terekhov Posted January 26, 2017 Report Share Posted January 26, 2017 just remembering.. victoria's burton money shot from years ago: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted January 26, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 26, 2017 14 hours ago, philw said: Burton gave up on Carving way back in the 1990s. I know you're talking about piste boards only, but many of their powder boards are piste capable and those would probably be wide enough. Wide enough? Not sure which model you are referring to, but I checked their whole range - their widest offering is a 26.6cm waist (some not too interesting middle range shape)!!! Going from my example in the first post this board would still be too narrow. As are most boards from all other brands ... About the Virus stuff - there is a small dedicated group which are having fun on those skinny boards. Nothing wrong with that! But for me snowboarding is also about "standing sideways" - this brings this special feeling. The Virus boards (most of them) are more like Skwals (which are also fun, but in a different way). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik J Posted January 26, 2017 Report Share Posted January 26, 2017 10 hours ago, terekhov said: just remembering.. victoria's burton money shot from years ago: drool 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted January 26, 2017 Report Share Posted January 26, 2017 6 hours ago, Erik J said: drool That's the general reaction to Victoria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terekhov Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 7 hours ago, Neil Gendzwill said: That's the general reaction to Victoria. that's what cool girls is for in snowboarding or elsewhere... - carvy-feely 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 Thanks for that! I have an old photo of her tacked to my office wall, charging down some gorgeous steep face in Alaska. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoroSnow Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 Just one more from the old days............ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 That's a killer pic (except for way too baggy clothes)! Note the plates on a fairly wide board. Alp? Amp? Also, note the overhang... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Stevens Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 you all can go off-topic with the best of them 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 Rob, how wide of a board you ride, nowadays? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Stevens Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 Not wide enough, which reminds me to call Donek back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 4 hours ago, BlueB said: That's a killer pic (except for way too baggy clothes)! Note the plates on a fairly wide board. Alp? Amp? She's clearly in tent. Board is (most likely) a Factory Prime. I'd check with closet inventory, but I'm away from the mountain at present. Might look wide, but then she's probably much smaller than her reputation. -- As to the board width topic: It's entirely possible that larger companies, with their scores of qualified test riders, have realized that wider boards for general purpose use aren't worth the tooling cost. Beyond a certain width, the board is going to be riding you. The feets may get larger, but the linkage that supports them is only stronger in proportion to normal physical activity, while the loads associated with riding are often significantly higher. Don't let that minor detail deter your pursuit however. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 37 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said: The feets may get larger, but the linkage that supports them is only stronger in proportion to normal physical activity, while the loads associated with riding are often significantly higher. This is why we never skip leg day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Beckmann AG said: Might look wide, but then she's probably much smaller than her reputation. I've heard her described as "tiny". Big clanking brass ladyballs though. Here's the poster I have hanging in my office: Edited January 27, 2017 by Neil Gendzwill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queequeg Posted January 27, 2017 Report Share Posted January 27, 2017 5 hours ago, BlueB said: That's a killer pic (except for way too baggy clothes)! Note the plates on a fairly wide board. Alp? Amp? Also, note the overhang... That's an FP. First Gen I think. They came in two waist widths 18cm and ??? 19.5 I think??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCrobar Posted January 28, 2017 Report Share Posted January 28, 2017 Hello Many times I have read guys stating that riding a wide board is more tiring then riding a narrower board. The explanation as to why is generally the idea that more leverage is created making it more tiring, makes sense I guess. The problem I have with this idea is that this has never been my personal experience. I can honestly say that in all my years of riding I've never thought, 'Man, my legs are tired ... I need to get a narrower board!' Also, the only time I can remember reading guys talking about a board being awesome, but very hard on the legs and tiring to ride, has been the new and narrow 18cm wide Madd killer. What also doesn't add up for me personally is the idea of softboot carvers generally use wider boards in the 26cm range, with soft boots that are much less powerful and supportive, but we don't seem to hear complaints about these boards being hard or tiring to ride. It seems to me that a board being hard or easy on the legs is a result of many factors, more than just being wide or narrow. This is just my personal experience, this may be different than yours. Cheers Rob 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRAZZ Posted January 28, 2017 Report Share Posted January 28, 2017 ^^^ Looks painful not tiring (look at the slo-mo) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 Rob, Given the available wind, I'm suggesting that it's entirely possible to have too much sail for the mast and rigging. That's structure, more so than conditioning. Given all the variables associated with equipment configuration and approach, correlating width and fatigue from rider preference will give you subjective trends, but not objective conclusions. On January 27, 2017 at 5:55 PM, lonbordin said: This is why we never skip leg day. 'Leg Day'? I don't believe I've met anyone by that name... So if you get stronger, you most likely get heavier, thereby adding sprung weight to the chassis. Given that increase in mass has a multiplier effect on loading, is lifting really a solution, or do you eventually become like Godzilla, theoretically useless on dry land? