A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Snowboarding
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Just bought board - Is it big enough??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 12th 06, 07:49 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

James;
I've got 2 seasons under my belt and I went through all of the same
issues you are going through when I purchased my board. I'm almost the
same size as you are (6'2, 210lbs, 10 1/2 US shoe size). I researched
for weeks and agonized over what board to choose.I ended up with a 162
Burton Custom. Where you are in your progession right now, either board
will probably work fine for you. As a lot of people have pointed out,
160 is at the low end for your size so switching to the 163 might not
be a bad idea. I'm in agreement that "wide" boards are not a great
choice. A couple of friends have them and do not like them. The
overhang issue can be addressed by changing the angle of your stance if
you stay with the 160. I'm not familiar with adding risers to Flows, so
I won't comment on that option.
It's funny, I spent so much time focusing on the length of my board
when I was starting out and now I find that I hardly ever think about
it. The only time I notice it is when I'm trying to go faster and the
board starts to chatter a bit on some turns. A longer board would
probably be smoother for me at higher speed. The things I focus on now
are boot fit and stance angle. I've found that dialing in the fit of my
boots to have a much greater impact on my performance and comfort than
the board ever could. I've taken my boots to a professional boot fitter
to decrease my heel lift and it's made a world of difference. I highly
recommend this.
I switched to Flows this season, and I LOVE them. I know a lot of
people bag on them, but the comfort and convienence is awesome and I've
seen no decrease in response since switching. I've even learned to slip
into the rear foot wrap just prior to getting off of the lift. This
allows for much better control when exiting the lift, something that I
had real trouble with when just trying to use the stomp pad. One
additional plus of the Flows is that you can put your foot in the rear
wrap while riding the lift (if the chair isn't full), this helps
relieve the weight on the front foot from carrying the board on the
lift.
In the end, you will probably be happy with either choice and probably
upgrade in a couple of years either way. Focus on your technique, start
to carve instead of slide, and challenge yourself everytime you go out.
Everything else will take care of itself.
Cheers,
Mark

Ads
  #12  
Old March 12th 06, 09:23 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cheers Mark, thanks for the advice

"Spark" wrote in message
James;
I've got 2 seasons under my belt and I went through all of the same
issues you are going through when I purchased my board. I'm almost the
same size as you are (6'2, 210lbs, 10 1/2 US shoe size). I researched
for weeks and agonized over what board to choose.I ended up with a 162
Burton Custom. Where you are in your progession right now, either board
will probably work fine for you. As a lot of people have pointed out,
160 is at the low end for your size so switching to the 163 might not
be a bad idea. I'm in agreement that "wide" boards are not a great
choice. A couple of friends have them and do not like them. The
overhang issue can be addressed by changing the angle of your stance if
you stay with the 160. I'm not familiar with adding risers to Flows, so
I won't comment on that option.
It's funny, I spent so much time focusing on the length of my board
when I was starting out and now I find that I hardly ever think about
it. The only time I notice it is when I'm trying to go faster and the
board starts to chatter a bit on some turns. A longer board would
probably be smoother for me at higher speed. The things I focus on now
are boot fit and stance angle. I've found that dialing in the fit of my
boots to have a much greater impact on my performance and comfort than
the board ever could. I've taken my boots to a professional boot fitter
to decrease my heel lift and it's made a world of difference. I highly
recommend this.
I switched to Flows this season, and I LOVE them. I know a lot of
people bag on them, but the comfort and convienence is awesome and I've
seen no decrease in response since switching. I've even learned to slip
into the rear foot wrap just prior to getting off of the lift. This
allows for much better control when exiting the lift, something that I
had real trouble with when just trying to use the stomp pad. One
additional plus of the Flows is that you can put your foot in the rear
wrap while riding the lift (if the chair isn't full), this helps
relieve the weight on the front foot from carrying the board on the
lift.
In the end, you will probably be happy with either choice and probably
upgrade in a couple of years either way. Focus on your technique, start
to carve instead of slide, and challenge yourself everytime you go out.
Everything else will take care of itself.
Cheers,
Mark



  #13  
Old March 12th 06, 11:34 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm 6ft 2", 13 stone and have size 10 feet. I started with a Burton Indie
164 - much too long. Last March I upgraded to a Ride timeless 161. I've had
7 weeks on it since then and it's been fantastic. Its a few mm's wider than
the decade but almost the same and I've not experienced problems with toe
overhang.

Long boards are for boarders who can't ride switch and who never leave the
ground. They are make jibbing difficult and are cumbersome in the park

My advice is to take back the decade and upgrade to the timeless 161.



"James Varty" wrote in message
...
I'm a novice to intermediate boarder and thought I'd buy a board in the
sales ready for next season. I've gone for a Ride 'decade' 160 cm, and
Flow amp 5 bindings.

