![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 (permalink) | |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mountains of Mordor
Posts: 5,370
|
Quote:
__________________
Snowboarding Sucks. |
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#32 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 70
|
Thanks; understanding that with a longer board length comes a thicker construction isn't information I'd run into before, despite reading around a lot!
I'm a pretty solid rider, but haven't had the pleasure of riding many different boards yet. Coming from the UK, options for trying new boards aren't as numerous as you guys in Canada and the US likely enjoy. Reading around more today, a number of people (including you!) have suggested that around 156cm is appropriate for someone weighing 180lb. And the dude in this link mentions jumps too. Ultimately, without great options for trying many boards I understand any mail-order purchase is a bit of a gamble.. But engaging in the science and bugging you guys for your experience helps narrow it down. Sounds I've got far more to lose by trying to go to short, than I do in not going short enough. From that perspective and the number of discussions I've read today, 156cm cambered sounds like a reasonably solid choice? |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 (permalink) |
|
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
![]() Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bear Mountain - Days Ridden: 20
Posts: 425
|
I weigh 170ish and I just got an Attack Banana 156, and quite frankly I'm worried that might be too small, but luckily i'll be using it for park emphasis. You weigh 200lbs and you want a 153? Email customer service, and they'll gladly give you the complete specs on the board and what appropriate size you'd need if you give them your specs. Since you're 5'9, 200lbs is a bit over the normal weight expectacy for that height, so again you wont get optimal performance out of a board that is too small.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 70
|
Sorry if I haven't been clear, but I now weigh 180lb (13 stone).
I DID weigh 200lb (14 stone) but shred my BF nicely in the last few months.. Endeavor say they reckon both 153 and 156 are fine for my weight.. What do you think? Most forumites I've encountered in other discussions seem to think 156cm is decent for a park/jump orientated camber board for someone at 180lb. Last edited by P-Ride; 09-21-2012 at 01:29 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 (permalink) | |
|
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
![]() Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bear Mountain - Days Ridden: 20
Posts: 425
|
Quote:
I emailed mervin and they replied fast with their recommendations and why. Good luck, have a good season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 70
|
Haha thanks buddy. I think I'm at the bottom of this now.. So here we go!
180lb - Endeavor Live 156cm camber with Union Force bindings for park/all mountain - Endeavor Color 159cm RC with Union SL bindings for powder - And I have a rigid 161cm Endeavor 'Paavo Tikkanen' cambered board that I'll try with both! I'm thinking the SL's and FAST down some groomed slope! That said, I'll try all sorts of combinations whilst I'm away! First trip just booked is a week in La Plagne, France in December.. A week ago I was planning to go on my own (my board buddies have dispersed globally) then ran into someone out drinking who I hit it off with; and now I'm part of a 20-man crew latching onto a university trip for orthopaedic students.. Mainly girls! Woohoo! |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 (permalink) | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 282
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 (permalink) |
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 70
|
Hey guys, just to say - I took my 156 cambered Live for its first spin yesterday!
Love it! Firstly, I can definitely see what you mean about the loss of 'stopping power' compared to a longer board.. If I was going down a particularly steep/treacherous run, I'd be more trusting of my 161cm camber to hold an edge.. But this board is very manoeuvrable and so springy/responsive! Ollieing is much more dramatic than with my reverse camber board. On one run I kinda scared myself on a kicker, jumping much higher than I have on my other board to date - managed to land good though! Speculatively, 153 may well have been too short; and this has delivered in every way I wanted - so thanks for clarifying how and why the difference may have mattered! I'm going into the new season with what feels like a great quiver. Picking up a pair of Union SLs so will enjoy mixing/matching them and the Forces with all three boards and learning more! |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 (permalink) | |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mountains of Mordor
Posts: 5,370
|
Quote:
__________________
Snowboarding Sucks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 186
|
P-Ride, I know it is too late now but it might not be too late for the bindings. If you go to sno-zone in milton keynes there is a snowboard shop in there that lets you demo stuff to include bindings, for free. If you buy any of it you can take the cost of the indoor session you paid for off the price of the item.
I havnt lived in the UK for a few years but it is super easy to get a trial. You couldve just tested any cambered board in the 150-160 range and seen how it held an edge and if you enjoyed how playful it was. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|