NateW

That's how I feel about my Kessler 174. It rides like a 15m SCR at low to moderate edge angles, and when I get down to hip-dragging angles it carves a path more like my 13m boards. The nonlinear feel is a little weird and I have mixed feelings about it. I'm the 2nd owner so I don't know much about the design, but the SCR in the middle of the board is pretty close to my F2 183, and it tightens up at the tip and tail. I thought I read that Contras were the reverse of this approach, so now I'm more confused than usual.

I should have thought of that, because that's how I started. 45/30 angles if I remember right. It works. It just gets better (IMO) as you narrower boards and steeper angles. Stiff boots, high angles, skinny boards, they all work great together. Also, boots get WAY more comfortable with custom liners (molded to your feet and boots) and custom foot-beds (also molded) and maybe shell modifications from a good boot fitter. Any ski boot fitter should be able to work with snowboard hard boots, they're basically the same thing. It can be expensive so I wouldn't suggest it right off the bat, but it's something to keep in mind. UPZ boots are wider across the toes than Raichle/Deelux. I used to get weird foot pain on steep mogul runs that I couldn't figure out for years... turned out I just needed a little bit wider boot.

My two cents: Look for a used board with a waist around 20cm. I started with hard boots on a 25cm waist all-mountain board, then 23cm, 21, 19... and finally settled on 19. At the time I was concerned that I'd lose versatility by going too narrow, but that never happened until I tried a 17cm waist. Everyone's preferences will be different but 20cm seems to me like a good place to start. Sidecut: 10m-13m. It mostly depends how fast you like to ride, and (to a lesser extent) how wide your local trails are. A larger sidecut radius carves better at higher speeds, but at lower speeds it forces you to skid in order to maneuver. Stiffness: medium to soft at first. Stiff boards require finesse to maneuver at low speeds, so I'd lean toward getting comfortable with stiff boots and high stance angles first. Unless you like a challenge, in which case go for it - just plan to spend a few runs having fun learning as opposed to having fun snowboarding. Consider getting used gear from the classifieds here. If you decide you'd rather stick with soft boots, you can probably resell for close to what you paid.

After adjusting the toe and heel placement to center the boot better, the winner is clear. It turns out I need them positioned more like the binding on the right, and less like the one on the left. Which means that the screw at the heel isn't accessible without moving the heel first. Since there's no clear winner from a strength standpoint I'm going to stick with the configuration that makes it easier to work on the binding. And easier to check/fix the tension on the bolts.

OMG... At first she was all "New Red Brick director Angie Callen to focus on youth and adults" but then she "Red Brick embezzler agrees to pay back $125k she stole from city of Aspen."

Last Wednesday... Lift operator: Nice monoski! A few seconds later, the other guy on the lift: How's your day going? Me: Well, other than having my snowboard mistaken for a monoski... Other guy busts up laughing.

These images don't show up for me - are they broken for everyone, or am I just lucky? Bigwavedave, if you still have them I'd love to see them. Thanks!

Time to resurrect this thread once again. You may (or may not) recall that I was asking about a full rocker board for powder days... I didn't get full rocker but I did get this: This one is flat between the bindings with an early rise-nose and tail. The post-it notes were slid in from the ends until they wedged between the base and the concrete, to give some indication of where the nose and tail start to curve up. That floor isn't perfectly flat, but it's pretty close - after taking the picture I moved the post-it notes to the top sheet and looked down the edge of the board to double-check the positions of the post-its, and they're about right. It's a product of RYM Experimentals, a small custom board builder in Washington State: RYM Experimentals | Facebook If you scroll back to November you'll see a familiar board. My regular do-everything board (as in, 90% of my runs for the last several years) is a Donek with the same length, width, and sidecut, but it's much stiffer, has camber, and has some early-rise to the nose and tail but not as much. The Donek has some flat sections that basically cause the nose and tail over hover a little bit when you stand on it to press the cambered section flat. Best snowboard ever. For everything but powder. This was supposed to complement the Donek for powder days, but I like the new one so much I moved the bindings to the center and made it my daily driver. I'm still surprised by how much I like this board, because I was expecting the softer flex, no-camber profile, and relatively-short edge length to compromise the carving performance significantly. At very high edge angles ("extreme carving" style) it doesn't have the edge hold of my previous do-everything board, but the rest of the time it works just fine. When riding with the base flat, it feels more neutral than I'm used to, presumably because of the short effective edge in that scenario. So it's very comfortable for straight-line travel. And I can do butter tricks again. Butter tricks have been nearly impossible for me for for over a decade because my boards have been cambered and so stiff that it takes a lot of effort to lift one end of the board. So now I have something fun to do in the slow zones. Unfortunately, when sighting down the edge to double-check the post-it notes, I also noticed a kink in the edge, behind the rear binding. I broke it already. This is not a RYM problem, this is a me problem. I still remember landing short on a large-ish jump on Wednesday with my weight too far back and wondering if I'd just broken my new board. It still rode fine so I breathed a sigh of relief a few turns later. Nope, I really did break it. Just barely. But, definitely. The top sheet buckled on either side of the rear binding, and if the light hits the base just right you can see a kink in it. I've got two Coilers that broke in the same spot after roughly the same amount of time, and my previous Donek also broke in the same spot after a few years. And my current Donek is several years old and due for a preventative replacement. I'm pretty sure my Doneks only last longer because they're substantially stiffer. So I'm going to ask RYM to build me another one... but stiffer.

