Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

Why don't companies publish equipment weight?

14510 Views 71 Replies 23 Participants Last post by  GonzoEatsFish
Is there a reason snowboard companies do not advertise the actual weight of their products? I feel, that in a sport where the term "lightweight" is thrown around more than anything, you would think that someone, at LEAST a review company, would publish actual weights of snowboards, bindings and boots.

This is all coming from a recent purchase I made... a pair of 2013 Burton Cartel bindings (whiskeymilitia for $140.) I read some stuff on them, I heard they were "lightweight." Got them in the mail, and they are significantly heavier than my 2012 Prophecys. I know the Prophecys are a "higher end" binding, but I would have liked to know beforehand. Maybe the Cartels are lighter than many other bindings, but all I am saying is why not just throw up the number of grams or ounces for comparison sake?

How much weight is shaved off a T. Rice pro if you buy the HP model? How much does do 32 Ultralight boots or a Ride Highlife UL snowboard actually weigh? Which are lighter, Burton Diodes or Union MC Metafuses?

I'm not trying to argue lighter is better, but it would simply be nice to know, and one might be tempted to try some new/different brands because of it.

Thoughts?
See less
Is there a reason snowboard companies do not advertise the actual weight of their products? I feel, that in a sport where the term "lightweight" is thrown around more than anything, you would think that someone, at LEAST a review company, would publish actual weights of snowboards, bindings and boots.

This is all coming from a recent purchase I made... a pair of 2013 Burton Cartel bindings (whiskeymilitia for $140.) I read some stuff on them, I heard they were "lightweight." Got them in...
See more
1 - 20 of 72 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Is there a reason snowboard companies do not advertise the actual weight of their products? I feel, that in a sport where the term "lightweight" is thrown around more than anything, you would think that someone, at LEAST a review company, would publish actual weights of snowboards, bindings and boots.

This is all coming from a recent purchase I made... a pair of 2013 Burton Cartel bindings (whiskeymilitia for $140.) I read some stuff on them, I heard they were "lightweight." Got them in the mail, and they are significantly heavier than my 2012 Prophecys. I know the Prophecys are a "higher end" binding, but I would have liked to know beforehand. Maybe the Cartels are lighter than many other bindings, but all I am saying is why not just throw up the number of grams or ounces for comparison sake?

How much weight is shaved off a T. Rice pro if you buy the HP model? How much does do 32 Ultralight boots or a Ride Highlife UL snowboard actually weigh? Which are lighter, Burton Diodes or Union MC Metafuses?

I'm not trying to argue lighter is better, but it would simply be nice to know, and one might be tempted to try some new/different brands because of it.

Thoughts?
^what he said. :thumbsup:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Mostly they don't publish weights, because at the end of the day it just doesn't matter.
Oh it does, at least when the parking lot is full and you have to lug the stuff all the way up to the lodge :laugh:

But really, if it doesn't matter, why do they advertise "lightweight"? And if they advertise it, why not post the numbers to back it up? :dunno: Basically, what BigmountainVMD said...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
Mostly they don't publish weights, because at the end of the day it just doesn't matter.
I disagree, I have bad knees and ankles from soccer. Demoed a proto ct which is significantly lighter and allowed for zero issues while riding the lift. Also when spinning I found it much easier to bring the board around when I didn't have enough pop. Maybe it's just me getting old but I actually could tell the difference.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Mostly they don't publish weights, because at the end of the day it just doesn't matter.
So if bindings made of bricks and snowboards made of cement rode better, you would be all over that shit! We could totally get some iron bindings that are just as stiff as some carbon fiber ones... and cheaper too! If it doesn't matter... why is that not the trend?

Cars are getting lighter, bikes are getting lighter, so are snowboards, bindings and boots. You can find a weight for the first two... why not the snowboard stuff?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
856 Posts
Cars are getting lighter, bikes are getting lighter, so are snowboards, bindings and boots. You can find a weight for the first two... why not the snowboard stuff?
Probably because the car doesn't come in 143, 145, 148, 151, 154, 157, 161, 157W, 161W and so on. Only thing it might make sense for is bindings.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
4,125 Posts
Mostly they don't publish weights, because at the end of the day it just doesn't matter.
This, pretty much. Also the 154 will weigh different from the 157 and the medium bindings less than the large, etc. so then you start worrying about the entire matrix of weights and surprise next thing you know you're snowboarding's equivalent of a weight weenie.

It's easier to just leave your wallet in the car if you want to shave a few grams, or drink one less beer, etc.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
This, pretty much. Also the 154 will weigh different from the 157 and the medium bindings less than the large, etc. so then you start worrying about the entire matrix of weights and surprise next thing you know you're snowboarding's equivalent of a weight weenie.

