Today's Poll (4/1)

In what direction do you think board design will head in the future?

Longer boards
Shorter boards
Wider boards
Narrower boards


I don't think the focus will be on any of that. I think the focus will be on different shapes, contours, rocker, tails etc. That is what surfboard design has experienced in the years.

What do you think?

longer and wider boards IMO also more hybrid rockers, like the LF one, cont. on the side, 3 down the middle.

Why longer and wider?

I think as far as width and length, they've allready figured it out. I think now the focus will be more on specific shapes for differant styles of riding. how certain features flow through the water to get a desired affect and feel . Basically refinement of ideas.

I agree with Blabel.

maybe more stuff will come along like the new byerly board, that will help change the sport

Yeah but hopefully they'll make crazy changes that will actually make the board BETTER! Sorry, just my opinion!

i heard something about somone wanting to put a foil on the bottom of a board. i dont think it will happen but if someone could master that board, we'd see some pretty sick air and new tricks for sure.

Would the foiled board be similar to the ones they've used in the ocean for big wave surfing? I know laird hamilton has experimented with this sort of thing. Anyway, that would be kind of interesting.

as for board design, I basically agree with kristian. They've already done short and wide when the squirt series was conceived, and now boards are going in the direction of a longer length but keeping that width. You know, necrason used to ride a 128-133 and now he'll go from like 135-140. Even murray went down to a 134 and now he'll ride a 140.

People will continue to tool around with channels and tip and tail shapes. Up to this point, there's only so much you can do with a rocker line because if there's too much (continuous) the board will be really slow. I guess there's a fine line to walk on that one. And jimmy redmon once said that you can only go so wide in the tip and tail before you need some sort of traction for turns--that's where the multi-finned designs come into play.

Anyway, there will be more experimentation, with this year's byerly being an example, but not all of it will revolutionize board design.

It's weird, there's this pressure to create something new, but if you don't, then people say you aren't progressing. I personally don't mind a simple board that can stand the test of time.

although changing just to be seen as progressive is obviously empty, not changing simply because something works isn't valid either. isn't inherit in the statement "a simple board that can stand the test of time," the idea that nothing new has been learned to improve the design? (as well as a vague "simple is better" insinuation)?

reminds me of the monty hall dilemma. you're basically saying the best technology to do the job was created awhile ago. although that can obviously be true, it becomes harder to believe as time goes by.

i think if there's pressure to create something new it's because we've watched our knowledge increase exponetially and consequently seen technology improve rapidly. why wouldn't we expect that?

i agree, the change should come from a greater understanding and better developments, not just because it's expected. but i don't think those expectations are unwarranted.

I think the materials the boards are made out of will be the biggest new development. The new theromset materials out there could reduce the board and binding weights by probably half or more, as well as make them stronger. The problem is the new technology and materials are not popular yet and are still expensive. Imagine how much faster you could spin or how much higher you could pop off the wake with a board that only weights 1.5 lbs.!

i personally don't like that light of a board i rode a dna and it seemed to want to drift out behind me alot

D) None of the above

Boards without bindings is where we are headed.

(While reading the following consider that I'm NO engineer!)

Chris....thats a cool concept. I think a board with built on bindings would be cool. Getting rid of the base plate some way would reduce weight.
I also agree with Kevin as well. New materials are going to change board design. A 1.5 lb board that is an 1/8 of an inch thick that can handle the nastiest sliders would rock. I think, then again, I'm an idiot.
I think binding design needs to look into using one of the most unique materials in the world. DENIM! I just want some denim bindings. Now that would ROCK! Back to listening to the new Billy Ray Cyrus LP.

im pretty sure chris meant wakeskating...and i thought you'd left wakeworld chris?? or was that an early april fools joke? ;)

wakes need to double in size! that would change the wakeboarding game, compared to snowboarders, wakeboarders air and possibilitys for tricks are weak! to scale the wakes we ride are what a pro midget snowboarder would call baby, does anyone feel where im going with this?

WakeBoard bindings also need to change drastically up until CD(concrete) bindings were all rubber. CD is taking a step in the right direction but they definetly have a ways to go.
with so many size and shape of feet it is rediculous to think that they come in Small meduim and large. thank god for Darin wiley making the Medium large thats a godsend for us short wide footers. i would pay good money to have my own binding that fit my foot specifically i would gladly pay 400-600 for a setup that fit correctly shoot a good set of snowboard boots and bindings retail for that if not more and everyone pays that. granted wake is a little differnt but i would still pay for a true fit...

Boards that are extremely light give you nothing to swing and having some weight there helps you to know where the board and you are during rotation.. thats my take on it

sorry about the run on sentances....

Maverick Concrete and subrosa started the no rubber uppers on bindings more then 3 years ago..CD just took what concrete did and made some improvements/adjustments..Just thought id let you know..

BTW i dont like that type of design ,i rode concretes for a year and they dont allow a full release 95% of the hard falls and your feet pull up into the ankle area and hurt like hell..this is dangerous IMO ..

board design IMO will go the way of trying to make them lighter and stronger like people are saying by finding better materials...

Boards without bindings!

I'll be breif with this because there's a lot to discuss. Christopher, just because a company tools around with a deck and releases a new model doesn't mean it is always the best improvement. It might be for that year, but it could be a small blip on the wakeboard design radar. I'm not totally opposed to adjustments because as things change, it is sometimes necessary to change a board (I guess my main example with that would be wake size and the increase in rocker that accompanies that change). However, there is technology that is put into wakeboards that is bogus and short term (phasers).

I also don't believe in putting out a crazy board just for the satisfaction of saying that "we were the first to do that." I won't buy into a board like that and I really don't care about boards like that. Granted, tooling around with wild shapes can prove to be beneficial and you may be able to take a little bit from that model to make another board better, but outside of that, I'm not interested in that sort of thing (but of course, I am not the entire public).

Lastly, I do like simple shapes--is that so wrong? Cobe mikacich has said the same thing about simple boards, so whatever, I suppose. (sorry for the organization...I want to watch seinfeld so I'm rushing here). I guess I just appreicate a shape a little more when the shaper is trying to achieve a lasting design from the start...I feel the trips are a pretty good example of this, and the project/drifter is not. Also, I feel that if anyone knows how to design a good board, it's shaun murray as two to three of his shapes (dating back from late 1997) still remain in the HL line. As a personal prediction, I don't see the asym. bottoms catching on, but I may eat those words in five years.

Also, sorry for not being as articulate as I could be. I'm sure you're looking for something better since my post botherd you as such, but I don't have the time.

Kevin, it is possible to go too light with a board. Once it becomes too light, it is harder to control on the water and becomes squirly. Also, it is hard to feel the board while you're in the air.

Toolfan, stinger used to make baseless bindings--BAd IDEA! Snowboarders did the same thing and they found out that it isn't so bad to have something under your feet to absorb shock. And as a wakeboarder, that footbed is especially important, due to the fact that you don't have a boot with an air cell in the heel to absorb the shock.

Maverick, I totally see what you're saying and I've thought the same thing to myself. Snowboaridng can be deadly...150 foot gaps?? Randall's section in blacklist does a good job of portraying the wakeboarding I think you're looking for..the distance he travels and the height he achieves is incredible and unbelievable to watch.

Also, I think the boards without bindings was a reference to wakeskating...and I agree!!

FYI duane Pacha and gator started Concrete and Duane owns CD.

better bindings would be nice, i don't need lube to get into my snowboard boots and i think staying in the bindings is the best way to avoid leg injuries. i wonder about wedges (like malibu's) designed to create spines, quarter pipes, and other different shaped wakes. This would bring something different to the sport.