Jump to content

Furberg 162 for Powder and Carving


Recommended Posts

I was looking to replace my 6 year old Dupraz 5’5” which is great in powder, decent for carving groomers and manageable in moguls. So I decided to give the Furberg a try. I received the board 5 days after placing an online order. I’m 5’7”, 135 lb so I figured the Furberg 162 would give me plenty of float for the powder days.

The Furberg snowboard was modeled after the Spatula powder ski,

All the reviews I read raved about the powder slaying abilities of the Furberg, but the opinions were split about whether it was good for carving groomers or not.

Executive summary: best powder board I’ve ever ridden, good for EC turns and moguls and worked well with both hardboots and softboots.

Buell did an excellent review on the rockered Tanker 172, so I’m going to follow his template, http://www.bomberonline.com/VBulletin/showthread.php?28956-2010-rockered-Rad-Air-Tankers I almost bought a Tanker 162 because of his review, but there was very little info on the web about the Tanker 162.

Furberg 162 specs: waist = 26.4 cm, scr = 16m

Powder: I went to Mammoth when the storm of the season was hitting. My first day at Mammoth was greeted with 24” of fresh pow and a two day total of 41”! I rode the board with soft boots/bindings. As expected, the board absolutely excelled in the pow. I had the bindings centered on the inserts and never felt like I had to lean back to keep the nose from pearling. The Furberg was definitely the easiest, most user friendly powder board I’ve ever ridden.

Chopped powder / Moguls: When I first bought my Dupraz, I thought it was great in bumps in comparison to my other all mountain boards at the time (Tanker 172, Donek Incline 160). Then when I rode the Dupraz back to back in soft moguls with a Burton Custom 152, I really preferred the shorter/lighter board for bumps. The Ferberg 162 felt much lighter than the Dupraz and the narrower nose/tail on the Ferberg made the jump turns easier. The Ferburg was almost as easy as the Custom 152 in the moguls. The Furberg powered through the chopped powder easily and made it fun but still tiring.

The day after the big pow day, Mammoth got another 1” of new snow and wind blown pow to fill-in some of the tracks. I switched to hardboots (SB413 w/BTS) and F2 plate bindings. What a huge improvement!!! Jump turns in the double black diamond runs felt more solid and more comfy. I had not used hard boots for all mountain riding for several years; not since I had pair of ****ty Nordica SBH’s. The combo of the soft F2 Proflex plate bindings and the soft SB413/BTS worked great. I should have gone back to the hardboots for all mountain riding years ago when I first got the SB413/BTS!

Powder day soft groom: Best board I have carved on super soft and choppy powder day groom! A couple times I felt the nose starting to dig when I carved too hard in the soft stuff, but the feedback from the board helped me recover. In that scenario with a stiffer carving board, I probably would’ve slammed. Actually, the Dupraz , Tanker 172 and Burton Custom are also really good in the soft groom.

Hero Groom: The 3rd day at Mammoth started off with hero-groom and I went with the Furberg and hardboots. I had the boots set at 33F/30B for zero overhang. After a couple warm-up runs, I went to Cornice which is a single black diamond run and the steepest groomed run at the resort. I proceeded to lay down the best EC turns I’ve ever done on an “all mountain/powder” board. I was getting armpit dragging turns on both heelside and toeside. On all my other boards that were not “carve” specific, I could only do EC turns on blue runs; I couldn’t hold the edge properly on steeper black runs.

For EC style turns, the 16m scr on the Furberg 162 felt like the 13m scr on my Coiler Stubby 171.

After my great run on Cornice with the Furberg, I switched to the Coiler Stubby 171 and headed back to Cornice. Unfortunately, by the time I got back to Cornice, it was way too crowded and bumped up to try any laid-out carves. The hero groom was quickly getting bumped up and I switched back to the Furberg.

Riding the Coiler and Furberg back to back really showed how much better the Coiler was for pure carving ability and wider variety of turn shapes. For the Furberg, I could do quick fall line S-turns and bigger laid-out EC turns, but not really get a carve size in between. If I tried to do a smaller/medium size carved turn, it became more of a slarve.

Conclusion: The Furberg is the closest board I’ve seen to being an actual “quiver killer”. Excels in powder and other soft snow conditions, carves groomers, handles moguls and was still light enough and short enough to take to the halfpipe and park. The board has converted me back to riding hardboots for almost all conditions! I suppose if I going to stay all day in the terrain park, I'll switch to soft boots the Burton Custom 152.

