for going straight in flat water--as long as the weights are balanced in relationship to the balance point of the board.
This wouldn't be true if boards were flexible. If they were, putting all 30 pounds in one spot would telegraph through to the bottom of the board. But with a stiff board, the bottom of the board shouldn't know where the weights are at all, as long as their positions are balanced. Think of a teeter-totter--you can make it level by putting a 30# weight in the middle, or one 15# weight at each end, or one 20# weight close in on one side, and one 10# weight further away at the other...
Where the location of the weights would matter could be in chop, or when turning, but even then if the weights were balanced relative to the board's balance point, I'm not sure it would even matter much then.
What would matter would be how high above the bottom of the board the weights were. The higher up, the tippier the board. This wouldn't matter with a perfectly efficient paddler on perfectly flat water, and going perfectly straight, but in real life it would. Imagine how tippy you would be with a 30# helmet vs. putting a 30# lead mat on the deck. I guess that's basically the same thing PonoBill was saying about race cars--weight up high (away from the axis of rotation down at axle level in cars or through the board in boards) matters more, just like weight away from the axis of rotation in teeter-totters matters more.
-
Sprint test take two:
This morning I re did the sprint tests with much better video results.
All you number crunching tech geeks like me will love this, you can watch the speed on the GPS and draw your own conclusions.
I will also publish my training log which I'm sure will incite some tech geek discussions.
Like PonoBill and pdxmike I did not think the weight distribution would matter for the speed test for the same reasons they mentioned and I don't think it did but I tried it anyways.
To my surprise, the board seemed to handle a little better. I tried to figure out why and then it made sense- with the weight spread out over the length of the board it yaws less (I'm not sure I'm spelling it right) especially from a standstill.
I know you could turn this into a science project as well but here is the simple explanation I came up with: When you are doing a flip off a diving board, you can speed up the rotation by pulling in your arms and legs closer to the center of rotation, while spreading out arms and legs- weight away from center of rotation- slows down the rotation. Same thing on the SUP. If all the weights are at the center, the board will yaw more easily (center of rotation is center of board), while spreading the weight away from the center of rotation makes it yaw less- makes sense, right?
Today my results were as follows:
400 ft sprints:
with 30 pounds extra:
Run 1: 48 sec
Run 2: 48 sec
Run 3: 48 sec
Run 4: 49 sec
So results were a little less conclusive as I was a second faster with the weights and a second slower without. Still significant though.
Without extra weight:
Run 1: 46 sec
Run 2: 46 sec
Run without the weights: 46 sec. top speed: 6.7 mph
B#2.MP4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z14IDBr00R4#)
Run with the 30 lbs weight: 48 sec. top speed 6.4 mph
B30#2.MP4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZHRsajfL8Y#)
-
Its like all the guys big fat guys you see buying carbon fiber parts for their bike or race car to shave a few pounds when they could loose 100lbs themselves ironic LOL
This exact issue came up in swimming a few years ago with the advent of the full-body tech racing suits. You could cut your times by 5% or so by spending a few hundred dollars on a suit, or by losing a few pounds or training harder. Most people decided they'd buy the suits, get the immediate benefit, then work on the other stuff. Then the suits were banned and it all became irrelevant.
The other way to look at it is like one of my biking friends does. He bought a $$$ carbon bike a few years ago. He figures if he'd lost weight then, he would have gained it back by now. Any training effect from extra training back then is gone by now. But he still has his carbon bike.
-
Downwinders are a series of hard accelerations to catch the bumps, and easy strokes to maintain a bump once you are riding it. Since the extra weight in Robert's tests was very noticeable in accelerating from a dead stop to full speed, its pretty easy to see how the extra weight makes a difference in downwind conditions.
