Home › Forums › Splitboards › Splitboard & camber/flat/rocker profile help
- This topic has 40 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 5 months ago by
LPowhuntr.
- AuthorPosts
- March 7, 2013 at 3:03 am #666699provotroutParticipant
@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.
March 7, 2013 at 3:54 am #666700LPowhuntrParticipantFirst 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.
March 7, 2013 at 4:51 am #666701LPowhuntrParticipant@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
March 7, 2013 at 9:13 am #666702ruapehu_explorerParticipantto 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/featured/articles/202-kyle-miller-reviews-7-splitboards) and it’s $400 at a couple places online right now.
(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-panoramic-splitboard?CMP_SKU=K2S0854&MER=0406&CMP_ID=SH_FRO003&mv_pc=r126&mr:trackingCode=9F6DF971-A4C6-E111-B7E9-90E2BA028069&mr:referralID=NAMarch 7, 2013 at 10:03 am #666703LPowhuntrParticipant@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/featured/articles/202-kyle-miller-reviews-7-splitboards) and it’s $400 at a couple places online right now.
(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-panoramic-splitboard?CMP_SKU=K2S0854&MER=0406&CMP_ID=SH_FRO003&mv_pc=r126&mr:trackingCode=9F6DF971-A4C6-E111-B7E9-90E2BA028069&mr:referralID=NAThanx
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 :-/
March 8, 2013 at 8:19 am #666704LPowhuntrParticipantJones 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.
March 8, 2013 at 8:51 am #666705ruapehu_explorerParticipanti doubt the jones mt twin is 20cm set back, that would be quite a lot. that’s nearly 8 inches… (the Never Summer Summit powder split is set back 1.625 inches). I think that number is either in mm (so 2cm) or completely wrong and backcountry.com’s info might be correct. either way, aside from the setback it might or might not have it has a mostly twinish shape with a slightly directional/twinnish design with the rockered nose/tail.
for comparison, posted weights from the companies are 3.63kg/8lbs for the voile palindrome, 3.55kg/7.81lbs for the prior AMF, and 3.02kg/6.64lbs for the AMF xtc (carbon) all in size 162. Prior’s weights state chinese hooks and tip clips are included, and I think Voile does the same.
I saw a reviewer post a 168 k2 panoramic’s weight as 9.3 lbs (4.2 kg), but didn’t find anything official or what the weight included.
good luck with your choice.
March 8, 2013 at 5:57 pm #666706powslashParticipantIn your shoes, I’d go AMF or Helix. The Helix is available on the Venture website now. Think I saw one on ebay too.Both those boards are pretty sick. Venture boards are built durable so you pay a slight weigh penalty. If you click the links in the sidebar–> Chris, the owner of the site, gets a piece.
Another thing I like about rocker tip and tail is it puts your weight “in the pocket”. Meaning you don’t have to do as much fore and aft weight shifts as you would on a comparable cambered board. You can weight both feet closer to equal and still float in pow instead of leaning back and riding back foot all the time.
Oh, and skinning. Breaking trail with a rocker nose rules.
March 9, 2013 at 7:19 am #666707LPowhuntrParticipantNarrowed down to 2 boards after reading up on Venture and the weight of there boards, good amount of reviews I’m going to pass on Venture atleast for this board might keep eyes open they seem like they make solid boards but definitely freeride oriented. K2 is out also after speaking with K2 and reading up about the board it’s not made for what I want to do with it that’s for sure. K2 mentioned that riding switch with this board in the backcountry is not something they would recommend also they mentioned that the rise on tip and tail is differnet so not gonna work.
I’m really considering Ferburg Freeride board but for right now and the upcoming season I want a fun twin board so I can take my resort and park riding in the backcountry and open up to hitting natural features. Steeps too but more then anything else slashing deep pow, jumps, cliffs, spins and flips.
I’m in contact with Ferburg I’m considering picking up a bigger big mountain board for my Heli trips I was considering a split but I’m not sure, extra 200$ for the split prolly better off doing that and having it for those long hiking days to hit the real steep runs and I don’t think ill have a issue with it on the very occasional heli trip either slip I mean.
But back to task at hand got some pros and cons to make things even more details btw sorry about being a pain about this just making sure that’s all thank you all again for all the feedback
Prior AMF 159 or 162 thinking weight wise and all (definitely XTC Carbon version) prolly better off going with the 162 (again I’m 5’6″ 165lb w/o gear)
Pros : super like light 6.65lbs, built tough, freestyle oriented, good float, a charger from what I hear, also with it being built to order I can change things on it aside from the visuals one thing that made me think was the Custom flex (softer or stiffer) for $70 not sure were the board stands as of now stiffess but its definitely something to consider. If anyone has any input on the stiffness and whether I should or should please let me know.
