Remember when you Thought you needed a Stiff board

[Bobby Buggs]

I just like everyone else in the ski days of the 80s was fooled into thinking if I wanted the Top performance ski it was gonna be mad stiff. And the misconception that I wanted "Race Stock" equipment so I could perform like the best in the world. Now today I realize how foolishly mislead we were:nono:

If you think about today's boards, or from my perspective Coiler metals, I have become a far better rider on steeps and more difficult terrain while riding the softest alpine board I have ever owned. Whew, long winded rant alert:freak3:

But really I have noticed that I can ride stiffer construction in shallow to medium grades but as soon as I get on a real angle I lose some of the ability to make the board react. I have tested this on slopes like lift line at Stratton and other places, taking 2 different stiffness of the same board on the same trail back to back. Not the most scientific way to test but its all I have. Now I dont profess to be a Pro rider or one of New Englands best but I would consider myself a sound rider. I was amazed at the change just a slight difference in stiffness can make in my ability to rule the board on a hill like lift line.

Im sure there are people here that still want or need a board thats stiff beyond what I could use but I would say the majority of weekend worriers would benefit from a board 1 step softer than what they have been on the last few years.

Discuss......

[John E]

I used to believe (back in ski days) that stiff skis worked better on hard snow and soft skis worked better in powder. I don't really know if that is true and if so, would it also be true for boards?

I could see how torsional stiffness might help hold an edge but longitudinal "softness" might help a board conform to undulations in the snow.

I would bet Bruce & Sean have studied & thought more about this than all the rest of us combined.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

I can almost remember when I was 185lbs and really lean and fit. All I had available were "Race Boards" in the 185cm range and I thought they were stiff. NOT!! Now they are comparably soft under my 245lbs of awesome old fat.

[dingbat]

I can almost remember when I was 185lbs and really lean and fit. All I had available were "Race Boards" in the 185cm range and I thought they were stiff. NOT!! Now they are comparably soft under my 245lbs of Pure AWESOMENESS!!!

FIFY:D

[Bobby Buggs]

John, I should have specified stiffness from tip to tail not torsional. Most people are not really capable of doing much of a torsional test by hand but can do a longitudinal test off the snow.

[b0ardski]

Actually, in the 80s I always preferred quicker turning, better for pow, medium stiff slalom skis, in the 200-205 range. I found the vokl p20s and then p30s of the time a bit too stiff for my taste.

When I got serious about boarding (as a full sized adult convert) in '89, long, stiff, carve-able boards were hard to find, but that's what I needed. Bought a K2 170TX in '89, followed by 180 kemper bullet(plank), 186 nitro diablo(tanker like) and 184 libtec grocer(sweet carving pow gun) lighter and more nimble than the nitro.

Got a deal on the "too short" asym 5.7 alp & 6.2 prime in '94 and preferred the softer alp for all mountain, loved it for everything from tightest trees to steep chutes... I'm rambling:freak3:

the point is I never fell into the stiff for stiffness sake trap

[Bobby Buggs]

I remember being launched by some of the Doneks and Priors from early 2000s

[lowrider]

Just wait till you try a plate on some of your old favorites. There's a whole new world of boarding comming this season. I'm wondering if two mini plates will make my old 205 Kneissel skis turn on a dime. :lol:

[Ian M]

This was a very recent revelation to me! Up until last year, my only board was a Factory Prime that was much too stiff for me. While I don't want to say that seven or eight seasons on it was a 'waste of time', I definitely could have progressed faster on a less 'racy' board that was the correct stiffness for me.

Also, Bobby, I agree that small stiffness differences are huge on the hill. This also ties in with conditions, though. I call my Coiler 'The Icemonster' for a reason, but it's too soft for groomed powder or the like. When the cord is really soft, that's the only time that I can ride the stiff Factory Prime and own the hill.

[lonbordin]

I think this is more weight dependent than people realize. I've got a board 178 BS Liberation that people swear is a stiff/dangerous race machine. I've loaded it up and ... nada. 245lbs and some leg strength keep it well in line.

I didn't realize what noodles SB boards were... until then.

I'm actually looking forward to riding a board that will bounce me... someday.

[Bobby Buggs]

After riding alpine since 2000 Im under the impression that a majority of alpine riders are in the 200 lb and below category. I fully agree with you that rider weight is a big factor in this equation.

[Race_Carver]

Yea Bobby, I remember those stiff, thick skis from the '80's all too well. Might as well been on a 2x4 with metal edges.:lol:

I agree with you concerning boards too. When I started racing, I was using a relative soft board. When I got better, I thought a stiffer board would make me even faster in the course. Boy was I wrong! Longitudinally stiff boards, steeps, ice and ruts are not happy campers when combined.

That's the beauty of the new metal boards. Increased ability to keep the edge in contact with the snow by flexing front to back, but increased edge hold by being stiffer/damper torsionally. Same thing with new race skis. Much softer than the stuff from the 80's.

Progress is a good thing!

