Forums Splitboards First Splitboard Sizing
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #777601
    GTryan
    3 Posts

    Buying my first splitboard and settled on a Burton Landlord split. Still undecided which size to go with (159 vs 163 cm).

    Im 5’9ish, 165lbs, size 11.5 boot. Board will be used mainly (if not completely) in greater Jackson Hole area. Will never be doing longer than 1 day tours to give you an idea about the size of my pack. My resort board is a NS Proto CT 154cm.

    Burton says 159cm for 145-185 lbs and 163cm for 185-205lbs. No idea as to my weight with gear, but I would guess closer to 185 which pushes me towards the larger board. Just worried it’ll feel huge compared to my 154.

    Any opinions greatly appreciated.

    Thanks

    #777827
    GTryan
    3 Posts

    Bump. Is this in the wrong place?

    #777837
    permnation
    302 Posts

    Good morning, you’re in the right place. I just looked at the specs of the Landlord and would suggest the 163 based on 165lbs. being on the low side of the weight range, plus the extra 2mm of width for your 11.5 boot. It shouldn’t be too much board for you. Good luck and happy splitting.

    #777857
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    I have 11.5 feet too and board’s width is what keeps me from snatching up a Landlord split. I boot out unless I both feet are at 20º or more.
    Whatever size you go, it will feel larger then you get used to it. In pow with a pack, you’ll appreciate the bigger board.
    Just don’t do moguls.

    Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page...
    http://splitboard.com/activity-2/

    #778073
    FloImSchnee
    290 Posts

    With size 11.5 feet I’d rather go for a board with >265mm waist.

    #778092
    GTryan
    3 Posts

    Thanks for the responses guys.

    Width is something I did not think about. I just assumed that being a split and nearly powder specific board it would run wider than my 154 main stick.

    So the 159cm has a 253mm waist and the 163cm has a 255mm waist. Hardly a difference, but if HansGLudwig boots out at less than 20 degrees I certainly will (12, -9 deg stance).

    Any recommendations for a wider board for big footed people?

    #778117
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    Any recommendations for a wider board for big footed people?

    I assume you want to stay in the similar price range and all mountain specs: Voile Revelator, Jones Explorer, Rome Whitetroom to name a few. There are more.
    And then there’s Craigslist & eBay. . .

    Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page...
    http://splitboard.com/activity-2/

    #780541
    Zude
    364 Posts

    Get something with rocker and at least a 26″ waist 160 length and up….Bigger is better for skining and pow.

    #780553
    rughty
    620 Posts

    I’m 135 without the gear and ride a 161 carbon solution. I am sure I am on the biggest and stiffest ride for my weight on this forum or close to it. I would say 160 and up as well. Great for pow days and nice and stable in less than ideal conditions. You could always go with toe ramps if your board width is too narrow. Raising up the toe even a 1/4 inch really increases the angle you could carve to reduce boot out. Not to mention edge to edge turning is much quicker on a narrower deck. DIY splits are better than carrying duplicate gear, ie cross country skis… To save a little more cash, time and energy, you could get prowder kits and not have to put in inserts. I think they are $100 to do each board. Voile touring hardware is cheap. Skins aren’t so cheap, but with the money saved on decks, they would be affordable.

    #783731
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    I run a 162 Prior AMF split and I’m slightly heavier with a centered stance it gets the job done 95% of the time. If you get a directional with any rocker you will be all set with a 160-162. The Prior is mostly camber with early rise tip and tail so with more rocker it would be perfect. Just my 2 cents.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.