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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
I'm fairly new to the sport, and wonder about board lengths and
widths. In skiing, beginners start with shorter skis, and usually seem to move up to longer skis for most purposes except tight turns. They use wider skis for powder. Using my ski logic, I purchased my first board this year, a Burton Bullet, which is a short 154 with 256 waist. I am 5' 10", 170 lbs. I live in the East, and make an annual trip to Western powder. My goal is to learn to board in powder, but Eastern groomers will be my daily grind. I have no interest in park or pipe. What dimensions of board will I be working toward? I guess that my board is considered mid-wide. What pluses and minuses are there to wide boards? Short boards? Thanks, Jack |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On Apr 29, 10:29 am, Jolly_O wrote:
I'm fairly new to the sport, and wonder about board lengths and widths. In skiing, beginners start with shorter skis, and usually seem to move up to longer skis for most purposes except tight turns. They use wider skis for powder. Using my ski logic, I purchased my first board this year, a Burton Bullet, which is a short 154 with 256 waist. I am 5' 10", 170 lbs. I live in the East, and make an annual trip to Western powder. My goal is to learn to board in powder, but Eastern groomers will be my daily grind. I have no interest in park or pipe. What dimensions of board will I be working toward? I guess that my board is considered mid-wide. What pluses and minuses are there to wide boards? Short boards? Thanks, Jack In addition to length and width, stiffness is another important factor it how a board handles. I've owned a soft 172cm board that was easier to ride than a very stiff 155 cm board I had. However, given a particular board model... like the Burton Bullet. The board will always tend to get stiffer with length (sidecut radius also gets longer), so people tend to use length to judge what stiffness they want. It is difficult to "eyeball" stiffness, but if the company has a "recommended weight" listing, try to be on the middle to heavier side of the weight range. The height of a rider is not super important (despite what you've heard) and again is basically used as a simple way to guess the rider's weight (much more important). When you are heavier compared to the stiffness of the board, the board is easier to flex and turn. When you are lighter compared to the stiffness, the board is more difficult to bend, but sometimes can be more stable at higher speeds (as when you make a high speed turn, your momentum gives you some extra energy to flex the board). As such I would recommend beginners have shorter, softer boards... while more advanced riders can pick longer, stiffer boards if they want to (there is no hard rule on the matter). Wide boards tend to be a little slower to respond moving edge to edge (toeside to heelside and vice versa) as they tend to be less torsionally rigid (easier to twist the board). For a 256mm board, I would expect you to have like a size 10-11 boots. If you have like size 7-8 boot, it might be a little sluggish to respond. A benefit of a wider board is added floatation in powder. Short boards are easier to manhandle in tight spaces like between moguls and trees. They are also easier to flip onto rails or spin off of jumps. However, they tend to be less stable and have a small "sweet" spot for balance as well as having a little less floatation in powder (wide and board shape are bigger factors). If you don't plan on any park, I would suggest going longer... eventually to like a 160 cm board (notice that is only actually 6 cm or ~2.4 inches). If you rode the West coast, with more powder and bigger, wide trails you could go even longer. Often, the construction and design of a board will make a much greater difference than the length/wide of a board. So don't buy any freestyle board, regardless of whatever the shop salesman says. For a slightly more "professional" explanation on things... here is a link to article on buying a racing snowboard (http://tinyurl.com/ 2vu256). Now the exact specifications that they refer to in the article are specific to alpine/race snowboards (longer, very narrow boards) but the generalities are still covered and applicable to all snowboards. Also they cover sidecut radius (very important) and taper (somewhat important) there. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On Apr 29, 10:29 am, Jolly_O wrote:
I'm fairly new to the sport, and wonder about board lengths and widths. In skiing, beginners start with shorter skis, and usually seem to move up to longer skis for most purposes except tight turns. They use wider skis for powder. Using my ski logic, I purchased my first board this year, a Burton Bullet, which is a short 154 with 256 waist. I am 5' 10", 170 lbs. I live in the East, and make an annual trip to Western powder. My goal is to learn to board in powder, but Eastern groomers will be my daily grind. I have no interest in park or pipe. What dimensions of board will I be working toward? I guess that my board is considered mid-wide. What pluses and minuses are there to wide boards? Short boards? Thanks, Jack To me, waist width is about clearing the ends of your boots. Any wider than that is unnecessary. While it's true that you get more surface area out of a wider waist, the board's already got a ton of surface area and you'll really only sink in powder if you sink the nose, which is a matter of binding placement and weight distribution. That being said, a longer board can be better in powder because you get more surface area and more nose without getting the slower handling that comes with a wider board. I do think shape is important, though. A tapered shape will handle better in powder but not hold a carve quite as well. The fish shape is an extreme expression of that. You can see it on the Burton Fish, Never Summer Summit, and Prior Spearhead (and other boards as well I'm sure.) The Burton Fish is reviewed as being awesome in powder and a bit questionable in other conditions. Haven't read reviews of the other boards. I'm 5'8" and 145ish, and ride a 160. I'd actually like to go longer if I buy another board. However, board length is as much a matter of your style as of your dimensions - I have a very carve-oriented style, so it's not as important to me to be able to throw the board around and I can go longer. You might have more fun in powder on a more powder-oriented board, but since the Bullet's tapered, it ought to be fine for learning. If you find you're burying your nose a lot or you feel like you have to actually pull upward on your front foot to keep it from going under, move your rear binding back - getting up on top of powder and floating in it at lower speeds are about sinking your tail, and it'll help tremendously while allowing you to keep the nose down on chop and hardpack. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