Yes, but that part was unintentional. I should have realized it before I posted this photo, because it made for an awkward first few minutes with that board. I took the photo when I was putting the board together back in December, and finally remembered to ask about it today. What I'm curious about is the placement of the three bolts that hold the top plate to the cant ...thing. Left side: one bolt directly under the heel, and one on either side of the toe Right side: one bolt directly under the toe, and one on either side of the heel I've been running them like the right side forever, on the theory that two bolts for the heel are better than one. But as I was putting those together I started to wonder if one would would be better, since the load path is shorter and the bolt is more in line with the direction of the forces that would be pulling the parts apart. Yes, I believe that's called a "mechanical fuse" in some circles. Or biological fuse in this case. Yikes.

That's good to hear. I was blissfully unaware of the post-Fin / pre-Gumbo era, and didn't realize there were dark days in between.

What is the camber/rocker/whatever profile like on these boards? How long is the effective edge when the board is flat with a rider on it? I'm intrigued by the stubby nose and good powder performance, that kinda sounds like it might have the early-rise nose/tail profile that I'm looking for.

There's two ways I can put TD3s together. Can you spot the difference? Which is better? Note that with Intec heels, there's far more force on the heel side of the binding than on the toe side. I am not at all concerned about being strong enough for riding, but in crashes there can be a lot of force in random directions. And I have a long history of doing stupid things involving various combinations of steep slopes, high speeds, and big jumps.

The carve calculator that I had on my web site ~20 years ago worked by projecting the sidecut onto the snow. SCR wasn't an input, but sidecut depth was. I thought "scr * cos(angle)" was too simple to be accurate, but when I compared results from that approach and my approach, they were so close to identical that I figured the differences were probably just due to the quirks of floating-point arithmetic. I never did the algebra to prove this, but I'm still pretty sure that all my extra arithmetic just reduced to calculating the SCR from 3 points and then doing a cosine. I don't think my math took board length "contraction" into account though.

Wait, is Walker / Forrest also Gumbo, or did Gumbo run it into the ground? Apparently I missed some quality drama here. All I know for sure is that I've been able to get the stuff I needed, and the last set of TD3s I got have been working flawlessly this season. I'm just glad Bomber is still Bombering. Best bindings ever. I thought the TD2s were perfect until the TD3s came out and were even perfecter.

The best slopes are the ones where you can hold on to the carve until you're heading uphill between turns.

If you're at the point where you know what specs you want, consider going to Donek (or another custom builder) and ordering exactly what you want. It costs more but I'm a huge fan of this approach. Flex is the hardest thing to specify, because it's so hard to quantify. I bought a used Donek and used that as a reference when I ordered my first custom Donek. But if there's a mass-produced board that you like, they can probably use that as a reference too.

I should have mentioned that the powder board I have in mind would be in addition to the other board that I mentioned. It doesn't need to handle groomers well. Riding this on groomers would be an interesting science experiment ("there are no failed experiments, only new data") but if I'm riding my powder board on a groomer, it's because I'm headed back to my car to switch boards. I always bring two boards to the mountain: one is the aforementioned 172x19 board, and the other varies depending on circumstances. The 'other' board is usually either an F2 with a 15m sidecut (if mid-week, because no crowds) or a Donek AX with a 21cm waist and the bindings set back a bit (if there's lots of fresh snow). This new board would replace my current "powder" board. I'm not fond of the 21cm waist, even on powder days.

So, did anyone ever hardbooting powder on a fully rockered board? Lots of discussion in this thread, but I was hoping to hear about how it works in practice, because I've been thinking about going that route for my next board. For the last several years I've been riding what suits me perfectly for everything except powder... so I've been thinking it would be fun to ask Sean @ Donek to use all of the same specs and just swap the current profile for a mild full rocker. Current board is 172cm x 19cm, 13m SCR. Cambered in the middle, with flat sections outside the binding inserts that lift the nose and tail a little bit when standing on the board. And it's exactly what I want, most of the time. But in powder it seems very sensitive to fore/aft balance, like there's a fine line between submarining and leaning back too far. I'm hoping that rocker will make fore/aft balance a little less twitchy in powder, more like a wakeboard.

