Madd 170 vs Swoard?

[Guest Hotmop]

I know this might be comparing apples and oranges, but I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to ride both the Swoard and the new Madd 170.

Before riding the Madd 170 at the ECES I was thinking of buying a Swoard. The Swiss concept is a new and maybe radical one. But the idea of maximizing leverage seems to make sense to me. And I have big feet.

After learning some things from Eric at SugerLoaf and applying them to the Madd, I finally got some positive feedback from a board.

Was anyone blown away by the Swoard? How many happy customers out there?

[nils]

Hotmop,

I have seen and tested the flex of a Madd 158 at fin's place, and was totally astounished by its stiffness, springyness. It is a very different board, and I wish I could have test ridden it because i'm intrigued about that board...

My big question about them is how can they be so grippy ( seems the main quality of them) and at the same time efficient on hard pack. We at Swoard have developped a different philosophy which is softer flex on the hard snow. Someone can explain how the grip (east coast hard ice) works on such a stiff flex..?

Then concerning the differences in shapes > they are very different because the madd is made to grip in freecarve and gates, where our board is more to grip effortlessly in freecarving ( and "extremecarving") not trying to gain seconds in edge change. From what I have seen with the madd, it is surely a more demanding board, physically asking more than the Swoard. Must be fun to ride in the morning when your legs are still like fresh!

Both are for different riding techniques, I am sure you can ride either with either technique thu..What would be interesting is having feedback from guys that tested both ( maybe someone did at the ECES?)

As for feedback on the Swoard, there was a topic here on the subject a few weeks ago :) same goes for the Madd (seems some people make pilgrimages and burn candles for it :)

Nils

[Jack M]

I got the impression that the Madd's were softer lengthwise, but stiff torsionally. They are much thinner than any other board I saw at the ECES demo tent.

I also felt that the boards were lively and playful, yet at the same time they did not chatter unless I did something wrong. Put all that together, and you have a board that will easily bend into an arc on hard snow, but that will also have great grip and response.

-Jack

[Guest Hotmop]

Curt, I'm sure your conclusions are not far off. Even though I'm not an aggressive rider, I want to be. And I do want a board that will keep up. I started carving in the early 90's but I just don't keep up the fitness that I think makes a good groove.

I'm also a big bloke (at 6'4" 220lbs) and soft boards kinda worry me. Almost every board gives way under the G-force of my frame pushing on it. But the Swoard does come in different stiffness.

My worn-out Madd 158 is my basis of comparison. I'm leaning toward the Madd 170 due to that performance familiarity, the lower cost, and the support around here (New England).

Still love to hear a word from someone that has used both sticks.

[kjl]

Originally posted by cmc

swoard= static rider

Madd = agressive ripper

The Swoards remind me of the older Pure carve maverics, at least they sort of look like that. I have not ridden a Swoard, spoke to some that did..Ill keep me my mouth shut....The Swoard is no comparison to the madd on East coast (Sugarloaf conditions.)

The good Swoard riders (the EC guys and some others) are anything but static.

Maybe

swoard = fluid rider

madd = powerful rider

?

I haven't really ridden Swoards on ice (I'm in Tahoe), and in any case I suck on ice anyways and would not be able to make a judgment anyways. I will say, though, that the Swoard is a very lively board. I like to get airborne on edge transitions and dive into each turn with lots of power, which I think most people would call aggressive riding, and the Swoard definitely lets me do that.

Jack, if the Madd is soft lengthwise and torsionally stiff, then that is exactly the same board philosophy that the Swoard guys are doing. They have a fairly soft board with lots of torsional rigidity, which to me translates into a really maneuverable board which still holds an edge when you want it to.

[underdog]

hey hotmop-i gotcha beat 6'0 235....im a downright slob. rode the 170 madd at eces....definately not as accomplished as these other guys(even though ive been doin it 10yrs) but that edge would not let go and i tried it slow, in a class, and fast, pointing down the fall line cuz i cant carve steeps(yet). but bombing down a hill and then really engaging an edge, it just HELD....and im pushing gravity about the same as you. havent rode a swoard but hope this helps, im puttin one in my quiver.

