Hello and welcome to my Bataleon Thunderstorm review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Thunderstorm as an all-mountain snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Thunderstorm a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Bataleon Thunderstorm 2024
Price: $489
Style: All-Mountain
Flex Rating: Medium (6/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (5.5/10)
Rating Score: 91.0/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain Boards
Out of the 37 men’s all-mountain snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Thunderstorm’ Specs
Check out the tables for the Thunderstorm’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
ALL-MOUNTAIN
PRICE:
$489 - BUYING OPTIONS
$489 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
Full Camber - Bataleon's "Low Camber" - with the 3BT doesn't feel like traditional camber.
SHAPE:
setback stance:
Unknown - see below for more details
BASE:
Sintered | Bataleon's "Ultra Glide S Base" 7000
weight:
Felt REALLY LIGHT
Camber Height:
6.5mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
144 | 238 | 92-136 | 42-62 |
148 | 240 | 101-145 | 46-66 |
152N | 242 | 119-163 | 54-74 |
154 | 250 | 139-183 | 63-83 |
156N | 244 | 150-194 | 68-88 |
156 | 252 | 150-194 | 68-88 |
156W | 262 | 150-194 | 68-88 |
158 | 254 | 158-202 | 72-92 |
159W | 265 | 167-211 | 76-96 |
161 | 257 | 176-220 | 80-100 |
162W | 268 | 180-224 | 82-102 |
Who is the Thunderstorm Most Suited To?
The Thunderstorm is best suited to anyone looking for that one-board quiver and wants it to do a bit of everything but leaning slightly towards a freeride feel vs a freestyle feel.
It still handles freestyle stuff really well though, but it's directional and should ride powder well.
Not suitable for beginners, IMO, but pretty close, given how easy it was to ride. I would say it's doable for low intermediate all the way to expert, if you're an expert rider who prefers their board a bit more on the playful/snappy side, rather than stiffer or more aggressive or if you were to use this board as your fun, mellow ride. Or for the lighter weight expert rider.
Perfect for intermediate to advanced looking for an easy to ride board that still allows you to ride with decent speed and can tackle any area of the mountain.
Thunderstorm DetailS
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Thunderstorm is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Bataleon Thunderstorm 2024, 156cm (252mm waist width)
Date: March 28, 2023
Conditions
Sunny. Barely a cloud in the sky. Perfect vis, naturally.
Temp: 2°C (36°F) and -2°C (28°F) with wind chill in the morning. 3°C (37°F), -1°C (30°F) with wind in the afternoon. Wind was 10kph (6mph) NE.
24hr snow: 0cm (0")
48hr snow: 15cm (6")
7 day snow: 20cm (8")
On groomer: Hhard pack, crunchy in a lot of places and a little icy in others. Softer areas too though. A good bit of chunder (ice balls/chunks) but not too bad.
Off groomer: Crunchy and icy in places. Doable but not great.
Setup
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 560mm (22″)
Stance Setback: Not sure of setback on effective edge but overall setback on board was 17.5mm (3/4")
Width at Front Insert: 262mm (10.31")
Width at Back Insert: 264mm (10.39")
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Response ADV
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 2920grams (6lbs 7oz)
Weight per cm: 18.72 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.71 grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 250 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 & 2024 models. So the Thunderstorm was bang on average on the scales. On snow, it felt really light though. Not sure if it's the 3BT that makes the board feel lighter or what it is, but felt really light when riding.
Powder
None to test in on the day, but it should be really good in powder. With that 3BT base, and the directional shape, and just the way it felt to ride, it should surf powder really well, without being a powder specialist or anything.
The Thunderstorm also has back seat inserts (2 extra holes set 4cm back from the main insert pack), so you can set back further than you otherwise could, helping when you get those powder days. Note that some minidisks won't be able to make use of the backseat inserts, due to not being able to span 4cm.
Carving
Once you get used to the 3BT, it's a nice board to lay carves on. It's nothing epic, but you can lock in the edge and carve with it - finding where that edge locks in just takes a little bit of an adjustment from where you would be used to engaging it on a non-3D-based board. The engagement point is just a little further into the lean, if that makes sense.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: So easy to slash on this board - and so easy to initiate turns.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Really quick edge-to-edge at slower speeds. So easy to throw this board around.
Skidded Turns: Not in the slightest bit catchy for me. You could be really confident slashing or skidding turns without consequence.
Speed
It's not an out and out bomber or anything, but it can handle moderately fast speeds well and remains stable.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: This board does get bucked around a bit and you feel it a bit too. It's not super chattery or anything but not super damp either. But it's super easy to make adjustments when you do get thrown off your line.
Trees/Bumps: So good. I found it super easy to maneuver in tight spaces.
Jumps
Found it really fun for jumps overall.
Pop: The pop was really easy to access - so you didn't have to put in much effort to extract it. Total pop was decent too - you get a little more out of it, when you really wind it up.
Approach: A good balance between stability and adjustability. It's not ultra stable or anything for those massive jumps, but it's stable enough for most and when you do need to make adjustments on the approach or stop in a hurry after a landing, kind of thing, it's really good.
Landing: Pretty solid. Wouldn't say an out and out stomper but still solid enough and pretty forgiving when you get the landing a little bit wrong.
Side-hits: Sick! So fun for hitting sidehits. Has all the elements I like for side hits.
Small jumps/Big jumps: It's sweet spot is medium jumps. But still good for small and large jumps.
Switch
Transitions into switch are super easy. It's a directional board, so never going to be perfect but still decent enough.
Spins
While landing and taking off switch may not be ideal, it has that easy pop and lightness that make it still really good for spins.
Jibbing
Not ideal for it, but still decently good. Felt confident on it and I'm not a super confident jibber.
Butters
It's pretty easy to get the nose and tail to press and you can lock it in to a press well too.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 12/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.5 | 9/10 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 3.5 | 7/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.5 | 9/10 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 6/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 91.0/100 |
Overall, the Thunderstorm is one of the most fun all-rounder boards I've ridden. It's so easy to ride and consequence free but at the same time has snap, stability and can really take you anywhere on the mountain and excel.
It strikes that balance between everything - snappy but not too chattery, not too stiff, not too soft, good in powder but also on groomers and in the park, not too playful, not too aggressive. And on top of all that, just has that unexplainable x-factor that had me smiling from ear-to-ear when riding this thing.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Thunderstorm, or if you are ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
If you want to check out some other all-mountain snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Thunderstorm compares to other all-mountain snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hey Nate,
Love the website I learned a lot from it.
I’m debating if I should get the 152N or the 154 of the thunderstorm. Right now there’s a pretty good deal for the 152N. I’m wondering if the 152N is good for me, specially because my feet are quite long for a woman. My length is 5’ 8”, weight is 160 lbs, shoe size is 41 in EU (I don’t know what that is in US).
I’m an intermediate rider riding in the European alps. Mainly ride the groomers, with the occasional little detour off piste. Don’t really care about freestyle.
If you have any other boards suggestions I’d love to hear them. Probably an all mountain board.
Thanks in advance! Really appreciate the time and effort you put into this.
Alisha
Hi Alisha, thanks for your message.
Depending on the brand of your boots, EU41 translates to either a US Women’s 9 or 9.5. Length-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 153, so length-wise, I think you’d be good on either. But the 154 may be a little on the big side, when combining length and width. Doable, but maybe not optimal. The 152N, if you can get on it width-wise (which I’ll explore below), is what I’d be leaning towards.
I think you should be OK on the 152N width-wise, particularly if you’re in a Women’s US9. The 9.5 would be more risky but might still be OK, depending on a few factors. For example, if you have lower profile boots and more angle on your bindings, then that would make it more likely that you’ll be OK with the width – as in no risk of boot drag. Bulkier boots, or if you’ve got a straighter back binding angle (e.g. 0-3 degrees) would make it more risky.
If US Women’s 9, you should be OK regardless, IMO. A US Women’s 9 (mondopoint 26) with an average profile will measure around 29-29.5cm for the outer boot length. With a 560mm (22″) stance width you’re looking at around 25.4cm at the back insert, with a zero degree binding angle. Your stance is likely narrower than that, but even at a 520mm stance, you’d be looking at at around 25.2cm at the back insert at narrowest. That would mean a 4.3cm total overhang (or 2.15cm per edge) at worst, with the bulkier length boot, which would still be fine in most cases. Only if you were really driving deep carves (e.g. eurocarving) would I expect you to run into problems with that level of overhang.
Hope this helps
Thanks for all the great content. Hey, you didn’t ride the Thunder did you? The reason I ask is that the other reviewers that rode that seemed to indicate that they preferred that model better. I wonder how much the change to the camber profile made, and I think the Thunder was made at the Mothership before production moved to China. I’ve been comparing reviews and I just now noticed that it isn’t you in the picture with the Thunder.
Hey Mark, thanks for your message.
I rode the Thunder for a lap but Fraser did the main testing on that one. I personally preferred the Thunderstorm over the Thunder, but I enjoyed both boards.
Hi Nate,
I love your website, it has been super helpful.
I’m an intermediate boarder in the PNW looking for a single quiver board. Based on your review this seems to be it. I currently ride a Salomon Super 8 154 but find that it is maybe too much on the free ride side and not agile or flexible enough for more freestyle riding with friends. It may be a little wide for my preference as well. A good board overall but looking for something that’s more all-mountain.
In terms of sizing, I’m wondering if a 156 Thunderstorm fit me. It seems to be the right fit based on the length guide. I’m 5’7 and 160lbs, with a shoe size of US7.5 (maybe 8 as it’s an old boot and seems a little snug). Would the 156 or 156N fit better?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Wai, thanks for your message.
I think the Thunderstorm would suit what you’re describing well. I have your all-mountain length at 156, so I think that’s a good option, but I would go with the narrow version, due to your boot size. If you didn’t want to go narrow, then I would size down to the 154, to compensate for it being wider than optimal for your boots. But I think the 156N would be just right for your specs. IMO the width is just right on the 156N for your boot/foot size.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
How do we get one of our boards over to you to try?
proteussnowboards.com – i think you’d have fun geeking out on our adjustable camber system, just curious how it would fit into your ratings considering it changes shapes?
Hey Drew, thanks for your message. Send us a message through our contact form. The adjustable camber system sounds really interesting.
Hi Nate, I tried few times to send a reply to your message but it does not appear so reply as new comment.
Thanks for all the suggestions. I’m riding +15/-15 and using middle inserts currently on TRS. I was wondering if I should go wide with Thunderstorm. I also heard on youtube that 3BT makes the board feel shorter than it is so maybe going 161 isn’t bad (I’m currently 157 on TRS)
I’m thinking of going with Union Strata with this board but also considering Falcor and New Force. Size large
Hi Maciej, thanks for the extra info.
Yeah, I think you should be fine on one of the regular width options, and I wouldn’t go wide unless you had to, so either the 161 or 158. I think the 161 would be your most “pure” all-mountain size, so that’s what I would be leaning towards. But the 158 isn’t wrong if you wanted to keep things more playful and closer to what you’re used to. I think the 3BT probably makes it feel a little shorter, but nothing drastic, so it’s not like, IMO, the 161 will feel like the equivalent of a 157 TRS, but their closer in size than the 4cm difference would suggest.
Both the Strata and New Force would both work on the Thunderstorm for sure. The Strata has better board feel for when you’re doing more freestyle things, but the biggest downside of using it on the Thunderstorm, is that the mini disc means that you wouldn’t be able to setup in the Thunderstorms extra setback inserts, which might be good to have on powder days. If you don’t think you’d bother to set it back into those inserts on a powder day, then the Strata would be a good bet. But if you want the option of taking advantage of those, then go Force New.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for you great job doing all of this reviews. I’m currently looking for new setup and picked up Ride Deadbolt boots (size US10.5) thanks to your recommendation. I’m looking for new board too. I’m currently riding 2012 Lib Tech TRS which I have ridden for around 5 seasons (it was in closet 2016-2022). It feels a little bit damp so wanted to get something new for next season.
I’m 184cm and 84kgs, consider myself advanced. I do around 15 days a season(mainly European Alps) but with pre-planned trips so conditions vary. I do a lot of powder if possible, but I also ride a lot with my 7y old son on/off groomers. This year I started to learn some basic jumps and butters and will continue. I like to charge hard but I’m 36 so trying to avoid being as crazy as 10y ago ;]
I want to have single board so decided to go pure all-mountain. I’m also interested in trying something new so 3BT sounds exciting.
I’m almost decided on Thunderstom but also consider Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker/TRicePro or GNU RC.
About the sizing I’m wondering if I should go with 156W, 158 or 159W
Thanks for any suggestions
Hi Maciej, thanks for your message.
I probably wouldn’t go T Rice Pro or RC, just because they’re not as good in powder, and it sounds like you like to take advantage of it when you get it. The Thunderstorm and Terrain Wrecker would both work well for what you’re describing, IMO, giving you a balance between easy riding at slower speeds, but decent stability at higher speeds, decent in powder and for butters, jumps, etc. I would be leaning Thunderstorm, mostly because it’s a little more stable at speed, in my experience and a little better for powder, IMO. The advantage of the Terrain Wrecker is that it will have a more familiar feel for you, given you’ve had the TRS, so you’ll likely adjust very quickly to it. The Thunderstorm will feel a little different to ride, so will take a bit more adjustment to begin with.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160/161, but you could come down a little from that if you wanted. Take into account the lengths you’re used to riding as well.
For the Thunderstorm, the 161 is an option and IMO should be wide enough for your boots but I think you’d also get on the 158 width-wise, so that’s an option too, if you wanted to err a little smaller. But if you could also let me know your typical binding angles and stance width, if known, to make a more accurate prediction. And also how deep you like to carve.
For the Terrain Wrecker, I think the 160 would be your best bet. And again should be wide enough, but if you could let me know that other info that would be great. The 157 is in range, but will likely feel on the smaller side for you, I would imagine – but could be OK width-wise as well. I think the 161W is probably a little big overall, when combining the width and length, but it’s doable, but the 160, IMO, is likely to be wide enough, so I don’t think you’d need to go to the 161W anyway.
Hope this helps
Thanks thats a help a lot. I ride typical duck -15/+15. Stance width, no idea I use middle inserts currently. Do I understand correctly that standard width is way to go? so 158 and 161 and not 159W?
Hello Nate,
I have tested Bataleon Thunderstorm 156-158 and the Jones Frontier 156.
I have found that I enjoyed the Jones frontier 156 more, because it felt snappier edge to edge and also it felt easier to lock in the edges when carving.
However, I think I could not fully explore the Thunderstorm’s potential in a couple of hours, it felt like it had more to be unlocked where as the Jones maybe felt like I would outgrow it faster.
What are your thoughts on both these boards? I am having a conondrum on which one I should buy to go from an intermediate to an expert rider. I enjoy Carving and Powder mainly, but would like to also be able to learn a bit of freestyle.
Height: 178
Weight: 74kg
Boots Size: 8.5 U.S (41.5 EU)
Hi Jean, thanks for your message.
Given you’ve ridden them both and sounds like you had the better experience on the Frontier, I think that would be the safer bet. And I think 156 is a good size for you. You could go up to the 159, but I would be more inclined to go 156. I put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157, but with the width of the Frontier and with 8.5s, I’d err down, even with the less than usual effective edge.
For the Thunderstorm I would also be erring 156, but the 158 is doable. Though it’s not as wide as the Frontier, it does have significantly more effective edge (120.3cm on the 156 vs 114.4cm on the 156 Frontier). I find that with the 3BT that the engagement point of the edge is a little further into the lean when carving, if that makes sense. It takes some getting used to, but it’s still there, but it is trickier to find, especially when you’re not used to it. While the Frontier does have some 3D shaping in the base, it’s not as pronounced.
I would say that the Thunderstorm does have more potential for progression in it, depending on the style of riding you were going to get into. But again, I think the Frontier would be the safer bet for right now, since it sounds like you had a better time on it.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’ve been riding my flagship for power days, as well as just hard-charging groomer days when there is not much or no powder. I just came back from a 3-day trip in Whistler and realized that I’m getting a bit old (42 years old) for extended riding on the flagship. The carving ability is unmatched and I can go so fast on it, but the stiffness + possibly a little oversizing make me feel that I should probably go for a softer board that is also good in powder.
I’m 5’4″, 130lbs, and boot size is 7, and I ride the smallest 151cm flagship. I’m a Level 7 and fairly advanced, but sometimes I still feel that the 151 length (combined with the stiffness) is a little large for me. I can ride it and carve deep just fine on groomers, but in the trees it’s hard for me to pivot turn this board fast enough. Perhaps I’m just too short and light for even the smallest flagship available. If Jones has a 149 or 148 that’d probably be better.
I have an older Mountain Twin 149cm and I’m increasingly inclined to use that as a powder board in place of the Flagship. The thing is, it’s not really that good in deep powder in my opinion. I can snag a 148cm Thunderstorm at a good discount and I want to see what you think about using the Thunderstorm to replace both the Flagship and Mountain Twin. I guess the real question is, how do you think the Thunderstorm compares to the Mountain Twin – are they simply too similar to spend the money on the Thunderstorm to replace the MT? I’d rather not spend the money on the Thunderstorm if it’s simply too similar to the MT.