I think 1paddle2paddle and LaPerouseBay got it right. The speed difference might seem very small in the controlled flat water test but in downwind racing it's all about catching and connecting bumps. That slightly faster acceleration can be the difference between making and missing a bump, which can compound the effect. If you race in downwinders you know that connecting one good bump train can put you 50 yards ahead (or behind if you miss it) of you competition, and it does not really matter if you are at the front or in the middle of the pack.
If you are not racing, or want a board to train on, save yourself a bundle and get a solid, less expensive board, but in racing, light weight is KEY
-
blueplanetsurf--your yaw comments sound like they make sense.
Thanks again for the experiment.
One question--could it make sense to add weights for training (or use a heavier board) then race without them? Or do you feel like the extra weight changes your stroke or balance--perhaps to the point that it would be disruptive to train with weight, then try to adjust to a light board for racing?
-
I meant to post the training log.
Background:
Training for the Battle of the Paddle in 2009, I started writing down my times over set distances to see any improvement through training. Later, I found these training runs to also be a great tool for comparing boards, different paddles, stroke technique, etc. and started to record everything.
I tested a bunch of different boards this way as you will see on the spreadsheet.
There are too many variables in downwinders to get conclusive results- wind, current, tides, windswell, groundswell, etc. unless you paddle with a buddy that paddles the same speed as you do, which is the only effective comparison I found.
In flatwater conditions you eliminate most variables with the biggest variable being the wind, so I include the estimated wind speed on the log.
As the half mile course is into the wind, then back downwind, looking at the total time is more useful although the total time is usually faster in lighter wind or no wind. I don't think any board comparison results are conclusive because of the variables but you can clearly see that at my weight of close to 200 lbs., 14 footers are clearly faster than 12'6 boards. You might find some things confusing, let me know if you have any questions.
Weight test results are highlighted in yellow.
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Au9qxAnW7ZMddEphZnVCb1U5M0I1ek1HVWl0QkpkUVE&hl=en
One disclaimer- just because a board is fast in flat water does not mean it will be fast in open ocean conditions.
-
pdxmike, I think training on the same board you will race on is best. A heavier board won't hurt but I like to go fast, even when training. I'm not the kind of person that puts on ancle weights when I'm running, but I guess it works for some people. It may be worth a try though. After taking the weights off the board, it felt noticeably lighter and faster.
Still, I think it's most important is to have a good feel for the board and use it as much as possilble before a race. I have used boards in races that I have never paddled on before and that's fine but certainly not ideal.
-
By the way, you didn't mention what board you used for the test. I wonder if a longer and more buoyant board would make much of a difference with additional weighting.
The 12'6 Amundson board I used is very stable and has a total volume of 247 liters, so it can float up to 247kg= 544 pounds.
For more information on this board, check Evan's review at standuppaddlesurf.net:
http://www.standuppaddlesurf.net/2010/11/04/amundson-126-sup-stand-up-paddle-board/#comment-65369 (http://www.standuppaddlesurf.net/2010/11/04/amundson-126-sup-stand-up-paddle-board/#comment-65369)
To see pictures of the setup I used and what lead to the experiment, read the "Heavier boards faster" post:
http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45 (http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45)
-
Can you tell me what board you used for these speed trials?
M
-
By the way, you didn't mention what board you used for the test. I wonder if a longer and more buoyant board would make much of a difference with additional weighting.
The 12'6 Amundson board I used is very stable and has a total volume of 247 liters, so it can float up to 247kg= 544 pounds.
For more information on this board, check Evan's review at standuppaddlesurf.net:
http://www.standuppaddlesurf.net/2010/11/04/amundson-126-sup-stand-up-paddle-board/#comment-65369 (http://www.standuppaddlesurf.net/2010/11/04/amundson-126-sup-stand-up-paddle-board/#comment-65369)
It's cool that you used the Amundson T/R. It's a board I'm considering along with the Fly Race, Angulo Shaka, and a few others for a do everything board. I read the review link you provided. It's a great deal for a 12'6" board. How do you find this board performance wise compared to other boards in it's class and just in general?
