Moses SABfoil

[alowishus]

What remains is to try 683s/710/483/91 when I get 483 back and compare it to 683s/710/450/91 (without shim).

Awesome stuff grigorib. Really good info. Your field tests are much appreciated by all
Will be very interesting how the two stabs compare wrt carving, gybes, riding swell and going fast etc.
Hopefully you will get some good conditions to put them through their paces.

[trod27]

Grig thanks for review. I am curious if the 633/683 will have issues on SS DC micro? I have one ordered and I hear the track is further forward then my DC 42 regular.

[grigorib]

Grig thanks for review. I am curious if the 633/683 will have issues on SS DC micro? I have one ordered and I hear the track is further forward then my DC 42 regular.

Yes the track is more forward on micro compared to any other 42” Dwarfcraft model. There’s plenty room to stand but certainly you’d want to mount the mast all the way back.

I rode 633/749/483/105 mounted on Micro and it was good riding.

[grigorib]

Distance between nearest bolts of wing and stabilizer
749 507mm
710 467mm
647 500mm
so it tells me I shouldn’t need two separate fuselages

Moses team, please consider releasing larger than 590 wing for 647 kitefoil fuselage, something 683s size or tad smaller. The wing can extend arrowshape forward and an inch back to end right before fuselage-mast front bolt.
Pair it with large stabilizer if you’d like to keep sales up but carrying two fuselages for people who fly with gear is a major hassle.
I think we’re well past the point of question whether kitefoiling needs larger wings as well. 548 was a first wake up call, 590 followed and I consider Gunnar who was the one clearing doubts and propped the demands on 633 for kiting

#needa683sfor647

[tkaraszewski]

Distance between nearest bolts of wing and stabilizer
749 507mm
710 467mm
647 500mm
so it tells me I shouldn’t need two separate fuselages

Moses team, please consider releasing larger than 590 wing for 647 kitefoil fuselage, something 683s size or tad smaller. The wing can extend arrowshape forward and an inch back to end right before fuselage-mast front bolt.
Pair it with large stabilizer if you’d like to keep sales up but carrying two fuselages for people who fly with gear is a major hassle.
I think we’re well past the point of question whether kitefoiling needs larger wings as well. 548 was a first wake up call, 590 followed and I consider Gunnar who was the one clearing doubts and propped the demands on 633 for kiting

#needa683sfor647

I'm planning to build a custom larger wing that mounts to the 647 fuselage, however my first design roughly splits the difference in size between the 590 and 683s (and is higher aspect, similar to the 550, but bigger).

[grigorib]

Distance between nearest bolts of wing and stabilizer
749 507mm
710 467mm
647 500mm
so it tells me I shouldn’t need two separate fuselages

Moses team, please consider releasing larger than 590 wing for 647 kitefoil fuselage, something 683s size or tad smaller. The wing can extend arrowshape forward and an inch back to end right before fuselage-mast front bolt.
Pair it with large stabilizer if you’d like to keep sales up but carrying two fuselages for people who fly with gear is a major hassle.
I think we’re well past the point of question whether kitefoiling needs larger wings as well. 548 was a first wake up call, 590 followed and I consider Gunnar who was the one clearing doubts and propped the demands on 633 for kiting

#needa683sfor647

I'm planning to build a custom larger wing that mounts to the 647 fuselage, however my first design roughly splits the difference in size between the 590 and 683s (and is higher aspect, similar to the 550, but bigger).

It’d be cool to take a 683 (windsurf wing, without “tail” in the back) and CNC an adapter to 647 for it.

I’d say a large kitefoil wing should stay thin <20mm and be <1000 sq.cm in size for my 200 lbs. the major point for it - to be able to go slow and start in lightwind without stalling and without board having to touch water.