[Jack M]

I dunno. The Kessler 185 I bought for the board test last year was the stiffest of the group, and I liked it the best. The Donek Rec GS was the softest, but it was still a great ride. It could be turned tighter and therefore was more versatile and "comfortable". But for carving at 10 tenths, the stiffer boards inspired more confidence.

My 14m 170 is stiffer than the 12m 177 I used to have, and I like the 170 better. The softer board would give up the ghost at times.

[Bobby Buggs]

Jack, much love but you dont represent the major portion of weekend riders.;) You know exactly what I mean by this.

[tahoetrencher]

to South Lake so that I may begin my struggle with them.

Keep the metal, send the rest.

Let's do LAUNCH sometime at altitude

And yeah I can go 200 if the camel is full.

[BlueB]

I always preached softer boards. So many new riders struggled in the past with a board too stiff for learning. I buy the most of my boards slightly too soft for my weight - easier to ride all day without legs getting burned out. However, I like having a springy board (or few ;) ) for occational thrill, but not as daily ride.

It is true that stiffer board might inspire one to push the envelope a bit, though. Or, that it performes a bit better for ful-on carving in chopped up softer stuff. But, for whole day, every day, I'd pick a softer one.

[bobdea]

Jack, much love but you dont represent the major portion of weekend riders.;) You know exactly what I mean by this.

I'll bite on that.

yeah, but as a weekend warrior I can say that my pretty stiff kessler inspires more confidence than my older and about as stiff coiler in a similar size.

I've tried a NSR and compared to my softer metal prior the NSR was stiffer and all around better. you'd think that the stiffer board would offer a harsher ride, not so.

too stiff I think is always bad but depending on geometry and construction there's a incredible range of what would be defined as stiff. interesting thing is, the newer boards seem to have a bigger weight range.

[philw]

I think it's a "Goldilocks" thing... you have to get it right.

I regularly try powder boards in multiple lengths, run by run, just to find the length which works. One size either way is always too much or too little. And to answer the post about that up there, it's not specifically the flex, it's the flex pattern which matters, most importantly around the tail, at least if you're riding trees.

As far as stiffer is better... well I have a GS board somewhere and it's a killer machine... if you can find a place to ride at GS speeds. At low speed it'll turn but there's no fun in it. Hence, it's "too stiff" by this reckoning. My piste boards are generally SL, simply because there are lots of speed cops and other people out there.

But the equation is some combination of length and flex. I suppose I could buy a 2m board with soft flex... but a 1.6m board with relatively stiffer flex does the same job and fits in my tiny European car much better... ;-)

[Jack M]

Jack, much love but you dont represent the major portion of weekend riders.;) You know exactly what I mean by this.

haha, ok I'm out.

[Allee]

I always preached softer boards. So many new riders struggled in the past with a board too stiff for learning. I buy the most of my boards slightly too soft for my weight - easier to ride all day without legs getting burned out. However, I like having a springy board (or few ;) ) for occational thrill, but not as daily ride.

I agree. I learned on a 97 Hot Blast, which is a plank, and I would have done myself a lot of favours on a softer board. The first time I rode something softer I was amazed at how much easier everything became, and how I wasn't exhausted by lunchtime.

Having said that though, I didn't ride that board for 2 years, and I took it out again for closing weekend at Whitefish last winter. It was a riot, snappy and springy and fast. I had so much fun I can't wait to take it out again.

[Bobby Buggs]

Allee, I agree that once you "master" some of the skills of this sport you can enjoy some of the stiffer rides and the attributes they bring to the hill. I remember the first time I figured out the tail on my Rossi WC184:eek:

Maybe broken down old man Buggs is just getting tired:sleep:

[valsam]

Steeps and softer flex boards rule!!!!!

+ice !

Everything is easyer and come with less effort on a softer flex board but at lower speed's than a stiffer board !

Stability at high speeds is the only advantage that stiffer boards have and in my opinion it's not worth sacrificing the fun that you get from a little softer board for that !

For the last 3 years i too ride my softest alpine board of the 4 i got and stoped even carying the other's with me to the mountain any more(only my rock board)!

[michael.a]

Everytime I think a board is 'stiff' and unmanageable I try to get on an even stiffer board, get my ass served on a platter, go back to the first board and its like wooosh I can do anything I want with it.

[~tb]

I still like what a stiffer board has to offer my riding. . . especially when conditions are good!

I told both Sean and Bruce at ECES this past year, that based on how good the conditions were, I found all the new metal boards to be a bore and not too much fun to ride. I stepped back a generation to a board that was metal, with less rubber and more stiffness and had a BLAST of a day, all day long.

I pulled out a glass board that was even stiffer and had more fun.

I think both have a place. there have been some poor condition days where the stiffer boards have been no good and the new metals were great. but on an epic groomed day, gimme a stiff board and let me loose!

just my 2 cents.

[SunSurfer]

after a significant number of people have experience on plates.

I rode a Riot this year with a plate and carved slopes all day that previously put the fear of God into me and had me skidding my turns!

And yes, the old Riot boards are stiff and have recoil to burn!

SunSurfer