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 12 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said: Given the available wind, I'm suggesting that it's entirely possible to have too much sail for the mast and rigging. Given that increase in mass has a multiplier effect on loading, is lifting really a solution, or do you eventually become like Godzilla, theoretically useless on dry land? It's possible to have too much sail but I've rarely run into that situation. I'm an avid dinghy sailor in the non-winter months. At my size I'm almost always wishing for more sail. I was out in my Force 5 last summer when it was gusting over 30 knots... You couldn't wipe the smile off my face and I didn't break a thing!!! There might be a point of diminishing returns but the few centimeters of extra lever versus a healthy adult male isn't going to radically alter the physics of the situation. I submit Ryan Knapton 's 30+cm softboot board as exhibit A. The defense rests... Really I'm going to sleep. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 24 minutes ago, lonbordin said: There might be a point of diminishing returns but the few centimeters of extra lever versus a healthy adult male isn't going to radically alter the physics of the situation. I submit Ryan Knapton 's 30+cm softboot board as exhibit A. The defense rests... Really I'm going to sleep. I submit (using lawyer speak here) that one rider is most likely an outlier, and not statistically significant? And hereby direct your attention to the Steve Bauer 'stealth' bike circa 1993: http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478 Garnered considerable attention but was not a game changer by any practical measure. Meanwhile: Edited January 30, 2017 by Beckmann AG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcousticBoarder Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/27/2017 at 6:53 PM, RCrobar said: What also doesn't add up for me personally is the idea of softboot carvers generally use wider boards in the 26cm range, with soft boots that are much less powerful and supportive, but we don't seem to hear complaints about these boards being hard or tiring to ride. I took my Donek Incline out last season on my hard boots and kept my angles above 45 degrees. I got thrown around way too much and had to go back to change out equipment after 2 painful runs. Point is, you have to be able to pressure the edge well enough. The reason why softboot boards are the width they are is so this is easily accomplished by the masses who are buying the boards. It's not designed solely for carvers who don't want boot out. These people are not the norm, and that's when you (like Ryan) go to a custom board manufacturer. Hardboot boards are of course going to be narrower because instead of pressuring the edges with the heel and toe, we are usually using side forces on the boots. Comes down to if you want a wider board, by all means get one, that's why we have AMAZING custom board manufacturers, but the market doesn't exist for that to be mass produced and be profitable. Ryan even says in the beginning of his Donek review that his viewers should NOT go getting a board with his specs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted January 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 AcousticBoarder - I see your point and you are definitely right, but I don't think that wider boards are a. more difficult to ride and b. more fatiquing. Of course if you exaggerate the width you might have negative effects, but why should we do that? My point is - go out and try a little wider boards, alpine and softboots, and you might be surprised by the new possibilites! There is a lot of speculating and theory in this thread now, but I guess that some of those riders never really found out their perfect width by experimenting with different shapes. I still think that adding a centimeter or better two to the average production board, would better reflect our anatomy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nils Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 Interesting topic, I remember that Jacques (Rilliet) idea behind widening the wild duck knifer shape in the late 90's to 23.5cm went along with the idea of softer flex, and controlling the torsion so the soft flex would not make a spaghetto like board. He optimized the width of the Extremecarver to suit his riding technique/ feet length and get the best compromise of width / boot angle/ power in order to ride near vertical * on the snow at the apex of the turns with more power than he had on narrower boards. ( * remember Jacques even sanded, polished and waxed his sidewalls ;)) It felt to me awkward at once coming from an oxygen proton at 19 something width to my first 175cm Swoard, but after understanding the required technique adaptation and other mods ( no canting, no lift, looser bindings) I found it way more comfy than what I was used to have on higher angulation boards. Yes wider means no quick edge to edge change, but it gives more power with less effort and allows longer feet to have less angles...It would be interesting to try the same shape with 24.5 or 25cm width..would become less agile, and less versatile thu... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terekhov Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 just to note: IMHO width is a matter of preference on flat 2d slopes, but when you go into - my lovely - chopped or moguls, any 3d high-turbulence snow - width is a huge hindrance. and - if you usually ride forward - static asym load on neck muscles due to constant high neck torque into travel direction not a blessing too so i'm - personally - agree to refuse from low angles just on that matter. feeling totally free in 50+deg stance yes, it is a problem when you want to ride ~0degs on current industrial boards. but - counting that 50-50 boardslide is not my daily routine - pretty happy with +45+30 on softboots, and 50+degs on hardboots any day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corey Posted January 30, 2017 Report Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, terekhov said: just to note: IMHO width is a matter of preference on flat 2d slopes, but when you go into - my lovely - chopped or moguls, any 3d high-turbulence snow - width is a huge hindrance. and - if you usually ride forward - static asym load on neck muscles due to constant high neck torque into travel direction not a blessing too Doesn't every softboot movie contradict this? Surely all of those riders wouldn't be better off on monoskis in choppy terrain? I have no dog in this fight, just pointing out a logic gap. 2 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.