Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

1 - 20 of 116 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,226 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I rode this at Loveland early season with the Arbor dude. Size 8.5 DC Lynx, Flux DM, 155lbs.

So this has Arbor's new system camber, a parabolic camber that is more aggressive between the feet and mellows out towards the tips, no rocker. They add the Griptech sidecut and "fenders" to the original contact points lifting them 3mm.

Stiffness: Above mid stiff overall with a pretty traditional directional flex. Stiffer in the tail and consistently softening up a little bit as you get towards the nose. A little bit softer torsionally than the tip to tail flex. Just enough to keep it malleable under foot enough to be able to foot steer effectively.

Stability: Oh my damn. It's fairly nimble at slow speeds even though it does have a fairly mellow sidecut. Not super active, but just enough that you can get around whatever you need to. It's lively but not harsh. Then as you get closer to speed it gets more stable, stays lively but gets smoother, and the sidecut quickens up. It has no speed limit and really does create a false sense of speed.

Carveability: Griptech, camber, average waist, and 15mm of taper. Lay it over and drive your foot straight down. Let the sidecut do it's thing and you can carve uphill. It's not a super snappy super fast transition, but it is still super fun to get horizontal and lay out a big ass trench and the taper lets you out of carve hook free so nice. It feels more like a all mountain gun than a regular all mountain deck.

Float: Well, it was early season Loveland. But it's Guch's board, has a longer nose, and has 1.5mm taper(EDITED: My original information was from memory talking with the Arbor Rep, apologize for the confusion). Yeah, it's camber, but if you ride super steep stuff, that's what you want anyway.

Pop: It's an Arbor, with camber, that Guch designed. Send it. It's accessible and there is plenty of it.

Butters: You gotta work for em but they're there. Based on the tip shape I expect quite a good amount of fun buttering around in deep snow.

Overall: If you're looking for a resort blaster to go fast on and lean over on between searching for pow stashes or on days between BC days, this is a phenomenal board. It's active, smooth, fast, and powerful, with just the right amount of accessibility and playfulness to keep it from being a gnar deck that will ride you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
Thanks dude!

Any thoughts on how it compares to the usual suspects, aka PYL and FA? Softer than PYL, less directional than FA for starters..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Thanks dude!

Any thoughts on how it compares to the usual suspects, aka PYL and FA? Softer than PYL, less directional than FA for starters..
I'll echo all of that and ask how it feels in switch. Also is it a lightweight board? The price of it suggests they might be using some $pecial materials.

Thank you
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
I rode this at Loveland early season with the Arbor dude. Size 8.5 DC Lynx, Flux DM, 155lbs.

So this has Arbor's new system camber, a parabolic camber that is more aggressive between the feet and mellows out towards the tips, no rocker. They add the Griptech sidecut and "fenders" to the original contact points lifting them 3mm.

Stiffness: Above mid stiff overall with a pretty traditional directional flex. Stiffer in the tail and consistently softening up a little bit as you get towards the nose. A little bit softer torsionally than the tip to tail flex. Just enough to keep it malleable under foot enough to be able to foot steer effectively.

Stability: Oh my damn. It's fairly nimble at slow speeds even though it does have a fairly mellow sidecut. Not super active, but just enough that you can get around whatever you need to. It's lively but not harsh. Then as you get closer to speed it gets more stable, stays lively but gets smoother, and the sidecut quickens up. It has no speed limit and really does create a false sense of speed.

Carveability: Griptech, camber, average waist, and 15mm of taper. Lay it over and drive your foot straight down. Let the sidecut do it's thing and you can carve uphill. It's not a super snappy super fast transition, but it is still super fun to get horizontal and lay out a big ass trench and the taper lets you out of carve hook free so nice. It feels more like a all mountain gun than a regular all mountain deck.

Float: Well, it was early season Loveland. But it's Guch's board, has a longer nose, and has 15mm taper. Yeah, it's camber, but if you ride super steep stuff, that's what you want anyway.

Pop: It's an Arbor, with camber, that Guch designed. Send it. It's accessible and there is plenty of it.

Butters: You gotta work for em but they're there. Based on the tip shape I expect quite a good amount of fun buttering around in deep snow.

