One Ocean Sports Edge Pro 2.0 14'0" x 23.5" Elite Carbon Hollow 2021 - Review

[@michaelfinch1965]

I jumped the gun/review, mine is coming today! Always reassuring to see a positive review post purchase.

[@TheSUPCompany]

Great news! It really is that good - enjoy :)

[@michaelfinch1965]

@@TheSUPCompany Well, I took it out for the first time and can give some completely unbiased (but subjective) comments. Your review is for the most part spot on. A slight difference for the Australian market is a resin fin, not carbon layup, yet the same for all other respects. I chose this SUP as an alternative to buying another OC1 (outrigger canoe). I wanted a tool that could do well in upwind, crosswind, downwind, both as a standard SUP and on my knees (sitting on heels) using an outrigger paddle. Using my fenix 6 gps, I am on averaged 2kph faster (over 5km) for the same stroke rate and effort. I noticed that the nose does catch the cross winds; however this was offset by the fact that it tracks so much straighter than my regular sup (and it is nowhere near as wind effected as a OC1 however unless its a V1, they come with a rudder). If you put the power on, there is a noticeable glide that will leave a smile on your dial. Yes there it is a twitchy board, but the secondary stability is outstanding, and coming from a 31' down to 23.5' is not an impossible task (just pick your conditions and skill up over time). When you think about it, there is an inverse proportional relationship between stability and potential board speed. All in all although I was happy to see a positive review on a board I just bought, the board ended up speaking for itself :)

[@katerivers9039]

Amazingly light boards, great video!!

[@TheSUPCompany]

They are as well as being exceptional rigid and very fast :)

[@tuannitro3387]

Thank for the Video.

[@TheSUPCompany]

You're welcome :)

[@gdhumphreysuk]

i came from a sprint 23 to 23.5 edge pro 2.0, just finished the paddleskedaddle and 4 of the top 8 in 14foot were edge pro 2.0 , not the easiest board but it is fast. other boards in top 8 were 2xsic 1x naish and 1x starboard.

[@TheSUPCompany]

Thanks for watching George. The Paddleskedaddle looked like a great event. Glad to hear you are getting on so well with your Edge Pro 2.0. We'd agree with your comments; the Edge Pro 2.0 certainly requires more rider input but it rewards with masses of accelaration and top end speed.

[@brained1502]

are you still riding the edge pro 2? if not, why did you change? :-)

[@noisy_193]

Great Video, can you guys do a Infinity Whiplash review? ;)

[@TheSUPCompany]

Thanks for watching. At this time we do not offer Infinity paddleboards, so no reviews lined up.

[@ozzy7160]

Were the people who switched to the edge pro 2.0, and gaining speed, coming off of a board with a similar width?

[@TheSUPCompany]

Great question Rick, to which the answer is yes. In two instances it we have had, it has actually been the case that these paddlers were on previously slightly narrower boards from another brand. Albeit, it is probably far to say that they were to narrow anyway for the conditions they regularly paddled in. After all narrow is not always fast especially if you are not stable enough to put the power down or at its most extreme - spending more time swimming than paddling :)

[@gdhumphreysuk]

i came from a 23 Sprint to the 23.5 edge pro (i'm 75kg). The sprint is less twitchy the the edge. I'm faster on the edge by about 1.30 min over my 3mile timed section i use. Initially the twitchness was unnerving but now i dont notice it. I brought one of the first batch Tony brought into the country.

[@asteppy]

Hollow SUP boards are being manufactured by others - Lightboardcorp, made by the canoe paddling giant Nelo is one. Prestol in Latvia make their own models and also one model under 425Pro brand. Plastex, another canoe sprint giant, also make a hollow SUP. They are not better or worse than foam core boards, just a bit different, I paddle one so..... Oh, and I am not 100% sold on the rubber plug hole in this board, I think a proper GoreTex valve screwed into a glued-in housing would be better at venting, and less prone to breakage/loss.

