Questions, questions, questions...

[Boyaryn]

Hi All, I've been carving since about '93 and purchased a Burton Alp 6.9, Burton bindings and Oxygen Kryptonite boots back in '96. I had a bit of a hiatus for a few years but I'm back into it as of last year. Recently, I realized that my equipment is 12 years old and I know that new technology will elevate my game.

I did a bit of research and it opened-up a new world for me. The usual suspects, Bomber, Catek, Donek, F2, Deeluxe, etc., etc. - has technology ever changed. After some reading I changed my stance from 60 and 45 to 54 and 51 (3 deg increments on Burton bindings) and happened to run into an alpine instructor on the hill. With a few tips I see a huge horizon of fun ahead of me - and with no aching ankles, etc.

But here's where you come in. I need some help with deciding which way to go. I'm torn between buying a Donek Freecarve (19.5 waist) and Donek Blade (22.5 or 23.5 waist depending on length). My burton is 21.5 waist which falls right between the two. I'm love to carve and I love big turns more that bombing downhill at breakneck speeds (you won't find me in a GS course) and I'm in mid-40's and in good shape (in case that influences your opinion). Quick turns are great but not on a steep slope. Any suggestions?

I also need some opinions on which boot to get, the Deeluxe, Head or something else. I haven't decided whether to go with Catek or TD2. Comments?

Lastly, does anyone know where I can try some of this equipment or a least fit a boot or see a board in Southern California. I may be in Denver in a month or so maybe there is something there.

Thanks to all!!

[cliffh]

FC all the way. I'm a fan of the FC1's personally (18 cm). Either way - they are great boards - classics really, and very very durable. The Blade was designed for some euro types that do that euro carve thing...that's not the way we roll onthis side of the pond

[tex1230]

The blade is a EC-specific tool. I bought a similar board (Coiler EX) and hated the width and ride. Went back to skinny and that's where I'm staying.

It really comes down to what you're comfortable with. There are a ton of boards in between those widths as well, even in Donek's stable, and if you don't like one, the classifieds here are very active and you can swap for something else pretty easily.

Boots - in order of width - DeeLuxe, Head, UPZ

if you have a wide foot, get Head or Upz.

use the advice in the tech articles to get the right size, and get the boots fitted by a professional if you can.

If you're in Denver and can make the drive to Silverthorne, Bomber is there.

[Sinecure]

If you want to come up to Tahoe, there's a crew who could probably let you try some stuff. And there is a shop that stocks the Head boots.

For boots, search for threads on the subject. My synopsis: Wide feet = Head or UPZ. Normal feet: Deeluxe.

I'll be at Mammoth May 9-11 and you could try any of my stuff you want. Let me know.

[queequeg]

I have the FCII with the 19.5 waist. I was a bit worried that the waist would be too wide for my purposes and feet (MP 26) as I had been riding 18cm boards in the past, but I like it. It seems to float a bit better in pow than my past boards (though I haven't done much pow riding this year). I really like the FCII ... it has great edge hold, is will support a lot of speed when you need it to, and has a very lively feel. Cuts through cruddy snow like buttah.

I will second the durability comment about the Doneks ... Iv'e had my deck whacked by a couple of spores this year with little to no damage.

You will find that the FCII is faster edge to edge than your alp, and much more lively and bouncy between turns. It's a really fun board. Otherwise I echo TEX's comments that the blade is an EC specific board so unless that's the direction you are headed, I would go with something else. If you like higher angles, or have big feet, I'd go with the FCII, otherwise, you may want something wider.

I have wide feet and ride Head Boots. I like'em. I hear the UPZ's are wide too with a narrower ankle channel for better heel holdown ... I really want to try the UPZ's actually but I haven't had a chance to.

[bobdea]

I have not been on a blade but I have been on a bunch of doneks and the only ones that I think are that spectacular are the race shapes IMO

They felt like more stable platforms generally, allowing me to do my thing with more confidence than the FC series.

[James Ong]

The Blade was designed for some euro types that do that euro carve thing...that's not the way we roll onthis side of the pond

What's this WE sh*t?

Get what you want, a wide board gives you relaxed angles and carving power is not compromised at all.

[Jack M]

How big are your feet?? Unless they are like US12 or bigger, the FC's 19.5cm waist will be fine.

