Forums Splitboard Talk Forum Arbor Splitboard feedback
Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
  • #576806
    4150 Posts

    Our friends at the Arbor Collective are stoked to announce they’ll be offering the Abacus splitboard next year (press release coming soon). :thumbsup:

    They’ve turned to to get a little feedback from anyone that had a chance to demo the boards at the recent Mt Baker Splitfest. They’re also interested in learning any of the split community’s thoughts about them entering into the splitboard market. Thoughts and comments are appreciated!

    ps. Anyone we know win one of the two splitboards they gave away at the Baker event?

    675 Posts

    Didn’t try one at MBSF, but love that Arbor is entering the SB market. I have a Abacus solid from 09 and it’s my go to solid. Unfortunately don’t get many days on it anymore as I don’t really ride resorts much, but I do love the Abacus.

    Also good is that Arbor is turning back to the freeride market, they seem to have put a lot more into their freestyle boards and team for the past few years.

    Thanks Arbor! Can’t wait to try a Abacus split.

    304 Posts

    They are the nicest looking decks! thats about all i can add.

    830 Posts

    I think Arbor’s are absolutely beautiful. I’ve always wanted an Arbor more than any other board. It would be nice for these newer companies building splits to provide an option between k-clips and hooks when you order. Options are always a good thing.

    291 Posts

    I have an Arbor Draft as my park board. Absolutely love it. It is by far their softest board, but I take it anywhere on the mountain. Handles 2 foot pow days like a champ. I am sure their splits are built of the same quality if not better. Anyone know how stiff this upcoming years will be?

    1490 Posts

    Hi Arbor. I have not ridden the new Abacus Split, and I have not yet seen full specs published anywhere, so I will not comment directly on it.
    I am glad you guys are going to be offering a split, and I do have some advice: the split market is starting to get crowded, but still, many companies are just offering split versions of their (generally designed for riding at a ski area) solid boards. If you want to distinguish yourself in the split market, I would suggest designing boards specifically to perform in backcountry snow conditions. Here are some ideas:
    Long sidecut radii: for snow conditions with any depth at all, deep sidecuts hurt performance (especially float and stability), long radii perfrom much better, I am talking radii like 11 m and above, even up to 20 m. One can still get quick short radius turns out of boards like this by downweighting in any kind of softer snow, and the long radius makes the board less hooky, and improves float. Long radius sidecuts like this need to be paired with a wider waist, to achieve the desired width at the feet (and same average width).
    Rocker, and low rise, blunted, tip and tails: Rocker works, plain and simple. My favorite for a split is flat through the middle of the board (a compromise, to allow for good skinning) combined with subtle early rise tip and tails. The rocker should just extend to the very tip and tail of the board, without an abrupt rise at the very tip and tail-this subtle rise, when combined with a blunted shape, allows the full surface area of the tip and tail to contribute to float.
    Tapered tip and tail: end the sidecut radius early, and blend the sidecut into the tip and tail shape over a longer distance. This makes the entry (and exit) point of the sidecut very gentle, making the board very forgiving when charging at speed through variable conditions, and also keeps the board from wanting to “knife” through the snow and dive at the transition from the sidecut point to the tip and tail shape. This (combined with rocker and long sidecut radius) also allows the rider to more easily incorporate slarves, smears, and all other sorts of sliding turns into their riding, allowing for more creative riding styles in soft snow.
    Nose to tail taper: Significant taper, setback, and a directional shape is going to be better for backcountry freeriders (8-15 mm), for freestyle riders, they will want a different board, but hard charging freeriders will appreciate significant taper on this design, as it allows quick planing, and also gives the rider more control over the tail of the board.

    Right now, no one is really making a split incorporating all of these features, some are close… Furberg makes solids like this…
    I would love to see splits with this design, perhaps a 167×26.5 with a 16m radius, and a 171×27 with a 18 m radius or so.

    Hint: see what DPS is doing with their skis, they are making some of the most advanced shapes for backcountry free riding, and adaptiong those ideas to snowboards makes total sense.