A Boiler plate with a 2nd board kit, from loopback's for-sale thread. But today I remembered that I still have other boards... Jack, TLN, you'll have PMs in a few minutes.

To be fair, I was adding the 2nd video when he posted that.

Sorry guys, my new plate arrived today. Maybe I should have given this thread more time before I bought... but oh well.

Thanks.

The picture didn't come through for me. But, regarding your questions... Sucking it up means less air, so don't do that. Unless you're in a hurry to get somewhere, or the landing is flat - flat landings are no fun. Straight or at an angle doesn't make much difference IMO, just do what it takes to land where you want. Extending violently or even aggressively can throw off your balance a bit, and the only way to get a perfect landing is to take off with perfect balance. So don't do that either. I mostly just think of it as keeping my legs firm. I'll give it a smooth push if that's what it takes to clear a flat spot and land where it's steep, but I try to let speed and terrain do all of the real work. Most people take off with the base flat on the snow. I believe that's generally the right way to do it. But I have a pathological aversion to that approach... I almost always take off slightly on edge, unless I put conscious effort into taking off base-flat (which I sometimes do). So either way certainly does work. Ideally you should be comfortable both ways and make a habit of doing both base-flat and on-edge takeoffs. Otherwise you might end up like me, trying to unlearn a habit. Style... I cannot do nose grabs. My boots and stance just won't allow it. Tail grabs work great though, and that's my default trick. Methods work, but it takes some effort to keep the nose up and keep the board beside me rather than behind me. "Shifty" is pretty easy and hard boot friendly. Just rotate your lower body to get the board sideways. I'm left foot forward, and rotating the board counterclockwise 90 degrees comes naturally. The other direction is awkward. I keep forgetting I need to work on that. 180s are fun, and if you practice riding backward you'll probably find that 180 airs are not that hard. Especially over small bumps. Frontside 180s are easier because you can see where you're going the whole time. Backside 180s involve a moment of blindness, which is scary but adds to the satisfaction when you get it right. After takeoff, I look straight down to gauge my height and direction - I can't see where I'm going but looking down keeps me aware of what's happening. By the time I touch down, I've rotated enough to be able to look where I'm going again. Situational awareness is critical due that moment of blindness; before takeoff, make sure there's nobody ahead and nobody coming from behind. Start small, work your way up. If I may toot my own horn... click here. And here.

A couple random things... Custom is great because you don't have to hunt through catalogs for the right set of specs. And you can get the flex you want too - especially if you start by buying someone else's used (therefore cheap) board from that same manufacturer. That gives you a baseline for your real board. And the used board becomes a backup or get sold to the next person... Sidecut radius is a very personal thing, and I think it largely it correlates with how fast you ride. Every sidecut radius has a corresponding speed range - if you're too slow, you'll need to skid more because the board won't want to turn, and if you're too fast, physics just won't allow a carve. So if you want to carve everywhere you go, you want a radius that will accommodate the speeds you will be riding at. For me, the sweet spot is 13m. I have a board with a 15m sidecut that I sometimes ride on mid-week days (fewer crowds, more open space), and it's fun, but to make the most of it I need to be riding a little faster than I generally want to. Which admittedly goes hand in hand with having a comfort zone that corresponds to the 13m boards I've been riding for the last 15 years or so. If you make a big step up in sidecut radius, you will need some time to adjust, but do not let that deter you. You will adjust. You'll adjust to riding faster, you'll adjust to skidding rather than carving in low-speed areas. I still remember the first couple runs on a 13m board, after 10m was the longest SCR I'd ever ridden. I'd put the board up on edge and lean in to turn... and it felt like the board just kept going straight, and I'd just tip over into the snow. Then I started riding faster, and I recalibrated my expectations, and after a few more runs I was loving it. I also found that 13m aligns very well with leaning way into the carves and getting horizontal. At 10m, it was hard. The turns end up so tight it feels like my head stops moving and my feet arc around it. At 13m it finally clicked. 15m works fine too. I tried stepping down to 11.5 later, but wasn't as happy. This is more about personal preference than anything absolute, but like I said 13m is where the sweet spot is for me. You said you wanted a board for bombing down the mountain, so I'd go with at least a 10m sidecut. And definitely don't be afraid to go bigger. Sure it will feel weird at first, but that will pass. What's the biggest sidecut radius you've got in your quiver right now? Add 25%. Expand your horizons.

It's been a pleasure doing business with you. Assembly time...