3\16\04 1:42pm-snowin like a banshee in buffalo ny. yay.

[Guest Hotmop]

Agreed. As I began this, I know full well it's almost an illogical question.

Nils' input on the Swoard was great. Curt's clarifying the difference is spot on.

I just wish Curt could send Nils a Madd and Nils could send Curt a Swoard.

Peace,

Matt

[BDZal]

As for longitudinal stiffness affecting ice performance... I'm not so sure that the traditional wisdom is accurate in all cases. My BS 180 is longitudinally the stiffest board I've ever flexed (besides some other BS's, and I'd bet some of those Donek and Coiler custom jobs are REALLY stiff), but it also holds better on hard snow than any board I've ridden. I only weigh 135 lbs so it should be way too stiff for me on "ice" as we know it here in Colorado (it does happen occasionally!). Is a softer longitudinal flex more for control than grip? Ease of use? I do have to ride it pretty aggressively, and it took me a little while to get the strength... Perhaps this board compensates control-wise with the tail taper - i.e. with that much taper (something like 1.5 cm) you can really feel the nose hook up. It responds well to double-pumping if I need to go tighter in the middle of a turn. I'll post a full review in a couple of weeks after I ride it with a flat base for the first time. I bought it used a year ago and never got around to getting a grind until I noticed it is pretty base-high. Whoever was riding this thing before me must've been railing the s*%t out of it.

[Guest Hotmop]

Something I did not take seriously until this past week at ECES. Make sure you get a quality grind!

I discovered that the past years of grinds were done far too aggressively on my Madd 158. I don't ride all that hard and didn't even ride it for the last 2 years (went to the darkside of freestyle). Now the base and edges are so thin that the embedded edge tabs are starting to pop base material off the board. Kinda looks like it is unzipping along the edge.

Considering the Madd has one of the hardest bases out there, I doubt I wore it off.

I blindly trusted the various shops that have done grinds for me and that now shows as a costly mistake. Make sure they know what they are doing.

[BDZal]

I'll second that about getting a quality grind. I got one done on my Donek 175 a couple of years back, very first grind on that board, and they took the base down to almost nothing. I should've inspected the edges before and after to see how much they took off, as I didn't notice until a year later when I got a core shot. Luckily Sean Martin directed me to a good shop (Edge Works), and they did a beautiful structure without taking even a noticeable amount off. Unfortunately the lifespan of the board is now a few years shorter. Stay away from Applewood Ski if you need tuning in the Denver area. The other board I took there at the same time came back so hairy it was like velcro. Base-high = convex ; edge-high = concave, correct? I might have that mixed up.

[Maciek]

So here comes my old question of getting quality tunning vs. local store tunning that might depend on your area (knowledge and experience of folks).

I see that I was blamed for lack of those skills and equipment, but then many people could be... including bad professionals in tuning shops.

That's a proof that you need a good store to tune your equipment right way so, it lasts years and rides properly.

[Maciek]

Originally posted by nils

Hotmop,

I have seen and tested the flex of a Madd 158 at fin's place, and was totally astounished by its stiffness, springyness. It is a very different board, and I wish I could have test ridden it because i'm intrigued about that board...

My big question about them is how can they be so grippy ( seems the main quality of them) and at the same time efficient on hard pack. We at Swoard have developped a different philosophy which is softer flex on the hard snow. Someone can explain how the grip (east coast hard ice) works on such a stiff flex..?

Then concerning the differences in shapes > they are very different because the madd is made to grip in freecarve and gates, where our board is more to grip effortlessly in freecarving ( and "extremecarving") not trying to gain seconds in edge change. From what I have seen with the madd, it is surely a more demanding board, physically asking more than the Swoard. Must be fun to ride in the morning when your legs are still like fresh!

Both are for different riding techniques, I am sure you can ride either with either technique thu..What would be interesting is having feedback from guys that tested both ( maybe someone did at the ECES?)

As for feedback on the Swoard, there was a topic here on the subject a few weeks ago :) same goes for the Madd (seems some people make pilgrimages and burn candles for it :)

Nils

Nils,

Madd is not for gaining seconds (even in edge change despite the fact it is so narrow). Perhaps it was designed for racing, but it is not the best board for racing. It is freecarving board. Today's race course requires rather wider and damper boards. They may not be like Swoards, but they will not be like Madds either.

