Riding a board built for less than your weight.

[rustisgold]

I know that riding a board that is too soft will make it harder to hold an edge, but how much of an effect would it really have on someone who is competent but not expert on a carving board?

I currently ride a Donek Axxess 177 that I purchased second hand on this forum. It is a blast to ride but hot damn does it go fast. So so fast.  I can never seem to finish turns on narrower runs so I end up having to scrub a ton of speed in the least carviest of ways (Especially on the busier days). I would like to buy a shorter board that will be more forgiving as the hill gets steeper or the runs get narrower (or both), but they all seem to be built for someone well under my weight (#220). Is it even worth considering a second hand board or a non-custom board, or would i need to go custom on a shorter board built for my weight?

 

Thanks!

[lowrider]

Not impossible but the trend seems to be shorter so the demand is high . The longer boards are abundant keep checking the used postings.

[Corey]

I've been down this road.  220 lbs, riding 'standard' boards meant for 180-lb people.  All-in-all, not terrible!  I didn't notice any negative side effects until I got in soft snow, and/or I started really pressuring the nose of the board with the board tipped up high.  Then the soft boards suddenly didn't work for me.  

For mild cruising, a too-soft board will want to make a tighter turn radius.  You need to be gentle, more like a cat and less like a bull.  That's not bad, as you expend less energy to make a turn.  

[rustisgold]

Thanks Corey! Exactly the sort of info I was hoping for!

[BlueB]

I prefer riding the boards made for lighter rider then myself. It takes a bit more focus to hold clean edge, but one can do way more variety on them. That being said, you'll definitely find the top acceptable speed on steeper harder snow, when on a soft board... 

Also, I believe that soft flexing boards are beneficial for learning. 

[lowrider]

The ultimate answer is how do you want to ride the damn thing ????    If you ride lite on your feet you can ride a board way under your weight class if you charge hard your are  likely to break it and blame the builder. You don't mention SCR which is the main stat you should be looking for in another board if you want tight turns.

[digger jr]

I’m 215 lbs and have had Bruce at Coiler always build boards for me for 175 to 180 pounder. Only now after 10+ years of riding can I appreciate what a stiffer board can do. 

[bruincounselor]

I have a persistent ankle problem from going over the nose of a too soft slalom board on a snowy day 5 years ago. I sprained my ankle severely in my boot. It was fun while it lasted, but not worth the ongoing reminder of that fateful day. It doesn't prevent me from doing anything, but the ache never goas away. Be safe out there.

[1xsculler]

29 minutes ago, bruincounselor said:

I have a persistent ankle problem from going over the nose of a too soft slalom board on a snowy day 5 years ago. I sprained my ankle severely in my boot. It was fun while it lasted, but not worth the ongoing reminder of that fateful day. It doesn't prevent me from doing anything, but the ache never goas away. Be safe out there.

I think I may have done the same thing to my ankle.  The outside of my rear foot all the way up to my knee is very sore and the outside of my foot is dark purple. I have no idea when or how the injury occurred. Maybe it was due to normal foot/ankle torquing. It is very sore and tender to the touch but once I get my boots on and am riding it really doesn't bother me much. I won't be able to board until March 9th so I am hoping for full healing by then.

[rustisgold]

Thanks all!

[queequeg]

Speaking only in terms of edgehold, my experience seems to be somewhat different than everyone else here. I find that a somewhat softer board will have much improved edgehold, but a smaller sweet-spot and waay less pop. I assume that this is because edge pressure is applied more intensely over a shorter length of edge that is right under your feet; hence when the ice is super hard the increased pressure over a shorter distance bites into the snow a bit harder. Of the two boards I have I definitely prefer the softer of the two on truly icy conditions, but I much prefer the stiffer of the two the rest of the time because I can carve more expressively and aggressively.

When I am carving on icy stuff on the softer board the the sidecut north of the nose (feels) as though it is not providing tons of edge pressure but feeding the channel being formed by the edge smoothly into the smaller high-pressure area between my feet smoothly (as long as I am pretty centered). When I am riding the stiffer board, edge pressure feels more consistent tip-to-tail, providing a bigger sweet spot without the extra-high-pressure spot between the feet that seems to create a deeper channel to carve through. 

Not sure if that makes any sense to anyone but that is at least how it feels to me. That said, I don't recall ever riding a board that I thought was a total noodle. I would imagine that a board that is *too* soft would just feel sloppy and awful.

Edited February 23, 2018 by queequeg

[philw]

11 hours ago, lowrider said:

Not impossible but the trend seems to be shorter so the demand is high . The longer boards are abundant keep checking the used postings.

I think there are two different issues here:

1. riding boards designed for heavier people.
2. riding boards designed to be ridden short.

The second is a question of feel and style. In 30 seasons or so of hard boots my board sizes have moved from 1.63 to 1.56 (piste) and 1.68 to 1.54 (powder). My weight is unchanged. Not a huge shift, but modern designs tend to be more stable than older boards and they work well shorter in my experience. (2) is not really an issue as much as a question of what you like.

