thoughts on board width

[bobdea]

Chris Klug said this "if its hard to ride pow on it its too narrow"

I aggree most anything under 19.5 is really a pain for me though I can still ride them it really makes the board a perfect conditions only setup

I have a narrow ass madd coming maybe I will get more more comfy riding at 70 deg

my toesides suck when my angles go past 65 or so too

any ideas on how to fix this?

any thoughts from the other side(those that like em skinny)?

[Mike T]

18 cm waists to be exact. But I have small dogs, my Raichles are 25 MP. I can easily do 60/55 on an 18 cm waist, which is my favorite stance. I definitely like to go as narrow as I can without overhang and without steepening my angles on hardpack. On spring snow I like a little extra width, it really seems to help when the slush depth varies.

[NateW]

Board width is a function of stance angles. So the true question is, what should your stance angles be?

I don't know.

I've been riding 55/50 for a couple seasons (21cm waist) and I have a board en route with a 17cm waist. I'm talking with another builder about a board with a 19cm waist. Dunno what the angles will be on those boards, but I'll have fun trying them and figuring out what I like.

[Donek]

I think board width is a function of what you intend to do with the board as well as your boot size and stance angles.

If you look at all the pro racers doing world cups, they try to keep their angles down to 45 to 55 degrees. This is largely due to the type of courses they are racing in. Balance is an issue more than speed from edge to edge.

When you talk to most recreational riders they are interested in agility and narrower boards. I think it is largely a preference issue, but the recreational riders in the US tend to lean towards narrow boards. I've ridden everything from an 18cm waist to a 24 cm waist with plates. It all seems to work fine once you adjust to the angles. I don't notice a huge difference in agility, but many others find wider boards cumbersome.

As long as you're having fun, ride it.

[LeeW]

well, im a bit spoiled -- got skiis, freestyle board (softboot settings) and hardboot boards. So I got plenty of options to pick, but it'd be a royal pain in the ass when it comes to travellin'. Anyhow, I find it more fun to carve on my old burton PJ7 as oppose to my Rossi. I wonder how itd go when I get my Madd158 and compare it to Rossi. I think Ill just leave hardboot to days of all day long session of carving whilst freestyle board/skiing for deep powder day. Doesn't hurt to be all round mountain rider/skiier

[Jack M]

I think you'll probably get used to it. Whenever my toesides get sloppy I try to concentrate on really dropping that hip into the turn and not bending at the waist too much. The hip-drop is actually easier with steeper angles. Check out this thread for a discussion on the "perfect" toeside (which happens to be photographed on a Madd!).

[Derf]

It depends on the board use. I ride an 18.5 cm board with 60/60 angles and size 27 boots. At first I found it a little narrow. I tried shallower angles on that board and I find it's harder to carve , so 60/60 are comfortable angles for carving. But this is more agressive carving I'm talking about (according to my standards, which may be lower than others on this board).

For freecarving/all mountain carving, I find 18.5 quite narrow and I'm more tired at the end of the day. A wider board with shallower angles would be good for freecarving, like the ~21.5 cm of the AM/Axis/4WD. I have yet to try one of those board (or even a board this width).

Derf

[Enzo]

About width....

I'm riding an 18cm GS & SL board for groomers and a 24.5cm 172 Burton Supermodel w/plates for pow. The Supermodel floats great in the deep stuff but the extra width is rather cumbersome when I pop back on groomers.

To add to the previous post...

Can anyone comment on how well the "hybrid" (~21.5cm width) all mountain boards (from Coiler, Prior, Donek) perform in both the pow and groomers? Are these boards truly the best of both worlds or is it a compromise situation?

[bobdea]

great decks easy to ride works everywhere turns like a SL deck on hardpack

in the crud its good too

I prefer somthing a little more racey but thats a preference thing

if you want to demo one send Sean a email in the fall he will mail you one ride it then mail it back

its not a compromise its just that its a different idea same as a ford F 150 is different idea than a Subaru STI

[Jon Dahl]

I rode three of the Donek Axis at SES last year, and if I were just starting with hardboots I would of been absolutely sold on 'em. My problem now is to decide which length to buy this season! I think the 177 gets the nod, maybe I need the 169 also! Anyway, they just feel relaxed for those days when you're soul riding but carve hard too. I used 45/40 for angles as compared to 65/60 on my Renntiger. I would take that as my anywhere board, even in a foot of pow. I think Sean could always spec you a 21.5 waisted board with a square tail and give you whatever flex you wanted!

[NateW]

I have a Coiler with a 21cm waist, it's lots of fun on groomers. I haven't had it in real POWDER powder but it handles fine in fresh snow.

The angles feel just a tad high though - I feel just a little contorted when making heelside turns, so I'm going narrower on my next board. I've been inching (2cm-ing) down from freeride boards, my last two boards were 23cm and 25cm, and so far I have not found any disadvantage at all to the narrower boards.

