Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums

Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/forum.php)
-   Boards (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/)
-   -   Proto VS SL - the NS company email reply (http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/50106-proto-vs-sl-ns-company-email.html)

marcdeo 10-09-2012 07:22 AM

Proto VS SL - the NS company email reply
 
Hello all. I emailed NS regarding some specific questions I had about the SL and Proto. I started a thread about it initially and put this email in the thread but I though the email had good info in it and some might not read the reply in the thread so I figured the info was worthy of it's own thread since there are like 5 active threads about the Proto and SL (why not make a 6th? lol)

anyhow I'm just sharing info. They replied in less than an hour =Very nice.


__________________
MY ORIGINAL EMAIL...

Hello! I have a few questions that I was unable to locate answers for online.The Proto: Is it a TRUE TWIN? It states it is on the website but some of the reviews I read state that it is Directional twin with regards to flex pattern.

The SL - (a) Are the shape and sidecut twin? (b) what about flex pattern? I have read that if you shift the bindings forward the SL is essentially true twin, however if the sidecut is NOT true twin, it would not become a true twin if I slid the binding forward to a cantered stance.

Im getting one or the other for sure - cant make up my mind :-)

thank you!

________________
THE NS REPLY......


Hi Marc,

The Proto CT is a true twin in every way, sidecuts, flex patterns, and binding stance. The SL is a directional twin, so it has symmetrical sidecuts and flex patterns with the binding stance slightly set back. If you move the bindings forward, you will get a ride like that of a true twin. Hope this helps!

Thanks for the support of NS!

hktrdr 10-09-2012 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcdeo (Post 524650)
Hello all. I emailed NS regarding some specific questions I had about the SL and Proto. I started a thread about it initially and put this email in the thread but I though the email had good info in it and some might not read the reply in the thread so I figured the info was worthy of it's own thread since there are like 5 active threads about the Proto and SL (why not make a 6th? lol)

anyhow I'm just sharing info. They replied in less than an hour =Very nice.


__________________
MY ORIGINAL EMAIL...

Hello! I have a few questions that I was unable to locate answers for online.The Proto: Is it a TRUE TWIN? It states it is on the website but some of the reviews I read state that it is Directional twin with regards to flex pattern.

The SL - (a) Are the shape and sidecut twin? (b) what about flex pattern? I have read that if you shift the bindings forward the SL is essentially true twin, however if the sidecut is NOT true twin, it would not become a true twin if I slid the binding forward to a cantered stance.

Im getting one or the other for sure - cant make up my mind :-)

thank you!

________________
THE NS REPLY......


Hi Marc,

The Proto CT is a true twin in every way, sidecuts, flex patterns, and binding stance. The SL is a directional twin, so it has symmetrical sidecuts and flex patterns with the binding stance slightly set back. If you move the bindings forward, you will get a ride like that of a true twin. Hope this helps!

Thanks for the support of NS!

That is typical NS customer service.
Quick response time? Check
Detailed and clear answer? Not so much...

The stuff about the Proto is all correct, but the bit on the SL requires clarification/correction: The SL is directional because the inserts have setback and also because the sidecut has setback. So just centering the bindings does not make it a true twin.

sabatoa 10-09-2012 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hktrdr (Post 524696)
That is typical NS customer service.
Quick response time? Check
Detailed and clear answer? Not so much...

The stuff about the Proto is all correct, but the bit on the SL requires clarification/correction: The SL is directional because the inserts have setback and also because the sidecut has setback. So just centering the bindings does not make it a true twin.

Didn't they say that the side cut was symmetrical?

sleev-les 10-09-2012 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabatoa (Post 524709)
Didn't they say that the side cut was symmetrical?

I thought I read that in the response too.

hktrdr 10-09-2012 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sabatoa (Post 524709)
Didn't they say that the side cut was symmetrical?

Yes, they did. But it is not clear what that means - symmetrical along the length/narrowest part of the board or symmetrical around the reference stand? And if they meant the former, then that statement clashes with their official sales materials which state that the sidecut is set back.
Which one do you believe (assuming there really is a conflict)? I will go with the official materials - especially after the customer service guys recommended the 'between chin and nose' method for determining the correct board size...

Basti 10-09-2012 10:42 AM

It's nice that they responded in detail. I wrote an email to Arbor eight weeks ago with a very similar question about the Coda and the Element and I never got an answer.

sleev-les 10-09-2012 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hktrdr (Post 524718)
Yes, they did. But it is not clear what that means - symmetrical along the length/narrowest part of the board or symmetrical around the reference stand? And if they meant the former, then that statement clashes with their official sales materials which state that the sidecut is set back.
Which one do you believe (assuming there really is a conflict)? I will go with the official materials - especially after the customer service guys recommended the 'between chin and nose' method for determining the correct board size...


Their website states setback, but doesn't go into detail on what is setback. When I had mine, the sidecuts were symmetrical, just the mounting points were setback.

hktrdr 10-09-2012 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleev-les (Post 524724)
Their website states setback, but doesn't go into detail on what is setback. When I had mine, the sidecuts were symmetrical, just the mounting points were setback.

Have seen reference to sidecut setback in several items of dealer literature. Hell, Gags even expressly mentions it in the SL product video...

03SVTCobra 10-09-2012 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcdeo (Post 524650)

The SL is a directional twin, so it has symmetrical sidecuts and flex patterns with the binding stance slightly set back. If you move the bindings forward, you will get a ride like that of a true twin. Hope this helps!

They are always quick to respond over there. I got the same response about the heritage

The Heritage is also directional, but has symmetrical sidecuts and flex patterns, making it able to be ridden like a twin if the bindings are slightly set forward on the board.

hktrdr 10-09-2012 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 03SVTCobra (Post 524753)
They are always quick to respond over there. I got the same response about the heritage

The Heritage is also directional, but has symmetrical sidecuts and flex patterns, making it able to be ridden like a twin if the bindings are slightly set forward on the board.

Yeah, they are quick to respond - just wish that they were clearer what they mean by 'symmetrical'/more accurate. Like the SL the Heritage (and the Legacy, and the Cobra,...) the sidecut itself is symmetrical, but the board itself is not (even disregarding the binding position) - because the sidecut is setback.
Consequently, unlike the Proto these boards do not become true twins when the bindings are centered on the board.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2