The Never Summer Proto Synthesis pretty much defines the all-mountain-freestyle category as we see it. It's good at pretty much everything except for powder.
While it may not quite have the same energetic personality as some of Never Summer's newer models, it's still a really reliable board that shouldn't let you down anywhere that's not deep powder.
In this review, I will take a look at the Proto Synthesis as an all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Proto Synthesis a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
NOTE: The 2025 model was the last version of the Never Summer Proto Synthesis. However, it was replaced by the new Proto Type 3. The Proto Type 3 is similar but has had some updates vs the Proto Synthesis. The review below hasn't been updated beyond the 2025 model. But we got out on the '26 Proto Type 3 and you can check out our review for that here.
Overall Rating
Board: Never Summer Proto Synthesis
Price: $699
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: Medium (6/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 84.3/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 29 current model all-mountain-freestyle snowboards that we tested:
- The average score was 83.7/100
- The highest score was 92.1/100
- The lowest score was 73.0/100
- The average price was $561
- The Proto Synthesis ranked 19th out of 29
Overview of the Proto Synthesis’ Specs
Check out the tables for the Proto Synthesis’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
All-Mountain-freestyle
PRICE:
$699 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID ROCKER
HYBRID ROCKer - Never Summer's "Rocker Camber"
SHAPE:
setback stance:
CENTERED
BASE:
Sintered- Never Summer's "Durasurf XT Sintered 5501 Base"
weight:
FELT Normal
Camber Height:
4.5mm (but harder to measure this on a hybrid rocker)
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
152 | 252 | 120-160 | 54-73 |
155 | 254 | 120-160 | 54-73 |
158 | 255 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
161 | 256 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
157X | 263 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
160X | 265 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
163X | 266 | 150-220 | 68-100 |
159DF | 280 | 150-220 | 68-100 |
Who is the Proto Synthesis Most Suited To?
The Proto Synthesis is best suited to someone looking for a do-it-all board, but not need it to be good in powder - either because they very really see powder, choose not to ride powder or have another board for powder.
It's especially well suited to those who want the above, but also want a reasonable amount of dampness, which isn't often in this type of board. Still nothing super damp, but damper than the average in this category.
Could definitely work as a one-board quiver, as mentioned above, but works best, IMO, in a two or more board quiver. In a two-board quiver, this would board would be very well completed with a powder specialist or powder oriented freeride board.
In a three-board-quiver, you might add a softer flexing park board to that powder board.
Not for beginners, but it's not a super challenging ride, so intermediate riders should be fine with it, IMO.
TEST/REVIEW DetailS FOR THE Proto Synthesis
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Proto Synthesis is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Never Summer Proto Synthesis 2024, 158cm (255mm waist width)
Date: February 26, 2024
Powder
There were a few small powder pockets around but nothing to write home about. But based on feel and specs of the PS, it's not going to be great in powder. It's a centered true twin that's got a little rocker in the profile, but not that much.
Carving
It felt really good on a carve. I feel like it's one of the better carving twins. Good for moderately high speed carves (though does have a limit) and slower speed carves too. And tight radius and long radius carves both felt good and were easy to achieve.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: It's not the easiest board going around to initiate turns on, but it's also nothing that's too difficult either. Pretty average here.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Agile enough at slow speeds without being lightning edge-to-edge or anything.
Catchiness: I noticed a bit of a catchy feel in the tail for quick slow speed turns, but that was the only time I noticed it. Otherwise felt un-catchy.
Speed
It's not a monster bomber or anything, but it handled decently high speeds without feeling too unstable. And had decent speed overall. Did have it's limits though.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: Again, I'd say average. It doesn't get bucked around super easily and it's not overly chattery. But it certainly wasn't invincible to being thrown off it's line and wasn't ultra damp - though damper than most boards in this category.
Trees/Bumps: It's decent enough, without being anything too special. Decent edge-to-edge speed and fairly easy to turn. Wouldn't be great in powder in trees though.
Jumps
Overall really solid jumper.
Pop: It's pop is fairly easy to extract and the total pop, when you really wind it up is above average too.
Approach: Really good mix of being stable but easy enough to make adjustments/speed checks without it throwing off your line/rhythm.
Landing: Nice solid landings and that extra bit of dampness that you get from it, over other boards in this category, was nice on a landing. Was also forgiving of errors and was easy to make any necessary adjustments and speed checks after landing.
Side-hits: Really fun for side hits.
Small jumps/Big jumps: I'd say medium to large are is where it's at its best.
Switch
Felt good riding in switch - and transitions were decent, though not as easy as some other boards.
Spins
Nice even feel in the air. Good for setups and landings in both switch and normal stance. Doesn't over spin and pretty easy to finish spin on ground as well, when you under-rotate.
Jibbing
OK without being great. Not my favorite for jibs, but if you're an experienced jibber, this should be fine, but not something that I feel would inspire a heap of creativity.
Butters
It's got a nice balance of being fairly easy to press the tip and tail, but not so easy that you can easily over-flex it.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Jumps | 4 | 16/20 |
| Carving | 4 | 8/10 |
| Turns | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Switch | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Speed | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Spins | 4 | 8/10 |
| Butters | 4 | 8/10 |
| Jibbing | 3 | 3/5 |
| Crud etc | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Trees | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Pow | 2 | 2/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 84.3/100 |
The Proto Synthesis is still a really good all-rounder (bar powder) but I feel like others in Never Summer's lineup have surpassed it. It's stayed still for a while and after re-testing it, it didn't feel as exciting as it did in the past.
But it's still a really solid all-round ride and particularly good for someone who's looking for an all-mountain-freestyle board with a bit more dampness than the average.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
To learn more about the Proto Synthesis, or if you're ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
To check out some other all-mountain-freestyle snowboard options, or to see how the Proto Synthesis compares to others, check out our top rated all-mountain-freestyle snowboards by clicking the button below.
Hi Nate, Last season this bord was rated 88+ out of 100 as one of the best all mountain freestyle boards around, this year you rated it 84.3. What have changed this season that it’s not as good as it was?
Hi Jonathan, thanks for your message and great question. I was waiting for someone to ask this.
