Forums Splitboards Nitro Snowboards have a splitboard
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 34 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #578925

    Hadn’t heard of it before and I was a bit surprised to see it on their site. Looks like a design a lot of people here might like; about 1cm of taper, 2.5cm setback, camber, and a long radius sidecut compared to what the big name companies usually put out (157cm = 10m, 162cm =12m, 166 = 13m)

    http://nitrousa.com/board/thunder-splitboard

    #669995
    PeRi
    110 Posts

    Yes, we had the chance to see it during the ISPO trade show!
    It looked quite good, nice pointy nose, setback, and full camber!

    glad to see more equipment options! :bananas:

    www.splitboardmag.com

    #669996
    dishwasher-dave
    460 Posts

    Good looking board. I had fun on a couple Nitro’s back in the day.

    The specs look good although I do wish folks listed nose and tail heights.

    #669997
    svelle
    10 Posts

    166 and 162 nose height 61,19mm tail height 31,71mm
    157 nose height 59,35mm tail height 29,87mm

    check the dimensions of the boards and compare them to the splitsticks dimensions……

    #669998
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    I love the taper and radius on this board….but why no nose rocker??? Kind of a bummer. I don’t see why anyone would want a split without some sort of rockered feature in the nose at least. Good to see a more progressive sidecut radius. I can’t tell you how many boards are out there that are beautifully designed and constructed only to be ruined by a gay ass 7.5-8 meter radius. I’d pass on this though (unless you’re accessing backcountry groomers lol).
    You can see in the video of the guy riding it how the standard nose sucks in powder.

    #669999
    Jefe009
    675 Posts

    …given Nitro’s history in splitboarding, I’m very surprised that this new board is what they came up with.

    viewtopic.php?f=9&p=84395

    http://www.snowboardmuseum.de/board/show/id/255

    www.splitlife.net

    #670000
    Taylor
    794 Posts

    @Jefe009 wrote:

    …given Nitro’s history in splitboarding, I’m very surprised that this new board is what they came up with.

    Why? Do you think the design is too conservative or too far out there?

    Nitro’s always shown occasional willingness to take risks with shapes that are more innovative than others’. The relatively large sidecut radii sets these boards apart. Furberg aside, is there another company that puts a 13m radius on a mid-60s deck?

    I like the blend of camber, long sidecut, taper, and gradual shovel shape. Should be versatile and well behaved in the backcountry – prioritizing speed and steeps stability while being less prone to hooking and more easily slarved and smeared in tight situations.

    Now if it were only 20 cm longer.

    @sun_rocket

    #670001
    svelle
    10 Posts

    have 3 years now already on the nitro/splitsticks shape. we intentionally did not put in a nose rocker. would have been too much with the tapered tail and killed the long effective edge. i ride this board in any conditions, even on casual resort days with possible hiking options.

    in powder never had nose diving issues, a little setback and the taper does the magic. for spring conditions more centered position of bindings and good to go.

    the board feels really stable at high speeds in pow or tracked stuff, still very agile and playful in slush or tighter situations like gullies and trees.

    the magic formula was to give it a stiff flex full camber long radius combo for a better uphill performance, and then put the taper in for pow days and agile edge control.

    we wanted to create an all conditions allrounder. looks like we did a good job. we are currently thinking of a second shape. still not sure in which direction this will go.

    #670002
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    @Taylor wrote:

    @Jefe009 wrote:

    and gradual shovel shape. less prone to hooking and more easily slarved and smeared in tight situations.

    I’m not seeing this in this board shape. The nose and tail look just as hooky as any other split out there. Besides the 12m radius and taper it’s basically a voile mojo.

    I think K2 has the best nose shape out there for what you described above. http://www.evo.com/imgp/750/55690/291051/k2-ultra-dream-snowboard-2013-158-front.jpg

    The K2 ultra dream nose with the nitro taper and 12m radius is the board that needs to be built. Actually, the K2 nose with the nitro/sicksplit tail would be better.

