Thinwater skinner wrote:
The regular fins are shorter and have a shorter stroke? Yes or no?
Actually same stroke, smaller sweep
Quote:
Either yes or no I would contend that the effort expelled for either is about the same. The greatest advantage for the standard fins would be used in shallow water.
Both STs and ST Turbos are more efficient than standard fins at all speeds, but especially at higher speeds where standard fins tend to "mush out". Here's a relative comparison using the Adventure with the same person, same boat:
Slow cruise (40 cycles per minute):Standard fins 3.0 MPH
ST fins 3.4 MPH
ST Turbo fins 4.5 MPH
Fast cruise (60 cycles per minute):Standard fins 4.4 MPH
ST fins 5.0 MPH
ST Turbo fins 5.7 MPH
Sprint speed (average, using GPS):Standard fins 6.5 MPH
ST fins 7.3 MPH
ST Turbo fins 7.5 MPH
The greatest advantage of standard fins is the tremendous amount of abuse they can take. They would be best, for example when traveling over oyster beds in shallow water. the current STs and Turbos are much tougher than the early versions, but not as thick as standard fins.
If you know how to "flutter" the fins, fin length makes no difference in shallow water.
viewtopic.php?f=26&t=18705&p=91916&hilit#p91916If getting in the shallowest possible water is important and you can't flutter for some reason, you could just as easily change your boat selection -- the Adventure (Revolution 16) has the shallowest draft (not including inflatables); or pin the fins against the hull and break out the paddle.
Quote:
Engergy exerted in about the same for all three.
No. Turbos are most efficient, followed closely by STs (but you have to use a faster cadence to make up the smaller size/easier push).
