My SL70 was a couple of years older than 2008 so I can't really answer your specific question, but I have tried a friend's latest SL70 and must say it was sweet like a dream! Have not compared the measurements but, compared to my old SL70, the new one felt a bit faster, more comfortable in high speed and had much better control when you are over powered. For the size, it is a really fast slalom board, my friend have done 35 knots on it with his GPS. The light and easy feeling when sailing is definitely the same and it is still very good in gusty light wind where it flies through the lulls. This was a pro model, making it much stiffer and giveing more direct response, you feel the smallest ripple through the board.

I still think the old SL70 is very sweet and competitive so, since i'm not competing, I would not upgrade just for the sake of it. More practice and time on the water would probably give me more payback than just buying a new board but the latest model is an excellent piece of art and the best board in this size I have ever tried!

Cheers / P

Hi Tim,
I had an SL58 '08, and have 55 and 62 '09, 58 and 66 '10. Assuming the changes I saw on smaller boards regard all of the size range, here is what I found.

Construction. '08 was extra light and a bit flexy, one could really sense the nose flexing up and down while sailing, which made for a very nice soft feel like having 'shock absorbers' but in my view didn't affect performances as the tail felt super stiff instead. Finish was accurate but minimal. '09 and '10 boards are much stiffer, a tad heavier, better finished and feel sturdier.

Bottom vee. My '08 SL58 had plenty of, which made for a super nice jibe with plenty of control. '09 and '10 boards have much less vee; jibe is still super easy but no more all that much 'waveboard like'. On the other hand, performances on '09 and '10 boards IMHO got much better. Also glide through lulls and drive through the jibes are now much more effective. The new boards simply don't want to slow down when power is off (I account for this on the much less vee, but maybe true reason is different).

Rockerline: this got even smoother, making for an almost undetectable transition from sub-plane to plane. '09 and '10 boards ask for less push to get planing.

Deck shape. '09 boards have a slightly thinner tail; '10 boards have very slightly bulkier rails from front straps to mast track, making for a slightly 'straighter' deck shape look.

In brief, subtle evolution made for better and better boards; but still I believe my '08 SL58 would be perfectly comparable to modern competition.

Hi Lulla - great to hear you like your sl70. Interesting indeed what you say about spinout. The 42 should be a good size fin for that board. Maybe because of the slightly different volume distribution you have to slightly adjust your back/front foot pressure? Hopefully temperature will rise soon so you can have some more time on the board.
cheers
c

Ciao Giu,

i would go
Slalom 58 (7.0 and down) My favourite !
Slalom 66 (7.0 and 7.8) excellent board in this range.
Slalom 75 (7.8, 8.6 and 9.5) approved by Pierre Moretti who is 100kg.

or
Slalom 58
Slalom 70 (70 up to 8.6) close to IS 111
Slalom 80 (8.6 and 9.5) close to IS 131

Ouch...

Hi Noell, I own CAs and Isonics, I am lighter than you, and I am not sure what you think a CA will get you that an Isonic doesn't. The Isonics are incredibly easy to sail once you get used to the modern "short" hull standard (Starboard/RRD/JP/Manta etc): all PWA female use them ... As you probably know a short hull makes the board slightly less reactive to a "passive" style of sailing, but if one is using these slalom boards as they should, i.e. powered to overpowered, the issue is rather moot. (if you are freeriding ... well that is different: get a Futura, I tried a 93 (2010) this summer and it is quite a great board, I bet that 90% of the time it is as fast as my slalom, the 2011 are even faster).

Since you already have an Isonics quiver and you are used to them, I would go as far as to discourage a switch to a CA. I have both a CA 58 (2009) and an Is-86S (2010) and I personally prefer the Is (more compact, less nervous). It is a personal preference of course, and I see no reasons to claim that one is much better than the other as often done, in hyperbolic (and occasionally nonsensical) terms, in this forum.

I have a Is-111 (2009) and no experience with the CA-70, but I always amazed at the range of the Is-111: I use 6.6 to 8.0 and my 70Kg weight could use a 9.0 (in competition Dunkerbeck regularly uses a 8.5 on it, and he is 110Kg). If anything, and although this things are VERY hard to determine, the consensus on the forum out there is that when you go from 2008 to 2009/2011 the range of the larger Isonics is even bigger, with easier control at the high end.

Vincent is right. It makes little sense to compare CA's and iS's without specifying the model year. Both have changed quite a bit, from my experience and that of friends.
CA's from '09 on are more free and fast than '08 and even easier through chop: less vee, lower nose, more tuck, the boards changed a lot even though maintained their 'feel'. iS's changed a lot from '09 to '10, becoming more free but at the expense of their famed wide range and control.
I was able to sail against a '09 iS111 with my CA SL62, both on 7.6 - 7.7 sails, with no problem; the same friend on '10 iS111 probably needed me on a CA SL70 to match his power, but is now considering a smaller board for use with 7.0 in higher winds, while he was perfectly OK in such conditions on his '09 board.
In my view, the iS111/107 'ideal conditions' have changed from 'general use 7.0 - 7.8' board to 'flat water 7.8 - 8.6'. Meanwhile, CA's have been refined and are getting more and more range year by year, while maintaining excellent control in rough conditions.