View Full Version : Serenity questions
8th May 2007, 01:09 PM
Does anyone know (or can anyone measure) the thickness of the Serenity (ie, if placed flat on the floor, how much overhead clearance is needed, fin not included)? I am thinking of buying one but want to be sure I've got enough room for storage on my board rack.
Also, regarding sailing the Serenity, I've heard it can be fairly tricky. I'm an early intermediate windsurfer (ie, I'm either a superb beginner or a lousy intermediate) and I never particularly had great balance, so I'm curious how hard it is for average (mediocre) sailors to balance during uphauling, sailing, and gybing assuming they can get along OK on a conventional light air short board or a transitional board?
8th May 2007, 04:56 PM
The median thickness is 18 cm.
Balance for uphauling : easy (the big 70 cm fin kind of dampens the sideway rolling of the hull)
Balance for sailing : easy (pointing, reach, deep reach). Delicate/tipy (downwind) for an intermediate.
Balance for jibing : delicate/tipy for an intermediate.
Balance for tacking : easy.
9th May 2007, 04:09 AM
Thanks for that input. I didn't quite understand what you meant by "median" thickness - I was looking for "max thickness", ie, total overhead height required for cleanrance - is that what you meant?
Great input on the balance, thanks, that's just what I was looking for.
A few other questions if you've got the time -
On my lake there are lots of power boats, some quite large, and they can make pretty big wakes. When I kayak (without a rudder) there is a strong tendency for the kayak hull to align itself parallel with wakes. Since the Serenity hull is very similar to a kayak hull, when riding in 5 - 10 mph winds on a body of water where you encounter boat wakes how does the Serenity behave?
Is it likely to "twist" in the same way or does the fin and tail shape let it track better than my kayak?
With little wind to balance against I'm also wondering if you're more likely to get thrown off the board on good sized boat wakes?
Do most people sail the Serenity in 5 - 10 mph winds without a harness (I would think so but I'm asking because I someone mentioned using one in light winds on a prior thread and that confused me). At what wind strength does a harness become desireable (I would guess maybe 10-12 with an 8 to 10 m2 sail)? I would think that unlike a planing hull which "frees up" once you pass the planing threshold (so the pull in your arms actually decreases initially with increasing wind), with the Serenity this never happens so at some point even in non-planing wind the harness might be nice to let you relax your upper body.
9th May 2007, 05:39 AM
Hi Jay- I sailed the Serenity for a while at a demo event so I'm not a great expert or anything, but I think I can answer your questions.
The wakes won't be a problem. As long as you are moving the board will cut through them without twisting.
You could probably benefit from a harness even in light winds. Being able to relax your arms will help you focus on trimming the board with your feet. When I tried the serenity it was very responsive in terms of both speed and turning to how I angled it side-to-side with my feet. Foot steering is like it is on a longboard with the daggerboard down- you lean it the opposite way to turn than you would on a shortboard.
I think you will really enjoy the board.
9th May 2007, 06:34 AM
The max thickness at 50% hull's lenght (median point, mid-point, half lenght, etc...) is 18 cm.
Didn't try it with wakes produced from traffic, sorry. I tried in 4-8 knots of wind, i.e., from ultra flat glassy water without any ripples up to 10-20 cm deep and short-period chop. The nose slices throught chop like a hot knive throught butter without the hull being disturbed. The long and narrow 455 cm lenght coupled with the 70 cm deep daggerfin does provide a pretty amount of inertia against any turning change IMHO (the hull is easier to tack or jibe with the shallower 41 cm fin BTW). Rolling of the hull could be a far more important issue as it is far easier to do, so wakes or small waves can play a role in stabilty here, but as I said above, I can't really comment on how the hull behaves in more challenging/demanding water conditions (not tested yet).
