Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Fri Sep 19, 2014 1:08 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:30 am
Posts: 75
Location: new zealand
My experiences with the never summer RC profile (same overall idea as lib's c2 profile) have been good for float, but with twin models you don't get the added benefit of a lot of setback or taper for extra flotation. I kind of agree with the seesaw description to an extent, I think it's a really fun design but like provotrout said you ride it differently.

And I don't know how S-rocker would translate to 'fun' and 'playful' for you spinning around on it; its a very directional camber profile (cambered with only the nose rockered). But the Rome Whiteroom is a twin-ish shape with the directional S-rocker and slight setback (2cm), so if that type of design lands well enough switch you could consider that board as well.

when comparing board length preferences, don't forget to think about your snow vs their snow. where are you riding anyway? west/east coast, continental/rockies? you said there isn't tons of deep snow in your area, you could be fine with what you originally thought. lots of light fluffy snow is where more surface area is your friend, and with gnarly steep terrain more edge contact with a stable ride is your friend.

if you know you like the feeling of camber with rocket nose/tail (camrock) over the central camber boards maybe just choose that design. Prior's AMF is a good board, and comes in 159 or 162, and for an extra investment you can carbon the 162 for more surface area and float while reducing the weight to throw around better. Or you can always find your favorite board and DIY it. 160wide Yes-The Greats splitboard??

Testing a bunch of boards out and picking your favorite like B-P said is your best choice, although not always possible for most people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
ruapehu_explorer wrote:
My experiences with the never summer RC profile (same overall idea as lib's c2 profile) have been good for float, but with twin models you don't get the added benefit of a lot of setback or taper for extra flotation. I kind of agree with the seesaw description to an extent, I think it's a really fun design but like provotrout said you ride it differently.

when comparing board length preferences, don't forget to think about your snow vs their snow. where are you riding anyway? west/east coast, continental/rockies? you said there isn't tons of deep snow in your area, you could be fine with what you originally thought. lots of light fluffy snow is where more surface area is your friend, and with gnarly steep terrain more edge contact with a stable ride is your friend.

if you know you like the feeling of camber with rocket nose/tail (camrock) over the central camber boards maybe just choose that design. Prior's AMF is a good board, and comes in 159 or 162, and for an extra investment you can carbon the 162 for more surface area and float while reducing the weight to throw around better.

Testing a bunch of boards out and picking your favorite like B-P said is your best choice, although not always possible for most people.


Very informative gotta say thank you.

And I live in the Midwest so splitboarding here is not my concern I do a good amount of traveling so me asking the very common question "whats a great all around board" is actually just what I need I go to west often (Whistler, Baker, Hood, Tahoe), Colorado, Utah, Montana also east from time to time and planning on Japan or hit Europe hopefully in the upcoming season all depends on conditions and its always fun to plan ahead and miss out on fresh pow else where or miss out because i came a week late or a week early. That happens all to often to me, now i do last min trips its a safer bet when the forcast is in my favor from the start.

So I need a board that will hold up to alot of different conditions. Realistically I know that I will loose a lil here and there getting that kind of a board but I can't only pack soo many boards on each trip. It Kinda a tall order to fill to say the least. Main concern float, stability at speed just to be clear on that

As for length very good idea to go bigger but get the lighter Prior gives me that options. My only concern is that I see that alot of splitboarding companies are going with the rocker/flat/rocker profile and that's one profile I have yet to try. So I want to make sure I don't miss out on something that might be better then anything I already rode.

I'm not 100% on any board or profile yet but I'm leaning towards the Prior or one of the flat profiles like Venture, Voile K2. From past experience and the boards I own that have those types of profiles I'm steering slightly away from Neversummer or lib tech rocker profiles. So if anyone has been on both flat and camber between feet and can give me some insight on the pros and cons of each that would be extremely helpful. Basically a Camrock vs BTX or RC kinda thing but in the splitboard sense of course

Thank you again all


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:38 pm
Posts: 250
Location: powder central, bc, canuckistan
i think stance width is another factor you haven't considered
the ns/lib styles of r / c are imo best with wide stances, they even out the pressure along the edge b/w the feet
where as with the mid deck camber, tip / tail rocker, if you have a wide stance, you end up with 2 areas of increased edge pressure, at each foot, which makes for a bit of an uneven ride, especially relevant when low speed billy goating, but for one of my friends it was a deal breaker in powder specifically.
flat / rocker less so, and of course the stiffness of the deck will also come into play in evening out the edge hold

id be interested to see peoples stance width along with their preferred camber / flat / rocker preferences... my stance is 23.5 - 24", ns r/c works for me

also honestly if you give almost any shape a few daze for getting used to it, you'll probably love it... we're talkin about snowboarding after all.

regarding length, sure a bigger board will float more, but you do gotta carry the thing around all day, and however much snow piles up on it too... i tend to go as small as i can with a split ride, with the rocker in the mix you don't often have to worry much about float...
stability at speed yah trade off.... i guess the solution is a happy medium... or a quiver!!