To see pictures of the setup I used and what lead to the experiment, read the "Heavier boards faster" post:
http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45 (http://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?topic=9373.45)
-
The 12'6 Amundson is the most stable "race" board I have tried.
I'm not a supporting sponsor here, so I won't go into salesman mode but I'll say this: The flat water speed compares surprisingly well to the other boards I tested. If you look at the training log link I posted earlier you will see the times compare well to some top race models I have tested, including Ron House, Bark, M&M, Everpaddle and La Hui Kai 12'6 models.
-
544 pounds?!?! That's unreal! No wonder it's stable!
The results of your second test, with the weights distributed along the length, are very interesting. The added weight at nose and tail make the board more stable. Hmm...
Could this be the first real point for the Heavy Is Better or Some Weight Is Good gang?
Or...Just playing devil's advocate here (no need get mad!)...
Maybe when folks are saying they get "more glide" with heavier boards, maybe they are actually gliding more because they are more stable; not because the weight is giving them more momentum. A wobbling board does not glide as well as a stable, steady board.
Ok...(covering up)...Return Fire!
-
Six Feet and Glassy, I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. The board was more stable with NO weight on top of it, no doubt.
I just noticed that putting the weights in the middle of the board made it yaw a lot, while spreading them out made it yaw less.
I was comparing weights in the middle vs weights spread out, not weights vs. no weights.
You could argue that putting weights on the nose and tail of a board would make the board more directional (and slower/harder to turn- like straightening out your body to slow down the rotation of a flip). I don't think this would make the board faster but it's an interesting thought.
Thinking along those lines:
When you are SUP surfing (as opposed to racing) you want the board to turn as easily as possible, so if you are turning the board off the tail, having less weight, especially in the front of the board and/or a shorter length, will make it easier to pivot the board.
-
Aah. Okay. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I just thought maybe I had a point for the other side.
I just can't believe that so many good, competent paddlers could feel that some added weight allows them to go better in the bumps (have more "momentum", as has been mentioned), if there is no good scientific reason to back it up.
I think they really are feeling something real. But what is it? Either they really Are going better with the heavier board or they Think they are going better, but not really.
Sorry. Haven't surfed or paddled in a while. And I've been here at Disneyland for a few days. My son is having a great time and that makes me incredibly happy. But I miss surfing and paddling. "Talking" about it here - though probably dissecting far more than needed - helps with the jonesing. :-[
-
Hi Ken,
It's all good, just a discussion, no need to apologize.
Glad you are having a good time at Disneyland with your son. Thinking, reading and arguing about this stuff shows you are passionate about your sport, I guess that's why I spend all the time doing this, too, and I don't think it's wasted time, just fueling the stoke.
I think the momentum argument is totally valid as is better handling in rough conditions and I mentioned those advantages talking about my heavy Bark unlimited board.
Tow-in boards are the only boards I know of where top level athletes will intentionally make the board heavier to make them perform better.
Among top level SUP racers there is a consensus that light and stiff is fastest. I know a lot of racers and no one thinks making their board heavier will make it faster. Most are obsessed about making it lighter and probably spend a disproportionate amount of money on it. Spending money on better, lighter gear is no substitute for time on the water. You could make the argument that if you have to work more to pay for that lighter gear, you would be better off not buying it and paddling more instead.
Discussing it brings out new ideas and concepts. I did not think spreading out the weights would make a difference until I was urged to try it and learned something new. That's what its all about, so keep it coming.
-
Tow-in boards are the only boards I know of where top level athletes will intentionally make the board heavier to make them perform better.
http://www.standupzone.com/Sept08_Peahi_P10-17.pdf (http://www.standupzone.com/Sept08_Peahi_P10-17.pdf)
-
Among top level SUP racers there is a consensus that light and stiff is fastest. I know a lot of racers and no one thinks making their board heavier will make it faster. Most are obsessed about making it lighter and probably spend a disproportionate amount of money on it.