    624 Posts

    Keep your true rocker profile, flats in the middle make no sense in my opinion, full rocker boards skin just fine. consider a constant radius deeper rocker in your longer boards, throw a few paulownia stringers in your cores away from the edges to watch weight, experiment with channelling out the base side of the core. Have a look at what Rad Air has been up to, they have 172 cm boards at 7.5 lbs. which is more than a half pound lighter than Voile and stiffer. A couple boards for cheap demo through local shops right by the mountains in places like SLC, Tahoe, Seattle, Bozeman and Anchorage would probably create tons of feedback for you. have the demo cost 20 bucks and refund for a solid report on the including the rider’s weight, style and experience with other boards.

    and for my 2 cents, ditch the big honkin clips.

    1448 Posts

    I love my little Arbor for its previous life as a playful groomer deck and fun but deep pow averse split/swallowtail, So I was stoked to check these out and chat with the dudes form Arbor during a recent splitboard art showing.

    The board is extremely light, well constructed and beautiful.
    Flat bottom with rocker tip/tail. As near as I could tell there is no camber (trad or reverse).
    They only come in small sizes according to the guy I spoke with. (Small in my opinion is less than 165)

    FWIW They also had a 145-ish women’s solid board on display with really nice graphics.

    Shark Snowsurf Chuna
    Voile V-Tail 170 BC
    Voile One Ninety Five
    Spark R&D Arc

    198 Posts

    Didn’t get a chance to ride the Abacus split but I did get to fondle one, was really happy to see a factory split Arbor, been hoping you guys would get into the market for a long while. I have the A-Frame in a solid and a DIY split (thanks to Down The Middle). I’d REALLY like to see you guys offer the A-Frame as a split, I’ll guarantee you at least one sale.
    Hope to borrow the Abacus split sometime in the near future to see how it compares.

    1669 Posts

    i tested an abascus years ago and thought it was a solid board, damp, good float and nicely shaped nose, cut through resort chop real well, but felt heavy.

    snurfer – you said they are light? Maybe I just felt heavy that day.

    do they list weights on their boards.

    864 Posts

    Hey arbor guys.

    Love the aestetics of your boards and your compannies mission statement.

    Not much technical input from me, but it does matter to me that we matter to you.

    Thank you very much for asking, and for making your boards available in split form..

    Oh yeah, make touring bracket inserts an option. I don’t like havind to direct mount dynafits and make a giant piec of swiss cheese around uneeded holes.

    134 Posts

    I got to handle this guy at the local board shop… a very pretty board. With the bamboo sidewalls (inside and outside), the board felt pretty light. Of course they all seem to w/o any hardware!

    A neat idea on the contact points along the edges too.. there is a magnatraction-esqe contact point on the heel and toe side of the board, right in front/behind the binding inserts. So, just two on each side (i think), but right where your boot would sit.

    A very attractive board!



    I agree with the poster who said the boards should be offered with the option of the Karakoram clips or Chinese Hooks from Vole. I prefer the Chinese Hooks because they make it a lot easier to throw your board together for a quick boot, but I understand that others might prefer the increased rigidity of the Karakoram clips.

    Also, sick looking decks.

    9 Posts

    I took the Arbor split out for a big tour to the Coleman Pinnacle on Saturday of the MBSF.

    It was definitely fun on the way down and that is a big part of what it is about. I’m used to a stiffer board and found myself giving into the more playful action. I was pumping pow turns in lower angle pitches, where I would have been pointing it, and not loosing too much speed to make my goal. The magna traction like sidewall bumps near the binders did allow my size 12 feet to have no drag.

    On the skinning front I found it to be deficient. The rocker point right in front of the touring bracket made the ski wash out when side hilling. We were in powder mostly but whenever it got firm near the wind blown ridge I found I had to work much harder to hold my edge, often with significant upper body pole bracing. This would be a nightmare for some of the spring tours with steep side hill ascents. I’m pretty comfy skinning up steep, firm stuff (think Rainier’s Pan Point climb in the spring & summer) so I don’t immediately attribute this to lack of skill or resistance to something new. When breaking trail I felt that the whole front of my ski/skin wasn’t doing anything. It seemed that I was getting less float that usual and therefor working harder to break.

