Your opinions please...Alps, Ultra Primes, UPZ vs Deeluxe

[1xsculler]

Alps and Ultra Primes vs all the other boards for the same purposes, i.e. general all around carving, and the pros and cons of UPZs vs Deeluxes?

 

I'm 6' 2'' tall and I weigh 150 #s. I'm a competitive rower who trains almost daily, year round.. I'm 72 years old and I'm trying to get my carve back (which was never all that solid in 2006) after a ten year break.  I've skied since 1948.  I have an Ultra Prime 69 and a couple of Alp 71s (one with a 1mm to 2mm concave base) each of which are right between my chin and my nose in length and both have 10.5 side-cut radii.  I'm wondering if a little shorter board, i.e. 164, with a tighter side-cut, i.e. 9.5, might make it easier for me to carve on a little steeper slopes.

Edited March 5, 2016 by 1xsculler

[1xsculler]

I now see that a little research on the various sites will answer most of my concerns but I still welcome your comments.

 

I'll probably order a pair of UPZs and Deeluxes, decide for myself in my livingroom, which may be very inadequate, and return whatever seems like it won't work.

 

I'm in SX91 Equipe ski boots now and they're fine for beginning gentle slopes but if I ever get good enough to carve on steeper stuff I doubt  they would have enough forward flexibility.

[AcousticBoarder]

I cannot say much for the boards, but for boots, it is all personal fit. Deeluxe has a wide heel and narrow toe box, and UPZ has a narrow heel and wide toe box. I believe deeluxe will also accommodate a higher instep better, however going to a good boot fitter will also solve this.

Another consideration is that UPZs shell has a smaller footprint than deeluxe does, meaning if you have large feet you should be able to get a couple degrees of wider stance, however if you have small feet it may become problematic for binding fitment

There are a couple other differences especially when including models but I am not knowledgeable enough to list them. Whatever your decision, don't expect them to fit perfect out of the box, most need to go to a boot fitter and get a custom footbed and/or liner molding.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Ski boots work for some people but most find the snowboard boots work much better. The additional flexibilty in all directions plus the adjustable forward lean is very helpful. The shorter sole lengths let you run lower angles.

Modern board designs incorporating titanal, multi-radius sidecuts and decambered noses are much easier to handle and turn tighter for a given radius. I would look into a new board.

[DonPablo]

I think Ultra Primes/Speeds work pretty well, you don't need to rush out a buy an Titanal board to have fun.

[ibrussell]

I have both 171 Alp and 168 UP and a 174 4X4   I iike the flex on the UP best of the three and will ride it as a all mountain in anything less than a foot and half of powder.  It's light so it can be thrown around but won't hold on hard pack as well as a newer board. The 4x4 is heaver and wider so it's slower edge to edge. Also have some glass Coiler's and ti Coiler's.  Glass ones will hold better on hard pack than burtons but take more effort to run them right.  Ti Coiler rides like a dream and will take whatever work you want to put into it.  Take both your boards up for the day see what you like about each, then keep an eye out  for custom this summer.  ib 

[Aracan]

The SX91 Equipe are rear-entry, correct?

Speaking as someone who started snowboarding in rear-entry ski boots, let me state once and for all that it is a very bad idea. The boots are far too stiff in all the wrong places. While probably not dangerous, those boots will seriously detract from your fun. Switch to SB boots or at least softer, buckle-type ski boots ASAP.

[Beckmann AG]

With a good pair of boots, and properly configured bindings, those older boards will be transformed. Perhaps not to the extent as riding a 'new' board, but good enough to get back in the game and figure out the next move.

[patmoore]

Re: boots.  I like a lot of forward flex and have modified my Head Strato Pros to allow extra forward lean.  Having said that, I frequently have to hop back and forth from skis to board so on those days I use a pair of Dalbello Krypton boots and loosen the power strap while putting the top buckle on the loosest setting.  It's not the best situation for skis or board but it is an acceptable compromise.

 

I'm close to your age (will turn 70 soon) and recently acquired a 168 Ultra Prime.  It's light and responsive and I'm going to be spending more time on it.  Probably make a few runs on it today.

[1xsculler]

Thanks a lot for the informative comments.

[mr_roboteye]

Alps and Ultra Primes vs all the other boards for the same purposes, i.e. general all around carving, and the pros and cons of UPZs vs Deeluxes?

 

I'm 6' 2'' tall and I weigh 150 #s. I'm a competitive rower who trains almost daily, year round.. I'm 72 years old and I'm trying to get my carve back (which was never all that solid in 2006) after a ten year break.  I've skied since 1948.  I have an Ultra Prime 69 and a couple of Alp 71s (one with a 1mm to 2mm concave base) each of which are right between my chin and my nose in length and both have 10.5 side-cut radii.  I'm wondering if a little shorter board, i.e. 164, with a tighter side-cut, i.e. 9.5, might make it easier for me to carve on a little steeper slopes.

 

 

When I used to live in Whistler I had an Alp 171 in 1999. I weighed a bit more than you do (170 lbs at the time) and rode (ride) quite aggressively. Long story short: I feel the 171 had too much sidecut for how stiff burton made it. Once the speeds started climbing I didn't weigh enough to be able to bend the board.

 

If you don't want to do fast carves I don't think it will be much of an issue for you but a word to the wise: it's a fairly stiff and not too forgiving board. At least the one I had was haha. Good luck

Edited March 9, 2016 by mr_roboteye

[1xsculler]

Thank you for weighing in mr_r.  If you as a 20 # heavier guy and a much more skilled carver feel the Alp 71 is too much board for you then it and my Ultr Prime 69 certainly must be too much board for me.  Their stiffness is probably holding me back more than my boots are.

 

What brands, models and lengths of board would you recommend for me, a, once again, beginning, 72 year old, 6' 2", 150 # carver wanabe?

[Neil Gendzwill]

Honestly that's the first I've ever heard of Alps being described as stiff or unforgiving.  They were Burton's old freecarve model.

[BlueB]

Yes softest of Burton carvers... I must admit I never rode the green one, that wast the last version produced. The blue square tail capped 169 and maroon sidewall 169 were very forgiving.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[mr_roboteye]

The one I had was like a closet door. Could have been a Wednesday board or an anomaly or maybe burton got some complaints about how the 169 was a little noodly and addressed it. Boris is right the Alp was replaced by the wire

[mr_roboteye]

Thank you for weighing in mr_r.  If you as a 20 # heavier guy and a much more skilled carver feel the Alp 71 is too much board for you then it and my Ultr Prime 69 certainly must be too much board for me.  Their stiffness is probably holding me back more than my boots are.

 

What brands, models and lengths of board would you recommend for me, a, once again, beginning, 72 year old, 6' 2", 150 # carver wannabe?

 

I think you should ride everything you can get your mitts on. It's the only way you'll figure out what you like :)

[ibrussell]

I have both and green 171 Alp is a lot stiffer than green 169 Ultra Prime.  Move your front binding forward of the UP Burton setback holes and you should be able  make it turn easier.

[mr_roboteye]

I have both and green 171 Alp is a lot stiffer than green 169 Ultra Prime.  Move your front binding forward of the UP Burton setback holes and you should be able  make it turn easier.

Thanks for the validation. It was a long time ago but I didn't think I'd gone that squirrelly in the head since then haha.