Very cool test results. Thanks for doing it!
I'm in agreement with everything you've said, except for the comment above. There is no question that light weight will be faster than heavier, especially in a racing situation. However stiffness may be overrated. Take a look at the Aleutian Baidarka kayak design, which is incredibly fast, and has a flexible hull that some engineers think make it faster than a rigid hull -- especially in rough water.
http://www.wolfgangbrinck.com/boats/classes/buildaleutian.html (http://www.wolfgangbrinck.com/boats/classes/buildaleutian.html)
There are some reports from early western mariners that Aleuts may have been able to get their kayaks up to planing speeds using muscle power alone. These are impossible to confirm now however, since most of the ancient baidarka knowledge was lost through western domination of their culture. The Aleuts had a lot of design innovations that may helped them reach very fast speeds, including the first ever implementation of a bulbous bow to minimize wave-making resistance (as seen on freighters and tankers today). Also, the oil-rich seal skin hulls also helped reduce frictional resistance. And, of course, the skin-on-frame construction could be made VERY light weight. George Dyson explains all of this in his book on Baidarkas.
I'm getting an idea for a Battle of the Paddle racer design. :)
-
I'm getting an idea for a Battle of the Paddle racer design. :)
You're not going to kill a seal, string his skin across a wooden frame and use his nose as a bulbous bow are you??? :o :o :P
I'll call Sea Shepherd now!! :D
-
LOL. No!! You've got a sick mind :)
-
Once again, I stand corrected.
The momentum of a heavier board is clearly an advantage if you are dropping into big waves, especially with offshore winds and chop on the face like at Jaws.
Thanks for the info on Aleutian kayaks, too. I'm amazed at the sophisticated hull design and ultralight construction using just skin and wood, cool. I can see how flex in the right places can make sense in rough water conditions.
I had another thought about the weight experiment and the effect of spreading out the weight on the deck. If you are carrying cargo on the deck of a tourning board, packing it in the middle would make the board yaw more than mounting it closer to the nose or tail of the board. Mounting cargo on the nose can get in the way of the paddle though and keeping the weight lower would make the board mode stable. So, it makes sense to have cargo hatches that allow you to load heavier items low and towards front and back. I'm sure the Aleutian Baidarka kayakers figured this out long ago but to me it's a new concept.
-
When I ordered my new Bark 14' recently, I asked Joe about going Carbon to save weight. He has decided it isn't making enough difference to make it worth it for most people. He said it would add $600 to go all carbon, version glass with some carbon reinforcement, and it would only save 3LBS. He said he doesn't believe it is worth it anymore. He even mentioned seriously considering abandoning it from his BOP boards, unless it was unlimited class, where the strenght of carbon matters. If I remember correctly, the top speed was about the same on the glass and carbon versions of his boards, but the lighter carbon board got up to speed one stroke quicker. That part I got from a video interview, I think. In any case, it shocked me to think he might go away from carbon on BOP boards, but he said it was costing him too much money in damaged boards, that get left out in the sun, and that with the latest designs, it isn't making much if any difference. I was plenty ready to pay the extra to go all carbon, if he thought it was worth it, but he talked me out of it.
I also think the test you did (while very nice of you to go to the trouble) doesn't reflect real world scenarios. 30LBS extra if way too much for the comparission to make sense. Worst case scenario, you have a 15lbs difference or there abouts, between the Aviso Hollow Carbon or some of the Bark or comparable race boards. 13lbs versus 28lbs or so.
-
I also think the test you did (while very nice of you to go to the trouble) doesn't reflect real world scenarios. 30LBS extra if way too much for the comparission to make sense. Worst case scenario, you have a 15lbs difference or there abouts, between the Aviso Hollow Carbon or some of the Bark or comparable race boards. 13lbs versus 28lbs or so.
Like Joe Bark told you, the difference in speed is very small.
