board characteristics for pow

[James Ong]

How would an ideal powder board be set up with regards to stiffness? Would you want it softer in the middle to improve manuverability in the trees? Softer in the nose to improve floatation? Some of the all mountain boards offered look good to me but i don't really need this one to carve well.

On the other hand a stiffer board would be nice for blasting through the crud when everything is skied ( boarded) out.

James:confused:

[bobdea]

a softer deck can help

in the chop I like my boards stiff so I can just pound through the crud

one of the better boards I have been on in the powder was my donek sasquatch that board is really stiff so I dont think flex is all you should look at

for me my pow ride of choice is a burton canyon 181 basicly a really big and wide burton custom

that board and the smaller canyon 173 handles it all with ease chop, trees,wide open pow runs whatever they will do it

lots of people like the Burton fish for the trees short with a super wide nose for allot of float from a little board

some people go crazy long like a tanker (not really my thing I like tight trees too much)

and others go the all mountain carver like a donek axis

it all comes down to prefferance

[Guest Randy S.]

James,

It looks like I'm done for the season. If you want to try my O-Sin 4807, let me know. Its a pretty fun pow board. It has a big soft nose and a v-tail.

Randy

[James Ong]

Whats the idea behind the split (?) tail for powder , and what are the specs of the board? Sounds like a cool setup though.

Why are you done for the season Randy?

James

[Guest Randy S.]

I tore my achilles yesterday morning in Scott Chute at Alpine in unbelievable powder. I have a doc's appt tomorrow to get the full prognosis, but the doc at 1st Aid basically told me I'm done for the season.

The split tail allows the board to sink a bit in the back, while still give you edge back there to carve on. The big nose keeps it afloat. All this adds up to the ability to weight your front foot in deep pow to initiate a turn, without having the board submarine on you. I've actually ridden carving boards in Tahoe powder lots of times. You move your bindings all the way back and you can still get decent float.

If you want to use the board this week, let me know. It could use a repair (I gouged the base pretty badly when I hit the rock that tore my achilles). If you want to use it, I can tell you how to find it at my cabin and get it repaired at Granite Chief (I have a repair credit there). There's a pretty bad cut in the base that probably should be repaired before you ride it. There are a couple of gouges that aren't a big deal. I hit a cliff pretty hard when I tore my tendon.

[bobdea]

that bites

it always seems to be the pow days that we are just going off and manage to get hurt

[Mike T]

Sorry to hear you are done for the season, man! At least it sounds like you went out in style, with all the pow-pow.

[lonerider]

Originally posted by James Ong

How would an ideal powder board be set up with regards to stiffness? Would you want it softer in the middle to improve manuverability in the trees? Softer in the nose to improve floatation? Some of the all mountain boards offered look good to me but i don't really need this one to carve well.

On the other hand a stiffer board would be nice for blasting through the crud when everything is skied ( boarded) out.

James:confused:

James, I think both are right. It all depends on if you are riding bowl powder or tree powder.

I just got back from riding my Burton Fish 156MD at Kirkwood and it *ROCKS* in the tree powder. It is wide, with a huge nose and a small tail and big setback stance.. That makes it naturally float up above deeper powder (meaning you don't have to think about leaning back like you do on a regular board). It is soft as well (with a short sidecut and taper), which makes it easy to make quick little turns with just a slight hip shift and so you and zip through the trees without making huge cross-rotational swipes with that board (actually it turns so easily, you will overturn if you try to push out your leg).

However, when I took my board out into the bowl powder... for untracked it was fine... but I didn't feel like I go much benefit compared to any other board at higher speeds... For small chop, the soft board absorbs it a bit... but in big chunky tracked powder... I was just bouncing around the whole time instead of blasting through it like a stiff board would - I'm told the OSin 4807 is great for that.

Randy that totally sucks man.

[nils]

I've made back in 2002 the comparison chart with all the swallowtails boards on the market.

Average size: 185cm

Average waist: around 23.5cm

Pintail: 1.8cm

Flex of the best boards i've tried; stiff long nose, softer middle part, and stiff long swallowtail.

The idea beeing:

- Nose is a bumper and absorbs shocks while always reputting the board flat for speed. Nose "scoop" is as flat as possible.

