Torn between 165 and 168...Vote Please - Snowboarding Forum

samalama · 03-13-2012, 11:20 AM

I'm having a hard time deciding between a 165 and a 168 size board. The board will mostly be meant for freeride allmountain style riding (no park/pipe). My weight is 210lbs and I'm 6'1" with a size 11 boot. Skill level (being modest) I would consider myself intermediate. I'd like your honest opinions because the sales guys are eager to push the last of their inventories on me. Some have 165 and others only have 168 so you feel my dilemma.

I'm looking at a freeride board but don't want to get into the details of manufacturer too much. I'd like to try and consider just the length only here..if that's possible. haha

What would you choose/suggest? 165 or 168?

Oh...i've also checked with all the calculators too but wanted your rider experiences.

SnowMotion · 03-13-2012, 11:52 AM

no reason for you to ride a board that long. I would demo a 159 or 160 and see what you think. I´m 6´1-230lbs size 11 boot and i ride 157 for everything, but even smaller for park......calculators HA thats a joke right?

Sick-Pow · 03-13-2012, 11:56 AM

Depends on location and riding style.

East coast, smaller hills, smaller board is fine.

West, anything goes.

samalama · 03-13-2012, 12:22 PM

Thanks for the votes and responses. I admit I'm a bit of a tool and clueless sometimes when it comes to this shtuff since I havent' bought new gear in years and don't keep up on the latest. That's what forums are for. Thanks guys!

I'm on the west coast/Pacific NW. Hood/Bachelor areas

david_z · 03-13-2012, 12:24 PM

I'm about your size, inch shorter but same weight and boot size. I wouldn't ride anything bigger than a 165 and even that length I don't think I'd really want to ride. I think both of these are probably too long for you unless you're riding powder all the time. I wouldn't go bigger than the 65 no matter what, but if I were you I'd try to stay around 161.

samalama · 03-13-2012, 12:28 PM

I forgot to add that your help is already steering me (i feel) in the right direction. Thanks!!!

Sick-Pow · 03-13-2012, 01:09 PM

RIding all that heavy pow, a 165 will be fun.

Try to demo some boards. Try a bunch of sizes, with waists that fit your foot and weight.

Try a NUG too.

extra0 · 03-14-2012, 12:24 PM

I'm about the same size as OP (little lighter) and I would only even consider 165 cm+ if I was consistently riding 4 ft+ deep powder. I ride a 163 fine in depths up to about 5 ft...pretty sure anything longer would exponentially affect agility in the lower depths.

sobrob · 03-14-2012, 12:28 PM

My opinion is to stay as short as you can get away with. More manuverability. For example: I plan on having two boards a 154 true twin for groomers and park and a 156-157 set back for powder.

WasatchMan · 03-14-2012, 02:03 PM

If I were you I wouldn't go bigger than a 162/163

168 is HUGE unless you're in 50"+ of powder

View Poll Results: 165 or 168?
165	29	96.67%
168	1	3.33%
Voters: 30. You may not vote on this poll

03-13-2012, 11:20 AM	#1 (permalink)
samalama Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 9	Torn between 165 and 168...Vote Please I'm having a hard time deciding between a 165 and a 168 size board. The board will mostly be meant for freeride allmountain style riding (no park/pipe). My weight is 210lbs and I'm 6'1" with a size 11 boot. Skill level (being modest) I would consider myself intermediate. I'd like your honest opinions because the sales guys are eager to push the last of their inventories on me. Some have 165 and others only have 168 so you feel my dilemma. I'm looking at a freeride board but don't want to get into the details of manufacturer too much. I'd like to try and consider just the length only here..if that's possible. haha What would you choose/suggest? 165 or 168? Oh...i've also checked with all the calculators too but wanted your rider experiences.

03-13-2012, 11:52 AM	#2 (permalink)
SnowMotion Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 224	no reason for you to ride a board that long. I would demo a 159 or 160 and see what you think. I´m 6´1-230lbs size 11 boot and i ride 157 for everything, but even smaller for park......calculators HA thats a joke right? Last edited by SnowMotion; 03-13-2012 at 11:55 AM.

03-13-2012, 12:24 PM	#5 (permalink)
david_z Official SBF Blogger Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Detroit suburbs Posts: 3,032 Blog Entries: 5	I'm about your size, inch shorter but same weight and boot size. I wouldn't ride anything bigger than a 165 and even that length I don't think I'd really want to ride. I think both of these are probably too long for you unless you're riding powder all the time. I wouldn't go bigger than the 65 no matter what, but if I were you I'd try to stay around 161. __________________ Repping the world's smallest mountains... Mt. Holly - 12 Pine Knob - 9 Alpine Valley - 2 Vail - 4 Breckenridge - 3 Crystal Mountain (MI) - 3 Hawk Island Snow Park - 5 Caberfae Peaks - 1 Boyne Mountain - 1 aGNARchy: no rules, just gnar!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-13-2012, 11:56 AM	#3 (permalink)
Sick-Pow Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,236	Depends on location and riding style. East coast, smaller hills, smaller board is fine. West, anything goes.

03-13-2012, 12:22 PM	#4 (permalink)
samalama Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 9	Thanks for the votes and responses. I admit I'm a bit of a tool and clueless sometimes when it comes to this shtuff since I havent' bought new gear in years and don't keep up on the latest. That's what forums are for. Thanks guys! I'm on the west coast/Pacific NW. Hood/Bachelor areas

03-13-2012, 12:28 PM	#6 (permalink)
samalama Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 9	I forgot to add that your help is already steering me (i feel) in the right direction. Thanks!!!

03-13-2012, 01:09 PM	#7 (permalink)
Sick-Pow Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,236	RIding all that heavy pow, a 165 will be fun. Try to demo some boards. Try a bunch of sizes, with waists that fit your foot and weight. Try a NUG too.

03-14-2012, 12:24 PM	#8 (permalink)
extra0 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: CA Posts: 582	I'm about the same size as OP (little lighter) and I would only even consider 165 cm+ if I was consistently riding 4 ft+ deep powder. I ride a 163 fine in depths up to about 5 ft...pretty sure anything longer would exponentially affect agility in the lower depths.

03-14-2012, 12:28 PM	#9 (permalink)
sobrob Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Colorado Posts: 31	My opinion is to stay as short as you can get away with. More manuverability. For example: I plan on having two boards a 154 true twin for groomers and park and a 156-157 set back for powder.

03-14-2012, 02:03 PM	#10 (permalink)
WasatchMan Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Salt Lake City, Utah Posts: 1,023	If I were you I wouldn't go bigger than a 162/163 168 is HUGE unless you're in 50"+ of powder