Forums Splitboards Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 41 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #578419
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    I need some advice from some people that have had a good amount of experience on different splitboards or that currently use or have used one of these camber/rocker profiles

    I am doing some research on some boards before i purchase one and when I first started I was overwhelmed because as always there is so many choices but after looking into each companies splitboard line and also considering what I plan on doing with the board a lot of boards were not for me.

    To clearify I wouldn’t call myself a freestyle rider but when I ride pow I feel more comfortable to mess around do spins and flips that’s way I’m leaning towards a centered board or slightly set back .5-1inch nothing crazy. So I can still ride and land switch without completely feeling out of whack.

    I’m 5’7″ 165lbs, I want a board that will float well in deep pow but also tough enough to take the big hits, like steeps, big jumps and perform well at high speed. I currently own a few board with a good amount of different camber/rocker profiles like Direction Camber/Rocker, Libtech Enhanced BTX!, Camrock, Direction/pow Camrock, TBT. I do not own a board with a rocker/flat/rocker profiles yet that’s is way I’m not sure how it performs. If I had to pick one of the above as the best in my opinion as all around profile it would be CamRock for sure I have The Greats in a 156 and I board is definitely one of a kind can handle Pow very will and steeps and super stable at high speed.

    These are the boards and camber profiles I narrowed it down to any info good or bad on any of these and also how the different profiles perform riding and touring would be greatly appreciated. Lenght suggestions also I current ride 152 park, 154-156 all around and 156-159 in pow.

    K2 Panoramic Split has All mtn Rocker : Rocker/Flat/Rocker 30% Rocker & 70% Flat

    Lib Tech Travis Roce Pro Split
    GNU Billy Goat
    both board have C2 BTX which is camber under each foot and rocker between feet and rocker tip and tail

    Never Summer Summit Split
    Never Summer SL Split
    both have NS R.C Tech with is Camber under feet and Rocker between bindings and rocker tip and tail. Slightly more rocker then the C2 BTX it appears

    Prior AMF Split has camber under and between bindings and rocker tip and tail, a similar profile to CamRock in my opinion

    Venture Helix has rocker/flat/rocker but from what I read that the Helix will not is available next season instead they are making a slightly setback version called the Zelix I think or something along those lines which depending how setback it will be will decide if it will work for my style of riding.

    Arbor Abacus which comes with a Parabolic Rocker profile which is rocker from tip to tail

    #666680
    ruapehu_explorer
    78 Posts

    i would take the never summer summit off your list. it’s quite directional/freeride, with a fair amount of taper and setback.

    the rest of the boards would most likely work for what you want. as far as camber styles and skinning grip, boards with flat (k2, venture) and cambered in the center theoretically have better skinning grip but i think people who have boards with rockered centers usually adjust and do just as well once they are used to the shape.

    i would size your board based on at least your powder sizing. but make sure to consider how far out of bounds and how much gear you will most likely be traveling with, what the snowpack and terrain you are usually riding in consists of. then consider how much of that playfulness you want to keep vs what kind of stability/float could be necessary for where your are. at your weight you’ll probably still be able to throw around a 158-160 pretty easily and lower-to mid 160s should still be a bit playful with more stability and float. I’m a bit taller and the same weight and my first split is a DIY 156cm, but we don’t get a steady supply big powder days where I am and mostly all my splitting was from the resort boundary out. so it all depends on what you need it for.

    as far as board choice, good luck. somebody on here loves every one of those boards so there are positives to all those models.

    #666681
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    Really appreciate the response, that slightly narrows things down for me well knocking the Summit out that is. I will definitely keep the size on the shorter length just to keep the playfulness up I’m thinkin no higher there 161. I don’t get too many powder days here either but I don’t travel a good amount so conditions vary. Ill keep trying to find more info on each board and hoping some people will give me some insight on some of these other boards

    Thanx

    #666682
    B-P
    134 Posts

    I would highly recommend adding the Voile Palindrome to your list. I rode it at a demo a few weeks back and that board rips. The added flat section under the touring bracket makes the boart quite a bit more stable than full reverse camber boards. I didn’t get a tour on it, but I can only imagine the skinning to be improved over a full reverse camber or the c2 type (never summer/lib).

    I have never really been impressed with the combination rocker/camber boards, in my opinion they do most things ok, but nothing really well. They lack awesome float in deep snow, but do ok, and dont feel as stable on hard pack as a full cambered deck. Boards that are cambered under foot with “early rise” are hands down my favorite splits though, its the ones that make their boards look like a piece of bacon that I have never liked.

