Kite Board Design by Naish

Onad · Mon Nov 07, 05 11:11 am **Kite Board Design by Naish**

http://www.kiteforum.com/phpbb/news_show.php?m_id=169 Cool Thumb's Up

Stuff...

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted

Onad · Mon Nov 07, 05 11:45 am

Are you referring to the product design (concept/process) or something else?

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted

Onad · Mon Nov 07, 05 12:20 pm

NateDogg · Mon Nov 07, 05 1:22 pm **Um...**

Is it just me, or does this board sound exactly like a drop 130 or 136? Design characteristics like single to double concave aside, the ride sounds exactly the same...

And doesn't Hein use CAD for all his proto's? I don't understand why Naish marketing is trying to hype this as something new if even top local shapers use the same methods.

Not trying to flame or anything, just being critical. Naish has some sick product and all, but if they haven't already been using this method to design their boards, then what have they been using all this time??? Market trial and error?? Shiiit.... Shocked

NaishUSA · Since 07 Jul 2005 53 Posts HR OR

Id like to address a couple of items on this thread:

1) John, while you are correct in mentioning that a "wave twintip" concept is not new Im sure that you'll agree that the construction technology and the design of boards in the past 4 years have progressed quite a bit (Im sure that your boards have). While the floater utilizes some design components that are familiar and have been utilized in the past, the end result and feel is quite different than the normal concept of kite TT's.

I would suggest that before you dismiss products out of hand you actually take a look at the board and ride it. Id be happy to provide you a demo once we get them in. You'll be surprised at the difference in performance between a floater and a traditional (pick a year) TT. The construction is also a bit different and takes advantage of newly available materials. Im sure that the board is not everyone's cup of tea but is definately different than anything else out on the market at this time. The floater is more about exploring riding style and performance possibilities than providing a product that is similar to what is currently available on the market.

2)Nate- Again Id recommend riding the board before making comparisons to other boards on the market. The construction is considerably different than the Drop and I would imagine (cant say for sure since Ive not ridden the drop but feel comfortable in making an assumption here) that they are different in ride characteristics.

It frequently amazes me at peoples reaction to information- it's consistently demanded but frequently dismissed as hype when available. I know personally, all the parties involved in the R&D, Testing, and Marketing of Naish products and fail to to see any 'hype' whatsoever in the designer's notes on the Floater. While you can ask Hein questions regarding his shapes on this forum it is a bit more difficult to have a one to one relationship with someone designing boards for a larger company. This was produced as information regarding what the designers had in mind when they were building the board and what their impressions of the board are. Is it enthusiastic? Of course, these folks live kiteboarding as much as we do and take pride in the work that they do. Is it 'hype'? Not in my opinion- it is providing an opportunity for the consumer to get into the minds of the designers and and to give the consumers the opportunity to understand the design concept and process.

There is a fair amount of information in the notes regarding the cad design process that Greg uses when shaping boards. Several months ago, while not entirely bashed, Naish's design methods were called into question by Hein without having any idea of the processes that Naish utilizes in board R&D. I provided info to Hein as well as members of the e-kiteboarding community about how the design process worked at Naish- this is an extension of that exchange. More information for a consumer to use in forming an opinion about a brand, how the brand functions, and how their products are developed. Simply that; information about people, their passion for the sport, and information about how they do things- no hype.

Critical is good-but the bash/negative mindeset that is so amazingly pervasive in this incredible sport is fairly easy to swing to.

Feel free to flame away...

~Matt

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted

Scriffler · Since 03 Jul 2005 581 Posts LYLE Addicted

You really need to give it to Naish, they passed marketing 101 with flying colors. They are the only company that can write technical specification charts for all small features on their kites, boards, footstraps, bars, and who knows what else. I think they have very good equipment, but what makes them number one is their attention to detail and superior marketing. I think all companies should follow their lead in the kite world.

Onad · Mon Nov 07, 05 3:37 pm

Hein · Since 08 Mar 2005 1313 Posts Possessed

Single to double concave is a great design
although fat rails are not very efficient.
On my boards the surfy feeling of a fat rail
is achieved by the V'd panels along the rail.

I see so many guys struggling to stay upwind
in marginal conditions on the LF boards. I think
the fat rails slow you down too much.
Plus. like all production boards, They are heavy
and lack twang. And the surfacing I see on
production boards never exhibits very smooth C2
continuous curvature. Bad surfacing prevents water
from flowing smoothly along the bottom. That means
lost/wasted energy.

Thanks for the mention, NaishUSA, but I still
don't know who does your 3D design/modeling
and what software they are using. Does the
guy driving the mouse ride? The screen shot
of the model looks a little busy and chunky! A
truely smooth surface has very few boundary
or tangency lines. Sure, these are critical
(negative?) comments but if you rise to the
challenges then you'll have a better 3D design
process.

-Hein

If you are interested in using computers for design
then remember this: Organized data managment
is the foundation for all computer work. Revision
level (change) management is especially important
in engineering.

NaishUSA · Since 07 Jul 2005 53 Posts HR OR

Hmmm....

Hi Hein,

While Im tempted to feed the fire I dont reallly find it is necessary to utilize the personal attack style of marketing that you choose for your products and your ego.

It is laughable to actually think that someone would even consider that one of the brands that pioneered the sport would actually hire designers and product managers that dont kite, but to quiet your concerns, nearly everyone at Naish rides; from Rob down to Jose who runs the warehouse. I think it would be fairly difficult create quality products without being able to effectively utilze and evaluate them- but maybe some other businesses use that model, I dont reallly know.

Let me know when you are headed to Maui, Id be happy to hook you up with the staff so you can see first hand the competency and enthusasiam that the whole comany shares. Who knows, you might even get a riding tip or two!

To refresh your memory:

Thread:

http://www.kiteforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2319434

Specifically:

http://www.kiteforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2319434

or if you would care to re-read the original post from this thread:

http://www.kiteforum.com/phpbb/news_show.php?m_id=169

Hopefullly this info is helpful, I should really go and change the squirrel that powers the CAD software

Wink

~Matt

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted

J.P. · Since 10 Mar 2005 638 Posts Addicted