I retested the Proto Synthesis in the winter and while nothing has changed with it on paper, it just felt like it’s fallen behind in comparison to other boards. Which is why I like to re-test after a while, even if there’s been no published changes. It feels a little more dead compared to how I remember it and vs some of Never Summer’s newer offerings and others. It’s still a really solid option, but just not something that felt as exciting and didn’t score as well after re-testing it. I don’t like when I have to change the score that much for a board that hasn’t had any significant changes, but I also rate a board how it feels to me and this is how it turned out on the re-test.
Nate, after your last post I was about to pull the trigger on the Gnu Hyper we discussed but I saw this and thought it might be a better fit. Since I am 90% on groomers. The 160x would be a good fit for by 215lb, 5’10” size 12 boot. With the rocker in the middle like the Gnu C2X It would keep the surfy feeling some what would be good on site and though I don’t ride switch much my encourage me to do a little bit more. Also, I’ve heard on icy conditions. The true twin is better than a tapered anyways, what’s your thought on these two boards? The Gnu hyper and the PS? Which is more forgiving, which is betterall around for groomers? Also, I think the PS is centered. I would likely write it slightly back behind reference do you think it’s still perform well that way? With +12 / -9 angles
Hi Nathan
I would say that the PS is better for carving and speed but not very good for powder, but if you aren’t going to see it that much anyway, then that might not be an issue for you. It’s not as easy a turner as the Hyper, IMO or as quick turning, but it’s not too hard to turn either. Just takes a little more effort vs the Hyper, which is pretty effortless. I would say the Hyper is more forgiving, but the PS isn’t unforgiving or anything.
I agree that the 160X would be a good size for you.
In terms of icy conditions, it’s generally better without taper, but I’ve never noticed the difference between a true twin and directional twin or a directional board without taper. The Hyper’s taper is pretty subtle, and it has magnetraction and they come out about even, in my experience.
You could ride the PS with a small setback an +12/-9 angles. I wouldn’t set it back too far though.
Hey Nate!
Thanks for your review!
I’m currently using a Burton Process 162W, Malavita size large and size 11 vans Aura Pro. For Never Summer Proto Synthesis, should I get the wide one 160X or the regular one 161? Also, do you think this board would fit my current boots and binding?
Many thanks,
Roger
Hi Roger
Thanks for your message.
The 161 may be pushing it width-wise depending on a couple of things. In my experience the Aura Pro is fairly low profile, so that’s in your favor to getting on the 161.
With Aura Pro 11s, I would guess that the outer sole length would be around 31.3cm. The width at inserts of the Proto Synthesis will be around 265mm (or 26.5cm) on the 161, assuming a 545mm (21.5″) stance width. That would leave you with a total overhang of around 4.8cm (or 2.4cm per edge if you get perfect boot centering.
If you’re stance is roughly 1.5″ wider then you can reduce that overhang by around 2-3mm. So total around 4.5cm with a 23″ stance, for example.
Also, if you’re back binding angle is 9 degrees or greater you’ll save a little overhang there too.,
At 2.4cm per edge, it’s going to be pushing it, especially on the toe edge, if you like to lay your carves deep. If you don’t then you’ll probably be OK.
If your stance width/binding angle – e.g. with a 23″ stance width and +15/-15 bindings, then you should be good, even if you like to lay deep carves. With those parameters, you’d be looking at around 1.8cm overhang per edge, which should be good for all but eurocarves (and might even be OK then).
So I think you can probably get on the 161, depending on some of those factors. I would go 161 if you can, rather than 160X, but 160X would work fine as well, if you think you won’t get on the 161 width-wise.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you so much for your reply!
Hi Nate,
Thank you for your reply! I forget to mention that I’m 6’3 so I have a quite wide stance (it’s 15/-15). I personally like carving but also want to try park for this year. Do you think that would affect the decision.
Thanks!
Hi Roger
Yeah, if you’re riding +15/-15 with a wide stance, then I think you should get away with the 161 width-wise. And the Malavita L should fit the 161 fine too. Even in the Large the Malavita doesn’t have a super long baseplate compared to some, so I don’t imagine you’d have any issues fitting that on.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the reviews! I would love your feedback.
I currently ride a Burton Skeleton Key 154 which I love, but I’m looking for a second board.
In good conditions, I gravitate to steeper, more technical terrain with moguls, drops and tight trees but for those days without fresh snow, I would like to start venturing more into the park and improve my switch riding. I’m being offered a slightly used Never Summer PS 2023 155cm and would like to know if it’s a good option. I’m a bit worried about the rocker feeling too loose in steeper terrain.
Stats: 145lbs, 9.5 Adidas tactical adv 9.5 and Ride A-8 bindings.
Thanks in advance!
Hi Mao
Thanks for your message.
It will feel a little looser than the Skeleton Key, but I didn’t find the PS super loose or anything. It’s slightly looser than average, but it’s something that can grip when you want it to, but get looser when you want it to. If you’re used to the camber of the Skeleton Key, it will likely feel a bit looser, especially at first, but it’s not what I would call super loose or anything. It won’t be as good for steeper terrain, but if you predominaly take your Skeleton Key out in that, then it would make a good complimentary board in your quiver.
In terms of whether the sizing is appropriate, if you could let me know your height as well. Weight and boot size are the most important things for sizing, in terms of specs, but I like to take everything into account (height can have a leverage factor). But just quickly, typically you’d go a little smaller with your more freestyle oriented board vs your more freeride oriented one. The Skeleton Key is a little wider than the PS (the 154 is 2mm wider at waist, 4mm wider at back insert and 2mm wider at front insert, with the PS wider at the tail, but overall the Skeleton Key is a little wider) but the PS has more effective edge, so they’ll overall probably feel a similar size. That doesn’t necessarily make the 155 PS too big, but typically I’d go a little smaller with the freestyle deck in the quiver.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Awesome response and super insightful! Based on your feedback I will probably stay away from the PS, I would rather have a board with full camber.
I will try to demo a few boards this season and choose based on that. What are some boards that would fit my description? Thinking of Capita DOA, Yes Standard, Ride Shadowban and Rome Freaker.
