Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

30 Apr 2008 12:04:27

bertbarndoor

I am an advanced beginner, 5'11 185 lbs (for those who haven't been
following), looking to lock-in harness-use, foot straps, power jibes,
and possibly (although not caring too much at this point) water
starts.

I am leaning (way leaning) towards the Rio (small) mostly because it
is smaller, and I have this feeling that it will be more performance-
oriented, while not being too difficult to learn what I want to learn.

I am interested in the Kona mostly because of all the people who keep
going gah gah over it and apparently it would be a fun board to have
(and useful for my purposes). That said, the damn thing looks and
sounds huge.

Thoughts and opinions and thanks in advance....

_Rob

30 Apr 2008 16:26:45

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

On Apr 30, 3:04=A0pm, bertbarndoor <bertbarnd...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I am an advanced beginner, 5'11 185 lbs (for those who haven't been
> following), looking to lock-in harness-use, foot straps, power jibes,
> and possibly (although not caring too much at this point) water
> starts.
>
> I am leaning (way leaning) towards the Rio (small) mostly because it
> is smaller, and I have this feeling that it will be more performance-
> oriented, while not being too difficult to learn what I want to learn.
>
> I am interested in the Kona mostly because of all the people who keep
> going gah gah over it and apparently it would be a fun board to have
> (and useful for my purposes). That said, the damn thing looks and
> sounds huge.
>
> Thoughts and opinions and thanks in advance....
>
> _Rob

Rob- I don't own either board, so please don't take my advice over
helpful comments from someone in either camp. I am a longboarder
(Mistral Equipe, Mistral Pacifico, Mistral Superlight, Fanatic Ultra
Cat), so you'd think I would definitively wind up saying Kona.
However, the 2008 Rio looks like a quietly revolutionary board in it's
own right. The outline, deck shape, and daggerboard are radically
different than prior Rios (which were Start clones). Starboard has
taken a stab at the one-board approach that Exocet so successfully
promoted with the Kona. Both are high performance boards, no doubt,
but they have different strengths. If you will be in waves, the Kona
must be your choice, since it does very well there. Are you going to
race? Kona again, since there seems to be a nice (though regional)
one design fleet emerging. If you are on a lake, either board will
work, but the Starboard is likely to be earlier planning by some
margin, and will do very well with BIG sails and fins (like formula).
If you are going to teach others on your board, the Rio will have an
edge, obviously.

You mentioned size, and with either board this is no small matter.
But the Rio does have some considerable advantage, in my opinion. I
often ask myself what I would do if I had no boards, and were to
purchase only one. The 2 boards you have chosen would be the
finalists, but I live in the city, so would have to give the nod to
the Rio, I think, just on the basis of size, since trying to store 12
ft. boards is a big problem for me.

I question your decision to go for the small size, though. I would
talk to Starboard about their recommendations for your weight. I
could be wrong, but think you are not likely to notice a big
difference between the medium and small in higher winds, but will
definitely notice the difference in light air.

30 Apr 2008 17:32:10

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

> Kona's, Rios

I believe the site http://www.lbwindsurfing.com/has hands-on vendor-
independent articles on the Kona, and comparisons with the Rio too I
think.

Good luck.

30 Apr 2008 17:37:50

sailquik (Roger Jackson)

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Hi Rob,
I would agree with jamiewa on the size Rio you are looking at.
Depending on your skill level, and the amount of wind you get
to sail in, getting the Rio M would seem a better choice to cover
windspeeds from 10-18 knots.
If you only intend to sail in 14 knots and higher then the Rio S
might be OK, but you'll lose alot of performance in 12 knots and
under.
I have the 2008 Rio M, and I like it alot.
I've sailed it in 6.6 m2 conditons and it's a pretty good planing
board
for something that's so "dual purpose".
I sailed it for 3 days at the Frisco Woods Windfest with 4.2/5.0 m2
Sailworks
Retro Rippers and a 7.5 m2 Retro.
It's truly a dual purpose board. Works good in displacement mode when
there's not enough wind, and rides good as a shortboard when the wind
comes up and you are in planing mode.
Hope this helps,

