ST93 vs Futura 93 - Page 3

Ola_H · 5th September 2007, 05:09 PM

Van,

I definitely see your point about that not everyone can have stashes of similar sized boards - that was more an extreme example to show my point.

In your case, I still don't think the volumes per se is the problem. It's more that you would like a smaller board in the S-type (or futura) range, something like a Futura 80 or 85 that could build on the iS76. I still argue that you could shave the st93 down to a real 90 liters and not really affect the range much. If you want to get it to work better in high wind for your weight, you have to do more than shave of some volume.

That said, even my F101 definitely is a class "smaller" than the iS101 when it comes to high wind blasting. I don't know how it compares with ST, but in conditions when the iS101 is a real handful for me, the F101 is still as smooth as ever. In practice the F101 and iS101 are to close to justify owning them both, but in a three board blasting/freeride quiver, I think a F93 really would fit rather well between a 75-80 liter fsw (I have a Kombat 79 myself and its w wonderfully versatile board) and an iS101.

For me (70kg) the real solution for high and med wind blasting is the iS76, but while is a very easy riding board, its still a light slalom construction. My personal ideal 3 board blasting quiver would be iS101 (or 96), iS76 and then either a Pure Acid 74 or a Kombat 79.

van · 5th September 2007, 05:21 PM

Ola H - Can You Please Confirm That The Futura 93 Is Actually 93 Liters Or Are We In For Any Surprises? If It Is 93 Liters I Would Definitely Consider Trading It In For The St '93'. I Don't Want To Get An Isonic For High Wind Blasting As I Like To Chop Hop Etc Etc And Prefer The Looser Fealing Of A Freeride Board. Don't Want To Get A Kombat Though Cause I Want To Race My Mates. So This Brings Us Back To The Original Question. How Does The Futura 93 Compare To The St 93 In Terms Of Speed/manouverbility.

qldsalty · 5th September 2007, 07:07 PM

Wow three pages on and we still don't know if the volume of the 93 is virtual or real. The suspense is killing me.

Erik Loots · 6th September 2007, 01:47 AM

Volume doesnt count that much! Look @ max width & tailwidth, those 2 count very much how long you can stay on the water. But even more important are fins and good (rigged) sail, if you are surfing in difficult conditions.

futura 93
l= 240cm
w= 61.5cm
t= >40cm

If I would use it... it would be my lightweather board

Stype 93
l= 242
w= 59.5
t=37.7

Just looking @ the 2 boards... My opinion: The S-type will be the better one if conditions get difficult, if you're skills getting bit better the s-type will be faster.

steveC · 6th September 2007, 02:07 AM

Hi van,

It seems that you're not as unhappy as you initially suggested, as the ST93 and iS101 appear to be fitting into non-conflicting categories of use, and each is apparently delivering in accordance with your original goals. Overall, that's a good thing. Yet, having heard many vent their annoyance with the virtual volume concept, you clearly aren't alone with your frustration. Yet, I sometimes wonder if the differing actual volumes were never discovered, whether folks would be unhappy with their choices.

In my situation, I have a 5 board quiver, and I can frankly say that I don't know the volumes of any of them. Of course, I have a general idea, but not the absolute numbers that so many unconditionally want. Sometimes I question whether too much detailed information is a good thing, because numbers often say so little about reality.

van · 6th September 2007, 08:48 PM

HI STEVE - LIKE I SAID I'M NOT UNHAPPY WITH WHAT I HAVE IT'S JUST THAT IF I WANTED TO BUY A 99 LITER BOARD THEN I WOULD HAVE GONE AND BOUGHT ONE. AS FOR YOUR QUOTE 'Sometimes I question whether too much detailed information is a good thing, because numbers often say so little about reality.' YOU ARE PROBABLY RIGHT BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE USED TO HAVING ALL THAT INFO.