PS, I’m 5’11”
Cheers,
Mao
Hi Mao
Just to note that the DOA, Standard and Freaker are all Hybrid Camber boards, so not full camber. They do however have a feeling that is more like Full Camber than something like the PS, as they have camber between the feet and underfoot. But they also have rocker sections (or in the DOAs case, more of a flat sections) before the contact points towards the tip and tail. The Skeleton Key has camber right back to the tail but rocker before the contact point in the nose, for reference to compare. That’s not to say they wouldn’t be suitable, but just to clarify.
The YES Standard Uninc, is a full camber version of the Standard.
If you wanted to go full camber, you could check out:
– YES Standard Uninc
– YES Basic Uninc
– Burton Blossom
– Burton Free Thinker
And, I haven’t ridden the following, but they could also fit your needs, being full camber:
– Rome Stale Mod
– Nitro Beast
Or if you were happy going slightly less twin, but still decent for switch, you could also look at:
– Nitro Team
– Burton Custom (camber version)
You could also check out the following to see if there’s anything that you think might work:
>>Top 5 Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
>>Top 6 Aggressive All Mountain Snowboards
>>Our top All-Mountain-Freestyle snowboards
Hey Nate, thanks for all the content! Really appreciate your insights and knowledge on these boards. 2 questions for you…
1. What size protosynthesis should I get? I am a 5’ 7” advanced rider, 158lbs, and size 9 boots.
2. I love the feel of my fun slinger, but wanted it to be a little more stable for faster riding. Would this fit the bill with still having a free style flair…or would you recommend the mountain twin instead? Stuck between these two
Hi Brandon
Thanks for your message.
Given you love the feel of your Funslinger but want a little more stability at speed, then I think the Proto Synthesis is the way to go. The Mountain Twin is a great board, but for what you’re wanting this is probably going to be your best bet. And yes, the Proto Synthesis still has a freestyle flavor to it – just a stiffer, slightly more aggressive option vs the Proto Slinger.
In terms of sizing, I think the 155 would be just right for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Definitely helps! Thank you! I’ll look for a 155. 🙂
You’re very welcome Brandon. Hope it treats you well and hope you have a great season!
Hey Nate ! I’m Looking at picking up this board right now on sale and the only size left is 155cm, I am 5’9, 165lbs, sz 10 boots. Would this be a good fit ? I ride mostly groomers bit also love side hits and head into the park sometimes. Also what bindings would you recommend, cheers !
Hi Will
For this board, for your specs and how you describe your riding, I think the 155 is just right.
For bindings, I would be looking in the 5/10 to 6/10 range ideally for you and this board – something from the following would be a good bet – >>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Great, thank you for the help !
You’re very welcome Will. Happy riding!
Hi Nate thanks for all your help
I am 1,8 meter
Weight 105-110kg
Boot size us 13
Will the NS PS 159DF be right size board for me?
Thanka
Hi Marc
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard all-mountain” length at around 164, so length wise it’s on the smaller size for you, IMO. But it is extra wide, so sizing down a little makes sense, even with 13s, IMO. But there is a 162DF as well, which would sill be sizing down a little. That said, the Proto Synthesis is a board you can size down for a little anyway, depending on how you’d be using it. If you’re looking to use it for a lot of freestyle stuff, then I think the 159DF would work well. If you’re more predominantly going to use it for bombing groomers, etc, then the 162DF might be the better option.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate do you know the insert width on 157x and the 160x? Torn between sizing at 6’2 215 11 K2 Thraxis boots
Hey James
I haven’t measured those sizes particularly, but difference between waist width and width at inserts tends to be the same or very similar between wide and regular sizes, so assuming a roughly 21.5″ (545mm) stance width, the 157X is likely around 272mm at the inserts and the 160X around 274mm.
Whilst the 157X wouldn’t be wrong, if you really wanted to ride something smaller, I would be leaning 160X. I would put your “standard all-mountain” length at around 163 and whilst sizing down this board a little can be a good idea, I would much sooner size it down 3cm rather than 6cm. And those widths are fine for your boots – they’re not so wide that you’d want to size down further, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Howdy SP!
First, I wanted to say thanks for the incredible resources; you don’t just do reviews, you also ofter an education. Amazing work.
Second, I’d like to hit you up for some advice if you don’t mind. I’m currently in the process of looking for a second board to balance out my 162 Burton Flight Attendant as I work on skill development, and I’m primarily considering the Yes Greats and the NS Proto Series.
Stats:
Height: 6′
Weight: 195lbs
Boot: 32 Lashed Double BOA
Boot size: 10 (but maybe should go up to 10.5 next time)
Binding: Burton Cartel Large (but would likely need a new binding for the new board)
Rider level: 6
Current board and why:
162 Flight Attendant
Although I’ve ridden for a number of years, from a skill standpoint I’m primarily a skier (certified instructor). When I realized I want to take snowboarding more seriously I demoed a bunch of boards while I was in Fernie, BC. For that terrain, and with my skiing style, I wanted a charger that felt like a monster truck, which the FA certainly accomplished! It got me through the entry level instructor cert for boarding, but as I try to get to the next level I feel like I could use a quicker, slashier, poppier ride for when I’m not trying to bomb.
Because I’m focused on developing all around skills, I still care deeply about the ability to lay down carves and I’d love something that’s better for quick turns as well. I’ve got some freestyle on skis, but I haven’t felt confident doing much more than 180s on the Burton. It’s a bit of a beast to whip around.
I’d also prefer something far better for switch. The FA can do the job, but it’s clearly kinda grumpy about it. I’m a big fan of blaming the user, not the tool, but I kinda think a shorter, quicker board would really help my development in those areas.
With all that nonsense out of the way, after looking at all your reviews it SEEMS like the Yes Greats at a 156 or a Proto Synth at a 158 might fit the bill. I do wonder if the 158 is a bit too similar in size to the 162 FA, and at the same time it kinda feels like the Slinger might be a bit too freestyle oriented for my current goals. I’m open to any other board on the market. I really enjoy how Capita does business, but since they discontinued the Asymulator I’m not sure they really make a board that fits the bill?