I discussed a variety of options with the guy in the shop but I think the
boards I've hired before have been wider. The selection of sale boards
wasn't great so I ended up going for this, but now I'm wondering if I
should have gone for a wide board instead. I'm 6ft 2" tall and weigh about
95 kilos, and have a UK size 10 (US 11) boot.

I'll have a bit of toe overhang on the board - is this usual? I could
probably swap it for something else over the next few days, so please let
me know if I'd be better off with something else.

Cheers

James




  #14  
Old March 13th 06, 12:22 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 12:00:55 GMT, "James Varty"
allegedly wrote:

"og" wrote in message
WIde boards suck If 251mm is a bit narrow adjust your stance or get
power plates. In anything but deep powder wider is definately not
better.


What is the problem with wide boards?


There's nothing wrong with wide boards as such. The issue is getting
the right size board *for you*. A board that's too wide for you will
suck. A board that's too narrow for you will suck. Statements like the
above don't contain the whole story.

Og isn't a big guy with big feet, but you are tall, presumably medium
build going by your weight and have big (ish) feet.

You need to consider the level of riding you're at and the terrain that
you're going to be doing. As Mike T says, carving or half-pipe adds
extra demands for the angle you need to get the board up at.
Additionally, riding steeps on a hard-pack day will also require greater
angulation between the board and the slope.

Only you know what level you're at, so you're best placed to make the
decision. I started off on boards with a width of about 25cm but soon
made the move to wider and wider boards as my feet decked out and set me
on my arse. However, if you make the move too early, you'll get the
impression that wide boards suck and end up having to do something else
to help you use a regular board, like change the angles you're
comfortable with, or slap huge plastic plates under the bindings to rise
your feet above the snow.

Also there's no cast iron rule over the width or even the length. The
rigidity (and sidecut) of the board will considerably alter how it rides
so a 161 of one model may be better or worse than a 164 of another
model, even by the same manufacturer. This is why it's best to demo the
board, although that's not always possible. Getting reviews on a board
from the net can help.

This probably doesn't help answer your question directly, but then it's
very difficult to say.

- Dave.

--
The only powder to get high on, falls from the sky.
http://www.vpas.org/ - Snowboarding the worlds pow pow -
Securing your e-mail

The Snowboard FAQ lives here - http://rssFAQ.org/
  #15  
Old March 13th 06, 04:14 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Edward wrote:
I'm 6ft 2", 13 stone and have size 10 feet. I started with a Burton Indie
164 - much too long. Last March I upgraded to a Ride timeless 161. I've had
7 weeks on it since then and it's been fantastic. Its a few mm's wider than
the decade but almost the same and I've not experienced problems with toe
overhang.


Frankly, 3 cm isn't going to be a huge deal. There are probably other
differences between the boards that make you prefer the Ride to the Burton.

Stiffness, flex pattern and sidecut make at least as much difference as
length. To take a couple of extreme examples, many novice/intermediate
riders rode and loved the old Burton Supermodel at 168 or longer. Those
same riders would get their asses kicked by a Rad-Air Lamm LSD 156.

Long boards are for boarders who can't ride switch and who never leave the
ground. They are make jibbing difficult and are cumbersome in the park


I ride switch fine on my Coiler AM 172 (alpine) and my 200 cm Tanker
(freeride). I'm not much for airtime but lots of guys use bigger boards
to huck cliffs, although if you like to spin lots shorter is better. I
agree that if jibbing and park riding is your thing, go shorter.

What length buys you is generally more stablility at speed, more
effective edge (ie more edge on the snow in a turn) and more float in
the powder.

Neil
  #16  
Old March 13th 06, 06:00 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Neil Gendzwill wrote:
Edward wrote:
I'm 6ft 2", 13 stone and have size 10 feet. I started with a Burton Indie
164 - much too long. Last March I upgraded to a Ride timeless 161. I've had
7 weeks on it since then and it's been fantastic. Its a few mm's wider than
the decade but almost the same and I've not experienced problems with toe
overhang.


Frankly, 3 cm isn't going to be a huge deal. There are probably other
differences between the boards that make you prefer the Ride to the Burton.


That;s exactly what I was thinking. Going from one model board to
another, a lot more changes that's likely to be more noticeable than
the 3cm difference in length.




Stiffness, flex pattern and sidecut make at least as much difference as
length. To take a couple of extreme examples, many novice/intermediate
riders rode and loved the old Burton Supermodel at 168 or longer. Those
same riders would get their asses kicked by a Rad-Air Lamm LSD 156.

Long boards are for boarders who can't ride switch and who never leave the
ground. They are make jibbing difficult and are cumbersome in the park


I ride switch fine on my Coiler AM 172 (alpine) and my 200 cm Tanker
(freeride). I'm not much for airtime but lots of guys use bigger boards
to huck cliffs, although if you like to spin lots shorter is better. I
agree that if jibbing and park riding is your thing, go shorter.