I could have tested the 12'6 Amundson in AST vs the carbon/ kevlar version which is 4 lbs lighter.
The reason I used 30 lbs was to get measureable results. The average speed difference in the sprint test was about 3 seconds for 30 lbs of extra weight. I think it's safe to extrapolate that a weight difference of 10 lbs would result in a speed difference of 1 seconds and half a second for 5 lbs difference. The problem is that a difference of half a second is too small to be conclusive given the variables of this test.
-
So at the end of the day, can we agree that the weight difference has much more benefit to the out of water carrying, than the in water paddling? Seems to me that while there may be a small difference in speed, the other factors (length, width, stabilty, volume, etc.) probably have much more to do with how fast you will go?
-
Its up to each individual to decide what is important. A large weight difference is easily measurable and noticeable, but if you are not racing then its up to you whether it matters if you are going 2-5% slower.
-
When I ordered my new Bark 14' recently, I asked Joe about going Carbon to save weight. He has decided it isn't making enough difference to make it worth it for most people. He said it would add $600 to go all carbon, version glass with some carbon reinforcement, and it would only save 3LBS. He said he doesn't believe it is worth it anymore. He even mentioned seriously considering abandoning it from his BOP boards, unless it was unlimited class, where the strenght of carbon matters. If I remember correctly, the top speed was about the same on the glass and carbon versions of his boards, but the lighter carbon board got up to speed one stroke quicker. That part I got from a video interview, I think. In any case, it shocked me to think he might go away from carbon on BOP boards, but he said it was costing him too much money in damaged boards, that get left out in the sun, and that with the latest designs, it isn't making much if any difference. I was plenty ready to pay the extra to go all carbon, if he thought it was worth it, but he talked me out of it.
I also think the test you did (while very nice of you to go to the trouble) doesn't reflect real world scenarios. 30LBS extra if way too much for the comparission to make sense. Worst case scenario, you have a 15lbs difference or there abouts, between the Aviso Hollow Carbon or some of the Bark or comparable race boards. 13lbs versus 28lbs or so.
30 pounds isn't too much weight and this test helped clear a lot of things up for my interests at least. I think once the weights were spread out, the test results were as close to real world conditions as it gets for what was involved. This test wasn't just about racing weight. Roto moulded SUPs were brought into the equation and there can be a large weight difference. The Amundson 12'6" was used in this test and in carbon it is around 28 pounds and the standard weight is 32 pounds. One plastic SUP manufacturer has a listed weight for a 12'6" model at 45 pounds, 14' model at 54 pounds, and a 16' model at 59 pounds. Sure, there could have been tests done at lighter weight increments, but 30 pounds represents the large difference one can expect with SUPs across the spectrum. Roto moulded is the extreme, but the interest is there. Also, 30 pounds in this test can represent a bag of gear, which helps tell us how much slower we can expect to be with a loaded board. The Yaw effects of placing the weights in the middle of the board as opposed to spreading the weight out across the board was useful as well.
-
To me this still doesn't make sense. The Roto Molded boards don't compete with race boards in any way. Those boards are typically designed for recreation and aren't going to be designed for the fastest conditions. It is not their purpose. Most the arguments I have seen on this board, typically are regarding boards that don't differ more than 5 lbs, with the 15lbs example I gave earlier being the extreme. Trying to compare a light weight carbon fibre race board to a roto molded board seems silly. Like comparing apples and oranges. The reason it was brought up had more to do with completely isolating the testing conditions. That way shape and design are taken out of the equation. In that scenario, it would truly come down to what type of difference the extra weight made. The nice that about that test condition, is the weight would be evenly distributed and almost part of the hull design, rather than some weights added to the top of the board in an unatural or uneven way.
