As Barrows noted, many of us spent many years rocking the trees before deep side-cuts came on the scene in the late 1980s. While I’d be interested to feel how it rides there, I’d have absolutely no hesitation taking this deck into the trees–in fact I’d want one that’s longer so that it floats better, planes at lower speeds and board angles and more capably handles fore and aft weight throws. Taken together, I think the rocker, early taper shovel and tail and taper likely make this a perfectly capable tree board.

Snowman 1: You should consider throwing up a separate thread dedicated to the Donek tree board. I think there are some cool and novel ideas bound up in that design also that people would be interested to hear about.

Good read!!
Ridden a 168 never summer summit cambered split in the trees with out an issue. Actually loved it so i bought the new R&C version in a 160 because of the claimed float. This design and length is not helpful in the BC at all. Too short and R&C acts like a barge and is very slow on low angle run outs. Great in steep powder.
A shame but it will stay at home this year.
Have a rossi experience split 159 for not too deep days and tight tree bound escapade. Great ride this one.
At speed the rossi seems to bite in hard when turning and has threw me on one occasion which lead to me ripping out the pucks. 😥
Wanted the 173 for more stability at speed and the deep powder fields of Asahidake and Tokachidake.
Time will only tell if it will be what i am after.
The only concern i have is that for what has been said by Eirik is that the board is soft in flex.
Daniel claimed that it is on the stiffer side of flex..

@furbergsnowboards wrote:

Glad to see the interest for the boards!

About the discussion on the performance in the trees with the long turning radius. Ideal shape for deep powder is fully reversed sidecut and and full rocker profile (like the Libtech Banana Hammock). A board like this is very quick and easy to turn in powder. Turning radius is not needed in powder. But boards like this does not work at all when you hit hard snow or ice.

The rocker revolution started in 2002 with the Volant Spatula, a ski with inversed sidecut and full rocker. I was fantastic in powder but sucked on hard packed snow. Today almost all freeride skis have a combination of sidecut and taper. And rocker towards the nose and tail. A shape that is great for soft snow, but actually works well also on hard packed.

The snowboard industry was 10 years behind the skiing industry until recently… 🙂

//Daniel Furberg
furbergsnowboards.com
facebook.com/furbergsnowboards

Uh…you must mean the rocker re-revolution. Snowboards had rocker in the 80s, homie, but thanks for stopping by and good luck with Furberg. The boards look great.

I must say I agree with Daniel, his boards are definitely something which has not been offered before for snowboarders, and I must congratulate him on going forward and taking the risk of starting a company to make these designs available.
I have been looking for a board with this type of design for a few years now, but every company I suggested it to just continued to make the same old designs, or they added rocker to the same old shapes and called it something revolutionary. No one really wanted to take advantage of rocker, and combine it with a forward thinking shape to offer more stability, control, and turn type options for the rider. 8-10 m sidecut radii make no sense for advanced riders who know how to turn, just as experienced skiers do not use deep sidecut, or “parabolic” skis-those designs are for intermediates, making it easy for them to learn to carve at moderate speeds on groomed resort runs.
Thanks Daniel!

@barrows wrote:

Ordered a 173 for delivery in the New Year. Very excited to have this board. It will be going under the knife right away, as I have no need for a solid backcountry board. I am going to be very careful to keep the weight down. No inside edge, carbon fiber sidewall addition, skis screws for old style DIY pucks, direct mount Dynafit toe pieces, Black Diamond split skins.
Lots of surface area, and an easy to ride board = more fun in the pow!

Awesome! Looking forward to the write-up.

I’m very keen to hear what you guys have to say about the Furberg splits you’re making. :headbang:

That sounds like a very good idea in deed.
The flex rating of the board initially was about 7 tops.
Always hard to tell how much you loose until you put it back together so maybe a 6 now at best.
So i think the carbon will help this little dilemma.

Do you intend on epoxying/glueing the carbon straight to the cut sidewall or taking out some of the core and use thicker carbon inlay between the top sheet and base?
What about the repeated flex of skinning and riding with respect to the carbon staying attached?

Great, a friend and i will do 3 boards and tell you how it goes!!
Furberg, Rossi and Arbor Abacus.
Thanks Barrows!!

barrows, I have some carbon sidewall boards and have 3 pieces of advice:

1. Can you get some real ski/board resin and heat cure it, it is way stiffer and tougher,

2. after laminating the rails, sand them smooth without going through the fibers then paint on a thin layer of SB-120? or any epoxy resin for surfboards with a UV block in the resin. otherwise it will yellow up a bit. see fiberglasssupply.com you could also add black tint to your resin that you laminate with instead

3. stop your carbon strips about a half an inch before the tip and tail so if it gets bonked, it wont start to peel, esp if you don’t use the toughened heat-cured version of epoxy. Cut up a bunch of shards of carbon, make a paste with the shards and some premixed epoxy, paint his on the last half inch areas and press it smooth with some clear tape, like 3m wide packing tape, sand that smooth.