- Mid zone is softer for easy torsion between the feet in order to be forgiving and easy to turn on the hard pack

- Tail is very stiff in order to pull out the G forces from high speed turns on the tail. The swallow both acts like a fin that helps canalizing the snow flow, and also bends assymetrically in turns, in order to give more stability in deep snow. It is one of the main benefit of the swallowtail, the last beeing the easier foot down the snow since it has less surface in contact.

Settings: compare to another freeride board, the ST is ridden on the front foot most of times, and pretty forward too...

Advantages of the ST: better speed handling, easier powder riding, forgiveness, and much more surfing like sensations. Turns are also easier to "conduct" rather to slide.

I'm not beeing objective ;)

Nils

[Neil Gendzwill]

Originally posted by lonerider

However, when I took my board out into the bowl powder... for untracked it was fine... but I didn't feel like I go much benefit compared to any other board at higher speeds... For small chop, the soft board absorbs it a bit... but in big chunky tracked powder... I was just bouncing around the whole time instead of blasting through it like a stiff board would - I'm told the OSin 4807 is great for that.

Haven't had a chance to take my Tanker 2000 into the open powder, but based on my other gun (old Gnu Race Room 179) I suspect it will just rip through it all. The Gnu just flat didn't care - powder, tracked pow, slush, death cookies, whatever. Mach schnell, baby.

[utahcarver]

Last years Xmas vacation I rode an old Burton M8 with plates in 16 inches of new snow one morning. The board is so long, wide, and stiff that it would've worked in 3 or 4 feet of powder, too. I got some great looks in the liftline, too. The reason I tell you this is that the M8 was great if you want to go fast in powder. It absolutely is no good for making quick turns.

This past weekend I rode a medium flex 172 freeride Rossi with TD2's and loved it in deep snow. But, I rode a bit slower and bounced more with each turn. So, what would I look for in a powder board?:

Application (what do you want it to do?)

Length (see application)

Width (wider is better)

Flex pattern (see Nils post here)

Stance setback/setforward (see Nils post here)

Heck, looks like you could buy an alpine board using a similar formula.

Mark

the best thing I have ever ridden IN powder is this:

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Neil, is your race room white and pink or grey and pink? 178cm right?

Post a photo if you get a chance. I love that you are still riding it in the pow.

Did you know they made a "Racer" only downhill board for DH in a 213cm??

Nose cut out. Crazy fast!!

[Guest]

It's funnny, my board of choice in ANY condition, pow included, is my 181 Prior WCR. That board handles perfectly in any condition I've put int o. I especuialy loive bmps with it. The long effective edge length allows it more manueverability in the bumps. Anf for deep pow, it hanfels perfectly. I've got a 4807, but I much prefer the 181.

[RJ-PS]

Take Randy up on his offer for the 4807, it's just a fun board. Even if you don't end up buying one you can have a good time playing with the characteristics of the ride.

Native Alaskans have over 100 different words for frozen water. So depending on what kind of "frozen water" you are riding on and where, your needs will be different.

When we went sailing and I bratted like the typical 10 year old about how long it took my dad would always tell me, "It's never about the destination, it's all about the journey."

So I'll be an annoying father figure and say, "it's not finding the one perfect board, it's trying all of them to find it."

Have fun!

[bobdea]

Take Randy up on his offer for the 4807, it's just a fun board. Even if you don't end up buying one you can have a good time playing with the characteristics of the ride.

Native Alaskans have over 100 different words for frozen water. So depending on what kind of "frozen water" you are riding on and where, your needs will be different.

When we went sailing and I bratted like the typical 10 year old about how long it took my dad would always tell me, "It's never about the destination, it's all about the journey."

So I'll be an annoying father figure and say, "it's not finding the one perfect board, it's trying all of them to find it."

Have fun!

thats why I have had so many boards, I really like to ride as many as possible.

everyone is different and fun in its own way plus it helps you figure out what your dream board is.

[lonerider]

thats why I have had so many boards, I really like to ride as many as possible.

everyone is different and fun in its own way plus it helps you figure out what your dream board is.

Yea... definltely try out a few boards to find what you like, just if you own 6 boards and are only riding 20-25 days a season, set a few free!!! Especially any who happens have purchased like two Coilers back to back and has a relatively unused Coiler AM 169/172 and weighs approx 150 lbs (ahem).

