Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums

Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/forum.php)
-   Boards (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/)
-   -   Hardbooter gone soft. Cobra X ? (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/130257-hardbooter-gone-soft-cobra-x.html)

ZeMax 02-22-2014 10:01 PM

Hardbooter gone soft. Cobra X ?
 
Hi guys, 6'3 , 180 pounds, 11.5-12 size boots. Hardbooting I consider myself Advanced, laying it down the Blacks and soft boot I score a low intermediate. Carving some blues.

Looking for my next board for apocalypse style snow condition: Golf balls, too soft snow, ice and throw in some hardback with sticky snow here and there. When those condition show up I usually go for the woods (reads Quebec style tree runs....think hard/icy moguls in between trees). Currently riding a Head Holster-I camber 163W. Not really wide enough and bit too stiff for bump and not loose enought. Not enough float either.

Exchanged some PMs with Linvillegorge and reading Dreampow review seems like a NS Cobra X would keep me happy. Bit nervous about the board rocker/camber profile since I've been riding heavily cambered boards.

Today had apocalypse style condition and demos tents were up :yahoo:

Tried a Burton Custom Flying-V. Hated it ! Too loose and heel side carves were impossible for me. Poor Edge Hold for the way I ride.

Next Lib Tech Skunk Ape. WOW ! Absolutely loved it. Finally able to lay it down heel side without having the cups touching the snow, now that's wide :thumbsup:

Alright still there ? Cool. My question the Never Summer Rocker/camber profile would feel like the Lib tech or the Burton or is it a whole other feeling ?

linvillegorge 02-22-2014 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZeMax (Post 1563593)
Next Lib Tech Skunk Ape. WOW ! Absolutely loved it.

Sounds like you've found your board. If you loved it, I fear the Cobra may be a little soft for your liking. It's not a stiff board. Like I said via PM, pretty middle of the road in terms of flex. The Skunk Ape is definitely noticeably stiffer. The magnetraction (though I'm not a fan) may be beneficial for your conditions too.

If you like the Skunk Ape, the Never Summer you may want to be looking at is the Heritage X or maybe even the Raptor X.

In terms of camber profiles, the NS RC profile is similar to the C2 in the Skunk Ape.

My opinion, if you've demo'd one and loved it, I'd get that one instead of rolling the dice on a board I'd never been on. Been there, made that mistake.

ZeMax 02-22-2014 10:26 PM

I though Neversummer had magnetraction too ?

Talking with my instructor he said that the magnetraction was probably why I enjoyed the Lib tech over the Burton. He then explained why I got my ass handed to me by the flying V. The mother !%!# can out carve my WCMR with his flying V grrr.

Going softer is not scaring me, easier Ze knees for bumps and might be able to score an instructor priced board from Never Summer.

But yeah Buying a board without trying can wields bad results. Head Holster-I for sale.

Trying my luck to see if anyone as ridden both. Lib does have a lead but the cobra 's blunted nose sounds awesome for vacation out west.

linvillegorge 02-22-2014 10:31 PM

Never Summer doesn't use magnetraction, they use vario-grip which is essentially a sidecut with multiple radii to create more contact points. I like it here out west because it creates better grip without the catchiness that magnetraction can have in soft snow. But, it doesn't grip on hard pack and ice like magnetraction does.

ZeMax 02-22-2014 10:46 PM

Sounds like it would be more Burtonesque type of profile. Seems like magnetraction is the patch to my lack of time working on my soft booting skills. Great Band aid if you ask me.

Again thank you very much for all the information. If somebody has more info to share feel free to chime in.

Meanwhile the hunt for a 166 skunk ape begins.

Funny how video reviews are saying it's a big big that rides like a big board and doesn't do well at slow speed.
I felt the exact opposite, felt very nibble and awesome at slow speed.

KellionBane 02-22-2014 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZeMax (Post 1563713)
Sounds like it would be more Burtonesque type of profile. Seems like magnetraction is the patch to my lack of time working on my soft booting skills. Great Band aid if you ask me.

Again thank you very much for all the information. If somebody has more info to share feel free to chime in.

Meanwhile the hunt for a 166 skunk ape begins.

A 166 is fucken monster sized for your weight.

I'm about your size, wear size 11s, weight slightly more than you, and my Hot Knife is 158. And I wouldn't consider going bigger than that, unless you're going to be riding in pure pow.

Side question: If you're use to hard boots, why not get stiffer bindings and boots?

linvillegorge 02-22-2014 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KellionBane (Post 1563737)
A 166 is fucken monster sized for your weight.

I'm about your size, wear size 11s, weight slightly more than you, and my Hot Knife is 158. And I wouldn't consider going bigger than that, unless you're going to be riding in pure pow.

Side question: If you're use to hard boots, why not get stiffer bindings and boots?

Wow. No doubt. A 166 is fucking HUGE. I weigh nearly 20 pounds more than the TS and my biggest board is my 164 Charlie Slasher pow stick and that thing is all I'd care to try to throw around in the trees. I rode killclimbz old 169 NS Premier splitboard once and it was WAY too much board for me.

ZeMax 02-22-2014 11:22 PM

I currently use Burton Driver X and malavita for boots/bindings. Apparently Driver X are supposed to be pretty stiff. Personnaly I do not want to go any softer then that. I started snowboarding in hard boots so my flex values are a bit weird.

I usually ride a 170 that fellow softbooters call: a H beam with edge :laugh:
I have a Coiler on order that's going to be 175.

The board I demoed was a 162. Checking lib tech's web site it looks like the 162 and 166 have the same weight recommendation. 1 finger length isn't that much more board to throw around. At 6'3 I got quite a large stance and leverage. Other "logic" behind the 166 is the 163w I have didn't have enough float for powder. Then again might have something to do with the board profile....hmmm...

Food for thought :thumbsup: Keep it coming !

EDIT: enlighten me: what is the TS weight reference you speak of ?

ZeMax 02-22-2014 11:27 PM

Ah ! Length is 165 only 2 cm more then my Head. Can't be that bad... can it ?

linvillegorge 02-22-2014 11:28 PM

TS = thread starter, a.k.a. "you" :laugh:

I think you'd be far better suited with the 162 you demo'd over a 166. A 162 is already on the big side for your weight. You've already said you loved it. You're overthinking this whole deal. If you demo a board and you love it, there ya go. You found your board.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2