Starboard Forums

Starboard Forums (
-   Free Forum (
-   -   Isonic 117 Wide 2011 - Trouble shooting (

Japs73 13th May 2013 01:59 PM

Isonic 117 Wide 2011 - Trouble shooting

since a year I own a 117 wide and sail it with a 8.6 + Select 45 and 7,8 + 42. I am around 85 kg. I am an experienced windsurfer (25 years since I learned) and have always sailed Slalom / Race boards.

Since I bought this board I have never felt comfortable on it, previously I owned a Isonic 111 and loved it, but was looking for a low wind board (117w) combined with a smaller isonic (97).

Specific problem is it seems I do not find the right stance and feeling on the board, basically I find myself doing all pressure with the back foot as my front foot just kind of floats on the board not being able to push do any pressure on it. In higher winds I have trouble keeping the front foot inside the strap, feels like is pushed out of the strap, and I find myself trying different body positions to correct it. Have tryied to lower boom and move the base position but does not help much.

I am a size 42 (8.5) and find the footstraps at their closest position too big, I like to ride on the edge of the board.

Is this becasuse I am used to paralel footstrap position? Isonic 111 was sweet and comfortable ... 97 is also nice to ride ...

I am a bit fustrated and thinking of selling the board.

Any tips anyone?


Unregistered 13th May 2013 03:31 PM

Hi japs!I have exactly the same feeling with my 117 not wide 2011..I'm not sailing so long time like you and I thought its all about my experience.i have tried many tricks with the base or the straps position even with the fins and harness lines but nothing really good.also I had the 107 which I change it with 97 and no any problem at all!!
In your case I would try bigger fins but I don't know if that will help you..the only thing I feel a little bit better when I use 44 even 45 for 7.8 than (42) and 47 for 8.6 than (45)

Unregistered 13th May 2013 06:10 PM

isonic 117 wide

i have had this experience to.

Reason have been the harnesslines in the wrong place and to much downhaul on the sail..
i try to use a very upright stance on this board and this helps a lot to discover if you have a good trim.

It feels like the board react very much on smallest change in trim.

i tried a 9.5 m2 sail on the board and in to low wind but still planing i got to much back foot pressure.
i used a 47cm select s10 fin.

The select fin works great with my 8.7m2 sail but i have ordered a blackfins project type r 50 cm to match this sail.

I use a 45cm blackfins project type r with my 7.9 and this is works great to if the max wind is around 17-18 knots and flat water.

im 77 kg

yOu should check your trim because the board is really fun when you get it together.

Unregistered 14th May 2013 12:38 AM

The 117Wide is monoconcave with smaller tail and good tailkick. In other words compared to the more conservative designs you will experience the nose to rise faster (like iS111 and iS97). But when taking a less raked fin/longer fin to lower the nose you get another problem (to much taillift and lifting front foot).

The solution can be found in a shorter stiffer fin with not too much rake, a good custom findesigner should be able to help you out. Or maybe one of the sponsored guys can help, but be sure the rider that recommends has the same weight!!! Beside that I would advice a lower boom position compared to what you would expect (based on previous experience). And maybe additional use a slightly forward postion of masttrack compared to your previous experience.

Or just buy the iS107 and you will recognize this fits better to your previous experience (only faster). The iS117W is very fast in a very wide range, but only once you tamed the beast though ;).

Japs73 14th May 2013 06:52 AM

Isonic 117 Wide 2011 - Trouble shooting
Thanks for your messages ....

Lower boom: there is not much room to lower the boom considering is a board for low wind where a high boom position is normally recomended, and consider the boards base rail is lowered for a low gravity center. I have tried to lower it a bit but for low wind position is not comfortable.

Bigger fin: on Starboard site the fin range is 38 - 46 for a sail range 7.0 - 9.2 so I guess 8.6 with 45 should be fine.

Base position: I have read both forward and backward ... ?

Downhaul: I guess downhaul has to do with the wind power more than with the board feeling ?

Fin Rake ... I can not afford to experiment with fins, just need a board that I can plug to my fin and rig and works fine, might not be the fastest combination, but I should not find myself in funny stances or fighting against the board

Any more comments please?

Any Starboard staff or rider advise ?


Unregistered 18th May 2013 09:42 PM

isonic 117 wide
"""Downhaul: I guess downhaul has to do with the wind power more than with the board feeling"""

Really.. the downhaul affect the pressure on the board.

less downhaul, more pressure on the board
more downhaul. less pressure on the board.

from the experience that i discovered from testing this board is that if you have to much downhaul the board will go too high in the water and as a result put more pressure on your backleg.

