Burton - Process Flying V, Nitro - Team Gullwing or Ride - Berzerker
Im looking into buying my second ever snowboard, my first was a 2010 Burton Mayhem 158, which is getting a bit banged up and I think I need an upgrade to progress my riding!! I'm about 5'8", 74kg (I'm for England!!), been riding for about 6 years manly in Europe, I enjoy riding the whole mountain! Which is why I like the look of the new boards this season with 'Hybrid twin' - (Ride) (Gullwing - Nitro, Flying V - Burton) profiles, which sound pretty awesome
My Burton Mayhem has a flat profile (i think) and is pretty stiff and boring (hard to butter) but goes ok in powder nd groomed, so I was looking for a playful all mountain twin upgrade, that handles powder but can also be pressed around a bit.
The Ride Berserker seems like an advanced board, I would say i'm defo an Intermediate, but i'd like a challenge, and the graphics are awesome so is Jake Blauvelt :laugh:, decisions decisions!
Also I've also looked into the Burton Process Flying V, and the Nitro Team Gullwing 2013, So out of these three models which would suit me best?if anyone has any info/pros/cons on any of these boards it would be great and very helpful!
Never get caught up in terms like advanced, beginner, intermediate on snowboard descriptions. They are just marketing short hand. Additionally words like freeride and freestyle function in much the same way. They basically take a bunch of data, put it into a mincing machine, swirl it about a bit and then have to fit it into three different moulds.
Its a best fit. It has a function, but its function is totally descriptive. Think of it like the title of a book. Its not the story, but does in some sense convey a general expectation of what the story might entail. But to find that out you need to read the book. Trite i know, but the point is that its not just bullshit, i dont want you to go too far in the other direction and just assume its cynical marketing nonsense. It has a genuine function, but you should really try not to see it as a specific quality the board exhibits. Its just a general overview of the type of person who might be interested in it. Its not however a "you must be this skilled to ride this board". In some cases it probably would be better that you can handle it, or that you have access to terrain where the board might seriously let loose and perform, but you have to look a little bit deeper for that in the actual board specs, reviews and of course chatting to folks that have ridden it (or why they got shot of it).
Its not in the catch all generic description of "advanced" because advanced boards cross the entire gammut. Sometimes price is the barrier, sometimes tech is the barrier, sometimes flex is the barrier and maybe sometimes its just that the whole thing together just feels a little much for a beginner on their first days on the slopes. The key thing is that you use the term only as a starting point to further investigation and recognise it to be only shorthand for a tonne of actual details about the boards specs.
And if it sounds alright, go and demo it because nothing tells you about how a board feels more than just strapping it in and mucking about. This isnt a guarantee either that you get it, but its just one more thing you can do to help narrow down your choices before committing to purchase.
So in summary, it all helps. Thats the point of it. These arent entirely abitrary designations. They have a descriptive function. But that is where the story starts, not where it ends. If you like the sound of a board dont come to the point that says "intermediate" or "advanced" and suddenly think "ah damn! thats not me." and use that one thing to decide you dont fit the boards intended audience. Youre looking at the terms the wrong way round. Once you start looking at the boards details, you can honestly stop looking at the catch all terms. Their function is to help you look at the details by appealing to an often arbitrary self declaration of your skill level.
Which brings me to the next point. The boards sidecut radius is a fact. The boards core construction is a fact. The camber profile is a fact. The base material is a fact. The addition of stringers, slimewalls, mtx, all of these are material facts. Advanced is a description. And as such one companies idea of an advanced board might not be another companies idea of an advanced board. Just as one riders definition of themselves as advanced might not be another riders definition of advanced.
PS. I loved my berzerker. Its not too stiff, fun to play on, kills it all, is awesome for slackcountry pow, and feels super nimble. Then again, ive got less than 100 days lifetime (close to the 90s i think now). My mate who i gave it to (on a promise before i even rode it), with about 20 days lifetime also LOVES it. Since id put myself somewhere at bugeoning intermediate and him at solid beginner (when you meet people on the slopes with more than 100 days a season it kinda gives you perspective), the advanced description seems hilariously misplaced.
However neither of us are park rats... and both of us love messing about in the trees. So you know... it suits our riding. And thats kinda the whole point of this massive message. :)
Out of your three choices it's hands down the Nitro Team. Great board that has been around for a while and that has this very nice do-everything flex and shape.
The Berserker is a bit too stiff for pressing around regularly. It's built more for high speeds, big jumps and pow.
Burton's Flying V has improved compared to earlier years but Nitro's Gullwing profile works better.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.