Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 12:45 pm Posts: 8 Location: Bellingham, WA
Holy canoli, my 163W arrived and had shrunk! It's about a cm or two shorter than my 163 Atomic! In all seriousness my blem was a super minor spot on the base that has been p-texed and kind of cleaned up. Once I wax it up, I will never be able to tell the difference. I feel so lucky that my tip and tail line up and the gap between the two boards is extremely minimal. I guess that just guarantees that it will explode in a fiery mess on the first ride.
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:45 pm Posts: 844 Location: hopefully not at work
Mine just arrived...haven't given it the 'magnifying glass' inspection, but here's my initial observations:
1. Slight hull...seems normal given others' observations. Doubt it will be an issue once pucks/bindings are mounted.
2. Construction looks solid. Inner edges are tight, base looks good (slight height difference b/n graphic interlays, nothing a base grind can't remedy if it's an issue).
3. Similar to BG, mine looks as though there is no camber. Not a deal breaker IMHO (especially given the $ invested).
For those that have experience with the Jones magnetraction, I have a question. How subtle is the outer edge magentraction on the Jones compared to something from Mervyn? Will post more if I find any 'show stoppers'. For now I consider myself fortunate and stoked!