Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 8:09 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
lilpusher wrote:
So I too am looking for a wider split but am less picky on side cut science. As for the rocker vs camber and magne- witchcraft fluff.. here are the numbers on my two boards for objective comparison.
prior spearhead split: L=166 Radius= 8.5 waist=260 camber, directional taper, setback stance
lib t.rice pro : L=161.5 Radius= 8.4 waist=260 hybrid rocker, centered twin deep magne-hype

oddly the 161 spearhead has only a 8m sidecut. If magnetraction is a band-aid for deep side cuts or crazy profile then I'm not seeing how the above arguments hold out when considering these numbers. I mean the prior board of equal length has a deeper side cut. :?

As for ride I would say the lib feels loose/surfy initiating turns and digs on the apex whereas the prior is more consistent and less floaty. surface area maybe? the lib has a big nose and tail.




Your numbers are wrong.
Re-read what you wrote. You said the prior spearhead split: L=166 (Length) of the spearhead was 166.
Then later you call it a 161 when comparing.


The Prior spearhead has a deeper sidecut, according to your data 8.5 compared to 8.4 on the lib. But, the prior is also a 166, where the Lib is a 161.
ASSUMING for the sake of conversation that the sidecuts were equal (.1 difference in actuality) the effective cut would be deeper on the lib, as it is shorter.
Taking the same sidecut radius extended out onto a longer board makes it effectively not as deep.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1522
Location: Colorado
shredgnar wrote:
barrows wrote:
And shredgnar, a "sex fest" would be a more apt metaphor, as both taylor and I speaking about actual riding impressions from the real world, and not mere speculation. :wink:


Dude, you are messed up. But you make a good point about waist width varying between boards, and you know your shit, I just think that sometimes we all wish we were riding instead of sitting in front of the computer so much, that it comes through in our thought process about snowboards. ;) Shit, I'd rather be riding a Burton Air right now than wasting time at work. :banghead:


Yes, I would rather be riding, if we had any snow... It has been a very frustrating season so far for those of us in CO. I did manage to get around 4K+ feet of splitting in yesterday, even managed to drop off a small cornice into about about 5 medium radius turns in creamy pow before hitting the windpack... But we need way more snow, help Ullr! Please.

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
barrows wrote:
shredgnar wrote:
barrows wrote:
Yes, I would rather be riding, if we had any snow... It has been a very frustrating season so far for those of us in CO. I did manage to get around 4K+ feet of splitting in yesterday, even managed to drop off a small cornice into about about 5 medium radius turns in creamy pow before hitting the windpack... But we need way more snow, help Ullr! Please.


I am on the East-Coast. And you win.
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 6:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 673
Location: Kodiak, AK
I think the term rocker is too loose to be useful. I would not consider my Venture Zephyr to be a 'rockered' board. It has camber between the bindings, even extending a little beyond the bindings depending on your stance. The only diff between it and a fully cambered traditional board is that the nose and tail rise start a little earlier. Big whoop.

My Jones Solution is closer to a 'rockered' design in that it has zero camber- the section between the bindings is pancake flat (even though the specs state it has camber- typical Jones :roll: ). Either end is early rise.

My Never Summer SL to me is an 'interrupted camber' board. When you stand on it, the central rocker flattens and the tip and tail generate plenty of running length. Unlike some, I do not find this behavior confusing. It's like having carbon stringer adding structure and pop where you want edge pressure.

To make all this more convoluted, the profiles only are what they seem to be on an unweighted board. Toss a rider on there, and the profile changes completely. Add to that the fact that when you are in a turn and are flexing the board and pressuring the edge, none of the observations of the unsprung shape apply anymore.

Burton is doing some interesting stuff manipulating the flex points by making the board thinner in specific spots like at the waist and at the bindings. I looked at some pics I took of my wife riding her Anti Social and you could see the flex points doing their thing. Another example of "WTF? That'll never work" and yet, she says... wow... nice. :)

_________________
Jones Solution 163W
Venture Zephyr 164/260
Never Summer SL 163X
Burton Spliff 148
Voile Mojo RX 166
BD, G3, and Gecko skins
Sparks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 8:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:41 pm
Posts: 1622
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Breakwater wrote:
Taking the same sidecut radius extended out onto a longer board makes it effectively not as deep.

Huh? Please explain. Unless you're talking about other performance differences from using a longer board I'm not following this.

philip.ak wrote:
Burton is doing some interesting stuff manipulating the flex points by making the board thinner in specific spots like at the waist and at the bindings. I looked at some pics I took of my wife riding her Anti Social and you could see the flex points doing their thing. Another example of "WTF? That'll never work" and yet, she says... wow... nice. :)

This is an excellent point, but will probably start the usual "Burton sucks" thread drift. I've been debating posting some comments on the Burton Spliff I just picked up. On the one hand, it's a f*ckin rad board and so far I'm blown away by how well it works in a variety of conditions. On the other hand, you can't even look at the specs for that board because you'll have the exact reaction you mentioned - "WTF? That'll never work!" 90% of the people on this forum will dismiss that board as a joke based on those specs alone. To me, that just shows that 90% of the people geeking out on specs don't know WTF they're talking about... or maybe more accurately, think they know more than they do. :)

OK, back to our regularly scheduled spec discussions...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
jimw wrote:
Breakwater wrote:
Taking the same sidecut radius extended out onto a longer board makes it effectively not as deep.

Huh? Please explain. Unless you're talking about other performance differences from using a longer board I'm not following this.


Draw a circle with a perfect 1" radius. Pretend that radius of the bottom half of the circle is the sidecut of the board.
and, Prentend it's on your computer screen.

Now, pull that circle to the left and to the right.. make it longer longitudinally. Don't make it any bigger vertically.