Anyway, sorry for the wall of text, but I wanted to provide as much detail as possible so as not to waste your time. Yall provide a remarkable service here. Thanks again for your time, and I hope you’re having a rad one!
Realized I left out stance angles:
Currently running +18/-12, but I think I’ll try +15/-15 on the new board for switch purposes. This is one of the more difficult things for me with snowboarding compared to skiing. Between all the adjustments, figuring out desired binding tightness, boot tightness, forward lean…it’s overwhelming compared to just clicking in!
Hi Kevin
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats and Proto Synthesis are 2 great choices for getting that more freestyle oriented board, but something that’s still got enough going for it for carving and riding faster. There are other options I could add in, but those are 2 of the best I can think of for what you’re describing, so won’t complicate things further.
Size-wise, I think 158 Proto and 156 Greats makes sense. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 161. So 162 definitely makes sense for a board like the Flight Attendant but sizing down this board makes sense a. because of the type of riding you’re looking to do on it and b. given that type of riding and that you already have a longer board in your quiver, having that shorter option is a better compliment to your existing board.
4cm makes quite a bit of difference when it comes to snowboards (vs skis from what I can tell), so I wouldn’t say the 158 Proto is too close size-wise to your 162 FA. That said, the difference is quite a bit less when looking at effective edge (122.6cm on the 158 Proto vs 124cm on the 162 FA – so a 1.4cm effective edge difference). Enough that it would still be noticeable and total length certainly contributes to swing weight, so you’ll notice it even more for spins. In terms of width, even in 10.5s, I’d say you’d be OK.
For the Greats, it’s a wider board, so makes sense to size down a bit more. The advantage of sizing down more in this case is that you’ll also be looking at a more reduced effective edge – so length-wise it should feel a little smaller overall. Overall size feel, because of that extra width will be similar to the 158 Proto, but I’d still say overall it’s going to be a bigger size feel difference vs the FA 162. Note also that whilst both boards have a tighter side cut (7.8m on FA 162, 7.66m on 158 Proto, 6.3m/6.8m (different sidecuts heel and toe, because it’s asym) on the 156 Greats), the Greats is quite a bit more different, which can help to aid in those shorter/sharper turns/carves as well.
Hope that’s not too much info! But hope it gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Super appreciate the guides – these have helped a ton when cross referencing ideas for gear.
So I’m running a 157X 21/22 Proto Synthesis. Enjoyed the board last season but am looking to replace the bindings. Based on your other comments, is there any reason you recommend the Malavita’s over the Cartels for this board? Is it purely due to the flex difference or is comparing the two just splitting hairs?
Also been looking into some of your other suggestions (Strata, K2 Lien AT). Comfort, response, and entry/exit are some of my top criteria, but response seems the hardest to find a sweet spot for. Is a 3.5 response necessarily a bad thing for a mid/mid-stiff flex board? Or just about in-line with the expectation?
All the best,
Justian
Hi Justian
Thanks for your message.
Between the Cartel and Malavita, I think the main thing I prefer with the Malavita for a board like the Proto Synthesis is just the personality of the feel. The Malavita has a little better board feel – and for more freestyle stuff – ollies, sidehits, jibs, butters and the likes, I prefer the Malalvita over the Cartel. Not sure what gives it that, but I suspect it’s the fact that the Malavita has a softer feeling basepate and a stiffer highback versus the Cartel, whereas the Cartel is the other way around. Overall flex feel, the Cartel I’ve always felt a little stiffer – very sublty but a little bit. But in the highback the Cartel has always felt softer. But yeah, both definitely work with the Proto Synthesis and if you’re not doing a lot of freestyle stuff, then it’s more or less just splitting hairs.
In terms of response, for a mid-flexing board something around 3.5-4 is good – it’s a good balance between getting good quick turns at slower speeds, but being enough to be able to drive the board hard enough at speed and for bigger carves. When you get into a stiffer board, you need stiffer bindings to drive it properly but for a mid-flexing boards, I find that if you go too stiff in the binding, the board can become a little twitchy when riding faster – and can affect how quickly you can turn when riding slow.
Hope this helps with your decision
Super appreciate the insights, thanks Nate!
You’re very welcome Justian. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate, I’m excited to pick up a ProtoSynthesis, but torn between the 158 or 161. Hoping you could ease my mind. I’m 6’0, 205lb, size 11 boots and an intermediate rider. I’m looking for a general all-mountain board; I enjoy bombing blacks, but also playing with jumps, spins, and occasionally trees. No jibs though. I’m leaning towards the 161, but just don’t want it to be too cumbersome in the trees. I’m coming off a 156 which feels just a tad small but way to flexy.
Hi Mark
Thanks for your message.
I think your more pure all-mountain size would be around 162, but this is a board you can size down for a little bit for. particularly if you’re going to be doing trees, spins etc. So it’s a close call.
The other thing to consider is the width. With 11s, the 158 and 161 are quite narrow for your boots. If you have low profile boots, binding angles like +15/-15 or similar (something that’s going to give you a bit of angle on both bindings) and aren’t carving super deep, then I think you get away with the regular width sizes. Also past experience helps too. If your 156 is a regular width and you haven’t had any boot drag issues with it, that’s another good indication that you’ll get away with the regular width sizes. But typically for 11s I would recommend going wide. If you do think you want to go wide, then the debate becomes between the 157X and 160X.
For the longer sizes, you’re looking at better float in powder and better stability at speeds – and for bombing, I think you’d appreciate those sizes. For trees, spins and generally more playful and freestyle riding, then the smaller sizes are going to work better, IMO. If you did go wide, I would be concerned with the 160X being the most cumbersome in trees – with the extra width on top of the length. But the 161 I think would be fine for your specs, given the size of your boots and that you would have pretty good edge control for the width of that board compared to your boot size.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi Nate,
A few years ago you helped me choose between a NS type two and a Yes Greats. Based on your advice I chose the Greats and have loved riding the board. It has been the board I ride everyday for the last 3 seasons. Recently not sure if it is because the board is a bit tired but I have been wanting more pop.
