Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:54 pm

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 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 2:01 pm
Posts: 794
Location: Colorado
I guess I will need more time to really try it out. I have a 164 Odin, and the jury is still out for me.

I am old and you know us old guys dont change easy. I really miss the snap from the tail of a cambered board. Rocker feels wishy / washy to me, not the same as driving a cambered board into a turn and waiting for the energy to release and launch you into the next turn.

_________________
Talking about snowboarding is like dancing about architecture...


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

Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:16 am
Posts: 490
Location: Salida, Flagstaff
PedroDelfuego wrote:
I think that sufficient float can be achieved with good taper, flex and nose profile. This would get you the float you want, but not at the loss of effective edge length and contact. I have always selected boards with lots of effective edge, and my new rocker board seem strange at high speeds. I think with rocker boards you should actually size up, rather than size down. Rocker seems great at low speed on powder, but at high speeds your life depends on you effective edge and edge hold (literally!).


I think this discussion largely turns on (pun intended) one's individual riding style, ability and terrain preferences. That said, Pedro's above statement really resonates with my experience and thinking.

I think rocker is useful in situations where relief from nose and tail hang-ups is beneficial. At low speeds to moderate speeds it provides super maneuverability--great for riding trees, for example. I think it can also be helpful on steeps; a decambed profile allows one to fall onto edge in high-stakes situations in hard snow more softly, with more control and with less risk of nose or tail hooking.

But at moderate and high speeds in pow, which is largely why I ride backcountry, I find rocker unnerving; the board can be trimmed to ride in the snow at a number of different board angles; it is more sketchy, less stable and less accommodating of aggressive or corrective fore and aft weight throws (think wheelie or endo instead of stability), and rockered tails in particular leave too little to rely on at speed and for braking power.

I've achieved similar low and moderate speed maneuverability to rocker while retaining speed stability with what is for me a well-thought-out taper, flex, length and sidecut configuration in combination with camber and a flat nose and tail. Specifically, I much prefer tapering a board to a rockered tail.

I agree magnetraction is an engineering apology for the edge hold dysfunction endemic to short sidecut radii.

_________________
Craig Kelly is my co-pilot
195 Glissade Big Gun
187 Donek Custom Split
181 Venture Storm Solid and Split
173 Rossi Race DIY Swallowtail Split


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:57 am
Posts: 152
Location: Canada
PedroDelfuego wrote:
I am beginning to feel that rocker is more of a intermediate rider technology/gimmick. I think that sufficient float can be achieved with good taper, flex and nose profile. This would get you the float you want, but not at the loss of effective edge length and contact. I have always selected boards with lots of effective edge, and my new rocker board seem strange at high speeds. I think with rocker boards you should actually size up, rather than size down. Rocker seems great at low speed on powder, but at high speeds your life depends on you effective edge and edge hold (literally!).


Interesting topic going on.

I would tend to disagree on this a bit as far as rocker being gimmicky...I think there are a few ways to skin the cat when it comes to float, and rocker is a way to do it for sure. The resulting ride is different when you don't need the float on any design, rocker, taper etc. and what you choose to use to gain the float you're after largely depends on how you can deal with its resulting charateristics.

In my case I shy away from taper boards due to boot size and riding stance, my back foot is always more centered and any hard pack I encounter with a taper my backfoot is always more booted out than my front - very sketchy. So for my float needs I choose more help from a little nose rocker. A furberg is the only taper board I think might fit me.

Maybe its just because I like a little rocker that I think its acceptable lol


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 9:16 am
Posts: 490
Location: Salida, Flagstaff
This discussion reinforces my belief that board design, and especially relationships between attributes like rocker, camber, sidecut, and early taper shovels, still has a long, long way to go. That there is so much room for evolution is exciting. That such evolution continues to be inhibited by the bell curve of consumer ability and knowledge is frustrating.

_________________
Craig Kelly is my co-pilot
195 Glissade Big Gun
187 Donek Custom Split
181 Venture Storm Solid and Split
173 Rossi Race DIY Swallowtail Split


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1503
Location: Colorado
pedro: You are not old, man! It took me a few days on the Storm to get it dialed, there is an adaptation period in one's riding if one has never ridden rocker before. I ride the Storm 40 CM back, which also makes the tail stiffer. I found it just took a little change in my riding style, and I could still weight the board and accelerate out of turns off of the tail when I wanted to. Although, those techs are mostly used (but not exclusively) in hardpack riding, and here on SB.com I really only consider backcountry riding and snow conditions in discussions.
Taylor: I mostly agree with your assessment of rocker: it does make a board ride looser, that is pretty much the point of adding rocker. By making the board ride looser, it is much easier to incorporate pivoting, slarving, and all manner of sliding type turns into one's riding. Including being more easily able to break an arc into a slide, and then back into arc, all within the same turn. I really like the freedom of creative expression in riding this gives me, as I feel it has opened up a new world of possibilities in my riding. At the same time, I disagree that rocker makes it harder to rail arcs, but it does take an adjustment in style to do so, and a properly designed rocker board, since there are all degrees of rocker out there, with many different profiles and flex patterns, finding the one which work best for one's individual style may be tricky. furberg has a very trick profile, which I found to be really fun: at first I thought I might not be able to make it really arc at speed, I was way wrong.
I do think most manufacturers would be wise to observe that tail rocker should be less than nose rocker (considering a directional board with taper here) to encourage straight line stability, and stability/hold at the finish of the turn. I certainly want some flat board behind my back foot before the rocker starts for that reason.