    Don’t buy anything until you get a chance to ride it, every board, even similar profiles (like the rocker/camber available from Never summer, Lib, Gnu, and Voile) all ride differently. There are probably no less than 10 twin boards that would fit your needs. Head to your local SplitFest or demo day and spend some time on each board you are looking at. When you are dropping $1000 on a board, waiting a little until you get to ride a few is worth more than you can imagine!

    Good luck on the search :thatrocks:

    #666683
    rughty
    620 Posts

    The Voile Palindrome is the same design Ben built when he owned Sentury. It used to be called the Sync. I had some BC days on the westshore of Tahoe and it was a sweet ride. Touring was no problem and float in pow was nice. Brooks took it out a few days later and killed it on that board.

    #666684
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    I had the Voile Palindrome on my list well bookmarks not sure how i overlooked it its a sweet ride and has a centered stance that a plus in my book any down sides to the flat area between binding ? Meaning stability or anything like that I would think that pop would be a lil better on the camber between the feet but for a split that isn’t a big deal. Rocker and flat no surprise it floats well.

    #666685
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @b-p wrote:

    Boards that are cambered under foot with “early rise” are hands down my favorite splits though, its the ones that make their boards look like a piece of bacon that I have never liked.

    You mean camber under foot like neversummer and lib tech right ? Meaning some sort of rocker between bindings and camber sections under foot then rocker tip and tail

    #666686
    provotrout
    130 Posts

    ..

    #666687
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @provotrout wrote:

    From my personal experience the C2/flyingV/artisan shape is kind of bouncy and doesn’t plane as well or feel as smooth as a proper S-rocker (camber to front foot, then early rise nose). But that’s not to say the twin capability of the C2 types doesn’t make them just as fun to ride, they just have different strengths.

    So you perfer the camber between the feet over the rocker between the feet right? I do notice that between my Banana Magic Enhanced BTX (rocker between feet) compared to The Greats Camrock camber between feet, the rocker obviously floats a lil better but overall camber feel better all around and more stable in my opinion probably because more of the board is planted on the ground at a time.

    #666688
    provotrout
    130 Posts

    to me the full body rocker of an overall “V” just feels a little like a see-saw. Whereas the S-rocker has the nose to float but the camber to flex underfoot and give a consistent contact area/flex feel. Idk, not exactly a tester but that’s my impression so far. I still like the V boards, just ride them a bit differently.

    #666689
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    Yeahh I know what you mean with a rocker board it a bit of a balancing act in thoery fun without a doubt and easier all around but when you wanna haul or really hold a edge not quiet the board of choice

    Thanx for the input greatly appreciated

    #666690
    ieism
    298 Posts

    I have a Libtech TRS, is a playfull board that’s really easy to ride and you can still ride icy slopes and traverses pretty well with the magnatraction. But I don’t think it’s the best for the uphill to be honest. I seem to slide back a lot more than people I tour with, not sure why this is.

    On my other LibTech this seems to be a little better, even with the same skins. I’m lighter than you and ride a 164, it floats just enough but I wouldn’t go any smaller to be honest for the TRS.

    Also it’s kinda slow if you need to ride out of flat bits. I don’t know if it’s the factory wax/grind, but it’s a lot slower than my other boards. Maybe a stonegrind and a few good waxes will solve this, but I should think it would be a little better from the factory as it’s not a cheap board.

    Just some feedback on the TRS, no experience with the other boards. So it’s not perfect, but i still slightly prefer it over my Dark Series Libtech as it’s not as stiff in the tail and a bit easier to turn.

    http://flatlandsplitfest.com/

    #666691
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @ieism wrote:

    I have a Libtech TRS, is a playfull board that’s really easy to ride and you can still ride icy slopes and traverses pretty well with the magnatraction. But I don’t think it’s the best for the uphill to be honest. I seem to slide back a lot more than people I tour with, not sure why this is.

    On my other LibTech this seems to be a little better, even with the same skins. I’m lighter than you and ride a 164, it floats just enough but I wouldn’t go any smaller to be honest for the TRS.

    Really ? A 164 yikes I’ve been told to go up to the 160s to be honest I was considering more around 159-161 tops comes down to the board I suppose I want it to be playful but yet stable enough at speed and above all float well cause without that I’m not going no where. But thanx for the info on this board helps me out a little when it comes down to the Gnu and Lib Tech same profile and all. Really appreciate it I’m surprised about the float I would think with that camber profile and rocker between feet it would float better then most.

    Thanx again

    #666692
    ruapehu_explorer
    78 Posts

    My experiences with the never summer RC profile (same overall idea as lib’s c2 profile) have been good for float, but with twin models you don’t get the added benefit of a lot of setback or taper for extra flotation. I kind of agree with the seesaw description to an extent, I think it’s a really fun design but like provotrout said you ride it differently.

