Bored with my board - opinions wanted - Page 11 - 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 04-19-2013, 03:00 PM   #101 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bamfb2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxrealtor View Post




I have a new 161.5, got it a day before I picked up the 157. I said above that the board looked huge even compared side to side to the billy goat.

The 161.5 is going back to the store. Didn't even mount bindings to it.
LOL. probably should have read your post first, huh? Good stuff.
bamfb2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-19-2013, 03:13 PM   #102 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
pdxrealtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bamfb2 View Post
LOL. probably should have read your post first, huh? Good stuff.
I wondered WTF. Figured maybe you skimmed it or something....
No worries
pdxrealtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2013, 11:27 PM   #103 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
rambob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: central oregon
Posts: 144
Default

Mr Wolf, Well said. "Uber-stiff": I like that term, describes them well!
rambob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 08:00 PM   #104 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 926
Default

You should give the 161.5 a try. IS the width and lenght way bigger then 157? I cant decide if i want a 157 or 161.5
blunted_nose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 08:24 PM   #105 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
pdxrealtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blunted_nose View Post
You should give the 161.5 a try. IS the width and lenght way bigger then 157? I cant decide if i want a 157 or 161.5
Here's a link to Lib Tech's Travis Rice page. Look at the specs and you can see for yourself. --- Travis Rice Pro – Lib Tech

After you look there, at the specs, then... read this entire thread, from start to end. You'll see I went through the exact same thing as you in trying to decide between the 157 or 161.5. If the 161.5 rode the same as the 162 BG I might have chosen it, but it won't. It's edge is long and its waste is wide.

The 157 has almost the same edge in a shorter package and the extra width helps get more stability.

Buy your board from dogfunk, they have several. Get the 157 and I I'll bet you will not only find it more stable than the BG, but you'll also find it a much funner, board to ride. It also holds an edge better IMO, probably due to the more aggressive magne-traction and reduced length.


I just sent my 161.5 back in the mail, 20 minutes ago. Again-- just read this entire thread and if you're still not convinced then I don't know.... I guess if you have the resources then buy both from DF and send one back. There were a couple posters in this thread who preferred and recommended I get the 161.5. Some of it will come down to preference. Hope this helps. Good luck!
pdxrealtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 08:49 PM   #106 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Epic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 230
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxrealtor View Post
Here's a link to Lib Tech's Travis Rice page. Look at the specs and you can see for yourself. --- Travis Rice Pro – Lib Tech

After you look there, at the specs, then... read this entire thread, from start to end. You'll see I went through the exact same thing as you in trying to decide between the 157 or 161.5. If the 161.5 rode the same as the 162 BG I might have chosen it, but it won't. It's edge is long and its waste is wide.

The 157 has almost the same edge in a shorter package and the extra width helps get more stability.

Buy your board from dogfunk, they have several. Get the 157 and I I'll bet you will not only find it more stable than the BG, but you'll also find it a much funner, board to ride. It also holds an edge better IMO, probably due to the more aggressive magne-traction and reduced length.


I just sent my 161.5 back in the mail, 20 minutes ago. Again-- just read this entire thread and if you're still not convinced then I don't know.... I guess if you have the resources then buy both from DF and send one back. There were a couple posters in this thread who preferred and recommended I get the 161.5. Some of it will come down to preference. Hope this helps. Good luck!
It seems you like the 157 t rice better than the 162 BG in every respect. Is there anything the BG has the edge in? I just bought one for next season and reading all this makes me want to return it and get the 157 t rice. If its more stable and more nimble it seems like the obvious choice

Edit: also is it the c2 or hp version you have?

Last edited by Epic; 04-22-2013 at 08:54 PM.
Epic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 08:59 PM   #107 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
pdxrealtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epic View Post
It seems you like the 157 t rice better than the 162 BG in every respect. Is there anything the BG has the edge in? I just bought one for next season and reading all this makes me want to return it and get the 157 t rice. If its more stable and more nimble it seems like the obvious choice
Deep powder That's the only thing I can't verify at this point.

The only problem I had with the T. Rice was after noon on Saturday, once. Some of the terrain was so chopped up the 'boulders' were taller than the nose and if I wasn't prepared they'd catch me and send me over the bars.

The BG has the raised nose so I never had this problem on it.

