Hello and welcome to my Capita Mega Merc review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Mega Merc as an aggressive all-mountain snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Mega Merc a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other aggressive all-mountain snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Capita Mega Merc 2022
Price: $799
Style: Aggressive All-Mountain
Flex Rating: Medium-Stiff (6.5/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Stiff (7.5/10)
Rating Score: 90.4/100
Compared to other Men’s Aggressive All-Mountain Boards
Out of the 19 men’s aggressive all-mountain snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Mega Merc’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Mega Merc’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Aggressive All-Mountain |
Price: | $799 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Chattery/Damp: |  |
Smooth/Snappy: |  |
Playful/Aggressive: |  |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Setback 12.5mm (0.5") |
Base: | Sintered (Capita's "Hyperdrive" base) |
Weight: | Felt lighter than normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (CM) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
153 | 253 | 100-160 | 45-72 |
155 | 255 | 120-180 | 54-81 |
157 | 257 | 130-190 | 59-86 |
159 | 259 | 140-200 | 63-90 |
161 | 261 | 160-220+ | 72-99+ |
156W | 261 | 120-180 | 54-81 |
158W | 263 | 130-190 | 59-86 |
160W | 265 | 140-200+ | 63-90+ |
*note that the 156W, 158W and 160W are new sizes as of the 2023 model.
Who is the Mega Merc Most Suited To?
The Capita Mega Merc is for anyone wanting a stiffer, more aggressive board capable of bombing hills/carving down the mountain, while also being capable on jumps and dealing with crud/chunder.
It has its weaknesses like any board does. It won't excel in deeper powder but it's also not bad there. Nor will it butter or jib easily but if you enjoy doing everything else, especially aggressively, the Mega Merc has got you covered.
Not a board I would recommend to beginners or intermediates as it is just too much but for anyone who is an advanced/expert, this is certainly a board to consider
The Mega Merc in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Mega Merc is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Capita Mega Merc 2023, 157cm (257mm waist width)
Date: March 24, 2022
Conditions
Sunny with barely a cloud in the sky.
Temperature: 30°F (-1°C) in the morning, warming up to 36°F (2°C) in the afternoon.
24hr snow: 0" (0cm)
48hr snow: 0" (0cm)
7 day snow: 27" (69cm)
On groomer: Hard packed but not icy.
Off groomer: Icy and crunchy to start but softened up as the day went on.
Setup
Bindings angles: +12/-9
Stance width: 555mm (22″)
Stance Setback: 12.5mm (0.5")
Width at Inserts: 264mm (10.39") at front insert and 266mm (10.47") at back insert.
Tester: Fraser
Rider Height: 6'1"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Tactical Lexicon ADV
Bindings Used: Fix Yale: M
Weight: 2720grams (6lbs 0oz)
Weight per cm: 17.32 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.59 grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 200 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 & 2023 models. The Mega Merc is light on the scales and felt a bit lighter than normal on snow as well.
Powder
Unfortunately on this day we had no powder to test in but looking at the specs the Mega Merc should be decent without being amazing.
It has a directional shape helping to sink the tail in deeper snow, while the rocker in the nose and tail help to give it some float when needed too. Overall it can handle decent amounts of powder but isn't going to excel on really deep days.
Carving
Really enjoyable to carve and I never noticed any washiness. Overall it felt best for long drawn out carves to me, as opposed to shorter/tighter carves.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashes: Some effort was required to release the tail but overall making turns/slashes was fairly un-catchy. But you couldn't get too lazy.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Not overly quick edge-to-edge at slower speeds but not terribly sluggish either. The rocker in the nose and tail coupled with the Wha-Pow tech allows you to be more relaxed and less on top of the edges when at slower speeds, than you otherwise would be. But this is still a board that feels best on edge.
Catchiness: While it did feel less catchy at slower speeds, the Mega Merc could feel a bit catchy at moderate-higher speeds when you got a bit too casual and didn't lean as hard into your edges.
Speed
The Mega Merc had a considerable amount of glide allowing it to go really fast when desired, which was perfect for bombing hills. With all the speed came stability and dampness too and it never felt like you were pushing it too hard. It just always had more to give.
Uneven Terrain
Crud: Handled crud/chunder with ease, smashing right through it whenever needed. Felt like it would take a lot to throw you off - and I never found that limit.
Trees/Bumps: It required some effort to get it moving quickly between edges, particularly at slower speeds, but when you put the effort in, you could get through trees pretty well.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Performed decently well on jumps.