Overall: If you're looking for a resort blaster to go fast on and lean over on between searching for pow stashes or on days between BC days, this is a phenomenal board. It's active, smooth, fast, and powerful, with just the right amount of accessibility and playfulness to keep it from being a gnar deck that will ride you.
Have a 162 coming in next week.. Contact at arbor called it medium stiff/smooth/big mountain cadillac ---exactly what you just described^^^
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
he means its stable

your "review" has several mistakes including:

the upturned fenders are 3 DEGREES not mm

the taper is 1.5 mm not 15
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
he means its stable

your "review" has several mistakes including:

the upturned fenders are 3 DEGREES not mm

the taper is 1.5 mm not 15
Wow, had to double check from arbor's site. It is indeed 1,5mm as you said. Wonder if it's a typo, since it wouldn't be more than two pixels of a computer screen, rendering it less than negligible. I mean, i don't even think many snowboard build tolerances are that tight..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Wow, had to double check from arbor's site. It is indeed 1,5mm as you said. Wonder if it's a typo, since it wouldn't be more than two pixels of a computer screen, rendering it less than negligible. I mean, i don't even think many snowboard build tolerances are that tight..
bend tolerances are not that tight, but dimension tolerances are, except in the case of libs hand finished nose/tails

this 1.5 mm of taper was common on illuminati boards, and this shape is basically a copy of one of those. Illuminati was a Jackson Hole brand tied in with Bluebird

Option used to do this on its Sansalone boards too. personally I'm not sure that minimal amount of taper can make any difference at all with float ( I guess its 3.3% more float going forward??) so the point of bothering with it eludes me.

also arbors stances are really wacky. this thing has basically a 21 inch stance centered, with 8 cm (essentiall 3 inches) of width available. this means you can't get wider than 24, and you can't really get any setback on it all. why so limited? the ref stance should be on the most innermost set of inserts on the back foot (since no one will ride tighter than 21) and the front ref stance inserts should be maybe 2 cm from the innermost set and have at least 3 width options in front of it. how is this not obvious to companies like arbor?

tail :::::: ::::: nose
^ ^

the arrows represent the ref stance, centered. this allows you to go to 25 if you want (very few would go bigger) centered and as little as 21 2 cm back and almost everything in between. the crude diagram is crap but you get the drift.

I wanted to get this board, but the stance options are just to limited. I ride 24 with a bit of set back so pretty much out of luck for me.

edit: diagram didn't work out
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,724 Posts
this 1.5 mm of taper was common on illuminati boards, and this shape is basically a copy of one of those. Illuminati was a Jackson Hole brand tied in with Bluebird

Option used to do this on its Sansalone boards too. personally I'm not sure that minimal amount of taper can make any difference at all with float ( I guess its 3.3% more float going forward??) so the point of bothering with it eludes me.
Pretty sure the small amount of taper is to improve the carving performance, not so much (at all?) for float. Same concept as the Flagship (2mm taper), I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Maybe but how does that accomplish that? Usually to " improve" carving performance companies will put a smaller radius near the tip. Making the board skinnier effectively makes the radius larger, all other things considered. Also Bryan's focus is powder riding. Why would they make a design consideration for carving and not mention it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,226 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
how is the stiffness compared to the coda (camber)?
Similar stiffness in the nose but stiffer from the front foot back.

What do you mean when you say it creates a false sense of speed?
Super smooth feeling at speed. Like driving at high speeds in a Tercel vs an M Series.

he means its stable

your "review" has several mistakes including:

the upturned fenders are 3 DEGREES not mm

the taper is 1.5 mm not 15
The Arbor website does in fact say 3 deg. My info was from the rep, I don't check websites all that often. The idea explained to me was the fenders were added to get the contact points as lifted as they are on System Rocker, which averages 3mm through the line. So yes, web stated at 3 degrees, but from my info that should total 3mm total lift.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,226 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
bend tolerances are not that tight, but dimension tolerances are, except in the case of libs hand finished nose/tails

this 1.5 mm of taper was common on illuminati boards, and this shape is basically a copy of one of those. Illuminati was a Jackson Hole brand tied in with Bluebird

Option used to do this on its Sansalone boards too. personally I'm not sure that minimal amount of taper can make any difference at all with float ( I guess its 3.3% more float going forward??) so the point of bothering with it eludes me.

also arbors stances are really wacky. this thing has basically a 21 inch stance centered, with 8 cm (essentiall 3 inches) of width available. this means you can't get wider than 24, and you can't really get any setback on it all. why so limited? the ref stance should be on the most innermost set of inserts on the back foot (since no one will ride tighter than 21) and the front ref stance inserts should be maybe 2 cm from the innermost set and have at least 3 width options in front of it. how is this not obvious to companies like arbor?

tail :::::: ::::: nose
^ ^

the arrows represent the ref stance, centered. this allows you to go to 25 if you want (very few would go bigger) centered and as little as 21 2 cm back and almost everything in between. the crude diagram is crap but you get the drift.