On Apr 30, 3:04=A0pm, bertbarndoor <bertbarnd...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I am an advanced beginner, 5'11 185 lbs (for those who haven't been
> following), looking to lock-in harness-use, foot straps, power jibes,
> and possibly (although not caring too much at this point) water
> starts.
>
> I am leaning (way leaning) towards the Rio (small) mostly because it
> is smaller, and I have this feeling that it will be more performance-
> oriented, while not being too difficult to learn what I want to learn.
>
> I am interested in the Kona mostly because of all the people who keep
> going gah gah over it and apparently it would be a fun board to have
> (and useful for my purposes). That said, the damn thing looks and
> sounds huge.
>
> Thoughts and opinions and thanks in advance....
>
> _Rob

30 Apr 2008 18:00:12

rod.r

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

hi rob

i also have not seen the rio apart from on the web, but it does look
like a nice board
and i agree that the small would seem to me to be the model to get,
especially if in
a previous thread you were looking at an ititial sail size of 6.5 or
7.0

i do however have a lot of experience on the kona, having owned one
for the last
year and a half as my only board, using sails from 6.2 to 9.0. i have
actually just sold it
and replaced it with 3 boards, a 113L freeride, Go170 and F2race
longboard.

here are my pros and cons

pros:
1. argueably the most versatile board ever made, ( i need 3 board to
cover it's range)
2. comfortable in 6.0 to 9.0+ conditions
3. surprisingly fast when well powered
4. the master at turning a crap session into a good session

cons
1. being good at everything means it's not great at anything
2. slow to plane in marginal winds, slow to accelerate....not for the
weekend racer
3. big and heavy to manouvre on land, (however the size disappears
once on the water)

personally, the decider for me to sell the kona was my local
conditions. i spend a majority of my sailing time on a big sail, in
my case a 9.0, and the marginal planing ability of the kona was just
not satisfactory for me. i'd be grunting along
at a fast slog just below the planing threshold while my mates on
wider boards would be zipping past me on smaller sails.

i personally think the kona suits people who would ordinarily use
smaller sails...people who don't want to use
anything bigger than say a 7.5 but want to get more sailing
time...here the kona would be great at extending TOW.

01 May 2008 10:35:26

James

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Nice summaries by jamiewa and Roger.

I agree with them that for your 185 lbs the Rio M or L would have a
broader range of use than the Rio S. With only 175 liters, the Rio S
would be slower and less stable in displacement mode, and slower to
get on a plane.

Also, good summary by Rod.r on the Kona. I have one, too, and he's
exactly right about it. It is incredibly versatile, does everything
pretty well, and is a no-stress board that doesn't require huge sails
or advanced skills to be enjoyable.

01 May 2008 12:24:16

bertbarndoor

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

On Apr 30, 7:26 pm, jamiewa...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
The outline, deck shape, and daggerboard are radically
> different than prior Rios (which were Start clones). Starboard has
> taken a stab at the one-board approach that Exocet so successfully

That is kind of what I was thinking with the Rio....

> but they have different strengths. If you will be in waves, the Kona
> must be your choice, since it does very well there. Are you going to
> race? Kona again, since there seems to be a nice (though regional)
> one design fleet emerging. If you are on a lake, either board will
> work, but the Starboard is likely to be earlier planning by some

I'm going to be on some type of lake almost exclusively. In fact, I
doubt it will ever really
see waves at all (besides some chop on the lakes). I really don't
envision any racing at this point.

> You mentioned size, and with either board this is no small matter.
> But the Rio does have some considerable advantage, in my opinion. I
> often ask myself what I would do if I had no boards, and were to
> purchase only one. The 2 boards you have chosen would be the
> finalists, but I live in the city, so would have to give the nod to
> the Rio, I think, just on the basis of size, since trying to store 12
> ft. boards is a big problem for me.

I also live in the city and I drive a Honda too. The length of the
Kona is just pretty much
a drawback right there by itself. I'd deal with it if, for some
reason, the Kona was just the best board in the world and the Rio and
everything else was total crap in comparison, but that just doesn't
seem to be the case. I think right there, I am getting more feedback
that my general leaning towards the Rio is probably going to be the
right decision for now....

