Jump to content
Note to New Members ×

THRIST Superconductor vs. KESSLER 168


Comapedrosa

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, barryj said:

Yes..... trying to move rear binding to get axle "in middle of rear foot" is giving me Huge stance And putting me in backseat  :smashfrea

Can't you move your axles closer? 

4 hours ago, pokkis said:

On Allflex/Vistflex type plates it is not so big issue as on old style plates where long stance force your bindings to incorrect place regards axles.

There are a many mounting points for axles on the Apex Race V2. Maybe bomber is more restrictive. I can even go 1 wider, but that's put the rear axle under the heel of my rear foot and it won't be centred on the ASIP mounts and that would bother my OCD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, barryj said:

Remind me of the advantaged/disadvantages of axle spacing....I though it had a direct relation to the performance/damping of the board.  Closer = less damping/more feel  - Correct ?? 

Oh I just thought since getting optimal axle placement is giving you huge stance backseat issues why not just move the axles optimally based on your comfortable stance width instead of the other way around? Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding something? 

I reckon just play with all axle positions and find what you like best.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to get this thread back on track.

Have had the pleasure of borrowing Pat Chouinard's Thirst Superconductor (175?) for the afternoon. It was built for about my weight, about 180lbs.

I rode my 2017 Coiler Nirvana Energy Torsion+ 174 (12-14m SCR) this morning which has about 30 days riding on it as a comparison.

The Thirst has a slightly wider waist but there was no problem putting it on edge with my standard 58/62 angles.

Once I had got acquainted with it on the greens, it was off to dark blue runs to put it through its' paces. Riding in flat light with light snowfall on chopped up groom the Thirst gripped well, came round almost as fast as the Donek MK, and made easy work of speed controlled carving on steeps. I felt more confident riding it in those conditions that I had my Coiler in the morning.

The Coiler with its P-Tex top is a stealth board. The Thirst is like a 2 stroke motorcycle, it roars in the turn on hard pack, it rings when you drop it on the snow before you click into your bindings, it resonates with every touch.

Help me! It's now 5pm, and I'm onto my 3rd can of Sprite, and I'm still Thirsty......

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 2/13/2019 at 6:08 PM, SunSurfer said:

Time to get this thread back on track.

Have had the pleasure of borrowing Pat Chouinard's Thirst Superconductor (175?) for the afternoon. It was built for about my weight, about 180lbs.

I rode my 2017 Coiler Nirvana Energy Torsion+ 174 (12-14m SCR) this morning which has about 30 days riding on it as a comparison.

The Thirst has a slightly wider waist but there was no problem putting it on edge with my standard 58/62 angles.

Once I had got acquainted with it on the greens, it was off to dark blue runs to put it through its' paces. Riding in flat light with light snowfall on chopped up groom the Thirst gripped well, came round almost as fast as the Donek MK, and made easy work of speed controlled carving on steeps. I felt more confident riding it in those conditions that I had my Coiler in the morning.

The Coiler with its P-Tex top is a stealth board. The Thirst is like a 2 stroke motorcycle, it roars in the turn on hard pack, it rings when you drop it on the snow before you click into your bindings, it resonates with every touch.

Help me! It's now 5pm, and I'm onto my 3rd can of Sprite, and I'm still Thirsty......

I know sunsurfer also has a 162 Kessler, so he is familiar with the K ride. Am I the only other one who has actually ridden both Kessler and Thirst? I've owned a 180 and two 162 Kesslers in the past. I have ridden a 168 and a 170 Kessler for a few runs.

I now own 3 Thirsts: SF 162 (small), Superconductor 175 (med) and 8RW 185 (large). I have ridden these 3 boards all winter and have gradually gotten to trust that they can handle most all conditions better than anything I've ever ridden before. I have found myself ridding my very familiar home mountain terrain in ways I had not dared before. I keep waiting for the big crash, when I've pushed it too far, but it hasn't happened...yet...:nono:shouldn't even say stuff like that.