I wanted to get this board, but the stance options are just to limited. I ride 24 with a bit of set back so pretty much out of luck for me.

edit: diagram didn't work out
I would argue just at many people ride narrower than 21 as people that still ride 24, depending on board setup and binding choice I ride anywhere from 21.5-20.5. That said, I don't think anyone should be riding this lower than 20 so shifting the insert pack out one would make more sense. I don't think it's a "really wack" stance setup as it will certainly accommodate 99% of people looking at it and you also have to remember it's a pro model. If Guch wanted the inserts there, that's where they go.

And I'm curious what makes you think this is just an updated Illuminati. The Illuminati board designer has nothing to do with Arbor, the Coda was what Guch was riding when he was first brought on, the nose shape already existed in the line, and the sidecut and waist mirror the Coda.

The 1.5 taper is likely a contact point shaping after effect. Guch may have wanted to have just a little bit less grab in the back to make navigating steep chutes a little easier, making it easier to bring the tail around, and mellowing out the contact points would bring in the width a touch. That's my best guess as it isn't really enough to effect the tails sidecut.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Nivek, if you don't mind I have a few questions:

How does the weight of this board compare to most others? Light/average/heavy?

Did you spend much time in switch? How did it feel?

Have you ride the Yes PYL? How would this compare?

It sounds like you liked the Coda Camber better; were they similar rides?

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I never said it was an updated Illuminati just that it's design and shape are similar. Obviously if he had input on both they would be similar.

The insert orientation is consistent with other arbor boards in the line. You have to go to a park noodle if you want a wider reference stance.

Even if more people are riding narrower ( which is conjecture you can't prove) the inserts could be set up to allow for more options. Arbor is not alone in this regard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,226 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Weight felt average. The directionalness of the deck is mostly after the contact points, and the flex. It felt entirely comfortable switch. Personally I would pick the Coda, but that board just fits my style of riding more than the Guch. If I wanted more of a charger deck I'd be swaying towards the Guch. From everything ive gathered, the Guch is a freeride altered Coda, so there are similarities.

Fair enough, maybe you didn't explicitly say an updated version. But again, what about it reminds you of Illuminati? And yes I can, by observation. I work in a shop and have been helping brands at demos turning screws for a number of years now. I can't remember the last time I set someone up past 23.5. Could other territories differ? Sure, but generally Colorado is a pretty dang good thermometer for industry trends in the US. And by the way, you did say noone rides less than 21. I do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
946 Posts
I am 6ft tall with a 32" inseam and ride no more than 22.5" ever on any of my boards. That make me think that with many people smaller than me riding, some of them probably have 21" or narrower stances.

I want the Guch, almost bought a 162 last night. I don'the need it though. I have to keep telling myself that I don'the need it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
Weight felt average. The directionalness of the deck is mostly after the contact points, and the flex. It felt entirely comfortable switch. Personally I would pick the Coda, but that board just fits my style of riding more than the Guch. If I wanted more of a charger deck I'd be swaying towards the Guch. From everything ive gathered, the Guch is a freeride altered Coda, so there are similarities.
Great info thanks. I'm mostly looking for a good deck to take with me to Japan for 3 weeks, so I'm looking for something happy in the deep stuff. It's to bad you didn't get any powder to try this thing out on, I wonder if that might be an area where it excels over the Coda. I also wonder if the Guch may be more charger than I need, your review of the Coda made it sound like it charged plenty. I'm pretty much down to the Guch, the Yes PYL or maybe even the Coda now based on how much you liked it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,226 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I am 6ft tall with a 32" inseam and ride no more than 22.5" ever on any of my boards. That make me think that with many people smaller than me riding, some of them probably have 21" or narrower stances.

I want the Guch, almost bought a 162 last night. I don'the need it though. I have to keep telling myself that I don'the need it.
Ullr says buy it. Do what Ullr says.
 
1 - 20 of 116 Posts
Top