After hearing that the Never Summer profile has adopted more camber I am interested in trying one of their boards.
I am debating between the Proto Synthesis and the Proto Ultra. My snowboard trips now have been more light powder and riding everywhere on the mountain.
What do you think the main differences I will notice if I change to a Never Summer Board?
Or is it better to stick with what I am familiar with?
Ultimately I would like to have pop that i can access a little bit more easily. The ability to charge down the mountain, carve well and am willing to sacrifice buttering.
Hi Andrew
Thanks for your messages (I published both mostly because there was a little bit of different info in each).
Firstly, can you remind me of your boot size?
Never Summer boards do have an overall different personality and feel to YES boards, but in terms of what you’d use the boards for the Greats and Proto Synthesis are good at the same things (IMO). Note that I am yet to ride the Proto Ultra, so I can’t say for sure about that one – but I’ll make some comments on what I would expect from it.
I would say that the new Proto Synthesis has a little more pop than the Greats, but it’s not an out of this world difference or anything. In terms of ease of access to that pop – I would say it’s a similar ease of access to that pop. If you went Proto Ultra – because of that extra stiffness you might be looking at a bit more overall pop, but it’s going to be harder to access that pop, I would say – something that would take a bit more of a load up.
Whilst the Proto Synthesis has more camber, you’ll still feel that rocker in the middle of the board and that’s one of the bigger differences – but that’s not a reason to not give it a try. It’s certainly not an overly loose board by any means, but you do get that little bit of a pivot under foot which some like and others don’t like as much – but it’s subtle on this particular board. That extra camber has made this board a little better at carving vs the Proto Type 2. If I had to choose one over the other for carving, I might still go Greats, but there’s basically nothing in it, IMO, very close.
Both are a really similar flex, by my feel. I found the Greats just a touch stiffer, but again not much in it. For speed, again it’s really close, but I would just give it to Proto Synthesis. I’d say dampness would be similar too.
Overall feel, they do feel different, but it’s something that wouldn’t take that long to get used to, if you wanted to try something different – and would certainly suitable for everything that the Greats is.
Going to Proto Ultra – again I haven’t ridden it so I couldn’t say for sure. But you’re likely to have something that’s noticeably harder to butter, harder to extract the pop. For big carves and for speed, I imagine it’s a step up . It’s likely harder/less fun to ride at slower speeds. I don’t think the Protosynthesis would be a step backwards from the Greats – I think it would be a step sideways, if that makes sense.
Size-wise, I think you’re probably good with the 155 Protosynthesis and 154 Ultra, as you suggest, but if you could remind me your boot size, that would help.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Sorry about that lol
I thought my phone had messed up when I didn’t see the comment.
My boots are size 8.5 or 9 depending on which boots.
I do not have alot of experience with stiffer boards so I find myself debating if going stiffer will be good. I like the idea of having a better carver and perhaps more edge hold. Losing a bit of playfulness doesn’t sound great even though I don’t mess around much with ground tricks.
Thanks for your help
Hi Andrew
Thanks for the extra info. Size-wise I think your spot on with those sizes for the Proto Synthesis and Proto Ultra. The Greats you size down a bit for, so I’d say those sizes will feel similar to the 151 Greats or maybe slightly bigger but nothing crazy.
Hi Nate,
A few years ago I had asked you for a recommendation and you had suggested the Yes Greats 151. I followed your advice and that is indeed a great board. I have ridden it everyday for 3 seasons now.
Due to some board damage, I am on the hunt for a replacement. I am interested in trying the never summer line. Since the proto boards now has more camber compared to the type 2. What do you think I will notice most if I do the swap? Will I sacrifice or gain any pop, speed, stability or dampness?
I am debating between the proto synthesis 155 and the proto ultra 154.
I currently weigh 195 and height 5foot5. I typically bomb down the mountain nowadays and hit as much natural features as I can along the way. Not sure if it is because the greats is a little tired but I noticed myself wanting more pop. Both of these Never summer boards came across my radar, I am worried the ultra may be too stiff and whether the proto synthesis would be a step backwards.
Please let me know your thoughts, will I regret the transition or should I stick with the Greats that has worked well.
Coming in really late here, but… how does the Protosynthesis compare to the Ride Superpig and Lib Tech Orca (or Gnu Gremlin for that matter, but less concerned on that one). I have big feet (size 12.5/13) and I’m looking for a board that I can carve hard on without booting out. I’m currently on a 2018 Rome National (157MW, so 263mm waist) and while I love the board, it just isn’t wide enough. I really like the pop and spring out of turns I get from the camber, but the width just isn’t there. That said, sometimes the National feels a little cumbersome in steep moguls/trees, but I think that’s mostly a rider issue lol. Maybe the hybrid rocker would help with that?
I ride in the midwest so edge hold is important too. But again, the biggest thing for me is width; I really want to get into some very low carves. I’m looking hard at a lower profile boot which may help, but both the Ride and Neversummer offer extra wide options. Thanks!
Hi Garrett
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Superpig, so not sure there. The Superpig, Orca and Gremlin are all quite different types of boards to the Proto Synthesis though – a lot more directional. The Proto Synthesis is more what I would call an all-mountain-freestyle board – it’s a twin and whilst you can certainly carve on it, it’s not great in powder and certainly quite different to the others you’ve mentioned.
Width-wise, if you were looking to go DF (drag free) on the PS, then you should have plenty of width – you’re looking at around 289mm at the inserts on the 159DF. I haven’t measured Rome boards before (haven’t tested them before now – just getting my first Rome boards to demo this week – excited to try them) but I would imagine with a waist of 263mm that it would be considerably less. Average is around 10mm wider than waist, so likely around 273mm give or take. But you could measure it to find out, so you can get a better of idea – to measure take the width from the base of the board, from outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge at the reference stance of the board (or whatever stance you ride at).
Compared to the others:
– PS 159DF:
– Orca 159 (a guess at what size you’d ride this board in): 276mm at the front insert, 275mm at the back insert (based on a 530mm (20.9″) stance. If you were going to ride it wider – then you could add a couple of mm there – e.g. at a 570mm stance it’s likely more like 278mm at front and 277mm at back.
