Hi,

The last 10 years I have been sailing quads. I had a Flikka Quad, A Goya Custom Quad and Fanatic Quad.

Unfortunately the sun got the best of my Flikka, it is completely delaminated.

In search for a new board I ran into a brandnew Starboard Nuevo 86 from 2015. Budget wise very attractive but a bit hesitating if this would be good for me...

Dimensions wise it is the same as newer boards of same size (224x58).

How would this board stack up against the boards that are 10 years newer?

I never sailed a twinzer, and have no idea how big the difference is.

Because the board is brandnew, the shop wont let me take for a test drive.

I am a waveriding first guy, not much of a jumper, and always sail pretty small. Like the float and ride.

Would this board suit my needs?

I read that a twinzer might have more problems going upwind, is that a big issue? And does a twinzer start planing as easy as a quad?


Curious about the experiences people had with the Nuevo 86.

Ha thanks for the reply.

The flikka is gone, beyond repair.
So the nuevo is more wave riding biased? That would be up my sleeve then.

Agreed, on old footage the Nuevo rips indeed.

I saw this footage of the shaper (James Hooper RIP) and Ben Severne how they liked the surfiness of the board. That all sounds really good, but do you loose out on something else to get this surfiness?

Is a twinzer harder to surf than a quad? Harder to go upwind or to get planing?

Frankism said..
Agreed, on old footage the Nuevo rips indeed.

I saw this footage of the shaper (James Hooper RIP) and Ben Severne how they liked the surfiness of the board. That all sounds really good, but do you loose out on something else to get this surfiness?

Is a twinzer harder to surf than a quad? Harder to go upwind or to get planing?

Quad is more secure in big surf and probably a little more precise through turns and more fashionable.
Twins have had a big resurgence in surfing disregarding what the cookie cutter pro,s are riding so perhaps windsurfing will follow.

I have yet to ride a modern quad that doesn't also work as a twin. Quad for fast waves, twin for mushy waves seems to work for me.

Dedicated twin (as the Nuevo) ideally has a wider, dedicated rear fin spacing (about 17cm vs 12-14cm) & more toe & cant.

quads "twin" "reasonably well" & common..okay...
pure twins should optimize to broad fin spacing imo...as nuevo did
If twins are slated for comeback, they should return from the netherworld as decent twin setups

philn said..
I have yet to ride a modern quad that doesn't also work as a twin. Quad for fast waves, twin for mushy waves seems to work for me.

Twins great in fast clean bowley waves with cross off,you can often get more turns .The only conditions they feel sketchy is big or lumpy days with a heap of current.

Re last two posts - and thats what created quads. They're a slightly detuned twin so make them just a little more secure for normal folks.
that's why many folks use their quad as a twin for onshore stuff, albeit that the fin spacing is not quite optimal

better yet is a trailer setup to fine tune the twin looseness, dunno why only Patrik did it - they work sooo well. I'd buy the starboard twin in a heartbeat even if it was twice that price.

Mark _australia said..
Re last two posts - and thats what created quads. They're a slightly detuned twin so make them just a little more secure for normal folks.
that's why many folks use their quad as a twin for onshore stuff, albeit that the fin spacing is not quite optimal

better yet is a trailer setup to fine tune the twin looseness, dunno why only Patrik did it - they work sooo well. I'd buy the starboard twin in a heartbeat even if it was twice that price.

I have a 5 box board I use in onshore, what sort of outline and size would you use for a trailing setup would you experiment with?

Frankism said..
I do most of my windsurfing in Capetown. Most spots are quite side of, wind is sketchy on the inside going out, but then again can sometime be really severe when on the face of the wave.

Key ingredients for me is floating ability to get out, and control/grip on the face of the wave

Its a win at $330 ,there will be no problems with grip bottom turns are smooth as butter on rail.

Mark _australia said..

Grantmac said..

Mark _australia said..
Re last two posts - and thats what created quads. They're a slightly detuned twin so make them just a little more secure for normal folks.
that's why many folks use their quad as a twin for onshore stuff, albeit that the fin spacing is not quite optimal

better yet is a trailer setup to fine tune the twin looseness, dunno why only Patrik did it - they work sooo well. I'd buy the starboard twin in a heartbeat even if it was twice that price.

I have a 5 box board I use in onshore, what sort of outline and size would you use for a trailing setup would you experiment with?

Not to say it won't work, but it should have the mains wider apart than a 5 box will allow. Still worth a go -
use your normal quad mains in the hope it is a tiny bit too loose, then stick an 8cm ish in the centre box about 3-5 fingers behind them
I can measure properly if u want

Not to be contrarian but this is why I suggested an am2 type setup. Ie a thruster with slightly smaller rear centre fin. The board is setup for that if it's 5 boxes.

also try what mark is suggesting.

Mark _australia said..

Grantmac said..

Mark _australia said..
Re last two posts - and thats what created quads. They're a slightly detuned twin so make them just a little more secure for normal folks.
that's why many folks use their quad as a twin for onshore stuff, albeit that the fin spacing is not quite optimal

better yet is a trailer setup to fine tune the twin looseness, dunno why only Patrik did it - they work sooo well. I'd buy the starboard twin in a heartbeat even if it was twice that price.

I have a 5 box board I use in onshore, what sort of outline and size would you use for a trailing setup would you experiment with?

Not to say it won't work, but it should have the mains wider apart than a 5 box will allow. Still worth a go -
use your normal quad mains in the hope it is a tiny bit too loose, then stick an 8cm ish in the centre box about 3-5 fingers behind them
I can measure properly if u want

Pretty sure I have a short base 8cm that'll work for a trial with the mains as far forward as possible.
Of course it'll be a while before I can try it out.

Mark _australia said..
Re last two posts - and thats what created quads. They're a slightly detuned twin so make them just a little more secure for normal folks.
that's why many folks use their quad as a twin for onshore stuff, albeit that the fin spacing is not quite optimal

better yet is a trailer setup to fine tune the twin looseness, dunno why only Patrik did it - they work sooo well. I'd buy the starboard twin in a heartbeat even if it was twice that price.

New patrik TS looks fun as with multiple thruster and twinzer fin options .

Doggerland said..
Capped at 92liters
Who is that Diethelm fellow calling fat, exactly?

Every fat bastard with a BMI greater than 25.