-
I think this test is about as real as need be. Everyone can agree that the difference in flatwater overall speed is pretty small. So if you're not racing, weight really doesn't matter too much. But anyone who races, or even moreso, anyone who is doing downwind races or runs, should know that a light board can make a significant difference in catching bumps. As mentioned, catching bumps is quick business; and taking one or two extra strokes to get up to speed is huge. And going 5% faster overall could move you quite a ways up the rankings in a tight race with many participants.
As for the methods, I would think outside of weighted mats, the weights plates might be just fine for these purposes. If I understand correctly, the roto boards are hollow. But are they baffled on the inside? How would you keep the sand or water - or whatever is used for weights - from shifting around in the board? One lean on a rail and all the water/sand goes to one side, etc...
-
I was thinking about the results today and what they mean.
So first, some simple math:
I rounded the sprint results to 3 seconds slower with 30 pounds extra weights. Over 48 seconds total that is a difference of just over 6 %
I'm assuming that each additional pound has a proportional effect on speed, so 6% divided by 30 pounds= 0.2%
So, I'm assuming that a pound of weight to the board makes it 0.2% slower.
So 5 extra pounds makes it 1% slower and 15 extra pounds 3% slower
This sounds very minimal and if you are cruising or touring, who cares if you are going 1% slower, that's only 36 seconds per hour of paddling.
I just want to put it in perspective from a racing standpoint.
Imagine for a moment that you are Rob Rojas and just finished the BOP Elite race in 1:03:15
If you want to check the results:
http://raceresults.eternaltiming.com/index.cfm/20101002_Battle_of_the_Paddle.htm?Fuseaction=Results&Class=Elite+SUP+Individual%7EOpen+MElite (http://raceresults.eternaltiming.com/index.cfm/20101002_Battle_of_the_Paddle.htm?Fuseaction=Results&Class=Elite+SUP+Individual%7EOpen+MElite)
You finished the Elite race in 15th place- a respectable finish against the world's top SUP athletes, but not top ten, no podium, trophy, prize money, shaking Jerry and Sparkys hands, pictures in the mags and on the web etc.
Matt Becker, on the other hand, finished in ninth place in 1:03:08. His time was 7 seconds (or 0.185%) faster and he makes the cut.
If you knew that making your board just one pound lighter would have made you 0.2% faster would you still say that weight does not matter?
I think not.
-
To me this still doesn't make sense. The Roto Molded boards don't compete with race boards in any way. Those boards are typically designed for recreation and aren't going to be designed for the fastest conditions. It is not their purpose. Most the arguments I have seen on this board, typically are regarding boards that don't differ more than 5 lbs, with the 15lbs example I gave earlier being the extreme. Trying to compare a light weight carbon fibre race board to a roto molded board seems silly. Like comparing apples and oranges. The reason it was brought up had more to do with completely isolating the testing conditions. That way shape and design are taken out of the equation. In that scenario, it would truly come down to what type of difference the extra weight made. The nice that about that test condition, is the weight would be evenly distributed and almost part of the hull design, rather than some weights added to the top of the board in an unatural or uneven way.
This never started as a super high performance racing topic. There was many different scenarios. Not just racing, and plastic SUPs got brought up several times over the course of the debate. It's not silly and no one was comparing roto moulded to a racing board either. It was more about heavier boards carrying carrying more glide and momentum vs lighter boards being faster getting up to speed and over longer distances in general. I'm interested in several different types of boards for touring/distance and the weights vary dramatically from 28 pounds with a 12'6" model, to 50 pounds+ for a plastic board. There is many different reasons why I am entertaining such a wide weight range between boards, and racing certainly isn't one of them. I am not alone on this and I have noticed other paddlers enquiring about the increasing number of plastic designs right now. This is why the 30 pound weight difference is of particular interest to me. Spreading out the weight isn't exactly the same as a heavier SUP, but it is the closest thing a the tester could come to the actual thing and it showed a markable difference than with having the weight centered. Makes enough sense to me.
-
Fine test, fine conclusions. I think most people can sort it out from here.