– Gremlin 158: 279mm at front insert, 277mm at back insert. This is also based on a 530mm (20.9″) stance. So again you could add a couple of mm for a wider stance.
– Superpig 158: This is based on a rough estimate from measuring the Twin Pig, so not that accurate – but maybe around 292mm at the nose and 288mm at the back insert. With a 10mm taper and a centered on effective edge stance, the back insert likely narrower, but this board is likely really wide even at the back insert – but again, this is a prediction based on a different board. In any case, in the 158, I doubt you would get any drag issues on it.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Thank you for your in-depth review of PS. It was helpful for me in making my first board decision.
I would appreciate a mini-consultation with you regarding my decision:
I ride for like 5-6 years, I can say I am intermediate/advanced, and I love doing buttering, tricks, high speed/carving, ollies, and this year I’m about to do more park (jumps, jibbing, etc.). I wanted to purchase a board that is mostly for the park (proto slinger), but I wouldn’t like to sacrifice that stability at a higher speed as I love to have that stability. So I want a playful board that can help me “treat the mountain like a park”, ride switch, tricks, side hits, but still, be able to perform great at higher speed. Do you think a proto synthesis is a right choice for me? I have union strata bindings.
I am 6.04, weight 198, but to make it a bit more playful, I’m considering picking up 158 board size. If any other board comes to your mind, I’m very open to hearing.
Thanks once again
Hi Theo
Thanks for your message.
There’s always going to be some degree of sacrificing one thing or another if you’re looking for a one board quiver that can be playful and buttery, but also stable at speed. But given what you’re describing, the PS is a good middle ground. There are certainly boards that are more playful and buttery and there are certainly boards that are more stable at speed, but the PS can do both well, without being at the ends of the spectrum (which would be a physical impossibility). So for what you’re describing, I think the PS should work well.
In terms of sizing, going shorter will help with playfulness. So the 158 for your specs will be more playful than it was for me. But you also sacrifice in terms of speed by sizing down. The 158 won’t be terrible at speed for your specs, but it won’t feel as stable at speed as I found it at 175lbs. So, this board could definitely work for you in the 158, but just keep in mind it would be at the cost of a little stability. Also, if you could let me know your boot size, so we can make sure the width/length combo will be OK.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thank you for your response!
In the end, after reviewing your Proto Slinger review, I think I will just go for Proto Slinger. The reason is, having fun, buttering, jumping, side hits, tricks, and being playful is just what I like waaay more than doing high speeds. I’m just way more excited to get something like Proto Slinger, and it’s rated as one of the best freestyle boards (and even #1 on your list). It’s still a bit stiffer than the Funslinger so I guess it will be capable to ride all over mountains (for sure not capable like Proto Synth- but guess still doable). It might be a good thing that I already have Union Strata, so it will help stiff up the board a little bit, so it will not be a completely soft freestyle board as it would be with Union Contact Pro. I think of getting Proto Slinger as a first board then later, as a second board to get something very capable of high speed + powder.
Now my only ‘concern’ is the size they have, it’s 156, but I’ve read somewhere on Reddit that sizing down is preferable for freestyle-style. I wear boots 9-9.5ish, 6’1, 198lbs, athletic posture. Do you think the size is fine for the riding style I’ve described?
Thank you once again, much appreciated!
Hi Theo
Sizing down for a freestyle certainly makes sense, but 156 is getting really small for your specs, IMO. However, as a dedicated park/freestyle board, I think it will be fine. But you’re going to feel it softer than I felt it, given you have almost 25 pounds on me at the time I rode it. And that’s going to reduce how stable it feels at speed.
So, I think it’s doable in that size, so long as your expectations are that this is going to be a board that’s going to be for all the fun playful stuff and you don’t expect too much out of it at speed or in powder. And I would be going in to the season, if you go for it, that would be a season of really focusing on your freestyle game. And adding that second board (longer and more suited to speed/powder) sooner than later, if you’re looking to get the most out of riding fast and powder days. If you go into it with that in mind, I think it can work for you. But at that size it’s not going to be great as a do-it-all board option, so you would just have to have realistic expectations.
Yeah, tbh, I don’t do too many blacks/double blacks and stuff, nor do I ride at super speed, something solid/intermediate I ride usually, just enough to enjoy the ride/mountain/views, and I think for that it should be enough. But 70% of the time I’m into joking, trying tricks, buttering, and stuff, and I think for that it will be super fun, what’s most important to me. Then next year I’m getting something that can seriously charge all-mountain + powder in my quiver.
Thank you so much, really appreciated it. Enjoy your season!
You’re very welcome Theo. Happy riding!
Hi,
Changed my mind about the TRS, stock issues in UK, and thinking about upgrading the PT2 to Synthesis instead.
My other boards are Capita Scott Stevens 155 and Yes PYL 159. The PT2 is 157.
I’m 178 cm and ~82 kg.
Board will mostly be used for medium to large jumps in the park, shredding up piste, and light pow. What size would you recommend for the Synthesis?
Hi Rick
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, for that board and considering the sizes of the other boards in your quiver, it’s a tight call between the 155 and 158. Typically I’d say 158 for your specs, but the 155 does become an option on this board, given that it has a lot of effective edge versus overall length. Going 158 would give you more in terms of big carves, stability at speed and float in powder, but in light pow, I think you’d get by with the 155. The 155 easier to butter and extract the pop from (but I imagine if you want that easy butterability, then you’d be going to your Scott Stevens Pro).
But going from the PT2 157 and given you want something a little more aggressive, I would be leaning 158. The Proto Synthesis is a little more aggressive than the PT2, but I think if you went 155, then it would kind of mitigate some of that aggressiveness, if that makes sense.
Many thanks, Nate. Thoughts pretty much mirror my own. Having a really tough time deciding between the two.
Ideally I want the best length for med/large jumps and going a bit Ryan Knapton on the piste.
Should mention I’m also thinking of swapping the PYL for 20/20 156. Don’t know if that makes a difference?