Pop: Overall an average amount of pop. Some of it was pretty easy to access, but to get most of it, you had to wind it up a bit.
Approach: Pretty good, without being amazing, for making last second adjustments and really stable. I never noticed any chatter of note.
Landing: The Mega Mercs stiffness helped absorb landings nicely, which made it good for landings off larger jumps.
Side-hits: Enjoyable on most side his. It was capable of handling rough approaches and landings and the pop was solid enough to get some extra air.
Small jumps/Big Jumps: A great option on any size jump. I really didn't have a preference.
Switch
Even though it is a directional twin board with a setback stance, it's only a minimal amount, which allowed it to feel really similar when riding switch. Transitions weren't perfect but were fun so long as you didn't get too sloppy with them.
Spins
Capable of setting up switch takeoffs/landings with a bit of effort and practice. The transitions felt decent too and once the board was in the air it didn't feel heavy, allowing you to whip it around for 180s and 360s pretty easily.
Butters
Initiating butters on the Mega Merc requires you to apply some muscle, due to its stiffness. But leaning into it and using your weight is well worth it as it locks into place nicely when you get there. But certainly takes some doing.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
SPEED | 4.5 | 22.5/25 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 18/20 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.5 | 9/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 90.4/100 |
The Capita Mega Merc is a capable board almost anywhere for the right rider. It's versatile but in a more aggressive way, which makes it really enjoyable for those that like their riding fast and hard.
Speed and carving are its two strongest attributes, while also being on jumps too. Don't expect it to rip powder like it does crud/chunder but it's still pretty decent in pow, particularly compared to other boards in this category.
Overall, if you can handle the Mega Merc, it's hard to find many faults in it. It's pretty well rounded.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Mega Merc, 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 aggressive all-mountain snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Mega Merc compares to other aggressive all-mountain snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hey Nate,
Looking to buy my first board after about 10 years of 1-3 trips a year and renting.
I love established tree runs, charging groomers, and powder when I can find it.
While preparing for a trip a had a few people reccomend the Ride Berzerker and Mega Mercury. I was only able to find a Berzerker 157 demo and I really enjoyed it. It was engaging, challenging, and good turn initiation on the medium speed established tree runs.
Would you say the Mega Merc would perform the same or better? Should I stick with the Berzerker since I really enjoyed it? Would you recommend any other boards.
Sizing suggestions would be greatly appreciated too. 5’10” 170 lbs.
Thanks!
Hi Balakay
Thanks for your message.
Having had a good experience with the Berzerker, that always makes it a safer bet, but I personally preferred the Mega Merc for most things. However, for trees I think I would prefer the Berzerker, especially size-for-size. Whilst I felt the Berzerker preferred speed over slower riding, I felt it was to a lesser extent than the Mega Merc and also if you’re tree runs are typically done at medium speed and not slower, tighter, more technical tree runs, then that’s less of an issue.
Note however, that I haven’t ridden the Berzerker for some time now and when I did I could only get on a 162, so whilst I felt the 162 Berzerker was similar to the 157 Mercury in terms of trees/quick turns/turn initiation, if it was the 157 Berzerker vs the 157 Mega Merc, the 157 Berzerker would be better for that. However, also note that the Berzerker has changed a little since I rode it. Also, just noticed that the 157 is technically considered a wide just looking at it now. However, with a 255mm waist, it’s quite narrow for a wide and is still likely narrower than the regular width 157 Mega Merc.
Size-wise, if you could also let me know your boot size.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for all the insightful reviews.
I’m looking to upgrade my board, and would love to get some advice from you.
I’m 5’9” 160lbs, wear size 10 boots, and CartelX bindings. I love weaving through trees, under the lift moguls where I need to deal with chop & chunder. If off-piste is too sketchy, I love bombing the groomers. Deep powder days are infrequent where I live, but need something that would be decently fun when I do get the opportunity. Some side hits here and there but not into park or buttering etc.
What do you think would work better between the Mega Merc and Kazu for my style of riding? Any other boards you could recommend?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Jacob
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning Kazu for what you’re describing. It’s not quite as good for Mega Merc for crashing through chop & chunder, but I much preferred it for trees and moguls. Size-wise, I’d be looking at the 157 for your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, your site is the best thanks for everything you do!
I saw you would prefer the cartel x over the Malavita, but I would appreciate some clarification on this. A lot of people recommend the stratas or regular cartels on this board, which I thought were very similar flex to the vitas.