Cons: there is only one $ will all the addons if I adjust stiffness 1169$ just the board without stuff adjust 1099$ Ouch! It has a 255mm waist width I wear size 9-10 boots depending on manufacturer I measured my boot across board angles (-15,15) and the boot is 260-261mm so a 255 waist don’t leave much overhand and depending on the boot might not leave any at all which means I would have to add 70$ to narrow it. But it’s all there what I been looking for. Down side if I would get this board the Ferburg would be out of the question atleast this season meaning if I were to buy both.
Then there is the Jones Moutain Split 160 thank you ruapehu_explorer for making things more difficult for me by bringing this board up. Haha 🙂 now it has 256 waist width so if that’s not gonna work for my boots this one might be out already ANYONE THAT MIGHT KNOW MORE ABOUT BOOT OVERHAND PLEASE HELP.
Pros: Camrock I know how it rides and I like, Megna traction ( I have on 2 of my boards and I also like), they say stronger edges 250% stronger now this sounds to me like a sales pitch but hey it’s working and if they are 5 % stronger I’d be happy one issues I have is messing up my edges stupid rocks here and there really take a toll. Come with Karakoram clips already I like that. Pro 650$ currently on sale
Cons : length ? 160 seems good but I was leaning towards 162, weight no specs given all I read was “average” so 8-9ish will be getting Karakoram bindings either way so that will knock weight down a lil.
Might all come down to waist width :-/
Thanx all
March 9, 2013 at 7:32 am #666708permnationParticipantFurberg 😀
March 9, 2013 at 7:35 am #666709LPowhuntrParticipantFor sure but I need a freestyle board first, I freeride 1/4 of the time at most depends where I am but if I had crazy steeps with deep pow in my backyard I think I’d pick up the Furberg first
March 9, 2013 at 9:43 am #666710ruapehu_explorerParticipantummm I don’t see all that much difference in wasit widths between the 159 and 162 AMFs (25.3 and 25.5cm) and 160 mountain twin (25.6cm), and that’s the waist range I’m always after with my size 10 boots.
like I wrote before, I don’t know firsthand but I’ve read the camber profile of the Jones Mountain Twin seems more rocker overall than a what I would think of a camrock. And the rocker profile illustrations make it look like a quite directional twin – both the nose and tail have rocker but there looks like there is a longer rocker area in the nose and possibly a higher rocker in the nose as well. could very well be similar design concepts of the k2 panoramic that you didn’t like, maybe you could get more specific info from Jones Snowboards on that (and the exact setback info).
Prior’s camber profile is a camrock, and the AMF is true twin. My friend has one and is pretty stoked on it. He had it in Japan and had a blast, so I’d guess it floats fine (he’s probably only 150lbs and rides the 159, and is a size 9 with Burtons).
since the Helix has been crossed off your list due to your concerns about weight, so far it seems like your posts are pointing you towards the AMF anyway.
camrock
light (carbon version) or at least not too heavy (normal version)
true twin.
I think the waist width with the 159 or 162 is fine for size 9-10shave fun, and good luck.
March 9, 2013 at 4:45 pm #666711provotroutParticipantI usually wear 10.5 boots and look for a waist close to 26. Have a 25.8 board and a 26.2, no problems with either on 32 team 2s (10.5) or with Dynafit TLTs (29).
Sounds to me like you’ll be ok on waist width.
Btw – If you have the coin for Krams and XTC Prior, you may want to look at Chimera (SLC). You can select the base/top colors and shape like Prior, carbon inserts are stock, etc. Use the link at right to investigate.. waist on the 160 Orb is 25.7 and no setback.
March 9, 2013 at 5:28 pm #666712LPowhuntrParticipantBut with that kind of a waist width my boot overhang will be barely a 1/8 of a inch like 2mm on each side that basically no overhang I was under the impression the boot over hang is a good thing when within lengh 12-18mm or so .5-.7 of inch to keep good pressure over your edges or something along those lines something about weight distribution and balance I mean it makes sense but correct me if I’m wrong. I know that going over that .75 mark can cause issues when really engaging a edge obviously your foot can get stuck on the snow and that’s never good.
