ANOTHER EPOXY QUESTION
Moderators: jimmy, collnarra, PeepeelaPew, Butts, Shari, Forum Moderators
what about a stringerless board instead, it sound like they would be weaker, but because there is no stringer, they can flex a lot more and don't tend to snap as easily, have seen a shaper mate turn one upside down & bounce up & down & the amount of flex is unbelievable & they rock in the surf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey Skoots,
It's pretty obvious that the stringer adds strength - they're not just there to look nice - but they also limit flex. All boards flex to a degree, and it's when a board gets old and loses some of this flex that it loses the liveliness (and it's time to get a new one).
It follows that a stringerless board is going to be more flexible, but it's also going to break more easily. That's because the stringerless board's structural integrity is bound by the strength of the composite (ie, the foam / fibreglass sandwich), rather than the stringer + sandwich.
Another way of thinking of this is that a snapped board is one that's simply flexed too far. Having said that, I reckon that flex is one of the areas ripe for experimentation, which is why it's cool that people are trying stringerless boards again.
Stringerless boards were a big thing for a while in the late 60s. I've got a Keyo circa 1968 that's stringerless (it's also immaculate, but that's another story). I think that stringerless never took off simply because it's not as durable. That, and the fact that surfers like the look of stringers, which is why they paint a stringer onto those SurfTech pop-outs that some people are so bullish about. Us surfers are pretty hide-bound by convention when it comes to our boards.
It's pretty obvious that the stringer adds strength - they're not just there to look nice - but they also limit flex. All boards flex to a degree, and it's when a board gets old and loses some of this flex that it loses the liveliness (and it's time to get a new one).
It follows that a stringerless board is going to be more flexible, but it's also going to break more easily. That's because the stringerless board's structural integrity is bound by the strength of the composite (ie, the foam / fibreglass sandwich), rather than the stringer + sandwich.
Another way of thinking of this is that a snapped board is one that's simply flexed too far. Having said that, I reckon that flex is one of the areas ripe for experimentation, which is why it's cool that people are trying stringerless boards again.
Stringerless boards were a big thing for a while in the late 60s. I've got a Keyo circa 1968 that's stringerless (it's also immaculate, but that's another story). I think that stringerless never took off simply because it's not as durable. That, and the fact that surfers like the look of stringers, which is why they paint a stringer onto those SurfTech pop-outs that some people are so bullish about. Us surfers are pretty hide-bound by convention when it comes to our boards.
Bob McTavish says there is no difference in structural strength between a stringerless board and one with a good stringer. He says, however, that a board with an average to bad stringer will be structurally weaker than a stringerless one, as it adds a point of strctural weakness where a snap can occur.
I can understand why people are hesitant, but when i spoke to my shaper and he told me about it i was just as doubtful, but when he grabbed a board, flipped it over, then put it on the ground & then stood on it, the amount of flex was amazing, he then proceeded to do the same to a board with a striger and the thing just popped & delaminated. The reasoning is that the stringer can only flex so far, so when you take a super heavy drop, your board will suck up some of the impact & thus be less likely to break.
I can understand what Wanto is saying about the life of the board though, not sure how long it will last, will just have to wait & see
I can understand what Wanto is saying about the life of the board though, not sure how long it will last, will just have to wait & see
I think the reason the smarter operators paint a stringer line on their tuflite boards is that surfers are a pretty superstitious and conservative lot, and struggle to accept anything that looks different.
I think it's about removing mental roadblocks to customer acceptance of a different technology.
Having ridden a tuflite shortboard for 7 months now, I'm definitely a convert to the technology, although not being able to get a custom board is a drawback. They are so much stronger and more impact resistant, yet only $100 more than a normal board, they are definitely worth the money.
If the surftech crew decide to adapt the technology to allow custom shapes, shapers will need to adapt rail design for the greater bouyancy, but I think you'll see polyester go the way of balsa wood pretty quickly.
I think it's about removing mental roadblocks to customer acceptance of a different technology.
Having ridden a tuflite shortboard for 7 months now, I'm definitely a convert to the technology, although not being able to get a custom board is a drawback. They are so much stronger and more impact resistant, yet only $100 more than a normal board, they are definitely worth the money.
If the surftech crew decide to adapt the technology to allow custom shapes, shapers will need to adapt rail design for the greater bouyancy, but I think you'll see polyester go the way of balsa wood pretty quickly.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests