Jack M

I think you should try them symmetrically!

I rode them for 1 day in pretty bad conditions, it wasn't a fair test. I'd be interested to try them again.

Some theoretical thoughts on Geckos... the advertised function is to "spread out" the footprint of the binding. At first I thought this would create large flat spots in the board, but apparently the flex of the plates and squishiness of the bumpers means this is not the case. I can't feel the flex by hand, but it would make sense that they would be designed to flex. The Geckos prevent the board from folding right at the binding, and make the impact of the binding on the board less abrupt. This is good. However, I believe that offsetting the two halves of each Gecko to somewhat align the plates with your binding angle will introduce a twist in the board as it bends. I think this defeats the purpose. Thoughts?

What size are your feet? Are you sure about that 18cm? I liked workshop's 19cm, but I have size 28 boots. I think you'll love the board.

Actually I would say 4-5cm doesn't qualify as decamber, a.k.a. early rise. It's just the usual blending of the camber with the upturn of the nose, i.e. normal rise. The decamber of my Kessler 168 starts somewhere around the first 'e' in Kessler. Now that's early rise.

I used to say they’d have to pry my Madd 180 out of my cold, dead hands... until I tried a Coiler NSR 185. The new tech is just overwhelming.

Expensive solution: UPZ or Mountain Slope boots, Intuition liners. Cheap quasi-solution: http://www.tognar.com/ankle-wrap-pads-pair/

Interesting, and discouraging. It would be good for your cause if you could get the issue to happen on snow, yourself. Let us know what you hear from Burton if you can.

^ no more UPZ for you?

These reissues do not suck, they're actually really good. The ones with the blue topsheets kind of sucked, and those were the ones with the epoxy problem. Your 180 looks like a 2005. I had one and loved it. Your 170 looks like a 2006 or 7 which were also great. I'd say it's worth repairing or even t-nutting to get another season out of it. Your 170 surely makes a longer turn than the MK, which turns very tight. The difference between the originals and reissues is a matter of great folklore around here. There are many differences... not really worth getting into it as the originals are very hard to find, especially a 170. Also, they can never be reproduced exactly because some of the materials are no longer made, and the tooling and molds were destroyed in a fire or some such catastrophe at the factory in Italy. The Donek MK is the path forward if you want a 158-like ride. If you want a board like your 170, a guy here had a custom Donek 172 made with the request that it be made like the MK only longer, check it out here: http://forums.bomberonline.com/topic/45745-donek-custom-172/

Hopefully we'll just have to replace the heel receiver.

Donek in the US.

Thanks Jennifer. I would order a pair of boots today if they were Intec compatible! I'm addicted to step-ins!

@Puhutes, if you buy the standard 100 flex boots and add the WC 120 flex tongues and yellow springs, is that the same as buying the WC boot? Or is the whole WC shell stiffer?

You do realize this is a thread about boots designed for World Cup racing, right? Also, I don't think 120 flex snowboard boots can be compared to 120 ski boots. I had a pair of 120 Salomon ski boots (these). They weren't just "too stiff", I couldn't even ride in them. Now I am in UPZ with the stiffest tongue which they call 160 flex (!!). Maybe combined with the rest of the boot it averages out to 120, but I'm loving this setup.

I don't think that's right. Someone else said the soft .951s were similar to UPZs with stock black tongues. As for your tongues, I posted some thoughts on the silver (stiffer) and gray (stiffest) tongues earlier. I'm running the gray tongues, I highly doubt they make the boot only a 100 flex. 120 seems right.

lol, touche. I didn't believe it either until I tried it.

Yep. In terms of scale, a 258mm wide board for a size 7 boot is actually a little wider than a 275mm wide board is for a size 10.5 boot.

I think the Kessler Cross looks pretty agreeable with pow and all-terrain riding. My Coiler SL 163 was surprisingly great in pow - 21cm waist, avg 10m radius, so the nose was pretty wide. The nose was more blunt than this and it was float city.

@t-nut, I got a 27.5cm wide 166cm long board to freeride and carve on in softboots, because I have size 10.5 boots. It carves, freerides, and handles trees just great. If someone with a size 9 boot jumps on it, they will think it's sluggish and unfit for certain activities. That is the concept of scale I mentioned. Boards good for carving in softboots will be different widths for different people. Declaring all softboot carving-capable boards as bad freeriders is shortsighted, or even rude. Anyone who rides a snowboard and spends a not-insignificant portion of their time on groomers should be able to carve (I realize this is a radical concept). Of these people, anyone who rides a snowboard that is not wide enough to prevent boot-out while carving is riding a snowboard that is not wide enough, period. They should get a properly sized board and learn how to use it everywhere. And I'm not talking Knapton-wide here. The vast majority of softbooters ride boards that are too narrow. Heck, too many softbooters ride stances that leave them with more board behind their back foot than there is in front of their front foot.

I wouldn't really factor in that big stiff 170 x 28cm wide board of yours when thinking about this, it's a pretty unique beast. My new 166 x 27.5cm board is a great freerider and it carves great on the blues.

I'm 190 lbs, 5'11". The stock black tongues were a non-starter. The silver tongues were an improvement, and I rode them all season last year. However they were still a little soft and I could over-flex them during chatter or impact. This did something not good to my rear ankle, I still get a twinge in it if I bend it a certain way. The gray tongues were the solution. When I first put them on at the beginning of this season I was kind of like "oh jeez, what have I done?", but after the first few turns I knew they were the right tool for the job. I've had a great season on them this year, I'll be getting rid of the other tongues. This would put me in the 120 flex .951, especially since someone else said the softer version is like the stock UPZ with black tongue.

Yeah. At only one point in that video do they show him linking two turns together... and it doesn't look like he'd have enough speed for a third. I liked the apple though.

I'm in the same boat. Would love to try the .951 but I have my UPZs dialed (Intuition liners, custom footbeds, punched, dark gray stiffest tongue), and, I love step-ins. Hmm, I think the .951 looks beautiful, and not at all like ski boots.

You don't understand the concept of scale.