LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 45 of 128 FirstFirst ... 3543444546475595 ... LastLast
Results 441 to 450 of 1274
  1. #441
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Charleston
    Posts
    1,268
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Stuart View Post
    Here you go:

    Roy,

    Thanks for putting this up.

    I'll say it again, I and a large portion of the SI crowd have a different idea of what performing on a surfboard means. Like I said earlier, you have a go-fast, go-straight board and in your mind that is the epitome of efficiency. That's fine with me.

    I think the surfer's idea of performance in this video have more in common with a lot of the SI users. In the video at 1:36 Beano tries a couple times to make a front side turn up the face of the wave. He tries this unsuccessfully then moves back further on the board to try again and still can't do it and finishes out the ride by jumping over the wave at 1:45.

    Later, when Jay is on the board he seems to be riding further back on the board as well and getting bumped around pretty violently but still holding on at 3:18 you can see he is trying to trim up to find the high line and at 3:24 attempts a backside turn down the wave and the board proves to be too unstable for him to complete the turn. The later rides show him trying to carve but unable to as the back of the board is too deep in the water.

    I know that these guy obviously don't know how to ride this board as you stated earlier. You ride closer to the nose than them. However, this video and their surfing also serve as examples of how the board they're riding, that shares similar design principles to your other boards, is able to catch waves and trim but fails when a carving turn is attempted.

    Early on in the Naval Architecture of Planing Hull by Lindsay Lord he writes of the early Japanese and Italian PT boats with 1800 HP that "took ten boat lengths to turn, with speed falling off badly during the turn." We see evidence of this with your videos. These surfers attempted turns and were punished for it, you trim but attempt no turns. We've seen this many times through the videos you've provided.

    Again, as I've said earlier, there is a problem with the definition of performance. In my opinion, your definition of performance is riding a wave for as long as possible with minimal movement. My definition of performance would also be riding a wave as long as possible but meanwhile, I try to see the top and bottom of the wave and with a powerful turn in there if possible.... throwing buckets if you will. That's just me and my level of progression right now. If you are at the top of the game for the boards you're making and riding how do you see them progressing? I see people riding modern surfboard doing backflips now. Where is the future performance of your designs going?

  2. #442
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Charleston
    Posts
    1,268
    Images
    8
    Another question for your Roy. What type of vehicle do you drive? No ill intent with the question, just wondering if your vehicle is modded out for efficiency too.

  3. #443
    Clemson Surf, that was more than Roy deserves in a reply. He is not here to have a 2 way discussion. He is here to force feed us the absolute most ridiculous idea of a surfboard and make us believe it has no weakness in its design.
    Which does not take anyone long to see his board falls painfully short.
    So... what is the future of Roy's boards? Roy's surfboards have no future other then an interesting blip to dissapear in time. Roy will be the only voice and when his voice is gone so will his boards.

  4. #444
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Charleston
    Posts
    1,268
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post
    Clemson Surf, that was more than Roy deserves in a reply. He is not here to have a 2 way discussion. He is here to force feed us the absolute most ridiculous idea of a surfboard and make us believe it has no weakness in its design.
    Which does not take anyone long to see his board falls painfully short.
    So... what is the future of Roy's boards? Roy's surfboards have no future other then an interesting blip to dissapear in time. Roy will be the only voice and when his voice is gone so will his boards.
    I've been here from the begining and know the game very well.

  5. #445
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Monmouth Beach, NJ
    Posts
    2,458
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post
    I would describe the imbalance you mention as a pull to one side or the other, but to call it lift would be like saying someone who jumps up and down was flying. Not to mention Koo Koo Roy will take your comments as support of his design.
    As I said, it seems to me to be a bit of a play on words, at least in the context of this discussion. And that seems to be the theme of this entire thread... terms like "lift," "efficiency," "performance"... and dozens of others are being used without consistency across the divide between Roy and his detractors... all with varying degrees of truth, and nothing but cursory suggestions of explanation. This thread has been nothing but a game... one that everyone involved is loving to play. People love to hate on Roy, and Roy is toying with anyone who will play along. (He'll likely deny that... we'll see.)

    Still... I believe Roy has a lot of knowledge about design theory, at least as it relates to his designs... more than most. I'm simply trying to understand HOW his boards work, and understand it in a non-judgmental way, because the argument of "good or bad," "better or worse" gets nowhere when you have different design goals. So I do not support his designs... they're not in line with my design goals. I just think it's interesting to see how his various design principals are put together to achieve a desired result... and I believe he's doing just that. It's just not a result I'm after, personally. Whether Roy can do the same, and recognize the benefits of other design principles applied to other design goals, is questionable. But calling modern surfing aimless flapping, and criticizing other shapers and their products, even going so far as to call them goons, does not imply that he has much appreciation for the work and contributions of others. Now go ahead, Roy... tell me how "incorrect" I am. Since my reading comprehension skills need improvement, and I have no idea about the physics of surfing or how the thruster works, I'm sure I've gotten you, and your boards, all wrong.
    Last edited by LBCrew; Feb 14, 2013 at 03:10 PM.

  6. #446
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,504
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemsonSurf View Post
    Roy,

    Thanks for putting this up.

    I'll say it again, I and a large portion of the SI crowd have a different idea of what performing on a surfboard means. Like I said earlier, you have a go-fast, go-straight board and in your mind that is the epitome of efficiency. That's fine with me.

    I think the surfer's idea of performance in this video have more in common with a lot of the SI users. In the video at 1:36 Beano tries a couple times to make a front side turn up the face of the wave. He tries this unsuccessfully then moves back further on the board to try again and still can't do it and finishes out the ride by jumping over the wave at 1:45.