To me, the harness was necessary as of 4 knots of wind because when hull's speed increased, the enhancing apparent wind did also increase the wind force into my big 10.6 sail. Also, I did set up my sail with minimal downhaul (-2 cm) and outhaul (-6 cm; upper third eyelet) to make its draft as deep as possible (sail touching the boom all the way; boom height up to chest level, seat harness with low hook, long harness lines). This made the sail very powerfull and the harness was indeed precious even in 4 knots of wind to save energy when I was overpowered in 8 knots...! So, my best advice so far is do wear a harness all the time: better safe than sorry...
However, as I didn't try it with a smaller sail yet, I can't comment whether a harness will be necessary or not with say a 8.x sail or less, but I do think so because of the enhancing apparent wind speed.
9th May 2007, 06:41 AM
Sorry, I forgot to say that for an intermediate, I would definitely NOT recommend about using a 10 m2 sail : the largest the sail, the tippiest the Serenity will become, especially downwind and during jibing transition. Better use a 7.5 or 6.5 sail for your skills and abilities, I'm sure it will be much more fun and enjoyable.
9th May 2007, 07:12 AM
I've sailed my Serenity 16 times now, mostly in pretty flat water. Over the weekend I did sail in some heavier boat chop. If you are moving pretty well, its not too much of an issue. However, I did notice a few times that it will tend to change your direction. I usually try to ride the chop, sail down it if possible - it can be fun. I expect the chop at my local spot will get a lot worse this summer, so I'll be interested in seeing how it does. Overall, I was encouraged this weekend. I am recovering from bashing my knee on the mast on one of my shortboards, so I didn't want to try to make any quick movements, which might have helped counter the chop. Right now, the only board I can sail is Serenity, because getting into the straps puts too my pressure on my knee.
As for a harness, I always wear it, even in light wind. It does make it less tiring.
9th May 2007, 07:32 AM
I think what Jay wanted to know was the highest part of the serenity above the flat surface it is sitting on. Looking at the pictures, that point would appear to be the front tip where it points upward?
9th May 2007, 12:37 PM
The Serenity will go between the racks in my trailer either bow first or stern first, but it works better stern first.
The rack bars are 7.50" (19.5 cm) apart with a thin carpet layer on both the top and bottom.
If you are asking what height down from a fixed surface (like from a ceiling) I'll have to measure that.
I'll need to stretch a string from the high point on the bow to the high point on the stern.
As far as slicing through boat wakes, the Serenity will cut through boat wakes and chop like a hot knife through butter.
If a wake catches you from the side, you will be OK if you are moving, less OK if not moving.
Everyone here seems to be talking HUGE sails and the abominable wide blade 70 cm fin that comes with the board.
I've sailed the Serenity with sails as small as 4.2 m2 (Sailworks Hucker) in foot high chop and 25 knots (G 30).
I've also sailed it with a 9.0 m2, but it's best with a 6.5-8.5 m2 rig.
My favorite (due to being very light weight and very powerful) is the Severne Glide 7.5 (pretty much designed specifically for boards like the Serenity).
I've always worn a harness as it makes setting the rail on the Serenity much easier and takes all the forces from the rig a puts them on the big muscles in the hips and thighs, increasing your endurance and time on the water by a couple of magnitudes.
Yes, for very light winds, you need to set the lines rather long, but with a harness, there's no need for the sailor to "hold the rig up" with hands and arms, but rather the hands and arms become the "adjusters" to optimize sheeting angle etc.
As far as the big fin, I rarely use it.
I've found that it really doesn't decrease the roll rate when the board is standing still with no way on.
It also has the nasty habit of being nice and stable when loaded up in one direction (lee rail down a bit to go upwind) but as it comes back through "neutral" when jibing, the big fin "bites" all at once (seemingly no matter how carefully you "transition" through vertical with no side load on the fin), and if your aren't real careful, and ready for it to "bite" you'll end up in the water beside the board.
I'm thinking about having a 60-65 cm fin made up with about 3-5 lbs of lead at the bottom. That would definitely decrease the static roll rate.
I've found very nearly the same upwind angle can be obtained with smaller 48-60 cm fins or weed fins in the 32-52 cm range.
Yes, you might lose a degree or 2 in upwind angle, but with a smaller rig, and smaller fin, you get alot less from factor drag, so better VMG overall, especially in really light winds.
