bobdea Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 guys, I whole heartedly agree on the SCR issue but what you have to realize is that few of the softbooted brethren ride a board that that is wide enough for them to rail because they have massive amounts of drag (often because they are not smart enough use the centering options on bindings) thus a small SCR does not bother most of them because they really don't tip the board. when they do a little they want it to turn allot so deep sidecut is in order. these boards are great boards but you still have to remember they're built for Joey from Jersey on the low end and for resort part rats on the high end. I have nothing from burton these days, other than some lifts I don't like but you have to realize that they are producing what's in demand and they are making some great stuff. their bindings are still the ****, light, tough(enough) and most importantly work on snow nearly flawlessly even with me on a softie setup, say the big tanker wide, I turn that in GS sized turns and that's about it any deeper and I'd toe or heel out to put this in perspective, the paperwork from rad air claims the 187 has a 9 meter SCR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 Bob, that's a very precise explanation of why Burton sucks. Even their top top top shelf boards are built for idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.T. Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 I got it, that's cause your wick-ked smaartI had a 181 back in the day. Decent board, but not great. I would take a Tanker over a Supermodel without thinking about it! Loved my 182 Tanker, but the 192 is even better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 tankers are **** too 9 meter scr on the 187 so it must be for Joey from Jersey. if you guys are gonna go ride resorts 3 to 15 days a year like the majority are posting about burton probably does make the best product for you even if you don't realize it. Lots of other good stuff out there too but unless it's a specialty probably not much better than burton. I have two tankers, I like them with their SCR under 10 meters. burton is for the masses but most people here don't have the terrain for a real freeride weapon. my tanker 187 will probably not come out this winter, the 177 is a good freerider so I will use that. I'd gladly ride a T6 is there was one as wide as I like or the custom X and I be I'd not really miss the tanker. I love the T6 it's just narrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 tankers are **** too9 meter scr on the 187 Yup. 9m on a 187 is insane. IN sane. RA's ride well *in spite of* their sidecut. So imagine the potential. The irony here is that too much sidecut depth is bad for skidded turns (Kent, jump in here any time). But don't worry, RA is in very good company.... practically everyone. Only Donek and Steepwater seem to have a g.d. clue. (priorsnowboards.com is down right now, so I don't know there) Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking Burton quality. I used to be the world's biggest Burton Boy. I just think their designs are all off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 their design is fine if you don't tip the board allot, most people don't that's what I'm getting at, even me on the hog of a 187 with a 9 meter SCR I have a hard time turning as tight as my metal 187 with the 14+ metre scr and I do tip the board more than your average softbooter to the point where I have a hard time riding anything narrower than 27 cm with US mens 11. we here are pretty much the special needs kids when it comes to snowboards. a custom x or supermodel in the biggest size I'm sure would be a damn fine board to take anything on the east coast, nevermind a t6 or the vapor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svr Posted August 22, 2007 Report Share Posted August 22, 2007 I did not like the supermodel (even the 181) as it was too soft...fun in soft powder, but not good for me in the backcountry. As for the tankers, last years and this years 187's have an 11.5m sidecut and the 200's and 12.45m and it makes them rail with plates or softies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 mine is this years but I was using an old spec sheet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 As for the tankers, last years and this years 187's have an 11.5m sidecut and the 200's and 12.45m and it makes them rail with plates or softies. See that's more like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dano Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 Q: What did one typical Burton Supermodel rider say to another? A: No way to tell, the annoying scraping skidding sounds made it impossible to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex1230 Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywhit Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 weak assed sh!t not making anthing bigger than 172. I liked the 181 (? maybe 183)supermodel I had in the late 90's that board was soooo soft in the nose, at speed it flapped like marilyn's skirt over a subway train. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevo Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 that board was soooo soft in the nose, at speed it flapped like marilyn's skirt over a subway train. willy's right on with the analogy. i had the 181 and i threw it in the dumpster after my bro filmed me on it...in slo-mo that piece of chit had a mind of its own! later bought a used coiler am for less money...it hauls my fat ass around like it's late for dinner- hardboots or softboots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Tokar Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 I picked up a 181 a few years ago with the intention of riding it in pow with softies ($200 on e-bay). I didn't use it until last year, and rode it with race plates and hard boots. It was great in pow, and when the stuff got cut up it was really forgiving in bumps, too. My favorite board is a Coiler 177AM that's pretty stiff, so it's much faster and handles crud a lot better, but the SM was FUN. I took it out later on some non-powder days, and it got up on edge and railed great. yes, it's got some noodle tendencies so you won't be going too fast on it, but the board brought me back to my youth, and got me looking for trees, bumps and everything off the groom (in hardboots). The board with race plates is significantly lighter that my alpine set ups, which made me want to play around a lot more, too. Would I pay for a new one? No. Would I prefer a Tanker? Probably. It's fun for some people to bash the big B, but you have to appreciate their history in getting us lift access. But then, I'm just a geezer that thought that the Backhill blew away the Snurfer... MT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willywhit Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 It's fun for some people to bash the big B, but you have to appreciate their history in getting us lift access. But then, I'm just a geezer that thought that the Backhill blew away the Snurfer... MT but the Big B has lost it's soul since the Backhill blew away the Snurfer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justk Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Are you sure thats not an insert problem? I have seen bindings rip from the board due to both, and the bindings usually involve blowing up (the boards pulled or stripped inserts, something I did to my Supermodel 6 years ago). I checked my bindings - tightened them down, moved the toe strap back and it seemed to work! So far, at least .... The board is 11 years old and I still haven't stripped an insert (fingers crossed). Still my favorite board. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 I like Burton stuff, although of course they are mortal enemies of competent snowboarders (those who can edge). However... Quality: well I think if you look up the definition of the word you may find something about "fitness for purpose". Your average rider, who buys these things, should be entirely happy with them. Try stone grinding a Burton board, then you'll know how flat they actually are. Does it matter? Not to the average rider, it seems. The colours are probably pretty good. The old Supermodel... I think the big boy length was 184; I have a 168 which had a relatively stiff (sic) nose and a soft tail: it was a powder board. So if ya found it crap at carving then you maybe were missing the point. In powder it was excellent... replaced only by the Fish/ Malolos IMHO. I'm not likely to bother riding the new boards, as they don't seem to be as specialized for powder as the Fish/ Malolo, and on piste I use a short slalom board (my dick's nothing like big enough to use one of those long boards). I guess I'd probably want to reserve judgment on the things until I'd actually ridden one, or heard enough from people who had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justk Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 I agree that it's not a carving board. It's my powder / crud / all mountain board. I have another Burton that I took in for a stone grind - it'd only been ridden a couple of times and couldn't even take a stone grind it's so flat. I settled for a wax and will probably sell it soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 4000 Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 I had the 168 Supermodel prototype the year before production and I believe the 168 was the standard . . . The topsheet was super durable as it was this rubbery matte finish. I think 2 years after that, they went with this glossy (read fragile) finish that chipped like crazy. Definitely one of the best carving soft boards of the time. It had the ability to just "Cadillac" its way over crud and inconsistencies on the snow and hold its line. Can't believe I sold it but no way in hell it would have still held its camber till today. What exactly are the differences between the old and new? Lots of adjectives used . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.