2019 SIC Catalog

[RideTheGlide]

@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.

[burchas]

@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

[RideTheGlide]

Every time I find a new interest, I want immediate expertise. Is that too much to ask?   

[burchas]

Every time I find a new interest, I want immediate expertise. Is that too much to ask?   

I feel your pain. What do you think we're doing here if not group therapy

[Ichabod Spoonbill]

@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! 

[RideTheGlide]

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.

[burchas]

@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! 

No worries. I willing to take one for the team and test all the new boards out there

[burchas]

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

[RideTheGlide]

No worries. I willing to take one for the team and test all the new boards out there

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."

[Luc Benac]

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......

[ukgm]

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.

[PonoBill]

@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.

[RideTheGlide]

@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.  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.

[burchas]

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?

[RideTheGlide]

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).