WinterGold

Here in Europe 1500$ for a board is just an average price if you look at the premium brands. But so far I have only bought one board in that price category. It was about 1300$ ... but there is no better way to spend your money, right?

I´m not sure I can follow you exactly . The video is here on Bomber - http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=26578

(you mean Vist - not Hangl, right?) Have you seen the video explaining the Vist plate. It shouldn´t be too difficult to add the center screws and that´s the way the plate is supposed to be mounted. But maybe it works that way as well ;).

Why the difference in waist width? Wouldn´t it be better, if the specs of the boards were as similar as possible? But anyway, very nice rides indeed :D.

@ursle - very nice ride . Are you going to use the center screws of your Vist plate? Or does the setup stay this way?

Ok, that´s what I thought as well (and good suggestion! Thanks!)! I just wondered about some racers, who seem to have a huge amount of lift (and sometimes canting as well). But then there are also top racers who seem to ride flat ... so it can´t have that much influence on performance. It´s mainly about comfort then as discussed here.

These boards look fresh and really cool (in my opinion ;))! And you can see the new Flex Plate, although it is completely integrated into the design. It now uses center inserts like e.g. the Vist plate.

Thank you very much! Now it works on my Mac .

And one more thing - I found the shape of the tails, especially of the Kessler GS 185, interesting. They are quite decambered a bit ... Here is a picture of the tail of the Kessler GS 185 when slightly pressured in the middle (pushed down a bit by hand) -

The Kessler definitely has a longer effective edge. Also the Apex´s tail is rounder. It will be interesting whether the board will be more forgiving because of that ... About the camber profiles - the Apex has 11mm of camber (with plate and bindings mounted) and the Kessler 162 has about 12mm of camber (with bindings only) - so it is about the same and pretty standard for raceboards I think. They also have the same thickness (core profile). Here are two pictures of the nose profiles without being pressured in the middle -

Our local resorts (not too high) normally open by the end of November or beginning of December, but right now it is far too warm (10°C/50°F). So it doesn´t look very promising for the near future. Next glacier would be a 4 hours ride ... so this might be an option (if I get too desperate ...).

I went full metal for this season :D. Haven´t ridden any of these yet :( ... There is an Apex TheFast 163 SL, a Kessler KST 162 SL and a Kessler KST 185 GS (with Vist plate). And NO, I am not a racer ;).

Of course I agree that canting/lift is a very individual thing and you should feel comfortable, but let´s say you are completely neutral and you can handle flat bindings as well as some canting or lift. Then the question is - Are there any advantages or disadvantages concerning some canting and/or lift? Can you get more pressure on the edges or less? Or any other factors?

@ursle - that´s a great variety! Can you talk a little bit about when you use what and the difference in feel (or technique) between the wider Coilers, the Kessler and those uber narrow Viruses? That would be really interesting .

If you look at the membranes then Goretex is the best known and many companies use it for their top lines. So I guess it´s pretty good :D. I also use some jackets and pants with the Toray Dermizax membrane and I couldn´t tell any difference from the Goretex stuff. As to recommending a specific product - I think it is difficult, because it depends on how you like your fit and whether you like your pants insulated or not (3L: not insulated; 2.5L: not insulated; 2L: insulated). I have used pants from the Burton AK line (Goretex, e.g. the 3L Hover pants), which I liked very much. They have a looser fit. For this year I am looking into other companies as well, e.g. Mammut (although their stuff is mainly designed for freeskiing).

But maybe it is more the riding style (EC) ... I don´t know ... what angles are you using on your EC boards? Racers often have low angles (between 45° and 50° on the back foot).

But most racers don´t use narrow boards and therefore relatively lower binding angles. So it would be the other way round ... And I don´t think that racers would risk breakage during their runs, because that would lose them the race. I talked to the constructor of the Ibex plate and he told me that if breakage is really a problem on his bindings then he wonders why hardly any spare parts are ordered from him at the moment ... but I´m not saying that it does not happen!

First of I must say that I really like your step into the softboot world ! But as Jack pointed out, your text immediately reminds one of a BX board. I know that you are trying to market your board differently, but still it is built for similar purposes. And therefore I would like to hear your opinion on the different constructions. If you look at top BX boards like the Kessler The Cross or the Apex Pro+, they come with the latest technology (metal, decambered nose and tail, new sidecut forms, bigger radii? (at least the Apex has 12.85m at 165)). Advantages have been discussed here many times. What´s your take on this subject? Why does Swoard not use these new technologies or am I just mistaken?

There are some great videos here! Especially the "matiurossbuono"!!! Your stance really does look a bit narrow - like the boards ... If you want to advertise your boards here, can´t you tell us a bit about your shape philosophy (different lengths, widths, kind of radii, decambered areas, etc.) and your preferred construction (metal?)? That would be nice !

And apparently some models were already sold out before you could even order them online ...

My guess is: production Kessler "The Cross" BX 168. Am I right?

I don´t see your logic. You just say that a certain board excels in the area which it was made for - that is pretty obvious, isn´t it? Of course an EC board will be good for this kind of riding style, etc., but how does this influence the versatility of a raceboard??? For a raceboard the same logic you just applied for other board types, is also true. It is perfect for a race course, but, as I pointed out in my last post, because of its shape, it also performs very well in other areas. So it actually is very versatile. But of course everybody will choose their boards according to their needs and preferences. And no board is superior for all purposes! And, by the way, you did write "metal race boards" ...

I always read about the different needs of "funcarvers" and "racers". Can someone elaborate on this concept (maybe this would deserve a new thread)? Of course everybody has different preferences and therefore there are a lot of different boards out there (and this is good!!!), but raceboards only made for one purpose??? An ultra narrow board would have a much smaller area where it really performs well, no? A raceboard is not too narrow and not too wide and it carves very well in all kinds of snow conditions. So how is it just made for one single purpose? I know that I did and do all kinds of riding with my "raceboards". I did my snowboard instructor courses on them. I can do some tricks with them, ride powder, etc. For me they are extremely versatile. And why would a "funcarver" not profit from new design elements like e.g. a decambered nose?

Is it a 2010 model? It would be very nice, if you could post some impressions, when you get the board and have tested it Because sometimes the F2 boards don´t have the best reputation, but I guess that only few people have actually been on the latest WCE F2s.

I agree with everything you say , queequeg. Glad that you like the boots as much as I do :D. About the Flo liner - I will definitely give it a try. It feels really good. But then I also used the standard Burton liners and they were not the best, but somehow they worked for me ...