_________________
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 1:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:51 am
Posts: 636
Funny how the thread about wide boards has morphed into another Taylor/Barrows handjob fest. You guys kill me. :banghead:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1503
Location: Colorado
shredgnar wrote:
Funny how the thread about wide boards has morphed into another Taylor/Barrows handjob fest. You guys kill me. :banghead:


OK, this brings me back to a point that I had wanted to make for the OP before we went OT. You have a very specific number for waist width, but this is not really accurate when considering many different boards. The width at the foot positions is what matters to avoid boot out, and this width is determined by three things: waist width, sidecut radius (and type to a much lesser extent), and taper. For example, my Storm 166 x 26 is the right width for me as it has a ~9 m sidecut radius, my furberg has almost the exact same width at the feet even though it features a 27 cm waist. These two boards have the same width at the feet, despite the fact that their waists vary by a full cm (the furberg has a 20 m sidecut radius). So remember to consider all the factors which change the width at your feet.

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:

_________________
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 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:22 pm
Posts: 3
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am
Posts: 1503
Location: Colorado
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.


I do not understand the question? I guess I am being dense. I suspect the t.rice has the deeper sidecut of these two boards, as it probably has the longer contact length, and both have, essentially the same radius. Even understanding this, I am not following what your point is?

_________________
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 3:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:51 am
Posts: 636
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:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
PedroDelfuego wrote:
Magnatraction is just like a Ginsue knife. Its a fuckin' gimmick!

Real chefs dont use serrated knives. And real snowboarder dont need magnatraction.



HELL YEAH!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
barrows wrote:
shredgnar wrote:
Funny how the thread about wide boards has morphed into another Taylor/Barrows handjob fest. You guys kill me. :banghead:


OK, this brings me back to a point that I had wanted to make for the OP before we went OT. You have a very specific number for waist width, but this is not really accurate when considering many different boards. The width at the foot positions is what matters to avoid boot out, and this width is determined by three things: waist width, sidecut radius (and type to a much lesser extent), and taper. For example, my Storm 166 x 26 is the right width for me as it has a ~9 m sidecut radius, my furberg has almost the exact same width at the feet even though it features a 27 cm waist. These two boards have the same width at the feet, despite the fact that their waists vary by a full cm (the furberg has a 20 m sidecut radius). So remember to consider all the factors which change the width at your feet.:


Yes, You are right.
What really matters is the board's width at stance point.

I had been using the waist width of 26.2 off of my Ride DH 2.1, I think I mentioned, but if not I will again.. that I boot-out on this board just ever so slightly. It's just a toe-drag, and it doesn't lift my edge off the ground. It's kinda like the Magne-Traction on my Hovercraft. I can live with it.
Anything less makes no sense to me, as surely It will get worse.
I don't boot-out on my Hovercraft solid, Ever. That's a 26.4 waisted board. What is it at stance? Don't know.

I ride everything 12degrees, -12 degrees. regardless of board shape.



I know that what matters is width at stance, but I had only been using waist width as a figure to "Shop" since manufacturers don't provide width at foot.....
They provide 3 spots. Tip, Waist, and Tail.

To me it seems reasonable to use waist width, and then assess the board style from there.
If we're talking about a tapered board, well, then I should be very cautious.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Wide Splitboards. Above 26.2 Waist
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 4:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 66
There has been a good conversation about Rocker/Camber profiles and sidecut profiles...
While everyone has their own preference, mine is this:

I LOVE Camber.
I LOVE Rocker.
I LOVE Rocker/Camber blend, whereas the whole board under-foot is camber, and ONLY the tip is early-rise rocker.
I LOVE smooth blended radius traditional sidecut.
I have never-ever ridden smooth radius REVERSE sidecut, but I ASSUME I would LOVE it.


I HATE Camber/Rocker blended underfoot. Camber under bindings, rocker middle. UGH. It makes an un-predictable board in both flex pattern and shape moving over snow.

I HATE wavy sidecut (Magne-Traction or whatever you want to call it) It makes for an un-predictable board in both edge grip contact points and shape moving over snow.


Some may prefer something else.
That's what I like & dis-like.


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 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 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