If you are playing around or cruising the extra weight doesn't make much difference. When I bought my 14' Glide I could have had the carbon version for about the same money. Elected for the heavier board because I'm hard on equipment and the Columbia River is brutal. I have NO expectation that the heavier board presents any advantage other than that.
As I recall the genesis of this debate it was that heavier boards might be advantageous in some conditions. I'm sure some folks will still maintain that is true, I've never seen it and this test doesn't show it. I LIKE the way a heavier board feels in the surf, but there's not much question in my mind that most if not all of the performance factors are diminished by weight.
It comes down to cost and how you intend to use the board. It's not just formal racing. I don't know about the rest of you, but for me and my friends, if three of us were paddling across a kiddie pond the guy in the back would want to be in front. Being the last guy to the beach on a Maliko run is just not a good thing. Most of the time improvements come from paddling better, getting into better shape, reading the waves better, catching more runners, and losing the blubber. But then there's that five or six percent difference in the board.
-
I agree with you, Bill, training runs can be just as competitive as a race, nobody likes to be the last guy. A 5-6% speed advantage is huge, usually speed differences are much smaller.
I got a message asking what GPS I used but can't figure out how to reply.
I used the Garmin Fortrex 401 that my wife gave me for father's day last year. It's a great training tool and I like to tape it on the board in front of me with electrical tape so I can monitor the speed while I'm paddling. Using a wrist band GPS makes it much harder to look at the current speed so you don't get that instant feedback.
It also has a pointer function which was a great feature for the Molokai race.
-
Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, but what may be a small advantage in the first minutes becomes a huge advantage as 10 or 20 mile goes on. My heavy 18 felt awesome early on in a run (especially if it was really windy) but fatigue sets in more quickly on a heavy board and then the disadvantage multiplies.
-
And then you have to carry the pig to the car.
-
"And then you have to carry the pig to the car."
You guys crack me up!!!
-
I'vbe never gotten hurt paddling. But I've hurt myself a few times carrying a heavy board (or a surfski) back to the racks.
-
I went paddling the morning with my friend Scott (known here as 1paddle2paddle) and we continued the discussion offline, especially about weight distribution and its effect. I just wanted to share some of the things we talked about to open them up for further discussion.
1) The test used weights on top of the board, not evenly distributed. Also, I used the sprint results to calculate the 0.2% effect per pound. Most likely the difference would have been smaller with even weight distribution and over a longer course. My estimate is that one extra pound, evenly distributed will make the board somewhere between 0.1% to 0.2% slower.
-
2) Static weight vs. dynamic weight. Scott said this has been a discussion topic amongst surf ski users. Some have argued here that instead of getting a board that is 5 pound lighter, you could just go on a diet and lose 5 pounds. Assuming you have 5 extra pound of fat and can lose it without losing any muscle mass, you should lose it, no doubt.
The argument Scott brought up is that body weight is dynamic, it can be shifted and used to your advantage, while the weight of the board is static and can't be shifted. This implies that a difference in static weight (equipment) has a bigger effect than a difference in dynamic weight (body weight).
I think most agree that a heavier board is slower, especially accelerating. So if you lose a bunch of body weight, you might be able to go faster but you still won't be as fast on a heavy board as on a light board. So, a light board is faster than a heavy board, regardless of the rider weight.
-
3) We decided it was too early in the morning to get into this but maybe some of you want to discuss it:
I talked to one of the guys from future fins at a trade show a while back. He showed me some new fins they make that are so light that they actually float. He told me you could feel the lift they create in the tail and that the weight of the fins has a bigger impact on performance than say the weight of the board. It sounds reasonable and I have no reasone to boubt it but I can't explain why it would make a difference where the weight is located. Does anyone want to take a crack at it?
-
Weight/buoyancy in the tail section, i figure, helps most with catching bumps. When we move forward on the board to help us catch waves or bumps, we are placing more of the board - more foam - behind us, making the tail more buoyant. This allows the wave to lift the tail more easily; then gravity does the rest. This is why a longboard catches waves easier - you have more board behind you. So I'd guess a buoyant fin could make some difference.
