Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: Rocker, Camber, and everything in between Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 
   

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
Today 12:25 PM
Mahihkan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiredsport View Post
Got it. What model was your old Burton? Also, let's check one more thing for good measure

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).
28.7cm
Burton Canyon
Today 10:57 AM
Wiredsport
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahihkan View Post
Thanks for the reply. I am 6'2", 195lbs and have Size 12 feet? My ChairmanX is a 169. I ride everything at the hill with the exception of the park. I also take it regularly into slack country/out of bounds stuff. The exception is backcountry, where I use my split.

Where I dislike the Chairman is when the snow is beginning to pack out and the board simply doesn't feel like it wants to carve fluidly no matter how hard I pump into the edges. It feels washy under foot. Much different than my old Burton 168wide traditional camber.
Got it. What model was your old Burton? Also, let's check one more thing for good measure

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).
Today 06:08 AM
Mahihkan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiredsport View Post
Hi Mahihkan,

Stoked that you are getting a new deck! To keep the terms clear, The Chairmain is a CRC model and the Flagship is RCR. There are big differences in the way these perform in relation to true rocker and true camber. Your Chairman had a lot more weighted surface contact length than would true rocker boards and the Flagship will have significantly less than a true cambered board. The transitions from camber to rocker on the Flagship begin early with the nose rocker being very long (the RCR is directional). Let's get your basics so we can know better where the Chairman fell short for you.

Weight
Foot Size
cm size of your Chairman
Typical Riding Area
Thanks for the reply. I am 6'2", 195lbs and have Size 12 feet? My ChairmanX is a 169. I ride everything at the hill with the exception of the park. I also take it regularly into slack country/out of bounds stuff. The exception is backcountry, where I use my split.

Where I dislike the Chairman is when the snow is beginning to pack out and the board simply doesn't feel like it wants to carve fluidly no matter how hard I pump into the edges. It feels washy under foot. Much different than my old Burton 168wide traditional camber.
Today 05:19 AM
Wiredsport
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahihkan View Post
I am an old school freerider. I love my carves. Last year I picked up my first rockered board. A Never Summer Chairman. While I adjusted to it, I never did fall in love with it. I am going back to a cambered board this year. Right now I am eyeballing the Jones Flagship which is cambered under foot, however appears to have a touch of rocker at the contact points tip and tail. My question is, how will this feel when I ride it? For those who know Traditional camber to ride it, how does the bit of rocker tip and tail feel to carve in comparison?

Gracias
Hi Mahihkan,

Stoked that you are getting a new deck! To keep the terms clear, The Chairmain is a CRC model and the Flagship is RCR. There are big differences in the way these perform in relation to true rocker and true camber. Your Chairman had a lot more weighted surface contact length than would true rocker boards and the Flagship will have significantly less than a true cambered board. The transitions from camber to rocker on the Flagship begin early with the nose rocker being very long (the RCR is directional). Let's get your basics so we can know better where the Chairman fell short for you.

Weight
Foot Size
cm size of your Chairman
Typical Riding Area
Yesterday 08:09 PM
Mahihkan I am an old school freerider. I love my carves. Last year I picked up my first rockered board. A Never Summer Chairman. While I adjusted to it, I never did fall in love with it. I am going back to a cambered board this year. Right now I am eyeballing the Jones Flagship which is cambered under foot, however appears to have a touch of rocker at the contact points tip and tail. My question is, how will this feel when I ride it? For those who know Traditional camber to ride it, how does the bit of rocker tip and tail feel to carve in comparison?

Gracias
11-28-2015 05:33 PM
SnowDogWax
Quote:
Originally Posted by ridinbend View Post
Pretty decent guide to a lot of companies various camber types.

Guide to snowboard camber types -
quite an extensive review of camber types







11-28-2015 05:11 PM
ridinbend Pretty decent guide to a lot of companies various camber types.

Guide to snowboard camber types -
06-30-2015 11:06 AM
Wiredsport Hi Bertie,

Profile is a single factor in the much broader performance picture. For example there are "damp" camber boards and very harsh feelling camber boards. That attribute is primarily impacted by core materials, thickness distribution, and laminates. Profile has much less of a role there.

To answer you Q about the the Hot Knife, it is a camber board. The subtle dip in the middle is a nuance feature and does not dramatically impact ride. So, rest assured, you have ridden camber (although only one flavor).

The Attack Banana is a fairly neutral design but EC2 possibly goes further than you would like in terms of relaxed profile for your east coast riding as described above (especially for more "normal" years that this past season).

The Rider's Choice is the Money board in Gnu's line for All Mountain. C2 is a highly versatile profile and the other elements have been balanced to match. This would be my choice for you.
06-30-2015 10:40 AM
Bertieman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiredsport View Post
Hi Bertie,

Camber: TT, C3 BTX (camber with a dip)
Rocker: BTX, !BTX! (rocker with double dips)
CRC: C2 BTX, EC2 BTX, XC2 BTX, C1 BTX (specialty directional)

I will be happy to compare specific models for you which is a lot more valuable than the generalities above. Let me know what you are looking at
Thanks for the quick reply. I understand what their profiles looks like, so I'm looking for more of a single response that explains what each profile excels at.

I'm in new england so I don't prefer having a pow board, split board, etc, I'd rather just have 1 or 2 all mountain boards. I have the hot knife which I found pretty bad in powder (talking 20-30 inches). Maybe setting it back would have helped. I also didn't care for the hot knife in large mogules because I didn't find it damp at all, at least compared to a never summer SL.

Being that I've never ridden camber, how much does the hot knife actually replicate camber? Is it really close, or somewhere between camber and something like the C2?

Anyway, I've been looking into the gnu riders choice C2 PBTX, attack banana EC2 BTX, and the trs XC2 BTX. Do either of these profiles prove more damp than the C3 or better in powder? Carving? Faster base? (co-sintered hot knife vs the TNT base).

Thanks!
06-30-2015 09:02 AM
Wiredsport
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bertieman View Post
Hey wired, any chance you could write up a different explanation for the lib tech model profiles, if you've had the experience with them?
Hi Bertie,

Mervin (Gnu, Lib, Roxy) has a complex naming structure for their line. It is important to note that they actually use unique profiles within many of their named categories so in reality there are more than the eight general profiles that they actually detail for Lib and Gnu. In terms of the general categories we are using for this thread. the Lib and Gnu lines can be simplified to:

Camber: TT, C3 BTX (camber with a dip)
Rocker: BTX, !BTX! (rocker with double dips)
CRC: C2 BTX, EC2 BTX, XC2 BTX, C1 BTX (specialty directional)

I will be happy to compare specific models for you which is a lot more valuable than the generalities above. Let me know what you are looking at
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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

 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome