A snowboard physics question... - Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
SnowboardingForum.com is the premier Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-11-2009, 08:57 AM   #1 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Default A snowboard physics question...

Since the dawn of the rocker craze, there seems to be a notion that even with the best rocker, they lean more toward park and have less pop than stiffer boards. yes, I am aware of the skate banana (I know it can do most anything), but Lib offers both BTX and MTX for a reason.

But here's my question. Given any rider's weight, if they find a particular board noodley or washed out at times, and complain about a lack of pop, can't they just technically get a longer board of the same kind, for a higher recommended weight? So let's say the skate banana was too soft for me at 149...I could get it in 153 or 155 and it should have more pop ANd handle like a rocker in all its glory. Thoughts?
phile00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-11-2009, 09:02 AM   #2 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 55
Default

but then, wouldnt you lack the stability of that shorter board you had?
chowman94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 09:06 AM   #3 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Vlaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Varies
Posts: 1,173
Default

Um..longer boards are in general, more stable than shorter boards. Shorter boards are better for pops and quick turns and more favorable in the park. Longer for all mountain and holding well under high speeds contrast to shorter. Same goes with stiffness as well.
__________________
Government - If you think the problems they created are bad, just wait until you see their solutions.

Screw being normal
Vlaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 09:42 AM   #4 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlaze View Post
Um..longer boards are in general, more stable than shorter boards. Shorter boards are better for pops and quick turns and more favorable in the park. Longer for all mountain and holding well under high speeds contrast to shorter. Same goes with stiffness as well.
Undoubtedly. So it seems my logic is correct? If so, I could take a board like a skate banana/hero/etc and if I felt it wasn't poppy enough at 148, I could get a couple sizes up for more torsional stiffness. So theoretically I'd have the rocker for easy transitions, but a longer length which would give more rigidity and pop according to my weight (although it would be less butterable).

Any engineers or technically savvy people care to comment on this? I would love to research the physics of snowboards. Seems for just a flat thing, there is a great deal of complexity involved with the materials, theories, and processes of building a snowboard.
phile00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 09:51 AM   #5 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Vlaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Varies
Posts: 1,173
Default

I'm an engineer, but I have to say I haven't really studied deeply in depth on the full physics of a board other than the basics. In theory I would think if you use a longer board thinking it will have more pop is tough to say. The longer it is the more effort I would think will be required to flex and pop it. It may pop more, but you're gonna have to put more effort in it with a longer board to transfer your weight to ollie the sucker. I'd have to say not getting into depth on all equations and what not, just thinking about it, I think there is a median line of being too short or too long. Not talking alpine long but if it's a bit longer, you may lose some pop, and too little, you will have pop but not a whole lot. I think there is a fine line for a giving board length and boarder weight and ability that mixes to create for that person, the ultimate pop they could get. Damn.. now I want popcorn.
__________________
Government - If you think the problems they created are bad, just wait until you see their solutions.

Screw being normal

Last edited by Vlaze; 01-11-2009 at 09:53 AM.
Vlaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 09:53 AM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 55
Default

oh, when i said stability i meant like easier to land jumps, turns, and ease of tricks over a longer board
chowman94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 09:55 AM   #7 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Vlaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Varies
Posts: 1,173
Default

Ah, gotcha
__________________
Government - If you think the problems they created are bad, just wait until you see their solutions.

Screw being normal
Vlaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 10:42 AM   #8 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlaze View Post
I'm an engineer, but I have to say I haven't really studied deeply in depth on the full physics of a board other than the basics. In theory I would think if you use a longer board thinking it will have more pop is tough to say. The longer it is the more effort I would think will be required to flex and pop it. It may pop more, but you're gonna have to put more effort in it with a longer board to transfer your weight to ollie the sucker. I'd have to say not getting into depth on all equations and what not, just thinking about it, I think there is a median line of being too short or too long. Not talking alpine long but if it's a bit longer, you may lose some pop, and too little, you will have pop but not a whole lot. I think there is a fine line for a giving board length and boarder weight and ability that mixes to create for that person, the ultimate pop they could get. Damn.. now I want popcorn.
But if it's a softer board to begin with, then technically as you go up in cm, it has to be more rigid for heavier riders. If my logic is correct, then it's kind of like a sliding scale. You take a given board that has a given purpose and as you move up and down the scale (length-wise), you are giving the board more exaggerated or less exaggerated attributes.
phile00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2009, 11:08 AM   #9 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Vlaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Varies
Posts: 1,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phile00 View Post
But if it's a softer board to begin with, then technically as you go up in cm, it has to be more rigid for heavier riders. If my logic is correct, then it's kind of like a sliding scale. You take a given board that has a given purpose and as you move up and down the scale (length-wise), you are giving the board more exaggerated or less exaggerated attributes.
I know what you're trying to say. However keep in mind that is the only benefit you may get from it. You will loose some ability in the board to turn fast, be more flexible, and lose rotational spin when popping with it being a longer board for your given weight. For any gain on the same board with the same person to be obtained going up and down the length, there is going to be a loss in something
__________________
Government - If you think the problems they created are bad, just wait until you see their solutions.

Screw being normal
Vlaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:45 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums