Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

Rocker, Camber, and everything in between

275K views 448 replies 130 participants last post by  16gkid 
#1 · (Edited)
Looking around at all of the current board designs at the SIA show in Denver a couple of weeks ago was cool as always, but also dizzying. Board profiles (camber, rocker, etc.) were still the top story, with every booth showing off their favorite flavor (or in most cases flavors). It made me think how confusing it would be for a newer rider to make a board choice in the current market and how hard it would be to feel confident in their selection. There are now so many varieties out there that it is hard to stay on top of them all.

I thought it might be helpful to start a thread here that showed the basic profile types all in one place without the marketing spin. There are definately many sub categories of each, but these are the broad strokes.




Traditional Camber

Pros - Tried and true performance. Great rebound which helps transition from edge to edge and also adds to pop for ollies etc. Longer running surface means good speed and edge bite in carves. Boards can be ridden shorter than some other designs without sacrificing running surface.

Cons - The contact points of the effective edge (roughly the boards wide points) are in constant contact with the snow. That can mean caught edges and some hard take downs.

Rocker

Pros - Easy turn initiation. Lifted wide points even when weighted means less caught edges. There are many varieties of this design which include various degrees of rocker, asymmetrical rocker (nose lifted more than tail, rocker center point shifted more towards tail, etc.) and multi-stage rocker.

Cons - Lost running surface, lost rebound, lost edge grip (many rocker designs get around this by using other design elements to add grip back in).

Flat

Pros - Maximum Stability. Longer running surface. Boards can be ridden shorter.

Cons - No inherent rebound. Without additional measures these boards tend to feel less lively. The contact points of the effective edge (roughly the boards wide points) are in constant contact with the snow. That can mean caught edges and some hard take downs.

Camber-Rocker-Camber

Pros - Reestablishes much of the lost running surface inherent to camber and some of the rebound. There are many different varieties of this design which alter the placement of the camber and rocker elements as well as the dimensions of those elements.

Cons - Potential for more catchy spots due to the multi stage profile.

Rocker-Camber-Rocker

Pros - Reduces the issue mentioned above from traditional camber where the wide points create catch spots. Good rebound.

Cons - less running surface than conventional camber.

Flat with lifted contact points

Pros - Reduces the issue mentioned above from Flat where the wide points create catch spots. There are many variations of this design. Some have so long a flat spot that they are very close to flat. Others have so little flat spot that they might better be called "Rocker with a little flat spot".

Cons - less running surface than Flat.

Flat-Rocker-Flat

Pros - Reestablishes much of the lost running surface inherent to camber and some of the rebound. This design has a little smoother weighted profile than Camber-Rocker-Camber...

Cons - ...but a bit less rebound and pop.
 
See less See more
1
#129 ·
Got it. It would actually need to show the whole deck so we can see what is going on outside of the bindings. Most "flat" decks are flat (or in many cases lightly cambered) between the bindings but, surprisingly, still are lifetd to various degrees at the contact points.
 
#131 ·
So, I posted in my intro that I'm riding a '07 K2 Union 164 that I purchased used. My post purchase research tells that this is a park board, but I'm wondering, with all the new tech, if it really wouldn't be classified as that any more. K2s site claims "hybritech" technology. Whatever, I set it on the kitchen table and it sure appears to be regular rocker. It also says its an "intermediate/advanced" board. I'm in the market for next season and being a freeride guy, I'm wondering kind of where I should be looking.
 
#132 ·
Hi Deacon,

Hybritech was actually a constuction design where the board was essentially cap construction at the tip and tail and sidewall constuction through the running surface. I was thinking the Union was cambered. Laying base down on the countertop is it a smile or a frown?
 
#143 · (Edited)
Hello.. Im looking to get a new board setup for next season but I have a few questions..

- I have only ever ridden camber type boards.. current board 2005 burton baron wide 162cm w P1 bindings.

- I use to ride in so cal. (Bear,Summit,Mt.High, Mammoth) but now I live in Switzerland so as you can imagine I have access to some of the best mountains in the world. The Alps are alot of groomer, off piste Pow and in the later months like now abit more hard packed kinda icy. I want a board that handles Pow and groomers well, not really hitting park anymore but use the whole mountain as a park for jumps, spins etc.