[@TheSUPCompany]

Thanks for watching Andrei. We've seen and paddled the Lightboard Corp models and choose not to offer them in store or online on the basis of our experience (the build was superb by Nelo, no less than we've come to expect from their sprint boats). We have not heard of Prestol before. So far in our experience we've been hugely impressed with hollow construction on the whole and found hollow boards to be both significantly stiffer and much ligther than foam core constructions. For flat water and down winding, hollow seems to be the best way forwards. A couple of larger legacy brands will be debuting their won hollow construction at the upcoming ICF World's in June for their team riders and we are excited to see to these models in this construction once revealed.

[@PaulGPhotography]

Is the Edge 2.0 an all water board, cheers

[@TheSUPCompany]

Hi Paul, thank you for the question. The Edge Pro 2.0 does work in a broad range of conditions due to the large amount of volume in the forward section while offering a lot of secondard stability once the 'wings' are engaged in the tail of the board as required or on purpose ie: when at the tail turning the board. However, it really comes into its own in flatter conditions. If you are considering a more all water biased board from ONE then we would highly recommend the Edge 3.0 - it is superb!

[@jaaaake777]

Has anyone put a straight edge across those stern concaves and measured their depth at the deepest point? More than 5 cm deep and it counts as a multihull and is illegal to use in competition. It looks close to that! But if they know what they're doing it will be 4.9 cm!

[@TheSUPCompany]

Thanks for watching Jake. But think it is worth reading the rules again as the measurement you are refering to in ICF Rule 3.2.7a states a concave shape in the middle. The shape in the middle of the ONE at the tail is convex, not concave. Here is the text from the rule... 'A catamaran is defined where a board has more than one(1)hull or having a concave shell with its deepest point in the middle being deeper than five (5)cm between the peaks.'

[@jaaaake777]

@@TheSUPCompany It's badly worded, but I believe it's got to be talking about the middle of the concave ( should probably say ' depth of the concave at deepest part' rather than middle. It also should say something about measuring the concave perpendicular to the Centreline of the board, otherwise the measurement would be confused/ conflated with rocker). As I say, the rule is badly worded. The rule, the way you are interpreting it above though, would not defend against a trimaran with short stabilizer hulls at bow or stern. Designers could have a conventional, but very narrow board in the middle sections that at the stern swoops up to a pair of ,say 3 ft long outriggers that sit a few inches above the water when balanced, but can be right out, as wide as you want for emergency stability. You could have the outriggers, say 3 ft apart, and it would be effectively impossible to capsize the board, yet you could make the middle hull, very, very narrow. I looked into this some years ago, as it would allow a very, very fast hull shape, but I read the rules and decided it was not possible. I also concluded that it would be so absurdly fast it would immediately be banned, and probably prompt a swift tidy up of the above rule. When I saw this board, it immediately made me think of those board ideas I'd rejected, as it's a watered down version of the same principles. I wonder if this board hadn't been launched in a global pandemic, whether this discussion would have taken place sooner. As soon as this board wins a major competition, if that stern tuck is producing concaves more than 5 cm deep, whichever brand came second would surely be requesting clarification on what, precisely, ICF means by 'middle'. But obviously those competitions have not been taking place, so the conversation hasn't taken place. Out of interest, have you measured the side concaves at the stern as I describe? Straight edge perpendicular to Centreline, measure the deepest point of any concave that's on the bottom surface of the board. Be interested to know what it is. I wouldn't be surprised if ONE are cogniscent of the rules of the sport and have designed it with 4.9 cm concaves. But I would be equally unsurprised if they haven't. I'd also be interested to know what ICF means. If the above outrigger approach I describe above is legal, I'll be tempted to build one myself!

