Technical question about sidecut... - Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 05:06 AM Thread Starter
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Technical question about sidecut...

So here I'm comparing directional boards and twin boards.

Directional boards can have different nose vs tail width/shape, and I've always assumed the sidecut was pushed back as well... (?)

And with twin boards it's more straight-forward. Symmetrical nose vs tail and symmetrical side cut.

Both of these assume the bindings are on the reference stance.

So my question is, is a twin board more versatile, since you can just move your stance backward, and thereby put more of the sidecut radius in front of you? Aside from the fact that a directional board is better in pow in terms of nose width/shape, you can just put setback on a twin board, right? I've never tried it before, normally I just stick with a setback and leave it there.

Am I making any incorrect assumptions? Does anyone have a true twin that works well in powder with a decent amount of setback?
phile00 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 10:13 AM
Banned!
 
snowklinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: L-Town
Posts: 6,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
There are twins that slay powder especially with all the new rocker variants.

Isn't the T.Rice a twin?

Haven't had a chance to get my NS proto into some pow, but i'm expecting it to handle pow alot better than my traditional camber board.

Support Local Business
"Shop Smart. Shop S-Mart!" - Ash
snowklinger is offline  
post #3 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 10:28 AM
Veteran Member
 
redlude97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Its not always as simple as pushing the sidecut back. Many directional boards use a progressive sidecut with different radius that aren't symmetric on a directional board. The core construction and flex pattern can also be altered. In some cases such as on ride's directional boards, the camber profile will vary from the tip and tail. The only time a centered stance board should be set back is in pow, and even then a directional board with similar construction will perform better.
redlude97 is offline  
post #4 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 10:43 AM
Veteran Member
 
zk0ot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WIS
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
you do know there is such a thing as directional twins right?

a set back twin. quite a few riders ride directional twins, like Eero as an example.

BUCK FURTON
zk0ot is offline  
post #5 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 11:30 AM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
jyuen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I believe that there's more to it than just the side cut.

someone correct me if i'm wrong, but i was under the impression that true twins, directional twins, and directional boards also have different flex patterns.

2007 Rome Agent 155, 2011 Rome Artifact Rocker 150, 2012 Never Summer Proto CT 152
2011 Union Contacts, 2012 Flux SF45, 2008 Rome 390's (Retired)
2011 Zoom Kaiju, 2007 Thirtytwo Prospects (Retired)
jyuen is offline  
post #6 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 12:31 PM
Veteran Member
 
zk0ot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WIS
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
very correct. directionals and powder boards will tend to get stiffer in the tail

BUCK FURTON
zk0ot is offline  
post #7 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 02:05 PM Thread Starter
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowklinger View Post
There are twins that slay powder especially with all the new rocker variants.

Isn't the T.Rice a twin?

Haven't had a chance to get my NS proto into some pow, but i'm expecting it to handle pow alot better than my traditional camber board.
Yeah, but directional/pow boards win usually because of the asymmetrical nose vs tale and sidecut.
phile00 is offline  
post #8 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 02:06 PM Thread Starter
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zk0ot View Post
you do know there is such a thing as directional twins right?

a set back twin. quite a few riders ride directional twins, like Eero as an example.
Yeah I'm def aware, I was just comparing the two polar opposites (because I'm going to be picking up a rockered twin).
phile00 is offline  
post #9 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 02:09 PM Thread Starter
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: CNY
Posts: 685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by redlude97 View Post
Its not always as simple as pushing the sidecut back. Many directional boards use a progressive sidecut with different radius that aren't symmetric on a directional board. The core construction and flex pattern can also be altered. In some cases such as on ride's directional boards, the camber profile will vary from the tip and tail. The only time a centered stance board should be set back is in pow, and even then a directional board with similar construction will perform better.
riight, the camber profile. I completely overlooked that. Good call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jyuen View Post
I believe that there's more to it than just the side cut.

someone correct me if i'm wrong, but i was under the impression that true twins, directional twins, and directional boards also have different flex patterns.
Yeah, this rings true as well, I was just simplifying the situation because I was going to get a twin rocker board, and wanted to gauge how it would perform with setback.

Burton custom cambered vs Arbor Westmark twin rocker with setback. Which one will be better in pow?
phile00 is offline  
post #10 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-05-2012, 03:04 PM
Veteran Member
 
redlude97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle/Portland
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
IME any rockered deck that is centered or setback will beat a cambered board of a similar size that isn't pow specific.
redlude97 is offline  
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