-After alot of research i am leaning towards the rome agent rocker wide 160cm w the mtn pop tech that is camber/rocker/camber. How much different is it then traditional camber? Will there be a huge learning curve? What does rocker feel like under foot?

I believe this board is the closest to traditional camber with the rocker but am not too sure. Any pros and cons.. to the C/R/C?

If not the agent rocker any other recommendations?

Also thinking about getting the Burton Cartel bindings or the flow NXGT bindings.. any thoughts, I like the NASTY system idea on the flow but how safe is it?

Thanks for any feedback.. Joe

My Specs: 6'4 195 lbs size 12 US boots
Current Board: 2005 Burton Baron wide 162cm / Burton P1 Bindings
 
#144 ·
The Agent Rocker is Camber Rocker Camber. It is an excellent choice of the Alps and for your style of riding. It keeps the weighted contact length very well planted and does amizingly well at holding a strong edge on ice. You will notice the biggest benefit in powder where it (in itself) has an advantage over trad camber.

The NX2's will be a great choice. They are a responsive and predictable binding that offers incredible transfer of power for freeriding.

STOKED!
 
#145 · (Edited)
Thank you so much for your feedback wiredsport!

- So you recommend the flow bindings.. my biggest concern is are they safe?
I ride a vans aura boot.. will this boot be too wide for the flows? I was thinking about getting rome 390 boss bindings but from the research that I have read on this forum they seem unsafe or less reliable?

- Also do you know if I really need to get a wide board? Do I lose anything from going wide?

Here are the specs of my old board..

Length:
162 cm (see options menu for other sizes)
Effective edge:
126 cm
Waist width:
22.62 cm
Sidecut radius:
8.57 m
Stance width:
[reference] 21 in
Stance setback:
25 mm back
Core material:
Super Fly II wood
Base material:
Sintered P-Tex
Recommended Use:
Intermediate to advanced all-mountain riding
Warranty:
One season against defects in materials and manufacturing

-What numbers/measurements are important here for deciding non wide/ wide?

Thank you so much for your help! Even more stoked about getting the agent rocker now!
 
#147 · (Edited)
I just wanted to post for those of you considering the switch from traditional camber to a hybrid like LibTech's C2.

I've only ridden traditional camber boards (Palmer Carbon Circle and Carbon Circle II) and was a bit leary of making the change. I'm 45 and didn't want to have to learn how to snowboard all over again.

I decided to bite the bullet after getting some feedback on this forum and bought a 2013 LibTech Travis Rice 157 about two weeks ago. I'm happy to report that there hasn't been much of a learning curve. I took it easy my first few runs but was back up to speed pretty quick. I don't ride in the park or jib, I just like to go fast on groomers and the occasional powder. My first day out it was in the 40's and the hill was pretty choppy but the T.Rice carved right through it. The T.Rice is stable at higher speeds and it's much easier to control at lower speeds than my Carbon Circle II.

I'm heading out to my local hill tomorrow and the conditions should be excellent. I'll update this post if I have anything else to add.

UPDATE: Just got back from my local hill and conditions were perfect - sunny and about 17 degrees. The hill was groomed up nice but a little icey. The T.Rice was just as stable at speed as my Carbon Circle II - maybe more so - which surprised me a bit. Oddly enough, I feel more comfortable on the T.Rice after only being out on it twice than I do on my Carbon Circle II - it's a sweet ride.

So, from my experience, I would say that a veteran rider who is looking to switch from a pure hard-charging camber board to a LibTech C2 profile (keep in mind that the T.Rice is one of the stiffer C2 decks) shouldn't have that large of a learning curve. I realize that this is a blanket statement and results may vary, but again, it's based on my experience with the T.Rice. There have been some reviews on the C2 boards being a bit squirrelly at higher speeds but I don't think I'll ever approach 40-50mph - I would guess I'm in the 30mph range.
 
#149 ·
I just wanted to post for those of you considering the switch from traditional camber to a hybrid like LibTech's C2.