Thanks a lot in advance.
Hey Leo
Good to hear from you again.
The Thunderstorm would fit what you want, IMO. Shorter, better in powder than the Mountain Twin and easier going than the Flagship. I’d say it’s different enough to the Mountain Twin, though you could get more different. But not just that it’s a different feeling board and more directional, but also because it’s noticeably narrower – which should aid in its agility in trees (that said, this would decrease it’s advantage in powder vs your MT).
If it’s going to be predominantly a powder board, then you could go for something a little more powder oriented. Some options that are in that 148-149 range, and are a little mellower than the Flagship, but more suited to powder (Thunderstorm is really good in powder, but if you wanted even more powder oriented);
– Capita Navigator 147 (241mm waist)
– Burton Hometown Hero 148 (244mm waist)
– K2 Passport 149 (246mm waist)
Hi Nate,
Again thank you for the awesome advice. I thought about getting a powder specialist board and looked at the Capita navigator as you suggested. However, my goal right now is to thin down the number of my boards. Don’t get me wrong, I love having a nice quiver, but having to wax multiple boards a season (even when one of them is only used once or twice, or not even at all when the condition doesn’t exist the entire season!) is becoming a chore that I would love to not have to do anymore.
As a result, I’m really looking for a great all-mountain board that’s good in powder but can carry me on everywhere else too, and the thunderstorm seems to fit that bill very well. So I think I’ll stick with the thunderstorm.
By the way, I did get my wife the 148 dream weaver in the end and we are going tomorrow to test it out! It’s a beautiful board to match with her green Union Legacy and black Ride Karmyn boots! Thank you for all your help and I hope you enjoy the rest of the season left.
Hey Leo
Fair enough. Waxing can be a chore! I’ve found getting waxing clamps, drill attachments for nylon and horsehair brushes and having all my waxing gear easily accessible has made it much easier for me. But I get it – I used to really dread having to wax like 5 boards, before I had a good setup. But I’m also in a different situation where I’m forced to do it, so I can see why you’d want to shrink your quiver for that reason.
I think the Thunderstorm would do a really good job fulfilling that role for your quiver. Looking forward to hear how your wife gets on with the Dream Weaver.
Hi Nate,
I’m sorry for the late reply! I have been really busy with business trips and work in general, while trying to sneak in snowboarding trips on the weekends.
I finally got to take out my 148 Thunderstorm with my son yesterday. 30 minutes in I realized I should’ve taken my Yes Greats, since the whole mountain was a sheet of ice from 4 days of 60-degree temperature in Lake Tahoe last week. Even though yesterday was in the 20/30s, it was still icy everywhere and I didn’t feel like the Thunderstorm had enough edge for the condition. Nevertheless, I felt like I still had a great time with it. It carved just fine and I didn’t feel like I had to lean in more than other boards to engage the edge; perhaps it’s because I usually lean pretty far in and flex my knees quite well anyway. I read in many forums that people complain that they can’t carve with 3BT, but I think it’s probably just because they don’t really know how to properly carve to begin with, and don’t know how to get high on the edges.
Obviously there was no powder for me to try on, but the board in general felt quite surfy, especially paired with my Strata bindings. One thing I noted however, was that there seems to be less pop than the Yes Greats, and I couldn’t get as high in the air. That’s a minor issue though. Riding switch also felt fine, not as natural as the Greats but totally ok.
Thank you again for all the great reviews and I truly appreciate you building this website with the wealth of information. By the way, since you mentioned K2 passport in the previous comment, I’ve been looking into that board as well, but noticed that you didn’t have a review on it. Could you tell me your impression of that board and when you’ll possibly post a proper review on it?
Hey Leo
Thanks for the update and feedback. Yeah, Greats definitely the better ride for icy conditions. And yeah, if you’re already using that technique, then you shouldn’t have to change too much to carve the Thunderstorm. And yeah, I see that sometimes when people say they can’t carve on 3BT and wonder about that, because I’ve never a problem carving on it.
K2 Passport review should be out later this week or early next week. Was planning to have it out mid-March, but running at least a month behind on everything right now!!
But quickly, I quite liked it. Found it was stable and quite damp and dealt well with crud. And was a fairly easy turner, but still good for carves. Nothing exciting pop-wise or anything like that. On the damper side, but not super stiffer. So more mid-flex but more of a smooth feel, rather than a snappy feel. On the heavier side, which helps make it damper/more stable.
Hi Nate! Love your work here. I bought my first board 5 years ago (nitro team gullwing) with your help. We had some good back and forths at the time.
Getting ready to take the Nitro out for its last few days this season after which I think it’s time to move on. Partly because I have abused it off piste and partly because I think it’s time for change.
I have loved my time on the board, but am now looking for something a little faster and a more stable. Not that the Nitro wasn’t stable.
I mostly ride groomers and a fair bit of powder when it’s there, I don’t do park and I hardly jump. The odd 180 and side hit here and there. But after 5 knee surgeries and a 6th coming up, I am very very cautious.
I love to slash and spray and stick trenches all over.
Questions: 1/would the Thunderstorm or the Goliath be a good option here? If not is there anything else you recommend?
2/my current board is 162W (I am 6foot3 and 95kg). Should I stick with that sizing or consider going shorter or longer?
Will probably get new bindings as at the same time.
Hi Ewald
Great to hear from you again.
I would say the Thunderstorm or Goliath Plus (I would be looking Goliath Plus over Goliath for what you’re looking for), would be significantly faster/more stable than the Team Gullwing. Though, if you’ve ridden the Gullwing a lot since you got it, it is potentially softer/less stable than it once was, so a new Thunderstorm/Goliath Plus.
The Thunderstorm is better in powder, so that’s what I would go with over the Goliath Plus, given that you like to ride it when available.
So, I think the Thunderstorm would certainly work for what you’re looking for and you should see some increase in speed/stability vs a well used Team Gullwing and should see powder performance improved as well. But if you wanted a more significant increase in stability, there would be other options to look at. Are you looking to stick with something in the mid-flex range? Or willing to go stiffer? Let me know, and I can look at other options, if you weren’t going to go Thunderstorm.
Size-wise, for the Thundetstorm, I would go with the 162W. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 164. And looking at our previous conversations, you will want to go wide. I would look at a range of like 161-164 in all-mountain boards and 162-165 if you were to go more freeride.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the response Nate!
Just had a full day at Verbier on the gullwing, still so good, but yes I need a little more control now for the direction my riding is taking.
I considered the Goliath plus, but worried it might be a lot stiffer than what I am used to. Although I see you rate the stiffness as a 6 on feel. I don’t mind moving up a bit in stiffness, it might help me carve better at speeds. On the gullwing I sometimes struggle to hold a carve at speed, lower speeds however it’s perfect and can easily correct during turns even. But That could also be user error.
I would like a board that is good in powder, but would not make that the main purpose of the board considering how little time I get in powder. Might be traveling to Japan though next year, at which point I will probably get a second board for powder. So maybe the Goliath Plus is a good option for me.
That said I am open to other suggestions you might have. Even across other brands.
Thank you again.
Hi Ewald
I meant to say “I wouldn’t say the Thuderstorm or Goliath Plus would be significantly faster/more stable than the Team Gullwing…..” when comparing brand new to brand new. Apologies for that. I just re-read my reply.
But yeah, I don’t think you’d find the Goliath Plus too stiff. Bataleon boards tend to feel softer than what they’re rated it, in my experience.
Going a little bit stiffer/more stable – but without going super stiff or anything, some other all-mountain options include:
– Slash ATV – re-rode this one recently and while it’s rated a 5/10 flex, it’s not that soft, IMO. A great carver and should give you a noticeable increase in stability without being something that you can’t ride slow/slash etc.
– GNU 4 x 4
– Burton Custom
– Nitro Team (camber)
Some of these not great in powder, but you could always keep your Team Gullwing for that (decent enough if you don’t see powder often or never that deep).
Some freeride options you could consider too – all of the above and below I’ve kept to no more than a 7/10 flex, so as not to go too stiff. For the options below as well I’ve looked at boards that aren’t too directional – like not too much taper or anything, so they’re kind of all-mountain, bordering on freeride.
– Burton Deep Thinker
– GNU Banked Country
– YES PYL
– Never Summer Valhalla (rode this recently so no review yet)
– Capita Aeronaut (also a recently tested one)
Hi nate
I selected the thunderstorm with the jones orions now i would like to combine them with some boots.
