Splitboard.com Forums

So who's on board for one of these for 2013?
This was my first year on a solution and it was my go to board for everything,like the idea on the carbon and also going up from a 161 to 164.
But i've never had anything like this and if people know who i am,i break shit alot.
Is this board going to break? will the tunisians get it sorted? who knows,not seen too much online about this or any video of JJ or crew riding this.

Did find a store taking pre-roders already though and the price is'nt as bad as i thought $1,099
http://www.basinshopping.com/Product/20 ... .3048.aspx

Opinions?

After switching back and forth between my Venture Zephyr and Jones Solution a lot this year, I decided I like my Venture more, so no, I won't be plunking over 1k clams down on a carbon Jones.

I'd like to know how much carbon is actually in that thing. I bet it's just a fiberglas baord with some stringers and a fancy carbonlook topsheet.

But prove me wrong.

Three hundred clams to save 200 grams(pretty sure thats the weight savings) is a lot in my mind. I think my money would be better spent upgrading my karakourams or shaving weight else were(pack and other equipment.) I know that every gram counts on your setup but I cant see spending another 1099 on the same board I have but 6oz lighter.

Hmmmmm, so I read this on car companies using carbon fiber in their cars....

"The Toyota study concluded that carbon-fiber production creates more CO2 per pound than any other automotive material in use today. This begs the question, just how "green" is carbon fiber and is it really the right solution for reducing vehicle weight?"

If that info is correct, and relates to the Jones line...

Don't know.. Seems kinda "against" what Jones is supposed to be "for". Almost like when they decided that putting themselvs in the position to possibly have to shoot a polar bear to get some lines...

SO now we are going to start calling out Jones for the use of carbon in his boards. Something that the snowboard industry has been doing for well over 15 years.

[quote="Freighttrain48"]Three hundred clams to save 200 grams/quote]

Prior, 200 clams to save 600g

easy math

Not necessarily in favor of "calling out" Jones for use of carbon in his boards, but it does seem somewhat incongruous with public statements of concern re: climate change and his work with POW. And those positions aren't ones that the snowboard industry as a whole has publicly professed.

I fully respect what Jones does in the mountains and also to raise awareness and support for climate change solutions. His boards, (QC issues aside) ride great. Still, he should have someone on staff whose job it is to harmonize all three of these aspects (riding, advocacy, and product) otherwise the environmental talk starts to look like greenwashing. It would have been simple (and inexpensive) enough to include a small surcharge to buy some carbon offsets to account for the extra GHG impact of a carbon fiber board. That would have been consistent with all of Jones' stated values.

Well stated. I agree. But for a small start up company, it is tough to invest in that kind of money when you are still building the brand. For as much as people think that Jones is a big company, they are smaller than 90% of the brands out there.

The comparison in the original article was made between carbon and steel, and the CO2 production associated with the automobile industry. Lets see, how much carbon fiber goes into a car and how much is in a snowboard? Could that study have been funded by the steel industry who is very influential in the automotive industry?

The point I'm making, contrary to splitrippin, is that Jones probably uses enough carbon in all of the carbon solutions it will make next year, as three fully carbon cars, which the study was based on (yeah, I'm guestimating). Calling out a new, small company for putting carbon fiber in it's boards, when a lot of other board companies do the same thing, is ridiculous. Then comparing them to a study done on the automobile industry, which is only slightly bigger than the splitboard industry, is just wrong.

What is missing from his statement is a) Scale, b) industry standards, and c) scope.

A few other things to think about. How many boards on the market have wood cores. Trees reduce carbon by turning it into oxygen. If you are cutting down trees, isn't that increasing the carbon footprint? Should we all start riding foam core boards? Well how much CO2 does that create? Ahhhhh! Crap, Im just gonna start skiing because snowboards are so bad for the environment.

It's a process, it's heading in the right direction. Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweating things and you will be good.

im gonna change my loser name to 'math nazi' just now...

if carbon fibre produces more co2 per structural unit than steel (ive actually heard that arguement before... somewhere... )... steel uses alot! of energy (burnt fossil fuels) to produce... in snowboards carbon generally replaces glass... not so much footprint there, id say if one is big against climate change, one oughtta man up and drag some heavier sticks around, your fuel is renewable.

also wood is considered carbon neutral as it uses co2 as it grows and emits the same as it decays.... if you embalm it in a case of plastic carbon glass and steel it may potentially be a carbon sink and Jones is actually saving the world!! one deck at a time

Geting out of the lift line and Skinning will offset the the required energy at some point....

You produce CO2 when you exhale, and you are working (breathing) harder when skinning than when riding the lift, so you may have a larger carbon footprint in the backcountry. Then again you will be working less hard with a lighter board and so over the life of the product you may offset the addition of carbon to the board.

Just glad I can contribute more worthless speculation to this thread.

The bigest problem will be making the carbon and non carbon decks feel the same.