I've only ridden traditional camber boards (Palmer Carbon Circle and Carbon Circle II) and was a bit leary of making the change. I'm 45 and didn't want to have to learn how to snowboard all over again.

I decided to bite the bullet after getting some feedback on this forum and bought a 2013 LibTech Travis Rice 157 about two weeks ago. I'm happy to report that there hasn't been much of a learning curve. I took it easy my first few runs but was back up to speed pretty quick. I don't ride in the park or jib, I just like to go fast on groomers and the occasional powder. My first day out it was in the 40's and the hill was pretty choppy but the T.Rice carved right through it. The T.Rice is stable at higher speeds and it's much easier to control at lower speeds than my Carbon Circle II.

I'm heading out to my local hill tomorrow and the conditions should be excellent. I'll update this post if I have anything else to add.
Hey thanks man! It's always nice to hear from someone making a similar transition.. Look forward to hearing more feedback.
 
#151 ·
Hi ****,

Rome and Flow make extremely strong and reliable gear. The warranty and breakage rates for these companies are among the best in our industry. They are tough, well designed and both companies have many years and many iterations behind them. Both are backed with awesome warranties and support from people that ride. Safe? It is snowboarding. It is inherently unsafe :)

Great gear helps with that.

STOKED!
 
#152 ·
I agree with your statement about snowboarding being inherently unsafe :).. However from what I have read about Rome bindings there are too many working parts that could and usually do break.. not to mention the non ratchet side of the binding just coming off. As far as the flows go you hear mixed reviews but you also hear the high back just comes unlocked and the cables have a tendency to break in some way. Now I have never had an issue with my P1 bindings or the Missions that I had before that.

I love the fast binding option of the flows because im getting older and I like the look of the Rome bindings but what I read in these forums the 390 bosses scare me. So would the cartels be a better maybe safer choice or have you heard of issues with them as well?
 
#153 ·
Every binding can and probably will have some kind of an issue. It's just the nature of the beast so-to-speak. Buy what suits your style man. I love my 390 Boss bindings, and so far they have held up well.
 
#160 ·
I started with the Burton step-in system which was quite crappy and went directly into Flow's so I don't have any experience with traditional strap bindings.

None of the Flow's that I've owned have the toe strap - I think this years models are the first to offer it.

I put a pair of 2012 NXT-FRX bindings on my new T.Rice about a week ago and it took me about 20 minutes to get them in the ball park at home and maybe another 10 minutes of adjustment once I got to the hill and made a few runs. I think there's YouTube videos for setting them up if you need more info.

This may be the wrong thread for discussing bindings so I apologize to the Mods if I'm out of line.
 
#162 · (Edited)
Another Advice post...

Here's my situation and request for advice.

215 pounds, size 10.5 boot, 30 days on the snow in the last two seasons after growing up on skis. Learned to board at Mammoth 10 years ago while stationed in San Diego, and been off the snow until I became the faculty advisor for the local college alpine/snowboarding club team where I teach. I'm a 43 year old male, been riding in the US mid atlantic area (PA, WV, MD) while accompanying our alpine ski and snowboard team. Squarely an intermediate rider who is still mastering the fundamentals of being dynamic, bending the knees, getting comfortable with speed, and staying stacked over the board. I'm generally ok at dynamic skidded turns and I can probably carve a little in the right conditions. I cannot ride the steep bumps smoothly (I tend to "shop for my turns" and its aggravating. I can get down, but not on a smooth line. I find a steep groomer is a blast, and have only been in powder one time (and it kicked my ass, though I can see the appeal, I think). My park interest is in the smaller jumplines and ride on features, with some intent to progress to being able to 180. I've not tried to pop onto anything, and definitely still working on being comfortable in the air off any sort of kicker (park or terrain).

I have been riding a 2011/2012 Rome Anthem 161 with what Rome calls Hybrid Ripit Camber, which looks to me like Camber with lifted tips, or maybe an RCR with a larger Camber section that ends outside the bindings. Although I have no other real data points, it seems to like the dynamic skidded/basic carves, it's fast, and has some pop in and out of turns, and is pretty stiff but damps out the chatter well. I've been pretty pleased on the east coast hardpack and the times it's thrown me have been rider error for sure.

