Which Fin Box is Better (Futures or FCS2)? 

When you receive repairs... Does the damage correspond with the results I produced in these pull tests?

@@continuesurfboards4564 yes 100%. I order all my boards with Futures.

@@continuesurfboards4564 I’ve done over 1000 fin box repairs, and yes, this is how it goes. Fcs damage tends to rip out foam and damage the board further away from the box. Futures breaks cleanly around the box, almost 100% of the time. I do find that futures will tend to have that delam effect more often than fcs, but maybe that is because it has a higher hold tolerance. Fcs doesn’t really crack, they just break out. Fcs also tends to rip the fiberglass 4-5 inches out from the box as well, usually all the way to the rail.

@@jonnyzuma6884 Thanks for your input... appreciated!

That could suggest more FCS2 systems out there

I regret building up an FCS2 collection. The easy snap in feature isn't always easy and fins do fall off.. I've lost a couple and ended up just putting a single screw in anyway, totally voiding the one unique feature of FCS2s.

I would choose glass ins any day however they aren’t really available since I don’t get custom boards anymore. Atm I have two boards with the fcs2 features, Although I’ll definitely be moving to Futures in the future excuse the pun because they mimic a glass in more as well as snapping off in the box not the box getter disheveled

The good thing about fcs is that it is safer, I would rather lose a fin than cut myself or someone who has their fin come off.

When you receive boards for repair, does the physical damage correspond with the results I got on these tests? I'm especially curious to know if Futures boxes simply blow out and/or if FCS2 fracture or shear the foam off in a given area?

@@continuesurfboards4564 sorry I'm switching accounts left right and center. Yea, your results rang pretty accurate. I find with the FCS boxes, they are more likely to lift, delam and rip the surrounding glass making the repairs much harder to hide. Usually futures damage is cleaner and only breaks the glass within a few MMs of the box. In all fairness though, I think a test that measures force pushing down on the fin into the box/board is needed. The biggest reason for replacing FCS2s is because one side or end of the box has been pushed into the board in impact which compresses the foam beneath leaving a void between the box and the foam. I have little doubt that futures would win that test as well though.

Thanks for your input... appreciated!

Same here, nearly no Futures repairs, LOTS of fcsii

@@wouteroosting4687 Majority of new surfboards come with Fcs as standard unless it's a custom, In theory you'd expect to repair more fcs boxes just because of the ratio. Of the newer boards anyway. Also depends on flex of fin, type of fin, glass job, foam construction, type of blowout etc. a lot of variables.

so true

How would I get into glassing? Would love to do it

Thanks for your input... and with consideration to your experience, may I ask a question? When it comes to performance (not hitting things or damage to the board) do you notice a difference in the energy transfer between FCS2 and Futures fin boxes?

@@continuesurfboards4564 thanks for minding my comment... Not really, besides those details, I think they're both good systems performance wise. I mostly notice the difference between templates and materials, more than a difference between the systems.

Agreed, which is why I often use forward screw tabs and nylon screws on the old Fins Unlimited format. Worth noting that when the FCS does break, there is greater damage to the foam blank. When the Futures breaks, it seems to come out of the foam cleaner. Six of one, half a dozen of the other ?

except it pops with barely any force. compared to a future that takes over 100 lbs to reach its breaking point

well said. I'd much rather replace a fin with no downtime than fix a finbox. these days, that's about 4 to 5 weeks depending on who fixes it. haha Also something that hasn't been mentioned, injury. I have hit my fins so hard at times that if it weren't for the breaking point, I would have needed stitches. One of my friends with glassed on fins had his entire hamstring cut. He was out for over a year. if he had fcs2 fins, hitting the back of the fins would have just result in a lost fin. maybe a bruise.

@@ThomyeSurfs that's so true. Coming down on the backside of a fin is a scary thought. Less so if they pop out.

In all honesty I think it comes down to how well the boxes are glassed in. The FCS2 box deforming could be a desireable thing if you think about its ability to withstand a shock.

I like both. you cannot beat the convenience of fcs2 though. I like the weight of fcs1 most but in the end in terms of performance, they are the same. One can argue that futures is better connected but let's get honest, Fanning, Slater, and a heep others, would not put world titles on the line if it made that much of a difference. Performance wise, all the same. The breaking point is lower on the fcs1 and 2 but in my opinion, that is a good thing. Better to break a fin on a surf trip and than a fin box. better not to injure yourself either. I own both and mostly buy the board based on availability. Sometimes it's futures and other times it's fcs. All good to me.

Thank you!!