With lots of time to think on the chair ride up after a run, I've been thinking about the comparison to other boards. Thirsts have the best qualities of several boards: the silky smooth carve of a Kessler, light and nimble sureness of a non-metal Oxess, the smooth & easy ride of a Coiler, the energy of a Rev and can be pushed hard and blast through crud like a 162 SG fullrace. I'm just trying to think of some of the qualities I liked about each of these other boards. Since I've been riding these Thirsts, I haven't missed them. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bigwavedave said:

I know sunsurfer also has a 162 Kessler, so he is familiar with the K ride. Am I the only other one who has actually ridden both Kessler and Thirst? I've owned a 180 and two 162 Kesslers in the past. I have ridden a 168 and a 170 Kessler for a few runs.

I now own 3 Thirsts: SF 162 (small), Superconductor 175 (med) and 8RW 185 (large). I have ridden these 3 boards all winter and have gradually gotten to trust that they can handle most all conditions better than anything I've ever ridden before. I have found myself ridding my very familiar home mountain terrain in ways I had not dared before. I keep waiting for the big crash, when I've pushed it too far, but it hasn't happened...yet...:nono:shouldn't even say stuff like that.

With lots of time to think on the chair ride up after a run, I've been thinking about the comparison to other boards. Thirsts have the best qualities of several boards: the silky smooth carve of a Kessler, light and nimble sureness of a non-metal Oxess, the smooth & easy ride of a Coiler, the energy of a Rev and can be pushed hard and blast through crud like a 162 SG fullrace. I'm just trying to think of some of the qualities I liked about each of these other boards. Since I've been riding these Thirsts, I haven't missed them. 

Ever ride a plate on a Thirst?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, daveo said:

Ever ride a plate on a Thirst?

I am not fan of plates for freecarving.  For racing I get it, East Coast ice, I get that.  Living out west and having typically good conditions and having tried a few plates, I found the performance gains not worth the low speed handling sacrifice, weight and stack height increase.  

A Thirst with reasonably flexy bindings will handle the worst conditions (spring freeze/thaw cycles) we get stunningly well.

I think our North America board builders are building some of the finest recreational freecarving boards out there and plates are not needed when you build them right.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/20/2019 at 3:38 PM, daveo said:

Ever ride a plate on a Thirst?

I guess the original question was K vs T, as much as I don't like making those "vs" type comparisons, it is personal opinion after all. All the boards I mentioned in my post I consider to be great boards. I just stumbled upon this old thread and after looking through it, I was struck by the many opinions offered by folks who have only ridden one of the boards in question.

Regarding plates, I once demoed an AF plate (on my Rev) and it worked fine, but I just didn't like the disconnect. I am fortunate to ride mostly fresh morning groom and go home when and if the going gets too rough.  Since I've been riding the Thirsts I have found that I will keep riding later as they seem to go through late day chop and push piles a bit smoother than my other boards, so now I'm even less inclined to get a plate.  

I see no reason why one couldn't mount a plate on a Thirst,  just not sure if it would be worth isolating yourself from the delicious feel of its silky smooth carve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Chouinard said:

When and under what conditions do you ride the 162? 

When I want to keep my speed under control and/or be more maneuverable e.g., flat light, early season limited snow coverage, crowded hill, narrow runs. It gets the least use of the three. Sometimes I ride it just to have a giggle. It rides like a SL board; very versatile and more fun than you'd expect...and makes small midwestern resorts with short runs more interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm waiting on a Thirst XC from Mark.  I think that would be the real comparison to the K168 which I also have. I haven't ridden the Superconductor yet, but if its anything like the 8RW, these boards couldn't differ more in feel, however their silky smoothness is equal, just different.  Iv'e also ridden the 8RW with Sidewinders, F2 Ti's and Titanflex and they ALL completely change the feel of the board underfoot. Not negatively mind you, just different.  Love it with the Titanflex.  Just came back from a week in Big Sky where I planned to try it with geckos but never did as the ride is so nice with the Titanflex.  The K168 too is just a great ride all around, but definitely improves with isolation, whereas it would be diminishing returns with the Thirst. FWIW...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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.




×
×
  • Create New...