AS FOR 'Yet, I sometimes wonder if the differing actual volumes were never discovered, whether folks would be unhappy with their choices.' YOU ARE PROBABLY SPOT ON THERE AS WELL. BUT NOW I KNOW I THINK IT'S MORE PSYCHOLOGICAL MORE THAN ANYTHING.

qldsalty · 10th September 2007, 11:31 AM

Van is right, we want to know the true volume. I have the Stype 93. The minute I unpacked it in the shop I was suspicious it was bigger than 93. When I'm powered in lumpy conditions the board jumps all over the place. It does behave more like 100ltrs than 90. I weigh 85 kgs. This for me has been a good thing because we mostly experience moderate conditions and the added volume gets me going quicker. It has made my 115 Stype a bit redundant. I resort to wave gear when I can't control the 93 anymore, but not everyone has the luxury of few boards and sails to choose from.
I can see your point as well Steve, but my friends who have ridden the 93 and I all said that board has got to be bigger than 93. We were right of course. So in our case the true volume is 99 and we felt it. Should we be in the dark as to it's true volume, the next board I bought would be smaller as our previous experience told us the 93 was a big feel. I would probably go to a 85ltr and then what would happen? I would be on aboard to small if it was true volume but just right if it was virtual.
I believe they need to be all virtual volume or all true volume. Not some of each. It makes it very hard to know what board to get next without that knowledge. We guess by width and tail width like you do but volume is still an important part of the equation for me. I used to upgrade my boards each year but now wait a season or two see what reports like this forum reveal.

Maximus · 10th September 2007, 11:47 AM

I thought volume was the knob on my stereo?

geo · 10th September 2007, 02:15 PM

Ridicolous.
Starboard people: you are the #1 company; you are able to have a huge lineup of successful designs and deliver them all over the world in order to satisfy so many different tastes sailing in so many different conditions; construction is OK; competition shapes prove to be winning races and you are strongly in hold of top places; everybody has to reckon you are the top windsurfing company... so...
So please why don't you make that one more small effort and spare people all this headaches about volume?!? Did a doctor tell you that unveiling/using real volume figures is harmful for you?

Ola_H · 10th September 2007, 04:00 PM

I'm a mathematician:

10th September 2007, 11:31 AM	#27
qldsalty Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 32	Van is right, we want to know the true volume. I have the Stype 93. The minute I unpacked it in the shop I was suspicious it was bigger than 93. When I'm powered in lumpy conditions the board jumps all over the place. It does behave more like 100ltrs than 90. I weigh 85 kgs. This for me has been a good thing because we mostly experience moderate conditions and the added volume gets me going quicker. It has made my 115 Stype a bit redundant. I resort to wave gear when I can't control the 93 anymore, but not everyone has the luxury of few boards and sails to choose from. I can see your point as well Steve, but my friends who have ridden the 93 and I all said that board has got to be bigger than 93. We were right of course. So in our case the true volume is 99 and we felt it. Should we be in the dark as to it's true volume, the next board I bought would be smaller as our previous experience told us the 93 was a big feel. I would probably go to a 85ltr and then what would happen? I would be on aboard to small if it was true volume but just right if it was virtual. I believe they need to be all virtual volume or all true volume. Not some of each. It makes it very hard to know what board to get next without that knowledge. We guess by width and tail width like you do but volume is still an important part of the equation for me. I used to upgrade my boards each year but now wait a season or two see what reports like this forum reveal. __________________ JP Supersport 136, Jp Slalom 112, Jp Spersport 100, STarboard Kode 112, JP Freestyle wave 101 and JP Freestyle wave 84, Go 155 Sails NP V8 9.0, NP H2 7.7, NP H2 6.7, NP Excess 7.4, Alpha 6.2 , Alpha 5.4, and Zone 4.7

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

5th September 2007, 05:09 PM	#21
Ola_H TEAM Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,191	Van, I definitely see your point about that not everyone can have stashes of similar sized boards - that was more an extreme example to show my point. In your case, I still don't think the volumes per se is the problem. It's more that you would like a smaller board in the S-type (or futura) range, something like a Futura 80 or 85 that could build on the iS76. I still argue that you could shave the st93 down to a real 90 liters and not really affect the range much. If you want to get it to work better in high wind for your weight, you have to do more than shave of some volume. That said, even my F101 definitely is a class "smaller" than the iS101 when it comes to high wind blasting. I don't know how it compares with ST, but in conditions when the iS101 is a real handful for me, the F101 is still as smooth as ever. In practice the F101 and iS101 are to close to justify owning them both, but in a three board blasting/freeride quiver, I think a F93 really would fit rather well between a 75-80 liter fsw (I have a Kombat 79 myself and its w wonderfully versatile board) and an iS101. For me (70kg) the real solution for high and med wind blasting is the iS76, but while is a very easy riding board, its still a light slalom construction. My personal ideal 3 board blasting quiver would be iS101 (or 96), iS76 and then either a Pure Acid 74 or a Kombat 79.