At the end you still have a 1" radius sidecut. It's just that now you have an oval. You extended the LENGTH, not the DEPTH.
The sidecut is just as deep when measured. But on an oval it's effectively not as deep when engaged in a turn.

The circle sidecut board will carve on that circle axis, and will go around and around and around untuil you take it out of the carve somehow. (P.S. I LOVE making uphill carves. Hah, just make sure no-one is on the other side of the trail before you rail-out.)
The oval sidecut board won't carve an oval... but it will carve the bottom half of the oval.. and keep going on that radius. which makes a much larger circle.
Therefore, Taking the same sidecut radius extended out onto a longer board makes it effectively not as deep. :scratch:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 9:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
jimw wrote:
Breakwater wrote:
philip.ak wrote:
Burton is doing some interesting stuff manipulating the flex points by making the board thinner in specific spots like at the waist and at the bindings. I looked at some pics I took of my wife riding her Anti Social and you could see the flex points doing their thing. Another example of "WTF? That'll never work" and yet, she says... wow... nice. :)

This is an excellent point, but will probably start the usual "Burton sucks" thread drift. I've been debating posting some comments on the Burton Spliff I just picked up. On the one hand, it's a f*ckin rad board and so far I'm blown away by how well it works in a variety of conditions. On the other hand, you can't even look at the specs for that board because you'll have the exact reaction you mentioned - "WTF? That'll never work!" 90% of the people on this forum will dismiss that board as a joke based on those specs alone. To me, that just shows that 90% of the people geeking out on specs don't know WTF they're talking about... or maybe more accurately, think they know more than they do. :)

OK, back to our regularly scheduled spec discussions...



This is exactly the stuff I knew about, and mentioned I didn't like when I brought my Fish surf-board into the discussion.
I don't like the variable core thicknesses, it changes the boards flex too much from point to point. I like a clean radius, clean (either rocker or camber) and clean flex pattern..
From there I use body weight and pressure application do make the board do what I want it to do.

Again, That's just me.
Clearly this stuff works for some.
Not me. I'm not closed-minded about it. I just don't preferr all the variation in a board. I just happen to not like lumps in the gravy.
I've given it a try, but just like how I can't ride a board under 26.2 without booting-out, I don't like riding these wavy gravy boards.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 9:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:41 pm
Posts: 1622
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Breakwater wrote:
jimw wrote:
Breakwater wrote:
Taking the same sidecut radius extended out onto a longer board makes it effectively not as deep.

Huh? Please explain. Unless you're talking about other performance differences from using a longer board I'm not following this.

Draw a circle with a perfect 1" radius. Pretend that radius of the bottom half of the circle is the sidecut of the board.
and, Prentend it's on your computer screen.

Now, pull that circle to the left and to the right.. make it longer longitudinally. Don't make it any bigger vertically.

At the end you still have a 1" radius sidecut. It's just that now you have an oval. You extended the LENGTH, not the DEPTH.
The sidecut is just as deep when measured. But on an oval it's effectively not as deep when engaged in a turn.

Umm... how did you do in high school math? :) By changing it into an oval, you just changed it to a non-constant radius sidecut.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:51 am
Posts: 641
but wait, what about the sidecut of the rocker when the radius is minimized? You guys are a joke. Go slide on snow, it's not rocket surgery.


Oh and, because magnetraction could never allow one to carve:
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
shredgnar wrote:
but wait, what about the sidecut of the rocker when the radius is minimized? You guys are a joke. Go slide on snow, it's not rocket surgery.


There are a lot of options in the marketplace.
And, a lot of bad options.

While the end goal is to go slide on snow, there's no harm in discussing and selecting gear prior to purchase.

After all its the right gear that helps us have a more connected ride.


Yeah, we have to geek-out on equipment. But the market is FLOODED with gear. I, for one don't just buy crap. I think about what I want to do, then purchase equipment that most closely suits the application. The right tool for the job.

If you don't want to listen..... You don't have to.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
shredgnar wrote:
Oh and, because magnetraction could never allow one to carve:
Image



We established that, with photos that the Hovercrafts Magne-Traction is basically non-existent.
Maybe you missed that?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:32 am
Posts: 184
Location: Northern NM
jimw wrote:
Umm... how did you do in high school math? :) By changing it into an oval, you just changed it to a non-constant radius sidecut.


+1

Geometry is hard... Earlier in the discussion/ sex fest someone else claimed that a larger radius side cut is deeper than a small radius side cut.

_________________
Venture Zephyr 168/26
furberg 167


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1522
Location: Colorado
chrishami wrote:
jimw wrote:
Umm... how did you do in high school math? :) By changing it into an oval, you just changed it to a non-constant radius sidecut.


+1

Geometry is hard... Earlier in the discussion/ sex fest someone else claimed that a larger radius side cut is deeper than a small radius side cut.



Hahaha, thanks Chris.

How 'bout this: take that oval, one section of it is a quadratic sidecut, and the other section is an elliptical. Now if you get a few degrees away from the perfect quadratic or elliptical, you now have a rotated quadratic or elliptical. I agree with the OP for myself though, if I can get a board with a pure radial sidecut I would prefer that. I also do not like the Burton's which have really thin core between the feet: these boards are forgiving to ride, but at speed and in demanding situations, they feel like the nose and tail are disconnected torsionally, and want to go different ways, leading to a snowboard version of the skateboard speed wobble effect: this is one of the reasons I never liked the Burton Omen I had, the Frontiers were much better for me, as they kept the core thick between the feet (thanks Johan).

_________________
Never Summer Prospector 167X, furberg 173 DIY, Dynafit TLT5/6 Mountain , Phantom Bindings, BD Glidelite Skins
Quiver Killer inserts

http://protectourwinters.org/
http://14ersnowboardproject.homestead.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], JimmyC and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  





Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group