Forums Splitboard Talk Forum Venture Paragon vs Storm: A Sizing Question
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #824682
    MileHighChels
    1 Posts

    Hello all, I am currently in the process of selecting my first split. I’ve been doing a bunch of research and speaking with buddies who currently split and have narrowed my selections down to something from Venture. Their quality and durability reputation is well known and it is also nice to support a local Colorado company. I am 6′, anywhere from 215-225lbs depending on which part of the season it is (I tend to drop weight thru the winter contrary to most), 11.5 boot, and I currently ride a LibTech Skunk Ape 161W with a 26.8 waist at the resort. I do occasionally ride a vintage, camber, 1993 NeverSummer 163 on pow days. I’ve never really had issues with burying the nose of the NS but I haven’t had it in more than 10-12″ or so of fresh at the resort. I am trying to decide what the better option is between the Paragon in a 166/27 or the Storm in a 171/27. I’m slightly worried the 171 would be a bit too much board for me. I’ve done plenty of boot packing and my 161 does seem a bit small in decently deep snow off resort. With the NS feeling decent in resort pow as a camber 163, I’m thinking the straight line rocker and the extra .2 of waist width over my Lib of the Paragon 166/27 would be enough but I have no experience splitting/skinning. Most of my splitting will be done on Colorado terrain and snow pack and I’d like to be able to use the split for pow in the peak season as well as corn in the spring. Will the 171 be too much to whip around in trees and heavy corn? Will the 166 be enough on the skin track and in pow with the added weight of gear/pack? All knowledge and opinions welcomed. Thanks!

    #824717
    summersgone
    813 Posts

    I would go with the Storm based on your weight. I typically lean towards longer for better float in Colorado since the backcountry is typically deeper and soft snow, so I would push you away from the 166. When I rode the storm 161 a few years ago I thought it was nimble and rode shorter than the length suggested, but floated great. The storm has 7cm of longer effective edge, but slightly more taper and a longer nose and will let you float a whole lot better and if you lean back on that tail it will maneuver well in trees. Will it be easy in super tight trees? Probably not, but when its opened up you’ll be a whole lot more confident, and deep days when you likely won’t be riding anything steeper than 30 degrees you’ll be happy for the extra surface area. Spring lines in particular will be good as well at speed.

    For perspective, I am 155lb + gear and I ride a 160-162 around 25cm width boards which I think is perfect for me. Remember you will have likely 15-20lbs more gear than riding a resort. I would typically ride a 156-158 at the resort. If I was to get a Venture again I would be on the 161 Storm or 160 Paragon.

    #824805
    Taylor
    781 Posts

    Agree with Summersgone – I’m about your size and ran a 181 Storm in my split quiver for years.

    Trees – in my experience Storms ride loose; the rocker pivots and slarves more easily than you’d expect given a board’s length. I loved the 181 even in tight trees, so shorter should be fine.

    Float – more length, surface area, and taper will float better – it will plane sooner and thus turn a bit easier at lower speeds. The longer shovel is less prone to dive at high speeds too. All of this is key in Colorado’s low density pow.

    Corn – the storm holds its composure in corn — well behaved, predictable, and hard-carving.

    The penalty of the bigger board is the weight cost on the uptrack. In my opinion, the benefits of a slightly larger board would outweigh those costs.

    Venture is a great company and they make bomber boards. You can’t go wrong either way, but if I were you, I’d go with the Storm.

    @sun_rocket

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.