The 4807 looks like a great board and I plan on "borrowing" Mark's 4807 to compare it to my 156 Fish. However, my ultimate plan will be to go for a Tanker 162 eventually (hopefully when the dollar isn't being smackdowned by the Euro)... being that I only get 30-35 days a season, I don't believe I should be own more than four boards. I mean if you don't even ride a board enough to have it re-waxed halfway through the season... Bob here rides a ton... and so deserves to get a lot of toys

[Guest Juss_Tredd'n]

Depending on the snow depth, steepness of terrain, snow density, moisture, and age of the snow- I'd say that the best board for carving powder is whatever board you find most comfortable, period. The main factors I look for in a powder board are these: Will I be accessing my powder paradise by way of the lift? Will I be humping my board up the side of the mountain on my back? OR- Can I use it for shelter in case I zig where I should have zagged and can't make it back to my truck before nightfall? (Just kidding)

Try to find a board that will offer you a consistant camber, deep flex, long sidecut, and plenty of width. While the concept of "carving" generally doesn't make much of a leap beyond "edge" issues; carving powder requires a relatively generous area beneath your board to keep it afloat, generate turn-resistance, and steady the tip as you snap out of the back of a turn. Forget what that kid-salesman told you about length. Your powder board should be at least eye level to you. I'm 5'7" and I ride a variety of powder boards ranging from 195cm down to 175cm. My shorter boards I save for windpack, hardpack, boilerplate, or spring conditions. DON'T WASTE A SINGLE POWDER DAY PRETENDING A SHORT BOARD WILL WORK! As far as I'm concerned, there are too few powder days to plunder already... especially if you're in the Lower 48.

Personally, (and this aint no sales pitch), I've never found a better board for carving powder than a Glissade 185, mainly becuase it balances out well with my hight/weight and the overall conditions of the snow I ride in. Check out www.glissade.com for more information on their longboards. Otherwise, check out whatever board manufacturer floats your boat and see what they might have to offer. But in any event- as they say- size really does matter.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

http://www.glissadesnowboards.com/

I have a grey/ black 185cm Glissade , used for 250$ Delivered.

Retail is approx. 550$

Bryan

[lonerider]

I'm 5'7" and I ride a variety of powder boards ranging from 195cm down to 175cm. My shorter boards I save for windpack' date=' hardpack, boilerplate, or spring conditions. DON'T WASTE A SINGLE POWDER DAY PRETENDING A SHORT BOARD WILL WORK! As far as I'm concerned, there are too few powder days to plunder already... especially if you're in the Lower 48.

Personally, (and this aint no sales pitch), I've never found a better board for carving powder than a Glissade 185, mainly becuase it balances out well with my hight/weight and the overall conditions of the snow I ride in. Check out www.glissade.com for more information on their longboards. Otherwise, check out whatever board manufacturer floats your boat and see what they might have to offer. But in any event- as they say- size really does matter.

I have a grey/ black 185cm Glissade , used for 250$ Delivered.

LOL, oldsnowboards is like "well thank you brand new member who I don't know at all for just talking wonders about the board I'm about to sell!" =]

Big boards are great... but my Fish 156 floats amazing well - if I pump it in the deep powder at speed, the floatation with bob me back up so much I will go airborne. Shorter boards can work, but it is a compromise of WEIGHT (not height), speed and strength as I'm sure the other poster knows. At 5'8" 150 lbs I'm much light than the XXL crew here, so I don't need that much surface area to keep me up. So much to my surprise, my Donek Phoenix 155 does a decent job in powder as well (whereas the Incline 155 is a beast to keep floating in powder from my experiences) - this was heavy spring powder (2-3 feet deep) so maybe it will be tougher with dryer powder. I'm not suggesting *anyone* get a short board as a powder board, just saying that you can enjoy powder on one. I've ridden 174 and 179cm powder boards and they float *great*... but the reduced ability to zip between trees detracts from the experience for me - my Fish can do the trees *fast* AND hit the big powder bowls. At most I would want something in the 165 range.

[Guest Juss_Tredd'n]

Whoops! There's a good reason why God created coffee... so people don't do stupid things when they're tired.