>
> I question your decision to go for the small size, though. I would
> talk to Starboard about their recommendations for your weight. I
> could be wrong, but think you are not likely to notice a big
> difference between the medium and small in higher winds, but will
> definitely notice the difference in light air.

I think I need some more input on this from the group (as well as
Starboard and the retail stores). I'll explain my thinking about why
the Rio Small. First of all, I am not stuck on the small whatsoever.
If I can be shown some compelling reasons (actually it doesn't even
have to be that compelling), for going with the medium Rio or even the
large, then I will consider it. Basically I was thinking the small
because of the flotation. A lot of people in the group (if you read
some of my past posts) had suggested a little lower flotation to
progress to the intermediate stuff. They had said around 150l. The
small Rio comes in at 175l. It is also slimmer and shorter than the
medium or large. The medium and large come in at 195l and 215l
respectively. Granted I don't know much about the differences at this
point (relying on the group and advice) but it is my impression that
people were suggesting something around 150l but if I wanted greater
stability, go with a bit more. I figured the Rio small at 175 would be
a decent compromise. That said, I certainly welcome more input on the
subject. Particularly since it is looking more and more like I'm going
with the Rio. Just a question of which one....

01 May 2008 12:30:45

bertbarndoor

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Hi, thanks for the input. I have to admit that I am going to need to
rethink my idea of the small. Truthfully, the light wind will probably
be a factor more often than not as it is pretty flaky around where I
live and the times I do get to go out are going to have to do more
with my schedule than what the wind is actually doing that day. All
that to say, I am probably going to be going with some mediocre
conditions frequently. Thus, can you explain why the medium would be
that much better in light wind? Isn't 175l pretty 'floaty' compared to
say 150l (which is what a lot of other rec.wsingers were advocating).
The medium adds 20 more liters, 6 more cm of length and 5 more cm of
width. I'm 186 lbs, are you close to that? What are the mechanics
behind flotation that would make me want to go higher than 175l??
Thanks again for the info and advice!! _rob

On Apr 30, 8:37 pm, "sailquik (Roger Jackson)"
<sailq...@embarqmail.com > wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> I would agree with jamiewa on the size Rio you are looking at.
> Depending on your skill level, and the amount of wind you get
> to sail in, getting the Rio M would seem a better choice to cover
> windspeeds from 10-18 knots.
> If you only intend to sail in 14 knots and higher then the Rio S
> might be OK, but you'll lose alot of performance in 12 knots and
> under.
> I have the 2008 Rio M, and I like it alot.
> I've sailed it in 6.6 m2 conditons and it's a pretty good planing
> board
> for something that's so "dual purpose".
> I sailed it for 3 days at the Frisco Woods Windfest with 4.2/5.0 m2
> Sailworks
> Retro Rippers and a 7.5 m2 Retro.
> It's truly a dual purpose board. Works good in displacement mode when
> there's not enough wind, and rides good as a shortboard when the wind
> comes up and you are in planing mode.
> Hope this helps,

01 May 2008 12:37:04

bertbarndoor

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Agreed, nice summaries by all. Great advice in this thread as well as
others in the group. I don't think I've had such a positive usenet
session in years. Now I remember why I love newsgroups!!

Anyhow, I have to admit that the more I read, the more I think that I
may have to rethink the small. If the wind I am sailing in and my
weight is the primary determinant, then I will say I will probably
always be around 185lbs, on flat lake water, and in marginal wind
(Ottawa and Kingston Ontario). I really doubt that I will see that
many days where it is really blowing hard and consistently. Thus, if
you guys are saying the medium, then I am going to consider that. ANY
COUNTER POINTS OUT THERE? Anyone out there who was advocating the 150l
boards want to chime in?? The small is 175l and the medium is a
whopping 195l!!

Opinions?? Thanks again everyone!

-Rob

On May 1, 1:35 pm, James <d0ugl...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Nice summaries by jamiewa and Roger.
> I agree with them that for your 185 lbs the Rio M or L would have a
> broader range of use than the Rio S. With only 175 liters, the Rio S
> would be slower and less stable in displacement mode, and slower to
> get on a plane.
> Also, good summary by Rod.r on the Kona. I have one, too, and he's
> exactly right about it. It is incredibly versatile, does everything
> pretty well, and is a no-stress board that doesn't require huge sails
> or advanced skills to be enjoyable.

