Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums

Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums (
-   Boards (
-   -   Why don't manufacturers.... (

Phenom 02-06-2011 04:28 PM

Why don't manufacturers....
...use a standard unit to indicate the amount of flex on their boards so that the flexibility between boards across multiple manufacturers can be compared easily? I'm not sure why companies still use "Flex-o-meters" with a system of arbitrary numbers that don't tell you much of anything useful in the grand scheme of things.

Would using a universally accepted unit just make too much sense?

Grasschopper 02-06-2011 04:52 PM

Pretty simple would make boards from different manufacturers too easy to compare on the internet and hurt sales.

Phenom 02-06-2011 05:05 PM

How would that hurt sales?

Nivek 02-06-2011 05:49 PM

8 Attachment(s)
Bataleon is a great example of why not. The ET is a 5/3/5. The Airobic is a 4/2/4. And the Funkink is a 3.5/3.5/3.5. How do you give each one of these boards a single number? The FK is stiffer between the feet than the ET and Airobic, but its tips are softer than both.

Which board is stiffer?

You can't even do this with the tip/waist/tip method either. Burton's squeezebox make the board stiffer just outside the binding, but the whole tip doesn't really stiffen up. that mean you now have #/#/#/#/#. That is far too much info for them to start making a standardized test.

Also that is what shop guys are for. Will all the models feel the same between the shop kid and you? No. Will the differences be similar. Yes. A board that feels stiffer than another will do so no matter who you are...usually

Flex will also feel different based on shape, camber, base profile, sidecut, and no two models are the same shape. The SubPop is softer than my old cambered Stairmaster but it feels similar on edge. The shape of the board makes it ride different on edge than if you were just pressing it.

BurtonAvenger 02-06-2011 06:18 PM

Seriously you're asking this? Take into account all the differences in materials, how things are laid up, epoxies, how it's pressed, where the reference stance is, carbon vs bamboo, etc. etc. it's impossible. Let alone flex numbers are a joke a guy a 215lbs on a 155 is going to flex that board a lot more than a guy that's 165. Too many variables.

Nivek 02-06-2011 06:20 PM

8 Attachment(s)
Of course you manage to say in 1 paragraph what took me 4

Chaos Theory 02-06-2011 06:21 PM

I just do the ol' flex test in the store - seems pretty accurate ;)

BurtonAvenger 02-06-2011 06:23 PM


Originally Posted by Nivek (Post 371175)
Of course you manage to say in 1 paragraph what took me 4

Oh Padawan you have a lot to learn. Email me photos later please k thanks bye.

Nivek 02-06-2011 06:29 PM

8 Attachment(s)

Originally Posted by BurtonAvenger (Post 371179)
Oh Padawan you have a lot to learn. Email me photos later please k thanks bye.

Yeah I'll get on that tonight. As for the catalog, seeing as how neither of us have cars at the current time, yeah I don't know when.

JoeR 02-06-2011 07:31 PM

It would be virtually impossible to produce a single number that would encapsulate all of a given board's flex characteristics, but it wouldn't be that difficult to come up with a standard system for rating some flex characteristics. A board's width varies almost continuously from tip to tail, but that hasn't prevented manufacturers from providing a "waist" width measurement that, although imperfect and perhaps differently defined from board to board, still offers very useful guidance to buyers. A "center flex" measurement could be calculated at the board's exact midpoint, or its binding reference point, using a standard amount of torque (the proxy for rider weight) and expressing the amount of flex using standard units. Once riders learned how their own weight and riding style related to the standard center flex rating, I think it would be helpful in making comparisons among boards. A standard "torsional flex" rating might be produced in a comparable way.

Of course, all of this would require agreement among manufacturers on the basic units to be employed, but that's certainly not impossible. Convincing manufacturers that it would be in their interest to do it might be impossible, however.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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