I tried Madd 158 which seemed to be a good board for slalom. In fact it is not. It is way too narrow board for many heavier/a bit bigger racers (myself at 185lbs/84kg included) and way too stiff for smaller racers who could appreciate a narrow board.

Madd is a great carving board for quite a few conditions and I would bet that East Coast of the USA is one place that it rides the best.

For racing, it actually has too much edgehold as you need speed control by washing out the board occasionally which is almost impossible on Madd 158.

The width of the baord does not allow for knee action and at higher stance angles you need to balance with your hips which is way slower and probably would not work so well when gates and ruts on course demand quick direction adjustments.

Also I noticed some interesting trend in todays carving/racing world: many freecarve boards can be stiffer than race boards. That's from my experience, some talks with folks and recent study on Donek website that as first place in the world published precise stiffness index (not just fancy graph and personal impression by riders).

So I get more and more to a question: are freecarvers getting so advanced in their domain that they need more demanding boards than racers?

My impression is that many ECES folks prove that it is the case.

I do not need that kind of board as Madd gave me a shot in my lower legs and I could not position myself at right angles to preassure the edge (stance angles too high on that narrow board).

To be honest, I would get Madd for myself only if it was about 0.5-1 inch wider board. But then I would not ride it on every day basis as it is quite stiff and it requires particular style of carving mastered for example by CMC (Curt). This guy looks as if he was born on that board and riding it is just a natural thing like sleeping or eating.

[Jack M]

Originally posted by BDZal

As for longitudinal stiffness affecting ice performance... I'm not so sure that the traditional wisdom is accurate in all cases. My BS 180 is longitudinally the stiffest board I've ever flexed (besides some other BS's, and I'd bet some of those Donek and Coiler custom jobs are REALLY stiff), but it also holds better on hard snow than any board I've ridden. I only weigh 135 lbs so it should be way too stiff for me on "ice" as we know it here in Colorado (it does happen occasionally!). Is a softer longitudinal flex more for control than grip? Ease of use? I do have to ride it pretty aggressively, and it took me a little while to get the strength...

Trust me, ice does not happen in Colorado! :D Well, the last time I was there I heard people complaining about "ice" and I was having the time of my life.

I think ice performance depends on many things. Freecarving on ice, you want to get your turn done as soon as possible so as to spend little time in the fall line and to control speed. A softer board will be more willing to do this. But many soft boards also lack torsional stiffness. Without it, the board just twists out of the carve. The Madd makes up for this with the CF x-wing topsheet. That topsheet also improves vibration damping, another enemy of edge hold, by the fact that it has a different resonance than the rest of the board.

I also rode a Prior 181/13m board at the ECES that was also great on ice due I think in part to the tighter sidecut than I'm used to on my 186 (15m). I don't know if there's any rocket science going on inside that board, but it doesn't have a cf topsheet, but it did great. That board struck me as a great balance between long boards and short boards.

-Jack

[mirror70]

Jack,

I actually thought the Prior WCRs were the best boards in the tent. I rode the 163, 171, and 181 and loved them. Edge hold was incredible and the boards were all extremely stable in the turns, even when going through the afternoon chop.

What I found with the Donek FC171 (or maybe it was a 173?) was that [flame suit on] it rode just like my Factory Prime did when it was brand new. It wasn't as damped as the same-size Prior and turn-in wasn't as quick.

What I found with the Madd 170 was [super-ultra flame suit on] that it rode just like the FC171, but with better turn-in and slightly less chatter. The Prior, imo, still trounced it it every regard.

I think what people love so much about the Madd 158 is that it rides like the short board that it is. In the past two years, the "cool thing" to do on this message board was to go with a longer and longer board to get more edge hold at higher speeds. In the process, I think people forgot how much fun it is to ride a short turny board like the Madd 158. IMO, that board felt just like my 153cm Speedster SL but with less pop (which, again imo, is part of the fun of the shorter boards).

Am I the only one who thought these things?

