Forums Splitboard Talk Forum World’s lightest factory split? Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total) Author Posts January 24, 2006 at 5:25 am #567384 karma surf 191 Posts Santa delivered a gift around Christmas time. I’ve been riding this a bit, and let the Jivester take it out for some spins. Incredibly light and agile with some taper. Holds an amazing edge in firm conditions as well. I’m not certain if this will ever be added to the existing lineup, but this cap prototype is one of my favorites. Props to my computer literate daughter for helping me navigate the pic posting! 😆 January 24, 2006 at 5:53 am #585635 frozone 56 Posts mmm…. cap construction January 24, 2006 at 7:29 am #585636 Ecobrad 2068 Posts Just who is this Karma surf guy anyways? ❓ 😀 Light, agile, taper, cap construction, firm edging. I think I’m gonna blow. Easy now eco, it’s just a board. Come on, give us more info on the board 😯 Please… January 24, 2006 at 1:55 pm #585637 TEX 2486 Posts You mean you would part with the Duran Duran special? _____________________________________________________________ If you can see Chuck Norris you are probably safe, if you cant see Chuck Norris you are two seconds from death January 24, 2006 at 3:41 pm #585638 Ecobrad 2068 Posts @patroller420 wrote: You mean you would part with the Duran Duran special? Can’t say I’d part with it but I definetly would shelve it for a long while. Actually, BCR’s let me borrow one of his bad ass Burton Custom’s which I took up to Mt. Rose and Castle last weekend and I’m hoping to be get a new split before spring. Even after I get a new split I think I’ll hold onto Duran Duran, I like having a loner. Plus it just looks cool in my garage. Well, kinda. January 24, 2006 at 6:35 pm #585639 Yoda 264 Posts I responded to a thread about cap construction and its lack of benifits… http://talk.splitboard.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1905 Lighter may be better for some, but I prefer durability especially in a board that costs over $600 and I want to last. Be aware that all the ultralight boards currently being produced (all with sidewalls) are focused on freestlye applications not backcountry. Many manufactures BC boards are built for durabilty – i.e. extra reinforcement at the edges or extra large sidewalls, not to mention the longer lengths associated with BC boards which all equals to added weight. I would rather see the lightweight freestlye contruction blended with reinforced edges and sidewall constuction. January 25, 2006 at 3:53 am #585640 karma surf 191 Posts Yoda, I’ll let all the Rando racing types know that saving weight isn’t important (we all know that wood is lighter than any current sidewall material) and that they should spend $3500 on a Ti Mt Bike instead of the whopping $750 for a split. Or maybe 2 Grand for a kite rig? 😉 Yes, sidewall construction is more durable than a cap (but then again the Voile 195ST has always been a cap- without ANY durability issues), especially for BC use. Keep in mind that we aren’t all after the same thing, and variety is key. We don’t all have the same needs, goals, desires as you, and that’s ok. Again, this board will most likely never see production, but it is fun to experiment, and I felt the split community would enjoy seeing some of the R+D which ultimately benefits us all. I would also add that this board is the highest performing all around factory split that I have ever been on! 😯 January 25, 2006 at 5:25 am #585641 jared 56 Posts yep the 195st is amazingly durable. my board from ’99/’00 got a grind this year and is still a real kick in the pants to ride January 25, 2006 at 5:53 am #585642 powderjunkie 1669 Posts My interest is definately sparked!! Nice looking board and terrain there, karma surf. Yoda makes good points on the other thread, but the weight issue will always be there and I think a cap construction is one way to shed some weight. Bottom line is how much weight is actually droppped with a cap or can other materials (although probably more expensive) be used to drop some weight without sacrificing edge durability. January 25, 2006 at 4:24 pm #585643 mtnrider 740 Posts Well, I just happen to have some sidewalls w/ 7 mm strip of maple attached, so they are a little heavy. They can be purchased as abs or ptex only, but then you add back up the wieght in the core anyways…so just for fun. They are for a 162 cm board. Each one weighs in at 92 grams. 92 x 4 = 368 grams roughly .81 lbs. If you’re that much of a weight weenie I’d say go for it but I totally agree w/ Yoda in that you’re loosing a serious amount of durablility. Pretty cool board either way though! How’s that? 8) January 25, 2006 at 4:37 pm #585644 Ecobrad 2068 Posts That’s pretty sweet and appropriate analysis, mtrider. For the amount of cash it takes to buy a split I’d have to vote for the durability. Just how much more durable is cap versus sidwall construction? January 26, 2006 at 12:03 am #585645 bcrider 4149 Posts Nice Christmas present karma surf, thanks for sharing with us! 🙂 Question for Yoda. When was the last time you took a shot to your edge that required sidewall repair? For me, I can’t even remember that last time. I do remember three years ago bending the edge on my splitter from hitting a rock but it didn’t require sidewall repair. (knocking on wood for this season) Personally I think it’s cool to see a cap splitboard (besides the 192 ST), its innovation and that’s what we’ve been wanting to see more of. Props to Voile. Mtnrider, .81 is nearly a pound of weight reduction. Combine that with some of the things mfgs are doing to bring the core/glass weight down and we have some real advancement in the product. An example I’ll give is the regular Burton Fish vs the Fish X (through their Series 13), The Fish X is 2lbs lighter just by using a better core and glass. Add 2 pounds to .81 pounds and we are close to a splitboard that is three pounds lighter than what’s currently available. Again I see this as a good thing for the sport. Lighter weight = more vertical = more powder = more smiles. Of course there is a balance between lightweight and durability but I don’t think the mfgs will overlook this. Karma, Is it possible to just make the outer wrap capped and not the inside edge? It seems like for the best inside edge connection you’d want a straight 90degee sidewall. Are there any cost savings associated with using a cap construction that would result in savings to the consumer? You also said that this is the highest performing factory split you have ever been on. What other factory splits