Hoping to find the time to run some GPS tests this summer to prove
objectively what I'm getting subjectively.
If I were racing the Serenity around a course, against other Serenity boards, then I might want the huge 70 cm wide blade fin.
For recreational sailing, I find the board to be faster and plenty stable with smaller fins.
Hope this helps,
9th May 2007, 02:12 PM
Hey everyone, thanks you guys have such great input. You really know how to get someone stoked!
Roger, you guessed right, the only spot I have to store the Serenity is at the top of my rack right up against the ceiling - that's why I wanted to know the max height - so if you do get a chance to measure that I would be really grateful!
I had no idea the board could be fun with the smaller sails. It still would be fun to try it with bigger sails, though (although maybe I'll give up on that idea once I try it and fail miserably).
Also, great input on fin size. I don't have a problem with weeds where I sail so I wouldn't typically get weed fins. Assuming I stuck with regular fins, what you you say is the ideal intermediate size fin to suppliment the 70 + 41 cm fins that come with the board - split the difference at 55 cm?
Very cool idea about a custom ballasted fin! Are you thinking of adding a small lead bulb to the end of a commercial fin? That might have a bit more drag then a lead sandwich but would have maximum righting moment. If you make a ballasted fin please post your results (with a picture)!
9th May 2007, 02:26 PM
I'll have to move my trailer in the morning (to get the Serenity out) but I'll make a valiant attempt to give you a number.
Yes, I like 54-60 cm fins about the best. Works great with the 7.5 m2 rigs.
Well, I was thinking of doing some testing on the static and moving roll rates of the Serenity, and perhaps taking a big fin and casting a lead tip with the same profiles.
But the bulb idea is good for getting the max weight at the farthest distance from the roll centerline.
I had a fairly heated discussion on static vs moving "roll rates" with Jim Drake last month, and now I'm interested in finding out how much the big fin reduces the roll rate when the board isn't moving.
Jim thinks something like 20%..... I think the number is significantly smaller.
Be interesting to see if the weighted tip fin (or the bulb fin) reduces the roll rate significaly more.
Making a test rig is going to fun on this one...!
If you store the Serenity with the deck down, then I'm pretty sure you can get it in 7.00 inches if your rack bars are only 5-6 feet apart.
You can easily store it above other boards, as the parts that will hang down are about 3-4 feet further out from the rack bars.
I'll work on getting you real numbers!
9th May 2007, 05:45 PM
When laying the Serenity upside down on a flat floor, the minimum clearance is about 19 cm around the mast track and 18 cm around the finbox. Adding 1 cm as safety margin or 2 cm with the boardbag, a clearance of 20-21 cm should be the bare minimum.
As to further dampen the rolling-over of the hull, I think a wide and long 80 cm fin should be even better than a lead bulb because increasing width generates more lateral resistance through water than a narrow and slender fin (to be done on the increasing list of test to do when I'll get mine...) when the board is not moving. The other side of the coin is that when moving, such a big fin might be more prone to flip over the hull when it is angled during a turn.
9th May 2007, 11:22 PM
I don't want to "dampen" the roll rate.
I have no problems sailing the Serenity with the current 70 cm wide fin (except for the way it "catches" after the board rolls through neutral).
I beleive that the huge wide fin is being provided to give a slower roll response when the board isn't moving, and to give it that last tiny bit of upwind angle.
Once moving, the board does not seem to need the big fin and it becomes a liability in terms of control and speed once the water getss flowing past.
Using a smaller 54-62 cm fin with a significantly reduced area and chord makes the Serenity alot easier to sail, doesn't seem to hurt the static roll rate (no water flowing by the fin) very much, and gives better speed and jibing.
Perhaps a tiny loss in upwind angle, but the Serenity goes upwind on "bite" at the nose and will easily head up so high the rig stalls with almost any fin I've tried.
I did try a tiny 29 cm weed fin and that was indeed too small as the leeway became a problem.
So, I wish to prove/disprove that the huge 70 cm wide blade fin really does slow/dampen the "static" roll rate.
The ability of the big fin to allow you to roll the Serenity slightly to leeward and "set" the roll angle is not in question.
It works almost too well in this mode.
But when the board rolls the other way (midpoint or downwind in a jibe) through neutral (where the fin is vertical and not loaded on either side) it "bites" sharply as soon as the foil begins to work on the new lee side of the fin.
Smaller fins do not do this, making me think the stock fin is a little too big.
Hope this helps,
10th May 2007, 05:45 AM
What kind of fins are you using in the 54-62 cm range. I've not sailed the big fin as much as the smaller one, but I do think it gives a lot more power, though this is very hard to judge accurately. Wind strength changes can make a big difference. Today I sailed with the big fin, the small fin and a 58 cm North Shore Maui race blade. Can't say it was any better than the small fin. Of the three, today I was happiest with the big fin. Though at times it can be a little overpowering, and it does make it harder to control. If the wind picks up, it seems better to "fin down" to a smaller fin, than to "rig down' to a smaller sail.
I'm wondering if a more flexible fin might work? I've got a Curtis Mongo 70 cm, which seems to have more flex than the 70 cm Drake. I'll probably try it next time out.
As for the static rolling problem, I'm not sure exactly what your referring to. To me uphauling, etc is not very difficult. Perhaps at my weight (60 kg, 133) I can get away with more than others. I do notice that jibing is not easy, however, I've improved on that score as well. Flat water is much easier to jibe than choppy water, for sure. What's really cool is that sometimes when it seems like a jibe is being blown, you have enough speed to push the sail down, and then it will come back up on its own - a sort of Serenity Laydown jibe:D
10th May 2007, 06:21 AM
I've used Deboichet Concepts (not the custom Debo's), stock OEM Starboard fins from older formula boards, GO's and such, and some pretty special System B CNC custom fins I got from over on Maui.
I've also used some Curtis Prototype fins, and smaller 40-48 cm SR-6b
slalom race fins.
I think you are giving up alot of speed with the big fin as I find it very "draggy" in light winds with smaller rigs, and just too hard to control in higher winds at higher speeds.
You've almost "proved my point" here.
Uphauling, if you stay over the Serenity's fore and aft centerline, is very easy.
So, providing the huge fin, which is supposed to make the board more stable at rest (zero speed roll rate would be the same as static roll rate here) doesn't seem to add any appreciable (maybe not even measureable) decrease in roll rate, but as soon as you begin moving, the big fin takes a bite and reduces the roll rate almost too much.
I have not found the Serentiy to be even slightly easier to uphaul with any smaller fin vs the 70 cm wide blade, so unless you are racing, against other Serenities with the big fin, there's no advantage to the big fin for recreational sailing.
I can jibe the Serenity dry nearly all the time, even with the big fin, but it's much smoother and easier with smaller fins.
And, yes, I know that "push the sail over and down, and have it pop back up.
Hope this helps,
10th May 2007, 01:26 PM
Thanks JM for your input.
I was measuring my rack tonight and it's going to be tight.
Roger, if it's not too much trouble, I would appreciate your measurment. I hope lack of sapce doesn't keep me from getting this great board...
11th May 2007, 02:12 AM
Sorry for the delay, but I'm in the middle of Texas (Abilene) and a look at the Weather Channel will dhow you that we've had several days of severe thunderstorms so I wasn't to thilled about trying to take any measurements in nasty T'Storms and heavy rain.
Got a little "break in the weather" a few minutes ago and I got some
measurements for you.
With the board sitting on a piece of carpet about 3/8" thick, the nose meausures 27 cm from the parking lot (asphalt).
The tail measures about 13 cm from the same surface.
I'm not totally sure how flat the parking lot is, but it's reasonably flat.
So, if you have 11" of vertical space and 14' 11 5/8" of horizontal space the board witll fit nicely.
If you have less vertical space, then store the board upside down and
it will fit nicely in about 8" of vertical space, but you may have to slide it into your rack tail first.
