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

Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 23rd 04, 04:17 AM
=JT=
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

a dealer gave me a story that fitting a (palmer) board is not by
height, but by weight, and told me a 165 honeypro or honeycomb would
be fine for me. i am 6'4" and 200 pounds, and a size 12 boot. the
165 honeypro/honeycomb stands about a 1/2 inch below my chin. do i
believe him? what do you think?

i can get a pretty good deal on a palmer. I like the honeypro,
honeycomb(stiffer-i like) and carbon circle(stiffer too). carbon
circle is topped at 164. even shorter. whats up? why does palmer not
put out a 168 or 169 on their higher end boards (honeycomb, honeypro,
carbon circle)??? i think there used to be a 169 carbon circle.
where did it go?

the only exception seems to be the Palmer-Shape board.

thanks for any info!!

Rick.
Ads
  #2  
Old January 23rd 04, 06:50 AM
Dmitry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?


"=JT=" wrote

a dealer gave me a story that fitting a (palmer) board is not by
height, but by weight, and told me a 165 honeypro or honeycomb would
be fine for me. i am 6'4" and 200 pounds, and a size 12 boot. the
165 honeypro/honeycomb stands about a 1/2 inch below my chin. do i
believe him? what do you think?


Watch out for boot drag. I think a 165 Carbon Circle will beat the hell
out of you the first day out if you're not an advanced rider, but it's only
257mm in waist. I'm wearing 9.5 size boots (Salomon Synapse) and
on my Carbon Circle 158 I'm good. But I would be really worried about
boot drag with the 12 size boots. Maybe if you also get PowerLinks
you'll be fine..

So the bottom line is I personally think that with 165 CC (can't comment
on Honeys) the length won't be an issue.



  #4  
Old January 23rd 04, 11:19 AM
Iain D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

Baka Dasai wrote:

Height is almost totally irrelevant. The board doesn't know how tall
you are.


Wrong. Greater height, longer legs gives wider stance which affects
performance of the board

Weight is relevant, but only to board stiffness, not
length.


Wrong. Greater weight means more G force in turns which means more
lateral force on the snow. A longer edge can provide more lateral
resistance.

In the tradition of rss politeness that should be: "I'm sorry, but
you're wrong" ;-)

--
IainD at ukme dot me dot uk
  #5  
Old January 23rd 04, 01:19 PM
Iain D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

Baka Dasai wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:19:59 +0000, Iain D said (and I quote):

Baka Dasai wrote:


Height is almost totally irrelevant. The board doesn't know how tall
you are.


Wrong. Greater height, longer legs gives wider stance which affects
performance of the board



Damn you're being picky.


Hah!
Not really. Your words were that height is almost totally irrelevant -
too strong I think. I'm 6 foot 6 (197 cm); my wife is 5 foot 3 (160 cm).
Therefore I'm nearly 25% taller than her: If her stance is 18 inches
then mine is 22 inches - if we want to have the same stability. If you
want to maintain the same nose and tail lengths then that's an extra 4
inches or 10 cm on the lenght of the board due to height. OK, there are
reasons why you might not add on all of that but this is not insignificant.

Anyway, a wider stance could be countered
by either a longer board or a modified flex pattern.


Yes, but why do that (other than to help your argument). And it wouldn't
help with the stability issue.

And there's not
necessarily a connection between rider height and stance width,


Yes there is. The standard estimate for stance width is the height of
your knee of the ground. If the tall person is going to be stable he
needs a wide base. Think about making a high step ladder but
constraining the base width to be the same as a small one - not stable.

How is "lateral resistance" relevant? There are advantages to a
shorter edge - it will have greater pressure per inch on it, and
therefore penetrate the snow better for greater edge grip.


Nope, to a first approximation the snow will resist a certain lateral
force per unit of edge. The bigger rider needs more lateral resistance
to follow the same track at the same speed as the smaller rider. Hence
the longer edge.

I'm not dismissing your points totally. I hadn't considered them,
but now that I have, they seem only very minor influences on board
length - much less important than the issues of terrain/turn
type/snow conditions that I identified.


Agreed your issues are important. But it seemed to me you dismissed the
standard wisdom on choosing board lengths a bit too quickly. Trust me,
I've thought about this!

Cheers, Iain

--
IainD at ukme dot me dot uk
  #6  
Old January 23rd 04, 02:15 PM
John Richardson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?


"=JT=" wrote in message
om...
a dealer gave me a story that fitting a (palmer) board is not by
height, but by weight, and told me a 165 honeypro or honeycomb would
be fine for me. i am 6'4" and 200 pounds, and a size 12 boot. the
165 honeypro/honeycomb stands about a 1/2 inch below my chin. do i
believe him? what do you think?


