No announcement yet.

Spitfire LFT vs. Future Shapes Technology

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Spitfire LFT vs. Future Shapes Technology

    Can anyone provide either some feedback or explanation between a Spitfire with LFT vs. FST? Has anyone ridden a Spitfire with LFT?

  • #2
    the LFT is going to be more lively and springy under foot. It's slightly higher performance, however it is only slightly more durable than a standard surfboard.

    The FST is the strongest variant. Parabolic stringers give a good flex pattern, and the deck and bottom skins give excellent durability. Not as high performance as the LFT, but not much in it. FST is also going to be $100-$200 more expensive..


    • #3
      Any reason not to go LFT?


      • #4
        if you want more durability get the FST. If you want higher performance, go for the LFT.

        Personally, I only ride the FST and TT boards now. I like the durability, and honestly I'm no pro, so can't tell a massive difference between FST and RF/LFT. The rails and bottom on LFT are going to be the same as a regular PU board in terms of durability. The deck will be much stronger though.


        • #5
          only if durability is your prime concern.. having said that, lft and rapidfire before it are CONSIDERABLY stronger than a pu/pe board. i ride them by choice. ding resistance is lower than fst but still more resilient than pu/pe. had my vanguard lft out in a double over head slab 2 days ago with 4 ft thick lips.. only made 2 waves, the rest the board (and i) got nailed.. i do this all the time..a pu/pe would be demolished..


          • #6
            FST calls out 1lb. EPS and LFT calls out 1.5lb EPS? Any difference in volume between the two?


            • #7
              It's just the density of the foam. Volume will be identical.