It's easier to just leave your wallet in the car if you want to shave a few grams, or drink one less beer, etc.
+1.

Are there differences in weight between items? Absolutely.
Do these difference have much or any effect for the vast majority of riding? Absolutely not.

Some of the other variables that are not specified would be much more useful - min/max width at the insert pack, mm of camber when unweighted, etc.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
Probably because the car doesn't come in 143, 145, 148, 151, 154, 157, 161, 157W, 161W and so on. Only thing it might make sense for is bindings.
Would it really be that hard? I don't think so. I'm not buying any "it's time consuming" or "it's too difficult" argument. Every other review for a board or binding says something like "these things are seriously light." Weight is a factor just like length, width or sidecut radius. Put a number behind it!

These guys do a bunch of bicycles in minutes. A snowboard company could easily do it.

2013 Trek Bikes – Actual Weights for Road & Mountain Bikes - Bike Rumor

I bet most of this forum knows how easy it is to weigh out a dime bag... get a bigger scale and boom, snowboards are no problem.

I'll take a 157 sack please...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
856 Posts
I agree that reviewers should do it. I don't think the companies really want to be called on their claims, but if a reviewer wants to put those phrases out there then they should back them up.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I agree that reviewers should do it. I don't think the companies really want to be called on their claims, but if a reviewer wants to put those phrases out there then they should back them up.
This is the only reason I could think of that a company would not want to publish the data. If Libs basalt "HP" scheme only knocked off 10 grams... no one would pay 200 more for the upgraded board.

I just think review companies should sack up and weigh some shit. It would be so damn easy...

Thegoodride.com has the closest I've seen and actually gives equipment up to 5 stars based on weight, but thinking about the difference between a 3 and a 4... it doesn't really help much.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
Have you ever picked up 2 large pieces of wood that were the same size but had the exact same weight? If snowboards were made of composite materials (like bikes) then It would be easy to publish accurate weights, but I think anything with a wood core is going to vary too much from board to board when they are being produced, much like 2 of the same guitars can vary quite a bit in actual weight, because that's what happens when you make things out of natural products. That would be my guess as to why you don't see weights listed for snowboards.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
It doesn't matter.. IMO.

They get lighter each year which is all that matters. It may be a liability thing as well. Maybe the guy who sued subway for getting 11" foot-longs is a boarder? Can't be to careful these days :)

To many products to bother really, Bikes can be significantly heavier than other brands and affect the rider more than a snowboard. I'd say the Never Summer boards are some of the heavier boards I've owned, but I still like them.

... Excluding the antiques I used to ride, haha.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
This is the only reason I could think of that a company would not want to publish the data. If Libs basalt "HP" scheme only knocked off 10 grams... no one would pay 200 more for the upgraded board.

I just think review companies should sack up and weigh some shit. It would be so damn easy...

Thegoodride.com has the closest I've seen and actually gives equipment up to 5 stars based on weight, but thinking about the difference between a 3 and a 4... it doesn't really help much.
Of course TheGoodRide star ratings are also pretty much random and have no/little connection to actual weights (or in some cases even their own reviews).
Case in point: NS Cobra (which is a light deck) has the same 2 star 'average' weight rating as, say, my Skate Banana (which, in fact, does weigh more).
Still, it makes no difference in use - other then when lugging the board up the mountain maybe.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Have you ever picked up 2 large pieces of wood that were the same size but had the exact same weight? If snowboards were made of composite materials (like bikes) then It would be easy to publish accurate weights, but I think anything with a wood core is going to vary too much from board to board when they are being produced, much like 2 of the same guitars can vary quite a bit in actual weight, because that's what happens when you make things out of natural products. That would be my guess as to why you don't see weights listed for snowboards.
Good point. I'm curious what the standard deviation would look like.

Of course TheGoodRide star ratings are also pretty much random and have no/little connection to actual weights (or in some cases even their own reviews).
Case in point: NS Cobra (which is a light deck) has the same 2 star 'average' weight rating as, say, my Skate Banana (which, in fact, does weigh more).
Still, it makes no difference in use - other then when lugging the board up the mountain maybe.
Yeah, I was just saying they are the only people even attempting to quantify it.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
Yeah, I was just saying they are the only people even attempting to quantify it.
Which is actually pretty retarded - weight is an easily measured characteristic. So there is no need 'quantify' it (i.e., put a number to non-measurable variable). They should just measure it - as it is, they are doing exactly the same as the advertising guys in the companies: Declaring things 'lightweight' without any basis.

What they are really doing is rating 'how heavy the board/binding/boot feels to them' - which is probably more influenced by a bunch of factors other than weight.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Not to mention board flex. My lighter board although the same flex rating as my heavier one (acc thegoodride and each brands rating/website), is not as flexy.
 
1 - 20 of 72 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top