    Later, when Jay is on the board he seems to be riding further back on the board as well and getting bumped around pretty violently but still holding on at 3:18 you can see he is trying to trim up to find the high line and at 3:24 attempts a backside turn down the wave and the board proves to be too unstable for him to complete the turn. The later rides show him trying to carve but unable to as the back of the board is too deep in the water.

    I know that these guy obviously don't know how to ride this board as you stated earlier. You ride closer to the nose than them. However, this video and their surfing also serve as examples of how the board they're riding, that shares similar design principles to your other boards, is able to catch waves and trim but fails when a carving turn is attempted.

    Early on in the Naval Architecture of Planing Hull by Lindsay Lord he writes of the early Japanese and Italian PT boats with 1800 HP that "took ten boat lengths to turn, with speed falling off badly during the turn." We see evidence of this with your videos. These surfers attempted turns and were punished for it, you trim but attempt no turns. We've seen this many times through the videos you've provided.

    Again, as I've said earlier, there is a problem with the definition of performance. In my opinion, your definition of performance is riding a wave for as long as possible with minimal movement. My definition of performance would also be riding a wave as long as possible but meanwhile, I try to see the top and bottom of the wave and with a powerful turn in there if possible.... throwing buckets if you will. That's just me and my level of progression right now. If you are at the top of the game for the boards you're making and riding how do you see them progressing? I see people riding modern surfboard doing backflips now. Where is the future performance of your designs going?
    It's all about the g-force. You don't get much from cruising, which is why modern longboards are made to turn quickly. That is what gets your adrenaline going.

  7. #447
    Quote Originally Posted by LBCrew View Post

    A symmetrically foiled fins does create lift. It's just at zero angle of attack, the lift on both sides is balanced and equal, and there is no motion. But once you change the angle of attack, even slightly, forces become unbalanced, and motion occurs. So technically, single fins can and do create lift.... but it's nothing compared to the amount of lift created by a single foiled fin, so this is a bit of a play on words, IMO.

    As I said, all fins create lift when there is an angle of attack.

    Saying that the lift of a double foiled fin is 'nothing' compared with a single foiled fin is totally incorrect. The amount of lift produced by a foil depends upon at least 5 factors, and it is thus meaningless and hardly a 'play on words' to state that the lift of a double foiled fin ( which is what you are using as your argument against lift being produced by single fins) is 'nothing compared to single foiled fins'.

    Single fins are quite capable of producing more lift than other fin setups, it depends upon many factors: area, foil, aspect ratio, speed, angle of attack, chord ratio etc.

    So the bottom line is that I am correct and those who have stated here that single fins cannot create lift at all are wrong... there's some careful back pedalling rearguard action going on, but 100% wrong is still 100% wrong.

    http://www.roystuart.biz
    .

  8. #448
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Stuart View Post
    As I said, all fins create lift when there is an angle of attack.

    Saying that the lift of a double foiled fin is 'nothing' compared with a single foiled fin is totally incorrect. The amount of lift produced by a foil depends upon at least 5 factors, and it is thus meaningless and hardly a 'play on words' to state that the lift of a double foiled fin ( which is what you are using as your argument against lift being produced by single fins) is 'nothing compared to single foiled fins'.

    Single fins are quite capable of producing more lift than other fin setups, it depends upon many factors: area, foil, aspect ratio, speed, angle of attack, chord ratio etc.

    So the bottom line is that I am correct and those who have stated here that single fins cannot create lift at all are wrong... there's some careful back pedalling rearguard action going on, but 100% wrong is still 100% wrong.

    http://www.roystuart.biz
    .
    As I said before, single fins don't cut it when it comes to lift. if a single fin is the same shape on both sides (which in surfboards they are) there is no measurable lift being imparted onto the board.

    Roy I honestly think you have zero clue as what is happening with your surfboard.

  9. #449
    Quote Originally Posted by MFitz73 View Post

    Im very dissapointed in you LBCrew. I would describe the imbalance you mention as a pull to one side or the other, but to call it lift would be like saying someone who jumps up and down was flying. Not to mention Koo Koo Roy will take your comments as support of his design.... which I have to now say again...
    You can't go against the laws of physics, and I assure you that all fins create lift, as do all surfboards.


    ROY'S BOARDS CREATE ZERO LIFT....
    Roy,don't buy it? you fly in an airplane with no wings but all the vertical fins you want. I'll fly in a regular airplane with wings.... we'll compare notes at the end....
    Presumably you are alluding to lift which acts vertically with respect to the surfboard bottom via fin cant and postulating that vertical fins do not produce this.

    That is however a different proposition from saying that 'ROY'S SURFBOARDS CREATE ZERO LIFT' ... and it is incorrect in any case since:

    1) Many of my boards have far more horizontal lifting fin area than the multi finned boards available on the regular market.

    2) Surfboard hulls are the main source of vertical lift.



    The problem with all the longboarders we see in Koo Koo Roy's video is that they all seem to be bad at surfing... even the "enforcer" that Roy was talking about.
    Trying to compete with my boards has that effect on many 'good' surfers.

  10. #450
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemsonSurf View Post
    No kidding man. No buddy really feels our pain in Charleston. My first time surfing Wrightsville beach I passed some guys leaving the beach looking pissed about the waves. When i saw them I was pumped and stayed out there most of the day. I would call out of work for the waves in this video.
    Some people say that I always surf bad waves, others say I only surf good waves.

    Lol