Here is the article you have been waiting for! I hope.

This is the Surfdocsteve comparison of the Axis 900, MFC 1400 and Armstrong 1550 foils. Yes, I have them all and have been riding the three wings a lot lately. I have tried to be fair in my evaluation. I ride two wings in one session to get a same day comparison. I have alternated which one is first and second in order to smooth out my fatigue bias of the second wing I fly. I have also ridden all three in the same day! I use the same board. I have paid for all the foils and have no financial disclosures for any of them.

Here is my rider profile:

I am an intermediate rider

I started riding February 2018

I ride 3-5 times a week as work lets me

I am 5’4” tall and 140lbs

I rode a 4’0” Freedom Foil Board about 32L volume for all the flight testing

This is my opinion, please do not get upset if you feel differently about one of the wings.

Here are some stats on each set-up:

MFC 1400

Weight = 7.2 lbs, Fuselage Length= 58cm, Wing width= 31”, Wing chord=8.8”, Thickness=23.7mm, Tail=225

Armstrong 1550

Weight = 8.6 lbs, Fuselage Length= 60cm, Wing width= 31.5”, Wing chord= 9.25”  Thickness= 26mm, Tail=Std   

Axis 900

Weight = 9.2 lbs, Fuselage Length= 60cm, Wing width= 35.5”, Wing chord=7.0” Thickness= 27.5mm, Tail=400

GLIDE
(Is the combination of lift and efficiency through the water): The Axis wing is the widest and definitely has the best glide of the group. It can be pumped at
a much lower cadence than the other two. If you lose some speed it will let you recover so you can continue to pump out. I even found that I could pause every
once in a while, between pumps and let it glide. It would maintain glide on very small waves when I would have had to pump on the other wings. The
Armstrong is a close second. I found with the Armstrong I needed a little more strength and higher cadence to keep the pump going. I am talking a small
difference here. This wing is excellent on small waves as well but would require a pump here or there when the Axis would not. The Axis has more lift but
less efficiency whereas the Armstrong has less lift but is more efficient. The MFC is a great glider as well but definitely required more pumps in small waves
to keep up the speed and glide. The MFC would lose speed at the fastest rate of all three and needed constant attention to pull the power out of a small wave.
On the opposite end when the wave steepened up the MFC would provide instant turbo charger type acceleration. The MFC is a very efficient wing but the lift
is much less at lower speeds for this wing. This made recovery at slow speed on the MFC difficult.

LIFT
(Lift is the upward force that a wing produces): The Axis definitely has the most lift of the three. The lift profile is steeper than the other two. You
notice this right away in the take-off with the Axis requiring more front foot pressure compared to the Armstrong & MFC. I also felt the extra lift at
higher down the line speeds. I would have to concentrate pressure to my front foot to keep from breaching. Conversely at slower speeds the wing would allow
me to keep going and even recover some speed. The Armstrong is the middle child here. It has a bit more control during steeper take-offs. Speed was more
controlled with a more even foot pressure at higher speeds. The Armstrong at slower speeds still performed well and allowed me to maintain those last few
pumps until I got to the second wave. The MFC has the most linear lift profile of the group. It allowed me to handle much steeper take-offs with confidence. Speed
was not an issue with this wing and it felt more comfortable at higher speeds than the other wings. The MFC’s one caveat is that it is a sensitive wing. If
you change your foot pressure to quickly it will let you know it right away. The good thing is that you can just as quickly recover from it since it is not
lifting with massive force.

PUMPING
(Ability to maintain speed and generate lift in flat water): The Axis is the best pumping of the three. It also has the best glide. When you pump on the
Axis you can feel the power and acceleration. I am only restricted by my strength and stamina with this set-up. The Axis allows me to pump with less
effort and I have been able to get some triples with this wing in each session I have used it. Second is the Armstrong. It has a great lift to efficiency
ratio and is close to the Axis. I was able to get triples on this wing as well but definitely was due to a closer cluster of waves than the Axis. The MFC is
the hardest to maintain a pump. The wing has the least lift of them all and this makes pumping a harder thing to do. It required a higher cadence and
effort. I would lose speed easier on this set-up. I was able to pump out to a second wave 80% of the time with the Axis and about 70% with the Armstrong followed
by about 60% with the MFC. 

STABILITY
(Resistance to change or state of steadiness): The Armstrong has the most stable feel to it. Pumping is smooth with no feeling that when you press down
on your front foot the wing will stray to the side. Foot placement has a wider sweet spot before causing misdirection. Turning is consistent and precise with
foot pressure and placement having a bigger sweet spot. Initiating the turn and coming out of the turn feels like you are on railroad tracks. It is also very
stable at speed, but not as much as the MFC which allows you to feel more confident at speed. Second best in overall stability is the Axis. It feels
stable when pumping and going down the line. Turning requires more thought with the wider wing-span noticeable in and out of the turn. Riding with a more
flowing style is better for this set-up. The MFC is the most unstable of the three except a down the line speed. This is not a bad thing. The MFC is the sensitive
one. It will respond to subtle changes in weight immediately and requires a higher level of precision to ride. Turns on this wing are precise but require
more attention due to the wing’s sensitive characteristic. If you have the ability, then the MFC wing will not hold you back. It is the type of wing that
does not restrict your performance.