FWIW, the extremecarving.com guys use boards in the 21cm range as well, and they really seem to enjoy groomers. :) They seem to think that it's the narrower boards that are less versatile. Maybe it's all personal preference?

[Gecko]

Originally posted by Jon Dahl

I rode three of the Donek Axis at SES last year, and if I were just starting with hardboots I would of been absolutely sold on 'em. My problem now is to decide which length to buy this season! I think the 177 gets the nod, maybe I need the 169 also! Anyway, they just feel relaxed for those days when you're soul riding but carve hard too. I used 45/40 for angles as compared to 65/60 on my Renntiger. I would take that as my anywhere board, even in a foot of pow. I think Sean could always spec you a 21.5 waisted board with a square tail and give you whatever flex you wanted!

Great another wrench thrown in the mix...I've been trying to decide between 2-3 boards for a while now and I had narrowed it down to the 179 Donek FCII, a 180Coiler RC or now to a 182 Axis...they all seem to have roughly the same sidecut and effective edge which is what I had decided on though the Axis is likely softer and it may not be as good on east coast boiler plate (where I'll hopefully be moving to)as the other two but likely better in the crud...ugh decisions

[skategoat]

We, who live in Ontario consider ourselves fortunate that we have no powder to worry about, thus no quandaries about what type of board to buy. I would say 90% of my riding is no groomers and hard pack. Our idea of powder is spring corn snow.

[Enzo]

Originally posted by Gecko

Great another wrench thrown in the mix...I've been trying to decide between 2-3 boards for a while now and I had narrowed it down to the 179 Donek FCII, a 180Coiler RC or now to a 182 Axis...they all seem to have roughly the same sidecut and effective edge which is what I had decided on though the Axis is likely softer and it may not be as good on east coast boiler plate (where I'll hopefully be moving to)as the other two but likely better in the crud...ugh decisions

That's sort of the same dilemma I'm having. I really want to trim down my quiver to 2 boards....a screamer for the groomers and then an all-purpose board that will perform well on east coast groomers and also excel in powder, crud, and occassional backcountry/tree conditions. I take an annual trip to JH every winter and I'm sick of lugging several boards with me.

I have a custom 173cm (18cm width) GS Coiler going into production soon. However, I'm very tempted to secure another production slot for a 169 All-Mountain (21.5cm width).

Who's going to twist my arm?:D

[ARCrider]

hey enzo

I've got three coilers now. two gs boards 184 and 188.

my newest is the am172. got it last year just in time for eces and I love it.

by the way: I was comfy with my stance and angles on the skinnier gs boards and swapped same to the AM even though it has 21.5 waist. It was working so well for me I just kept it at 70/65 or so. I did have some people say I should back off on the angles but I was more than happy with the way it rode.

My experience comes from slalom water skiing not soft boot snowboarding so that might explain why I prefer steeper angles.

[Jon Dahl]

the fact that I get flamed over on the couloir forum for splitting a 23.5 waisted F2 flame, as being too "skinny"! Wait 'till they see pics of it with my binding angles! Gecko, get the Axis and YOU make the other choice, 'cause I'll not start any more controversies. Lucky guys, I'm trying to get my quiver up to 3 good boards.

[Jon Dahl]

need to be thought, such as I may still run 30/20 on a wide pow stick so I can achieve all the above stated goals, and have my toes inside the board edges!?

[Mike T]

Bob, everything you write makes sense to me as I read it. But I do have one empirical observation that may contradict some of it.

It has to do with balance. And I don't have any math or physics to back this up (despite having graduated from MIT with a Bachelors in math - I've long forgotten all the good stuff due to the fact that being a software engineer pays better on the west coast :rolleyes: ), and I'm not any kind of expert on body balance, so I might be talking out my rear end.

So here goes...

... on a wider board, I feel more "balanced" if I use shallaower angles.

Example... on a skinny board like a Donek FC I, I use a stance like 60/55 which puts my boots right over the edges. When I get on my Axis, I feel a little "wobbly" if I don't back off a little. Not much - 55/50 makes a difference, 50/45 makes more of a difference. I sually go with 55/50 because my body likes it better (to your point!), and it does address the feeling of lost balance enough.

I probably wouldn't have been able to put that into words at all until I started riding a Tierney board this summer. The unbalanced feeling is really bad whenI try to ride that thing in an alpine stance - and I said "hey, this is a gross exaggeration of that funny feeling I get on my Axis at 60/55".

Am I making any sense at all

[Jon Dahl]

limiting your motion range is exactly what I meant, and for the reasons you mentioned. Going too far one way or the other results in just that, and creates more work for less percieved board control. I think I put that right.

