New Think surf ski release?

I've come across these images so thought others may be interested.

Putting 2 and 2 together and getting 7 this is what I have come up with.
It looks like a new model from this years Think Kayaks surf ski range. By looking at the images, and I'm just spit balling here it may well fill a gap between the Uno models and the Evo II? It looks like it has more rocker than previous models and also is wider near the tail like a few other nameless skis, maybe it is more say Eze like in the tail.
As with all the Think models you know you're going to get a leg leash point, carry/tiedown handles front and rear and bungy storage area behind the seat.

Yep, I can confirm that Think is about to launch a new ski - no details yet.

Yep, two new skis from the Think stable about to be released.


The one to sit between the Evo II and Uno Max is particular is a gem. Watch this space!

Shame the Think legend did not catch on, I don't think people gave it a fair shake. They'd Look at the chine and flattish bottom and mutter "I don't get it" like it was a Greenlander boat. Yes the glide felt a bit sticky to me but it had great downwind control.

So you are saying this is the legend replacement? I would agree based on how thin the rails are at the seat, probably 17" of beam i'd guess ... Hope they get good vacuum action on the epoxy there.

Here is my worthless guess...Keep in mind that here in my area in the states, boats such as the Think models are seen about as much as Big Foot or the Loch Ness Monster in real life. They are but a myth that you see pictures of from time to time.

About 19(482mm) - 21(533mm) inches wide and 16 (4577mm) - 17(5182mm) feet long?

Possibly a boat between the Epic V6 - v8 range? Looks like she has a good amount of rocker, similar to that of boats in this class.?

Think makes a good looking boat.

Stew, Can you tell us anything about where the other model will sit? i.e between the Eze and the Evo II or is it an improvement on either of those models.

Lost John, yep the Legend was quite unique some say that it was popular with a few out there. The chined hull just isn't as smooth as the rounded hull when the conditions are mixed which in many areas around the World, water conditions are mixed more often than not. The popular models stay, the least popular one's just run off the end of the line. Nothing lasts forever.
On the flip side the Uno Max still has a chine with the more subtle shape and even roll transition, I thought.

lost john wrote: Shame the Think legend did not catch on, I don't think people gave it a fair shake. They'd Look at the chine and flattish bottom and mutter "I don't get it" like it was a Greenlander boat. Yes the glide felt a bit sticky to me but it had great downwind control.

So you are saying this is the legend replacement? I would agree based on how thin the rails are at the seat, probably 17" of beam i'd guess ... Hope they get good vacuum action on the epoxy there.

I wouldn't say it didn't catch on, it was a very successful boat for us here in Australia when it was released. It certainly was different, but that's how we do things.

Yes, this boat will be a replacement for the Legend, and your beam estimation is very close.

PaddleFaster wrote: Here is my worthless guess...Keep in mind that here in my area in the states, boats such as the Think models are seen about as much as Big Foot or the Loch Ness Monster in real life. They are but a myth that you see pictures of from time to time.

About 19(482mm) - 21(533mm) inches wide and 16 (4577mm) - 17(5182mm) feet long?

Possibly a boat between the Epic V6 - v8 range? Looks like she has a good amount of rocker, similar to that of boats in this class.?

Think makes a good looking boat.

'
Nope, way off. As I said above, the boat pictured is a new model to sit between the Uno Max and Evo II.

Thank you for the kind comments on the looks, we like them too!

Stew: Thats what I get for trying to use the curb height in the background to calculate dimensions!

They are good looking boats. I wish we had them readily available to paddle about a bit here...

That looks like a lot of rocker in the rear! I placed a piece of paper along the length of the boat on the picture to see how the rocker goes and I don't see both ends of the boat being in the water at the same time on flat water... Also, hard to tell about the fat-looking tail without a top view, but what's the purpose of such fat a$s if it indeed is that wide? Wouldn't that lead to burying the nose (slows you down, combined with the tail being pushed = more boraching) and lifting the middle (decreases stability) between waves, without much use for increased speed due to surfing? Thoughts?

I guess if people were after something to race in flat water they'd pull out a K1 or Uno Max over one with more rocker.
Rocker makes for better handling and stability in a variety of angles of waves and ocean swells, especially the knarly stuff from my experience.
Not everyone is an elite paddler so having 5 or 6 models gives everyone an option and a few choices when making their surf ski choices. I've always had two surf skis one for when the conditions are pretty (a tippier ski) and when it's blowing 30 or 40 knots I need the extra comfort and stability of something narrower or with more rocker.
Like I said to a mate a few weeks back, we are not all blessed with the balance of an Olympic Gymnast, so it's what works for each of us and horses for courses as the saying goes.
I'll try the new ski out and draw my own opinions about it, my review will of course be on how I find it.

For many of us we are either in the Fenn, Epic and Think camps. I Love Thinks but also appreciate many love other brands, that suit them better. Any brand ski purchase is fine with me, they get more people out on the water and a few more paddling mates.