TURNING
(Ability to change direction): This is a tough category to access. What is good or bad in a turn? I think it is very subjective and rider dependent. I am not a
radical foiler. Smooth drawn out turns are my thing vs guys who are whipping a foil around in pocket of the wave. That being said the MFC is by far the best
turning of the three. The sensitivity of the wing allows you to initiate the turn at will and turn in a tighter radius despite its size. This sensitivity is
a double-edged sword. Any break in concentration can lead to a breach, pearling or loss of speed. It is not the most stable in a turn. The stability prize 
would go to the Armstrong. Turns are smooth and confident with the Armstrong. I keep using the analog of being on tracks, but it holds true for this wing. The
turn has a comforting stability to it with breaching and pearling less likely. The Axis is not that much wider than the others but you can feel it in the turns. I
felt the need to slow the foil down more to turn with this wing. The turns are wide and require more input to keep under control. Finally all the wings turn
well at slow speeds. Pumping out to a second wave I could whip all the wings around in a relatively tight turn, but the most control would still go to MFC
followed by Armstrong with the last being Axis.

SPEED
This is very subjective. I tried to make it objective by wearing a Garmin 735xt with the Wave Tracker 2 app on it. I will give you my subjective view and the
objective truth. Hands down the MFC felt the fastest to me. I would get out of a session and think that the MFC won that round. The objective truth is that
the Armstrong was the fastest on GPS. It would hit a mile or two per hour faster than the MFC on the same day and recorded the fastest speed of 22.4mph (Armstrong).
The MFC was always about 1-2 mile per hour slower than the Armstrong. The Axis was the slowest of them all and I could feel it.

Armstrong top speed; 22.4mph

MFC top speed; 20.5mph

Axis top speed; 17.5mph

It was a surprise to me that the Armstrong was faster. It did not feel that way, but I have a theory about it. The MFC is a very
sensitive wing to fly. Every move is quick including getting up to speed. I think it is this sensitivity that makes it feel faster than it really is. The
stability of the Armstrong counterbalances the feeling of speed. What it is that this test tells me is that speed is really objective. One to two miles per
hour in speed difference is not a lot, barely 5 to 10%. The stability of the wing makes more of a difference in the feeling of speed then the actual speed.
The other thing is that the Armstrong and MFC are really close in speed. The Axis trails by a lot. The Axis is a high aspect ratio wing and I would have expected
it to be the fastest of all, but the lift profile is steeper and I believe this slows the wing down in order to allow a better pump and glide.

OVERALL VIEW I really like all the wings. I plan on keeping all of them, until something better comes along, but even then, I would be hard pressed to
let them go. The pump and glide of the Axis is intoxicating. I have long desired to be able to pump to a second wave on a regular basis and even be able
to skip the first wave that comes along to go to the next. This wing allows me to do that! I personally rate that above turning ability and speed. The
Armstrong is the best all around foil. It is the most stable and pumps really well. It handles the speed well and turns well. It is just overall the best
choice at this point. If you take into consideration weight, speed, stability, turning and construction it is the foil I would get if I could only have one.
The Axis is a great set-up, but the weight is still an issue and I think that carbon is a better choice for corrosion issues along with strength to weight
benefits. The Armstrong wing selection is limited. You have a 1200 and 1550 to choose from with the other wings more extreme.  The Axis line has a lot of wings to choose
from and this is a clear advantage of the Axis system. When they switch to carbon it will be a compelling choice. I have not had the opportunity to try
the other wings yet, but I will.  The MFC has a lot of flex, but that is something that you just get adjusted to, not necessarily a negative. The MFC wings are ultra responsive which is why I have tried to put them on my Armstrong fuselage. (I am still adjusting at this juncture) The issue I have with MFC is the reliability. I have had the keel
crack and know of 3 other people who have had the same type of issue. The way the keel attaches to the fuselage is a weak point in the design, which is
common in other set-ups too. Armstrong has this issue eliminated with their design. Axis on the other hand has a more stable front wing attachment. The
Armstrong should in theory win in this category, but I have had some slop in mine and know of another that has an issue with the front wing flexing on the
attachment to the fuselage. There is no perfect set-up. They all have their positives and negatives. Which one would I pick if I could only have one? It
would be the Armstrong. It is the compromise between the other two. It is well built, and the wing selection should be expanding in the near future.