Thank you for taking the time to share your experience with fin box repairs. Those real life / anecdotal observations are valuable, and sometimes more valuable, than what's done in a laboratory setting (note that my shaping bay is definitely not a legitimate lab). And it's solid, that you caught that my are a focus was on the side load forces. I actually gathered a lot of data not featured in the video. Mostly having to do with rotation of the box at a given force and how that translated in to the foam and glass. Interesting stuff! A number of other repair guys have chimed in as well. It's interesting to see the similarities and differences in their remarks and I hope the discussion continues. Thanks again- Michael

Thays the oppsite to what ive experienced as a surfer. My fcs2 boxes were constantly popping out from the slightest knock. Switched to futures and only lost one so far.

Chris, Jeremy here. i thought the same too.

@@jeremystanley6815 Yeah mate, stoked to see you over here!

Great suggestion!

same here. just had 2 boards swapped out (fcs for futures) great experiment. cheers!

FCS design and intention is that if you hit an object in the water that the fin breaks off.

@@danjohnson3756 yeah but they come out way too easy.

I just lost a machado keel for my quad set. It just fell out on a lackluster day surfing beach break.

You sparked my curiosity and I checked out Project Farm. What a great channel... Subscribed!

Switched to futures for the same reason did the same thing in 2010

It’s much more convenient if you need to reset on your own with minimal tools or no access to luxury’s like ding repair service, or on a rural surf trip.

Thanks for your question... At 60-65 lbs., the FCS2 box appeared to be buckling from within itself. This was especially notable along the space between the fin tabs. And, there was only a slight delamination of the overlying glass. Note: After the pull, the fin wobbled considerably in the FCS2 box, but the fin tabs showed no sign of stress or damage.

Thanks for the complement and especially for sharing your firsthand knowledge.

That number also reflects the market share FCS has though.

I actually looked into having a machinist CNC cut fins made of steel for this experiment (to isolate the action, to that of, the fin box itself). However the cost of fabrication was pretty high and a number of people suggested just keeping it simple and authentic with products made by Futures and FCS respectively. But to answer your question... Yes, I'm totally open to doing more tests like this. Especially with different foams, glass materials, and fin constructions. And if the good people at Futures and FCS took interest, and helped offset the costs, I could defiantly make that happen sooner than later!

Try the fin removal tool. I got one as a gift and it works great. It puts the pressure on the fin box while pulling out the fin, so you aren't pulling on the whole fin box.

Yes!, FCS II gives you 2 different options for securing the fin just in case one fails. The threads found on the box/plugs can easily be stripped and then the only option for Futures is to permanently resin a fin in

@@allwedoisurf 100 percent. I’ve also had futures where the bottom is too tall and I’ve had to sand fins down so the base of the fin isn’t sticking out of the box. Just a mess. Also gotten 2 boards with futures that ALREADY had the screw hole stripped and the screw never tightened down. Just turned and turned.

Me too! So many boards just hit other boards or rocks!

Thank you for your question... My focus wasn't really in comparing the endurance limits of the fin boxes. It was more aligned with seeing how each fin box respectively transfers energy from the fin to the board and from the board back to the fin again. And being that the forces we put on our fins during normal surfing activities (not an impact) are greatest in a turn (a lateral force) I went with a side-load pull. And note that I collected a ton of data not featured in the video. Fin box rotation at a given force, deflection of the foam, etc. As for impact resistance? A number of guys who repair boards professionally, have chimed in on that. And, if the topic is of interest and there's enough community support, I'll be be happy to explore that too. Let me know? Thanks again for your question.

Thanks for your suggestion and input.... Cycling the fin could be a fun and useful experiment. And please, let us know how your pined fin box installs go.

Your former boss might have been right, the experimental design is poor and most of the results are not relevant to the finished product which is a composite and should only be tested as such. Unbonded boxes with no glass on the foam tells you nothing about how a finished composite will work. The strength from the backside of a finished box plays a large role in strength and needs to be accounted for. Further, this only looks at ultimate failure from lateral stress which never happens unless you hit a rock, but that's user error. Stress/strain is probably a better indicator of which box would better transmit force to the board. You might not know what you are talking about. These tests are interesting at best and professional ding repair guys in the comments are saying contradictory things regarding which box fails more often so no conclusion can be drawn.

Thank you for your input and for subscribing... appreciated!

@@continuesurfboards4564 looking forward to your future work! yiew.

Yes... the distance from the hole to the base of the fin is the same.

To add a little more to this, I do get that the fin box comes into play as well, but I thought the more important question would be the foam/glass combination.

