View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
dhanson928
Joined: 12 Mar 2012 Posts: 99
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:10 am Post subject: Stupid Kook board question |
|
|
Starboard Isonic W 55? Anyone know anything about these boards? There's one available for a decent price. I have tried The Google to find out more about it...displacement, size, shape, reveiws, etc...but I get nothing on this particular board, just general Isonic Rap. The seller knows nothing about sailing. This one looks pretty old school, but the river doesn't care much, nor do I, if the size and shape are appx correct for my occasional needs.
I'd like a marginal wind board for those days when I head out east to find I either slog a bit or get skunked. I want something in the 90+ liter range to carry a 180lb guy.
Anyone know anything about this particular Starboard model?
Thanks, |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kellydennis
Joined: 02 Apr 2006 Posts: 9
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:44 am Post subject: Ironic |
|
|
That is mostly a Slalom oriented shape my guess is you might be happier looking for a larger freestyle/wave board which will be more fun in moderate swell. Unless your main goal is to go fast, in which case , it would probably work fine. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dhanson928
Joined: 12 Mar 2012 Posts: 99
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:08 am Post subject: Re: Ironic |
|
|
rhysharriman wrote: | That is mostly a Slalom oriented shape my guess is you might be happier looking for a larger freestyle/wave board which will be more fun in moderate swell. Unless your main goal is to go fast, in which case , it would probably work fine. |
Thanks, I knew it was sort of slalom. Just wondered if anyone know the liters and how this budget-priced old board might ride, etc. I am mainly looking to 'get back' to the launch without swimming. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Philgoude
Joined: 05 Sep 2011 Posts: 15
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
dhanson928,
What year is the board you are considering?
You could look into the archives of the Starboard website and find out more about the specs/reviews/etc...
For example, the 2010 website can be found at http://star-board.com/2010/.
It looks like you can go as far back as 2008.
All the best,
Yohann |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20936
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:29 am Post subject: Re: Ironic |
|
|
dhanson928 wrote: | I am mainly looking to 'get back' to the launch without swimming. |
That takes volume, not necessarily narrow niche performance. I can't emphasize strongly enough how right Rhys is. I've gotten obsessed with avoiding swims out east after several hundred of them, but I still wouldn't ride a race board for that purpose; their performance niche is too narrow for that and a big wave/FW/FSW board does that AND is fun in terrain that beats the crap out of Isonics. Catch the May swap meet, buy a big board that turns and rides smoothly and jumps when it's planing and slogs home just as well as an Isonic when neither is planing. You can get excellent ones for <$200 that will be fun all day, not just on flat, FLAT water. Only if the wind drops to zero will a 95-115L liter wavy board not slog, in which case that Isonic won't help you either.
There are also many tricks to avoiding swims, including getting the heck back to shore before upper-level frontal winds lift off the surface as the evening cools down, as happened out east Sunday when the fan literally unplugged around 7:30:17 and the wind dropped from ~ 30 to ~3 mph -- a 99% power decrease -- within a hummingbird's heartbeat. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dhanson928
Joined: 12 Mar 2012 Posts: 99
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 12:37 pm Post subject: Re: Ironic |
|
|
isobars wrote: | dhanson928 wrote: | I am mainly looking to 'get back' to the launch without swimming. |
T. I've gotten obsessed with avoiding swims out east after several hundred of them, but I still wouldn't ride a race board for that purpose; their performance niche is too narrow
beats the crap out of Isonics.
There are also many tricks to avoiding swims, including getting the heck back to shore before upper-level frontal winds |
I tried going through the Starboard web pages pretty vague and hard to decipher...
I stopped windsurfing during the time that Starboard came into wide use, so those boards are unknown to me...and I never was a race guy anyhow. I do have a big wavy polyester board I made for La Ventana and Baja...works fine but it's heavy.
This Isonics I guess you've answered my questions....it's not going to be worthwhile...
I hate swimming and then carrying back from downwind but I hate sitting on the shore when others are sailing even more (I draw my line at 5.7 sq meter sails) ...so I am looking and asking. After about 15yrs in the Gorge, I do know how to minimize my swims by coming in "in time"....but sometimes I still get caught, especially in marginal winds when that "one more reach" might be just barely enough to get back upwind to make the launch again..
Thanks everyone., |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20936
|
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:34 pm Post subject: Re: Ironic |
|
|
dhanson928 wrote: | I do have a big wavy polyester board I made for La Ventana and Baja...works fine but it's heavy. ... I draw my line at 5.7 sq meter sails |
I have several big boards which are a lot of fun for 4.5 to 6.5 on big swell, yet slog very easily at 200#. They weigh about 15 pounds, run 90-96 liters, and slash extremely tightly with just back toe pressure and jibe wide or tight with ease. The primary reasons I normally sail smaller boards is that, for any given shape, smaller boards ride and slash better at full speed on chop. That said, I have had a lot of fun overpowered on a 3.7 and 96 liters of wave board (because the wind line was 500 yards offshore and threatening to move a kilometer offshore). The same board is also a ball powered moderately with a 6.5 on 3'-4' feet of swell on very steady days.
Mike \m/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jorionw96
Joined: 18 Mar 2001 Posts: 33
|
Posted: Fri May 03, 2013 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
3.7 and 96 huh. Sounds lame. Kinda like most of your posts. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20936
|
Posted: Sat May 04, 2013 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jorionw96 wrote: | 1. 3.7 and 96 huh. Sounds lame.
2. Kinda like most of your posts. |
1. Tell that to the east coast ocean sailors who swear bu=y and advise exactly that, rather than use it for situations like a kilometer-wide wind shadow.
2. Nice, useful, relevant contribution to the forum. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jorionw96
Joined: 18 Mar 2001 Posts: 33
|
Posted: Sun May 05, 2013 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK if you are a 200#er you need 30 to 35 average for 3.7. I don't want to be on a 96l board anywhere out east in that amount of wind. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|
|