REVIEW; Neversummer Raptor 156 - Page 19 - 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 04-08-2013, 07:16 PM   #181 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 11
Default

Thanks for the feedback on the length question...

Sounds like up to 1 cm of overhang is ok, but no overhang would be bad...

I'll take some measurements...
markiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-09-2013, 12:09 AM   #182 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 11
Default

So I have a 164 at home, just checked the overhang in bare feet...

Front foot at 0 or so, back foot at about 1.6 cm or so...

So I don't know, do I switch for the wide board to cut teh back foot to 0.6, but the front foot isn't wide enough?

The 164 definitely looks skinnier than my previous board.

I guess with the premier, I wouldn't have to think through this issue because they have only one size which is perfectly wide for my foot size.

Is the 161w going to turn better given the shorter length and tighter side cut?
markiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 09:14 AM   #183 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
wernersl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 415
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by markiel View Post
So I have a 164 at home, just checked the overhang in bare feet...

Front foot at 0 or so, back foot at about 1.6 cm or so...

So I don't know, do I switch for the wide board to cut teh back foot to 0.6, but the front foot isn't wide enough?

The 164 definitely looks skinnier than my previous board.

I guess with the premier, I wouldn't have to think through this issue because they have only one size which is perfectly wide for my foot size.

Is the 161w going to turn better given the shorter length and tighter side cut?
I can only speak from my experience. I weigh about 260 and ride a 165W. I wear size 11 boots. There are times I wish I bought a normal width. Thats only when riding slowly with new riders. Its a bitch to turn at low speed. Once Im freeriding, I have no problems banging turns with it. I havent barefooted my board, so I cant help you there.
wernersl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 12:17 PM   #184 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 11
Default

Thanks for the feedback Werner SL...

Still thinking on this, but with a 164 sitting in my livingroom, I might just keep it and give it a go.

One thing that I'm wondering about is bindings. Are the new style reflex bindings lower profile (board to boot) than my 2008 vintage burton Cartels?
markiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 01:24 PM   #185 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
scottyroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Wasatch Mtns, Utah
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by markiel View Post
Thanks for the feedback Werner SL...

Still thinking on this, but with a 164 sitting in my livingroom, I might just keep it and give it a go.

One thing that I'm wondering about is bindings. Are the new style reflex bindings lower profile (board to boot) than my 2008 vintage burton Cartels?
I think the profile is about the same. I had 2008 Burton Mission bindings and upgraded to 2013 Burton Cartels this year and the disc width is pretty much the same.

Regarding the 164 vs 161X... you are right on the fence with your angles. I would say if you hadn't already bought the board, go with a 161X, but since you already have a 164 you might as well give it a go. The 161X is still avaiable at Backcountry.com Never Summer Raptor X Snowboard - Wide | Backcountry.com - I would buy it at that price and give it a go. If you don't like it you return it in a month or 10 years from now and all you have to pay is $6.99 in shipping. If you are that torn, I would go that route.

I have a 164 and love it but keep in mind I'm 6'3" 195 with a 10.5 boot with an 18/0 degree directional regular stance. Fits me perfectly. Maybe you could play around with your stances with a 161X to give you more leverage and control at the edges since they are so agressive right now. Either decision you make won't be earth-shattering and detrimental to you ride. Both decisions have their pros/cons with your boot size/weight/stance angles.
scottyroo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 11:16 PM   #186 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: California
Posts: 3
Default What Size to order 159, 164 or 161W

I am getting close to ordering a 2014 Raptor and seeking some advise on size.

Currently riding 2010/2011 Raptor 164 with Burton C60 Binding and 10.5 Burton Ion Boots

Rider Stats:
Height: 5'11"
Weight: 180-185 lbs
Boot size: 10.5
Sex: Male
Stance: Regular
Riding Level: Advanced Freeride
Preferred Terrain: carving groomed hills, steeps and powder
Experience: 10+ years average 30 days per season
Location: California, Lake Tahoe Area

Considering following there sizes: 159, 164 or 161W


Any recommendations would be appreciated.
CAfreerider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 12:33 AM   #187 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAfreerider View Post
I am getting close to ordering a 2014 Raptor and seeking some advise on size.

Currently riding 2010/2011 Raptor 164 with Burton C60 Binding and 10.5 Burton Ion Boots

Rider Stats:
Height: 5'11"
Weight: 180-185 lbs
Boot size: 10.5
Sex: Male
Stance: Regular
Riding Level: Advanced Freeride
Preferred Terrain: carving groomed hills, steeps and powder
Experience: 10+ years average 30 days per season
Location: California, Lake Tahoe Area

Considering following there sizes: 159, 164 or 161W


Any recommendations would be appreciated.
159 best. You could go 164 if you really wanted to, but I do not see the benefit.
Definitely not the wide.

Last edited by hktrdr; 09-21-2013 at 12:35 AM.
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:08 AM   #188 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Clarkston, WA
Posts: 237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hktrdr View Post
159 best. You could go 164 if you really wanted to, but I do not see the benefit.
Definitely not the wide.
I tend to agree with this especially if you do any tight trees

danm
danm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2013, 05:26 PM   #189 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: California
Posts: 3
Default Will order 159cm

Quote:
Originally Posted by hktrdr View Post
159 best. You could go 164 if you really wanted to, but I do not see the benefit.
Definitely not the wide.
Thank you for your reply.
I will order 159 broad.
CAfreerider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2013, 10:39 PM   #190 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
wernersl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: SoCal
Posts: 415
Default

aint gonna lie...a bit envious of the 2014 model!
wernersl 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 01:26 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