Hope this helps,
11th May 2007, 02:30 AM
Roger, you are a life saver, thanks!
It was the nose height I was particularly interested in; the nose rise is a bit more than I had guessed based on the other measurements available. Now I've got to see if I can make that work, but now thanks to you I know exactly what I am trying to fit and won't have any nasty surprises.
Last question - do you have any thoughts on the technora vs wood construction for this board? The wood is 25% more expensive but significanly lighter and probably stiffer. The lightness would be nice (it also looks great) but I don't know how important the added stiffness is in a board like this. Is the wood more durable and if so is that even an issue in a light wind board like this? In the light winds I would think that I would be less likely to damage the board (I'm sure I'll fall but not likely to catapult so the mast shouldn't be breaking the nose I would think).
11th May 2007, 05:16 AM
I've never had the opportunity to sail the Technora Serenity.
The one I have is wood.
The WOOD construction is for sure lighter and perhaps a bit stronger
(impact type dings) so if you can afford it, I think that's the way to go.
On the other hand, the Technora will be easier to repair nicely.
Funny thing you should ask about dings and mast "slams" in very light winds.
They happen, more than you think, because peoplre don't think there'[s much force in the wind, so the board won't get dinged, but 'if you drop the boom head on the deck (often happens when you run aground coming in or going out) you will get some damage. That's what happened to my demo Serenity. I didn't do it, but someone at one of the demo's in florida sure did. I'm waiting for a new piece of wood and a new Tiki sticker to have mine repaired to look like new. I fixed it, but it's only watertight, not pretty.
I'd recommend some sort of multi density EVA pad to protect the area where the mast or boom head is likely to strike, at least at first until you get dialed in on "Serenity sailing".
Besides, you think you are getting the Serenity for very light winds (probably < 12 knots) but I'll bet that once you get it you'll "push it's limits" and probably sail it up to around 20 knots, just to "explore" what that's like.
Hope this helps,
11th May 2007, 09:08 AM
Roger, thanks for that input. Great advice as always. Sorry to hear about your board damage. That's a shame for such a beautiful board. The tiki sticker is a great idea to cover it though.
I was going to put on a mast and a boom pad, thinking that would be enough but your idea of putting on some additional padding on the deck (at least temporarily) is a very good idea.
Do you know where I could buy the multi density foam?
I would prefer to put on such a pad in a totally removable way such as using clear silicone. Do you know if that part of the deck is rough (non-skid)? If smooth, then silicone would come off completely (otherwise maybe not). Do you have any other tricks for temporary adhesion?
Regarding sails, I was going to use Retros which I currently own (great sails). I'm curious if you have any thoughts on how well the Huckers would work on this board? For example, I would think that a 6.6 Hucker would have tons of low end power and deliver the pull of a 7.5 Retro at the weight of a the weight of a 6.5 Retro. Have you ever trided it?
11th May 2007, 09:54 AM
Well, the damge is to the deck in the existing large Tiki sticker, so the wood is to repair the Aus. Pine veneer, and the sticker is to replace the damaged areas of the original sticker.
Starboard has since moved the Tiki man a little further forward to get it out of the normal "impact zone".
Not sure if my discussions with Tiesda on this had anything to do with moving the Tiki forward, but I've noticed the current production models have the sticker out of the boom impact area.
Brad Miley, up in Pennsylvania, at Ebb Tide Windsurfing, was making some really nice multi-density deck protectors a couple of years back, so he might be a good source for a custom pad for your Serenity.
You'd need to rig up your board, with your rig, and then figure out the area where the board needs protection.
The deck in that area has non-skid, but I'm not sure why as no one will ever step that far forward when sailing.
I've been close to there a few times when sailing the board backwards into or away from the beach (to keep the fin clear of the bottom) but it's definitely got non-skid on it. You could use a marine grade adhesive sealant or perhaps some industrial grade double sided tape.
Either way, with the appropriate solvent, you could clean the area back off to original (except for UV yellowing of the adjacent areas.