Hi Rick
I think for smaller jumps and sidehits, if they were going to be the thing you were doing the most, then I’d be leaning 155. But for larger jumps, I think you could ride both, but the 158 would give you that little bit more stability on approach and landing – and for getting Ryan Knapton, I’d be leaning 158, too.
Don’t think it would make really much difference (to your decision on the Proto Synthesis) if you change PYL to 20/20 156. Given it’s more of a short wide board, that would still be the bigger board in your quiver.
Boom! Decision made.
Thanks, Nate. Legend 🙌
You’re very welcome Rick. Have an awesome season ripping up the mountain!
Ok Nate, I’ve labored long enough between choosing either the Yes Greats or the ProtoSynthesis. Which would you recommend as the best of the two options for the All-Mountain/Freestyle experience?
Context: I’m an intermediate snowboarder, primarily at home on icy groomers in Midwestern resorts. I avoid rails, but love hitting kickers and side hits. I love cruising/carving and riding switch. I need something that can hold an edge and yet not be “catchy” (I got rid of my CAPiTA DOA last year because I kept catching an edge in the icy terrain and getting slammed to the ground.)
It looks like your previous reviews would give the Yes Greats a slight advantage given the context… For the record, I have the ProtoSlinger as well – so the Synthesis might be a badass combo. Ya know, branding. But not necessarily the better All-Mountain/Freestyle board. And I don’t see myself doing double backflips off A-Basin very often. :-/
Help a brutha out!
Hey Taylor
Thanks for your message.
You really can’t go wrong with either for what you’re describing – so you can’t make a wrong choice, IMO. But a couple of things to consider:
– The Greats is a little better in icy conditions in my experience. But that’s not a deal breaker – the Proto Synthesis (PS) is good in those conditions as well, but the Greats just a little better, in my experience.
– I found neither overly catchy – less catchy than the DOA in my experience.
– Given that you have the Proto Slinger, going to the Synthesis is bit more of a sure bet, because it will be a more familiar feel. The Synthesis and Slinger certainly don’t feel the same, but if you went Synthesis you’d be going closer to a “stiffer Slinger” than you would be if you went Greats. Saying the Synthesis is just a stiffer Slinger, isn’t completely accurate of course, but it’s closer to that description than the Greats is (if that makes sense!).
– On the flip side of the argument, going the Greats would give you a greater contrast in your quiver – with a different feeling board.
So, again, I don’t think there’s a wrong choice for what you’re describing, but hopefully that gives you more to go off
Nate, thanks for all you bring to our learning! Could you give me your top 3 bindings to match perfectly with the ProtoSynthesis?
A brief explanation why you chose these 3 bindings would be super helpful too.
I’m thinking Burton Genesis, Union Stratas maybe?
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
Union Strata for sure. A really good flex match for the Proto Synthesis (PS) and assuming you’ll be doing some freestyle or just like to have good board feel, then Strata really good for that – good shock absorption too. Definitely a top 3 for the PS for me. Nice and responsive too – particularly for it’s flex.
Burton Malavita – again a good flex match and also got good qualities for freestyle, like board feel and shock absorption. Not quite as responsive as Strata, IMO, but not far off.
K2 Lien At – for the same reasons really.
Genesis would also definitely work. The only reason I wouldn’t include it in the top 3, is that it’s a little less responsive than the 3 listed above and I like something just a little harder driving for the PS. That said, the Genesis definitely matches the PS – and would be in the top 5 options, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I am 6″ 1′, 260lbs, size 9.5 boot, advanced to expert freerider. Currently my go to board is a Neversummer Westbound 163 (which I love). I am looking for a good true twin board for buttering and side hits, to add to my quiver. I wanted to pick up the Peacemaker, but the largest it comes in is a 155 and I am afraid that will be too small for me.
Do you think the Proto Synthesis 161 would be a better fit and still give me the softness to play with more buttering, jumps, and spins? Or do you have a better board suggestion? I am partial to Neversummer, Ride, K2, and Burton.
Hi Elijah
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, it’s a shame Never Summer dropped the 158 Peacemaker for the 2022 model. They had a 158 for the 2021 model. They dropped quite a few sizes for the 2022 models.
I think the Proto Slinger would have been a really good bet for what you’re describing too, and a great compliment to the Westbound. But they also dropped what would’ve been the best size for you – the 159. If you can find a 2021 model in the 159, that would be a great option, IMO. Without going wide, which you won’t want to do with 9.5 boots, IMO, the largest size in the Proto Slinger is now 156.
The Proto Synthesis (PS) is softer feeling in terms of flex than the Westbound (WB) (by my feel PS is 5.5/10 flex and WB 7/10 flex). And it butter pretty well for the flex too. So it’s definitely a viable option for what you’re describing. It’s less of a contrast to the WB than the likes of the Slinger and Peacemaker, but does still complement it and will be better for butters, jumps and spins, IMO. Also, if you do go with a smaller size, like the 161 or even 158, then you that difference will be more exaggerated. In fact, if you went 158, it will likely feel quite buttery (more buttery than I found it, given I was only applying 175lbs to it. So, in some ways it might be a better fit than something like the 158 Peacemaker or 159 Proto Slinger, just because you might almost over butter those boards).
If you did want something softer flexing than the likes of the PS, then something like the Burton Kilroy Twin 159. There’s the K2 World Peace too (but I haven’t ridden it and the longest non-wide size is a 157, which I think is going to be too small). The Ride Kink is another but longest is 155, so too small, IMO.
Plenty of other options from those brands too, if you wanted to look at similar flex to the Proto Synthesis.
Hope this helps
Hello Nate,
I am deciding to pick up this or the Super Doa 2022 or even Yes The Great. Any suggestions ? i like to hit jumps and butter when i ride. Also, just wanted a board that can literally do everything and playful at same time. I Am 5’10” and about 72 kg ish.
Thanks
Dean
Hi Dean
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing I would be looking at either this or the YES Greats. Super DOA is less playful, IMO. I wouldn’t say the Proto Synthesis (PS) or Greats are super playful either. But they’re not not-playful – they’re in between playful and aggressive. The Super DOA is more on the aggressive side of things, IMO. It’s not like far end of the scale aggressive, but more so than the other 2. Both the PS and Greats are better for buttering than the Super DOA too, IMO. The Super DOA is awesome for jumps and I have no doubt you’d love it for that, but the Greats and PS are also great for jumps and from what you describe about buttering and playfulness, I think they’d be a little better suited.