[CarvCanada]

I love angles of 45-50 degrees. They're so comfortable. You can slide the board very easily, and at any time during your carves you can release some inclination and slide your board out comfortably. I don't feel any less that I'm locked into the carve and I feel that I have many more options for getting more angulation from my inclination on heelside and toeside.

I found with >60 angles that it's really hard to do toeside slides and heelside slides don't come as naturally. Also, when carving really hard and aggressively, and let's say you come up to a drop-off, it doesn't come easily to get out of the low carve and slow down.

[Gecko]

Originally posted by Jon Dahl

the fact that I get flamed over on the couloir forum for splitting a 23.5 waisted F2 flame, as being too "skinny"! Wait 'till they see pics of it with my binding angles! Gecko, get the Axis and YOU make the other choice, 'cause I'll not start any more controversies. Lucky guys, I'm trying to get my quiver up to 3 good boards.

I really wanted a Coiler because the ordering of one meets my schedule however the Donek Axis with it reduced angles (I ride 49/43) fits the with what I actually need. Coiler doesn't make a 180ish AM and I've been longing for a longer board for some years (I miss my 180cm and 200cm Flites) I'd decided on a 11m-12m sidecut and roughly 160cm of effective edge...This'll likely be my primary board for some time...there is also the issure of RC/FC type board vs an AM type board, my present all round board has a 21.7 waist...I'm used to that and agan the Axis fits better with my needs than my wants...in truth I don't need a RC I just want one...

[Mike T]

I have a custom AM on order - 180 cm, 157 edge, 12.7 sidecut - I'm sure he could build you one too ;)

[Guest AlpentalRider]

You make great points Bob. I never have really cared to line my bindings up with my board edge and have set stance angles by strapping in with the screws loose and rotating until my body feels like it's in a comfortable position. The angles that I have come up with for me is 54/51 in an alpine setup and 33/30 in my softies setup. As long as I don't get boot overhang, I'm happy.

I also noticed that my body likes my feet at 19" apart on my softie setup and 17" apart on my hardboot setup. Alot of people would say that it's way too narrow and that i'm sacrificing stability, but I find my self way more stable with these distances. If I try and go wider, I feel like my legs are too far apart and I lose my balance and ability to pressure the board how I want to in turns.

So I think your right on the money with your comment about setting your stance angles up based on how your body feels and not strictly by board location. The reference points are a good place to start, but from there, let your body do the talking :)

[Jack M]

Originally posted by Bob Jenney

Been meaning to chuck this out there for some time. I know it'll generate some controversy, but here goes anyway.

There is no mechanical advantage to shallowing up your stance angles on a wider board. (Within reason)

Why?

1) All newer bindings are supported by a relatively small footprint that is nowhere near the edge of the board and this is where the drive comes from. (No matter the stance angle)

Well, I don't think the footprint of the binding really matters, since in a rigid interface between binding and board, the board becomes the horizontal lever, and your leg is the vertical lever. So having your toes/heels close to the edge wouldn't give you any more leverage with which to tip the board up in a totally rigid interface.

However the rider-to-board interface is not completely rigid due to boot flex, so stance angle does affect leverage slightly. Another important point about putting your feet across the board is that it does give you more leverage with which to balance yourself side to side. I think that may be the more significant benefit.

Imagine you're an iron worker building a sky scraper. 50 stories up, are you going to walk along a 12" wide I-beam with your feet pointed straight ahead, or across the beam?

2) Edge to edge leverage comes mostly from your ankle up. The leverage your body weight generates, overcomes any mechanical advantage that might be realized by running a shallower angle or having your foot run more perpendicular to the board.

Leverage does come mostly from your vertical lever (your leg), however if your toes and heels are very far inboard of the edges, you are losing balance leverage and you should try a less angled stance to see how it feels. If you prefer the higher angles, then you should consider a narrower board, because it will be easier and quicker to put on edge. (However board width also gives you some balance leverage.)

3) I believe your stance angle should be determined by your flexibility or the ability to move around so you can better apply nose/tail pressure to initiate/complete a turn. By forcing your stance angle to match the board width, you may not have the full range of motion in your body to move around as needed.

Absolutely, the bottom line is whatever works for you and gives you the most range of motion without sacrificing balance. However the best and most succinct advice to give anyone who doesn't know how to set up plate bindings is still to put your toes and heels as close to the edge without hanging over, and adjust from there. It is the only concrete reference point.

-Jack

[Neil Gendzwill]

Interesting stuff. My understanding from the racing world is that slalom riders like lower angles, necessitating a wider board as it's easier to make the sudden edge. This is my experience also as a guy who likes to be in the bumps and steeps. I don't think I could get that sucker across the fall line as quickly as I need to, nor pressure the edge on jump turns like I want, if I had steep angles. General purpose riding has different requirements than groomed carving.