I fitted the vans joney kass ones and they feld great but it could be they are to stiff seeing they are a 7. Or would this be fine. If not what type of boots would also be a good match
Hey Michael
We didn’t test the One and Done Danny Kass, so couldn’t say how stiff they feel in reality. From Vans, they rate it a 5-8 flex, which doesn’t make any sense to me, as it doesn’t have the removable tongue stiffeners, that I can see, so I don’t get how they give it a range – unless they’re saying this is what it will feel like depending on the weight of the rider. So if you’re a lighter rider you may feel them a little stiffer, but if that’s the range, I imagine they would feel around a 6 to 6.5/10. And should work fine with your setup. Also, the most important consideration with boots is the fit to your feet. If they feel good on your feet that’s the most important thing. Then matching your style/setup. It’s unlikely that they’ll be too stiff for your setup and if they feel good on your feet, that’s a large part of the battle won.
Great nate,
thanks again you are a great help.
You’re very welcome Michael. Hope you have a great rest of your season!
Hi Nate
I’m writing to you after reading all your reviews and I think you’re the best person which could give me an advice.
I am an intermediate-advanced rider and have 17 years of experience.
My first snowboard that I still have and use is a Forum Youngblood Doubledog 153 with Forum Faction bindings.
I am 180 cm tall, weigh 80 kg and wear 27.5 cm.
Since the Forum snowboard has a very high flex, I cannot use it at high speeds and certainly not in pow because I put in a lot of effort.
I want a stable snowboard at medium and high speeds with which I can carve safely and ideally I can also use it in pow.
I just bought a Thunderstorm 156 with Flow Hybrid bindings that I tested 1 week ago. The setup seems ok-ish but it seems to me that it is not stable enough at high speeds.
My question is whether a LT Orca 2023/2024 would be better. There would also be Jones Flagship / T.Rice Pro or LibTech Rocket, of which I don’t know what to choose.
Would you recommend me to change the Thunderstorm with something from what I have listed or to stay with it and practice more?
Thank you very much for the answer and advice
Hi Mihnea
Thanks for your message.
With stability at high speeds being your main focus, I would have gone with the 158 or even the 161. I know it would likely feel weird coming from a 153, but with freestyle boards like that you typically ride them smaller – and they tend to have less length outside the contact points. That said, if stability at speed and powder float is your main focus, then going to something like the Orca or the Flagship makes sense. The T Rice Pro probably won’t give you as much as you’d want for powder, and I would go with something more directional as the second board in your quiver.
With the Orca being so wide, you’d prob want to size down to the 153, though with your focus on speed/powder, the 156 might work better. But it’s not going to feel great in terms of slower riding or edge-to-edge quickness, IMO at that size for you. The downside of going down to something like the 153 is that you reduce how good it will feel at speed, when on edge. Flat basing (because of that extra width) should feel nice and stable, but when on edge, that lack of effective edge in the 153 may make it not as stable at speed as you’d like it, when carving.
The Flagship would be my pick to compliment your existing board. I would be leaning 161 for your specs. However, if you wanted to keep it a little more mellow, the 158 would also be a good choice. And since you’re used to a smaller board, you might feel more comfortable with it. It would still provide more stability at speed and powder float vs the Thunderstorm 156 (even the 154 likely would, given the nature of the Flagship).
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I am overwhelmed by your answer!
I did not expect you to give me so many explanations!!!
I’m from Romania and I’m not used to such behavior from foreign people!
I ordered a Jones Flagship 158 board with Union Strata bindings.
I will give you a feedback as soon as I do a test with the new setup.
At the same time, if you ever come to Romania, let me know so that I can accommodate you as best as possible. Maybe we will ski with Dracula next to us at night… who knows? After all, it is about the Carpathians and we have many slopes with very high ascents.
Bloody kisses for you!!!
You’re very welcome Mihnea. And thank you for your kind offer. If I’m ever in Romania (and would be cool to check out what the ski resorts are like there), would be great to shred some slopes with you (and Dracula!). Hope the board treats you well and that you have a great rest of your season!
Hi nate
i was wondering what kind of bindings ar a good match for the thunderstorm.
I am considering the jones orions but i am open to suggestions.
greetings Michael
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
The Orions would be a good match to the Thunderstorm, IMO. They are a good flex match and should work well with it, IMO. The weakest point of the Orion’s, IMO, are their board feel. It’s not terrible but it’s not great. If you’re not that concerned with board feel (which I like to have for butters, ollies, side-hits etc especially), then they should be a great match.
Hope this helps with your decision
thanks nate,
i am also considering the bataleon asto asyms but it could be that they are to stiff are there any other options that are maby better?
Hi Michael
I think you might just get away with the Astro Asyms. We have only tested the Astro Full Wrap, which would definitely be too stiff, IMO, but the Asym is supposed to be softer flexing. By how much is hard to say, but assuming they are around that 7/10 flex, then they would work with the Thunderstorm, IMO. I wouldn’t go too much stiffer than that, but I’d say they are still in range and shouldn’t make the board feel twitchy or anything (which bindings that are too stiff for a board can do).
There are lots of other options that would be a good match in that 6/10 to 7/10 flex range, but if you have your eye on the Astro Asyms or can get a good deal on them, I’d say they would work.
Going slightly softer but a similar binding, you could look at the Rome Katana. What I felt at a 6.5/10 flex, so not that much softer, but would be a good match, IMO.
Or if you wanted to get down to around that 6/10 flex, check out our top 10 all-mountain bindings, all of which are in that 5/10 to 6/10 range. Or if you wanted to err a little stiffer and wanted to look at other options outside the Katana and Astro Asym, this list would be the one to check out.
thanks nate this was just what i was looking for.
looking forward to driving down my board on the mountain
You’re very welcome Michael. Hope the new setup treats you well and that you have a great season!
Hello again nate.
I am now looking for boots.
I fitted the vans danny kass ones and liked the feel. But could it be that these are to stiff. And if so wich boots could be a good match.
Hi Nate, thanks so much for all you do. I’m trying to decide on my first board in about 15 years. I rode a ton in the 90s and 2000’s, but less so the last 15 years due to starting a family. I’m looking between the Thunderstorm and the Beyond Medals (a bit stiffer in the tail?). I used to ride super aggressively, high speed bombing. Now more mellow as I ride with my girls, so would ideally go for something quick and easy at slow speeds, but stable enough when I open it up and charge. I’m a US 10.5 boot but have rode wide boards since they started making them basically to for powder and big mountain stuff. Not really jumping or dropping cliffs anymore, but I do like side hits and gullys. Riding in the PNW, but occasionally pop over to UT or down to Tahoe.
Which would you consider?
Many, many thanks in advance.
Cheers,
Jason
Hey Jason
Thanks for your message. We haven’t tested the Beyond Medals, so don’t know for sure, but it’s likely to be a little stiffer overall, with Bataleon rating it 7/10 flex and the Thunderstorm 6/10 flex. Likely to be a fairly even flex on the Beyond Medals, given it’s a directional twin, so not sure how much stiffer in the tail it would be, but overall should feel a little stiffer.
The Thunderstorm is nice and easy and quick turning at slow speeds, so it’s certainly got you covered there. And all-round a board that doesn’t have any obvious weaknesses, so I think it would work well for what you’re describing. If you wanted something slightly stiffer, less directional and with a bit more pronounced camber (the Beyond Medals has Bataleon’s “Medium Camber” vs the “Low Camber” on the Thunderstorm. Then the Beyond Medals might be the way to go, but can’t say for sure, having not tested it. Loved the Thunderstorm though, so I don’t think you can go wrong with it, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much, Nate. Really love your site here and all the incredibly useful information you provide with such enthusiasm and positivity. Helping me through indecision paralysis!
Cheers!
Jason
You’re very welcome Jason. Hope you have a great season! If you think of it at the time, let me know what you go with and how you get on, once you have a chance to get it out on snow.
Salut Nat,
Grace à tes conseilles j’ai choisir la Bataleon Thunderstorm
j’ai pris la taille 154 j’avais un petit doute sur le 152 car je pèse 68kg et mesure 180 cm avec des bottes de taille 41/41,5. Qu’en penses-tu ?
Je suis maintenant à la recherche de fixation et de bottes. Aurais-tu un combo gagnant à me proposer ?
j’ai un profil intermédiaire, je fais surtout de la piste et de temps en temps un peu de freestyle. je ne bombarde pas tellement, préférant m’amuser sur les pistes
merci encore,
Will
Hi Will
I think the 154 was a good size choice for you.
In terms of bindings and boots, I would be looking for something around 5/10 to 6/10 flex for your specs and to match the board well. Check out the following to find some good options in that flex range.
>>Top All Mountain (medium to medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
>>Our top All Mountain Bindings Picks
>>Top 5 Freestyle Bindings
Hope this helps
Happy holidays and thank you Nate for your detailed review!