    I would like to try the Nitro though. It’s still a great shape.

    #670003
    Taylor
    794 Posts

    The “board that needs to built” is a split board version of this:

    Furburg created a new category, but they’re in many ways limited. This would push that envelope.

    @sun_rocket

    #670004
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    Exactly!
    Furberg went a tad too far out of the box imo.

    #670005
    peacefrog
    376 Posts
    #670006
    Taylor
    794 Posts

    @peacefrog wrote:

    http://www.atomicsnow.jp/snowboard/#/products/Info/a-sb-snowboard/AC5003004.html

    Looks like Atomic laminated the cross section of a peanut. My penis is longer than that board. And all that sidecut.

    Seriously though, what I’m talking about with DPS is something long and light, with long taper shovel and tail, whose rocker’s matched to its sidecut, which isn’t too much. Doubling the width of that DPS ski would, quite literally, just about do it.

    @sun_rocket

    #670007
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    I would not discount furberg until you have ridden one, they are surprisingly versatile for backcountry conditions. I only wish Daniel would move production out of Asia, and to the US or start his own manufacturing in Norway.
    I recently saw one of this year’s furberg splits (173) which one of my partners just received, the build quality actually looks pretty good, and the board is definitely more solid in terms of the core than my first year DIY split.

    #670008

    @Taylor wrote:

    The “board that needs to built” is a split board version of this:

    Furburg created a new category, but they’re in many ways limited. This would push that envelope.

    Well , here’s one. 164cm, 11m radius, rocker-flat-rocker, and my secret weapon.

    #670009
    JimmyC
    351 Posts

    Singlewhitecaveman, do you have any idea if that Chimera will become available to the buying public? That would be welcome addition to the quiver—and an interesting change of pace from my Unicorn Chaser.

    #670010

    @JimmyC wrote:

    Singlewhitecaveman, do you have any idea if that Chimera will become available to the buying public? That would be welcome addition to the quiver—and an interesting change of pace from my Unicorn Chaser.

    We’re going to work on the width some more, and maybe have it for a late-season release. This has been in the works for several years now. If we get it to where we feel ready we’ll introduce it into our demo program for this year.

    Sorry, I don’t mean to de-rail this thread. 🙄

    #670011
    Taylor
    794 Posts

    @barrows wrote:

    I would not discount furberg until you have ridden one, they are surprisingly versatile for backcountry conditions. I only wish Daniel would move production out of Asia, and to the US or start his own manufacturing in Norway.
    I recently saw one of this year’s furberg splits (173) which one of my partners just received, the build quality actually looks pretty good, and the board is definitely more solid in terms of the core than my first year DIY split.

    I’ve checked out the furburg in person, but not ridden it. The construction was good, but not on par with the design. It’s size is right at the lower margin of where physics fail me. Dum Dum is still a ways off size wise. Wish either of those decks were made in the neighborhood of 180. Still, I’d love to see DPS engineering and construction put to a split board — or see a split board company match them. I may pick up a 173 furburg this season nonentheless.

    @sun_rocket

    #670012
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Taylor: agree on the sizing, for what you are looking for you would want a bigger furberg, probably 185 even. The furbergs ride a little short, I find the 173 to be easily as maneuverable as my 166 Storm, maybe more so. The quality on the first year boards, like the one I have, is a little weak. But the 13/14 split I just saw was really much, much better. Clearly Daniel has worked hard with his builder, and improved the core (denser wood) the base, which is now a very nice graphite loaded sintered base, and the precision of the split construction, which has a very tight seam and precise matching between halves.
    Please suspend judgement on the furberg construction until you see some of this seasons boards.

    #670013
    BGnight
    1382 Posts

    You kooks and your long boards. No one needs longer than a 164-67 for an everyday board. Anything longer than that in anything other than 3 feet of fluff and you’re regressing.

    WHAT IS THAT CHIMERA? And I want more specs. Taper?

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 34 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.