01 May 2008 13:13:39

sailquik (Roger Jackson)

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

On May 1, 3:30=A0pm, bertbarndoor <bertbarnd...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Hi, thanks for the input. I have to admit that I am going to need to
> rethink my idea of the small. Truthfully, the light wind will probably
> be a factor more often than not as it is pretty flaky around where I
> live and the times I do get to go out are going to have to do more
> with my schedule than what the wind is actually doing that day. All
> that to say, I am probably going to be going with some mediocre
> conditions frequently. Thus, can you explain why the medium would be
> that much better in light wind? Isn't 175l pretty 'floaty' compared to
> say 150l (which is what a lot of other rec.wsingers were advocating).
> The medium adds 20 more liters, 6 more cm of length and 5 more cm of
> width. I'm 186 lbs, are you close to that? What are the mechanics
> behind flotation that would make me want to go higher than 175l??
> Thanks again for the info and advice!! =A0_rob
>
> On Apr 30, 8:37 pm, "sailquik (Roger Jackson)"
>
>
>
> <sailq...@embarqmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> > I would agree with jamiewa on the size Rio you are looking at.
> > Depending on your skill level, and the amount of wind you get
> > to sail in, getting the Rio M would seem a better choice to cover
> > windspeeds from 10-18 knots.
> > If you only intend to sail in 14 knots and higher then the Rio S
> > might be OK, but you'll lose alot of performance in 12 knots and
> > under.
> > I have the 2008 Rio M, and I like it alot.
> > I've sailed it in 6.6 m2 conditons and it's a pretty good planing
> > board
> > for something that's so "dual purpose".
> > I sailed it for 3 days at the Frisco Woods Windfest with 4.2/5.0 m2
> > Sailworks
> > Retro Rippers and a 7.5 m2 Retro.
> > It's truly a dual purpose board. Works good in displacement mode when
> > there's not enough wind, and rides good as a shortboard when the wind
> > comes up and you are in planing mode.
> > Hope this helps,- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hi again Rob,
OK, I was looking in your other posts and now I see that you are going
to be sailing mostly on fresh water.
Fresh water provides a little less buoyancy than salt water, so this
shifts my suggseations even more in
favor of the 2008 Rio M.
I weigh about 175/180 lbs., so I'm a little lighter than you.
I sail mostly on salt water (I've only sailed the new Rio in the
Pamlico Sound west of Cape Hatteras).
I found the Rio M to plane up quite early and very easily the day I
sailed it with a 6.6 m2 Sailworks
NXslm race sail.
I have sails up to 9.1 m2 so I can chose a sail that gives me the
power to plane in 10 knots and up.
You are heavier and looking primarily at smaller rigs (for now, I'd
guess) so the added width and volume
will get you going a little sooner.
If you were to get the Rio Large, then you are getting into a board
that's really big and best in displacement
mode (sort of like the Kona).
I've sailed the Kona, and while I agree it does all the things the
others suggest that it will, when you are
in fully planing mode (I sailed it with a 5.6 m2 Sailworks Hucker last
summer in about 16-18 knots of wind)
it's still a very large and very long board even though only the rear
portion is in the water.
The Rio M did not feel this way. It felt like a kinda big shortboard,
but if you want one board to do it all,
you have to make some compromises.
I think those who try the 2008 Rio M will find that it's really a very
good compromise between displacement
"glide" and planing width/size.
If you have any racing aspirations, then maybe the Kona would be
better as there is a lot of Kona Fleet/ Kona
Experience activity going on around the world.
If you just want to free sail, and have a board that works in < 12
knots in displacement mode, and then "transforms"
into a slighty longer/heavier short board in planing mode at around 14
knots, then I'd look at the 2008 Rio M.
Hope this helps,

01 May 2008 13:30:55

rod.r

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

hi again rob

some further thoughts....

1. what is the most used sail size at your location...bigger the sail,
bigger the board
2. if you have a marginal back, you may want to limit your max sail
size. often, a wider than required board can compensate for a smaller
than optimal sail size
to get you going earlier.

