Jump to content

Old Coiler cheap


SEJ
 Share

Recommended Posts

188 WCC PR 0109 6.3

Picked this up from nekdut a couple of years ago. Best way I can describe the cosmetics is "Rode hard, put away wet". This board was built for Mike Kwiatkowski, (His name is on the top sheet). 188 is a lot of board for me, but I thought it was a pretty easy ride compared to my 188 Burner. But, 188 is a lot of board for me. I'm having storage issues due to new arrivals, so it's gonna go. Performance wise, the only issue is the edges have some chips. If you put them all together it would be less than an inch. I did not feel a problem from this when I rode it. I'll get some pics up, don't know if the chips will show. It's far right on my avitar. I had the base stone ground, and did the edges 1-2 myself.

$100 plus shipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With my cheapo metric tape measure I would say 19cm waist. Sidecut, I don't have a clue. Now that I think about it, I think it rode a lot like Mike T.s Monster I rode last year. I think he told me it was 13/14 or 14/15.

I didn't ride it last year, so memory is fading, I just remember it seemed really easy for it's length. Email Bruce with the ser. # and he will tell you it's life history. Might take a couple of months to respond cause he is supposed to be building all the boards people have ordered. (Plus the one I WON at SES!)

I weigh about 175. I had no issues decambering it, but it didn't feel like it would fold up if I pushed it real hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That most likely is a 15.7 sidecut, 4mm taper. I had one for several years, remarkably easy ride for the length and sidecut from that time period. Mine was a 6.6 stiffness and I was in the 185 - 200 range in those days; would have to guess 160-180 is the ideal range for this one but that is just a guess. I'd pick it up myself if I weren't spoiled rotten by my Titanal quiver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't let the length fool you guys- these are great boards that are relatively forgiving- if you are in the market for a 182-185 then this is a killer deal. Those extra couple of cm are completely manageable.

I'm totally boarded up, but wanted to bump a great deal on a great rinding stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm new and am riding a 180 RCII flex 6.5 I got used at the end of last year. I'm about 180-185 lbs. Would I notice much flex difference between your PR and mine? (I also have a 177 AM with flex 8.0 which seems too stiff on hard snow at my speeds and skill level.) Also, I think the sidecut radius on your PR is a lot bigger than on the RCII -- I'm just learning to make turns small enough to fit on our narrow runs, so am I crazy to consider this board? 188 sounds like a lot of fun...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teach, I've got the same RCII. I think mine says 6.5 +4 whatever the plus 4 is.

I would say the flex is about the same in that they both feel right to me. BUT, the RCII is 11.5 SCR and the PR felt more like 14 or 15. Mike recalls it as 15.7.

Not harder to turn, but you need to be going faster and you will make much bigger turns. I would stick with the RCII on the tighter runs. BUT, if you've got some open hill on the weekdays, (Lots of room to run), it would be a fun board to haul a$$ on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

teach, sorry for the delay. Plenty of edge if you don't mind the nicks. To grind them all off would be possible, but you would lose a lot of edge in the process. Not worth it in my book. The base is a different matter. Thor Von Rippington came by and spent a few days with us over Xmas. Of course we ended up in the shop looking at the quiver, flexing decks, talking shop. When I showed him the PR he said "WCC and you only want $100?" Then he looked at the grind and said "Something's weird, got a wonderbar?" Bottom line, the board is base high, and best we could figure out, the stone was not flat when they ground it. Base high is easy to see, the grind doesn't quite make it all the way to the edge. The other part is weird, there is a slightly low spot near the center of the board that has structure. If the stone didn't do it, there would be no structure. Bad stone.

I have one guy that I let mess with my boards, Dave Teteak, he tunes at Shoreline in South Lake Tahoe. Long time carver, good dude. He was written up in Trans world snowboarding showing how to euro carve back when they still covered our part of the sport. (He was riding a red top FP if that helps dating it) He was off surfing somewhere so I let somebody else do it. (How hard can a base grind be, right?)

I'm not advertising this as a cherry board. Rode hard, put away wet sort of says it all. Used, abused, but still perfectly functional. Not perfect in any way, but still a fun ride for very little money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the detailed condition report. That's a shame about the messed-up stonegrind. I think I need a board on the smaller-scr end: I just calculated the scr on my RCII and it looks to be 13.7m or so; maybe not that different from this PR. In order to fund more pressing needs (good small scr board, smaller boots) I'll pass on this. Hope it gets a good home!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mmbishoff, KC has it nailed. I mean, the really good people can ride damn near anything, but, at 120 you would have to go mach I to decamber it. On a steep run that resembles an open football field you might get three or four turns before you would have to deploy the drag chute.

Teach, I'm really suprised your RCII is not 11.5. Maybe custom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RCII I got second-hand. It's about 19.3 waist and 23.5 or so at nose 24.0 at tail, both measured where the sidecut profile stops curving out. Those points are about 156 cm apart, about equally far from the waist (actually 2 cm offset, but this makes little difference). If you assume the sidecut is an arc of a circle, you get about 13.7 m for the radius of that circle. Doing the same calculation for my 177 AM (26.5 nose, 26.3 tail, 21.5 waist, 154 cm apart) you get about 11.8 m. That's scr, right?

So that explains the big turns, I guess. I thought the AM was more like 10 m or 11 m. Before I got the AM last year (used, also) I rode soft-boot boards with scr around 8-9 m; then my problem was not being able to make big turns cleanly! The AM is really stiff (8.0) so hard to bend to tighten the turn radius; now I see more clearly what I'm up against!

I emailed to check the scr of both boards from their creator, along with weight ranges etc., just yesterday. I'm very curious now. I guess both must have been custom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every Coiler is custom. Bruce doesn't build one till somebody orders it. There are a lot of standard patterns (shape, sidecut, etc.) but all are built for the rider's specific weight. (Flex) That's what makes it harder to find the right one when buying used.

My 180 RCII is standard shape. 11.5 SCR. 13 SCR would be a custom shape.

My 172 AMT is standard 12 SCR (I think his older 172 AM were 10.5 SCR) I think 12 SCR for the 177 is probably standard as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teach, a little misinformation on my part. I was reading RCII and thinking RC20. Dave from yyzcanuck straightened me out. Mine is an RC20 which is 11.5SCR. Dave said the RCII is 12.7SCR. If I had read more carefully I would have picked up on the 19.3 waist. The RC20 has a 20 waist. It would be fun to swap them for a day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...