I’m 6’1”, 195-200 pounds, size 13 boot, stocky weightlifter build, and getting next years mega merc in 160MW for all mountain and side hits. I currently ride vitas (on a westmark rocker) and love the dampness and construction. (I just bought some stratas but I much prefer Burton’s straps/highback padding/construction, so no more union for me)
Would another pair of vitas be too soft for this board, especially at my higher weight? (FYI rumors are the vitas are being discontinued)
And are the new cartels stiff enough, or should I go with the cartel x? Supposedly the cartel x are now as stiff as previous cartels, and new cartels are now softer like missions. I’m open to other brands too. Thanks!
Hey Todd
Thanks for your message.
I would go Cartel X on the Mega Merc. Capita may rate it a 6.5/10 flex, but their flex ratings only rate the core of the board. The glassing and other things can really increase the stiffness of a board, like in the case of the Mega Merc. I would personally go stiffer than the Malavita on it. And for your weight/strength I think stiffer would work better too. Anything in that 7/10 to 9/10 flex range would be a good bet, IMO. You can definitely ride it with the Vitas (I did) and could ride it with the Cartel’s too, but not ideal, IMO – if I was to setup with this board I’d go stiffer. The Cartel X would be a good match, IMO. For some other options you could also check out:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply! Would the cartel x be stiff enough to drive this board with my heavier weight/strength?
Also, how do you feel about the Now Drives for the MM? I know you rated them pretty low, but I assume with the hard bushings it will be plenty powerful. White lines gave it their 100 award this winter and it seems Now/Jones bindings are getting a bigger following since you’ve reviewed the drives 4 years ago.
Hi Todd
I think the Cartel X would be stiff enough. But they’re the softest I would put on the Mega Merc.
The Drive would work well. The biggest reason for my lower rating on the Drives is because of board feel and the straps. They have since improved their straps, so that shouldn’t be a big thing. The board feel thing probably hasn’t changed, but board feel is most important for freestyle stuff, so if you’re not going to be doing creative playful tricks or anything like that, then that wouldn’t be an issue. Apart from those things, I generally liked NOW/Jones bindings.
Dear Nate,
you are providing a “feeling” flex of 7,5 for the Mega Merc although on the other hand the physical flex is 6,5. Is the flex really tending to be harder than the specs are?
Why does Capita for this reason not provide the inbetween flex of 7 or so.
Somehow this makes me feel unsure and I am afraid of the board beeing not stiff enough for bombing, going high speeds stable and carving.
I am in detaill comparing a bit with the Yes PYL.
Thanks a lot,
Andi
Hi Andi
Thanks for your message.
This, IMO is definitely more than a 6.5/10 flex. Capita, from what I’ve been told, and I don’t know if it’s the same for all brands, base their flex rating on the flex of the core only. Which doesn’t take into account glassing or anything else, which can make a huge difference to the flex of the board. You’ll notice that Capita have the Merc and Mega Merc both rated at 6.5/10 flex. But the Mega Merc has Triax/Triax glassing, versus Triax/Biax glassing. Not to mention things like the Carbon array on the Mega Merc. And in reality, at least in my experience, the Mega Merc is significantly stiffer then Mercury.
Mega Merc stiffer than the PYL, in my experience. I also had someone else helping me with testing last winter and he also found the Mega Merc stiffer than the PYL.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
it seems that I am very close to going with a Mega Merc. Since right now it’s almost end of current season and close to release for the 2024 models I am not sure if it would be worth it to take a look at what Capita will enhance for the Mega Merc 2024 (if the previews of the grey/silver top sheet are real than I would rather prefer the 2024 design).
But mainly I am curious what technically will be updated
.
I will have maybe one or two snowboarding days left riding this season so it could make sense to wait a bit. On the other hand there would be good offers for the last 2023 models.
When apropximately will you be testing the 2024 capita models and updating it in the review section?
I actually can’t wait to get to know the enhancements.
All the best,
Andi
Hi Andi
From what I can tell the 2024 Mega Merc is getting a new base, but otherwise, apart from the graphic, looks to be technically the same board. Not sure how much that new base differ from the old, it was already pretty fast. We are unlikely to retest the Mega Merc, given the changes don’t seem to be significant. There are other models with more significant changes and new models, which are our priorities to test. But essentially you’re not looking at too much difference, so the main reason to wait for the 2024 model would be for the graphic or the potential of a slightly better base. Unless you can’t find your best size in the 2023 mode, then I would wait for the 2024 model. Better to wait to get the best size later rather than a sub-optimal size now, IMO.