It sounds Thunderstorm can handle some freestyle ride well, assuming the rider can ride freestyle already :D. I am an intermediate rider and am practicing basic jumps (ollie, 180), and some flat ground tricks these days. Do you think it would be good for that purpose? Or should I go with a real freestyle board?
Hey Jack
If you are doing those things but also want a board that will be good in powder and ultimately more optimized for riding in a particular direction, rather than feeling the same riding either direction, then it could definitely work. If you want it to be predominantly for jumps, 180s, ground tricks etc, then going with a more pure freestyle oriented board would be the best bet, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!
I am an intermediate rider still riding my first board I purchased 2021 Capita Outerspace Living 159W.
I am looking to purchase a new all-mountain board more fit to my skill level. I mostly ride marked trails, glades/tree runs, some off piste, and a couple of laps in the park.
I really want a board that is more stable at speed, a bit more aggressive, fun to carve and can do just about everything I throw at it. For shape I am looking for a directional or directional twin with camber.
I am looking at the Bataleon Thunderstorm, Bataleon Beyond Medals, Amplid Singular, Public Research and capita mercury.
6’4”
195lbs
Boot size: 12
Any specific recommendations you have on the sizing for an all-mountain board, and any recs on boards listed above or others I should consider?
Thanks!
Justin
Hi Justin
Thanks for your message.
In terms of the Thunderstorm, it will, IMO, give you a step up in terms of speed and carving vs the OSL, but just note that it would be a relatively subtle step up. Noticeable but not a big leap or anything. And note that while the Thunderstorm is technically traditional camber, the 3BT doesn’t make it feel like a typical camber board. But I also don’t think there’s any downside going from the OSL to Thunderstorm. In addition to the small improvements for carving/speed, you’d also be looking at something that will be better in powder, just as quick edge-to-edge at slower speeds, overall a little better in trees (particularly when there’s powder in there), better for jumps, IMO and just as good for boxes/rails. If you go to the 162W (which is the size I’d recommend for you for this board), then that stability at speed will be a slightly bigger step up. So I think it could work for sure.
We haven’t tested the Beyond Medals, but based on specs and experience with other similar Bataleon boards, it could work too. Looks to be a bit stiffer than the Thunderstorm and probably a little better at speed and carving, due to that extra stiffness and the fact it has Bataleon’s “Medium Camber” vs the “Low Camber” on the Thunderstorm – so that camber should be more pronounced. It also has more subtle 3BT than the Thunderstorm, so will feel a little more “cambery”. Won’t be as good in powder, IMO, but a little better for riding switch. May not be as nimble at slower speeds and might be a little more challenging for jibs, but should be at least as good for jumps. Size-wise I would be leaning towards the 161W but the 164W would be doable too, if you wanted to go bigger, but given you’re riding trees and some park, I’d be leaning 161W.
We haven’t tested either the Singular or the Research and haven’t tested anything from Amplid or Public, so can’t say much about them unfortunately.
The Mercury could work for sure. It’s a very versatile board and would be a step up in carving/speed vs both the OSL and Thunderstorm, IMO, but would also be a step up in terms of difficulty in riding vs the Thunderstorm, IMO. Don’t get me wrong it’s not super stiff or super technical or anything, but it is a little more challenging. You would be looking at a bit of step down vs OSL for boxes/rails, IMO, but still a step up for jumps. Not, IMO, going to be as good for quick turns at slower speeds vs both OSL and Thunderstorm and would be down for trees for me. Not as good for powder vs Thunderstorm, IMO, but at least as good as OSL in that respect. Size-wise, I would be looking at the 160W.
If you wanted to check out some other options, you could also check out >>our top 10 all-mountain snowboards picks.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision.
Hi Nate,
I’m going snowboarding for the 5th time this coming season. I want to buy my snowboard, bindings, and boots instead of renting this year.
I would appreciate your personal opinion and help if you don’t mind.
I’m 6’3 and 203lbs, shoes size 11.
With some extensive research online but also from a local shop, I have decided on the k2 maysis boots and on the union str or union force classic bindings.
But I’m not sure what to go for in regards to a snowboard. I want to progress in the coming years. I will describe myself as solid level 4 rider and maybe a beginning intermediate rider (level 5). I’m comfortable on blue groomers. I’m probably not going off the groomers pretty soon, and I’m not looking to make big jumps or going into any parks anytime soon either. I want to improve my smoothness and try out some carving coming season.
I have been looking at the bataleon goliath, bataleon goliath plus and bataleon thunderstorm. But i have been also interested in the nitro team. What do you recommend? And in what size?
Thanks in advance, Nate. I really appreciate all the thorough reviews.
Hi Joost
I would be leaning Goliath. I think it’s a really good high-end beginner/low intermediate board. It’s got enough to it, that you won’t outgrow it too soon, but it’s also a pretty easy going ride. It would match the Maysis/STR or Maysis/Force Classic setup too. The Thunderstorm would be by next choice, followed by the Goliath Plus, then the Nitro Team. Don’t get me wrong, I like the Team, but it’s a bit more of a step up from the other 3.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163. In most cases you’ll need to go wide, but in a lot of those cases the board might be a little wider than ideal (the pitfalls of 10.5 to 11 boots, that are often borderline wide and regular boards). But if it’s a little wider than ideal, then sizing down the length a little bit helps to compensate for that. So in the case of the Goliath, I would be looking at the 161W. Same for the Goliath Plus. For the Thunderstorm I’d almost go 161. It’s borderline width-wise. But you might be able to get on it. It’s going to be around 269mm at the back insert, which is sometimes OK for 11s. But it would depend on your binding angle on that back insert. If you were worried about that being too narrow it would be a debate between the 162W and 159W. But I like the Goliath in 161W better size-wise for you. If you did go Nitro Team, again it would be a debate between the 159W and 162W.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks, Nate for your fast reply and help!
I will make a decision soon between the Goliath and the Thunderstorm. Will the Maysis/STR or Maysis/Force Classic setup also be good for the Thunderstorm? Or will you suggest another setup?
Thanks for the help with the size as well, I appreciate it.
Hi Nate – thanks for your help. Would the K2 Maysis + union str or Force Classic also be a nice setup for the Thunderstorm? Is the Thunderstorm more of a step-up than the Goliath? I’m a bit afraid that I will outgrow the Goliath a bit too soon since I will be riding more in the coming years than I have been in the last couple of years. Thanks for your help so far! Much appreciated.
Hi Joost
I would say the Thunderstorm is a small step up, but it’s not a big difference. I would choose between them based on what you think you’re more likely to get into down the line. If you think you’re likely to get into riding the park and riding switch and that kind of thing, then I’d be leaning more Goliath. But if you think you’re more likely to stick with mostly riding groomers and carving and maybe getting into some powder riding, then I’d be leaning Thunderstorm.
The Maysis/Force Classic would still be a good match to the Thunderstorm. The Maysis/STR would still work, but not quite as good a match as the Maysis/Force, IMO.
Thanks a lot for your time and well-explained recommendations, Nate!
I have bought the Bataleon Thunderstorm 159W with the K2 Maysis/Union Force Classic set-up. I’m excited to try it out soon.
Have a wonderful season
Joost
You’re very welcome Joost. I hope your new setup treats you well and hope you have a great season! If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve a chance to get the new setup out on snow.
Hi Nate – I am trying to determine which size would be best for me. I am 5’-7”, 145 lbs, and have size 8.5 boots. According to the Bataleon size guide, the 152N is most applicable for my weight, but is recommended for boots only up to size 8. I’m technically on the lower end of the weight range for the 154; do you think that would be a problem? I tend to lean more towards the free riding aspects like speed and carving. Thanks in advance!
Hi Alan
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 153cm, so I think you could go either way, length-wise.
In terms of width, you’d probably be OK on the 152N, depending on a couple of things.
The width at inserts on the 152N Thunderstorm will be around:
– Front insert: 252mm
– Back insert: 254mm
Though, this is assuming a 22″ (560mm) stance width. At your height, I would suspect this would be narrower, which would mean you would be on a narrower part of the board. At a 20.5″ (520mm) stance width, for example, you’d be looking at around:
– Front insert: 249-250mm
– Back insert: 251-252mm
Using the lower numbers here as an example, and assuming your boots are an average profile boot (3cm longer on outside vs mondopoint) and as such will be around 29.5cm long. With that back insert at 251mm you’d be looking at around a 4.4cm total overhang (or 2.2cm for toe edge and 2.2cm for heel edge, assuming perfect boot centering). This is for a 0 degree binding angle. If you ride with something from a 9-15 degree angle on your back foot, then you would be reducing that overhang. I’m typically comfortable with a 2.2cm overhang and you’d reduce that a bit, if your back binding angle wasn’t completely flat.