(1) on the other hand, which is what the thread title is about.
As an experienced rider, riding something specified for someone lighter than you... is a different issue completely. Most of my experience of "testing" different board comes from powder, where it would be unpleasant to ride an incorrectly sized board. That's why suppliers like Lib have lots of different sizes of board, and why custom builders exist (although also why you probably can't use them unless you have enough specific experience not to need to test boards). On piste, I've ridden board designed for heavier people, and they require huge amounts of unsubtle input to make them turn properly: they're designed to have more mass applied to them than I have. At the other end of the spectrum, boards for lighter people or soft boards generally... that's easier to manage, but you will easily overpower such a board and find it doing what you don't want.

In powder it's not particularly about the overall stiffness of the board; too short and you just ride too low in the powder, accelerate slowly and generally sink. Too long and the tail causes problems as it refuses to sink in the turns (which it should do - that's why they have those fancy tail designs). On piste, perhaps it's more about the overall flex of the board. I still think there's a relatively narrow sweet spot for board length. In powder, some years they'll make the 156 (or whatever) a little bit differently from the previous year and although I can of course still ride it, it's a completely different board (less fun) just because they change the flex a little bit. More often they'll fix that issue the next year...

Bear in mind that the recommended length for a board comes from what the designer had in mind for the board's use. That doesn't mean you couldn't ride it at a different length if your use is different. My feeling from this board is that many people ride huge boards, which is fine, but those boards would not be particularly practical where I ride.

[rustisgold]

Thanks queequeg and philw!

 

philw, I agree that huge boards are favored here. And to be fair my huge board is a total blast to ride, but in New Mexico, we have a lot of narrow steep terrain. I rode in Taos last weekend and had to switch to softboots after only three runs because I was EXHAUSTED from muscling the board through turns it wasn’t ready to make.

Next year will be a short board year.

[Shred Gruumer]

I think most boards are way too stiff!... but then again I like to sip tea in my turns...Why should carving be work!!  shouldn't it be called "Fun"..?

[philw]

4 hours ago, rustisgold said:

...

philw, I agree that huge boards are favored here. And to be fair my huge board is a total blast to ride, but in New Mexico, we have a lot of narrow steep terrain. I rode in Taos last weekend and had to switch to softboots after only three runs because I was EXHAUSTED from muscling the board through turns it wasn’t ready to make.

Next year will be a short board year.

Yeah, I rode Taos too (hell froze over..) - and a great place it is! It's more like most of our European terrain, hence I ride a slalom board.

Stiffness.... for piste, the issue for me is "does this board support me when I turn or not". So the stiffness has to be such that when I push into a turn, there's potential for the board to push back. I don't want it to wash out when I'm riding hard, but I also don't want to have to ride hard all the time. To me, that's why a "sweet spot" exists. 
 

[barryj]

I too am in favor of softer boards for my weight.......just makes the day and my legs last much, much longer!

Stiffer boards are also more twitchy and will pay you or make you pay depending on your attention to the given situation.

If your looking for specifically for tighter turns, look for boards with a smaller SCR, regardless of length .........and yes I would even by a slalom board on the soft side.

[BlueB]

11 hours ago, queequeg said:

Speaking only in terms of edgehold, my experience seems to be somewhat different than everyone else here. I find that a somewhat softer board will have much improved edgehold, but a smaller sweet-spot and waay less pop. I assume that this is because edge pressure is applied more intensely over a shorter length of edge that is right under your feet; hence when the ice is super hard the increased pressure over a shorter distance bites into the snow a bit harder. Of the two boards I have I definitely prefer the softer of the two on truly icy conditions, but I much prefer the stiffer of the two the rest of the time because I can carve more expressively and aggressively.

When I am carving on icy stuff on the softer board the the sidecut north of the nose (feels) as though it is not providing tons of edge pressure but feeding the channel being formed by the edge smoothly into the smaller high-pressure area between my feet smoothly (as long as I am pretty centered). When I am riding the stiffer board, edge pressure feels more consistent tip-to-tail, providing a bigger sweet spot without the extra-high-pressure spot between the feet that seems to create a deeper channel to carve through. 

Not sure if that makes any sense to anyone but that is at least how it feels to me. That said, I don't recall ever riding a board that I thought was a total noodle. I would imagine that a board that is *too* soft would just feel sloppy and awful.

These are very valid observations and are true for slightly softer board. Part of the reasons for good performance of SLIGHTLY softer board in hard conditions is that it would bend without excessive pressure applied by the rider, which result in more subtle touch and better balance. Then when it's way too soft, it just starts folding/bending/twisting too much at speed on solid snow, especially when slightly out of the sweet spot, as noted by you. 

[BlueB]

I generally agree with Phil. I've also gone shorter and softer with my boards over the years, mostly due to the traffic and conditions and type of all-round riding I started to prefer and also the requirements of the work. I hardly ride anything longer then 170 nowadays (I'm 6' 180+), some of my boards are ridiculously soft. I also gravitated towards wider boards, lower stances and tight radii... And then there's my 17cm wide Loony, for the hero days when I want to go crazy... or should I say loony? 

What I find quite interesting is that we have quite a few active threads, right now, that tie into the same picture: Softer boards, the length and the speed, lower angles thread, etc.