Hi Nate, I am looking to upgrade by board and the Mega Merc looks great. I currently have a 2020 Assassin Pro 162, but I am more into charging boombing and carving that spending any time in the park. I ride in the East and in resorts and it looks like the Merc is a better at handling the bumps and better for carving and bombing. I am about 82kg, 6′, I have size 11 Thraxis boots, I set my bindings at -15 +15. My level is getting to high intermediate to advanced. I ride some switch but not much only when my legs get tired.
I think that the 161 Mega Merc should be a good fit, but my feet are a bit on the large side an perhaps I should go with the 160Wwhat do you think? The Mega Merc is 3mm wider at the waist than the 162 Assassin Pro. I have never knowingly fallen from heel or toe drag on the Assassin Pro. For bindings I would most likely reuse my 2020 Union Falcors or buy some new ones if I can get a good deal. Keep up the good work. You website is amazing.
Hi Duncan
Thanks for your message.
I think you should be good on the 161 with those binding angles, assuming you weren’t getting any boot drag on the Assassin Pro 162. The 162 Assassin Pro, assuming a roughly 22″ stance width is around 267mm at the inserts. The Mega Merc 161 is around 270mm at the back insert and 268mm at the front insert, again assuming a roughly 22″ stance width. So it’s not a lot wider, but wider by a little bit. But assuming you’ve had no issues on your Assassin Pro, you should be fine.
In terms of length, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 160 – so you could go either 159 or 161, but I would be leaning 161 in this case as I think it’s best for your riding style, you’re used to a 162 and it gives you that little bit more leeway width-wise – but even ignoring width, I’d be leaning 161 for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks for your recommendation. I am trying to get a 161 on sale. Another board which looks interesting is the Amphid Singular. Have you ridden that one?
Hi Duncan
Haven’t ridden anything from Amplid yet, unfortunately, so don’t have any first hand experience with the Singular unfortunately.
Hi Nate, killer reviews! Your site has helped me make some tough decisions.
Quick question: where are you measuring the width at the insert packs? I assume the middle of the reference stance but if not let me know. I wish manufacturers would make it standard to post that measurement. Thanks for doing it for us!
Hey Ryan
Thanks for your message.
Yeah middle of the reference stance. And it’s on the base of the board (not the top sheet) – so outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge.
A few starting to do it now, which is good to see. Nidecker, Jones, YES all now show width at inserts.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Im stuck between the mega merc and the Goliath plus, my height is 5’6 and weight 158lb current board is the Goliath 2020 153 and looking to upgrade to something a bit more aggressive
The Goliath would be the 156 my weight is at the lower end for this on the chart, I’m thinking it might be a little harder to handle going with the aggressiveness of the board where with the mega merc i can go for the 153
What’s your thoughts? Do you think the 156 Goliath would be to much or just go for the mega merc on the 153
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
In my experience the Mega Merc is considerably more aggressive than the Goliath Plus. I haven’t ridden the regular Goliath, but I found the Goliath Plus to be not super aggressive at all. Not ultra playful either, but playful enough that I have it in my all-mountain category, rather than aggressive all-mountain. Even going 153 in the Mega Merc and 156 in the Goliath Plus, I still think the Mega Merc would be more aggressive, personally.
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 155, so I don’t think the 156 is too far off for the Goliath Plus, though depending on your boot size, it might be a bit on the big side, when combining length/width. If you could let me know your boot size, that would help.
If you go Mega Merc, I think the 153 is the best bet.
Given the size difference, it should even out a bit in terms of aggressiveness, but I still think the 153 Mega Merc will be noticeably more aggressive than the 156 Goliath Plus (based on my experience with the 156 Goliath Plus and 157 Mega Merc), so I think it depends on how much more aggressive you want to go and how much different you want the feel. If you’re looking for a more subtle difference (all be it a little less subtle than it otherwise would be by sizing up), then I’d go Goliath Plus. If you want a more pronounced difference and a more different feel of ride, then the Mega Merc.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I am currently looking for a replacement for my Capita SuperDOA. Great board, but since I mainly want to carve down the groomers at high speed and occasionally look for the powder I think the Mega Merc suits me better.
Which size do you think would suit me best? I weigh 91 Kg and have shoe size US12. I come out on the 160W myself. I prefer to ride my board as short as possible and the 158W could also work, but I’m just a bit over the weight limit for the 158W. What do you think?