How much of a difference will probably depend on what board and fin you have now. It will very likely not matter to those on heavier boards. For fins, I have a 10" Futures Classic fin that weighs over a pound. May not sound like much, but when you figure someone mentioned going carbon only saves three pounds, one pound is pretty significant. I can't imagine there being much difference if you already have a lightweight fin. Then again, we are messing with an area where there is much less foam to begin with, so weight should have proportionately more effect there.
Will be interesting to see if you can feel or measure a difference.
My first test with such a fin would be to get the lightest board you can, mark your feet position for optimum trim. Use the heaviest fin you can find first, then use the buoyant one, and see wasabi. Fun fun fun!
-
I could lose 5 pounds without losing muscle mass...not that I WILL though.
-
Roto moulded is the extreme, but the interest is there. Also, 30 pounds in this test can represent a bag of gear, which helps tell us how much slower we can expect to be with a loaded board.
No kidding. I haven't even mentioned anything about paddling with my 75 lb dog on board.
If 5 -15 lbs is the norm, then I have to be off the deep end.
-
I got some nice, clean waves this morning on the North Shore, dawn patrolling with a friend. Just wanted to share some more thoughts regarding dynamic vs static weight.
There is often a point during early takeoffs when you are stuck at the top of a wave, trying to drop in but not quite on the face yet. If you have a light board, you can often kick it out in front of you and down onto the face by quickly moving back and then take the drop with your feet in position for the bottom turn.
When you are dropping into bumps on downwinders you can do the same thing and make it into a bump that you would otherwise miss.
This is an exmple of using the dynamic weight of your body to move the static weight of the board.
In this situation, the ratio of static weight to dynamic weight is important.
If you are a 200 pound rider on a 20 pound board it will be easy to kick the board forward because the momentum of your body weight is 10 times that of the board, so by making a small shift back, the board will shoot forward. If a 100 lbs rider tries to kick the same 20 lbs board forward it will only move half as much relative to the body. My conclusion is that the ratio of rider weight to board weight is important. It's also an example why losing 10 pounds of body weight will not have the same effect as losing 10 lbs of board weight.
-
I did not see if anyone considered the buoyancy factor in this topic. a race board is like a boat and its hull is designed for a displacement which will give the good immersion, the proper immersed length, etc... overloading it will immerse transom, hull, increase wetted surface etc and will give extra drag. ... resulting to slower speed.
a board and rider which is within its designated water lines should perform well. if you reduce weight of board by few pounds and increase wight ot rider the same, the board will be more handy and the gain of speed will be felt if the rider is more powerful only.
If the board is heavier and the rider lighter, the theoretical max speed will remain the same, there will be a little more stability ( the global center of gravity is lowered ), the board will make a similar speed assuming a similar powerful rider , but it will be more difficult to speed up ( ie catching a bump on a downwind trip or starting up a race) . The board will have also more inertia, wich is an advantage in some situations such as upwind run ( reduced pitching and pounding).
But whatever weight of board, if a too heavy rider paddles on it and the transom is immersed, nose dives in water etc, the advantage of a superlight board is bullss$$$t
We can say a lighter board is generally an advantage, but we do not have to worry about a couple of pounds: a good rider on a heavy board will still perform wel, a bad rider on a superight board will not take any advantage
I've been happy when I won a 7 mile race on my 42 pound plywood 14 footer... I'm not sure that 5 pound less shoud have been doing a difference.
-
A good summary, Pierre, I agree with what you wrote.
I think an important point is that the rider weight needs to be matched to a design that is tuned to work best at that load. A board that works great for a heavy paddler might not work well for a lighter paddler who will float higher in the water, resulting in a different water entry and exit (and vice versa). The board weight needs to be factored into the equation.