Go Back   Starboard Forums > Free Forum > Question for Scott Mckercher (and SB Team) - Quad 100

Thread: Question for Scott Mckercher (and SB Team) - Quad 100 Reply to Thread
Your Username: Click here to log in
Image Verification
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:

Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
1st December 2015 02:56 AM
Antoine Lefebvre Hi Unregistered, Hi Anowan,

I'm no Scott McKercher but I can guarantee the rocker issue we had on some 2013 and 2014 Quads was a manufacturing issue which happened when the moulds were built. This has been fixed for a while so there shouldn't be any issues with any 2015 or 2016 Quad...

The Quad 100 is indeed a thicker version of the 94 (previously 92). The extra volume/thickness does get you planing a bit earlier, even though it seems quite big for wavesailing at 75 kg. Scott weights 85 kg and most days, he uses the Quad 79 at Margaret River. When it does get light (12-15 knots), he's on the 84. It is Scotty but maybe the 94 would be better for you...

The Quads work well as twin fins boards too. We supplied the 2012 and 2013 Quads with a set of twin fins for those who preferred the looser feeling. However, a set of MB Twinzers 17 (the ones from your Kode right?) would be a bit too small (and too stiff) for the Quad 100. They would work on 94 but I would recommend some 17.5 cm (if not 18 cm) for the Quad 100, especially if you are trying to boost the early planing abilities...

Hope this helped and sorry for the very late reply!

30th November 2015 11:25 AM
Anowan I am bumping this as I am considering a quad 100 2015 for the same reason: targeted at float and ride, side shore to sideoff, wave sailing in 15knts with 8 knots or less on the inside where the waves break, with no channel to escape the incoming white water. Even though I am no heavy weight at 75kgs (plus winter wetsuit) I tell myself the extra volume would still benefit me in those conditions compared to the 94. Am I right ?
What about the rocker ? Does it differ from the smaller volumes ? When using the board more powered up I intend to try it in twin fin mode to maximise the get up and go, would that work with a set of say 17cm ?
I also own an extraordinary Kode wave 87 that I use in sideon to onshore euro mush, and in those condition the board is STELLAR ! It is the best eurowave board that I have ever ridden, just fantastic. So good that I wonder if I could get a kode 92/93 for those lightwind wavesailing in perfect waves instead of the quad...
What do you think ? ( I am no keen on the reactor due to the supershort length hindering the balance when shloging )
17th February 2014 09:29 AM
Unregistered any thoughts on this?
14th May 2013 04:04 AM
Unregistered Good question but no reply yet?????
5th May 2013 11:04 PM
Question for Scott Mckercher (and SB Team) - Quad 100

Hi Scott,

I am considering the purchase of Quad 100 for (ultra) light wind wave sailing (side shore, side on, side off). The main target is 10-15 knots light wind clean conditions (schloging out, etc).

However, I will probably also extend the range of the board a bit further (more onshore conditions, more wind 15-20 knots).

I have heard (have not tried for myself) that the 2013 SB Quads 92 and 87 are a bit slow to plane (with a serious rocker line). The 100 has very similar dimensions to the 92 but is thicker.

The question is: does the 100 quad have the same type of rocker line of the 92 or does it have a bit faster rocker line (starts planing sooner) etc?


Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT +7. The time now is 01:48 PM.