Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi guys,

I need some help regarding board size:

Coming season I'll be riding some more than the last years, a little here in Sweden and some in Canada. Since my old board is run down and I only had rentals for a while a new board is needed.

I'll be riding a healthy mix of powder and groomer with little to no park. Hence, and I've semi-decided on the T.Rice Pro (2013 model for budget reasons) but am unsure about the size.

For stability and float 164.5 seems ideal, yet I'm undecided between 161.5 and 164.5 since I'm not sure my physics match the 164.5.

I'm [email protected] (6 feet, 165lbs) with US9 shoes (sneaker size... need new boots as well).

What do you think? Which size fits best?

Thanks!
Andreas
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
767 Posts
at 165lbs i'd be looking at the 161 or even the 157. Its a stiffer board and will be plenty stable in smaller sizes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,285 Posts
For groomers you're looking way to long you should be in the 157 range. Also with size 9 feet the t.rice is too wide to give you an agile feel as it's a mid wide. There are better board choices out there for you. If you're set on the rice go with the 161. Realistically how much powder riding are you going to be doing and how deep are you thinking it will be?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Focus should be on powder, groomers is rather means of transportation yet it all depends on snow conditions of course. Realistic I'd say 50:50.

Reg. how deep - no idea really, we are going to Revelstoke & Fernie which seem quite powder-safe.

I'm not 100% decided on the Rice yet. What else should I consider as an all mountain?

Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
Don't do it. With US size 9 shoes, you want a more narrow board. T. Rice is a mid-wide. I had a 161.5 T. Rice with size 11 boots and it was still less nimble edge to edge than other, more narrow boards I have ridden since.

If you are stuck on the Rice, do not go over the 157, but you should go for other options like the TRS.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,966 Posts
Agree, the T. Rice is not the board you are looking for - too wide and just ok in pow (true twin after all).
Lots of choices for slightly directional all-mountain/freeride boards (since you are not planning on hitting the park) with powder capabilities.
Two (sets of) questions for you:
1) Are you buying in Sweden? If so, what brands do you have access to?
2) Bit more info on the terrain that you typically ride and your riding style and level ? Real steep/technical? Or more blue/black runs?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
Alright, you convinced me - I will be looking beyond the T.Rice.

TRS seems fun but really difficult to get your hands on over here, which leads me to your question, hktrdr:

Re. where to buy:

I will need to ship to Sweden which usually is not a problem within EU. From the US it's more tricky. Yet, with a good deal on the board (like EVOs 2013 Outlet boards) I could use a mail proxy service.

Still, accessibility is bonus and will make my life easier :).

Re. riding style:


Not super steep, super technical. Just "regular" powder. Will be doing some cat boarding but nothing too crazy.


Edit: What about the Burton Flying V? Would that fit or does it dive in powder?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
Burton is usually easier to find... they have big boy distribution channels.

From what I read the Sherlock will blow on ice, but that's quite fine in my book - trying to avoid ice anyway.

Anyway, the thread title doesn't really match the discussion anymore and the misses just figured she also needs a new board so I'll open an new thread based on your recommendation.

Thanks so far!

edit: continues here - http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/92073-2-powder-all-mountain-boards-me.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
So what else do you guys recommend? I wear size 9 and was thinking about T.rice. Riding style is probably same as OP. Mostly Blue/Blacks with limited poweder.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,223 Posts
Just start looking at the stats of the board. The 161.5 T. Rice has a waist width of 26.0 cm. With size 9 boots, you want something in the low 25s. With my size 11s, I ride a board with 25.3 waist. I'm going up to 25.5 this year, but I could still throw down amazing carved lines with a more narrow waist.

Width at the inserts will be different from the waist, but the waist is a good indication of what you will have at the inserts.
 

·
Scorching the Slopes
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
So what else do you guys recommend? I wear size 9 and was thinking about T.rice. Riding style is probably same as OP. Mostly Blue/Blacks with limited poweder.
FYI, I am a size 9 boot and just sold my TRice HP 157 because it is too wide.
TRS is your best option otherwise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
He got the Lib Tech TRS - it says so in the text you quoted ;o).

Check this thread that I opened based on the suggestions here:

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/92073-2-powder-all-mountain-boards-me.html

I found some recommendations for these:

> Rossi Experience / Krypto MagTek
> Burton Sherlock
> Burton Custom Flying V
> Lib Tech TRS

and am leaning towards the Sherlock - just unsure if 157 or 160.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
He got the Lib Tech TRS - it says so in the text you quoted ;o).

Check this thread that I opened based on the suggestions here:

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/92073-2-powder-all-mountain-boards-me.html

I found some recommendations for these:

> Rossi Experience / Krypto MagTek
> Burton Sherlock
> Burton Custom Flying V
> Lib Tech TRS

and am leaning towards the Sherlock - just unsure if 157 or 160.
Is there anything slightly stiffer than the TRS, Flying V? I have the SL 155 and it feels too soft for my riding style (hard charging).
 

·
Scorching the Slopes
Joined
·
2,139 Posts
He got the Lib Tech TRS - it says so in the text you quoted ;o)
No.
I suggested the TRS as an alternative.
I didn't say I got it though.

I DID get the Hot Knife actually.
I thought it would be better than the TRS for hard charging around the east coast where I ride mostly.
Lib Tech lists the stiffness of both the Hot Knife and the TRS at 6 (out of 10), so the camber profile would be the differentiator in terms of the Knife being a better charger.
But I haven't ridden it yet.

To be fair to amq, I DO have a 2013 TRS already.:giggle:
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top