    And I don’t know how S-rocker would translate to ‘fun’ and ‘playful’ for you spinning around on it; its a very directional camber profile (cambered with only the nose rockered). But the Rome Whiteroom is a twin-ish shape with the directional S-rocker and slight setback (2cm), so if that type of design lands well enough switch you could consider that board as well.

    when comparing board length preferences, don’t forget to think about your snow vs their snow. where are you riding anyway? west/east coast, continental/rockies? you said there isn’t tons of deep snow in your area, you could be fine with what you originally thought. lots of light fluffy snow is where more surface area is your friend, and with gnarly steep terrain more edge contact with a stable ride is your friend.

    if you know you like the feeling of camber with rocket nose/tail (camrock) over the central camber boards maybe just choose that design. Prior’s AMF is a good board, and comes in 159 or 162, and for an extra investment you can carbon the 162 for more surface area and float while reducing the weight to throw around better. Or you can always find your favorite board and DIY it. 160wide Yes-The Greats splitboard??

    Testing a bunch of boards out and picking your favorite like B-P said is your best choice, although not always possible for most people.

    #666693
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @ruapehu_explorer wrote:

    My experiences with the never summer RC profile (same overall idea as lib’s c2 profile) have been good for float, but with twin models you don’t get the added benefit of a lot of setback or taper for extra flotation. I kind of agree with the seesaw description to an extent, I think it’s a really fun design but like provotrout said you ride it differently.

    when comparing board length preferences, don’t forget to think about your snow vs their snow. where are you riding anyway? west/east coast, continental/rockies? you said there isn’t tons of deep snow in your area, you could be fine with what you originally thought. lots of light fluffy snow is where more surface area is your friend, and with gnarly steep terrain more edge contact with a stable ride is your friend.

    if you know you like the feeling of camber with rocket nose/tail (camrock) over the central camber boards maybe just choose that design. Prior’s AMF is a good board, and comes in 159 or 162, and for an extra investment you can carbon the 162 for more surface area and float while reducing the weight to throw around better.

    Testing a bunch of boards out and picking your favorite like B-P said is your best choice, although not always possible for most people.

    Very informative gotta say thank you.

    And I live in the Midwest so splitboarding here is not my concern I do a good amount of traveling so me asking the very common question “whats a great all around board” is actually just what I need I go to west often (Whistler, Baker, Hood, Tahoe), Colorado, Utah, Montana also east from time to time and planning on Japan or hit Europe hopefully in the upcoming season all depends on conditions and its always fun to plan ahead and miss out on fresh pow else where or miss out because i came a week late or a week early. That happens all to often to me, now i do last min trips its a safer bet when the forcast is in my favor from the start.

    So I need a board that will hold up to alot of different conditions. Realistically I know that I will loose a lil here and there getting that kind of a board but I can’t only pack soo many boards on each trip. It Kinda a tall order to fill to say the least. Main concern float, stability at speed just to be clear on that

    As for length very good idea to go bigger but get the lighter Prior gives me that options. My only concern is that I see that alot of splitboarding companies are going with the rocker/flat/rocker profile and that’s one profile I have yet to try. So I want to make sure I don’t miss out on something that might be better then anything I already rode.

    I’m not 100% on any board or profile yet but I’m leaning towards the Prior or one of the flat profiles like Venture, Voile K2. From past experience and the boards I own that have those types of profiles I’m steering slightly away from Neversummer or lib tech rocker profiles. So if anyone has been on both flat and camber between feet and can give me some insight on the pros and cons of each that would be extremely helpful. Basically a Camrock vs BTX or RC kinda thing but in the splitboard sense of course

    Thank you again all

    #666694
    karkis
    270 Posts

    i think stance width is another factor you haven’t considered
    the ns/lib styles of r / c are imo best with wide stances, they even out the pressure along the edge b/w the feet
    where as with the mid deck camber, tip / tail rocker, if you have a wide stance, you end up with 2 areas of increased edge pressure, at each foot, which makes for a bit of an uneven ride, especially relevant when low speed billy goating, but for one of my friends it was a deal breaker in powder specifically.
    flat / rocker less so, and of course the stiffness of the deck will also come into play in evening out the edge hold

    id be interested to see peoples stance width along with their preferred camber / flat / rocker preferences… my stance is 23.5 – 24″, ns r/c works for me

    also honestly if you give almost any shape a few daze for getting used to it, you’ll probably love it… we’re talkin about snowboarding after all.

    regarding length, sure a bigger board will float more, but you do gotta carry the thing around all day, and however much snow piles up on it too… i tend to go as small as i can with a split ride, with the rocker in the mix you don’t often have to worry much about float…
    stability at speed yah trade off…. i guess the solution is a happy medium… or a quiver!!

    never summer snowboards
    phantom splitboard bindings
    dynafit touring
    atomic boots

    #666695
    powslash
    382 Posts

    Sounds like you narrowed down to my two favorite profiles, camrock and flatrock(venture). Going from camber to flatrock is a natural transition because you keep the charging performance that you expect from a cambered board with the added bonus of a playful ride from the rocker tip and tail.

