@@Julianuribe23 Sub Scorcher 🤙🏼

Kenny is 5’10. His board is a 5’9”.

@@domohabitare3579 they work well on the seaside.

@@KnutAsdam-k4g that’s not normally a board we recommend these for…but they may work well. Worth a shot.

Keen to see which way you went I have a 36 litre rad ripper and wished I bought the 33/34 litre Am eyeing off a small rad ripper or the retro ripper in 33 litres

@ I never made up a choice, I was hoping to get some feedback from them.

Absolutely.

I had a proctor Apache with biolos controllers and did 5 of the hardest backside hacks in a row at pitas. It was like 9 years ago but that shows how damn memorable it was.

Yes, for sure.

@@Oshri_sudri the boxes are pretty far forward for a twin, it goes okay with the hybrid keel fins like bmt but not with upright twins. Goes way better as a quad

More of a traditional shortboard feel underfoot.

Not flat, it’s based on the Sub Driver shortboard.

@@catalystsurfshop5628 what shortboard is close to the RNF 96 as far as rocker goes

@@RM-kh1jjUber Driver

The ripper is a bit wider and flatter. Also, the ripper has the 5 fin option if you’re wanting to ride a quad.

@@catalystsurfshop5628 which has a wider wave size range and when it picks up which board handles larger waves better sub driver 2 or ripper? And which on handles smaller waves better?

Ripper on the smaller end, sub driver on the bigger end.

@@davidjuliano706nailed it.

Thanks! Will do.

While very similar on the surface, the Sub Driver does have a touch wider nose and more of a hip in front of the front foot. Also, the sub driver features a v off the tail where the stub driver does not have v off the tail, but rather a continuous deeper concave throughout to add lift. Either board will work for performance surfing in small/average surf.

@@catalystsurfshop5628 didn’t really understood what’s the difference surfing wise

@@RBNK157 the sub driver is more user friendly in our opinion. A bit more built-in speed and easy flow.

So what waves and size waves am I using the SUB driver for Vs the STUB driver for? And how do I size those boards compared to the driver 3.0? For ex I’m a *stock* (not bro dims) in the driver 3 6’0 so what length and volume for a sub and a stub?

@@CC-ys8qqwave range is the same, 2-5ft/average surf. It’s a preference at that point of which one you get a good feel from. As for sizing, look to go an inch or two longer in the stock size on the Driver 3.0.

This could be a good beginner board if upsized correctly and for someone who is athletic.

@@catalystsurfshop5628 Thanks! Someone just suggested the Lost Crowd Killer would be good for a new-ish surfer too as it's more of a traditional fun shape and has more volume. I might snag one of those

I have a rad ripper in lightspeed that I love but actually it’s a Couple of litres too big Did you look at a retro ripper as well ? I am thinking another rad ripper but in PU and less volume

@@martijnandriessen8073 can do.

The Ripper has more tail rocker. Good question. Thanks!

Think you’re on track with those assumptions. The big difference IMO between the 3.0 and 2.0 is the rocker profile. The driver 3.0 and 3.0 stub have more kick in the tail than the 2.0 series. Holding the board in my hands the tail is more pulled in too I think. Those attributes would slow the board down to give it more control in steeper waves, so I think that’s why they took out the vee and made it a double concave - to balance out the rocker and add some speed and looseness since it’s geared towards smaller waves. The result is a really responsive board that should excel for an active surfer in 2-5ft punchy waves. The design approach (performance outline and performance rocker but with lots of concave to counteract it) is very similar to what Sharpeye has been doing for a long time (ie, Disco, Inferno 72)

5'10" 180

Sabotaj.