Now, if you have bulkier boots or if you really like to lay your carves deep (e.g. eurocarving), then you’d be at risk for boot drag. But otherwise I think you’d be OK.
With the 154, you’d be looking at adding 8mm to those insert numbers – so nothing that I would say is too wide, but it would be on the wider side for your boots. So the 154 is on the bigger side overall, IMO, when taking into account the combination of length/width. But it’s still doable. And if you’re going to be spending more time riding at speed and carving, then I think it will work for sure. But if you wanted to get on the 152N, you might be able, depending on the profile of your boots, your binding angles and your carving aggressiveness.
Note that if you were to go 154, you would likely find it behaved a little differently to how I experienced the 156. You’d likely feel it stiffer, more stable at speed and better in powder but not as good for riding slower, short/sharp turns at slower speeds (think trees) and more effort to butter, spin, ollie etc.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thank you for the awesome knowledge base you’ve created with this site! I was looking for confirmation that I’m on the right track for a new snowboard setup. It’s been about 20 years since I bought my first random set of gear (a Never Summer Legacy from ~2003 on Cartel bindings) and I’m due for an upgrade / looking to try something new…
I’m a low-intermediate (level 5) that only makes it out to the mountain a couple times a year at best over the past ~25 years. I enjoy cruising down blues and starting to hop off little bumps and occasionally navigating through the trees. I don’t do any switch. No park or big jumps etc.
I’m ~5’10” and 165 pounds, boot size ~11.5.
I’m looking at the Bataleon ThunderStorm in 156W mated with Union Strata bindings in Large and TBD on the boots (looking at Burton Photon BOA in 11.5). Was looking for something more directional given no switch. The 3D board profile seems interesting.
Is this a reasonable setup to try, or do you think I should be looking at something further towards the beginner spectrum like the Typo (or other)? Thanks in advance!
Hi Marty
Thanks for your message. I think the Thunderstorm should suit what you’re describing really well. It’s super fun (and easy) for side-hits. Nice and maneuverable for trees and I think you’ll be fine with it at your level. Because of the 3BT it is a little different feeling to the average snowboard, but I don’t think it will take you long to get used to it. It’s an easy riding feeling, in my experience.
Size-wise, I think the 156W is right on for you. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157/158, but for the style your riding and your level, I would definitely err down to the 156W over the 159W. And yeah with 11.5s, you’ll want to go wide with this board, for sure.
The Strata should be a great match to the Thunderstorm, so I see no issues there. The one thing to consider, however, is that the Thunderstorm does have “backseat inserts”, which are two extra holes behind the main insert pack. These are good to use if you were going to set your bindings back more on powder days. If you don’t really ever go in deep powder, this shouldn’t be an issue. Or if you think that you wouldn’t make the effort to change the position of your bindings, this wouldn’t be an issue either. But if you want to have the option to use the backseat inserts, you would need different bindings, as the mini-disc in the Strata is too small to bridge the gap between the last holes on the main insert pack and the backseat holes.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate! Really appreciate the reply. I don’t imagine I’d ever make the binding shift for deep powder, but if I wanted the flexibility, what other bindings compatible with the 4×4 pattern would you suggest, and would they be a worse pairing with the Thunderstorm?
Also, do you have any suggestions for how to navigate selecting a good boot for that setup and riding style? Thanks again!
Hey Marty.
If you wanted to have that option, there are quite a few binding options that would work well. If you wanted bindings still with good board feel (which I think you’d appreciate for side-hits), but with 4 x 4 compatabiliy, I’d look at something like:
– Burton Genesis (only downside is more pricey than the Strata)
– Burton Malavita (still more pricey but not by as much)
– Burton Cartel – (note quite as nice as the Genesis or Malavita but much better price-wise. Burton have quite a few bindings in the 5/10 to 6/10 flex range and all tend to have good board feel)
– Flux DS (a little softer than the Strata and the 3 above, but still doable for the Thunderstorm, for sure. Not quite as good board feel, but close)
– Salomon Hologram (again not quite as good board feel as the Burton’s or Strata, but still decent board feel)
Lots of other options if you’re not that worried about board feel, so let me know if that’s not a big deal. Otherwise one of the above would work well, if you wanted that option to use the backset inserts.
For boots, I would be looking for something with at least 5/10 flex and up to 7/10 flex. Given your weight and being a lower intermediate rider, I would be looking more in the 5/10 to 6/10 flex range, ideally for the board 6/10 flex. Thankfully, there are a lot of options at that flex level. You can check out our top all-mountain boots list for some great options, and also our top freestyle boots list (don’t have to be used for freestyle, just the name we give for our top softer boots list) for some 5/10 flex options.
Flex is, IMO, the second most important aspect. The most important being fit. Which of course depends on the person. Ideally you would try on in store (if you can’t find anywhere with the particular model you want to get, trying on something in the same brand is a good proxy. Not perfect but usually boots from the same brand fit similarly. If you can try on, see our sizing and fit guide below, so you know what to feel for when you try on:
>>How to Size Snowboard Boots
If you can’t try on in store, the guide below covers some things that are typical for different brands, depending on your feet.
Sizing Snowboard Boots: The Different Brands
If you can’t try on in store, and have the means, it can be a good idea to buy more than 1 pair and go with the one that fits the best and then return the pair you don’t want. But first make sure the return policy of the store is going to work for this, before you do it.
Hi Nate!
I recently moved to Switzerland and would like to buy my own board, since I will be on the slopes a lot more ;). I was hoping to get your opinion on which board you would think most suitable for me. If you have the time ofcourse!
Allthough I am a woman, I am pritty tall (1m78), which makes me look at boards for men, since womens are often too small (I am aiming towards 160). The problem with that is that I only weigh 65kg and have very small feet: 23,3cm (37,5 EU). Which makes most of the mens board too stiff and wide…
I have been boarding for the past 14 years and would dare to say I am an expert on groomer and like to go off groomer and in the fun park from time to time. That makes me believe I would need an all-mountain board.
I would like a directional twin, or at least the opportunity to work on my goofy as well. Since I’m only 24 and just moved to the incredibly expensive (and beautiful) land called Switzerland, I would hope that the pricetag remains somewhat to the lower side…
I know I am asking for a lot, but with my heigt, weight, small feet and budget I am starting to get lost in the search to a perfect board for me. I sincerely hope you can help me out, but don’t worry if you can’t find the time!
I wish you a beautiful winter season!
Robin
ps: Thank you for the amazingly detailed reviews you post!
Hi Robin
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, in terms of sizing, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 151/152. IMO, 160 is too long for your specs. However, since you are an expert rider and have been riding more than half your life, you will have sizing preferences and that’s something you would be used to. And that was probably influenced by the fact that a lot of people still go purely off height, when sizing snowboards. Whereas, IMO, and what most people believe these days, is that weight is more important than height. I like to still take height into account, because of the leverage factor (not everyone does, some go just off weight, but I don’t think that’s accurate enough, even if it’s more accurate than going just off height).
But even if you have a preference for something 160, I would size down from that anyway, based on your boot size. If a board is wider than optimal for your foot size, then it’s a good idea to size down, in order to compensate for that extra width. And with your foot size, even something like the 152N Thunderstorm would be wider than optimal for your boots, so you could size down to that, IMO (which wouldn’t even be a size down from what I think your best length would be, but if your preference is 160, then it would be a size down). Note also that bigger boards tend to feel stiffer than their smaller counterparts and it’s relative to your weight. So, if I felt the Thunderstorm 156 at a 5.5/10 flex and I’m 81kg, then you would likely feel that size stiffer than I do, because you are applying less weight against the board, it won’t flex as much. So if you’re riding longer men’s boards, it’s not just the men’s board making it stiffer, it’s that extra length – and it’s dependent predominantly on weight and not height. So, if an 85kg person says they think it’s a medium flex, for example, someone at 65kg, is probably going to find it stiff.
So with all that said, I would say 151/152, whether in a unisex board like this or a women’s board, would be the most optimal, as even in women’s boards that length is likely to be on the wider side for your feet. However, if you were really worried about that feeling too small, particularly if you’re used to riding longer boards, then you could go up a bit from there, but I wouldn’t go as long as 160, not with the kind of width you’ll be getting and even medium-soft flexing boards in that flex are going to feel stiffer and with that width, it’s going to take a lot of energy to get leverage on the edges of the board, IMO.
If you wanted to go longer, for example in the Thunderstorm, then I would go 154. The reason I’d only go up that much, is that you also get quite a big difference in terms of width, when you go to that size vs the 152N.
In terms of the board, you could look at the Thunderstorm and I think it would treat you well, but given that you ride park sometimes and want to work on your switch riding, I would go with the Goliath (in the 153) if you wanted to go Bataleon and really wanted to go with a men’s board. Biggest downside there for you is it costs more. The Thunderstorm isn’t as good for riding switch but given your budget, I think it would be good enough. Some other options to consider.
