Hello, welcome to Boardseeker Windsurfing Magazine please use the links below to jump to a specific section.

Navigation Search Content Other Mpora Sites
drm
Twinser test
17 September '08 | 7:09am
First - congratulations to a great test, which really benefits from being on the web as well! I have read my fair share of tests through the years (German, US, UK, France, Spain, Australia, Canada...) and this one

is the best ever.

Anyway, I happen to have a couple of q's:

Is there any particular need to adapt my sailing style when going for a twin, or is it basically the same challenge as it ever is? (front foot pressure, more active sailing, mastfoot pressure...). Having spend a lot more time with back- rather than frontside sailing, I know my backfoot pressure is likely to be a bit to much rather often...

Also, being your average level happy-go-lucky sailor when in waves (but just LOVE it), is it worth splashing up that ?????? for a twin, which I am just about to do?
A Clone
Re: Twinser test
17 September '08 | 5:49pm
drm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> First - congratulations to a great test, which
> really benefits from being on the web as well! I
> have read my fair share of tests through the years
> (German, US, UK, France, Spain, Australia,
> Canada...) and this one
>
> is the best ever.
>
> Anyway, I happen to have a couple of q's:
>
> Is there any particular need to adapt my sailing
> style when going for a twin, or is it basically
> the same challenge as it ever is? (front foot
> pressure, more active sailing, mastfoot
> pressure...). Having spend a lot more time with
> back- rather than frontside sailing, I know my
> backfoot pressure is likely to be a bit to much
> rather often...
>
> Also, being your average level happy-go-lucky
> sailor when in waves (but just LOVE it), is it
> worth splashing up that ?????? for a twin, which I
> am just about to do?

Thanks for the nice comments on the test - glad you like it!

The technique is slightly different, but not massively. On bigger boards, you may actually find them (twins) easier to sail as they turn tighter and with less effort, keep their speed up well and generally allow you to position yourself more easily on the wave.

I am not sure what size of board you are considering and how big you are, but i think if you are a bigger sailor (80+ kg) and considering a bigger (+80 litre) board, you will notice the biggest difference/advantage.

If you are considering a sub 80 liter, then you should probably try one first and make sure its your thing and that you are impressed enough by the difference to make the plunge from single to twin.

Either way however, I think you are unlikely to be disappointing that you made the change and will enjoy the new sensation of riding that the boards can offer.

Good luck and let us know how you get on!
drm
Re: Twinser test
17 September '08 | 8:04pm
Thanks for the reply! I am 77-78 kgs and am getting myself an RRD twin 90 soon... will be used with 5.9 and 5.3 sails. I was looking at the 82, but think that it is (after having read your test) that it is to small for my needs, having a 75 litre modern classic as well.

My technique needs all the help it can get, so I really liked your reply1
A Clone
Re: Twinser test
17 September '08 | 10:05pm
drm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for the reply! I am 77-78 kgs and am
> getting myself an RRD twin 90 soon... will be used
> with 5.9 and 5.3 sails. I was looking at the 82,
> but think that it is (after having read your test)
> that it is to small for my needs, having a 75
> litre modern classic as well.
>
> My technique needs all the help it can get, so I
> really liked your reply1


Sounds good! For 5.3 and 5.9 sails, 90 will be best I think. If you were looking at 5.5-5.0 then 82 would probably be the best choice with your weight.
Swede
Re: Twinser test
18 September '08 | 7:31pm
How would the RRD 90 Twin handle a fully powered 5.0 for a 75kg sailor for 1-2m x-on wave sailing? I have the Evo74 2006 which I love and will keep as my small wave board but want to complement it with a bigger wave board. I use the Evo for 4.0-5.0 sailing which would mean that I would be sailing the bigger wave board with 5.7/6.0 as the biggest sail and have the 5.0 as my crossover sail. Maybe the Mistral Twinzer 84/RRD 82 is a better option?
dog
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 8:12am
I sailed the Quatro 81L Twin the other day in el medano and it was amazing! I think it is underrated in its ability to be fully amazing in cross on to cross off conditions. I for sure am getting one now, i would fully encourage everyone to at least consider it as the RRD is a little bit 'fanatic skate' like, in my opinion, for anyone who actually wants a wave board. Also the Quatro look sweet.
blender
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 12:17pm
I am considering a twinser for my small waveboard. I weigh 90 k. I have just broke my 80l evo which I liked. The mistral sounds good for the sort of sailing I like., but I am concerned that being so short and me being heavier, is it likely to nose dive all the time? What board would you get to partner with a larger 95l board for someone of my weight?
uwe
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 3:36pm
Hi ,

yes really superb twin test, how about the real bigger twin fin
like the 99liter RRD Twin wave would it have the same advantage
as the smaller boards to an 93kg 187cm sailor ?