Kocho wrote: That looks like a lot of rocker in the rear! I placed a piece of paper along the length of the boat on the picture to see how the rocker goes and I don't see both ends of the boat being in the water at the same time on flat water... Also, hard to tell about the fat-looking tail without a top view, but what's the purpose of such fat a$s if it indeed is that wide? Wouldn't that lead to burying the nose (slows you down, combined with the tail being pushed = more boraching) and lifting the middle (decreases stability) between waves, without much use for increased speed due to surfing? Thoughts?

Why would volume in the tail bury the nose? Where the nose goes is dictated by how you surf. The extra volume will help pop onto runs. That said, the picture may be a little deceiving, it isn't an excessive amount of volume by any means.

In addition, the target market for the boat needs to be considered. This boat is step up from an Evo II, so is a little more unstable, but rewards a paddler capable of paddling it with more speed. The design is aimed at guys who don't want to take the step into an elite level ski and then compromise their stability and performance. With that in mind, it has to be able to pop onto runs easily, surf well, and provide that stepping stone from intermediate to a more advanced level, without being too much of a challenge which an elite ski may be.

From a personal perspective, I think the development we have seen in the past two years in surf ski design from a lot of manufacturers has been brilliant. I have seen far too many guys on the water on the wrong ski, often sold to them as it was all a dealer had in stock, or their range had, leading to poor technique, injury and lack of enjoyment of the sport. Now paddlers are spoilt for choice with a range of skis which cater for every level and different conditions. A paddler can now make a choice based on their skill set, and where they want to be with their paddling, without compromise. For us at Think, this has been exciting as we have been able to merge all the experience and data we have collected over many years and design lots of new skis along the way to offer paddlers lots of choice. For us there is nothing better than seeing guys out on the water on our designs and hearing from them how much they love their ski. And I'm sure that is the same for many manufacturers. We're in the industry because we love paddling, and we hope our designs reflect that.

Hi Stew. When can the Kiwi Cousins expect to see the new boat ?

Ziraph wrote: Hi Stew. When can the Kiwi Cousins expect to see the new boat ?

Hi Ziraph,

Your best bet is to have a chat with the guys at Fergs, who look after Think locally in NZ, and can give you accurate time lines for the next shipments. I only look after Oz.


Cheers,

Stew.

Ferg's details here:

www.fergskayaks.co.nz/

I am currently putting together our order, and will be aiming to have the container on our shores early November. Thanks for the interest Ziraph!

That's a foreshortening effect from the camera. (really fat stern)
I've taken pics of the surfski I designed (with kayakfoundry) and am building at the moment, that looked really inaccurate if I held the camera too close.

I'm sure you are right about not putting too much volume in the tail, mine is a bit exagerated like that. I suspect the new Think is actually a lot closer to the uno/evo intermediate in the tail too, as the market for it is going to be intermediate paddlers looking to move up, and skilled paddlers looking for somethings lightly more forgiving than a skinny as elite ski in gnarly conditions.

The difficulty for any company like Think, is that race winning designs aren't high volume products if the general public isn't skilled enough to use them, so with this new model, they will be putting an intermediate step in place for people trying really hard who haven't quite got there yet... Like me, except I like to design and build my own stuff

Stew wrote:
Why would volume in the tail bury the nose? Where the nose goes is dictated by how you surf. The extra volume will help pop onto runs. That said, the picture may be a little deceiving, it isn't an excessive amount of volume by any means.

I'm thinking steep, wind-generated waves, where the tail is better to stay a bit buried under water while the tip of the wave catches up and lifts you up closer to the cockpit where you ride the top of the wave instead start surfing at the bottom of the wave. If the tail is fat, it will lift up too much too soon and the weight gets transferred to the nose while it is still at the back of the front wave and it will go under, lifting the center and decreasing stability. For long ocean or open water swells it won't matter. It also won't matter once you get going and change your angle on a steep wave to go diagonally... And yes, the photo is probably exaggerating too...

I agree.

So much depends on the wave height and peak to peak distance though.

I think the surfski I'm building is really good in that respect, but I suspect the average surfski paddler wouldn't see it as aesthetically pleasing. Manufacturers like Think have to conform to people's expectations to a large degree, even while slowly pushing boundaries. The one I'm building has a high volume bow that's sharp top and bottom, very low volume stern and enough rocker that it's only just keeping majority of it's length with a waterline contact.

But... I'm still a surfski newbie

Kocho wrote:

Stew wrote:
Why would volume in the tail bury the nose? Where the nose goes is dictated by how you surf. The extra volume will help pop onto runs. That said, the picture may be a little deceiving, it isn't an excessive amount of volume by any means.

I'm thinking steep, wind-generated waves, where the tail is better to stay a bit buried under water while the tip of the wave catches up and lifts you up closer to the cockpit where you ride the top of the wave instead start surfing at the bottom of the wave. If the tail is fat, it will lift up too much too soon and the weight gets transferred to the nose while it is still at the back of the front wave and it will go under, lifting the center and decreasing stability. For long ocean or open water swells it won't matter. It also won't matter once you get going and change your angle on a steep wave to go diagonally... And yes, the photo is probably exaggerating too...

What you are describing is dependent on the ski length and your technique. Volume will have little effect on short wind chop, you're always going to have to manage the shorter distance between the crests. That's why shorts skis are so much fun in wind chop, the Eze is a perfect example.