– Rome Muse 152 (pretty similar price to the Thunderstorm)
– Yes Hel Yes 152 (or 155 if you wanted to go longer) – a little more expensive, but if you could find a past season model, you would be able to get it on sale. And not as much as the Bataleon Goliath.
– Jones Twin Sister 152 (or 155) – same price as Hel Yes
– Capita Outerspace Living 152 – the cheapest option so far
– Jones Dream Weaver – 151 (or 154 or 156) – bit more directional than some others here, but still rides switch OK and a reasonably priced board
Note that I didn’t consider anything that was over USD$549. So there are lots of other options, but they were outside that price range.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
Thank you so much for taking the time to write such a detailed recommendation.
I am really surprised at the fact that I have been riding wrong sizes of boards since forever. Because like you said, everybody always focused on my length rather than my weight and boot size. I didn’t know the difference would be that big, but I do think that sizing down almost 10cm will be a big change for my riding in general. Perhaps I’ll have to ‘re-learn’ my boarding skills the right way again.
Your recommendations are really interesting and I will probably be looking to something very similar but as you said in a last season sale or something to spare my wallet.
Just out of curiosity (maybe for future reference), but which board would you recommend if budget wasn’t a problem?
As I said, thank you very much for taking the time to share with me your knowledge and view on boarding for someone with my ‘specs’ ;). I wish you the most beautiful winter season!
Robin
You’re very welcome Robin.
Yeah, I know that would be a big sizing adjustment. Which is why I included the longer options of some of the boards. If you don’t feel comfortable sizing as low as early 150s, then you could look at more mid-150s, but I would size down at least 4-5cms from 160.
Having a look at some boards that cost more, I would still have the likes of the Hel Yes and Twin Sister at the top of the list. They’re really versatile and given you still want to be able to go into the park and want to get better riding switch, I think they’d still be your best options. Could throw in the Jones Airheart 2.0 as well. It’s stiffer and going to be better at carving and speed but a little harder to learn switch on and a little harder to ride in the park. And not as good in powder either.
Hope you have a great season too!
Hi Nate!
I’m riding a 2011 Burton Malolo and I’m thinking of a getting a new board. I’ve been to the local snowboard shop and the local Burton store so far. The boards they recommended me are the Thunderstorm and the Burton Flight Attendant (or Deep Thinker). Last years FA would be the roughly same price as the Thunderstorm. Not really looking to add a lot more boards to the equation, as there certainly are options, but what would a comparable Capita board be?
I’m a resort (mostly with family) rider so I’m not really interested in tricks, mostly groomers, solid turns and good grip in chunder/icey situations. I’m 210 lbs, 5’10”.
3BT seems like something people either really love or hate, so I’m hesitant to get the Thunderstorm. Hopefully there’s a chance to try it near me this winter.
Thanks for all you do!
Hi Patrik
Thanks for your message.
Those boards are quite different to each other, IMO, so I think it depends on a couple of things. In fact, if you check out our reviews of the FA and Deep Thinker, you’ll see that they are all in 3 different categories.
The Thunderstorm is softer flexing and more playful (5.5/10 flex by my feel) vs the other 2, especially vs the Flight Attendant (FA). I really like 3BT, but as you say, it’s not for everyone. But I do think it’s something you could get used to and enjoy, even if not right away. However, in this case, because the FA and Deep Thinker are going to be better in crud/chunder and icy situations, I would be leaning towards one of those.
Between the Deep Thinker and the FA, the Deep Thinker is the easier going, more playful option. Not what I would call playful overall, but also not aggressive – kind of right in the middle. The FA is more on the aggressive side. The Deep Thinker feels lighter and easier to turn, particularly at slower speeds. It’s better in trees and better for shorter/sharper turns and just cruising vs the FA. But it’s still good at faster speeds and carving etc, but just not quite as stable at high speeds as the FA.
Check out our reviews of them for more details, to help make your decision. And let me know if you want a sizing opinion. If so, if you could let me know your boot size and the size of your Malolo.
Hope this helps
Hi,
Thanks for your answer! I had the chance to try the DT, Good Company and the Skeleton Key (FA was reserved while I was there and it’s probably too aggressive for what I need) at a Burton event today. I thought the Skeleton Key was the best/most fun for me. More playful at slow speeds than DT, but still performed well carving. Don’t get me wrong, DT was just fine and might come out on top in other circumstances. The Skeleton Key seems to be the style of board that suits my needs the best. Looks like I’m in the “mellow freeride” category. Hopefully I get the change to test the Capita Navigator/Bataleon Thunderstorm this winter. I’d be totally happy with a SK, but I enjoy the process 🙂
My Malolo is 162, but I’d probably be looking at something a little shorter. Boot size is 10.5 US.
Hey Patrik
Thanks for the update and the insights into your experience.
Yeah Skeleton Key is also a fun board for sure.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. But no reason you can’t size down a little from that. I think the Skeleton Key would work fine in the 158 for you (is that the size you tried). And the DT, should you have still been considering it, I would have said, typically 160 for your specs, but the 157 isn’t out of range either, if you wanted to ride something smaller. Curious what size you rode the DT in? Note that I rode the 158 Skeleton Key and the 157 DT.
If you get a chance to test the Navigator and Thunderstorm, I would definitely be interested to hear what you think of them.
As someone who mostly rides slow/moderate speeds with family and occasionally faster on my own, would you go Navigator/Skeleton Key or Thunderstorm considering my 210lbs? They seem to have very similar edge-hold and maneuverability at slow speeds according to your reviews.
Hi Patrik
Thanks for your message. I would say the Thunderstorm has the best maneuverability at slow speeds, then the Navigator a very close second. The Skeleton Key I didn’t find quite as agile at slower speeds, but still good. They’re all fairly similar in terms of stability at speed, IMO, but if I had to say I’d say the Skeleton Key is a little better at speed, but followed closely by the other 2. The Skeleton Key also slightly better edge hold and slightly better on a carve. Note, however, that this is comparing Thunderstorm in 156 vs Navigator in 158 and Skeleton Key in 158. While the length difference isn’t that big, the Thunderstorm is also narrower in the 156, so it’s overall a smaller board than the other 2. So, the agility and speed performance would likely even out a bit if comparing size for size.
You would be able to get on the Thunderstorm 158 width-wise, IMO. But it’s still going to, IMO, feel a little smaller than the SK 158 but probably about the same as the Navigator 158. While the Navigator 158 is a little wider overall than the Thunderstorm 158, the Thunderstorm has more effective edge, so that would even things out there, IMO. The Thunderstorm does have a little more effective edge vs the Skeleton Key as well, but with the width difference and the ease of the 3BT, I think the SK 158 would still feel a little bigger than it.
Typically I’d say 161 for the Thunderstorm for you, but since you wanted to size down from the 162 Malalo, you could go 158 Thunderstorm. But I would still say the SK 158 is the better size for your specs.
Hey Nate,
I’m a high beginner/low intermediate looking to buy a board I can progress on and also still have fun on when I’m better- basically an all rounder that I can keep for a long time. The description of this board matches what I like to do perfectly – not big about park but would love to have something fun on groomers that I can also push if I want to. I’m mostly in California and Colorado so see decent powder. Only thing holding me back from pulling the trigger is if this might be too aggressive for me. Also looking at the Yes Typo and Capita Outerspace Living as more my current skill level but this board seems like it’ll be more fun and last me longer. Specs are 5’10 180lbs Size 10.5-11 boots. I’m thinking the 156 or 156W? Let me know what you think!
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the Typo and Outerspace Living area little more suited to your level, but the Thunderstorm isn’t an overly aggressive board or anything and it’s not too far off where you’re at, IMO. It would be a little more of a challenge to begin with, IMO, but also something that would last you longer through your progression. So I’d say that the Typo/OSL would be the best choice for right now, but as a balance between right now and the future, the Thunderstorm could work well.
Size-wise, I would put your typical all-mountain length at around 159 – so I think the the 158 would be a good bet in the long run, but might be too narrow for 11s. If you were definitely going to be in 10.5s, then I would be pretty confident it was narrow enough and that’s what I’d go with. For right now, the 156 would be the better length, IMO, but long run more 158. In terms of width, the 156 may be doable with 10.5s, depending on the profile of your boots and your binding angles and how deep/aggressive you would be looking to carve in the future. With 11s, I would go wide and the 156W would be a good bet, IMO. Because you’re on the cuff of regular and wide, going a little shorter with a wide board is a good idea.