_________________
never summer snowboards
phantom bindings
dynafit touring


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:15 pm
Posts: 295
Location: Washington
Sounds like you narrowed down to my two favorite profiles, camrock and flatrock(venture). Going from camber to flatrock is a natural transition because you keep the charging performance that you expect from a cambered board with the added bonus of a playful ride from the rocker tip and tail.

Every profile has it's pros and cons. The deal breaker for me with the rocker under foot profile is shitty one-foot riding and traversing. The board just wanders around on the center rocker and won't track straight. So if you're riding in areas with long luge track exits you might consider that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 3:31 pm
Posts: 60
Location: Easton, WA
To clarify what I was referring to as my favorite, the poster who answered was correct, I like full length camber under foot with an early ride nose and tail. That setup gives hands down the greatest versatility in a split board while maintaining awesome float in deep snow. Granted they don't have AS much float as a full reverse camber board (rocker, v-rocker, banana or whatever the marketing term is for a particular brand) but in my experience in testing boards for the past 3 season, they have as much if not more than the rocker/camber contraptions. The biggest difference is an early rise board that gets submerged will rise back towards the surface, the rocker/camber boards would just bury deeper unless you lean waaay back to get the nose back up. In the pnw when you get that famous cascade concrete, a board that nose dives can be the death of you! hahaha I have notice that with every variation of a rocker center, camber just under the foot type of board. Again, they do everything ok, but excel in nothing.

Powlash nailed it too, when you one foot one of the combo decks, its super squirly and difficult to hold a line one footed. The same thing happens when in ski mode. If you have a long traverse or a long ski out, those things are impossible to control! My current split is a full reverse camber and neither the tip nor tail is anywhere close to the ground in ski mode. I have had to re-learn skinning it difficult terrain and also buy new skins with higher grip and less glide to keep the things under me. My split for spring/summer will be a flat kick with early rise nose. If you have ever toured with a skier or somene with a cambered split in the spring/summer, you will notice how easy they move accross difficult hard terrain or up steep icy skin tracks, because you will be struggling!

I feel (and this is an honest opinion) that a full cambered/flat board with early rise OR the voile palindrome with the added flat section underfoot would be the best option for a true ALL AROUND setup. I ride a full rockered board and love it in our deep heavy snow, but I take the sacrifice of knowing in the spring I will be carrying my Mr. Chomps on every tour until my new split comes haha

_________________
Chair2BoardSports


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
karkis wrote:
i think stance width is another factor you haven't considered
the ns/lib styles of r / c are imo best with wide stances, they even out the pressure along the edge b/w the feet
where as with the mid deck camber, tip / tail rocker, if you have a wide stance, you end up with 2 areas of increased edge pressure, at each foot, which makes for a bit of an uneven ride, especially relevant when low speed billy goating, but for one of my friends it was a deal breaker in powder specifically.
flat / rocker less so, and of course the stiffness of the deck will also come into play in evening out the edge hold

id be interested to see peoples stance width along with their preferred camber / flat / rocker preferences... my stance is 23.5 - 24", ns r/c works for me

also honestly if you give almost any shape a few daze for getting used to it, you'll probably love it... we're talkin about snowboarding after all.

regarding length, sure a bigger board will float more, but you do gotta carry the thing around all day, and however much snow piles up on it too... i tend to go as small as i can with a split ride, with the rocker in the mix you don't often have to worry much about float...
stability at speed yah trade off.... i guess the solution is a happy medium... or a quiver!!


I have a 22-23.5 freeride to park, also depends on the bindings i have i ride Now bindings in pow and they have flat footbeds to comfortably anything past thats uncomfortable and putd pressure on my heels and stuff. With my 390 boss bindings with canted footbeds i run 23-24 wide and it feels normal.

All the splitboard bindings i was looking at like sparks and Karakoram al have flat footbeds so more then likely i will be riding with a 22inch stance

As for stiffness most the boards on my list are mid-stiff but the ways companies rating system varies thats gonna be tough to go by without having all the boards in front of me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
powslash wrote:
Sounds like you narrowed down to my two favorite profiles, camrock and flatrock(venture). Going from camber to flatrock is a natural transition because you keep the charging performance that you expect from a cambered board with the added bonus of a playful ride from the rocker tip and tail.

Every profile has it's pros and cons. The deal breaker for me with the rocker under foot profile is shitty one-foot riding and traversing. The board just wanders around on the center rocker and won't track straight. So if you're riding in areas with long luge track exits you might consider that.


So in you opinion flatrock over camrock? Stability at speed and edge hold between both profiles is the same you think? I would think the camber would more stable but thats just a assumption

Completely agree on the rocker between the feet, they are fun but not very versatile especially in splitboarding


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 12:17 pm
Posts: 129
Location: Wasangeles
LPowhuntr wrote:
So you perfer the camber between the feet over the rocker between the feet right? I do notice that between my Banana Magic Enhanced BTX (rocker between feet) compared to The Greats Camrock camber between feet, the rocker obviously floats a lil better but overall camber feel better all around and more stable in my opinion probably because more of the board is planted on the ground at a time.


Realized I didn't respond to your question really...

