Lightwind speedboard for 2010

For next season I have to buy a lightwind speedboard, with at least the same or even better performance than the Fanatic Falcon 91 I recently sold. The board should be excellent in these conditions:
  • Windstrength 8-25kn (should be comftable floating so at least 90 liters)
  • Good for medium waves/ chop and flat water. The board doesn't have to be able to take 2m waves, I don't speedsurf in those conditions. Max waveheight is approx. 0,5-0,6m
  • Good for downwind courses from 120-160 degrees downwind.
This lightwind board will be used on open water, pure focus on 5x 10sec speed. So average speed is not important, acceleration and drag count a lot!!! For these requirements there are no specific boarddesigns, sooo I have choose the best compromise... (when will gps-boarddesigns hit the market???)

The candidates for season 2010:
  1. Fanatic Falcon 91/90/89 (2006-2008), the monoconcave series. Just buy one back, this is a safe bet since I have enough experience with these boards. From what I heard the 90/89 should be better in higher waves/chop
  2. Angulo Magnum 60 (2009), I tried this board last week. Definitly have to test it on more flat water, felt like a lot of potential.
  3. Fanatic Falcon 102 (2010), this one is inbetween a power and efficiency design. Biggest advantage, this board hammers thru everything :)
  4. Tabou Manta 65 (2010), should be fast...
This is the current ranking of choise above, I would buy a new fanatic falcon 90 at this moment if I had to choose. But there is enough time to test :). Do you miss a very fast boarddesign?? Comment and tell me why this board should be added to the list.

Erik Loots

Erik is windsurfer for 10+ years. In his daily life he is professional in construction dewatering, advisor, troubleshooter. Erik likes adventures, explore and to challenge himself. During his life he is trying to get the best out of it and have respect for the earth, nature and future generations. The modern world is about sharing, in this blog Erik shares his experiences, selfreflection and lessons learned.

10 comments:

  1. You never thought about to get an iSONIC 86 or 86 slim.
    Chris

    ReplyDelete
  2. JP Slalom VI 59!
    Yet to be reviewed though...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Both the "basic design" of the Isonic or JP slalom are in my eyes more suitable for PWA worldcup conditions, or really powered up sailing.

    When I step on a isonic or JP slalom it is very comfy sailing, but to go as fast as for example the fanatic falcon 91 I need lots of power and sail on the edge. My weight doesn't help because with isonics and JP slalom design I have problems to have a loose ride from begin to end.

    Conclusion for me is the bottomshape of the board has to generate some lift. This way I can use the board bottomshape more for looseness and don't have to sail 100% on the fin all the time. I can use a smaller fin or harder fin that suits highspeed without the danger of flying away on high speed OR low acceleration and control at low speed.

    One board that should be added is the HTS SR59, but the tail is sooo small. I need a board that can take at least a powerfull 34cm fin. (I noticed last USM a powerfull 30cm is just to small for 35kn 5x 10sec average in lowwind)

    Cheers,

    Erik

    ReplyDelete
  4. What do you think of a new F-Ray95LTD 2010? Especially compared to Falcon SL102

    ReplyDelete
  5. I tested in 2008 the first Fanatic Ray 95 (was a bit lighter construction compared to the 2009 Ray).

    Here you my findings: http://www.speedsurfingblog.com/2008/12/fanatic-ray-95-2009-test.html

    The ray 95 would be having a bit to less width to accelerate in lower winds for me. In other words the board just pops out of the water to late. But it is an excellent board!

    The Falcon 102 is from what I heard a good one. If you like to sail powered up the new falcon 102 would suit you better than the older falcons. I know for sure the falcon 102 will be faster in bottom-end (12-18kn) compared to the ray 95.

    CHeers,

    Erik

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks. How much wind do you think is min. needed to sail the F-Ray95LTD "full-on" with RS:S 7.0m2? My weight is 95kg.

    How is the Falcon 102 do in stronger winds (24knots and up)? Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Ray 95 needs at least 18-20kn to be full-on. I guess lightweight surfers can glide from 12kn... But definitly not full-on.

    The Falcon 102 should be a bit better in highwinds compared to my falcon 91. Sooo on real flat water you can handle 28kn at least. On open water the falcon 86 will be from 24kn seriously better. Ofcourse it depends on technique I believe Antoine Albeau could sail a falcon 102 in 35kn winds

    ReplyDelete
  8. Erik,

    As i myself can not choose between RAY95LTD and Falcon SL102. I was thinking maybe a Falcon 95(09)can be something for me. (also due to pricetag)

    How is planing of Falcon95 compared to Ray95 as the FF95 is 61cm width instead of 59cm(Ray) there should be a difference?!

    How is the control/gybing of FF95 compared to new FF102SL in stronger winds (24+ knots)

    I appreciate your comment very much. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the Ray 95 is the easiest to surf and get a good result at least in 24kn of wind. The Falcon 102 is a bit more difficult in stronger winds, but I think most windsurfers will go faster with falcon 102 on average.

    It does take some more energy to surf the 102 in gusts.

    The falcon 95 performance+control is somewhere in the middle of the Ray 95 and falcon 102.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks again Erik, looks like something for me! Plan to sail this board in between 16 to 24+(+) knots of wind, mainly with 6.2 and 7.0 RS:S should work

    ReplyDelete