Thanks in advance Uwe
A Clone
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 4:16pm
Swede Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How would the RRD 90 Twin handle a fully powered
> 5.0 for a 75kg sailor for 1-2m x-on wave sailing?
> I have the Evo74 2006 which I love and will keep
> as my small wave board but want to complement it
> with a bigger wave board. I use the Evo for
> 4.0-5.0 sailing which would mean that I would be
> sailing the bigger wave board with 5.7/6.0 as the
> biggest sail and have the 5.0 as my crossover
> sail. Maybe the Mistral Twinzer 84/RRD 82 is a
> better option?

Hi Swede! We are not really too keen on speculating about boards we havent tried yet (rrd 90). Many people assume that boards of different sizes within one range perform in a similar way, but this is sometimes not true and cannot be assumed.

Whilst we have heard great things also about the RRD 90, we couldnt really speculate as to how it would cope with a 5.0m sail. For sure at 75kg, you would have more fun on the 82 in 5.0m conditions. You would also we able to use a 5.7 on it (82) ok and prob 6.0 if you wanted to - it just depends what kind of sailing you want to do. Down the line in nice waves, 82 will be fine on that size of sail. In underpowered cross on, you would probably have more fun on the 90.

Bit of a tricky one.....I will speak to our technique man Jem who has sailed the 90 RRD quite a lot and get him to post some comments on here.
A Clone
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 4:23pm
blender Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am considering a twinser for my small waveboard.
> I weigh 90 k. I have just broke my 80l evo which I
> liked. The mistral sounds good for the sort of
> sailing I like., but I am concerned that being so
> short and me being heavier, is it likely to nose
> dive all the time? What board would you get to
> partner with a larger 95l board for someone of my
> weight?

Hi Blender, I think the Mistral would be a nice choice. It has plenty of control at the top end (if you are using it as your smallest board) but also reasonable 'get up and go' to help with your weight.

The diving nose might be an issue if you spend a lot of time off the plane (eg wobbling out in cross off conditions etc), but if you are reasonably proficient on a wave board, you will get the hang of it pretty quickly I think and once planing it isn't an issue at all.

I dont know where you are based, but Funsport in Rhosniegr have one (our ex test board) that you may be able to demo....
A Clone
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 4:28pm
uwe Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi ,
>
> yes really superb twin test, how about the real
> bigger twin fin
> like the 99liter RRD Twin wave would it have the
> same advantage
> as the smaller boards to an 93kg 187cm sailor ?
>
> Thanks in advance Uwe


Hi Uwe, glad you liked the test! Again, its hard for us to say what the bigger boards will be like as you cant always assume that the performance of bigger models will represent a scaled version of the smaller board.

However, the general consensus is that the bigger you go (on board size), the bigger advantage you will notice over a single fin with regard to wave riding performance in cross on conditions.

Our Technique guy (Jem) is going to post some stuff on here shortly as he is around 95kg and has sailed the bigger RRD's a lot.
arnie
Re: Twinser test
19 September '08 | 7:57pm
dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I sailed the Quatro 81L Twin the other day in el
> medano and it was amazing! I think it is
> underrated in its ability to be fully amazing in
> cross on to cross off conditions. I for sure am
> getting one now, i would fully encourage everyone
> to at least consider it as the RRD is a little bit
> 'fanatic skate' like, in my opinion, for anyone
> who actually wants a wave board. Also the Quatro
> look sweet.


Hi dog,

I agree. My 81L twin arrived yesterday. I am 205lbs dry and intend to use it for 5.0 and down. According to the test here a perfect choice for me. Also, if you look at the individual score list, you can see that the Quatro twin scores 10 out of 10 points for cross shore riding. No other board tested receives that score, only the mistral with 9.75 points. The rest trail behind, some even considerably! Also, the Quatro's wave riding control is 2nd highest, pairing mistral's, and with the RRD leading marginally. Personally, I think these two categories are THE most important when considering a wave boards. Total these two categories and the Quatro scores best, even as a weighted average. In addition, who cares if a board has a mast track indicator or not, or if the foot straps are not top notch? Those two things have nothing today with a board's shape and how it thus performance on a wave.

