Blast 167 too long for 60kg/132lb

[nutmeg]

Hello,

I am pondering getting a more interesting board for next season (I am currently riding 97/98 Hot Spirit 158) and will probably get a Hot Blast. However I am yet undecided on the length, http://hammersnowboards.com/products/hotsnowboards/blast.php suggests the 167 for me (1,76m), but as I am quite slim (~60kg) I guess the SL160 should be long enough for me.

Any thoughts?

thanks, cu andreas

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Depends largely on what kind of riding you do? Your skill and aggressiveness. Your weight is a factor, one of many. I know stong gals that ride 180cm and hard charging guys that ride a 158cm. Ride as many boards as you can , ride as often as possible and find your "Magic" board(s). I have found that on any given day , you can have fun on most any snowboard. This certainly doesn't mean you won't have a better time on your favorite board (a board that fits you and your style) it just means it is hard to say what is right for you. If you can send photos of you riding, describe what you like to focus on (steeps, blues? ) pure carving? gates? could help to some degree.

Hot makes excellent boards and have been doing it for a long time. Fine tools for sure! Early Hot Asym This is a good example of a short board riden by a strong trained World Class Alpine professional. One of Mike's slalom boards back in the day.

[nutmeg]

Depends largely on what kind of riding you do? [...] If you can send photos of you riding, describe what you like to focus on (steeps, blues? ) pure carving? gates?

Sadly the only photography connected with my snowboarding is an X-ray of my left wrist (nothing broke though). ;-)

I ride what my local resort has to offer, no gates, mainly red with a little bit of blue and some black (steep) on the way home. The slopes are quite crowded here usually so I need to able to have at least some fun with small, tight turns.

The main reason I am looking for a new board is that I want switch to one that is more difficult to ride initially but offers more grip when the slope is hard or even icy.

thanks, cu andreas

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Sounds like a shorter board with lots of sidecut might be the ticket then. Not so surprisingly , finding a really good shop or putting allot of effort into an excellent tune can make a great deal of difference on the boards "Grip". TIme and time again I have been surprised by how well a board rides only to find it has a "Super Tune". The ultimate is of course when you have both. A Super well built board and a Super Tune!! Example was the quiver of boards at the "Demo" tent at SES 2005. Fin and Michelle had the GOODS!

Jumping on a freshly minted "Madd" 180cm was pure joy!! The Tune on those boards was awesome. The surface pattern was excellent for the conditions. STRUCTURE was key on the warm afternoons of recent snow/ turned wet snow. The edges were much sharper than most conditions required , but when I hit the scraped off areas (RARE!) the edge bit like a Ginus Knife!

Might get that old Hot to the Winterstieger? Breath new life into it too!

Have fun! Bryan

[Allee]

I'm 150lb/68 kg and I have the 156. It's a great board even if I have thrashed it to death learning on it.

I'm an intermediate rider and spend a lot of time on wide open stuff, blues and groomed blacks. On that, it gets a little bit squirelly when you push it along, not as stable at speed as it could be (hardly surprising as it's only a baby). Anything bumpy tends to really upset it, too. But on perfect groom it's awesome, and holds an edge brilliantly.

There is a 162 on it's way to me which might be an improvement (and a little less beaten around). I'd love to try the 167. If you're a strong rider then you shouldn't have any trouble, for all that they're supposed to be really stiff and nasty I've always found mine to be very forgiving and surprisingly easy to just tool around on.

Hope this helps.

[outsider]

i'm 160lbs and the 167 was barely enough for GS. in my oppinion, a super agressive 130lb rider would have fun on the 67 while someone who doesnt ride as hard would prefer the next smaller size (i cant remember if they make a smaller gs board, they might drop down to a slalom radius board the nest size smaller). I ride a 158 blast for slalom, and it is beginning to get a little too soft for me after several seasons of riding, but was ideal when i first got it.

[nutmeg]

Thanks to all of you for telling me your thoughts on this. After weighting your opinions (and taking in account my requirements) I intend to go for the shorter board.

have fun, cu andreas

[Guest stoked]

Location Austria? Hello(!)

seems like both boards would be fine and it's a matter of you wanting a slalom board or something also stable for wider and higher speed turns

also don't the Blasts have rather soft flex? in this case 167 might sound longer than it feels on the slope

on the other hand I did also have fun with sister's 156 Burton Alp last season even though I brought 1,80 meters and up to 90 kilos to the slopes

so I guess if you want a squirrely board easy going anywhere get the 160 or if you want to feel the rush of going through wide turns like on rail tracks get the 167

although I guess the 167 might take you for a ride at first at least that was my experience when I switched from a 157 Hooger Booger Booster (still the best beginner's board ever) to a 166 Nidecker Extreme :)

at least with a good tune whatever length of Blast should be good enough to rip on ice