    Every profile has it’s pros and cons. The deal breaker for me with the rocker under foot profile is shitty one-foot riding and traversing. The board just wanders around on the center rocker and won’t track straight. So if you’re riding in areas with long luge track exits you might consider that.

    #666696

    To clarify what I was referring to as my favorite, the poster who answered was correct, I like full length camber under foot with an early ride nose and tail. That setup gives hands down the greatest versatility in a split board while maintaining awesome float in deep snow. Granted they don’t have AS much float as a full reverse camber board (rocker, v-rocker, banana or whatever the marketing term is for a particular brand) but in my experience in testing boards for the past 3 season, they have as much if not more than the rocker/camber contraptions. The biggest difference is an early rise board that gets submerged will rise back towards the surface, the rocker/camber boards would just bury deeper unless you lean waaay back to get the nose back up. In the pnw when you get that famous cascade concrete, a board that nose dives can be the death of you! hahaha I have notice that with every variation of a rocker center, camber just under the foot type of board. Again, they do everything ok, but excel in nothing.

    Powlash nailed it too, when you one foot one of the combo decks, its super squirly and difficult to hold a line one footed. The same thing happens when in ski mode. If you have a long traverse or a long ski out, those things are impossible to control! My current split is a full reverse camber and neither the tip nor tail is anywhere close to the ground in ski mode. I have had to re-learn skinning it difficult terrain and also buy new skins with higher grip and less glide to keep the things under me. My split for spring/summer will be a flat kick with early rise nose. If you have ever toured with a skier or somene with a cambered split in the spring/summer, you will notice how easy they move accross difficult hard terrain or up steep icy skin tracks, because you will be struggling!

    I feel (and this is an honest opinion) that a full cambered/flat board with early rise OR the voile palindrome with the added flat section underfoot would be the best option for a true ALL AROUND setup. I ride a full rockered board and love it in our deep heavy snow, but I take the sacrifice of knowing in the spring I will be carrying my Mr. Chomps on every tour until my new split comes haha

    #666697
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @karkis wrote:

    i think stance width is another factor you haven’t considered
    the ns/lib styles of r / c are imo best with wide stances, they even out the pressure along the edge b/w the feet
    where as with the mid deck camber, tip / tail rocker, if you have a wide stance, you end up with 2 areas of increased edge pressure, at each foot, which makes for a bit of an uneven ride, especially relevant when low speed billy goating, but for one of my friends it was a deal breaker in powder specifically.
    flat / rocker less so, and of course the stiffness of the deck will also come into play in evening out the edge hold

    id be interested to see peoples stance width along with their preferred camber / flat / rocker preferences… my stance is 23.5 – 24″, ns r/c works for me

    also honestly if you give almost any shape a few daze for getting used to it, you’ll probably love it… we’re talkin about snowboarding after all.

    regarding length, sure a bigger board will float more, but you do gotta carry the thing around all day, and however much snow piles up on it too… i tend to go as small as i can with a split ride, with the rocker in the mix you don’t often have to worry much about float…
    stability at speed yah trade off…. i guess the solution is a happy medium… or a quiver!!

    I have a 22-23.5 freeride to park, also depends on the bindings i have i ride Now bindings in pow and they have flat footbeds to comfortably anything past thats uncomfortable and putd pressure on my heels and stuff. With my 390 boss bindings with canted footbeds i run 23-24 wide and it feels normal.

    All the splitboard bindings i was looking at like sparks and Karakoram al have flat footbeds so more then likely i will be riding with a 22inch stance

    As for stiffness most the boards on my list are mid-stiff but the ways companies rating system varies thats gonna be tough to go by without having all the boards in front of me.

    #666698
    LPowhuntr
    102 Posts

    @powslash wrote:

    Sounds like you narrowed down to my two favorite profiles, camrock and flatrock(venture). Going from camber to flatrock is a natural transition because you keep the charging performance that you expect from a cambered board with the added bonus of a playful ride from the rocker tip and tail.

    Every profile has it’s pros and cons. The deal breaker for me with the rocker under foot profile is shitty one-foot riding and traversing. The board just wanders around on the center rocker and won’t track straight. So if you’re riding in areas with long luge track exits you might consider that.

    So in you opinion flatrock over camrock? Stability at speed and edge hold between both profiles is the same you think? I would think the camber would more stable but thats just a assumption

    Completely agree on the rocker between the feet, they are fun but not very versatile especially in splitboarding

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 41 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.