Splitboard.com Forums

Anyone else notice how large the min stance width is on these boards -?? My 164 only goes down to "21.3" but effectively i think it's an inch bigger than that (center to center). It's max is 26" Compared to a Voile Mojo Rx -> 17" min - 24.75" max. I'm having to set my stance width up by one inch. Wonder why the big difference on the lower end?

the jib influence.

Lol, wondering when this was gonna start coming up (jimw was first person to address this here).
With Voile pucks I was able to squeeze out just under a 21" stance (21.5" w/ karakorams), but with the outer most inserts you could achieve a 28" stance from my measurements. Kind of ridiculous unless he's targeting this thing toward Yao Ming's family. I think he should have taken the outermost inserts and move them to the inside.
I decided I'm not paying for a factory splitboard that only allows me one possible stance option. Pretty board though.

This is something Jeremy should become aware of FOR SURE! I ride at like 22.5, so I'm good...

Hey Brooks, how tall are you? I'm like 5'11, so slightly wider works for me. I can see how anyone under 5'9 could be screwed on the 164 size.

The 161 Solution goes from like 19.0' to 25.2 inches, roughly...

Ya and i'm 5'8" - Worst case i guess i'm getting the drill out!

All I can think is JJ fucked this up.

28"....really.
Who wants to be riding a pow board more than 24".
I'm 6'3, 185 usually riding 22(maybe up to 24 on a park board).

You're gonna buy a new board and drill it out Steve?!! To each his own I guess.

Be interested to here from JJ on this and his reasoning.
Tom Burt is around here, I thought JJ might chime in about some of the observations on the forum.

It's one thing to be able to fit your stance on the most inside inserts, but you get no front to back adjustability, even less if you front angle is steep. The first Voile 180 or 181 had the same problem, just did not float like it should have in the factory inserts. Drill'em, glue'em old schoolers (of which I am one) . . . and on that note is a 168 with the same running length as the 164 really an old schooler's pow board? maybe if you weigh 150lbs.

1/2 joking on the drilling.. already bought the board. Like Jimw, just didn't notice it in the specs. I'm gonna squeeze the stance as much as i can and hope/pray the the for/aft position is dialed. The front of my old mojo hangs out like a diving board so I hope the rocker/camber of this one makes up for that... she is a beauty though!

5'9"

We will bring in the stance for next year. When I go to a bigger board I always widen my stance a touch. The 164 is a lot of board for me (5'7", 150lbs) and ride a 21.5" stance normally. I figured there would be few people smaller then me on the 164 and needing a smaller stance then me. I must be on the minimum stance and did not realize it.

Good feedback....we will make the changes.

Jeremy

Thanks for coming in and addressing the issue. That goes a long ways around these parts.
I think overall most riders around here use a 20-21" minimum stance width which works on the board. It's the fact that one can't move the setback an inch forward or backward that concerned me personally.

Jeremy, off topic, but what's your stance width riding a 161? I never thought of widening my stance according to board length and I ride 62's-66's. Hmmmm

I am 6', and weigh about 195. To ride my Solution 164, I am going to have to use a stance that is 3" wider then my normal stance. I am going to try to keep an open mind, maybe I will like it, but I am a bit bummed that I didn't do better research when I bought the board. Sometimes you take a risk as an early adopter. I hope that I don't encounter any unexpected quirks in my Karakoram bindings!!

Yup, the stance width issue kept me from even considering a Jones Split. I ride a 21" stance, and also like it about 4 cm to 5 cm back, with around 27 degrees and 12 degree angles. I could not come even close to this on a Jones, but it is easy to achieve on every other split I've tried.
should be OK for those who prefer duck though, as duck stances can be wider for the same "effective" width (duck stances place the heels closer together).
Good to see that JJ is going to allow more options on next years boards.