Do I want a Tanker?

[RJ-PS]

Bola, call me. You need to carry the new Tankers, unbelievable. New glass, new fibers, new tops, insane. 209.201.7926

SVR, very jealous. I wanted to be at Freeride days with the boys. What is your next excursion?

Bullwings, the 05/06 is slightly heavier, slightly stiffer. The 07/08 are more damp and track better. The older boards are exciting, but the new are more intuitive. Seem to know what you wanna do and just do it. Hard to explain, but the Tanker's have always had an ability to carve and to float.

In answer to your question, you can't go wrong with an older model Tanker. I still ride some of my older models.

I am currently working on importing the last run of 192s in existence. These are the vampire models that Sandy is talking about and the last of the 192s in existence. The last ones went fast, just a warning.

Heading out tomorrow on 3 feet of Freshies!!!!! WOOOHOOOO Tanker TIME!!!!!

[svr]

RJ, I will be coming to mt baker/crystal mtn/mhm and maybe stevens pass in february for the PNW mini seasion with Jon Dahl, Jim, Bryan (maybe), Thomas_M and any ther riders that will be available to ride the days we are going to be there (keep your eyes on this post for more info and dates: http://www.bomberonline.com/VBulletin/showthread.php?t=18140

Freeride days was amazing and hope you can get a chance to go next year. The first-tracks invitational should be good this year as well...hope to see you there. take care.

cheers,

sandy

[photodad2001]

Strictly based on the numbers, but wouldn't a Donek 180 Tucker Freeride be a better choice over a Tanker?

Length EE SCR NW WW TW

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=600 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=170>180 Tucker</TD><TD width=55>180</TD><TD width=55>153</TD><TD width=55>12.3</TD><TD width=65>28.50</TD><TD width=65>24.10</TD><TD width=65>28.20</TD><TD width=45>5.7</TD><TD width=35>630</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

[inkaholic]

Strictly based on the numbers, but wouldn't a Donek 180 Tucker Freeride be a better choice over a Tanker?

Length EE SCR NW WW TW

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=600 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=170>180 Tucker</TD><TD width=55>180</TD><TD width=55>153</TD><TD width=55>12.3</TD><TD width=65>28.50</TD><TD width=65>24.10</TD><TD width=65>28.20</TD><TD width=45>5.7</TD><TD width=35>630</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Hopefull DT will chime in here. He had a 180 Tucker and 182 Tanker. After riding both he got rid of both and picked up the 02-03 192 seen in the Tanker porn shot above. The 182 in the shot is the one he got rid of to another friend. He can elaborate on what he didn't like with the Tucker when he sees this.

Ink

[photodad2001]

I'll be interested to hear what he has to say. I was planning on saving up for one for next year. Might have to change my plans.

[D.T.]

182 Tanker vs. 180 Tucker

First of all, both are great boards! Somewhat similar specs yet very different ride.

Background: 5’9”, 210lbs, mondo 26 boots, ride aggressive in all terrain including steeps, big bumps, tight trees and chutes when the opportunity arises.

I bought the Tanker as my powder board. It was an ’02-’03; hence, a 24.6cm waist and 10m SCR. I rode it with Salomon Malamutes and Flows on Palmer risers. It floated me decently in deep powder. Sometimes I needed speed to get the nose up if it was a Sierra Cement type of day. The board carved great as well as doing very well off piste. The only issue I had was in super tight trees where the spacing was too narrow to kick the tail out to check speed. The board was snappy and would put me airborne between carves if I loaded the tail. It was fast edge to edge.

I bought the Tucker as a backcountry board; it replaced a 171cm Steepwater Plow. I rode it with Garmont AT boots and SnowPro Race bindings. It had a 24.10cm waist and 12.3m SCR. The board is light weight which was good for carrying on your back. You could really feel the larger SCR. The board felt at home riding fall-line, yet was soft enough to decamber and crank some tight turns. I was concerned about the short nose diving in soft and variable conditions.

Direct comparison:

• The Tucker had significantly longer effective edge (153cm vs. 141.5cm). In some situations, that made it more difficult to get the board to come around (not an issue for bigger riders, but could be for lighter riders).
  

• The Tucker had a shorter nose than the Tanker; I felt I had to keep more speed in the soft stuff in order to keep the nose on top.

• The Tucker felt more alpine-ish. The Tanker carves well, but has nothing on the Tucker. (yes the boots and bindings played a role, but I can drag knee and a$$ on my 192 Tanker in softies)

• The Tucker was more stable at speed.

• I would say that the Tanker was the stiffer of the two.

• I have small feet, so the waist of the Tanker was not an issue with angles @ 21deg front, 18deg rear.

• I rode the Tucker with plates, so the 24.1cm waist was not an issue with angles @ 45deg front, 40deg rear.

• Best way to describe the difference is the Tucker is more alpine-ish freeride board while the Tanker is more all-mountainy freeride board.