Silicone is probably the last product I would recommend. I don't like silicone products after spending years and countless taxpayer dollars trying to get the stuff out of aluminum castings used on Naval radar systems. I can assure you that you won't be able to "cook" your board at a temperature that will truly eliminate all traces of silicone adhesive "intrusion" into the substrates.
Once the silicone was applied as a sealer for subasseblies, it migrated into the pores of the aluminum in the castings and they had to be heated to almost heat treating temperatures to get it to "boil out" so the casting could be recoated/repainted properly.
Retro's work really well on the Serenity, as do the Hcukers.
I'm not sure the 6.6 Hucker has quite the light wind power of the 7.5 m2 Retro, so I'd probably use the 7.5 Retro if I only had one rig.
I have them all so I'm free to experiment.
Both sails rig on a 460 cm mast, so the one additional batten in the Retro really doesn't add that much weight.
I've used both, and enjoyed them both.
I see alot of people using larger sails on the Serenity, but I've never really figured out why.
The board slices through the water almost effortlessly, so going with a larger rig just adds weight and doesn't seem to give you much more in terms of speed and angle.
Hope this helps,
11th May 2007, 12:56 PM
I didn't realize the Tiki man had a clear background, I thought it was for covering the damage. It sounds like you are going to do a really nice cosmetic repair. Do you do that yourself or have an expert do it? That is way beyond my ability but it's nice to know that nice cosmetic repairs like that can be done on wood boards.
Thanks for the input on the adhesives. I learn something new from you every day! You know, the Serenity is such a beautiful and graceful looking board I do hate to plaster a pad up there which will detract from it's looks. I'm assuming that it's the boom head and not the boom arm that does the real damage? If so, do you think that either of the following approaches might work as well as a foam pad: 1) Cut a strip of multidensity foam maybe 1/2" or so thickness (or maybe dense pipe insulation which is already tubular) and put it inside a "boom bra", and/or 2) use a deviator. I've always hated deviators on rental boards I've used (primarily because they get in the way when repositioning the rig for waterstarting) - but in the case of the Serenity I doubt there will ever be enough wind for that so this might be one case where the Deviator would add value without any drawbacks? Also, the other thing about the Deviator that some people discuss is that in major catapults there is the potential that it might damage the mast track due to already big sail forces being multiplied by the leverage of the "Deviator fulcrum". I'd guess that this also wouldn't be a problem with the Serenity (people might drop the sail but are unlikely to be catapulted) UNLESS Starboard, in an effort to keep the board light "underengineered" the mast track compared to higher wind boards knowing that this mast track will not be subject to the same abuse as their other boards. Do you know anything about the construction of the mast track on the Serenity?
Regarding using the Hucker with a Serenity I guess the thing I'm trying to wrap my mind around relates to the issue of sail twist. It's my rudimentary understanding that the significant twist designed into most current sails (including Retros) is only beneficial when there's sufficient force on the sail to bend the top of the mast downwind, and even then, the benefit is better sail shape and sail stability resulting in better top end speed (meaning that in light winds the twist isn't doing you any good and effectively you're carrying the equivalent of a much smaller and relatively heavier sail). So with more draft, less twist, and less weight (for equivalent power) I would guess the Hucker would outperform (as well as accelerate faster in puffs). That being said, I never under down-haul my Retros to minimize twist becuase in planing winds the CE instability penalty is too great. Maybe you could make a case for under-downhauling Retros in light winds for use with the Serentity? Is that how you've rigged your Retros with the Serentiy?
Thanks again for all your thought provoking input.
11th May 2007, 10:02 PM
I do the "fast and ugly " repairs to the demo boards, to get them back on the water ASAP, but when I want good looking (as close to original as possible) repairs I take the board to the "master".
On the East Coast (where I'm based that "master" is Donnie Bowers at Fox Watersports in Buxton (Hatteras), NC.
As far as protecting the deck of your board, any of your suggested methods could work, but you would need to do some "testing" to find out where the impact points on the mast/boom really are, and then put your padding in these places. I like the deck pad approach the best as it's pretty easy to scope out the actual impact areas on the board and protect them.