Jolly_O wrote:
What dimensions of board will I be working toward? I guess that my board is considered mid-wide. What pluses and minuses are there to wide boards? Short boards? Arvin and Andrew have addressed it pretty well. The board needs to be wide enough so your toes and heels don't drag in the snow. As it gets wider, it takes more time to move from edge to edge. This is something you don't care about as a beginner, but as you get better and look for more responsiveness you might go narrower. However, as you get better and start tilting the board more on edge, you'll get more sensitive to the toe/heel drag (we say "boot-out", as in you get booted out of the turn by the drag), so you may want to go wider. Wider boards float better in powder, but any board wide enough for softies is wide enough for pow IMO. Longer within the same model line is usually stiffer as Arvin points out. Longer means more edge on the snow, more stable in the carve and at speed. Shorter means easier to turn, more responsive, and also easier to spin if the park's your thing. Some boards are designed to be long, others to be short. 165 is pretty long for a park/pipe board, but pretty short for a powder board unless it's a fish design in which case it's long again. Confused yet? Neil |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 09:44:25 -0600, Neil Gendzwill wrote:
The board needs to be wide enough so your toes and heels don't drag in the snow. As it gets wider, it takes more time to move from edge to edge. This is something you don't care about as a beginner, but as you get better and look for more responsiveness you might go narrower. Even if your shoe size does normally not permit a narrow board, you could choose for a narrow board with risers. There are boards which have integrated risers, like the K2 Recon Riser. I would love to try such a board with my shoe size (European size 46). -- Bas. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 18:27:42 -0700, Andrew wrote:
If you find you're burying your nose a lot or you feel like you have to actually pull upward on your front foot to keep it from going under, move your rear binding back - getting up on top of powder and floating in it at lower speeds are about sinking your tail, and it'll help tremendously while allowing you to keep the nose down on chop and hardpack. Personally, I would never recommand people to change the location of the binding for the cause of better riding a certain snow type. If your stance is wide enough for your height and has the recommended offset for the board, you should simply move your weight from one foot to another to balance the board. If you, as you advised, move your binding back to go better in powder, you have to over-compensate on other terrain. In my experience, the key is to get a wider stance (if it fits the length of your legs) and keep the offset as it is. You will both get more response, beter feel and a good balance on all terrain. -- Bas. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
Thank you all for the great posts. The link at
http://www.bomberonline.com//article..._snowboard.cfm was also a great reference. I have more than enough information to ponder on for a while. Thanks again! Jack |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
Bas Mevissen ) writes:
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 18:27:42 -0700, Andrew wrote: If you find you're burying your nose a lot or you feel like you have to actually pull upward on your front foot to keep it from going under, move your rear binding back - getting up on top of powder and floating in it at lower speeds are about sinking your tail, and it'll help tremendously while allowing you to keep the nose down on chop and hardpack. Personally, I would never recommand people to change the location of the binding for the cause of better riding a certain snow type. If your stance is wide enough for your height and has the recommended offset for the board, you should simply move your weight from one foot to another to balance the board. If you are riding powder all day, then that back leg gets a major workout trying to get more weight on the tail. Last decent powder day I put the bindings back to compensate and the next day once it was gone, back to the normal spot. Steve. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:41:40 +0000, Steven Slaby wrote:
Personally, I would never recommand people to change the location of the binding for the cause of better riding a certain snow type. If your stance is wide enough for your height and has the recommended offset for the board, you should simply move your weight from one foot to another to balance the board. If you are riding powder all day, then that back leg gets a major workout trying to get more weight on the tail. Last decent powder day I put the bindings back to compensate and the next day once it was gone, back to the normal spot. OK, fair enough if you have a day where you are (almost) always riding powder. -- Bas. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Question on board dimensions
On May 7, 5:21 am, Bas Mevissen
wrote: On Mon, 07 May 2007 10:41:40 +0000, Steven Slaby wrote: Personally, I would never recommand people to change the location of the binding for the cause of better riding a certain snow type. If your stance is wide enough for your height and has the recommended offset for the board, you should simply move your weight from one foot to another to balance the board. If you are riding powder all day, then that back leg gets a major workout trying to get more weight on the tail. Last decent powder day I put the bindings back to compensate and the next day once it was gone, back to the normal spot. OK, fair enough if you have a day where you are (almost) always riding powder. -- Bas. I've been very happy with the back binding back in all conditions. It does compromise hardpack performance slightly, but I like not having to mess around with my setup for different days. Of course, your mileage may vary. Andrew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Industry standard hole pattern EXACT dimensions | Aegis | Snowboarding | 3 | April 22nd 05 11:05 PM |
board question part duex | Howlee | Snowboarding | 4 | February 9th 05 02:25 AM |
Board Question | Howlee | Snowboarding | 10 | February 3rd 05 08:40 PM |
infinity pole dimensions | Onno Oerlemans | Nordic Skiing | 2 | December 9th 03 08:47 PM |
Not another board length question | Serena | Snowboarding | 5 | October 2nd 03 06:04 AM |