• Due to the relatively narrow waists, binding type and boot size must be a consideration on Tucker and could be an issue on the Tanker depending on year/waist width.

• Both are great boards! I think each person would have to demo each to determine which they liked better.

I bought the boards for two different purposes; both did the intended jobs really well. If I was to buy another backcountry board, I would buy a Donek and have Sean use the Tucker as the basis, then make a few changes (more nose, stiffer...). I sold the Tanker to buy a 192. I sold the Tucker because I was not being used. If I "need" it, it resides in the garage next door.

[photodad2001]

Thanks for all the info. Sounds like I'll be sticking with my original plan after all. I'm looking for a good carver. We don't get a lot of powder so the Tanker wouldn't be a better choice, at least for me. I do like your idea of adding stiffness. I'm a big guy fluxuating over and under 250.

[scotts.Scheinman]

You want a Dupraz(not taking anything away from tankers)

[D.T.]

I do like your idea of adding stiffness. I'm a big guy fluxuating over and under 250.

Sean does charge to modify the flex. IIRC, it's $100?!?

[Shred Gruumer]

Well most of the posts on this thread I don't think I have ever met you guys.. but I am really intrigued by this Tanker thing..and have been for a couple of years...Im thinking of pulling the trigger on a brand new o7/08 187 tanker..

I ride with plates..thats that.. I can't handle tha pain of soft boots put on my ankles ..so used to being able to use a hardboot interface..

Im not planning on riding it on ice but nice groom it will see and crud and mashed potato snow..slush.. and an occasional Big Mountain Montana dump..

They sound like fun to ride and cruise around on..then have a board if it dumps... just an additonal stick for certain situations.. but again mainly on soft groom so I don bury it..like you would with a narrow alpine board..

\

I Never ridden one.. I have a wide bx and like it with plates though..

You think I should pull the trigger on this..?? or is this going to be a noodle...

Right Said Shred...

[BlueB]

Shred, I assume you won't go super low angles with h/boots? Then do yourself a favor - get the 192, it's the narrowest and carviest of the Tanker line-up. 187 is wide and more for softies.

[mrjamie]

You think I should pull the trigger on this..?? or is this going to be a noodle...

I've been riding a 187 cut down to a 164 (check the videos thread) with a swallow-tail. I use Salomon SPX90 bindings and Burton Driver-X boots, so I'm on the stiffer side of softies.

My tanker handles carving no problem, and every day as my technique gets a little better I find new ways to push the board and enjoy riding.

If this is a really big purchase for you, I can shoot some video on hardboots so you can see with your own eyes -- or you can just take our words for it :p

[carvedog]

This is a very interesting comment from Paul Gruber. I am sure the Tanker aficionados know who he is.

"Paul Gruber

Balgach / Switzerland

(Longboardclassic organizer, Stuben/Austria www.longboardclassic.com)

Oh my god!

I was in Stuben yesterday with a very good friend. We both ride longboards since day one. I rode nothing else than a 2m *** since 7 years. This board became like a second skin to me… my shape, my style, old but fast.

But since yesterday, exactly 9.56 in the morning I have a new dream board! Hey man, your board totally rocks. We had icy slopes in the morning ending with 20 cm of slush snow in the afternoon. In all conditions it was a total bomb.

I decided to change the name of my hobby from snowboarding into SNOWSURFING! Because this is what this board is made for. Bottom turns, surf style, all possible. It is a little unstable when you go very fast…. But why go so fast when you can do real surfturn on every bank in the terrain.

Hey Serge, you have revolutionized the board shape.

Here is the score for the test yesterday: 9.9 out of 10!!!! Congratulations."

Need I say more. I can say that the stability at speed is rock steady should you decide that turning is overrated on uber steeps.

Bola

http://www.allboardssports.com

1-303-415-1600

Bola - I am not sure what you are saying here. What board is he riding? I am into surf style and think of surfing constantly on the mtn even tho I never bin in the ocean surfing that is. I am shopping hard and ready to pull trigger on a tanker 192 or 200 as soon as funds come together.

What does it mean?

My only concern is getting the long boards to come around quick in the tighter terrain and bumps. I love the trees but don't go super tight as there is no need here. I don't do zipper line too often or big fall line bumps, more into big gs bumps and crud busting style, not caring if I go around, turn on top of or do the explode-a-bump style. Weight at 250 does have some advantage sometimes.

[BlueB]

It sounds as Paul Gruber was testing the Dupraz...

I dont like Tanker 192 in steep big tight bumps, but it's managable. I can not tread it through the tight trees either. However, for all the rest you described it's a dream board. Wish I could have a 23 waisted version!

I've got feeling that with your skill and 250lbs you'll make that thing turn on a dime.