With regard to the CF x-wing improving torsional rigidity, might I suggest that they try using either a satin weave or UD instead of a plain weave? UD would allow them to improve torsional rigidity with zero effect on the longitudinal flex. Another suggestion would be to either rotate the fabric or use [for instance] a 60º/0º weave so that the fibers run from the toe of one boot to the heel of the other. That would, in theory, move the weft closer to being in pure compression. Among other things, what would allow the matrix to act as a damper in a single plane rather than two. I know, I know - I should shut up now. :)

[mirror70]

While you were busy in the keilbasa-fest, I was secretly riding all of the boards in the demo tent as well as any board I could find on the racks by the lodge. I'm swift like a ninja so nobody noticed.

Ninjas are totally awesome and insane and sweet. Isn't that qualification enough? ;)

More seriously, yes, I am qualified to talk about designing for and fabrication of composites. Well, ACG seems to think so anyway.

[Guest apocalypsem3]

is madd snowboards still in production? if yes, where can i find some information on them?

[mirror70]

Check the date on the pics. 'twas my first week riding plates and only my second season snowboarding.

I've come a long way since then.

[D-Sub]

either you two know each other or someone just spent way too much time trying to tear someone else down.

[NateW]

Ninjas have real ultimate power.

[Guest Jagger]

Ninjas kick ass!:D

[Maciek]

Originally posted by NateW

Ninjas have real ultimate power.

They are whimps. They can't fight with pitch fork, tea spoon and pliers.

I can :)

I can also fight using cereal or powder sugar. You can do that too. Just learn to say loudly: "fast" with mouth full of it.

[Guest Pepe Le Pew]

I had the opportunity to ride both at SES.

They are very different. I am not going to compare them but I can give my *personal* impressions:

Swoard 175: Nils recommended that I use the Hard flex model given my weight (210 pounds, 6'1"). I found the board to be too wide, forcing me to change my angles considerably (given my 27 boot size, from 60+ to less than 50 degrees), and making edge transitions on flat terrain feel weird.

It bevahed well on steeper slopes though and you don't have to worry about booting out (although it very rarely happens to me on skinnier boards anyway). I had experimented with extreme carving the previous day on a Donek 186 GS. I didn't really feel that the Swoard helped me with this technique.

Madd 170: I was concerned about the size at first but tried it anyway. It rides longer than it is. The last day at Copper we had pretty hard snow. My not so well-tuned F2 RS 182 couldn't handle it. I switched to the Coiler Pure Race 186 (probably my next purchase) then to the Madd 170. I didn't really notice that I lost 16cm of edge (although I was probably not going as fast since the sidecut is quite smaller on the Madd). It is very grippy, up to a point where it can be treacherous (I don't know how, but even with the board almost flat, skidding to get to a complete stop on hard stuff, the grip is such that I had to be careful not to catch the wrong edge). while on edge, I felt immediately comfortable, and found the board very predictable. It had the kind of sidecut I was looking for this year (to replace beat up Rossi Race 171) so I bought one of the demos!

Anyway, whatever your choice, I am sure you won't be disappointed...

Eric

[moxie]

For those of us who could not attend SES or ECEC, and contact info for Madd? w/s? or phone #?

Thanks

[John Gilmour]

Originally posted by Maciek

Nils,

Madd is not for gaining seconds (even in edge change despite the fact it is so narrow). Perhaps it was designed for racing, but it is not the best board for racing. It is freecarving board. Today's race course requires rather wider and damper boards. They may not be like Swoards, but they will not be like Madds either.

(reply- The Madd 158 is a race ready slalom board. Anton Pogue was formerly kicked off the US team and got back on the team by winning World Cups Slalom events on the 158- Adam Hoestetter (Sims Fila), Jeremy Jones (Rossignol) also used the 158 in World Cup Slalom events as well as the US Open. The 170 however should be characterized as either a "Consumer GS/freecarve or a Hardboot boardercross deck)

I tried Madd 158 which seemed to be a good board for slalom. In fact it is not. It is way too narrow board for many heavier/a bit bigger racers (myself at 185lbs/84kg included) and way too stiff for smaller racers who could appreciate a narrow board.