Long-story short, I would probably go 158, if you think you’ll get on it width-wise, which is going to depend on the boots you end up with. Otherwise, I think the 156W is a good bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Awesome, so helpful. Really need to nail down the boot size – last season my new 10.5s were killing my toes so probably going to try renting 11s this year. For reference, what size Typo and OSL would you recommend? (156W, 157W)?
Thanks so much!
Hey John
Yeah I would probably be leaning 156W for the Typo as your best now length – and could be a length you stuck with too. But I’d say the 159W is probably your best length all-round for that board. Note too that even in 10.5s I would go wide for this particular board. In 10s, you could go 158, but 10.5s and up I’d go to the wide’s (the wide sizes aren’t overly wide for wide boards, which works well for 10.5s/11s.
For the Outerspace Living I think the 157W would be your best bet. It’s wider than the Typo, so even as your long term size, I think 157W would be your best bet. You could do 155W even, but for the long run, I’d go 157W. In 10.5s you’d probably get away with 158 in this one. But in 11s I’d go 157W.
Went with the Typo 156W and Union Strata L bindings. Thanks for all the advice! Stoked!
You’re very welcome John. Thanks for the update and I hope your new setup treats you well. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
I meant forgiving at the last part.
Hi Justin
Thanks for your message and sucks your board was stolen.
IMO you’ll find any of those options more forgiving than the Mercury. If you value powder performance more than switch riding performance, then I’d be leaning Thunderstorm or Thunder, as they have the best powder performance of those options, IMO. I think they’d be really well suited to what you’re describing. I’d go Thunderstorm personally, but since you’ll be looking at a past season Thunder, they you’re probably looking at a cheaper price and it’s still something that would suit you well, IMO, so it’s definitely an option.
The Pathfinder and Rider’s Choice aren’t as good in powder – and the Rider’s Choice isn’t as forgiving as it used to be. Though, still more forgiving than the Mercury, IMO, but closer in forgiveness to Mercury than the other options here.
The Mountain Twin or Standard would be great options if you want a good balance between switch and powder performance. As would the Outerspace Living – it’s not as good a board overall, IMO, as the Standard or Mountain Twin, but it is a really good option, IMO, for lower intermediate riders, so it might be the most appropriate right now, but the other 2 you might appreciate more down the line.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi, I’m a lower intermediate rider looking to buy a new board that I can comfortably ride for a good few years before I outgrow it. In the past I had a Capita Mercury which I got for crazy dirt cheap without doing much research, and while I did have fun with the board espeically on powder, it felt pretty unforgiving and hard to maneuver at slow speeds. Sadly the board was stolen, so now I need a new board. Im looking for something a bit more forgiving than the Mercury. Currently my prospects are the Bataleon Thunderstorm, Bataleon Thunder, Jones Mountain Twin, Yes Standard, Capita Outerspace Living and Capita Pathfinder Camber and GNU Riders Choice. Which of these boards would be best suited for me? Ideally I want the board to be versatile and relativley unforgiving but also pretty decent at powder.
Hi Nate,
I’ve been holding my breath for this review. Having read loads of your print (and others – gotta be objective!) my search has narrowed down to three boards. I was wondering if you could help me decide between:
This Bataleon Thunderstorm; the Rossignol One; the Jones Frontier.
I’m 6’2″, c.190Ibs, UK11/US12 (Burton Imperials, so quite low profile) and looking to replace my now quite old (2002) “Lib Tech Emmagator” (165). A boarding hiatus of a few years but I’m a fairly accomplished intermediate. I’m looking to return to groomed pistes (mixing mellow sweeps with some speedwork), powdery margins and tree trails. I also want to undertake the odd venture into heavier powder (if I’m lucky enough), and start to butter and jump (though I certainly won’t be needing a pilot’s licence – maybe I should say ‘hop’ instead).
I notice from your sizing pages that a 161/162 board length would be ideal – I’m curious as to whether I’d notice the drop down from my 165, especially in powder; or has 20 years of R&D improved boards hugely?
Hope you can help!
Hey Johnny
Thanks for your message.
Between those 3, I would say:
– The One is the most aggressive, IMO. And when I say that you have to be more aggressive with it to get the best out of it. I rate it a similar flex to the Frontier overall, but it’s stiffer or softer in different places. It’s quite a bit softer tip and tail vs the middle of the board and torsionally stiffer. The Frontier is a more even flex. It’s torsionally softer but a little stiffer in the nose/tail vs the One. This makes the one more effort to turn, particularly at slower speeds but does give it more stability at speed, which it’s the best for out of the 3.
– The One is also the best of the 3 when it comes to edge-hold in icy conditions. The Frontier next and then the Thunderstorm. Thunderstorm not terrible in icy conditions or anything but not as good as the other 2, particularly the One.
– The Thunderstorm and Frontier are better in powder than the One. This is for a couple of reasons. 1. they are more directional and 2. they both have 3D contour in the base. This helps both slashing turns and powder float.
– Thunderstorm is the springiest/livliest/snappiest feeling of the 3. Just feels like it has more energy and you don’t have to do much to access that energy. The Frontier is the next most snappy and then the One, which is a damper, smoother feeling in comparison.
– For jumps and butters I’d take the Thunderstorm any day of the week. It’s got that pop energy. Easiest to access the pop but also most total pop. Easy to set up for spins etc. The One has more total pop than the Frontier, but it takes quite a bit of energy to extract it. The Frontier is easy to access its pop, there’s just not that much there.
– The Thunderstorm is also the lightest, both on scales and for feel on snow. On the scales it actually came out right on average weight but felt really light on snow. The Frontier was heavier on the scales than the One, but on snow, the Frontier felt normal and the One felt heavier than normal. This can often be the case, I find with torsionally stiff boards. And I think that 3D contour in the base also makes a board feel lighter than it is.
– For trees I’d also hands down take the Thunderstorm. I found it really quick and easy to get edge to edge, it’s the most agile of the 3, in my experience and more agile than most boards I’ve ridden. The Frontier is good in trees too though, I really liked that in trees and for shorter/sharper turns in general. I wasn’t a big fan of the One for trees.
– For carving I found them all fairly equal performance-wise. That’s not to say they feel the same on a carve but overall performance. With the Thunderstorm and 3BT in general I find that the engagement point for a carve is a little deeper, but I’ve not had issues with it, once I’ve gotten used to it.
In terms of dropping size and powder. All else being equal, a smaller board won’t float as well as a bigger board in powder. But surface area is only one factor. e.g. a tail that’s shorter than it’s nose will help a board keep the nose up and the tail sink a little (same with a narrower tail vs nose). Rocker in the nose also helps keep things floating. 3D contour and other things in the base can help with powder float too. But surface area certainly plays a big part. From what I could find out about the Emmagagator, it sounds like it was fairly stiff but also leaning freestyle, so probably had a more twin or directional twin like shape “Hard Carving Freestyle”. Also there was no such thing as rocker in snowboards back then, nor 3D contoured bases, so it would have been a flat base, all camber board. So probably didn’t have much going for it in terms of powder float, except for size (and that’s relative to the weight of the rider on it, too).
So, IMO, dropping down 3-4cm from your Emmagator you shouldn’t notice any decrease in powder performance from the Thunderstorm or Frontier, in fact you’ll likely get better float. From the One you’d probably even maintain that same level, with the 161W.
Note that the boards here are likely to feel softer flexing and more mellow than what you’re used to, which you’re very likely to appreciate for the likes of trees, jumps, butters but may not (maybe with the exception of the One) find them quite as stable when you’re riding really fast and if you’re laying down big carves. Just to give you an idea you’d be getting a board that’s a little more optimized in other areas, but may sacrifice in others potentially. Again, having no experience with the Emmagator, I’m only hypothesizing, so I couldn’t say for sure.
Size-wise for the 3, I would go:
– Thunderstorm: 162W
– Frontier: 161W – you could go 164W with this one too, it’s in range, particularly as you’re used to a 165 (which looks like it was wide) and this is a board you can err a little longer on if you want to
– One: 161W
Hope this helps with your decision
Wow – that is a highly considered and exceptionally detailed reply! Thank you Nate, I don’t know where you find the time to do this but it is very much appreciated.
I have decided to take the plunge with a Thunderstorm. Your analysis of the Emmagator is broadly similar to my experiences with it; a lovely board, but I would get the aching back knee quite quickly in powder, and it was a bit limousiney through the trees. I’m looking forward to seeing how the Bataleon floats and how ‘lively’ and nimble in the woods it’s going to be. I’m hoping to hit the slopes next month; I shall keep you posted.
Thanks again for the time and effort you put in to answering all my questions. I hope your winter is pure white.
Johnny
You’re very welcome Johnny. Sometimes I’m not sure where I find the time either. But I have this compulsion to give as much info as I can relevant to a decision.
Look forward to hearing what you think and hope you also have a great winter!