It's also very hard to say because these boards just aren't apples to apples. Even a 159 BG has less effective edge than the T. Rice 157, and all the BG are not as wide in the waist. It's just a different board.

I'm totally stoked on the board and the confidence boost it's given me over my 162 goat. It's a fast ripping board over the chop or down the groomers.

I have the pro model. I ordered the 161.5 in the HP and the 157 in the pro. It was my only choice since they were out of the HP in the 157. Since I've ridden it 2 days now and it's working so well I figure why swap it out for the HP. Plus I've seen a couple threads recently of the basalt boards cracking. And I like the graphics better on the pro Vs. the HP.

Last edited by pdxrealtor; 04-22-2013 at 09:01 PM.
pdxrealtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 10:29 PM   #108 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epic View Post
It seems you like the 157 t rice better than the 162 BG in every respect. Is there anything the BG has the edge in? I just bought one for next season and reading all this makes me want to return it and get the 157 t rice. If its more stable and more nimble it seems like the obvious choice

Edit: also is it the c2 or hp version you have?
Edge-to-edge - unlike what PDX wrote, in my experience the BG is MUCH more nimble and and quick - absolutely no contest. I know car analogies are a bit tired, but it is like an open wheeler/Indy (BG) compared to a Nascar (T. Rice).

Also, to me the BG is damper. I know people consider the T. Rice to be pretty damp too, but I believe it is mostly because with a mid-wide deck there is just sooo much board...

As PDX mentioned, float in pow might be another point - but that could be result of the set-back on the BG.

To me, the BG always felt more freeride-ish and the T. Rice more big-mountain freestyle-ish. Maybe the marketing is shaping my perception, but that is honestly how I feel about it.
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 10:40 PM   #109 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
pdxrealtor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hktrdr View Post
Edge-to-edge - unlike what PDX wrote, in my experience the BG is MUCH more nimble and and quick - absolutely no contest. I know car analogies are a bit tired, but it is like an open wheeler/Indy (BG) compared to a Nascar (T. Rice).

Also, to me the BG is damper. I know people consider the T. Rice to be pretty damp too, but I believe it is mostly because with a mid-wide deck there is just sooo much board...

As PDX mentioned, float in pow might be another point - but that could be result of the set-back on the BG.

To me, the BG always felt more freeride-ish and the T. Rice more big-mountain freestyle-ish. Maybe the marketing is shaping my perception, but that is honestly how I feel about it.
The problem I'm having in comparing is the different sizes and profiles. What I'm saying is I can work the edge much easier on the 157 T. Rice vs. the 162 Goat.

Exactly why, I can't say for sure. However I'm thinking it's because while even though the BG has less effective edge in the 162 vs. the T. Rice 157 the board length is still board length. It's extra 'meat' to throw around.

Let me clarify-- My comparison is based on the 162 vs. the 157 T. Rice and that is it. Based on specs and tons of reading I think if I had been on a 159 BG it might have been less of gap between the two boards.

The BG should be the more agile, nimble board. But the boards are so different length for length it's hard for me to compare.

Part of the reason I started to look at a different board was because the BG was turning too easy for me, IE too agile.

What I'm finding though is the even though it's a more agile board the extra length was requiring extra work from me that was not needed. Again, it's so hard to say without riding a shorter BG and even then the profiles are so different.
pdxrealtor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2013, 10:46 PM   #110 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pdxrealtor View Post
The problem I'm having in comparing is the different sizes and profiles. What I'm saying is I can work the edge much easier on the 157 T. Rice vs. the 162 Goat.

Exactly why, I can't say for sure. However I'm thinking it's because while even though the BG has less effective edge in the 162 vs. the T. Rice 157 the board length is still board length. It's extra 'meat' to throw around.

Let me clarify-- My comparison is based on the 162 vs. the 157 T. Rice and that is it. Based on specs and tons of reading I think if I had been on a 159 BG it might have been less of gap between the two boards.

The BG should be the more agile, nimble board. But the boards are so different length for length it's hard for me to compare.

Part of the reason I started to look at a different board was because the BG was turning too easy for me, IE too agile.

What I'm finding though is the even though it's a more agile board the extra length was requiring extra work from me that was not needed. Again, it's so hard to say without riding a shorter BG and even then the profiles are so different.
Yeah, I was aware that you were on different size boards. Really the 162 BG was probably to long for your and you would have been better off with the 159...
hktrdr 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 09:15 PM.



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