View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
dvCali
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 Posts: 1314
|
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
U2U2U2 wrote: | This differs from n 5.0 —6.0 steady of your initial post.
95L is not what I would consider for lightest , nor 7.0 |
It depends on your weight. I regularly use my RRD FSW 90 with a 6.5 Point-7 ACX and it is perfectly happy with it. (I am 160.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
U2U2U2
Joined: 06 Jul 2001 Posts: 5467 Location: Shipsterns Bluff, Tasmania. Colorado
|
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A crap load of things , play into this.
Wind and size board availabity and sailor ability. I dont like to slog and a 6.5 on a 90L would be painful if such the case. Powered up , a 105 or 117 for me.
YMMV _________________ K4 fins
4Boards....May the fours be with you
http://www.k4fins.com/fins.html
http://4boards.co.uk/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dllee
Joined: 03 Jul 2009 Posts: 5329 Location: East Bay
|
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A 90-95 liter slalom board will easily sail well with a 7.0. but the same size freeride or fsw would do every bit as nicely with a 6-6.5. Flat rocker, hard tail rails, and light weight the main factors. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dhmark
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 Posts: 376
|
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
https://www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Review/2017-Fanatic-FSW-STB-TE-95-review?page=1
Based on this review and the personal testimonial of a good friend who sails at a slightly better level than me who did the same comparison between Fanatic Freewave 98 and STB 95 at Arenal, and concluded no contest between the 2, I'm looking to get one of these.
Only concern is possibly the short length, but the design really maintains mass and volume right up to the tip and then just cuts off bluntly. I like the narrow width, don't like the look of those short fat FSWs. Trifin will be something interesting to try. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
NOVAAN
Joined: 28 Sep 1994 Posts: 1555
|
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I tried the new short stubby Tabou 3s 96 and 116. They had a boxy tail and full rails. The extreme short shape made it slower to plane and hard to slog compared to the classic 3s. Doable but a bit more work. The biggest issue was in ruff conditions, these boards did not ride nearly as smooth as the classics. Uk windsurfing mag. stated the same. The wide thick tail being the reason. Haven't ridden a Fanatic in a long time. Maybe they have a better platform. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
U2U2U2
Joined: 06 Jul 2001 Posts: 5467 Location: Shipsterns Bluff, Tasmania. Colorado
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
dhmark
Joined: 04 Sep 2007 Posts: 376
|
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another personal testimonial from Kevin at Sunset says the STB freewave is a chop eater (Crissy in SF), they seem to have the right formula. Performance in rough conditions very high on my priority list. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jingebritsen
Joined: 21 Aug 2002 Posts: 3371
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
capetonian
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 Posts: 1197 Location: Florida
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
dhmark wrote: | https://www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Review/2017-Fanatic-FSW-STB-TE-95-review?page=1
Based on this review and the personal testimonial of a good friend who sails at a slightly better level than me who did the same comparison between Fanatic Freewave 98 and STB 95 at Arenal, and concluded no contest between the 2, I'm looking to get one of these.
Only concern is possibly the short length, but the design really maintains mass and volume right up to the tip and then just cuts off bluntly. I like the narrow width, don't like the look of those short fat FSWs. Trifin will be something interesting to try. |
Another +1 for the Fanatic Stubby FSW. I have the Fanatic Stubby FSW 105 L and a Quatro Tetra 109 L. I used to have the Tabou 116 L classic. The Fanatic is 229 cm vs. 238 for the Tetra and 242 cm for the Tabou classic. The Fanatic is easily the most easy planing of the 3 boards. I used it from 6.7 down to 5.5, and even with a 5.5 it is still comfortable, though typically if there is enough wind for a 5.5 I'll ride a wave board unless the wind is very onshore, in which case the early planing of the 105 is great for getting out through the waves. It wave rides slightly better than the Quatro Tetra in cross shore conditions and noticably better than the Tetra in onshore conditions. My only complaint is the footstrap distance apart. I am 6'2 so I put the back strap in the furthest back holes and front strap in furthest forward holes, and that is OK, but not as far apart as I normally set the straps. People taller than me will probably find the footstraps too close together. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
U2U2U2
Joined: 06 Jul 2001 Posts: 5467 Location: Shipsterns Bluff, Tasmania. Colorado
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
capetonian wrote: | dhmark wrote: | https://www.seabreeze.com.au/forums/Windsurfing/Review/2017-Fanatic-FSW-STB-TE-95-review?page=1
Based on this review and the personal testimonial of a good friend who sails at a slightly better level than me who did the same comparison between Fanatic Freewave 98 and STB 95 at Arenal, and concluded no contest between the 2, I'm looking to get one of these.
Only concern is possibly the short length, but the design really maintains mass and volume right up to the tip and then just cuts off bluntly. I like the narrow width, don't like the look of those short fat FSWs. Trifin will be something interesting to try. |
Another +1 for the Fanatic Stubby FSW. I have the Fanatic Stubby FSW 105 L and a Quatro Tetra 109 L. I used to have the Tabou 116 L classic. The Fanatic is 229 cm vs. 238 for the Tetra and 242 cm for the Tabou classic. The Fanatic is easily the most easy planing of the 3 boards. I used it from 6.7 down to 5.5, and even with a 5.5 it is still comfortable, though typically if there is enough wind for a 5.5 I'll ride a wave board unless the wind is very onshore, in which case the early planing of the 105 is great for getting out through the waves. It wave rides slightly better than the Quatro Tetra in cross shore conditions and noticably better than the Tetra in onshore conditions. My only complaint is the footstrap distance apart. I am 6'2 so I put the back strap in the furthest back holes and front strap in furthest forward holes, and that is OK, but not as far apart as I normally set the straps. People taller than me will probably find the footstraps too close together. |
Nice post/review. First I recall seeing that has sail sizes that are similar to mine.
I’m short so the only comment on footstraps is my Witchcraft has wide placement, which I got used to, and guess what my others are now the same. _________________ K4 fins
4Boards....May the fours be with you
http://www.k4fins.com/fins.html
http://4boards.co.uk/ |
|
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
|
|
|