(snip)


thanks for any info!!

Rick.


Here's a short answer:

I'm 6'3", 205. Bought a 165 last year. Glides well. Turns well. I don't
have my bindings set at the widest stance possible on the board. All
problems with performance are operator-related.

John


  #7  
Old January 23rd 04, 02:45 PM
=JT=
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

thanks for the info. I think i will be fine with the Palmer Power
Link Plates. without the plates the honey* and carbon circle boards
are just too narrow in the waist for me.

the longest Carbon Circle is 164.

"Dmitry" wrote in message news:gv3Qb.127064$I06.1099662@attbi_s01...
"=JT=" wrote

a dealer gave me a story that fitting a (palmer) board is not by
height, but by weight, and told me a 165 honeypro or honeycomb would
be fine for me. i am 6'4" and 200 pounds, and a size 12 boot. the
165 honeypro/honeycomb stands about a 1/2 inch below my chin. do i
believe him? what do you think?


Watch out for boot drag. I think a 165 Carbon Circle will beat the hell
out of you the first day out if you're not an advanced rider, but it's only
257mm in waist. I'm wearing 9.5 size boots (Salomon Synapse) and
on my Carbon Circle 158 I'm good. But I would be really worried about
boot drag with the 12 size boots. Maybe if you also get PowerLinks
you'll be fine..

So the bottom line is I personally think that with 165 CC (can't comment
on Honeys) the length won't be an issue.

  #8  
Old January 23rd 04, 07:11 PM
Jason Watkins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

Wrong. Greater weight means more G force in turns which means more
lateral force on the snow. A longer edge can provide more lateral
resistance.


To be picky, accelleration (g) in a balanced, carved turn is
determined purely by inclination. To keep balanced you have to trade
angulation, speed and turn radius for eachother. The other terms,
including weight, cancel out.

However, given a constant effective edge, varying weight would vary
lateral pressure per unit edge length. I've got no clue what snow's
deformation function is like, but I'd assume it's very complex and
there's some critical pressure where the snow will break free instead
of just compressing down and letting you stick your edge. So longer
length will give you better edge hold, and the more you weigh the
longer you'll have to go to avoid overpressuring soft snow.

I think I've got that all right. You can play with nate w's calculator
(www.natew.com) to see what I mean.

God I'm a geek, and I should definately get back to work.
  #9  
Old January 23rd 04, 07:39 PM
Iain D
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

Hi Jason

Wrong. Greater weight means more G force in turns which means more
lateral force on the snow. A longer edge can provide more lateral
resistance.



To be picky, accelleration (g) in a balanced, carved turn is
determined purely by inclination. To keep balanced you have to trade
angulation, speed and turn radius for eachother. The other terms,
including weight, cancel out.


But I said force not acceleration.
Force = mass x acceleration (I'm sure your recall!)
Inclination determines lateral acceleration relative to gravitational
acceleration - if inclination is 45 degrees then lateral acceleration
equals g amd the lateral force to provide that acceleration is equal to
the weight (i.e. mass time acceleration).

However, given a constant effective edge, varying weight would vary
lateral pressure per unit edge length. I've got no clue what snow's
deformation function is like, but I'd assume it's very complex and
there's some critical pressure where the snow will break free instead
of just compressing down and letting you stick your edge. So longer
length will give you better edge hold, and the more you weigh the
longer you'll have to go to avoid overpressuring soft snow.


Agreed.

I think I've got that all right. You can play with nate w's calculator
(www.natew.com) to see what I mean.


Cool. I notice he credits Jack Michaud at Bomber online. Jack and I did
this article some time ago - gosh must be 4 years now:
http://www.bomberonline.com/articles/physics.cfm

God I'm a geek, and I should definately get back to work.


Agreed :-)

--
IainD at ukme dot me dot uk
  #10  
Old January 23rd 04, 07:41 PM
Mike T
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Most palmer boards top out at 165 length. WHY?

God I'm a geek, and I should definately get back to work.

Agreed :-)


Better yet, go ride!


 




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
Anyone ridden a Palmer crown? which board next question? Nick Snowboarding 3 January 22nd 04 02:41 AM
Palmer Power Links & high-backs question R-nee Snowboarding 4 January 5th 04 09:39 PM
kids on boards Mike Snowboarding 7 September 23rd 03 04:26 PM
Board Length Marty Snowboarding 1 September 20th 03 02:50 AM
Help with buying Kids boards tg Snowboarding 3 September 10th 03 12:00 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:58 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.