[@TheSUPCompany]

Hi Jake, ICF means 'International Canoe Federation'. The ICF are one the many organisations responsible for the 23-25 different ‘World Champion’s’ we saw in the last full year of ‘global’ competition in 2019. As we understand both the ICF and ISA (International Surfing Association) will be running World Championships in 2021. Current ICF Rules state - “Rudders and/or foils are not permitted. The board may have only one hull - no multi-hulls allowed and no catamarans. The length of the board will be defined as the distance from the tip to tail.” The ICF rules you are referring to do not take effect until January 2022. The full ICF rule you are referring to - 3.2.7 - is quite clear and concise for 2022; “The board must have one hull only” ruling out your described outriggers or Arma’s fore or aft / nose or tail. Rule 3.2.7a also states; “A Multi-hull and Catamaran styles are not allowed.” The rule also defines the ‘middle’; “A catamaran is defined where a board has more than one (1) hull or having a concave shell with its deepest point in the middle being deeper than five (5)cm between the peaks.” The ‘middle’ is therefore the centreline of the board as ICF’s 2022 Rules state; “3.2.2 -All boards must be built symmetrically upon the axis of their length.” So due to the symmetry of a board, the distance between the two ‘peaks’ would have to be the centreline and therefore the ‘middle’ of the board. This would certainly mean the Edge Pro 2.0 continues to be legal. The ONE Edge Pro 2.0 was also launched in August 2019 and has competed in many national and international competitions. It’s first major European outing was in the 2019 11 Cities event when paddled by Chris Parker of SUPracer.com. Initially limited in number, the Edge Pro 2.0 will become a much more common sight in as competition around the world resumes. With other larger more established brands only a few months away from launching 2022 raceboards, you can expect to see much more aggressive flat water focussed boards available. One thing is certain, innovation in board design will continue to be more interesting than spectating the ICF and ISA fighting one another in court for the 'ownership' of Stand Up Paddleboarding and all it's £'s / Euro's or Dollar's.

[@jaaaake777]

@@TheSUPCompany Interesting stuff. With your and ONE's interpretation of the rules you could have an evolution of the design here that's faster without being a 'multihull'. You could make the false transom part wider and slightly higher off the water, and that could enable you to make the main part of the board more u shaped canoe body and less flat/ board shaped. You could let the edge of the widest part of the transom return a little, so the board will actually be optimised to run on the centre hull and that last bit of the aft rail, heeled slightly towards the side you are paddling. This means you can pick your strongest side and paddle it all day if you want. ( The slight drag of the aft rail will turn you towards the side you are paddling and counter the paddles steering effect). The fin can then be made smaller, perhaps even removed all together, conversations about 'tracking' will be a thing of the past. It's not as easy as 'That's a 'multi hull' because it's clearly got separate hulls'. You can very sneakily, subtly roll the underbody from your central hull into your aft amas. You can use a more conventional looking top moulding to mask what's going on under the water to 99% of even industry experts. There's no sudden jump from when a hull has a deep centre with sharp or deep rails to a trimaran. It's a continuum, with a very fuzzy grey area in between, especially with these rules! That's why concaves and EXACTLY how and where you measure them is so critical to the rules. The rules are woolly, and as you say subject to huge politics/ conflict, but I do believe this board will stimulate healthy discussion about it. I am a great admirer of the board, and am pleased to see any developments that will stop our sups being the slowest racing craft afloat. I want this board to be a success, so that it opens the floodgates to even faster designs. But for this to happen manufacturers need to be pushing the various rulemakers into a much clearer definition of concaves versus multihulls.

[@TheSUPCompany]

@Jake Frith interesting indeed especially when you factor in racing rarely if at all takes place in mirror flat conditions, there is plenty of traffic, draft trains, race craft and many mark roundings to contend with. On top of this different events at a variety of locations as well as events with in events such as sprints and endurance rounds. Then the logistics of a paddlers constant struggle to get 14ft kit around the world (we've lent many a world level athletes stock boards in order to compete at UK stop overs of European and World events as they do cannot get their kit to a location). Stand Up Paddleboard racing and designs will continue to develop at quite a pace and as predominately displacement craft lean on as well as be influnenced by craft in other realms from K1 to racing yacht.