(reply- this would appear to be contradictory with both Adam Hoestetters weight (light about 155lbs) and Anton Pogue's size and weight (about 185))

Madd is a great carving board for quite a few conditions and I would bet that East Coast of the USA is one place that it rides the best.

(reply-narrow groomed trails with a few steep sections are where the versatility of this deck shines., I would prefer to ride the 170 out West (longer turns) and in Europe (mixed conditions)

For racing, it actually has too much edgehold as you need speed control by washing out the board occasionally which is almost impossible on Madd 158.

(reply- World Cup racers detuned the board to accommodate their preferences and snow conditions...it is far easier on race day to remove extra grip than create it)

The width of the baord does not allow for knee action and at higher stance angles you need to balance with your hips which is way slower and probably would not work so well when gates and ruts on course demand quick direction adjustments.

(reply- Again- Anton Pogues race results would appear to disagree with the above statement- my riding style would also likely differ with your assesment)

Also I noticed some interesting trend in todays carving/racing world: many freecarve boards can be stiffer than race boards. That's from my experience, some talks with folks and recent study on Donek website that as first place in the world published precise stiffness index (not just fancy graph and personal impression by riders).

So I get more and more to a question: are freecarvers getting so advanced in their domain that they need more demanding boards than racers?

(reply- freecarvers are most interested in holding an edge- racers will trade absolute edge hold for skid in order to shave critical hundreths off a course...the needs are not identical)

My impression is that many ECES folks prove that it is the case.

I do not need that kind of board as Madd gave me a shot in my lower legs and I could not position myself at right angles to preassure the edge (stance angles too high on that narrow board).

(reply- the type of conditions (loose granular) and terrain Maciek is accustomed to at his home mountain in New Jersey might lead to develop a novel style that will not work as effectively in steeper terrain. Also with such short vertical drop New Jersey's resorts likely do not promote good conditioning of his legs- I do not recall seeing his style of riding- but likely CMC's style of riding will translate to most hardpack terrain regardless of snowcondition or pitch or length of the hill - this low slung compressed over the edge type of riding is what we have developed these boards for- the thrill factor on Madd boards is very high. Yes.....at first....it can be a super quadricep burner, but like anything else you adjust. Your body condition improves and adapts. My legs just buzz like crazy at the end of the day and that puts a huge smile on my face the whole ride home...ain't life grand?)

To be honest, I would get Madd for myself only if it was about 0.5-1 inch wider board. But then I would not ride it on every day basis as it is quite stiff and it requires particular style of carving mastered for example by CMC (Curt). This guy looks as if he was born on that board and riding it is just a natural thing like sleeping or eating.

(I would not reccommend a Madd board for a rider like Maciek (based solely on his body angulation from the Avatar photo and the lack of others referencing his riding skills, I think a forgiving wider softer freecarve board in the 165cm length would be appropriate for the terrain and snow conditions likely anything over 170cm would be too much board for a New Jersey mountain snow, terrain and his current riding technique)

Really Smart riders ride what suits the terrain as well as their abilities, personal goals and style.

No so smart riders hop on a unfamiliar carving devices, three days later place high in the world championships and then foolishly celebrate by maching into a set of trees crippling themselves for the rest of the season.

[John Gilmour]

mirror,

Your comments are welcome, I like to hear what people have to say about our boards. Likely the FC171 is a better board for you and they type of riding you enjoy. I have yet to flex the reissue 170's and so I can't comment on how identical they are to the older ones. Ride the board that gives you the most fun. Some "competition boards" are not "fun" to ride at all. Our goal at Madd is to make competition level boards that still have a high fun factor and work over a wide range of either snow conditions....or turn radii.

I tuned a 170 for Anton Pogue for a Banked slalom at a US Open. He had never ridden the board before and took a single 500 foot vertical drop run to accustom himself to it. He went on to podium at the event.

As for the new glass orientation suggestions (I thank you for taking the time to suggest these- and your thoughts are very well organized) we tried several different types of glass and weaves and this is what worked out the best for us- though as newer materials emerge we hope to incorparate any new materials which give a noticeable improvement. Keep those ideas coming. much apppreciated. ;)

also thank you to the moderator who reformatted my other post to be more legible :)

to buy Madd boards call 617-504-3323