Due to the nature of its double skin design, the Paia is optimized to perform at a lower angle of attack. To adjust for this, it’s recommended to select one size larger, as illustrated above. Riding comfortably at this higher power level makes the Paia less sensitive to board and foil pairing than the following descriptions that relate more directly to single skin parawings.

I’m around 170 pounds (~77 kg).

Riders around 50 pounds (~23 kg) lighter might ride one size smaller parawing.

Riders around 50 pounds heavier might ride one size larger parawing.

I have thousands of sessions on foil, hundreds of them with a parawing.

Riders with less experience on foil and/or with a parawing might ride one to two sizes larger.

I think that the biggest single variable in defining the low end range of any size parawing is the combination of board efficiency and rider technique.

I heard the expression, “riding the pain train” used to describe learning the skills of SUP-foil paddle-up.  The awesome efficiency of that technique and equipment crosses over to amazing low end on a parawing.  Very differently, technique and equipment crossed over from wingfoiling might require selecting a parawing one, two, or more, sizes larger.  

When low end range is important to my session, I ride a highly efficient, 6’, 90 liter board.  For sessions where the lowest part of my range isn’t a concern, I ride a 4’10”, 60 liter board.  The chart here reflects how board selection affects my range.

To maximize my range and to enjoy riding at a power level as light as possible, I normally ride a 1080 foil with effective takeoff lift.

Riders on lower lift foils might ride one size larger parawing.

Even within a one mile stretch of the north shore of Maui, riders don’t agree on what the wind speed is. Speed reads differently depending exactly how and where it’s being measured, and readings at different locations fluctuate in different wind directions. Expand this to larger scales and there is no common language for any wind speed. We’ve done our best to present as accurately as we can based on our years of experience.

The chart provided above represents my riding, on a highly efficient board, for surfing and general cruising, where I most enjoy a feeling in the bar that’s as light and comfortable as possible.

When my riding goal is instead for upwind/downwind riding, I select +1 size larger to ride with a bit more power for higher upwind angles.

When my riding application is for downwinding, I also normally select +1 size larger for range security in case the wind is lighter at any portion of my run.

The low end range of the original Maliko was aided by relatively longer lines and open arc shape, yet hindered by indirect power delivery. Its upper range was limited by the bar system’s lack of trim control, leading to wing instability.

The Maliko 2 has an even more open arc shape and comparatively longer lines, especially into the smaller sizes, extending its low end range. It has fewer panels and lines, limiting stability and upper range, but increasing its pack/stow performance.

The Ka’a and Kanaha have considerably shorter lines, leaning their range toward increased upper range stability with lesser low end power. The reduction in their low end range from their shorter line length is offset to reach similar low end by their direct power delivery, especially effective in increasing wind speed and into the smaller parawing sizes.

In comparing the Ka’a and Kanaha, they share the majority of performance characteristics. Performance differences are relatively subtile. The Ka’a has a slightly lower aspect ratio leaning its performance toward low end power and maneuverable handling. The Kanaha has a slightly higher aspect ratio leaning its performance toward high end stability and higher upwind performance.