Jones Aviator Review: Aggressive All-Mountain Snowboard Review

Hello and welcome to my Jones Aviator review.

In this review, I will take a look at the Aviator as an aggressive all-mountain snowboard.

As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Aviator a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other aggressive all-mountain snowboards.

NOTE: The 2021 model was the last model of the Aviator (as we know it). There is an Aviator 2.0 to replace it. The 2.0 version is different enough that I will need to test it and create a brand new review for it, once I get the chance to test it.

Overall Rating

Board: Jones Aviator

Price: $599 (USD recommended retail)

Style: Aggressive All-Mountain

Flex Rating: Stiff (8/10)

Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Stiff(7/10)

Rating Score: 79.8/100

Compared to other Men’s Aggressive All-Mountain Boards

Out of the 20 men’s aggressive-all-mountain snowboards that I rated:

• The average score was 82.6/100
• The highest score was 91.0/100
• The lowest score was 75.8/100
• The average price was $600
• The Aviator ranked 15th out of 20

O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Aviator is capable of.

Demo Info

Board: Jones Aviator 2019, 156 (253mm waist width)

Date: March 13, 2018

Conditions: Overcast plus a little rain, getting a bit heavier around 2:30 in the afternoon but not too bad. Wet snow higher up the mountain. Visibility all good though. Slushy snow in patches.

Bindings angles: +15/-15

Stance width: 580mm (22.8”)

Stance Setback: 40mm (1.6”)

*note that reference stance is 600mm stance width with a 20mm setback. I rode it on a slightly narrower stance with a larger setback.

Width at Inserts: 265mm (10.43“) at the back insert and 261mm (10.28”) at the front insert

Weight: 2860grams (6lb 5oz)

Weight per cm: 18.33grams/cm

Average Weight per cm: 18.21grams/cm*

*based on a small sample size of 24 boards that I weighed. So pretty much bang on average. So a normal weight board.

Flex

Whilst Jones rate the Aviator 8/10 for flex, it didn’t feel that way on snow. It felt closer to the Mountain Twin than it did to the Ultra Mountain Twin (UMT). The Mountain Twin gets a rating of 7/10 by Jones, but I’d say more like 6/10 and the UMT gets a 9/10 but I’d say more like 8/10. The Aviator felt like 7 at most and maybe even closer to 6.5/10. Felt a little stiffer in hand, but still not close to what the UMT felt in hand, but on snow, 7/10 at most, IMO.

Powder

I didn’t have any notable powder to test the Aviator on, but it felt like it would do well in the deep stuff.

It’s got a long nose going for it (and quite a long tail too for riding pow switch) and a 20mm setback. It’s also got spoon 2.0 incorporated (Jones’ spooned up edges tech).

It does have a mostly camber profile with just a bit of rocker just before the tip and tail, so that’s not going to help in the powder, but overall I think it would go quite well, without being amazing.

Carving & Turning

It carves quite well, but not up there with the likes of the UMT. Though it was certainly more forgiving for skidded turns than the UMT and easier to maneuver at slower speeds.

For an aggressive board, and one that I was expecting to be more catchy, it’s quite forgiving and not that easy to catch an edge on.

Was a little easier to navigate in tight trees as it felt a little more agile than the UMT at slower speeds. At high speed, felt similar to UMT in terms of edge-to-edge quickness. Overall, quite quick edge-to-edge without being lightning fast.

Speed

Feels super stable when riding fast and feels pretty damp too. This board is more forgiving at slower speeds than I expected but that doesn’t take away from its feel when riding fast. Charging is still the preferred speed of this board.

Let’s Break up this text with a Video

Uneven Terrain

It does pretty well in most types of terrain, including crud, and bumpy undulating terrain. Pretty versatile in that sense. A little better in uneven terrain than the UMT.

Jumps

Landings were stable, approach was stable – and approach was also agile enough for trickier approaches to some side hits. Had decent pop – not as much as the UMT but still pretty good, and maybe a little easier to extract that pop.

A little easier to spin than the UMT too, I found.

Switch

It felt fine riding switch – and with that longer tail it would be pretty good riding switch in pow, IMO. There’s only a small difference between the tail and nose (nose just 1cm longer) so in that sense its pretty close to the same each way. Though it does have a directional flex and a 20mm setback – so it’s certainly not the ultimate in riding switch, but very doable.

Jibbing

Not my kind of jibbing board – too stiff and too much camber for my liking for jibs. But some will be fine with it.

Changes from the 2020 Model

The only change for the 2021 model, that I can see, is that it has a new base. Now has a sintered 8000 base, replacing the sintered 9900 base on the 2020 model. And a different graphic of course. 

Changes from the 2019 Model

The 2020 model for the most part is the same as the 2019 model. A few tweaks here and there but by and large, essentially the same board. Different graphic of course. 

Changes from the 2018 Model

I didn’t ride the 2018 model, so I couldn’t say firsthand how different it is, but these are the main changes:

1. Jones rated it 7/10 in terms of flex for the 2018 model – 8/10 for the 2019 model, so it sounds like it’s stiffer than the 2018 model.
2. The 2019 model has carbon under the top sheet, which is supposed to increase torsional stiffness – and this might just be the reason that they’re flex rating went up.

Otherwise it looks like everything else is the same as the 2018 model (apart from the graphic of course).