​Werner Gnigler on the Freestyle Wave ’27: “Fine-tuning in the 17th generation”

In the interview, Werner explains the thinking behind the new shape and why even small changes to the rails, fin positions and trim can make a significant difference. The interview therefore offers insights not only into the development of the new Freestyle Wave 95, but also into the fundamental principles of board design.

How important is the Freemove or Freestyle Wave group in general, and specifically for JP-Australia?

This is very important to us; it’s our second most important range after the Magic Ride. I believe this range also plays a significant role in the market, particularly when you look at the feedback from windsurfing centres.

What has the target audience been like so far – both in terms of riding ability and what the riders want to do? Has the target audience changed with the new shape, or are you still targeting the same riders?

In this segment, you can’t really change the target audience. We started with the concept back in 2001 and have been refining it regularly ever since. The new board is now the 17th generation – that’s how many times we’ve redesigned it. Even back then, we managed to cater to the main target audience quite well: people who enjoy riding in slightly stronger winds, catching a few waves and perhaps trying out the odd freestyle trick or two. The skill level of the target audience hasn’t changed much over the years. We’ve deliberately chosen never to veer too radically towards speed, waves or freestyle. After all, a freestyle-wave board simply has to be the perfect all-rounder in this volume class – for slightly stronger winds, when you can really glide and ride.

Magic Move and Freestyle Wave: two different approaches

You’ve also had the Magic Move in your range for some time now, and it plays an important role in the 90–110-litre volume class. Has this additional board played a part in the further development of the Freestyle Wave?

Planing is always an important consideration. The Magic Move is, of course, in a different class altogether, where early planing and gliding through a jibe are even more of a focus. The Freestyle Wave is positioned as a more sporty model. Naturally, every new board development also influences the other models and takes them a step further. With the new Freestyle Wave, early planing was certainly a key focus. Although we’ve always been very good at this, the board has probably moved a bit closer to the Magic Move in this respect.

A consistent characteristic across all sizes

Have you redesigned all the sizes now?

Yes.

Do the characteristics vary significantly with size, or do they remain essentially proportional?

The performance characteristics remain fairly consistent across the entire range. The sizes from 85 to 105 litres will be available relatively soon. The 75 and the 125 will follow a little later. However, the entire range is being replaced. It’s all about fine-tuning here too. On the larger boards, the tail will be proportionally a touch wider, but not by much, as the board as a whole is getting wider in all directions. This means the proportions and ratios remain similar. We’ve found a good balance. You can’t just make radical changes overnight. For the very large and very small boards, we’re only making minimal adjustments to their characteristics.

There are brands where the boards vary significantly from the smallest to the largest model. The smallest board might then be almost a waveboard, whilst the largest has more of a freeride character. Can you still recognise the shape of the Freestyle Wave when riding, for example, an 85 and a 115?

Immediately. We deliberately don’t do it any other way. Each name stands for a specific area of use, a target group and a particular level of performance. A range like that – from 75 to 125 or 145 litres – simply doesn’t work if the characteristics change completely. Naturally, a heavier surfer will choose a 105 or 115 board, whilst a lighter rider is more likely to opt for the 85. But if both are good surfers, they expect the same design philosophy. We don’t simply give heavier surfers a freeride shape and lighter ones a much more wave-oriented design. The balance has to be right, and we stick to this principle.

“A name stands for a specific area of application, a target audience and a specific level of performance,” Werner Gnigler

Rocker and V: The basis of the new shape

What exactly did you change about the shape? What changes were made to the rails, the bottom and the rocker line?

As I said, we’re now on the 17th generation since 2001. It’s always small steps. That’s fine-tuning. We know that small differences in the overall package can result in significant differences in performance. That’s why we launch a new board every two years – because we want to ensure we take a meaningful step forward. We have certain parameters we can work on. The rocker line and the shape of the V are still crucial. We try to design the centreline efficiently: relatively elongated and without much rocker. At the same time, we alter the rail line so that it features a significantly stronger rocker.

​ “We try to design the centreline to be efficient: relatively long and without much rocker.”

With the new shape, we’ve used a pronounced V-shape at the front, reduced it in the centre, and, compared to previous generations, reintroduced a much more pronounced V-shape at the rear. This alters the board’s characteristics and manoeuvrability, particularly due to the change in the rail curve.

I briefly placed the board on a straight edge. It struck me that it has practically no rocker. Over the last 20 centimetres at the tail, it runs completely straight. Nevertheless, the board turns very well. Is that down to the V-shape design?

When I look at the last third of the board – that is, the section from the foot straps onwards – there’s relatively little V. At the very tail, however, the V is significantly more pronounced. As a result, the board has roughly five to seven millimetres of rocker along the rail – depending on the position. I don’t need pronounced rocker in the centre because I incorporate it via the rail. The strong V-shape at the tail lifts the edge – or rather, the rail – upwards. Between the footstraps, the deck is relatively flat again, and in the area in front of the mast track I have a stronger V-shape once more. This means I have significantly more scoop – or rocker – along the rail overall than on the centreline. That’s the trick: between the footstraps, a flat zone forms in the centre, which makes the board very stable and allows for fast riding. As soon as I put the board on its edge, I essentially have a wave rocker line.

Fin positions and trim: Why the stern can become wider

Let’s move on to the Finns. You’ve made the stern significantly wider to improve performance in the lower wind range. How has this affected the boat’s manoeuvrability and trim?