If this is going to be your only snowboard, the wider board will do better in powder/off-piste/crud. So if this is the case and all-terrain ability is a priority, the Blade will probably be better.

But if you can relegate the Alp to all-terrain/powder/spring duty, and you want a more focused carving tool, get the FC. Again, 19.5cm is VERY middle of the road, and quite versatile.

Good luck, and welcome!

[Boyaryn]

Great input everyone! I have 28.5 so I'm told I need 28's according to Bomber. I suspect the Heads will work better - I have wide feet.

One more question regarding the FC. If I decide to try a EC turn will it hold the carve or will I lose it? Not necessary thinking about laying down an armpit (although that would be great) but at least both forearms.

[Boyaryn]

If I was to go with the Donek FCII, what length should I get 171, 175, longer? My Burton Alp is 169. I'm 6.0' and 190 lbs. I suspect the 171 would be snappier - would it still be stable at higher speeds?

[cliffh]

What's this WE sh*t?

Get what you want, a wide board gives you relaxed angles and carving power is not compromised at all.

it's called a joke, tongue in cheek,

[Sinecure]

If I was to go with the Donek FCII, what length should I get 171, 175, longer? My Burton Alp is 169. I'm 6.0' and 190 lbs. I suspect the 171 would be snappier - would it still be stable at higher speeds?

I've gone pretty darn fast on my FC1 171. Above 60-65mph, it starts to get squirrelly, but mostly because it gets air under it. For actual carving at high speed, its great. I now mostly ride boards in the 180 range - I'm the same size as you, only a little shorter. Either the 171 or 175 would be great. Go shorter if you want to carve through really tight chutes and longer if you want to cruise on open groomers.

[tex1230]

I rode the 171 and the 179 - I found the 171 very hooky - really cranked into a turn. I haven't ridden the 175 but to me the longer the better with the FC's

[Mike T]

If you go for the Donek FC, I heartily recommend the 175. I've ridden most of the sizes and that one, in my opinion, gives the best tradeoff of stability at speed versus ease of use at lower speeds. The longer ones just seem so... hooky to me.

Several others have mentioned how durable the Doneks are, I have to second that - they have lasted very well for me, the only other deck on the same level for me durability-wise has been the Coilers with standard construction.

Now if you want to lean more towards performance than durability, look into titanal boards. I can't say enough good things about the titanal Coilers and I quite enjoy my titanal Prior as well. The edge grip is insane. I actually find myself longing for icy days!

[Fastskiguy]

Well by some amazing twist of fate I've got a 171 FCII (19.5cm waist), a 175 Behle GS (23 cm waist), and a 180 Blade Medium (23.5cm waist) so I think I can comment on this with some authority. I lack any comparison to other boards-I haven't ridden anything else so take that into consideration. I'm 195 pounds, have a size 30 boot, and ride in Wisconsin, 300-500 foot vertical hills with 2-3 trips out west each year, should get in a little more than 500,000 feet for the season.

The FCII is the easiest for me to ride and requires the least speed to get a carved turn going. I can crank the tightest turn on it too, especially at lower speeds. The GS board will carve a tight turn too if I'm going a little faster-it seems like it takes more speed to get it to bend. The Blade will turn tightly too but it's got to be tipped way up on it's edge. Once it's up there it bends really nicely. The GS board feels the most damp but the Blade feels really damp too. The FC is more lively. The wider boards (23 &23.5) are easier to balance on than the narrow one (19.5cm) when going slowly or getting on and off the lift but they don't feel more or less stable when going down the hill. I don't have a problem running different angles on the different boards, either way seems fine, but I guess this is a big deal to some people. I can't tell a difference in edge hold between the three of them! The Blade feels different when carving...like there's more (gripage) between your feet or something. I don't have any experience going off the groom with any of them. I think the FC is a little more versatile but even though they are different, I'm darn happy to ride any one. I think for really laying it over the Blade gives a more stable platform between your feet but you can get way over on the other boards too. I've got a case of "EC Fever" now so getting laid out is a high priority in my life LOL!

I'm interested to hear other comments too, I think they are both good choices...maybe the 170 Blade would be the best? a little tighter radius than the 180 but still pretty wide and soft so it'll bend really nicely into the arc. Good luck :)

[queequeg]

If you go for the Donek FC, I heartily recommend the 175. I've ridden most of the sizes and that one, in my opinion, gives the best tradeoff of stability at speed versus ease of use at lower speeds. The longer ones just seem so... hooky to me.