Between the PS and Greats, I personally favor the Greats, but both are really nice decks and I would probably decide with sizing. If you can let me know your boot size, I would be happy to give you my opinion as to which sizes I think would work best for you – and if one particular size from either board is likely to work the best.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate thanks for the review
I’m 6’3 195lbs 10.5 boot
Would I be ok with a 161 for this board?
I didn’t want to go the 157wide as I think it’s too wide for my boot and 158 may be too short?
I like side hits but also carving and a bit of speed
Hi Steve
Thanks for your message.
I think the 161 would be just right for your specs. The right length and the right width. I wouldn’t consider anything else for this board for you. 161 is just right, IMO.
Hope this helps
Ok cool I’ll go with that, cheers!
You’re very welcome Steve.
Great review! What size would you recommend for 5’10 190 and size 10.5-11 depending on the boot? Always hard since I’m in the grey area with a wide board. Thanks!
Hi Brian
For your specs, I would go either 158 or 157X.
It’s a tough one with that boot size, but I would say:
– If you’re in relatively low profile 10.5s, with binding angles similar to +15/-15 (something with a decent angle on the back foot, doesn’t have to be as much as 15 degrees), then you should be OK with the 158.
– If you’re in 11s OR if you have bulky 10.5s OR you have relatively low profile 10.5s and ride with a pretty straight back binding angle, then I would go 157X.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
rode my new Proto Synthesis yesterday for the first time. To my surprise it was extremely hooky between the bindings. Could’nt rail a good carve without having that hooky feeling under and between the bindings. The less stance width the more hooky it felt. Friday I had my proto tt under my feet, no Problem at all. It’s not a Boot out, I ride a 157 x with boots size 10. I always ride wider boards … my proto f.e. is a 161 x. I ride now since 2006 and never had similar problems. Have you experienced similar with this board?
Hi Richard
Thanks for your message.
I didn’t have that issue with the Proto Synthesis, but have experienced what you describe on other boards before, but didn’t get that feeling myself on the PS.
Really not sure why it would be doing that, but a couple of things you could look into a. detuning the edges at the contact points, even just a little b. giving it a good scrape and wax (if you haven’t already). Other than that, I’m not sure what the issue would be, but yeah, I didn’t feel that on this board, and I know the feeling from other boards.
Hope this somewhat helps
Hey Nate,
I’m torn between this board, the Capita DOA and the Jones Mountain Twin. I like to carve groomers, get a little speed at times, play around all mountain, small side hits, not much park as of right now. Any Suggestions?
Hi Patrick
All 3 would certainly work for what you’re describing. Some things that might help you decide.
If you see powder a bit and want some decent powder performance, then I would be leaning Mountain Twin from those 3. MT still a good option if you don’t see powder much, if at all, but if you do, then I think it’s an easy choice.
If no powder: The MT both has what I would call a stable feel (on a scale of loose to locked-in, stable is in the middle). The Proto Sythensis is very subtly on the looser side of stable. It’s closer to stable than it is to loose, but the rocker in the middle, just gives it a subtly looser feel. The DOA has a stable feel but just to the “locked-in” side of stable, if that makes sense. If you check out the little graph in the specs table in the review, this will make more sense. So if you want something just on the slightly (but very subtly) surfier side, then I’d be looking at the Proto Synthesis, if closer to more locked-in (but again subtly more locked-in than right in the middle) then DOA.
I slightly preferred the Proto Synthesis for carving over both the DOA and Mountain Twin, but all pretty similar at speed.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate love the reviews! Making it difficult to decide between this and the Trs or Terrain wrecker. Does the Proto Synthesis edge hold up in icy conditions? I mainly ride the local mountains in Vancouver but head out and around BC when i get the chance. I’m an intermediate rider looking to push my riding more but factoring in icy conditions for an all mountain board. Would you still recommend the proto synthesis or one of the lib techs? Thanks!
Hi Rah
Thanks for your message.
I didn’t get any icy conditions to test this particular board in, but based off every other similar Never Summer board I’ve had in icy conditions, I’d say it holds up pretty well. It’s not what I would call a 5/5 icy conditions board, but a 4/5. The TRS, IMO has a little more edge hold in icy conditions, but I would say the Terrain Wrecker is similar, from my experience to the Proto Synthesis. Maybe just a fraction better, but not much in it.
So, if you want the best in icy conditions out of those 3, then I’d be leaning TRS, but the TW and Proto Synthesis are easily good enough in those conditions, IMO. It would only really be if you were seeing those types of conditions like every other day or 2/3 days kind of thing, that I would really want the step up.
Between those boards, my biggest question would be powder. The TW, IMO, is the better option in powder out of the 3. If you don’t really ride powder that much, or never really deep powder, then that’s less of a factor, but if you do, I would be leaning TW. If you don’t see that much pow and you like to ride switch a lot, then the PS or TRS, as they’re better for riding switch. There are some other subtle differences, which you can check out in the reviews, but those are a couple of the main things between those boards.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!
Another great review!
I was wondering what length would you recommend for 5’10.5 height , 159lbs weight with boot size US 9. For an intermediate all mountain rider. It would be paired with Cartels M, unless you think its not a good setup. 🙂
Many thanks
Marcin
Hi Marcin
I think the 155 would be spot on for the Proto Synthesis for you. And the Cartel’s are a good match, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the advice Nate, really appreciate it.
I also had a look on the Yes Standard, which tops your all mountain board list. Starting to think that it might be a better option, as it seems to be more versatile, without really lacking anything compared to the Synthesis. I guess 153 would work for me?
Would Burton Rulers be too soft for the Standard with cartels? Are the Photons a better option?
Many thanks!
Hi Marcin
Yeah, I would go 153 for you for the Standard.
Cartel’s a good match the Standard, IMO. Rulers would definitely work too. If you were being really fussy, then I think the Photon’s would be more ideal, but the Ruler’s certainly work.