You're absolutely correct. While the fin box is the foundation for our fins, the foam and glass are the foundation for the fin box. So the whole of the fins and fin box system is absolutely dependent on the structure of the surrounding material. I did this test with 2lb block cut EPS foam and 6/4/4 glass, The result certainly would differ with 1.5 lb foam or 4/4/4 glass.

Thanks for your input Kenji. You're absolutely correct that impact is the primary cause of (major) damage to fin boxes. But I wasn't testing for damage aspects... My interest here was aligned with exploring the effectiveness of each fin box to transfer useful energy from the fin to the board and, from the board back to the fin. With the fin box being the conduit of that action between the board and fin. It's about high-performance surfing and ensuring the rider gets all the available drive and control they can from their equipment. And while it's not featured in the video, I actually gathered quite a bit of data about that. Measuring the rotation of the box at a given force, deflection in the foam and glass, and other things. And there were some pretty interesting finds! That being said, quite a few people have expressed interest in me doing a series of impact tests. If that's of interest to you as well, let me know? Perhaps I'll do that too... Thanks again, Michael

Maybe... Is there something specific you're interested in?

Good questions... I really appreciate your points of concern and especially that you took the time to address it in a comment. 1) Futures and FSC make a number of templates that are nearly identical. Futures has three base templates and FCS has four. The fins I used in this experiment are not the same but are close in form. 2) And yes... Flex and strength are certainly a factor that can influence the outcome of a result. But a key thing to note is that the force applied to each fin box is being transmitted through a similar type fin that's made by the respective manufacturer. (IE: Not a carbon fiber blend vs plastic or an authentic vs counterfit product). 3) And yes, the holes for the anchor bolts are drilled to the same arm (XYZ) and they're oversized by 40%. Like-for-like. And please know, that I totally and completely respect your point that this is just amateur science (emphasized). In retrospect, I see a number of things that could have been done differently, and, that would have improved the data. It's just a matter of starting somewhere and moving forward. Hopefully, and perhaps with enough community interest, and some support from Futures and FCS, I can improve upon this and take it to a new level. Thanks again!

@@continuesurfboards4564 Awesome replies!!! As an engineer who loves to surf (and do some amateur science myself), I am absolutely going to subscribe and watch/learn from your videos. Hope to see more from you.

@@continuesurfboards4564 the actual fin box shape/design/depth of the fin boxes disperses forces differently to each other. The lip and bottom of the futures finbox encourages to flip and 'snap' out like the bottom of a boat rocking back and forth, It wants to pivot out. Hence the minimal foam damage in test 2. The length and base of futures fins/boxes are designed to have greater area to disperse force compared to FCS's 2 tab system. There's only 1 fail point in Futures which is strong but when it goes, it goes. Fcs has multiple from the fins to the individual fin tabs to the mechanism of the actual fcs block to the structure of the board around it. I'd like to also mention that the FCS system relies on the structure around it to disperse force e.g. glass + foam. Which is why the figure 8 outline of the FCS fin box took out more foam in test 2. The flex and construction of the fin in my opinion plays a bigger part in this experiment. The more the fin flexes the less amount of force is actually going through to the fin box - like a sponge. Also this leads to warping of the arm gradually changing the angle of force. But great video and amateur + anecdotal science at it's best, this is why we re-test and evaluate. I was looking at this project through the eyes of judging it as one of my students final science projects (Senior physics teacher). Best of luck in the future super stoked that this was made!

Thanks for your comment. And you're correct that kiteboarding puts considerably more stress on our fins and fin boxes. I surf, kite, and build both surfboards and kiteboards. And yes, the fin boxes on my kiteboards are installed with considerably more reinforcement. And true to your suggestion... nearly all of my kiteboard orders include Futures fin boxes.

Wow, I never thought about the possibility of getting stabbed by the sharp end (tip) of the fin and FCS II at least has the potential to just pop out rather than give you a possible deep flesh wound. Thanks for this new insight. I'm taking out my grub screws and don't care if I lose a fin.

And i hate all those holes around them,ugly boxes.

Thanks for your input... You're absolutely correct that FCS boxes have the cant angle built into the box and Futures incorporates that angle to the fin. I can't speak for other board makers, but we always zero our fin boxes to accommodate the respective FCS cant angle or the Futures 6.5' install dummy fin, regardless of the hull design. And know that this project wasn't about proving which box is stronger, but more so, exploring which fin box transfers energy better between the fin and the board. I gathered quite a bit of data that wasn't featured in the video and plan to do a follow-up video in the near future (it will also include anecdotal input from the comments received herein). Thanks again- Michael