Here's the issue. Relocating this summer to the Pac NW (Seattle) for the long haul. Going back to grad school for a year as I transition out of the military, so should get some good time on the snow next season, probably calling Stevens my new home mountain, although I've got family in Portland and Bend, so plan on seeing Hood and Bachelor (and hopefully Whistler and Baker) pretty regularly over the next decade or so. I grew up near White Pass and would love to get back there to see the new back area they recently opened up with new lodges and high speed lifts.

So, in light of my new riding environment and in hopes of expanding my skills, I am looking to add to my "quiver" if you can call two a quiver. I'd like something softer than my Anthem and more friendly to learning the ground tricks while slowly progressing in the park/jumplines, capable of groomers (because I'm going to be on some sort of groomer nearly everytime I go to the mountain, I think), but also powder friendly (assuming I'll see more of that in the NW than on the east coast). I also find riding switch seems difficult on my Anthem (though admittedly I don't practice enough) and I'd like to do that in conjunction with learning to butter/spin/180's to increase my options for having fun on the snow which means a twin or asymetrical twin, maybe. Given all that, some overlap with my current board is probably inevitable.

I'm thinking about a Camber-Rocker-Camber board. I'm not stuck on any specific brand, but I like that Gnu is handbuilt in the NW (Park Pickle or Riders Choice, probably), and I like the looks of the Arbor line in general, or I could get another Rome or NS deck, and I'm definitely ok with buying this years models as opposed to the cutting edge 2014s. I'll hopefully eventually get to the point where I can appreciate and take advantage of cutting edge, but for now, a discounted 2013 board is just fine. On the binding front, I've got Rome Mobs (not the Boss or 390, just straight Mobs) on the anthem, and they seem just a bit soft (plus the forward lean adjustment screw is gone on one of them), so I'm looking for an upgraded set of bindings as well, which is another thread, but might tell you about my riding experience thus far.

So it's time for the sanity check. Reasonable to add a new board? I could see bringing two to the mountain most days. I've ready through the 17 pages in this thread, and look forward to any feedback/advice.
 
#163 ·
Welcome back (home) to the great PNW! Stoked for you.

You are starting out with a great board as a base and you will have a lot of fun adding in something new. Camber Rocker Camber is a great way to go. The Rider's Choice (161.5 cm) is a strong example and the Rome Agent Rocker (159 cm - Also CRC) or the Arbor Westmark (159 cm - with Arbor's System Rocker and Griptech) will be amazing alternates.

You have the right idea and a little extra help from a new deck will be all it takes to have you hitting all your goals.

STOKED!
 
#164 ·
Didn't know where else to post these pics. Took them a few weeks ago to compare camber and RCRs of the 4 boards we own.

From left to right: Prior Brandywine 153, Burton Custom 156, Burton T7 159, Virus Avalanche 160. Bottom, 8 year old tabby.



Prior Brandywine: moderate camber under foot, tips start to rise about 6" past each binding.


Virus Avalanche FLP AFT: moderate camber under foot, no early rise on the tail, early rise on the nose beginning about 8" from the inserts.


Burton Custom: slightly more camber than the Prior or Virus extending out to each tip.


Burton T7: FUKIN CAMBER BABY YEAH! You could park a German WWII tank under this thing...
 
#167 ·
This thread seems like a good place to ask this. I plan on getting a new board soon if possible. I do most my riding on the Austrian alps. I tend to ride mostly hard pack and off piste and powder if possible. Never park. I am 16 years old and plan on using the new board for the next three years minimum. I weigh 140lbs and have a size 12 boot currently (which I plan on replacing as well). I am looking at the burton custom and custom x. Both boards are camber. Would I be better off going with one of these boards or a board with a combination? If I would be better with a combination board some suggestions would be helpful. I don't really care what brand. Those boards just caught my eye.
 
#168 ·
Hi Some Guy,

Are you mostly laying down carves and surfing the pow or are you all mountain freestyling it?

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).
 
#169 ·
Hi Some Guy,

Are you mostly laying down carves and surfing the pow or are you all mountain freestyling it?

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).
I'd check both feet too... i think most people have some difference in size between their feet. My left is a half size bigger than my right, but i think some guys are even more.
 