The foam pad does not have to be "ugly", but I agree anything on the deck is going to take away from the Serenities sleek look.
You could try the Deviator, but be aware that the Deviator creates a serious "pinch point" in addition to being a n=major cause of "pried out" mast boxes.
Perhaps the Jez's knob is a better solution.
I think the mast track in the Serenity is as strong as any other Starboard, but the leverage exerted by the Deviator is a pretty terrible and damaging force.
I've sailed the 6.6 m2 Hucker on the Serenity, rigded as full as possible for good light wind power, and it moves the board quite well.
The Huckers are not "light weight' sails like say for instance the Severne Glide.
I rig all my Retro's by the "position of the front of the batten above the boom" method, so no, I don't under downhaul Retros in an attempt to get better low end. Retro's give alot of good low end due to seam shaping and batten tension.
If you want less twist in your Retro, and you have a 490 cm race mast, try the 7.5 Retro on that mast, or if the ferrules are compatible, use the top of the 490 on a 460 bottom. That will put more tension (due to d=the difference in IMCS ratings 490 vs 460) in the top of the sail and limit the amount of twist in the top.
I've never experienced the "CE instability" you speak of, on any Retro, so I'm not sure what to do about that.
I always downhaul until the end of the batten above the boom is pulled back to the middle (front to back) of the mast, and on compatible masts, that's also where the top twists off to the tuning symbol.
Hope this helps,
12th May 2007, 03:47 PM
Do you know were I could get a Jez's Knob in the US? Searching the web I only see it sold overesas.
The CE instability I was referring to was only when I experimented in light wind by significantly under DH a big sail and then the wind picked up and was gusty. When normally DH'd, I agree Retro CE's are rock solid.
12th May 2007, 07:44 PM
Do you normally "rail" the Serenity? I find it much easier to do so with the big fin than the small fin. However, I'm not sure if railing it adds much to the overall speed.
13th May 2007, 10:35 AM
If you don't "rail" the Serenity, how do you get it to sail upwnd?
If I want to head up higher, a little "railing" (lee rail down) and the Serenity heads upwind with any of the fins I've tried (except perhaps the 29 cm weed fin which isw simply too small for the board).
If you want to head downwind, put a little weight on your heels and the Serenity "bears off" nicely.
Railing the Severnity (like you would a long board) and keeping your weight forwars so the nose "bites" and rolls a nice little pressure wave off the bow will take you upwind really high. Just watch that you don't let it get too high where the Serenity is a bit prone to "stall".
So, with any fin larger than 30 cm (race blade, cleaver fin, weed fin) "railing" is the way to make the Serenity go where you want it to with the best speed. Railing is how you steer. Steady rig pressure (albeit with the rig pretty vertical and maybe carried a little more forward like you would when railing a longboard to get mas waterline length and upwind angle) will give you the speed.
Hope this helps,
14th May 2007, 06:48 AM
True, you can rail the board with just about any fin, but I guess what I'm saying is if you have the larger fin, with just a little encouragement, the fin will push the windward side of the board up by itself, and you may even need to apply some pressure to keep it from turning over. This is how I sail a longboard most of the time (if there is enough wind.) With the smaller fin, railing is accomplisehd more by the effort of the sailor pushing the leeward side down. So its sort of a matter or railing powered by the fin or by the toes. On a conventional longboard, its easier to keep the board on a beam reach if the cb is partially retracted, though normally when railing one is trying to head upwind.
I don't find that you need to use the rail to sail up (or downwind) - sail steering is the way I do it, (though railing does help going upwind.) I'll give your ideas a try, however. I often can even rail on a beam reach (or close to it) with the big fin.
However, having said all that, I can get Serenity going very fast by sailing it flat on a beam reach - the nose lifts and probably the first 1/4 or 1/3 of the board is out of the water. I'm wondering if "railing" is a quicker mode of sailing than that? I can't really decide. What's your experience.
BTW - next fall you should come to the Atlanta Fall Classic, and we can have a "Serenity Race" in our notorius weak winds.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.