Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I need some help here. I just got a new board online that was delivered today, but I think the topsheet was put on the board BACKWARDS. This is suppose to be a Directional Twin board with a setback of 10mm according to the website and the paperwork on the board. On all my other directional boards with a "setback" it usually means the nose is longer than the tail. In the board that was just delivered, the nose is "SHORTER" than the tail, I measured from the tip of the board to the first set of binding holes and from the top to the first holes it is 16 inches. Then I measured from the tail of the board to the first set of holes and it is 17 inches, meaning, the tail is LONGER and the nose is SHORTER. Therefore, I am thinking that the topsheet was installed upside down. Can I get some opinions on this? Here are a few photos with the tape measure.

I'd hate to mount the bindings and ride the board "upside down" as I'm sure everyone on the mountain will come up to to me telling me that my bindings are mounted on the board wrong - or worse yet, they don't say anything and think I'm an idiot. Opinions please!!!

Would you keep the board and just turn the board backwards and mount the bindings so that the nose is 17" to the first set of holes and the tail is 16" from the end to the first set of holes or am I missing something?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Well, when you put it upright so that the board name is upright, the top (nose) is shorter than the bottom (tail). The 17" if the board is upright is the bottom and the 16" if the board is upright is the top measurement - this is what has me stumped. The nose is shorter than the tail......:dunno:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
My bad man i had to re-look at the pics, i was completely backwards...
ive never heard of that happening before, i would maybe try to contact the manufacturer see what they say maybe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Is it possible that the "reference" stance holes for the binding discs are not the same for the front and back sets of holes? I think they mark those, and if you laid the bindings over those holes and then measure to the center of the discs, do you still get a shorter nose than tail?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
Thanks - that's a thought - I think I measured that already also. Let me re-measure.

Okay, I just measured again and there are reference points on the board. I re-measured and the top (nose) is 18 1/2" and the bottom (tail) is 19 1/2" to the reference stance holes. Again, the tail is still longer....

I have two other boards similiar to this and the nose is 1" longer than the tail - directional with 10mm setbacks on the specs. This is why I am stumped.

I still think the topsheet is installed backwards. :icon_scratch:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Goofy.

That's odd. You originally said the setback was 10mm? I'm no metric expert, but isn't than 1 cm which is only a 1/3 of an inch or so? Still doesn't explain the measurements. I think I'd send it back, it might not make a difference in riding if you used appropriate holes to create the setback, but just knowing that it wasn't quite right would annoy me to no end. You should get what you asked for, imho.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,344 Posts
If it's wrong, even using different binding holes wouldn't necessarily resolve the problem. Unless the board is a true twin (which it isn't if it has a setback), it's going to have different geometry in one direction vs the other. Sidecut, location of contact points, etc would be wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I have two other boards similiar to this and the nose is 1" longer than the tail - directional boards with 10mm setbacks on the specs. This is why I am stumped.



That's odd. You originally said the setback was 10mm? I'm no metric expert, but isn't than 1 cm which is only a 1/3 of an inch or so? Still doesn't explain the measurements. I think I'd send it back, it might not make a difference in riding if you used appropriate holes to create the setback, but just knowing that it wasn't quite right would annoy me to no end. You should get what you asked for, imho.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,445 Posts
Its either the top sheet is back to front or the insert holes were drilled with the core back to front.
10mm setback should be 20mm difference between tip and tail length.
Its definately a defective board either way so you should be able to swap it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Send it back. Either the topsheet was layed up backwards or the holes were misdrilled. Either way you shouldn't have to figure out their mistake.

If you do however want to find the nose it shouldn't be that hard. The measurement you show in the pictures idicates one inch difference from bolts to tips, yet the setback is only 10mm. That means the shape probably has a longer nose than tail from the contact points. If you measure from tip to contact you should find the nose.

I've had a few boards with backwards topsheets and could never get used to looking down and seeing tail where the nose should be. Even if I know it's set up right I can never get over the graphic, pretty silly actually. It took many large stickers to ease my mind.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,445 Posts
The measurement you show in the pictures idicates one inch difference from bolts to tips, yet the setback is only 10mm. That means the shape probably has a longer nose than tail from the contact points..
No 10mm setback will give a 20mm difference in nose/tail langth. 1 inch is 25.4mm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Yep, and 25.4 - 20=?

That extra 5.4 has to be somewhere, could it be... the nose. I lernt maf too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,445 Posts
Snowboards are rarely build to such close tolerances, Ive measured a lot hehe.
I agree 5.4 is technically missing assuming accurate measuring but its hardly the issue here
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
I can't see it in the pics but does the board have the same amount of inserts for both bindings? Some boards have an extra "powder setting" for your back foot. Meaning 6x2 inserts in the front and 7x2 or 8x2 in the back so you can put your back binding as far back as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
The hole pattern is 6x2 on front and back. Attached are two other photos. You can see there are areas for the "reference" stance for the bindings which they indicate by < and > on the board. I have put the tape measure from the end of the board to the middle of the reference stance. The first picture is the tail of the board which shows 19 1/2" from the tail to the middle holes of the reference stance which is the third set of holes from the left. The second picture is the nose of the board which has 18 1/2" from the nose to the middle holes of the reference stance which is the third set of holes from the right.

Again, it looks to me that they did indeed drill the holes with the board reversed. As the nose is suppose to be softer than the tail, I don't even think you could ride it backwards as then the nose would be stiff and the tail soft.

I have emailed the shop and waiting to hear from them. Guess I'm just wanting some confirmation that this looks wrong to other people also.
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,966 Posts
See kids what happens when you don't buy a Neversummer !

Hahaha.... Just kidding guys, put down the pitch forks and get the undies unbunched. Just poking the bear a little bit here for fun....:D
Erm, you know that I normally stay out of the NS hater vs. NS fanboy/promoter shitfights, but this was an exceptionally unfortunate spot to bring up NS considering their habit of putting the inserts in the wrong location...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
I looked up a stock photo of the board online

FRENEMY MAGTEK | Boards | Rossignol | Snowboard | Women |

Comparing where the holes are drilled in this picture and where they're drilled in the photos you've uploaded there's definitely an obvious difference. It looks like the holes were drilled too far towards the nose by a good inch or two at least. Just compare the holes to the graphics in both pictures and it's SUPER obvious. You should definitely be able to get a new deck for a mistake like that.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,966 Posts
Lighten up, it was a joke!
Oh, I was definitely not getting worked up about your comment. In fact, my intent was similar in that I did not want this to get too serious - specifically, I did not want this to descend into another pro/con NS debate. In the interest of that, I thought that bringing up NS in the context of a construction issue that they seem to have been struggling with was unfortunate.
Sorry, misunderstanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
324 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
OMG - I was looking online and found a video review where they had up close photo of the board and I stopped the video and was showing my husband and you could definitely see that my holes are not like in the video - the are a good 1-2 inches higher than they should be - we both must be good detectives!

I looked up a stock photo of the board online

FRENEMY MAGTEK | Boards | Rossignol | Snowboard | Women |

Comparing where the holes are drilled in this picture and where they're drilled in the photos you've uploaded there's definitely an obvious difference. It looks like the holes were drilled too far towards the nose by a good inch or two at least. Just compare the holes to the graphics in both pictures and it's SUPER obvious. You should definitely be able to get a new deck for a mistake like that.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top