    Last summer my buddy Chris and I decided to challenge/torture ourselves ascending the steep Pan Point route at Rainier. We skinned the whole thing while all but 2 other skiers switched to boot packing. The “skin track” was at most a cm deep edge and super firm. I’m not going to lie and say I didn’t sweat the exposure at the finish but we made it in good form. This board would never have done that. Not a chance, in those conditions. The reality of touring in the bc is we deal with variable conditions, spend most of the time ascending and often deal with exposure. I want a tool that doesn’t let me down, even in the worst of it.

    Maybe I’m just not a rocker split board guy but I’m guessing there is a happy medium where the rocker moment is further forward from the touring bracket.

    I was using my usual Spark binders, Voile skins and relatively stiff Burton Serow boots with new impact 5 liner. I’m coming from an older, fully cambered Voile Split Decision, if that helps put my observations in perspective.

    Arbor makes beautiful gear and from all appearances this looked well made and durable. If they figure out a way to keep the rocker action while improving the uphill capabilities they will have a winner.

    4150 Posts

    @Waiting4winter36 wrote:

    I prefer the Chinese Hooks because they make it a lot easier to throw your board together for a quick boot

    I don’t want to drift the thread off topic but I gotta share a couple thoughts on this…

    After 12 years of splitting using the Chinese Hooks and now a couple months of using the K-clips…I don’t think I’ll ever go back to the hooks.

    Something to consider is how many times you have to touch the hooks throughout the day. Lets say you do 5 transitions in a day, you have to touch and swivel the hooks a total of 20 times. With K-clips it’s cut in half as you only have to open (or close) each clip, not swivel 4 hooks. It may sound trivial but again after a day with many transitions you’ll notice a lot more ease and speed with the K-clips. Not to mention the way they pull the seam and two halves together is second to none.

    In terms of getting the two halves together with the clips, after a day of two it becomes just as easy as the hooks. In fact the halves can be slid together in the same manner as the hooks where they catch on each other. Its super easy. The exception may be on Voile boards that are capped down the middle seam but Voile isn’t even using that style of construction anymore so it’s moot.

    In my opinion, the K-clips are faster, more effective, and just as easy to use as the hooks.


    4150 Posts

    @chdoba wrote:

    I’m coming from an older, fully cambered Voile Split Decision, if that helps put my observations in perspective.

    It does.

    If this was your first time skinning a rockered board that has a lot to do with your experience skinning the Abacus. Much like riding a rockered board, skinning it is the same…it definitely take some getting use to and requires small adjustments to technique.

    I’ve been using rockered boards for a couple years now and the Abacus for a couple months. In my experience with the board I haven’t noticed anything specific to the shape or rocker point that has made it more or less difficult to skin than any other rockered split. I’d also call the Abacus extremely versatile in many conditions from powder to firm snow and it’s definitely a tool “I” can trust. Currently I consider it my go-to board for anything. 🙂

    I’ve never skinned up Rainier but I did skin the Abacus up Shuksan.

    4150 Posts

    Here’s a recent pic and viddy of the Abacus in use.

    pic by SchralpMacchio aka Alex Do


    Keep up the good work Arbor! :thatrocks:

    35 Posts

    I’ve been riding an arbor draft for about 6 years. I recently made it in a split and have been using it all of this season with about 30 days on it. For being a park specific board, I’ve loved it as an all mtn. board. It is not noodely even when it is a split. Yes, the board has seen its fair share of abuse with cracked edges and base damage, the boars still slays. I’m interested in Arbor’s splitboard, but still more interested in their solids, because company made splits are just out of my price range.


    4150 Posts

    Here’s the official spec sheet for the Abacus split! :thumbsup:

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.