Reverse if you put less downhaul your board can feel a bit sticky.
This is within 2 cm on the downhaul on my 9.5 sail.
I recently used my 9.5 sail and my select 47 s10
i had pulled the sail according to specs: 522cm downhaul.
Went out and the had a lot of pressure on the backfoot and had a hard time to go upwind.
I changed the setting and discovered that my harness lines were a bit off and then i moved the mastbase forward and dropped the boom down .
this gave me a pretty ok setup but not good.
Day 2 i used the same setup except doing the rigging visually.
i checked the loose leach on the upper part of the sail and used 520.5 cm downhaul since 522 gave a very loose sail.
The end result was a centered mastbase position and normal upwind ability and a more relaxed stance.
So my experience with my sails and this board is that too much downhaul gives me the problems you describe big time.
This is for gunsails mega xs and north warp f2011 and select s10 47 cm and black fins project type r 45 cm

This is racing equipment.. trim and trim and trim...otherwise buy a freerideboard.

good luck !!

mikerb 23rd May 2013 08:56 PM

Trim the 117
I sail the 133 but have experienced the same issues when I first started using the board. It is true that all of the variables ( mast foot position, harness line position, sail trim, boom height) need to be in harmony and I suspect some have found solutions by accident! Like most of the Isonics the board needs to be sailed with even pressure on both feet. The biggest single trim factor that impacts on the balance between your feet is boom height.........OK there are limits and other aspects of trim have to be right as well.
I do not agree with the comments about downhaul adjustment. Too little downhaul on any large sail will certainly result in too much back foot pressure and with the 117/133 short board length you lose the ability to go off the wind. I set anything larger than 7m on max downhaul all the time...just using outhaul to increase/decrease power. I think some may have noticed a difference in balance between the feet simply because the centre of effort of the sail has moved forward by releasing downhaul.
I think the other aspect of trim that helps get that balance between the feet is harness line probably need to try longer lines.
Overall my suggestion would be.....lower the boom by about 30mm.......bring the mast track back slightly.......use the next size up harness lines............set your harness hook lower if it feels uncomfortable at first.

BelSkorpio 23rd May 2013 09:51 PM

All good suggestions, mikerb.
But it can change rapidly when the wind strength changes.

I was yesterday on my IS122 + 7.8 sail and felt a bit uncomfortable, the first hour when I was heavily overpowered also because of nasty chop.
I know my equipment + settings very well.
Then after 1 hour, the wind dropped off a little bit and I felt totally ballanced, without having changed any setting.
When the wind decreased further, there was again no perfect ballance and I also recognize the things that the topic starter describes. Too much pressure on the backfoot and difficult pointing. I always try to compensate this by turning/rotating my feet and body towards the nose of the board. It helps to a certain extent. But it remains a fact that Isonics like a lot of sail power and when you don't have enough of it, it's difficult tuning.
I experience this also much less on my IS101 (97) and IS87, but I think it is because I ride these boards in much more wind.

Remi 24th May 2013 12:12 AM

Hi All,

This is the basic set up for iSonic 117 that we test with riders from 65 to 100 kgs :

Foot Straps : Totally in the back position for the back one and middle for the front one or back if your are not tall.

Mast Base : recommend position or 5mm more back

Boom : Eyes height

Harness Line : Adjustable one that you can trim between light to strong winds. Minimum length, hand to elbow

Fins : 42 with 7.8 44 with 8.6, 9.2 44/46

Hope this help, if need more details no problems

All the best

Johnny Walker 24th June 2013 08:36 PM

Hi Japs,
I entirely sympathise with your frustrations.

The basic problem is there is too much distance between the front and back footstrap plugs.
One day I plucked up the courage to rout some holes in my iSonic 105 and install some extra footstrap plugs behind the exisiting front ones. I reduced the distance between the footstraps by 7.5 cm and it tranformed the board.

I have since owned an Falcon 124, iSonic 121 (2010), iSonic 97 (2011), iSonic 90 (2011) and they have all received the same footstrap treatment and everytime the floating front feeling has gone away.

If you would rather not start cutting holes in you board, you could buy a 2013 iSonic. I got a new iSonic 110 last week and compared to the 2011 boards the front straps are 4cm further back.

All times are GMT +7. The time now is 11:48 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.