The main reason why I prefer camber or flat between feet is turn initiation and transition toe to heel feels more natural - probably because I've been riding camber b/t feet for 15 or 16 years, so that's where my muscle memory has been molded. It could also be easier from a physiological point, but who knows.

And the rocker only 'floats' better compared to twin(ish) camber board shapes. A directional tapered board with an s-rocker type shape can plane more and plow less than a comparable length flying V/c2 board imo.

_________________
Rome WR 165 / Phantom 2.0 / TLT5 / Backcountry Skins / Snowpulse RAS 35


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
First of all I gotta thank everyone for their input, I'm new too splitboard.com and I gotta say you guys rock :-)

I somewhat narrowed down my first list. Camrock and Flatrock are leading the way, considering how everyone is raving about these including myself well Camrock atleast it sounds like a safe bet that these profiles will be a good fit. Now if it was a question of price well currently atleast Flatrock would win but I don't make dicisions like this by getting the cheapest thing possible.

K2 Panoramic snowboard 154, 158, 162, 168

Prior AMF 159, 162, 165, 169 going to get carbon upgrade if I do buy and go longer (longer + lighter sounds great)

Venture Helix which might not be possible because as mention I don't see it in next season line up

Voile Palindrome 159, 162

Also have to mention that I'm doing some reading on Furberg snowboards but man those boards as splits are really up there 167 the smallest what a beast well for me atleast. recently recommended gotta consider all options here but I got a 15 page topic about those boards to read up on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2013 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
ruapehu_explorer wrote:
And I don't know how S-rocker would translate to 'fun' and 'playful' for you spinning around on it; its a very directional camber profile (cambered with only the nose rockered). But the Rome Whiteroom is a twin-ish shape with the directional S-rocker and slight setback (2cm), so if that type of design lands well enough switch you could consider that board as well.


I looked into the Powder S seams like yes it not that far bad but with the s camber it would definitely feel different switch and I feel I would sacrifice float going switch.

Thanx for the suggestion I'm open to all and any


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:30 am
Posts: 75
Location: new zealand
to make things more difficult there's also the jones mt twin to consider. no experience with it whatsoever but it looks fun. it's supposed to be camrock but a lot of owners say jones boards look more rocker throughout than having much central camber.

for 'cheapest' you'll probably find that being the k2 panoramic. 154 is probably too small for you no matter how nimble you want it. i think it's tied for the most affordable of all the splitboards at full price ($600) and on sale turns into a pretty good bargain. Kyle Miller wrote a review on 7 boards a little while back that includes the panoramic (http://splitboard.com/index.php/feature ... plitboards) and it's $400 at a couple places online right now.

http://www.mountaingear.com/webstore/Ge ... Code=97950

http://www.snowboards.com/K2-Panoramic- ... erralID=NA

(for $420 dogfunk has 100% guarantee, they are connected to backcountry.com and I trust them as a retailer, no experience with the other 2 sites I just posted)
http://www.dogfunk.com/k2-snowboards-pa ... erralID=NA


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Thu Mar 07, 2013 3:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
ruapehu_explorer wrote:
to make things more difficult there's also the jones mt twin to consider. no experience with it whatsoever but it looks fun. it's supposed to be camrock but a lot of owners say jones boards look more rocker throughout than having much central camber.

for 'cheapest' you'll probably find that being the k2 panoramic. 154 is probably too small for you no matter how nimble you want it. i think it's tied for the most affordable of all the splitboards at full price ($600) and on sale turns into a pretty good bargain. Kyle Miller wrote a review on 7 boards a little while back that includes the panoramic (http://splitboard.com/index.php/feature ... plitboards) and it's $400 at a couple places online right now.

http://www.mountaingear.com/webstore/Ge ... Code=97950

http://www.snowboards.com/K2-Panoramic- ... erralID=NA

(for $420 dogfunk has 100% guarantee, they are connected to backcountry.com and I trust them as a retailer, no experience with the other 2 sites I just posted)
http://www.dogfunk.com/k2-snowboards-pa ... erralID=NA



Thanx

I wasn't trying to go the cheap route I ment but these deals are hard to pass up I even found a voile Palindrome for just under 600 and its a true twin that's a plus.

Jones boards are sweet but the mtn twin is set back 20cm according to the site all the boards are that's why I didn't consider them but then sites like backcountry.com says its a centered stance.

The K2 Snowboards Panoramic I wonder how it will do at high speed and all the profile works for me would like it centered but hey 1in setback won't stop me from riding switch. Also weight of the board I wonder how it compares to Voile and I doubt it will be lighter then Prior

What to do :-/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
PostPosted: Fri Mar 08, 2013 1:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:16 pm
Posts: 71
Jones site is definitely missleading every board says 20cm setback stance, but the mountain twin appears to be centered

So down to :thumbsup: Jones, K2, Voile, Venture, Prior

Any input here guys I'm going off of only what I hear it would be Prior, Venture, K2, Voile and then Jones quality and duability .... And warranties I suppose which don't mean everything but shows how far the company stays by there boards.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 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