[Shred Gruumer]

Well after some discussions with RJ ... and some Traveling considerations.. I narrowed it down to either a new 182, or 187,.. 200 would just be too much of a hassle to travel..and would be even more limited use for where Im at..I want to ride it more than once a year.... But maybe you can talk me into it..

I emailed a few of you so I could talk to ya and get some good feed back so look in the mail.. or email me if you got something you can tell me...will chat..

You look at the specs and what not... and its a tuffy... I certainly would love to have it narrower waist but want to stay at 187... but the 182 has the narrow waist... Will I loose a lot of stability with the 182..or you think since I'll be in hard boots and better angles that it actullly will work better.. But I do want to be able to bomb through the bumps and slush and stuff.... So do I go with a 187 or possibly a 200...

Help...........help....... If Bruce would make me a Schtubby Tanker..Id do it!! uhhh ohhh...:rolleyes:

Right said Shred

[P06781]

Seriously the 200 rides as easy as the 187 or 192 !!! I mean its only 13cm difference and really not that much. They say the surface area of the 187w and 200 are similiar for the float! I have been riding my 200 alot lately (last 10 times) and have no problems in the trees or carving groomed. I say go for a newer lightweight 2k!

Jim

[Shred Gruumer]

Well about the biggest board I can carry is the Tanker 182... which would still make it the longest Ive got.. problem is portability.. I would have to buy now a board bag capable of carry such a 200 stick.. I don't ride powder..its the exception.. so I want to get some use on it on soft groomer here in. the midwest as well..

Im thinking that I won't like the width of the 187 just to wide.. I think ..My BX is around 24.5 or 25.. so going with the 182 seems practical.. not to mention crowd friendly.. But will it Hold.. I know the 200 will be way more stable..it has more edge.. but if im carving up with a BX board at 168.. won't the 182..be sufficient..and should be more torsional still due to it not bieng as wide? usually thats how it works.. less likely to fold the nose on groom.. And if I have powder then Im set.. well thats where Im heading.. Bigger than 182 is going to be a hassle.. not to mention a 200 out here will serve no purpose other than a wow factor... which would be cool.. but even getting it in a car will be a problem..

So...182?

Anyone riding one and carving it..? I was hoping someone who is a hardbooter by nature and knows my riding could help...

This I can't believe is a hard choice...especially with me...

I think some east coasters have some experience with the 182..please chime in..

Thanks again for reading..

Shred

[Bullwings]

There's one thing I'm curious about with the tankers: how's the nose on groomers? I'm pretty sure it's great for powder, but is it easy to stuff/fold on the groomers when you're carving?

[big mario]

on my tanker, I don't think its much of an issue.

mario

[Jon Dahl]

There's one thing I'm curious about with the tankers: how's the nose on groomers? I'm pretty sure it's great for powder, but is it easy to stuff/fold on the groomers when you're carving?

I have come close to overloading the nose on my 192 in softer slushy snow, but not really "folding" it. It will chatter some, but only when I have really been pushing the limits hard. At high speeds I am more comfortable on my Renntiger (173) just due to the bigger sidecut and its ability to bust through the crud. At medium speeds I love the Tanker more, and for the average day it would come out for the second half.

Shred, I think where you are at, the 182 is a better choice. My $.02 amero .....

[Shred Gruumer]

John.. thats where Im at... I need to sell something to get something..So my pride and joy My MADD BX 168 is up for sale and hopefully turn its self into the Tanker 182.. I can't stop looking at it on the RAD Air site.. and the waist is better than going wider..

How stiff are they? have you twisted and flexed a new one? The short side cut will not bother me at all.. Im not a fast rider..just cruise on groom..Nice controlled carves while drinking tea in my carves.. Im sure the 182 is hopefully capable of that..

Like I said if I can ride a Rome 158 with plates and carve it.. the Tanker gots to be able to do the same but with a ton more stability..

Keep the info coming..Im hoping I won't be dissapointed.. all roads say no way..:)

[Shred Gruumer]

I sold enough on Fleabay so I could get a Tanker.. a tit for tat... thing..

I got a 182 as the next would have been a 200 which would be very impractical to travel with and only use it basically once a year.. so the 182 got the nod !!

If that don't work.. my Coiler AMS 188 is coming..shhhhhhhh sckhitt did I say that out loud...? AMS= "All Mountain Schtubby" woo hoo....

Just kidding..... Maybe not?

Can't wait to see the Tank!!

Right Said Shred.. I'll give a good midwest review of the thing...

[D.T.]

the 182 got the nod !!

you'll be a happy man!

[Randy T.]

Anyone know what year this one is? And/or have any info about it.

I'm meeting with the seller today and am thinking about picking it up to try out. He said it's about 5 years old.

[Bullwings]

My 182 should be on the way.

I have another question (I know, they never end). How's the tune on these boards from the factory? Do I need to bevel and tune my edges before the first ride out? I thought I remember someone complaining about the factory tune (or lack of), but I'm not sure.