Roy, your surfboards perform terribly in all aspects compared to all other boards. Your opinion about this is different because it is wrong. You should only ask $2000 maximum, more than that is being selfish. I truly believe you are not a good person. Please dont reply to this i dont care
Here is a review of a Stuart board's abilities as written by an no-agenda Randy Rarick. The whole thing is a longer article, but the part that's of interest is performance, right? Cause that's what's being claimed is 'revolutionary.'
Randy Rarick is being charitable & diplomatic in his performance review of a Stuart board he rode in Hawaii in 2008:
"For Hawaii, you don't need that much rocker. Maybe some nose lift to keep from pearling, but the extreme rocker didn't fit in the curve of the wave and just seemed to slow it down. While the soft rails in the nose are very forgiving, to extend it all the way to the tail makes if feel like an old '60's tanker. I would add some rovings and build up an edge in the tail so that you get some release off the tail. As of now, with the soft rolled rail in the tail, the water wraps over the rail and that combined with the extreme tail lift, just makes it slow down. There is simply no release in the tail. The fin as mentioned above is more area than necessary for the tail width and just tends to create additional drag. Template wise, I would of moved the wide point forward to allow more tail rail, which would of improved the "run" aspect of the board, as now with the curve in the back, it just cuts down what "turning" radius there is. The rocker is way too extreme and you could cut off two feet of nose and it would not hamper the performance of the board in any way. This particular board, as mentioned was fun to ride. The only problem is that I had to make it work. It didn't make it easy for me. I doubt I would want to take it out in anything much hollower than what I had it in, since as I mentioned above, there was no way I could get any drive off the bottom. On a big facy wave it would be fun, but the idea of taking this out to Pipeline would be a scary thought in my opinion."
Doesn't sound like it's worth being in Costco, let alone $500k. People buying this thing really are clown acts.
Sorry, but Randy is totally wrong, he only rode 6 waves and fell off on four of them.
Take his comments re. rocker for example, he claims to be a surfboard designer but makes the newbie mistake of saying that the board has a an extreme rocker when it is in fact on the low to moderate side.
His comments re. release are just as silly. The tail is a low drag displacement tail, the water is designed to wrap over it and all the release occurs at the pintail.
There's a lot more BS in there too, but that's enough to be getting on with. Bottom line is that he failed to ride the board as it is designed to be ridden, and failed to realise that this was due to rider error.
Ok, I get it. Everyone is wrong. But you. You are the surfboard way & the truth.
BTW, you're the one who said it's essentially unparalleled in wave-catching function. Yet, a guy with decades of experience on all types of boards "failed." Not the equipment. The rider.
Got it. This is just free PR for you, isn't it? Along the lines of 'any publicity is good publicity.'
Your suggestion that I've said that myself and my boards are "the way" is also wrong, I've never said that. My comments on the performance of these designs are specific, and qualified by specific performance goals.
That is correct.Quote:
BTW, you're the one who said it's essentially unparalleled in wave-catching function. Yet, a guy with decades of experience on all types of boards "failed."
Not the equipment.
It was rider error, and an inability to admit it or adjust to the requirements of the shape.
It doesn't even matter if this board can perform ok. It is still a scam. The guy thinks people walk longboards to keep balance. I can ride in one spot on my friend's Allison and keep perfect balance. Maybe poor nooB surfers are just better at longboarding.