Regarding cross-on conditions (from dead onshore to almost side-on), I wouldn't even use a wave board unless the waves are really big (logo +), a freestylewave board would do better in such conditions: earlier planing, more speed, better pop. So personally, I regard that category less important for pure wave boards: by original design they are not really intended for such conditions.
jimbo
sail test
17 March '09 | 11:16pm
sweet sail test,
and good photos too, nice to see the clones can actually sail, makes a change, at least the testers know what they are talking about.
more of the same please...
Auraki
Re: sail test
20 March '09 | 5:26pm
Hi, very good work on wave sails.
Disappointing was the totally devastating impression on the fly. The more, cause the very good results obtained by this sail in SURF magazine. It` s confusing and am not convinced that the 0.2 sqm make all this difference.
The same thing happened for the Ego one of the winners you judge as very well in low end and not so good in stronger winds, exactly the contrary by Surf. Have to say that they used the 400 rdm platinum but the really correct is the 370 as you used( it was a mistake by north on their website to indicate the 400 as ideal, ) Anyway, such a difference is leading to distrust in Tests.
And if 0.2 sqm can make all this difference, than a serious test in wavesails should consider in taking at least two significant measures for any sail. When I see the test about the 4.7 I dont want to wait one or two months to know how the 4.2 goes.
Next year sails are just 5 monts away. We need tests to have better knowledge, not more confusion
A Clone
Re: sail test
20 March '09 | 8:27pm
I think you will find quite a big difference between the 4.5 Fly and the 4.8 (that we tested) - hence the difference in conclusions between ourselves and Surf mag. Its not normal for sails to be so inconsistent between sizes, but it certainly seems to be the case in this instance. I heard one Pryde sailor describe the 4.5 as 'the best sail he ever used' and the 4.8 as 'the worst sail he ever used'!

With regard to the Ego, the sail offers really good bottom end - there is no doubt about this. Quite why SURF Mag didnt find this I dont know, but we are absolutely certain in our findings. The only thing I can say is that we only test relative to the other sails in the test. For instance The Ego has one of the best bottom ends 'in this group' however if we included sails such as the NeilPryde Alpha and Gaastra Poison etc, then maybe the Ego would rank lower - its all comparative to the sails in the group as this is the only fair way of doing it. Maybe Surf Mag included some of the power wave sails in their group so found the Ego ranked lower in comparison?

We chose to keep the Power wave sails for our 5.3 test which we are finishing off at the moment.

I hope that clarifies things a bit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 21/03/2009 | 8:56pm by admin.
auraki
Re: sail test
22 March '09 | 12:46am
The 4.5 as one of the best sails instead of 4.7 the worst.

To be loyal, to Neil Pryde you should take an aftertest, if what said from the Np chief ( I cant remember the exact name) is true.
He states too that the sail has to be compared with .2 sqm less then the others. And I think its true remembering the Core (similar NP concept with four battens). I think its really damaging the brand if it is this way.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Ego in the German test they took the 400 instead of 370 this is a stiffer mast and makes the sail way different.
I tolked with many team riders of North and anyone was suggesting the 370
A Clone
Re: sail test
22 March '09 | 9:15am
Just to be clear on the size choice of The Fly. We do not choose the sizes. We send out a test invite for 4.7 sails and each manufacturer sends us the sizes and models they think most appropriate.

The comments that David Mead makes in his official response to our The Fly test are mostly factors that they established AFTER giving us the sail. SURF MAG get the sails later in the year and by this time, Pryde had realised that the 4.5 was a better choice for the test.

This was too late for our test and pretty much out of our control. Our job is to test the sails that are presented to us as fairly and honestly as we can and this is what we did in this instance.

We are discussing the possibility of a re-test on the 4.5 Fly at the moment with NeilPryde, but the ball is in their court with that one.

To be honest with regard to the EGO, I would have thought a longer stiffer mast would have increased the bottom end yet further, not reduced it?! But until we try it, we are only guessing.
awavesailor
Re: sail test
1 April '09 | 9:59am
I have recently got a twin fin board and borrowed some sails. I have to say that in "just powered" conditions the 5.1 fly that i have on loan is magic with the twinny it seems to help stick extra rail length in the water to get my turns even better. It does get a bit physichal when it's proper windy though. By comparison the 5.0 zone is less "automatic" in the riding department than the fly but behaves itself better and i prefer it for jumping - it seems to rotate faster.
Hope this is of some help - that fly really is different - many will hate it others will absolutley love it !
Author:

Your Email:


Subject:


Attachments:
  • Valid attachments: gif, jpg, jpeg, png
  • No file can be larger than 400 KB
  • 5 more file(s) can be attached to this message

Message: