Rocker, Camber, and everything in between - Page 22 - 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 11-23-2013, 03:00 PM   #211 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiredsport View Post
Hi RCB,

There are huge differences in boards since the mid 90's (many of the biggest changes not being in profile at all). Cores have improved a lot with newer cores largely being milled to allow well considered flex zones. Board weights have come down significantly. Laminates and laminating processes have improved. Many more...and more refined sidecut options are available. Magnetraction is now present on all Gnu models. Etc.

And then there are the profiles Even if you were to stay with camber, there have been notable improvements made there as well.
THanks good info I'll be teaching my boys snowboarding this season. They started last season and they are learning fast lol. I am looking at the Rome boards. Looks like maybe a rocker flat rocker board might be fun. Since I won't be flying down the hills this season I want to get something fun while going slower.

I think the GNU Metal Guru looks like something that might work for me. Also looking at the GNU Street series but concerned how it would ride if I feel like bombing down the hills.

Last edited by rcboxer; 11-23-2013 at 08:59 PM.
rcboxer is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 11-23-2013, 04:36 PM   #212 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Snowboard Sloth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 12
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Hey man! first off, I'd like to say that you sure know how to start a thread! All of my questions about camber were answered.
I would like to know how performance changes from a stiff board to a soft board. I already know that a really stiff board can get through more powder and ice, and that a really soft board will make it easier to do things like buttering, but is that it? I'm a freestyle/park guy so I won't be hitting huge powdered mountians or anything however I will be doing jumps and jibs.
Snowboard Sloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2013, 08:54 AM   #213 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Wiredsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,362
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboard Sloth View Post
Hey man! first off, I'd like to say that you sure know how to start a thread! All of my questions about camber were answered.
I would like to know how performance changes from a stiff board to a soft board. I already know that a really stiff board can get through more powder and ice, and that a really soft board will make it easier to do things like buttering, but is that it? I'm a freestyle/park guy so I won't be hitting huge powdered mountians or anything however I will be doing jumps and jibs.
Great question and (of course) not so simple to answer.

While it is very true that jib boards (for instance) are all softer than race boards it is also true that there are big variances in stiffness within any category. Some jib boards are going to be relatively firm while others are noodles. Most current boards have multiple flex zones so even a "soft" board may have stiff sections (and vice versa). Also important, flex changes by size within any given model so the 152 may be notably softer than the 156 of the same board. The best advice you can get on flex is to determine what a specific board was designed to do and then use the manufacturer's weight chart to center yourself in the intended user range for the size that matches your weight.

Here is some info from our fit tips:

Trying to get an accurate idea of how a specific board will flex in comparison to others? Watch out! There is more marketing misinformation and straight out nonsense published about flexibility than about most other elements of snowboard fit. Finding the correct flex (stiffness and feel) is crucial, but it won't be found in a single number printed on a fit chart. Let's clear one thing up straight off. There is no industry standard for flex. That is to say, what one company considers a "4" has no direct relation to another company's "4" or "Medium Soft", or "Less Harsh". That's correct, boards that carry the same number may (and usually do) have an entirely different feel. OK, so that makes it tricky to compare one brand to another, but what about within a brand? Even here, big problems exist. Most brands are still putting a single flex rating on an entire model. That is to say, this year's Travis White pro model gets a flex rating of "2", but what? It's rated a 2 in both 149 cm and in 163 cm? Hey now, the chart says that those two sizes are rated for riders separated by 70 lbs, how can the flex rating be the same? Wait, you say, they are rating the overall flex of the model so it could be compared to other models of the same brand of a similar size. The problem there is that board designer's change the flex of each model at different size breaks to achieve the feel that they are after for that specific model. In other words, the difference in flex between a 149 and a 154 in one model may be far greater than the flex difference between those same sizes in another model. Additionally, many times a rider will be deciding between two sizes of the same model. Does the 157 really have the same flex as the 159? If so, why are the weight ratings for those sizes so different? The biggest confusing factor, however, comes from the improvements in flex control technologies that have evolved over the past decade. A board that is designed to have a buttery soft tip and tail with a firm mid section flexes far differently than a constant flex board designed for a similar rider size. It is not that it is necessarily more or less flexible, but that the flex characteristics are entirely different. To get around this issue, certain companies have switched from a flex rating to a feel rating. This is a step from bad to worse. There is simply no way to compare these complex relationships in a single number or term. It would be equal to comparing a tangerine to a pineapple using a fruitiness scale, rated 1 to 10. What is the answer? The only way to figure out the flex component is to dig deeper. Getting the info on the core weight range that a model and size were developed for and understanding the flex characteristic of that model is the only way to get the correct flex for your needs.
Wiredsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2013, 09:58 PM   #214 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 82
Default

Amazing thread, just spent the past hour or so reading all the posts while I was at work.

So I'm looking at getting a new board. Still riding a Forum Warrior that I got years ago. I believe it's a full camber. After reading everything I'm leaning towards rocker camber rocker or camber rocker camber.

I'm 5'8'' (who cares), 156 pounds and wear a size 9 shoe (important parts). I ride in western and northern Michigan which isn't anything too crazy, mostly groomers. I plan on doing some smaller jumps on this board and getting some air off natural features and doing some butters. I'm not going to be doing any rails or boxes or half pipe.

I was looking at the K2 Happy Hour as this looks like it might fit my needs but wanted to see if there are any other options that you might recommend Wired, or tell me if I'm thinking about things correctly. Thanks for the help in this thread!

Edit: Forgot to add that I will probably be using this board for snowkiting too on a frozen lake that's normally covered in snow as well, getting some air with the kite.

Last edited by DrGwiz; 11-30-2013 at 10:04 PM.
DrGwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 08:57 AM   #215 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Wiredsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,362
Default

Hi,

Because of your edit (kite/frozen lake) I would suggest Camber or Rocker Camber Rocker. Kiting imposes a very unique dynamic that requires constant and capable one sided edging. I would rule out any models with primary flat or rockered sections.

STOKED!
Wiredsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 11:06 AM   #216 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 82
Default

Awesome, and if I left out the snowkiting what was your recommendation going to be (just out of my own curiosity).
DrGwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2013, 11:13 AM   #217 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Wiredsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,362
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrGwiz View Post
Awesome, and if I left out the snowkiting what was your recommendation going to be (just out of my own curiosity).
There will be many boards in the CRC and RCR profiles that would be awesome for you.
Wiredsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2013, 11:33 AM   #218 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Hi thanks for all your info on this thread. I have a question cuz im not sure which to get lol

I want the new gnu street. I'm thinking I want the 152, but possibly 154. leaning towards the 152 because I ride an old gnu 150-252 hasshaulff camber board. IT has 114 effective edge. It feels good to me but i want to get a playfull fun board. I am riding with my two boys this year teaching them to ride. 9 and and 8 year old I just want to play on smaller jumps fun boxes butters and stuff. Do you think the 152 street is going to be too small for me since its a rocker board. iT has 116 effective edge which is two more cm then the camber board i ride now. or should I go 154 with 118 effective edge? i am between 180 185 pounds with a size 11 shoe.

thanks for your time
rcboxer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2013, 11:46 AM   #219 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
Wiredsport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,362
Default

Hi,

There would be no advantage to the 152 at your specs. As always, we highly suggest that you take tip to tip board length out of your buying decision and focus only on the intended rider for the model you are considering. You are either right at or over the max rider weight for the 152 (the board will best perform as intended when you are centered in the range). You are best centered on the 157 cm size in this model.
Wiredsport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2013, 02:02 PM   #220 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiredsport View Post
Hi,

There would be no advantage to the 152 at your specs. As always, we highly suggest that you take tip to tip board length out of your buying decision and focus only on the intended rider for the model you are considering. You are either right at or over the max rider weight for the 152 (the board will best perform as intended when you are centered in the range). You are best centered on the 157 cm size in this model.
Cool thanks for that, Good info

Last edited by rcboxer; 12-02-2013 at 02:24 PM.
rcboxer 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 08:34 AM.



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