5th September 2007, 05:21 PM	#22
van Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Greece Posts: 80	Ola H - Can You Please Confirm That The Futura 93 Is Actually 93 Liters Or Are We In For Any Surprises? If It Is 93 Liters I Would Definitely Consider Trading It In For The St '93'. I Don't Want To Get An Isonic For High Wind Blasting As I Like To Chop Hop Etc Etc And Prefer The Looser Fealing Of A Freeride Board. Don't Want To Get A Kombat Though Cause I Want To Race My Mates. So This Brings Us Back To The Original Question. How Does The Futura 93 Compare To The St 93 In Terms Of Speed/manouverbility.

5th September 2007, 07:07 PM	#23
qldsalty Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 32	Wow three pages on and we still don't know if the volume of the 93 is virtual or real. The suspense is killing me.

6th September 2007, 01:47 AM	#24
Erik Loots Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Netherlands, Alkmaar Posts: 109	Volume doesnt count that much! Look @ max width & tailwidth, those 2 count very much how long you can stay on the water. But even more important are fins and good (rigged) sail, if you are surfing in difficult conditions. futura 93 l= 240cm w= 61.5cm t= >40cm If I would use it... it would be my lightweather board Stype 93 l= 242 w= 59.5 t=37.7 Just looking @ the 2 boards... My opinion: The S-type will be the better one if conditions get difficult, if you're skills getting bit better the s-type will be faster.

6th September 2007, 02:07 AM	#25
steveC Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 639	Hi van, It seems that you're not as unhappy as you initially suggested, as the ST93 and iS101 appear to be fitting into non-conflicting categories of use, and each is apparently delivering in accordance with your original goals. Overall, that's a good thing. Yet, having heard many vent their annoyance with the virtual volume concept, you clearly aren't alone with your frustration. Yet, I sometimes wonder if the differing actual volumes were never discovered, whether folks would be unhappy with their choices. In my situation, I have a 5 board quiver, and I can frankly say that I don't know the volumes of any of them. Of course, I have a general idea, but not the absolute numbers that so many unconditionally want. Sometimes I question whether too much detailed information is a good thing, because numbers often say so little about reality.

6th September 2007, 08:48 PM	#26
van Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Greece Posts: 80	HI STEVE - LIKE I SAID I'M NOT UNHAPPY WITH WHAT I HAVE IT'S JUST THAT IF I WANTED TO BUY A 99 LITER BOARD THEN I WOULD HAVE GONE AND BOUGHT ONE. AS FOR YOUR QUOTE 'Sometimes I question whether too much detailed information is a good thing, because numbers often say so little about reality.' YOU ARE PROBABLY RIGHT BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE USED TO HAVING ALL THAT INFO. AS FOR 'Yet, I sometimes wonder if the differing actual volumes were never discovered, whether folks would be unhappy with their choices.' YOU ARE PROBABLY SPOT ON THERE AS WELL. BUT NOW I KNOW I THINK IT'S MORE PSYCHOLOGICAL MORE THAN ANYTHING.

10th September 2007, 11:47 AM	#28
Maximus Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 158	I thought volume was the knob on my stereo?

10th September 2007, 02:15 PM	#29
geo Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 327	Ridicolous. Starboard people: you are the #1 company; you are able to have a huge lineup of successful designs and deliver them all over the world in order to satisfy so many different tastes sailing in so many different conditions; construction is OK; competition shapes prove to be winning races and you are strongly in hold of top places; everybody has to reckon you are the top windsurfing company... so... So please why don't you make that one more small effort and spare people all this headaches about volume?!? Did a doctor tell you that unveiling/using real volume figures is harmful for you?