The past couple of “family” snowboard trips to CO, I brought the Dupraz for the pow and the Burton Custom for hanging in the terrain park with the nephews. The next CO trip, it’ll be the Coiler for the hero snow and the Furberg for everything else.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
I've been looking at the Furberg since reading your post. It sounds like a well designed board. Never rally heard of it before, however, you recommend it?

I'm at Mammoth now and scored my best powder day in years!! I rode the Furberg all day with my new Dynafit TLT5' and the board worked great. You should definitely get one, you just need to figure out what length you need. There is a long Furberg thread at Splitboarder.com with discussion on which length to get.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Good for you and very nice riding! You are an expert rider and can make it happen on pretty soft snow (or at least it looks like that on the vid).

 

I recently had a student switching to hard boots (an experienced soft boot rider) who brought a Furberg to the lesson. I started him on my Nidecker Proto first and he was railing after few runs. It was impossible for him to carve a turn on the Furberg, later on.

I didn't ride the board myself, just giving my observations. No intention to put the Furberg down by any means, but it doesn't seem like a good choice for someone who is just getting into carving aspect of the sport. However, it does look like a really good pow board.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...I started him on my Nidecker Proto first and he was railing after few runs. It was impossible for him to carve a turn on the Furberg, later on.

I didn't ride the board myself, just giving my observations. No intention to put the Furberg down by any means, but it doesn't seem like a good choice for someone who is just getting into carving aspect of the sport. However, it does look like a really good pow board...

 

I've read other reviews where the riders could not carve the Furberg very well.  The Furberg does have a fairly soft flex and a large 16m SCR.  Possibly your student was too heavy to carve the board effectively or trying to force a smaller carve than what the board wanted to do.

 

The time the video was taken, it was later in the day, so the snow was firm enough that it did not get all bumped up.

 

I agree with you that I would not recommend the Furberg for someone who wants to get into carving.  UNLESS they only planned on owning ONE board for everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 years later...

Anyone riding one of the 2019/2020 model Furbergs? They all look intriguing. Wondering if the All Mountain is a quiver killer for road trips, or if the All Mountain Split is a good splitboard for many conditions? Does anyone has any updated reviews of this brand of boards?

Things that are getting my attention include the longer sidecut radii of this brand. Also the light camber under foot - would that feel weird? I seem to like the pop I get from traditionally cambered boards. I can see how the the de-cambering of the tip and tail would make sense in powder, and to help with turn initiation in harder conditions. What about the "reverse side-cut?" Seems like a lot of nose/swing weight out front, but what do I know. I've been reading some reviews, and watching some on Youtube. Anyway, curious about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a Furberg Freeride 162 split from last season, and a Freeride 168 from 16/17.  

Not a quiver killer.  Not a carving board or a piste board at all.  I would travel with only a Furberg if I was going heliboarding in Alaska maybe.  It's the shit for steep lines and tight trees in fresh and chopped powder, but a bit boring in open bowls or mellow terrain where you might prefer something with some sidecut and pop.

This is a board for big lines.  Very stable and forgiving, easy to land and it turns tighter and easier than any other board I've ridden.  (Which is why I had to have the split.)  Awkward on groom or hardpack, it's a different kind of ride.  Be careful on your first run.

Never tried the all mountain.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not checked for years, but ferberg used to use a quite short edge length. 

I like a short edge because the turn size is more stable with board inclination than a longer, deeper sidecut. 

Short edge length buys more time in a turn at a given radius.

Large radii boards are harder to move around on at slow speeds, but produce a beautiful turn shape at speed. Adding edge length causes more board flex which takes away the big turn size we are trying to achieve.

We need to start with a bigger radius on the board to achieve the same turn size as edge length increases. The board becomes inherently harder to ride.

I found shortening edges is just as effective as increasing radii. 

Edited by Kijima
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
On 1/23/2020 at 7:19 PM, Kijima said:

I have not checked for years, but ferberg used to use a quite short edge length. 

I like a short edge because the turn size is more stable with board inclination than a longer, deeper sidecut. 

Short edge length buys more time in a turn at a given radius.

Large radii boards are harder to move around on at slow speeds, but produce a beautiful turn shape at speed. Adding edge length causes more board flex which takes away the big turn size we are trying to achieve.

We need to start with a bigger radius on the board to achieve the same turn size as edge length increases. The board becomes inherently harder to ride.

I found shortening edges is just as effective as increasing radii. 

Intriguing Kijima. I tend to gravitate toward shorter boards these days. Maybe what you describe is a large part of why I find them so fun.

Link to post
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.



  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...