We’ve moved the entire trim position further back. The key factor is where the trim is set – in other words, where you stand and where the footstraps are positioned. The board has a Powerbox, which naturally imposes certain limitations on positioning. However, we’ve tried to bring the positions as close together as possible and shift them slightly further back overall. Because not only is the fin positioned further back, but the trim has also moved rearwards, I have more pressure on the tail. This means I can still drive the slightly wider tail into the jibe radically. Thanks to the slightly straighter outline – because the tail isn’t as narrow anymore – I also have a relatively stretched rail line in the water on bigger waves when I load the front of the board. This offers plenty of control, even on longer turns. We’ve also adjusted the fin positions and reduced the distance between the side fins and the centre fin. This brings the pivot points closer together as well.

"The further apart the fins are, the more stable the board becomes on long turns. But it’s also meant to be lively.”

Can you give me some rough figures? How far back have you moved the foot straps and the fins?

The centre fin has been moved back by about 1.5 centimetres, and the foot straps by about two centimetres. There was still a bit of leeway there. As for the side fins, I think we’ve moved them back by three to four centimetres, or rather, closer to the centre fin. That’s quite a significant change.

What do the central and side fins do?

What is the function of the side fins, and what is the main purpose of the centre fin?

The centre fin is, of course, the main fin. It provides the drive against which you can apply pressure. The side fins provide additional support. This allows you to use a smaller centre fin, which improves manoeuvrability. If I leave out the side fins, I need a centre fin that’s about two centimetres larger to achieve a similar level of performance. The board then naturally becomes more directionally stable, and I can apply more pressure. The riding feel becomes a bit more like slalom. However, with the larger centre fin, the manoeuvrability suffers slightly. That’s why we’ve tried to bring the fins closer together. The smaller gap between them means they work together more efficiently. You feel more fin pressure, even though the centre fin is smaller. If the fins are further apart and I’m using the same fin configuration, I don’t feel them working together as effectively. Thanks to the smaller gap between the side fins and the centre fin, they support each other better, even when riding straight ahead.

​“Because of the smaller gap between the side fins and the centre fin, they provide better support, even when riding straight ahead.”

That sounds plausible. Have the side fins stayed the same, or have they also got smaller?

I think the side fins have stayed the same. We’re still using size 10s and 12s – two different sizes, that is. I’d need to check that again carefully.

Do all sizes come with a thruster setup?

I’m not quite sure about the individual construction methods yet. We do have different designs, after all. I’d need to check that again. In principle, though, all the boards have fin boxes for a thruster setup, as these are already integrated into the mould. That’s the plan, too.

When is a single-fin setup a good choice?

Who would you recommend trying to ride without side fins – that is, with just a single centre fin? Is there a particular reason for this?

There are riders who like to ride fast and tend to focus on carving. In that respect, they’re already moving a bit towards the Freemove target audience. Those who like to build up more pressure via the centre fin can also ride with a single-fin setup. Someone who likes a bit more sail pressure and works more heavily on their back foot will get a riding feel that’s a bit more reminiscent of a sporty freeride board. However, our actual target group wants to be able to jibe and enjoy a lively riding experience. The boards are designed with this in mind. Over the years, our understanding of this target group’s needs has also improved. Generally speaking, the trend for freestyle-wave boards is towards slightly smaller fins.

​Generally speaking, the trend for freestyle wave boards is towards slightly smaller fins.”

We’ve tended to err on the side of caution so far, because we know from feedback from our windsurfing centres that getting up and planing quickly is the most important thing for many riders. No matter how much wind there is, getting up and going is always a key consideration. A slightly larger fin makes this easier, especially for people who don’t get out on the board every day. That’s why we try to compensate for this with the setup and the thruster fins. We want good acceleration whilst also maintaining good manoeuvrability.

So, by comparison, you still haven’t caught up with the very small Finns?

No, not with the really small ones. Otherwise I might as well ride a waveboard, for example a Magic Wave with a smaller fin.
That’s what waveboards and freestyle waveboards are for. Wave riders perform proper turns in the wave. Freestyle wave riders tend to stick to smaller, more playful waves and try out different manoeuvres there. They don’t usually ride in classic sideshore conditions with long, clean down-the-line waves. That’s the next level.

The construction methods: S-Tec and Wood Pro

There have also been some changes to the construction methods. For the coming model year, there is the S-Tec construction method and the wood-sandwich version, which is called Wood Pro?

Yes, the Wood Pro.

So is S-Tec the new, highest-quality construction method?

Yes. It’s the same as with our slalom boards and the other racing boards. S-Tec is the highest-quality version. The World Cup boards are built using S-Tec. It’s the best and lightest technology we currently offer.

The S-Tec construction method is particularly interesting for this group of boards, as riders want their boards to be as light as possible.

Yes, exactly. Weight does, of course, play a part.

Outline and volume distribution: Less mass in the bow

Let’s go back to the shape for a moment: has anything changed in terms of length and width?

The outline has changed slightly. Not only has the tail become wider, but we’ve also removed some material – or rather, reduced the width – in the nose area to make the board feel more responsive. This concentrates the mass further towards the centre. It improves balance when planing. With less mass moving at the front, the board is also easier to ride.

Have the key dimensions, such as length and width, remained the same otherwise?

Yes, they’re quite similar – or rather, they’ve remained largely the same.

The Rail-Shape: Small differences with a big impact

Have there been any significant changes to the rail shape as well?

The rail shape is always crucial. It simply has to flow harmoniously. Here, too, it’s all about fine-tuning. The rail must, of course, taper off towards the tail to provide sufficient grip. Basically, though, we haven’t made any radical changes. If you raise the apex point (see photo) slightly in the middle section – in other words, raise the widest part of the rail a little – water doesn’t splash over the tail so easily when planing. This makes the board ride more freely.

I also get more consistent lift when turning, and the board doesn’t cut in as easily because the edge is slightly rounder. We’re talking about changes in the millimetre range here, not half a centimetre. But if the apex point is just a little higher, that can already make a big difference when jibing, during manoeuvres and, of course, when surfing.

Werner, thank you very much for your time!