Oldnbroken wrote:Been wondering if the Dundee 132X42 was any better at planing with moderate power than my Monk 132X41, which could be better in the lulls.
When I've got lots of power, it is sublime.
Kinda wish they had designed the Dundee 132X42 as a 135X42 or 136X42.
The length really doesn't make as much difference as you think. It's more width, outline and stifness. Remember nearly all the Shinn boards share that same magic rocker line, so they do feel similar, just tuned around outline and stiffness. Length is there to accommodate stance, but outside that, a longer board adds drag as much as it adds size. So the width/outline and stiffness make more of a contribution than the length which everyone seems to measure by.
If you ware wanting a healthy dose of the upper power level ability of the Monk, but more low end then try the Street. It has the same rail length as the Monk size for size but more tip area and stiffness for pop, which also has the added advantage of planing slightly earlier, for the very slight compromise of ragged edge control..
What will be really interesting will be to try the Monk forever against the Street in lighter winds - the MF is coming back with feedback that indicates it's is better underpowered than the previous Monks, and so it will be interesting to see how it is back to back with the Street.
The Dundee is softer in tip, and for the width indicated feels surprisingly small underfoot, so don't be afraid to take a bit more width in Dundee than you would normally expect to - you are rewarded with an excellent low end, but sill never seem to get your ankles pushed when you start to load - hence why the 135x44 dundee feels so small and responsive for such a big board..