Forums Splitboards furberg 2.0 twin and freeride and womens Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 35 total) 1 2 → Author Posts January 3, 2015 at 2:55 am #776803 permnation 278 Posts I have been more than pleased on the 172 freeride. Briefly, I love the old rockered-shape, and it will still be ridden on really deep days, but the new shape is even better when steepness and variable conditions prevail. Not sure what else to say besides, It fucking rips! Kudos Daniel! January 3, 2015 at 3:02 am #776804 permnation 278 Posts furberg deserves a “sticky” at the top of the page along with voile, prior, and venture. Happy New Year! January 3, 2015 at 3:16 am #776805 permnation 278 Posts Disclaimer: Full-blown furberg fanboi but have put dozens of riders on furbergs with only 3 naysayers….board designer of Weston, owner/rep of venture, and a cold smoke bro. January 3, 2015 at 3:39 pm #776830 Taylor 771 Posts That ^ is pretty funny. @sun_rocket January 4, 2015 at 2:27 am #776938 permnation 278 Posts Welcome to Colorado, Taylor. I have some weekday access to Monarch. I would be stoked to get your opinion on the 172. A long-boarders review, if you will. Off topic, what’s up with the gun-toting ginger attempted-rapist deal at Monarch? I hope this kid is caught and/or given some serious slope-justice. My $ is on him being from within a 100-mile radius of DFW at 10 to 1, and the over at +250 miles from Amarillo. Go Ohio State! January 4, 2015 at 3:44 pm #776975 Taylor 771 Posts Thanks Perm. Colorado and its early snow is treating me right. Shredding and board testing sounds like a ton of fun. Shoot me a msg and we’ll sort dates. Later this month and beyond is best for my work schedule. Or I can come to WC on Saturdays. Yeah, the Sawatch sex offender. Let’s hope he gets caught. @sun_rocket January 4, 2015 at 10:33 pm #777038 bkooy 9 Posts Hey Permnation, can you describe the rocker profile on version 2.0 a bit? From the website it looks like camber with early rise tips but it’s a tad vague. Curious as to how it’s different from the previous version and how that affects powder performance. Many thanks. January 5, 2015 at 2:16 am #777059 permnation 278 Posts Taylor wrote: Shredding and board testing sounds like a ton of fun. Shoot me a msg and we’ll sort dates. Later this month and beyond is best for my work schedule. Or I can come to WC on Saturdays. Sounds good! Holiday madness is winding down. It’s been a good one. I’ll send a PM this week. Late this month will work for sure. bkooy wrote: Hey Permnation, can you describe the rocker profile on version 2.0 a bit? From the website it looks like camber with early rise tips but it’s a tad vague. Curious as to how it’s different from the previous version and how that affects powder performance. Many thanks. Thanks for your response. I just got done with a 10 day bender at the shop twisting DINs and have tomorrow off. A picture of 2 old models and 2 new models base to base will show the difference. It is camber between feet with early rise rocker at tips. I will post some comparison pics tomorrow. January 6, 2015 at 6:19 am #777150 permnation 278 Posts new furberg freeride split 160 on left and old 173 on the right January 6, 2015 at 6:23 am #777153 permnation 278 Posts January 6, 2015 at 2:20 pm #777185 permnation 278 Posts bkooy wrote: Curious as to how it’s different from the previous version and how that affects powder performance. Many thanks. Hope the above pics help and show the difference in profiles of the old and new freeride models. Due to a slow snow year at Wolf Creek, my powder days have been limited, number-wise and terrain-wise. So far what I have experienced on the freeride 2.0 is just as good or better than the 1.0 when on a sustained pitch in soft conditions. The board is just “there” and capable of whatever the rider’s input may be. Both 1.0 and 2.0 have that feeling with the 2.0 more eager to gobble up vert down the fall line. We have some serious flat-management with lots of great lower angle meadow skipping between the goods. There is more float on the 1.0 with the big rocker in this style terrain. To help with this, I have sized up on the 2.0 to the 172 from mainly riding the 167. Currently 5’11” 183lbs 11 foot January 6, 2015 at 11:37 pm #777227 permnation 278 Posts January 6, 2015 at 11:46 pm #777233 permnation 278 Posts [youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpxKKAdaIKM&w=560&h=315%5D January 7, 2015 at 5:16 am #777274 bkooy 9 Posts That’s quite a change between 1.0 and 2.0, thanks for the info and pics, that was what I was looking for. I already have an all round board that I like so am inclined more to the high float powder version. Time to keep an eye out on gearswap. Thanks Permnation. January 7, 2015 at 5:51 am #777282 Taylor 771 Posts Yeah, that’s more than a little bit of camber. I’d love to hear their rationale. As I’ve said before, the Furberg guys deserve the benefit of the doubt. @sun_rocket January 8, 2015 at 12:48 am #777346 HansGLudwig 601 Posts @permnation That’s a really nice comparison shot up top. Now I want one! If I could juust get that grand in my bank account to ship one to my house. @taylor Don’t forget putting the two halves together doubles the look of the camber hight. On my screen, the camber was 2 1/2 cursor ‘arrows’ high and the slider puck was two ‘arrows’ high. That means t the camber is just over half the hight of the pucks. I don’t have my split with me at the moment but, pucks are ≈ 1 cm high; so we have ≈ 5 mm of camber hight. That’s less than any of my resort boards and on a par with my Fish. Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page... http://splitboard.com/activity-2/ January 8, 2015 at 1:43 am #777350 permnation 278 Posts HansGLudwig wrote: 5 mm of camber hight Hans, I measured 9mm, which gives 4.5mm of camber. If you factor in +/- .5mm, you are right on! Thanks for your input. Hope to hear you are on a furberg in the future. January 8, 2015 at 1:46 am #777351 permnation 278 Posts bkooy wrote: Time to keep an eye out on gearswap. I am keeping mine, but there are some 167s and 173s on ebay. January 8, 2015 at 2:17 am #777358 permnation 278 Posts bump for Gecko thread January 8, 2015 at 2:27 am #777360 Taylor 771 Posts re: camber, good point @sun_rocket Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 35 total) 1 2 → You must be logged in to reply to this topic.