157w or 160 opinions please - Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
User Tag List

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-22-2009, 09:34 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
tschamp20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: S.E. VA.
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
157w or 160 opinions please

im 6' 205lb. all-mountain and was wondering the pros and cons of riding 157w instead of a 160.would the 157 turn easier but still get good speed because of extra surface area.or am i really off here.
tschamp20 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-22-2009, 09:43 PM
Veteran Member
 
Slinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have both..i really liked my 157w this weekend..it was pretty stable and handled well...its the first wide board i've really riden and liked. what size are your feet?
Slinky is offline  
post #3 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-22-2009, 10:02 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This doesn't answer your question, but are you sure a 157 or 160 would be long enough? I'm more than 50lbs lighter than you and a half foot shorter, and I like riding my friend's 155.
unsunken is offline  
post #4 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-22-2009, 10:18 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
tschamp20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: S.E. VA.
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ive got a 162 but was thinking about something shorter and more nimble.i wear a 10.5.how big are you slinky? what did you like about the 157w?
tschamp20 is offline  
post #5 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-23-2009, 06:20 AM
Veteran Member
 
Slinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm 6'4 190 with a size 12....
I found the board to be very responsive, its a burton Custom. I was able to bomb down hills at a good clip and not feel like it was going to wash out on me...it was only my second time out this season so my legs arent totally their yet but it felt easier to get up in the air then my 160 rossignol...the cons i would say are it was harder to keep afloat in powder but thats about it
Slinky is offline  
post #6 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-23-2009, 07:35 AM
Leo
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Leo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Detroit Area
Posts: 6,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't suggest you do a wide board with only 10.5 boots. Not even at the size 157. If all you ride is powder, then a wide board will be great. For your weight and riding style, I recommend you ride a 159 or 160 regular.

Here are the Pros and Cons with board lengths...

Shorter Boards (boards that are below your weight range)

Pros: More control, more flex (even if the board is meant to be a little stiffer, since you are well above the weight range of the board, you are effectively making it softer), much easier to perform tricks on

Cons: Less float in soft snow such as powder, generally less speed (speed is highly dependent on snow conditions and rider skill level0), less stability at higher speeds, less "pop" - the reason for the less pop has to do with the above explanation of you being over the weight range for the board

Longer Boards (boards that are your weight range and above)

Pros: More float especially good for powder riding, more stability at speed, more "pop", board is designed with your weight range in mind so you get the intended feel of the board, generally more speed

Cons: Less control than shorter boards, are slightly heavier, harder to do tricks like spins

There are probably more to this, but it is all I can think of at the moment. I'm sure others will add their expertise.

Of course, a rockered board will change all of these factors. For example, if you get a 157 snowboard with rocker, you will actually gain float. Still, a 160 rocker will float better than a 157 rocker. Equally so, a 160 rocker will make it easier to butter and control, but a 157 rocker will still be better at it.

Now, you can ride a 157 just fine for all-mountain at your weight. You will have to adjust your riding to accommodate for the smaller size. For example, let's say you are riding in powder with this 157. You will most likely have to set your bindings back on the board and will have to use your back leg more to keep your nose above the pow. You'll be able to ride it, but at the end of the day your leg will hate you for it.

If you want to go with a 157, try one with a rocker. A 158 with rocker will be even better. Avoid the wide boards, you don't need those unless your boot size is 12 +

www.aGNARchy.com Reviews and David Z's rants
Leo is offline  
post #7 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-23-2009, 08:18 AM
Veteran Member
 
Slinky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo View Post
I don't suggest you do a wide board with only 10.5 boots. Not even at the size 157. If all you ride is powder, then a wide board will be great. For your weight and riding style, I recommend you ride a 159 or 160 regular.

Here are the Pros and Cons with board lengths...

Shorter Boards (boards that are below your weight range)

Pros: More control, more flex (even if the board is meant to be a little stiffer, since you are well above the weight range of the board, you are effectively making it softer), much easier to perform tricks on

Cons: Less float in soft snow such as powder, generally less speed (speed is highly dependent on snow conditions and rider skill level0), less stability at higher speeds, less "pop" - the reason for the less pop has to do with the above explanation of you being over the weight range for the board

Longer Boards (boards that are your weight range and above)

Pros: More float especially good for powder riding, more stability at speed, more "pop", board is designed with your weight range in mind so you get the intended feel of the board, generally more speed

Cons: Less control than shorter boards, are slightly heavier, harder to do tricks like spins

There are probably more to this, but it is all I can think of at the moment. I'm sure others will add their expertise.

Of course, a rockered board will change all of these factors. For example, if you get a 157 snowboard with rocker, you will actually gain float. Still, a 160 rocker will float better than a 157 rocker. Equally so, a 160 rocker will make it easier to butter and control, but a 157 rocker will still be better at it.

Now, you can ride a 157 just fine for all-mountain at your weight. You will have to adjust your riding to accommodate for the smaller size. For example, let's say you are riding in powder with this 157. You will most likely have to set your bindings back on the board and will have to use your back leg more to keep your nose above the pow. You'll be able to ride it, but at the end of the day your leg will hate you for it.

If you want to go with a 157, try one with a rocker. A 158 with rocker will be even better. Avoid the wide boards, you don't need those unless your boot size is 12 +
listen to this guy
Slinky is offline  
post #8 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-23-2009, 10:56 AM
Veteran Member
 
zakk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
not to further cloud the issue, but a lot of this is personal preference.

I'm 5'10 and 270 and I ride a Rome Riff 158w. I have size 11 feet but the Burton Rulers I'm cursed with have the shinkage tech, which helps.

I have a 163w Forum Raider for pow, and its a boat. I could surf the damn thing in Santa Cruz.

Next board is going to be a 156 Sierrascope (I think) as everything is saying I don't need a wide. So it up to you

Some guys are having a blast on a mini-board or a snowskate, so alot of it is what you want to do. Are you a bomber? 160 might not be enough speed for you. Park? 157 might be too long for a jibber.



Clif notes: boards are personal preference

-zakk
zakk is offline  
post #9 of 9 (permalink) Old 12-23-2009, 01:15 PM
Rocksvillebeer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
I prefer narrower boards hands down. I'm 185-190 and ride a 162 all mountain, all the time. The shorter board "should" feel more maneuverable and faster edge to edge, but because it's wide it won't. It'll feel like a boat.

My next board is likely a 161--but 161 and 162 is pretty much the same thing.
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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

 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome