Freeride Board recommendations

AG80 · Joined: 04 Mar 2014 Posts: 39

"FSW" is freestyle wave. I would agree with Zirtaeb. I have an Exocet x-cross 115 liter which is their version of the "freewide" boards and Exocet cross 94 which is FSW. Those 2 boards cover 4.5m to 8.0m conditions for me.

jingebritsen · Joined: 21 Aug 2002 Posts: 3371

here i go again with my rant about FSW. the boards are actually just free rides with a sexier name.

freestyle boards plane quickly, top out, and are rough riding in chop. think of them as slalom boards with their tails chopped off. the geometry is cramped. fin and foot straps are moved forward on the slalom rocker. this also helps the tiny fins used provide a bit more lift. the boards are designed to pop, spin, and slide all directions. yet, they stink on waves. in a phrase, not enough rocker.

wave boards have enough rocker to make turning on waves easier and more radical. they need more wind to plane. lots of dedicated wave boards for hookipa and similar spots are so rockered out that they are bucking broncos over wash board chop.

two more dissimilar names should not be paired.

BTW, lots of free rides are pretty decent in onshore conditions while wave riding. and, yes, if waves get more ideal they will suffer. typically, the FSW name is a hook for those that never quite make it into the surf to think they might some day, but never do. some savvy marketing guy exploited that.

rollerrider · Joined: 17 May 2003 Posts: 100

Exocet Cross. Plug n play

TheAdmiral · Joined: 27 Dec 2009 Posts: 43

I'm hoping for an opinion from Jingebritsen on exocet 138 scross and xcross. Which is better early planning. Weight 165 and can plane well but don't pump on to plane. Is carbon due to weight savings worth the money. I've sailed a 138/scross once and thought it was both early planning and very fast for a wide board. I currently use a Starboard f155 for early planning but gybing a challenge at 85 wide. Also sail an Isonic 145/88wide which requires a lot of rider imput due to it short(224 length) and a lot of down wind to plane. Any opinions are appreciated. Mark

AG80 · Joined: 04 Mar 2014 Posts: 39

I can comment on the X-cross. I weigh 180-185 and bought the x-cross to replace a Fanatic Shark 135. The shark was a very good freeride board, but the x-cross at 115 liters planes about the same as the shark at 135 liters and is more maneuverable. Jibes very well. It will plane with a 7.5m sail in 12-13 kn. I am very happy with the purchase.

jingebritsen · Joined: 21 Aug 2002 Posts: 3371

admiral, s-cross 138 close outs are the ideal ticket for your money...

x-cross 138 is good, and i am about to test the next edition. either choice is excellent.

8.3 kg for pro
8.8 kg for silver

0 of the s-cross 138's in stock at sandy point progressive sports. check stock at other dealers

plenty of x-moves available.

VinceSF · Joined: 05 Apr 2005 Posts: 249 Location: Maui, HI

jingebritsen · Joined: 21 Aug 2002 Posts: 3371

vince, wave boards different rocker to me means exactly what i said. free rides. wave boards with flatter rockers are exactly that.

marc5 · Joined: 21 Oct 2015 Posts: 60 Location: SW Ohio

(sorry to sort of hijack this thread, but......)

jingebritsen, your comments regarding FSW are interesting. I've been looking at FSW (RRD, etc) in the 95-100L range to replace an old Seatrend ATV 8-9 (89L). That was a great bump and jump board for 4.5-5.5. Really nice for Great Lakes side onshore waves and flat water carving. Now I'm in a place that's more flat water/chop. Would pair with a Firemove 122 I use down to 6.2. (181 lbs, pretty experienced sailor). Thoughts?
Thanks!