|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|04-05-2010 07:07 PM|
nice dude you'll be stoked on the 154! stable on jumps but still small enough to jib and play around with.
to john doe....not sure if you are speaking in general or to me specifically. my only problem was the tail slipping out when i landed off center. it hasnt happened since i got a longer board, so i would attribute that to the added tail length holding my weight better and was also told this by a few people when shopping for a new board. im not a physics major tho so i dont know.
|04-05-2010 07:06 PM|
Originally Posted by fredericp64 View Post
|04-05-2010 06:32 PM|
Originally Posted by ready2shred View Post
|04-05-2010 05:30 PM|
I actually did get psyched out about my purchase.
Then I started analyzing.. figured out that I was asking around for a ''park'' board. Not really taking into account its various subcategories, rails, jibs, big air, etc.
In general ppl told me that if I wanted a board for ''park'', that I should go with a 152.
I realized that what was most important to me were the aerials- and that the 152 would be sketchy on the larger ones. Asked a few experts/staff @ Sierra Snowboard, told them I wanted a board for aerials. 154 came on top.
I guess I must have given off an impression of wanting a board explicitly for rails, boxes, and whatnot.
In the end I cancelled the order since it was still in processing. I emailed them explaining my retarded situation, with a bit of bullshit here and there.
They were pretty good to cancel it since items on sale have a no return policy
I switched the order for the same board in a 154.
Close call eh?? loll :P
|04-05-2010 03:54 PM|
Originally Posted by ready2shred View Post
fred, what did you end up buying anyway...
|04-05-2010 03:50 PM|
yea dude it might just be me and my riding style. i like to shred rails and boxes but i like going big off jumps a lot more. i had a 158 and that was too big, then the 152 which i found was too small. the 155 is a happy medium and perfect for me.
i dont wanna sketch you out about your purchase. i think im the only one in three pages in favor of the 156 haha. just think about your riding style and what kind of features you want to progress on.
|04-05-2010 10:56 AM|
Wow really? that sucks.. haha hope that won't be that case with me.
I could always cancel the order considering it hasn't been shipped yet, but I'd have to act fast.
I don't get the chance to do demos around where I live so I went with what the majority had recommended me to get.
Could anyone second the previous statement?
|04-05-2010 01:13 AM|
|ready2shred||i realize you already bought the board so this is sorta pointless. i rode a 152 for the past two years and im you're height but weigh less. i was having trouble jumping with the 52, i would always land in the back seat and loop out when trying spins. this year i bought a 155 and it made a world of difference. it is 100x more stable on landings and theres no difference in swing weight. if anything my 155 quantum is lighter than my old 152 burton Love. i went from sketchy 360s to floaty 720s after a few days with the 55. im sure you'll be fine but be careful on the park kickers|
|04-04-2010 10:23 PM|
|rasmasyean||Usually the board will be wider too to accomodate bigger feet of the large person it's designed for. Also this will make it heavier from the added width too.|
|04-04-2010 07:10 PM|
Originally Posted by fatboyj711 View Post
i do realize that i bought the gnu a little larger than would normally be suitable for me, but they didn't have any 154's, and i thought the length would suit me for all-mountain riding, as i am completely incapable of doing anything in the park.
i've gotten a little better since then, and i just went riding for three days straight. aside from the difference in flex and edge feel, the length does make a noticeable difference for me. it may be because i don't weigh much, but yeah, i don't know what else to say. as far as the ride, they both ride very well, and i can control both boards without any problems. the major differences for me were that the sierrascope is a noodle compared to the gnu, and the gnu is much more stable at high speeds coming down steeper slopes.
as far as the difference between a 152 and a 156 sierrascope, i have no idea. it sounds to me, given the specs of the op, that 152 would seem appropriate.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|