Lib tech Banana magic/T Rice size - 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 08-08-2012, 11:33 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 20
Default Lib tech Banana magic/T Rice size

Hey everyone.

I have a question about what size you'd recommend for a Lib tech Banana magic or T Rice snowboard.

I'm 5'11, 190 lbs, mostly stick to the groomers but hoping to do more powder riding this year as well, so basically I want something that is nimble and fun but also floats well in powder.

I know a snowboard doesn't know how tall you are, but controlling a 161 is going to be harder than a 158, but a 161 will float better... I suppose the question is, on these Lib Tech boards would a 158 float well for me? I already have a 158 K2 Slayblade and it doesn't float much but it is 100% flat.

Thanks in advance!
Londoner_25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 08-09-2012, 07:09 AM   #2 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Both of these boards will float WAY better than the Slayblade (great deck for many things - powder not really one of them). Magic even more floaty than the T. Rice and much more playful/lively (but also more squirrelly at speed - basically a much more rockered board than the T. Rice), so the 157 might work for you.

Note that for the T. Rice the trade-off between the 157 and 161.5 is going to be greater than for the 157 and 161 Magic - not only are you adding 3.5cm of contact length (vs. 3cm on the Magic) and a pointy nose/tail, you are also going to a slightly larger sidecut radius 8.2m to 8.4m, while the Magic is 7m at all sizes).
As a result the difference between the different sizes will be more marked - the 161.5 will gain quite a bit of powder capability, but is also more if a bomber board than a playful deck. In contrast, the Magic just 'sizes up' without much change in character.
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2012, 09:54 AM   #3 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
SnowOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bear Mountain
Posts: 872
Default

Thought I'd through my two cents in since we seem to be really similar:

I'm 5'11 and I weight around 170-175lb. I have a K2 Turbo Dream 159 as my pow dominant board, but I recently just got a Lib Tech Attack Banana 157 as a park dominant board. Lib Tech's are really flexible, so your weight with that short of a board would probably equal to the same thing I'm looking to get out of my Attack Banana, which is park dominance. I'm not exactly sure, but i'm fairly certain the Banana Magic is a little more stiff than the Attack Banana and Skate Banana, so if you want Pow/freeride dominance I would go with a larger size
SnowOwl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2012, 07:07 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 20
Default

Thanks for the answer.
Londoner_25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2012, 11:59 PM   #5 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tylerkat89 View Post
Thought I'd through my two cents in since we seem to be really similar:

I'm 5'11 and I weight around 170-175lb. I have a K2 Turbo Dream 159 as my pow dominant board, but I recently just got a Lib Tech Attack Banana 157 as a park dominant board. Lib Tech's are really flexible, so your weight with that short of a board would probably equal to the same thing I'm looking to get out of my Attack Banana, which is park dominance. I'm not exactly sure, but i'm fairly certain the Banana Magic is a little more stiff than the Attack Banana and Skate Banana, so if you want Pow/freeride dominance I would go with a larger size
Attack Banana is a bit of a strange choice for a park board. It certainly is fairly stiff - about the same as Banana Magic and T. Rice actually (all of them much stiffer than the Skate Banana).
In order of float it is roughly Magic>Attack>T. Rice because of the extra rocker/more mellow camber in the profiles (Enhanced>EC2 BTX>C2 BTX).
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2012, 10:10 AM   #6 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
SnowOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Bear Mountain
Posts: 872
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hktrdr View Post
Attack Banana is a bit of a strange choice for a park board.
Haha yeah agreed, but I got it for cheap cuz it was minimally used and 157 was the size for sale, so I figured I'd turn it into my park board to get better on. I needed a second board anyways to take my brother along for the first time next season
SnowOwl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2012, 07:19 PM   #7 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Riley212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: North Seattle
Posts: 880
Default

I am 5'10 170 size 9.5 boots, i ride the 157 banana magic. it doesn't float as well as my pow board (158 charlie slasher) but does just fine once you get the nose out. I say get a pow board to even up the quiver, the trice and naner magic are fairly similar to the slayblade. but if you are set on one of these go for the 161 banana
__________________
Dude, suckin at somethin' is just the first step to bein' sorta good at somethin'
Riley212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 03:42 AM   #8 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 20
Default

Well thanks for all this guys... just to let you know. Last Friday I went ahead and bought a 158W Banana magic.... not sure if I made a bad decision here but I guess we'll find out. I got it on sale, but my master plan here is set the bindings back and not complain (I'll do my best).
Londoner_25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2012, 09:26 AM   #9 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Oscar1243's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: the last frontier
Posts: 15
Default

Don't think you made a bad choice. I just sold my 10-11 magic 158w, but only because I wanted a 163+ freeride board. I'm 5"11, 225lbs and this board did exceptionally well, even in the choppy crud. It is a bit loose on the flats and it will keep you on a constant edge but this board kills it for as stiff as it is (abt a 6 IMO). Good luck and good riding. Cheers.

[edit] this board is a good floater on POW, I rode it to hell and back in the AK backcountry (hatchers pass, turnagain, Valdez, Thomson pass, ect). And not to be argumentative but it is nothing like a slayblade. I rode one last yr for 3 weeks while my buddy went to Hawaii on vacation and that board is what made me rethink my board choice. It has carbon stringers inside the board, it killed the powder and the choppy crud and it was stable as hell on the flats. It was lighter than my magic (158w, union sl) and he had (163w union atlas). It was IMO a more fun board to ride for my style... Just throwing my 2 cents out there...
__________________
"riding is riding bro"

Last edited by Oscar1243; 10-10-2012 at 09:33 AM.
Oscar1243 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 02:47 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