#170 · (Edited)
Wiredsport,
I plan on riding mostly on hard pack and near the hard pack. Any jumps would be from natural terrain. These will probably be few and far between. The odds of me hitting a fresh powder dump are extremely low as I live in Germany by Nuremberg and ride most weekends at least one day. The locations are planned before the season starts.

My larger foot measured 27.6225cm from toe to heel.

Edit: left out I will be doing more carving and when I'm off piste, I will be more or less surfing if there is enough snow. I've only been riding about two seasons but I have been riding with expert skiers the entire time. This has caused a quick progression in skill on piste and in areas we don't have to hike to get to.
 
#171 ·
Got it. Camber is really fun for what you are looking to do and if I were riding primarily in your area, I would have a straight camber board in my quiver. The Custom in 154 is a great choice. The 152 in the Custom X will also work, but you are on the lighter side so you will not likely want the extra stiffness unless you really love a stiffer board. 27.6 is a size 9.5/10 shoe and does not require any extra width.

STOKED!
 
#173 ·
Yessir,

Boot sizing is wild these days. Foot size is all that matters for determining board selection, but of course you want great fitting boots (regardless of the size that the MFG puts on the tag).

Stoked for you!
 
#175 · (Edited)
Hi,

Did you mean how should boots fit? If so, these are the tips we suggest.

Your boots should be snug!

The most common complaint about boots is that they are too loose, not to tight. The junction between rider and board begins with the boot, as it is in the most direct contact with the rider. When fitting boots, use the following method: A. Slip into the boot. B. Kick your heel back against the ground several times to drive it back into the boot's heel pocket. C. Lace the boot tightly, as though you were going to ride. NOTE: This is where most sizing mistakes are made. A snowboard boot is shaped like an upside down "7". The back has a good degree of forward lean. Thus, when you drop into the boot, your heel may be resting up to an inch away from the back of the boot, and your toes may be jammed into the front of the boot. Until the boot is tightly laced, you will not know if it is a proper fit. D. Your toes should now have firm pressure against the front of the boot. As this is the crux of sizing, let's discuss firm pressure: When you flex your knee forward hard, the pressure should lighten, or cease, as your toes pull back. At no time should you feel numbness or lose circulation. Your toes will be in contact with the end of the boot, unlike in a properly fit street or athletic shoe (snowboard boots are designed to fit more snugly than your other shoes). When you have achieved this combination of firm pressure and no circulation loss, you have found the correct size!
 
#177 ·
Hi guys, a new joiner in the forum here.

Thank you for the very comprehensive post, Wiredsport.

I am a beginner-intermediate goofy snowboarder currently looking into Rocker-Flat-Rocker snowboard (ex: K2 Grenade). What is the benefit of this board in comparison to Rocker-Chamber-Rocker board (ex: Flow Merc)? I mainly ride all-mountain freeride on major powdery/ minor slushy terrain.

Open to any suggestion for board type. :laugh:


Thanks.
 
#178 ·
Stoked Chemisiq,

A few things. The Merc is actually Camber Rocker Camber (not Rocker Camber Rocker - I know, this stuff gets crazy sounding). It looks like this:



The idea there is to keep a lot of contact area and drive while still benefiting from the looseness of rocker.

The K2 deck (I think you mean the Brigade) is almost entirely flat with a bit of lift at the contact points. That leads to a very stable board but at the expense of energy and ease of transitioning from edge to edge in carves.
 
#179 ·
Hey, new to the forum and snowboarding in general, but looking to upgrade my board. I've rode about 20 times, but am able to navigate blacks, ollies, ect.

I was wondering which style is best for which kind of conditions. From what I understand rocker is better for powder and camber is better for the harder snow? I live in Vail and usually ride Vail and BC. I'd say about 1/4-1/3 of the days are powder and the others are not.

I'm looking for something for mainly freeriding right now, and maybe progress to a little park toward the end of the season.

What do you think would be the best fit?

I've heard good things about NS and Lib, specifically the NS Proto CT, which I've heard can hold an edge like a Camber, but can also float through powder.

Your input is appreciated! Thanks!
 
Top