02 May 2008 00:13:45

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Don't have any comments on your choice of boards, but I would suggest
you rethink the idea of learning waterstarts. Even if you get light
and/or flukey winds at your most common sailing site, you will find it
an extremely useful skill. For many if not most people, it's the
stepping stone to all other advances in sailing, since it helps you
get out into stronger winds and significantly decreases the amount of
energy you waste uphauling. And if you get hooked on the sport like so
many of us have, and it sounds like you're well on your way, you'll
want to travel to other places to sail -- Maui, the Carribbean,
Hatteras, the Gorge -- and I can guarantee you that those places are
almost unsailable if you can't waterstart.

On Apr 30, 9:04=A0am, bertbarndoor <bertbarnd...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I am an advanced beginner, 5'11 185 lbs (for those who haven't been
> following), looking to lock-in harness-use, foot straps, power jibes,
> and possibly (although not caring too much at this point) water
> starts.
>
> I am leaning (way leaning) towards the Rio (small) mostly because it
> is smaller, and I have this feeling that it will be more performance-
> oriented, while not being too difficult to learn what I want to learn.
>
> I am interested in the Kona mostly because of all the people who keep
> going gah gah over it and apparently it would be a fun board to have
> (and useful for my purposes). That said, the damn thing looks and
> sounds huge.
>
> Thoughts and opinions and thanks in advance....
>
> _Rob

02 May 2008 06:05:31

bertbarndoor

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

Good advice. I guess what I was saying is that I DO WANT to learn
waterstarts, just that I figure it might take me a season or two to
get there. That said, I am a quick study, in decent shape, and have
had some 'practice' over the years, so you never know. Any case, I
appreciate your advice and I hear where you are coming from. Maybe
I'll make my planned learning curve a bit steeper! Thanks, Rob

On May 2, 3:13 am, sm...@seattletimes.com wrote:
> Don't have any comments on your choice of boards, but I would suggest
> you rethink the idea of learning waterstarts. Even if you get light
> and/or flukey winds at your most common sailing site, you will find it
> an extremely useful skill. For many if not most people, it's the
> stepping stone to all other advances in sailing, since it helps you
> get out into stronger winds and significantly decreases the amount of
> energy you waste uphauling. And if you get hooked on the sport like so
> many of us have, and it sounds like you're well on your way, you'll
> want to travel to other places to sail -- Maui, the Carribbean,
> Hatteras, the Gorge -- and I can guarantee you that those places are
> almost unsailable if you can't waterstart.

02 May 2008 07:57:50

John I

Re: Kona One vs. Starboard Rio

On May 2, 8:05 am, bertbarndoor <bertbarnd...@gmail.com > wrote:
> Good advice. I guess what I was saying is that I DO WANT to learn
> waterstarts, just that I figure it might take me a season or two to
> get there. That said, I am a quick study, in decent shape, and have
> had some 'practice' over the years, so you never know. Any case, I
> appreciate your advice and I hear where you are coming from. Maybe
> I'll make my planned learning curve a bit steeper! Thanks, Rob
>
> On May 2, 3:13 am, sm...@seattletimes.com wrote:
>
> > Don't have any comments on your choice of boards, but I would suggest
> > you rethink the idea of learning waterstarts. Even if you get light
> > and/or flukey winds at your most common sailing site, you will find it
> > an extremely useful skill. For many if not most people, it's the
> > stepping stone to all other advances in sailing, since it helps you
> > get out into stronger winds and significantly decreases the amount of
> > energy you waste uphauling. And if you get hooked on the sport like so
> > many of us have, and it sounds like you're well on your way, you'll
> > want to travel to other places to sail -- Maui, the Carribbean,
> > Hatteras, the Gorge -- and I can guarantee you that those places are
> > almost unsailable if you can't waterstart.

The Kona's largest strength is how it sails once on a plane. The step
tail boards release like no other long board. The fin is placed in
such a way that one is driving off the fin like a short board sooner
than a conventional, fin back, long board. Next best is its turning,
again because of the step tail. It rips around on a planing gybe with
moxie.

There are several Konas available. The Kona 11-5 is my favorite. It
does fantastic things for me in the surf and ain't a slouch in the
flats either. Methinks it planes earlier than the boards with EVA
foam to the rails.