www.oldsnowboards.com Posted October 26, 2011 Report Share Posted October 26, 2011 Wow, those runs were not steep enough for the amount of snow you had underfoot. Got that right!! Can't change the mountain. Need a longer board !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickenll Posted October 26, 2011 Report Share Posted October 26, 2011 I've ridden the EST system now for a few years on my freestyle board. I do like it a lot more than the standard; however, not for the same reasons as he mentioned. I feel like you get a better flex with the board because the bindings are attached at the far ends of the bindings and not in the middle (EST bindings are wider because of where they attached to the EST channel). They're also great because of the simplicity to change your stance on the go. But if you ride pow, you probably wouldn't feel much of a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpinegirl Posted October 27, 2011 Report Share Posted October 27, 2011 Bryan, I never once suggested that you ride a shorter board. so please stop arguing that point with me. I do recognise that your needs in a powder board are dramatically different from a 135 lb woman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two_ravens Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 Alpinegirl, just want to say I appreciate your thoughtful comments and calm demeanor. Exactly what BOL needs more of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softbootsurfer Posted October 28, 2011 Report Share Posted October 28, 2011 as for your Girlfriend and the trips out west... get her a used Malolo and put both feet back all the way... Watch her Smile! as she passes you by screamin in pure pleasure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two_ravens Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 SBS, thanks for the timely advice - went to the ski swap a bit late this morning because I'm not so excited about the opening bell feeding frenzy, but there were still several Malolos to choose from. Walked out with an older 158 (old insert pattern - so I can go hardboot or soft :)) in good shape for $45. Sweet! So if we have another *&%$#@! big snow year, I'll get to compare Fish and Malolo directly. NickG, hope you and your girlfriend have as much success finding her a board! p.s. it is interesting to me how much softer the flex is on the Malolo than the Fish. Hmmmm..... seems like that should be a good thing for me in pow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.oldsnowboards.com Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 Bryan, I never once suggested that you ride a shorter board. so please stop arguing that point with me. I do recognise that your needs in a powder board are dramatically different from a 135 lb woman. Who is arguing? The thread starter seems open to members offering their opinions and observations, if you are not, so be it. So I am naive as to whatever qualifies as powder and simply would like to pose the following question: what is more important? Overall surface area and its distribution or board length and stance set back affecting those two things? You asked, right? If you want to ride a little board on your dust on crust. Enjoy!! :rolleyes: untitled.bmp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 Everyone picks the tool they think best for the job. If anyone wants a fight about which board is best, I guess the best place for that is your chosen powder field. The Fish is different from traditional powder boards. It floats lower. It's wide, so you don't have the stability problems, and then the taper and stance make it track and not submarine. Fish copies seem to work in similar ways. You obviously need to ride Fish at the right length, which is written in the specs. They ride shorter than you'd ride (say) a Malolo. The uninitiated (me included) will usually scoff when handed a Fish, but by the end of their first run they only smile. I've never actually seen anyone ride a 164 Fish, but I've seen a lot of big people enjoy 160 Fish. Last year I rode the 164 Stellar in "big" conditions - where penetration was an issue as per the chap's video here. Sure, in those conditions more board is good, but you're still balancing avalanche risk versus steepness. On those days most people have penetration problems. But you can't just add more board; most people on longer boards than I will have difficulties in those conditions. There's some trade between manoeuvrability and straight-line acceleration/ speed between shorter and longer designs. It's more effort to take a Stellar through a tree-run than it is to take a Fish. Either works, it's just which is more fun for you. Most riders, tourists or workers, seem to opt for Fish-style boards these days where I ride (which includes trees). The difference between a 156 and a 163 is more than just the 7cm length. The length is nominal, the difference is more in the construction of the board. They could make them all the same length and just vary the construction, but then the shop assistants would be confused. I usually test adjacent lengths and it makes a huge difference: one is right and the other is wrong. "Powder is Powder". Not so, there's a vast difference between resort powder and back country powder, and then moisture content, temperature, and terrain all contribute. ...many people just can't wrap their head around riding long, fast, stiff boards. And many people confuse size with performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
softbootsurfer Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 SBS, thanks for the timely advice - went to the ski swap a bit late this morning because I'm not so excited about the opening bell feeding frenzy, but there were still several Malolos to choose from. Walked out with an older 158 (old insert pattern - so I can go hardboot or soft :)) in good shape for $45. Sweet! So if we have another *&%$#@! big snow year, I'll get to compare Fish and Malolo directly.NickG, hope you and your girlfriend have as much success finding her a board! p.s. it is interesting to me how much softer the flex is on the Malolo than the Fish. Hmmmm..... seems like that should be a good thing for me in pow. a Good Thing Indeed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted October 30, 2011 Report Share Posted October 30, 2011 Walked out with an older 158 (old insert pattern - so I can go hardboot or soft :)) in good shape for $45. Sweet! So if we have another *&%$#@! big snow year, I'll get to compare Fish and Malolo directly. Good job! if Targhee is anything like last season you'll love that. Meanwhile, I've had my Fish since the end of the end of the 2009 season, and I haven't even ridden it yet ... "sigh" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo_writer Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Interesting reading throughout this thread. I've been riding a 146 Burton Amp (or is it Alp?) and just bought a Burton 150 race board on eBay. I couldn't pass it by for $15 plus shipping! I weigh about 120-125 right now but need to take off about 10 pounds. It sounds like the 150 will work for me - the 146 is usually no problem unless I get into a really tight spot. But I've only been riding with hard boots a few times so far. I'm also hoping my daughter will eventually try out one of the race boards after she gets a little more confident on her freestyle board. She's graduating from college this year, so I'm encouraging her to commit to really learning to snowboard next year since it's something she has wanted to do for several years. She's about 5'2" and 140 pounds (but would also like to lose some weight). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Stevens Posted February 5, 2013 Report Share Posted February 5, 2013 "Powder is Powder". Not so, there's a vast difference between resort powder and back country powder Phil... Help me out here... I've never understood this. Unless I have this wrong, you're saying that the snow rides differently, depending on what it's fallen on. Depth aside, where there might not be enough new snow to keep from hitting the old snow underneath, I don't find any difference between 40 cm's off the lifts vs. 40 cm's off the sleigh, cat or heli. We'll also put aside avi risk, and the other variables you mentioned like density, wind effect, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.