In my opinion 550 had too straight of leading edge line and to fight seaweed better I’d arrowhead it a bit

[tkaraszewski]

Distance between nearest bolts of wing and stabilizer
749 507mm
710 467mm
647 500mm
so it tells me I shouldn’t need two separate fuselages

Moses team, please consider releasing larger than 590 wing for 647 kitefoil fuselage, something 683s size or tad smaller. The wing can extend arrowshape forward and an inch back to end right before fuselage-mast front bolt.
Pair it with large stabilizer if you’d like to keep sales up but carrying two fuselages for people who fly with gear is a major hassle.
I think we’re well past the point of question whether kitefoiling needs larger wings as well. 548 was a first wake up call, 590 followed and I consider Gunnar who was the one clearing doubts and propped the demands on 633 for kiting

#needa683sfor647

I'm planning to build a custom larger wing that mounts to the 647 fuselage, however my first design roughly splits the difference in size between the 590 and 683s (and is higher aspect, similar to the 550, but bigger).

It’d be cool to take a 683 (windsurf wing, without “tail” in the back) and CNC an adopter to 647 for it.

I’d say a large kitefoil wing should stay thin <20mm and be <1000 sq.cm in size for my 200 lbs. the major point for it - to be able to go slow and start in lightwind without stalling and without board having to touch water.

In my opinion 550 had too straight of leading edge line and to fight seaweed better I’d arrowhead it a bit

One problem with fitting the 683 or other "wide" wings to the 647 fuselage is the bolt spacing on the 647 is much closer together than the surf fuselages, you end up with no positive connection to the fuselage at either the front of back of the wing.

Seaweed isn't much of a concern for me, nowhere I kite regularly has much seaweed.

If you buy me a 683 windsurf wing I'll cut two 683->647 adapters and send you one. No idea how well they'll work, but I've got the CNC equipment and an aircraft manufacturing engineer friend, so I'm sure we could make one.Since the screw spacing is different, you'd screw in the adapter to the fuse, then screw in the wing to the adapter over the top of the other screws. It'd work fine, except for the aforementioned problem about the screws all being relatively centered in the wider wing.

[grigorib]

I promised I’d compare 483 and 450 stabilizers side by side. so I did yesterday with 683s wing, 710 fuselage, 105cm mast and my 36” woody board under 7m Rally.

Session #1 - 450 stabilizer shimmed with 0.9mm washer - felt pretty good. Proper foot position on the board
Session #2 - 483 stabilizer, no shim. Perfect and perfect foot position
Session #3 - 450 stabilizer shimmed with a 1.2mm washer. Perfect ride, perfect foot position.

Waiting for my proper shims to come in mail.

Conclusion - 483 stabilizer is amazing but has wingtips pointed down and prone to damage in shallows. 450 stabilizer is more compact, 45g heavier, has better, damage-prone winglets pointed up and it takes shims to get foot positioned right where they were with 483

I will also try to do another attempt of riding 683s with 710 fuselage and 91cm mast but 330 or 325 stabilizer when I get to OBX coming weekend.
I hope to see you guys on water

[max]

I promised I’d compare 483 and 450 stabilizers side by side. so I did yesterday with 683s wing, 710 fuselage, 105cm mast and my 36” woody board under 7m Rally.

Session #1 - 450 stabilizer shimmed with 0.9mm washer - felt pretty good. Proper foot position on the board
Session #2 - 483 stabilizer, no shim. Perfect and perfect foot position
Session #3 - 450 stabilizer shimmed with a 1.2mm washer. Perfect ride, perfect foot position.

Waiting for my proper shims to come in mail.

Conclusion - 483 stabilizer is amazing but has wingtips pointed down and prone to damage in shallows. 450 stabilizer is more compact, 45g heavier, has better, damage-prone winglets pointed up and it takes shims to get foot positioned right where they were with 483

I will also try to do another attempt of riding 683s with 710 fuselage and 91cm mast but 330 or 325 stabilizer when I get to OBX coming weekend.
I hope to see you guys on water

so if the 450 is not shimmed, how does the front foot position change in comparison to using the 483?

and how does the 450 change the ride . . . slower to faster, more carvy or less, and . . . ?

[grigorib]

...
so if the 450 is not shimmed, how does the front foot position change in comparison to using the 483?

and how does the 450 change the ride . . . slower to faster, more carvy or less, and . . . ?

If 450 is not shimmed you’d need to step forward couple of inches or move mast back which I can’t do on either 36” woody nor 42” Micro boards

450 feels about same as 483 - I don’t think think it changes the ride. Great setup, don’t forget to shim it though