This means that the difference is about 10%. It looks like too much, IMHO.
Sorry for my English.
That could come down to temperature difference on battery mixed with wind conditions mixed with acceleration differences. I have massive differences even just depending on how aggressively I carve.
To really test the difference youād need a pretty controlled environment.
Chrysler used to run cones on their 85HP motors and there is a lot of information in the marine and outboard forums and motor forums about this. Iāll need to find the links again, but if you in a rush just google it.
ā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦ā¦
20 characters
#expectedresponseā¦ .
yes dear Yezza. I remind me about a discussion with your SUPERPUPER Inflatable.
You said that this is so perfect and blah blah blah.
We want data from you, not give, so what?
I have poste litle bit data ( after that long time i have now less ) but for you my data are not enough.
So think about 
I know, many reasons can influence the measurement result.
Water temperature, is it windy, how do I stand on the board, do I go straight or do I make a lot of turns, and, and and.
But the fact is, I drove over 26 km a few times with the cone, but never without the cone
2 Likes
Iām thinking that conditions are not necessarily comparable, a boat needs 5-10 times the power for the same velocity so even if you got only a 1% difference with a tailcone on a boat prop it would still be 1% of 20hp - which is 150w, if youāre instead cruising an efoil at 1000w itās a large improvement. Iād appreciate if you could find those numbers.
This is why you donāt get what you want. Your insults are like a spoilt child. You donāt even understand your own data hence why you still think that just because you drove over 26km a few times with the cone that thatās the magic partā¦
There are for more things at play than what you listā¦
Well no, but the concepts areā¦
You also canāt just scale things down linearly and expect things to translate in terms of data. Hence why I said google and havenāt bothered posting data.
There are things like subcavitation, supercavitation, hub vortexes etc all play a massive role. Then the speeds that are foiled at play a role based on propellor pitch etc. There are props that may benefit slightly from a cone at certain speeds and then there are others that wonāt. But unless the cone is fully balanced it will introduce additional vibration and a whole bunch of other nasties tooā¦
The only realistic way to test the effects of a cone would be in a proper controlled test environment. Otherwise its essentially just pissing into the windā¦
1 Like
That was a whole lot of text to basically say you had no background to your own statement āAt the speeds efoils run at the tailcone will have absolutely zero effect other than looksā
Ok, then thatās settledš
Now it would be great to get more real numbers, i agree it will be hard to prove by just riding, even though it can be an indication. So far only @nice2cu has provided any data, so until the rest of us add or counter with something good we fall into the keyboard warrior category.
TouchƩ, @Jezza?
The real touche may be that your age is showingā¦as you seem to have forgotten that you had this exact discussionĀ±2 years ago and you were providing data from Google 
It was where nice2cu put on a reverse finned tailcone to act as a brake 
āAttack is the best defenceā is an old saying, question is if that is how you want to collaborate on forums?
Google can find many good things, so please debunk any data i shared, if you please. 
Right now you seem to have many opinions but no facts - it would be great if you didnāt disappear into thin air before sharing anything of value, like other times.
1 Like
The cone Looks stupid we can agree on this.
2 Likes
It seems that Fliteboard seems to think there might be some value in a cone shape.
Personally by the time I efoil for 20km Iām ready for a break anyway so donāt really care if the cone adds a bit to the rangeš
1 Like
ā¦ to late 
20 characters
1 Like
Iāve been watching you here in the forum for a long time. There is also a German-speaking group that makes fun of your often highly qualified comments. It is you who is constantly hostile to people with new ideas and attempts. Yes, data can be read and interpreted in simple and complex ways. Reading or interpreting these correctly is often not very easy because an incredible number of parameters can lead to a result or an incorrect result. The best example is Formula 1. There Mercedes once again managed to read and understand the car from their data! I have never presumed to fully understand my data nor to claim its accuracy. I really enjoy building my Efoils myself, tinkering around a bit and also have one or two contacts with developers from professional Efoil development. Among other things, the idea for the cone was not mine but someone who helped develop a very good efoil that has been on the market since the year before last. As a person who is open to ideas, I accepted the idea of āāthe cone without question, took into account the tips on the correct angle and, through some unprofessional tests, was actually able to achieve a positive effect. Since I, as a hobby DIY driver and hobbyist, donāt have the requirement to get every single watt and every 0.1 second out of my Efoil, that was enough for MY needs
5 Likes
Ok, cool storyā¦
Yeah, they very often misinterpret things due to language barrier and let emotions get in the way. As a result in the last attempt one made a bit of a fool of themselves. But its very strange that youād try to deflect on to personality here but again it seems that emotions have come to playā¦
Iām not sure which Efoil company this is, but none of the top brands are running cones on their props.
Well at least to you it appears thereās a positive effect. However when I look through your build log, I can see that before the cone, you were riding a completely different and highly inefficient foil. During this time you also didnāt even have the metr app working and as a result werenāt able to measure any data at all.
Once you managed to get the metr app working you were riding a completely different (more efficient foil). However even with the cone you were still getting higher Wh/km that others without cones. Then eventually in your build you switched to a Veloce M and also removed the āstrutā from the motor to fuselage which alone would give you that extra 3km range. I would suggest you read over your own build log as it very simply shows how you have started achieving a more efficient setup regardless of the cone and in reality you donāt have any current data to really measure the efficiency of the cone itself. You are completely guesstimatingā¦
I fully well know that my comments are not going to make everyone happy, but this is the internet and thereās always going to be someone that sees something differently.
So, my last answer to this themeā¦.
It is very charming that you read all content from my thread 
Yes, you are right, my beginnings was with V1 a total different system than now with my V2.
But believe me dear Yezza, I am not fully stupid and compared the different settings together.
The tests with the cone I made only with the V2 and same setup!
So, same Akku charge, same wings, same propeller, same size from my 2 Mala Inflatables, and last but not least, the same lake.
Also I take care that I ride the same speed.
Yes, the 2 metr Screenshots before are showing one tour with very straight, the other one I drove several curves, that makes some differences.
I forget if I wearing the same swimming trunks 
.
But again, I make about similar tests with and without.
Also shorter distances, the results are was always a little bit improvements when I using the cone.
In the last 1,5 years I have a lot of stress with my job and family. So I wasnāt able to make more tests. I only want ride on the lakes and Ocean and I was happy that my efoil running since first time without problems.