What length buys you is generally more stablility at speed, more
effective edge (ie more edge on the snow in a turn) and more float in
the powder.

Neil


  #17  
Old March 13th 06, 10:54 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

LeeD wrote:
I actually agree with all you guys, but since James is kinda starting
out, he can choose a wider board for his next 6 to 20 boards.
At size 11, 25.8 is about right, even for pure pipe, hiking and not
riding anywhere else. But my bindings have really high toe ramps, and
the plasticl rear hoop clears by well over 60 degrees.
He's gotta start somewhere, and I actually have seen good riders with
size 12's on Customs (248cm waist) and ride OK.


In general, I agree with what Mike T and Neil G said about not having
more tha 3/8" overhandg, but for this specific case I agree that it
won't be a problem for James because he is still learning to carve
(maybe in a few more years he'll notice that he's deep in a carve and
suddenly the board will "slip" out on him). As LeeD said, if he has a
pair of bindings with a tall baseplate and/or toeramp, then I think
James can probably get a lot out of such a board. Wider board require
more force to get them up on edge, if you are a bigger person with
bigger feet, you will easily have sufficient leverage to get the board
up on edge, however if you have smaller feet and less body
weight/strength, then the board will feel a little difficult to
manuever.

I'm not super familiar with Flows, but from the website the AMP5
doesn't look like it has a the extra thick baseplate that I've seen
with some of the other bindings (the toeramps don't angle up either).
This is NOT saying that the AMP5 are a bad binding, just that they
might not give you the riser effect that would help you avoid boot drag
issues from riding a narrower board.

As mentioned, a 160 is a little short for you. A 163 is a literally 1"
longer. More important differences are the sidecut (the Yukon is
slightly longer, but not by much), stiffness, and material
construction. I personally would go with the Yukon (it's a better
freeride board anyways).

In response to Edward's comments, he doesn't realize it... but he is
implicitly suggesting riding the longer 163. You should notice that he
has noticeably smaller feet (probably a 1 cm or .5") and lighter (~30
lbs = 13.5 kg = 2 stone) than you and he's riding a 161. Wouldn't it
make sense that you, being a bigger guy... ride a board that's a tiny
bit longer and stiffer. I also agree with Neil G that I don't think
Edward understand how much cna change when you are going from board to
board... especially from Burton to a company like Ride, which have very
different board design styles, material constructions, and model lines.
For instance, the Ride Timeless is one of ride's top end freeride
models ($480 USD - sorry I'm not going to convert every single value
between US and European units), where as the a Burton Indie was a
medium range all-mountain freestyle model ($380 USD). I really liked
the Ride Timeless and thought it was an excellent all-around board,
smooth and stable on groomed rides, light and responsive in the park
(some freeride boards are less capable in the park and many freestyle
boards are not very good on regular trails - most Burton boards have a
very freestyle flavor to them and Ride has a more freeride flavor).

Again, I stress that going from 164 to 161 is a only 3 cms (not much
more than an inch) different and barely a weight difference... I'm
pretty sure Edwards is just parroting what he's heard from other people
because it is true that if you go really, really long... the boards do
become more cumbersome in the park and less easy to jib... but when
people say that... they are talking about like 175-185 cm alpine boards
compared to freestyle/freeride boards. Even then, they are some crazies
who can rip it up in the park in super longboards and hardboots (there
are quite a few photos and videos of people riding park/pipe/rails and
switch in longboards, wearing hardboots, and super high angles like
60+) obviously they aren't riding like Shaun White, but I bet that they
are probably better than most of the people who claim increasing your
board by 3cm is really going to mess up your park riding. I recently
just went from 155 to 158 for my park board and I'm 150 lbs = 68kg...
here's an old video of me doing a rainbow rail
(http://www.dotphoto.com/MemViewImage...&ICT=17&IPP=16).
I apologize for the quality, I tried uploading it to google video, but
it says it will take a few days to be publicly posted. If you have high
speed internet access, there are some more videos of people doing
butters and riding switch on 172-182 cm boards.

  #18  
Old March 16th 06, 09:32 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cheers for all of the comments. I'll change it for the Yukon at the weekend.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Board spec question and the Burton Baron Frank L Lynn Snowboarding 2 April 11th 05 05:42 PM
Board flex and fast powder turns id Snowboarding 10 December 14th 04 03:08 PM
Bought my first board, a little help please John Snowboarding 14 January 23rd 04 03:42 AM
Burton Dominant Sizing------Please help Lee Snowboarding 5 November 21st 03 06:22 PM
Anyone bought from Board Paradise? Tiburon27 Snowboarding 0 August 5th 03 02:08 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.