The Glissade web addy is www.glissadesnowboards.com, as opposed to just plain "glissade" as I recommended in my previous post. (Thank's for pointing out my err, Brian- I owe you a sandwich with swiss cheese)

I'm pleased to see that there are other people on here who aren't intimidated by longboards- especially with this being a "Carving Community". Most of the brainbucket speed freaks I know between Washington State and Alaska prefer shorter decks it seems. Probably for the fact that most hardshell riders here in the Pacific Northwest are simply used to riding less ice than the guys I know from back east, (ie. Vermont, Connecticut, and New York).

BRIAN: Since you are into "old boards", perhaps you might have a connection to obtain an especially classic deck for me. I'm looking for a Glissade pressed in 1986. Top dollar is yours if you can find one... all of the guys I know of who ever had one have since used them as a burnt offering to the Powder Gods. Religion can be so sad sometimes. It's no wonder Christ wept!

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Juss. I don't know that I have ever seen one? 1986? Very cool! I know they have been building very high quality boards for years , just didn't realize they went back that far. A photo would help a great deal. I would invite you to post on our www.oldsnowboards.com "Questions" forum thread to see if some of the guys may know more.

Lonerider, for your weight , the 174cm is probably like a 200cm to us "Heavy" riders. But I am not heavy , I'm your brother.:) There , it has been said.

I look forward to trying the boards that will eventually appear. The "Fish" shape in "Long board" sizes. I have a fish, but riding a 160cm on a pow day is not likely going to happen any time soon. I am a firm believer in "No replacement for displacement" , big boards work. They fit what I do.

The Glissade 185cm is quite happy in the quiver of big boards here. It did seem like a relatively good time to "Offer it up". But there is certainly no hurry. A better time will be when a "Heavy" new friend I meet on the mountain has a size 12 or 13 foot and is in dire need of a "Big Stick" to match. Then I can have the pleasure of riding with another friend with a better tool.

Juss- Come on down to the south a bit and visit some of the mount hood longboarders. Of course there is nothing here that you have not seen in your travels. You pretty much list the "Meca" of the PNW longboard deep snow areas. Well done! There are at least a half dozen guys in the Portland area on the BOL board and probably more in the Seattle area. Again. Welcome. you have found an excellent source of "Like Minded" folks here on BOL.

Be sure to do a search on "Tanker" or "Rad-Air" in the archives. There have been more than a few conversations about this subject.

Bryan

Juss, perhaps email me direct with more history about Glissade? Love to hear about it.

Another link that is easy to confuse is "Rad-Air" , http://www.rad-air.com/

Leave out the "-" and you end up at an auto mechanics site in Ohio.

[lonerider]

Juss. I don't know that I have ever seen one? 1986? Very cool! I know they

Lonerider, for your weight , the 174cm is probably like a 200cm to us "Heavy" riders. But I am not heavy , I'm your brother.:) There , it has been said.

Lol :D What are you talking about? That post didn't make any sense to me - "Brother?"

It's all good... but drop the quotes around heavy... there is nothing wrong with being big and tall. Just don't be like Randy - rockin my world with his 210cm board and calls me a midget as he lasers past me at "LUDICROUS SPEED!"

[Guest Juss_Tredd'n]

Hey gang- I have a quick few before taking out on a short hike down the beach to watch a pair of eagles that have recently moved into the area, (now a total of 6 residenting the local coast, pretty darn cool)- but I wanted to hit on this hieght/wieght issue that has come up a couple of times now in the last few posts.

Hieght and wieght play an integral role in many parts of riding. Especially when it comes to the location for your "handlebars" in powder. As with any other situation on a board, your maximum velocity is reduced whenever your wieght shifts toward the tail-end of your base's contact with the snow. In powder, the friction ratio is increased on the base of your deck toward the tip. The higher your speed of travel, the more force is placed toward the back of your board negating flexion. The greater contribution of forward lean that a rider puts into his/her leading leg is also negated above the plane of the board, which causes the riders center of gravity to become lower than most traditional carving stances permit. To compromise this situation, many riders have gone to wider stances, though at speed, a wider stance will lower the response of the boards effective edge as it responds to the planing effect caused by inertia, displacement, friction, and gravitational influence. The trick is to follow a simple guideline to find your proper stance width according to the flex pattern of your board by factoring in your hieght/wieght accordingly. The below model is relative to common "powder" board flex patterns with more flex emphasis toward the tip of the board. (And remember, this is powder-specific, my peoples)

1.)For every 20#'s of the riders wieght, backshift your stance 1cm off-center.