I've got the 175 and love it. It does seem to balance the tradeoffs between long/short scr boards very nicely. I do want to fill out the quiver with a longer-scr 185 and a short, bouncy 158 but this is definitely a pretty solid main-squeeze board.

[Boyaryn]

Thx MikeT, you (and all) have been a great help. It looks like I'm leaning toward the Donek FC 175.

What about bindings? Catek or TD2?

[kumimajava]

being new here, I faced the same question, so I did a bit of "research" on it - and the most popular answers seem to be:

1) the "search" feature is your friend - lots of info on this already on this forum. the Carver's Almanack also discusses this.

2) both bindings are good, but slightly different. If stepless adjustability is essential (e.g. due to anatomical features of your legs/knees/etc), go Catek; if you care more about the "suspension", then TD2. (more details - use "search").

3) you can't really "go wrong" with either Cateks or Bombers.

hope this helps :)

[Boyaryn]

FASTSKIGUY, I seemed to have missed your posting because earlier I was on my PDA (small screen). Thanks for your input. Now I'm screwed... FCII yes but 171 or 175?? Can 4 cm make that big a difference? I do like my old, very old, Burton Alp 169 but in comparison with todays gear, it's a 2x4. Maybe it will end-up in a coin toss.

After seeing some videos on YouTube my initial response was to jump allover the EC boards, especialy the Donek Blade 180 medium (which Sean suggested), which you have. Maybe I'll start with the FC and next year it's the Blade. It seems that most of the carvers have a few quivers - why not me too?

[nekdut]

Between the Donek 171 and 175, the 4 cm makes a fair difference because the sidecut radius of 171 is 11.2 and the 175 is 11.75m. The extra edge length isn't the real difference, but it is the slightly looser 11.75m which is getting into the comfortable freecarve range (at least for me, which starts around 11.5 and goes up to 14).

Things get extra interesting (and a bit hooky) at the 179cm FC, as it has the same 11.2m radius as the 171. Sean introduced the 175 a few years after stocking the 171 and 179 at the same sidecut radius, to fill the gap a bit and open up the turns as well.

[Fastskiguy]

FASTSKIGUY, I seemed to have missed your posting because earlier I was on my PDA (small screen). Thanks for your input. Now I'm screwed... FCII yes but 171 or 175?? Can 4 cm make that big a difference? I do like my old, very old, Burton Alp 169 but in comparison with todays gear, it's a 2x4. Maybe it will end-up in a coin toss.

After seeing some videos on YouTube my initial response was to jump allover the EC boards, especialy the Donek Blade 180 medium (which Sean suggested), which you have. Maybe I'll start with the FC and next year it's the Blade. It seems that most of the carvers have a few quivers - why not me too?

Heh, I had the same dilemma last year! FC vs Blade and then which length. I think you get a little more versatility going slowly with the FC than with the Blade, tighter turning too, but not as good for extreme carving.

[Jack M]

Great input everyone! I have 28.5 so I'm told I need 28's according to Bomber.

FCII then, no question.

[Boyaryn]

What about the Olympic Upgrade? Anyone have any experience with this?

[queequeg]

What about the Olympic Upgrade? Anyone have any experience with this?

I haven't tried without, but mine is an Olympic and the board is indeed damp, smooth and grippy compared with other boards I've owned ... that said, my other boards are much older so who knows. Still plenty of bounce and energy despite the dampness.

[xy9ine]

being new here, I faced the same question, so I did a bit of "research" on it - and the most popular answers seem to be:

1) the "search" feature is your friend - lots of info on this already on this forum. the Carver's Almanack also discusses this.

2) both bindings are good, but slightly different. If stepless adjustability is essential (e.g. due to anatomical features of your legs/knees/etc), go Catek; if you care more about the "suspension", then TD2. (more details - use "search").

3) you can't really "go wrong" with either Cateks or Bombers.

hope this helps :)

how about the f2's in comparison? not as trick looking (have ti bales though), but cheaper, and they look solid & simple to set up.

(another born-again alpine newb looking to upgrade my decade+ old hardware) .