 |
Join Date: Jan 2007
10-01-2009, 6:48 PM
|
Reply
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
10-01-2009, 8:36 PM
|
Reply
|
|
i like the similar flex action on your "hola" video too.
maybe this is too much thinking (or too little), but i guess you could say the belly is like a 2-3 inch spring since that is about the size of the rocker
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
10-01-2009, 8:39 PM
|
Reply
|
|
Definitely.
In iPhoto I zoomed in a lot more and it was crazy looking.
Couldn't really get the quality good though so I apologize.
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
10-01-2009, 9:04 PM
|
Reply
|
Rainbow Bright called... and she wants her outfit back! If you dont know who that is.. Google it! 
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
10-01-2009, 9:32 PM
|
Reply
|
|
^^^hahahaha RAINBOW BRIGHT!!!!!
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
10-02-2009, 6:05 AM
|
Reply
|
|
Wow... busted out the Rainbow Brite... lol
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
10-02-2009, 6:27 AM
|
Reply
|
|
dang.... that was funny
|
|
10-02-2009, 6:44 AM
|
Reply
|
|
Anyone else see a board flattening out as a bad thing? That looks terrible.
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
10-02-2009, 6:56 AM
|
Reply
|
|
^ not on a landing.
Do you car springs flatten over bumps?!
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
10-02-2009, 7:17 AM
|
Reply
|
flex the other way... 
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2003
10-02-2009, 7:18 AM
|
Reply
|
|
Yes, on a landing. Flat is more surface hitting the water thus slowing it down and creating a harder landing.
Also, if landed on the wake like above in the right spot, the tip will go under.
Flex construction is awesome, however there is a reason they are all making their boards stiffer.
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
10-02-2009, 7:32 AM
|
Reply
|
|
^ it is the board taking its curve, bending, absorbing the hard landing and putting less through to your knees and ankles.
where have you see they are making them stiffer... because I would prefer the opposite
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
10-02-2009, 9:09 AM
|
Reply
|
|
The flex in the board dissipates energy and makes for a softer landing.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
10-02-2009, 1:42 PM
|
Reply
|
|
Geting Older, actually its opposite, more surface area speeds a board up. Smaller boards have more resistance per square inch (or cm. in our case). And less rocker makes a board faster also. I have a board that has very little rocker (its a prototype) and its is incredible fast. I can cut out and pass the boat up, try that with a 3 stage or a continuous rocker with a lot of curve. That being said, the absorbtion of energy in the flex may have some tendency to slow a board down, that would be an interesting study for sure.
Im a firm believer in bigger boards ride better. But thats just an opinion
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
10-03-2009, 3:49 PM
|
Reply
|
^^^Similarly Randall Harris mentioned in a Q and A on wakeworld about how the board rockets forward and carries momentum on impact due to the rocker line flattening out a bit. http://www.wakeworld.com/getarticle.asp?articleid=2173 As for the question that pops up commonly on the forum, "is it gona make a difference if i don't have boots with a four hole or even a 6 inch plate?" i think this answers it well don't you think? the modern Rainbow Bright.. hahaha 
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
10-03-2009, 4:15 PM
|
Reply
|
|
Kevin is right.
|
|
Join Date: May 2001
10-04-2009, 10:30 PM
|
Reply
|
|
I don't remember rainbow bright being so slutty.
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
10-04-2009, 11:13 PM
|
Reply
|
|
That's borderline porn...
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
10-05-2009, 10:03 AM
|
Reply
|
|
"Smaller boards have more resistance per square inch (or cm. in our case)."
This doesn't make any sense. With differences only in length, why would a (ie) 138 cm Lyman be more resistant than a 142?
Fd = -1/2 ro v^2 A Cd v(hat)
}
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
10-05-2009, 10:41 AM
|
Reply
|
|
nerd.
but thats exactly right
stick your hand out of you car window at 50 mph... palm facing where you're going, then twist it 90* so its thinner to the wind... which was harder to hold?
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
10-05-2009, 11:33 AM
|
Reply
|
|
more weight pushing down into the water per sq cm (rider weight and setup weight), which to me would equate to more resistance. Just a thought
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
10-05-2009, 12:15 PM
|
Reply
|
|
^ small boards have more drag... that maybe a confusing factor... me at 180 lbs on a 134 will have it sit lower = more drag which could be looked at as resistance, but a big board with more surface area has more actual resistance against the water
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
10-05-2009, 2:43 PM
|
Reply
|
|
Sorry, being a mathematician, I'm prone to apply a formula to things that logically don't make sense to me.
Now, with regards to drag, are we getting into issues with the buoyancy of the board? I understand that more weight would cause the board to ride lower, however; could this be dramatically affected by a change of only a few centimeters in length which would vary board area by the most hundred cm^2? Or would there have to be more drastic changes, such as between a 143 and say a 103?
|
|
10-05-2009, 11:12 PM
|
Reply
|
|
Randall Harris mentioned in a Q and A on wakeworld about how the board rockets forward and carries momentum on impact due to the rocker line flattening out a bit.
So this would reduce a lot of stress on knees based not only off of the decrease in vertical force and sharpness of landings, but also the decrease in horizontal force when you hit the water as well? Have we had a thread on knee injuries on flex vs traditional boards? Just curious.
|
|
Linear Mode