2.)Convert the riders hieght to total inches and divide by 20. Take the remainder and, (like in step 1), backshift your stance 1cm for every 20" in hieght.

3.)Total stance width depends solely on solving these two issues: Did you buy that board to work for you? Or, did you buy that board so you could work for it?

Nobody should have to "pump" their board in and out of turns on powder. That's simply a waste of good snow- and as a powder stashing Alaskan- I feel confident to say as much. Carving powder should be nearly effortless if you did your research before picking a board off of the shelf and laying your finances on the line. If I could put this to anyone more plainly, I'd be glad to oblige. But being a big fan of physics... Total Length should be no less than 97% of riders Total Hieght. And stance widths should never excede 10% (in inches) of a riders total wieght. (ie. 180#'s = max stance width of 18")

So for those of you who might be riding your shorter boards in powder thinking you are doing just fine and are having a blast, consider this; there's a whole lot more fun to be had on a board that was fully made for the purpose in which you are using it. I'd rather see more people out there kicking up horrific sized rooster tails than watch "shorties" flailing in their own man-made snow berms. The nice thing about deep powder is, that you don't have to wallow in it.

Ciao'

Juss

[lonerider]

Nobody should have to "pump" their board in and out of turns on powder. That's simply a waste of good snow- and as a powder stashing Alaskan- I feel confident to say as much. Carving powder should be nearly effortless if you did your research before picking a board off of the shelf and laying your finances on the line. If I could put this to anyone more plainly' date=' I'd be glad to oblige. But being a big fan of physics... Total Length should be no less than 97% of riders Total Hieght. And stance widths should never excede 10% (in inches) of a riders total wieght. (ie. 180#'s = max stance width of 18")

[/quote']

I disagreed with several of the things you just said. I'll avoid going into many of those things to simply point out that your stance width calculations are completely wrong... or at least very biased for heavier riders (i.e. over 170 lbs) which was what I was pointing out in my previous post (heavier riders assume they are the norm). According to your comments... you would recommend a 5'7" at your same height, but only 130 lbs (skinny, but no unusually so) to have a stance width of 13"?!?! For me at 5'9" (I forgot I grew an inch) I would only be allowed a stance width of 15"?

So for those of you who might be riding your shorter boards in powder thinking you are doing just fine and are having a blast, consider this; there's a whole lot more fun to be had on a board that was fully made for the purpose in which you are using it. I'd rather see more people out there kicking up horrific sized rooster tails than watch "shorties" flailing in their own man-made snow berms. The nice thing about deep powder is, that you don't have to wallow in it.

Juss

*Clearly* you know what your are talking about... I pray to thee, O Wise One! Give us your knowledge so that we may truly experience powder nirvana!

[Guest Juss_Tredd'n]

Hey Lonerider. Yes, a 13" stance should be ideal for you for carving powder. Remember, we're talking about carving here- not setting up a jib board- and you'll need to be able to maintain an approximate parallel between your shoulders in turns rather than reaching over your hip on a healside turn. Which, aside from maintaining a better balance in the flex of your board, is why you should be keeping your stance widths closer in. If you were to give it a try and take a few good turns, you'ld know why within minutes.

There always seems to be a select few who question the math, and only a one-in-a-vast-handfull who can prove it doesn't work for them. If you were 5'9" and only 110#'s, I'd say you would have a something to contest the physics. But then again, I think if you were 5'9" and only 110#'s you'ld have bigger fish to fry than what stance to set your bindings at. Like, say, hitting the gym and building your mass.

I, myself, have been riding with various stance widths using this same technique over quite some period of time. When I was trying to sell skiers into buying snowboards back in the day I often got asked "how do I set up my bindings", and this was the result I came up with over the course of time. And no, it's not biased toward the heavier rider at all. In 1991 I was only 156#'s. On my race decks, I rode with an 11" stance width, and on my freeride boards, I rode with a 14" stance. And it worked the same then as it does now that I'm still 5'7" but weigh in at 194#'s. (Thanks Nautilus!!) Just give it a try, lay out on a few carves, and see how your board responds. Arguing it out with me will only serve to take more time off of your life than what is required to change the position of six or eight bolts.

Thanks for your post.

Juss