As for Chimera snowboards the ORB seems like a pretty sweet ride, I haven’t heard too much about these boards but I just read through there entire site and seems to me that are going some different routes to say the least. Completely splitboard oriented I like that but no weights on the site any ideas on weight of the boards compared to Prior? With them cutting down on edges that should definitely cut weight but by how much.
Ill do some more research on them and go from there. That flat/camber/early rise seems differnet but looks like its would float well.
March 9, 2013 at 6:42 pm #666713powslashParticipantRegarding Venture weight, I ride Storms and like the extra heft for plowing through cascade mank. I can see how extra weight wouldn’t be desirable on a freestyle deck. It’s possible the Helix is a little lighter but can’t say for sure, never touched one. Could contact Venture directly and ask for weights.
March 9, 2013 at 11:27 pm #666714LPowhuntrParticipantJust emailed Jones, Venture and Chimera we see what they tell me
Thanks again guys will update when I get some info
March 10, 2013 at 3:38 am #666715ruapehu_explorerParticipantThe Orb looks interesting but I wasn’t sure if it was in the type of camber profile the OP was after. I can’t tell if it is a flat dual camber and then rocker tips (like a dual-camrock) or the same sort of design as the voile artisan, where it’s rockered overall from the flat central section (like a variation of lib’s c2 or never summer rocker/camber profiles).
March 10, 2013 at 6:46 am #666716jimwParticipantI know it’s tough when you’re talking that kind of $$$… but I think you are overthinking this. 🙂
Any of those 3 boards are going to kick ass. That waist width should be just about perfect for size 10 boots. Note that things are going to be significantly wider at the binding mount points vs the specified minimum waist width due to the sidecut.
I haven’t ridden any of those 3 boards, but I gotta say… the graphics on the Mountain Twin are SICK. And that’s the most important thing right??
Oh yeah, really you should buy a Burton Spliff, everyone else is. 🙂 You could buy 2 or 3 of them for the price of one of those other boards. Altrec has them on sale for $420. Get it??
March 11, 2013 at 12:58 am #666717LPowhuntrParticipantAfter much searching surprisingly I found a picture of the camber profile for the moutain twin and Jones is out of the mix mainly because according to this pic and after reading up about it, it’s damn near confirmed that Jones Twin is a twin shape but a directional board that statement by its dont make any sence but its true. Stiffer tail, less rocker on tail, and I’m thinking 20mm setback stance so yeah definitely glad I didn’t make a impulse buy and pick that one up.
And to clearify yes I’m prolly putting a lil too much thought into this but that precisely why I do my research after the season because I think it’s a great time to get some feedback and I know I have damn near the entire off season to order the board I want and know that I made the right choice. And if I’m going to drop 1100$+ on a board ill over think it everytime but thank you for the input either way
So I’m going to wait for the emails from Venture and Chimera and depending on what they tell me I’ll make my choice if Venture weight isn’t too much up there I’m thinking under 7.5lbs tops ill pick up the board from Venture before the model disappears from their line.
Prior AMF Carbon is very tempting and I’m still strongly considering it and the camber profiles seems like it might do better at speed then the flat camber from what I’ve heard and experience on it. Only thing is I hear the flat is better in tour mode and also Im sure would have more float in deep pow.
Lastly
Chimera I’m extremely interested in these boards mainly because if the tech they put into their boards and the fact they specialize in splits. I’m really curious at the weight of the boards and hopefuly soon ill get that info. Only thing about these boards that’s iffy is the camber profile seems like a mix between Venture and Libtech/NS and I passed on those particularly because of their camber profiles also I noticed that Chimera is pow oriented which is all good but on they do on the steeps and hardpack? Not to much reviews or info on these. Also not sure how i feel about not having a metal edge all around.March 12, 2013 at 1:38 am #666718LPowhuntrParticipantGot a response from Venture, jones and Chimera
Venture helix : naked weight is 8.4lbs for 162 split
Chimera : ORB 160 just over 7.5 lbs
Jones : confirmed all splits are setback 20mm and no weight available they said they would have weighed one for me but they are currently out of stock.By these numbers it’s coming down to Chimera making because of their innovative ideas I’m really wondering how the boards feel in various conditions, Chimera offered to let me demo one if I’m I’m in Salt Lake City, might take them up on their offer.
Solid choice would be the Prior AMF Carbon, guess ill see how things pan out with Chimera and time wise with Prior manufacturing the board.
Thank you everyone for your help 🙂 ill will post a detailed review of which ever board I end up going with as soon as I get some time on it.
- AuthorPosts
.jpg)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.