have you been on? Would you say the cap itself makes this board the highest performing or is it also the shape, flex, etc? Thanks again for sharingÃ¢â‚¬Â¦and thanks to your daughter for helping you post the pics. 8) January 26, 2006 at 6:53 am #585646 karma surf 191 Posts First off, I have never ridden a cap board/ski ever until this came along. I was initially of the same impression of “cap=crap” 😉 I have since changed my opinion. BCR hit it on the head when he shared his own experience with board durability. I’m not throwing out unsubstantiated claims about caps falling apart, but I am a first hand witness of dealing with warranty at Voile and not seeing any difference in claims on a cap (195ST) vs. sidewall construction. For the most part, the wood whether in a cap or sidewall board will eventually lose camber and become less “lively”, but the boards are still rideable. And this takes a number of years to happen, but wood does have a finite life span. Most splits make it to old age, even boards with zillions of miles. Second, Mtnrider’s experiment vastly ignores all construction techniques in regard to cap vs sidewall construction. A simple example is comparing the response of this cap to the Mtn Gun, or the Freeride. The cap prototype feels softer flexing like the Freeride, yet holds a wicked edge on the firm like the Mtn Gun. There is zero torsional “split slop” felt on this board at high speed on edge in the firm. To get this on a sidewall, the core had to be thicker: enter the Mtn Gun. The real weight savings on the cap is that the core can have less depth than a similar responding sidewall board. The cap delivers power to the edge in a way that sidewall construction doesn’t, and this thing carves like a Ginsu. Third, I was initially of the same feeling that BCR just shared, and I conveyed my hesitancy with the rest of the crew before we built this thing. My concern was exactly the same as his: A straight sidewall on the inside edge would keep the board feeling more like a “solid”, since there would be more edge to edge contact, and having a cap on the inside edges would create a noodle board. I was wrong. The owner felt the slider tracks and interface provided all the power transfer, and he was right. Owners of Burton splits with the Burton hardware who have converted to the Voile interface can back this up. The old perception of the soft Voile boards is not because of the interface, but rather the boards were intentionally layed up to perform well in soft snow conditions. Could there be a cost savings to the end user on a cap split? Possibly, and the end cost is important to us, and that’s why the split kit is still available. Finally, as far as the “weight weenie” theory goes: If Joe Blow enters a Rando event and has to skin 4 miles that’s 21,120 feet. If his stride is 3 feet (extremely generous), he is striding 7,040 times. If his split weighs .81 lbs less than the competition, his legs would end up moving 2,830.2 lbs less weight during the race. That’s the difference between first and last place in an event where seconds matter! For a non-racer like me, it may translate to one extra 600 vert shot a day. For me that would give me 36,000 more vert each season! I’ll take the board in to the scale and see where it lands, but taking the board off my roof rack to hit the trailhead always freaks me out. It is instantly, noticeably lighter. Specs for this proto are a 29.25cm nose, 24.5cm waist, and a 28.5cm tail, giving it 7.5mm of taper. This is a 166 length. And remember, there aren’t any plans to bring this to the public, so there’s no reason for the diehard sidewallers to pull their hair out! 😉 But I will say that we have some very exciting plans for a new model (no plans for these to be capped), 4 different lengths, and I’m STOKED- No further details from me though! It is good to see discussion here again, I’ve missed some of the fire from the old crowd! Welcome back Jared! January 26, 2006 at 4:08 pm #585647 jive stick 110 Posts I spent about a week on the board. No days were spent on hard snow. There just wasn’t any. 😉 The board is easy turning and lively, reminding me of my Temple Cummings. I found no defects from the capping. There was some thought it would cave in the middle, but if it did, it was unnoticed. I gave it back cuz it’s a litle short for the amount of snow we have. I like the 78ST for the deeper snow and the 95ST when it’s too deep? It’d replace the 66 if it went into production, though, as the go to for most conditons. I’d enjoy another demo in spring or firm snow conditions. I don’t want or need a mtn gun, I’d rather ski hard snow. wowasatch.com January 26, 2006 at 4:28 pm #585648 mtnrider 740 Posts Good stuff. I think a cap construction would be good to offer the public if. Not everyone likes vanilla all the time. I’ve previously owned 2 cap board through out my years of boarding. They both have been my only boards to split wide open. I thought one was a killer board but when it was replaced I chose a different model. I take pretty good care of my stuff, keep all my gear in tune. There is no argument against weght savings. There are less materials involved in the lay-up so why wouldn’t it weigh less? I never conducted an experiment, I simply threw out a quick factual number. Would it actually result in a cost savings to the customer? Or would it result in more returns to the manufacturer therefore keeping the price high at the store? btw, I happen to know a great CNC programmer/machinist if you’re interested in any tooling 😉 January 26, 2006 at 5:19 pm #585649 powderjunkie 1669 Posts I’ve never had durability issues with cap boards. I like Salomon boards and have ridden Ride, Burton BMC, and Gnu cap boards with no problems or delamination on the edges or anyting. But I have had some of these boards have little splits or breaks in the edges after a couple of seasons, which could be because of the cap. I suppose a hard rock shot would blow out a cap edge before a sandwich edge though. Why wouldn’t Voile consider producing a cap board? Dropping close to a lb. on the board is significant to me. Then if we can drop another lb. with an integrated sliderplate/binding combo, we’re in business. 8) Hey Karma – are you also known as funseeker? Trying to figure out who you are. 😕 January 27, 2006 at 1:44 am #585650 dacksdescents 50 Posts whats the weight of this board? January 28, 2006 at 9:37 am #585651 jared 56 Posts I’m liking that taper number. Thanks for posting karma. Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total) You must be logged in to reply to this topic.