I’m also still in doubt about bindings to go with it. I currently have a pair of Rome Katanas. Fantastic bindings, but the Union Falcors appeal to me as well. What do you think about both bindings?
Thanks!
Kai
Hi Kai
Thanks for your message.
If you’re best size according to height/weight is 160W, then you should be fine on the 158W, if you like to size down a bit. I wouldn’t worry too much about being over the weight limit. You’ll probably notice it feeling a bit softer flexing than what I did and you’d likely sacrifice a little bit in terms of float in powder and stability at speed. But this board will float better than the Super DOA, even in a smaller size and it’s super stable at speed, so even losing a little bit there, it should still be nice and stable. But if you could also let me know your height (weight is more important for length sizing, but I still like to take height into account as it does have a leverage factor, IMO).
I really like the Katana’s and I think they’d be a really good match with the Mega Merc. The Falcors also a really good match, but if you already have the Katana’s I’d stick with them.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your reply.
I’m 1.90m (6’28).
Looking at Capita’s weight chart for the Mega Merc, the 158W goes up to 86 Kg and the 160W up to 93 Kg. Since I weigh 91 Kg myself (with clothes, helmet/goggles about 93 Kg), I automatically ended up with the 160W. I currently ride my Super DOA in 158W, but it goes up to 90 Kg.
Although manoeuvrability is important to me, I also want to get some higher speeds with the Mega Merc. Hence the extra 2 cm seemed handy to me for a bit more stability. Since I will still ride the 160W on the short side, manoeuvrability will also be fine don’t you think?
Does my height make any difference do you think?
Hi Kai
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” for your height/weight at around 163, so going 160W would be sizing a little shorter anyway. And the Super DOA is a board you typically ride a bit shorter anyway (more freestyle oriented and with more effective edge per overall length – e.g. 158W Super DOA has effective edge of 124.9cm versus the 158W Mega Merc with 122.3cm. The 160W Mega Merc has an effective edge of 123.9cm). So, the 160W Mega Merc is in a lot of ways the equivalent to the 158W Super DOA size-wise. So yeah, I think you’ll be fine on it maneuverability-wise.
In this case I think your height does make some difference. If you were like 5’9″/5’10” and were wanting to size down a little, then I wouldn’t consider the 160W sizing down and would be more inclined with going 158W.
Thanks Nate! I think the 160W is best for me then. The 161 would also be an option, but 160W fits a bit better in terms of weight and width and for what I want to do with it.
Have a nice season!
You’re very welcome Kai. Hope you have a great season too! If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on with the Mega Merc, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hi Nate. Hope you are having a great upcoming season. After seeing all the YouTube videos and reviews on this board, I see everyone has matched the Mega merc with the union atlas. I am torn between the union falcor and the union atlas. Not sure the difference between the mini disk and regular disk? Heard the mini disk is more surfy? I can’t find any good information between the two. Union website shows the falcor better for all mountain/freeride and atlas better for all mountain/freestyle. I’m an all mountain/ freeride guy that likes to ride fast and aggressive, straight line, bomb hills and groomers, powder and trees. Prefer side hits or launching off natural features rather than riding in the park and I don’t ride switch unless I land that way or buttering. Please help me decide which binding that would pair with the mega merc and my style of riding. Thank you so much for your time and I look forward to your response.
Hi Ron
Thanks for your message.
I would say the other way around, that the Atlas is more all-mountain/freeride and the Falcor more all-mountain/freeride/freestyle. I put in both because it’s still good for freeride. But it’s the binding with the better board feel and shock absorption, so to me, that makes it better for freestyle – and riding in both bindings, I would prefer the Falcor when I’m doing freestyle stuff over the Atlas.
I would say in terms of feel between the two bindings that the Falcor has a more explosive/springy response to it versus the Atlas, which has a more consistent, even response.
Both suit the Mega Merc for sure, so there isn’t a bad choice to make. The Falcor, IMO, will be better for when you’re hitting sidehits and buttering. For everything else, I think it depends on what you like the sound of more – explosive/springy or even/consistent. If it was me, I would put the Falcor on the Mega Merc but depends on that personality you’re after.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you so much for your detailed explanation. I’m leaning falcor. Also looking at the capita bsod. So basically I am between the mega merc and bsod for a new board. Then the atlas and falcor for bindings. I’ve read all your reviews and I can’t make up my mind. Which board seems better for my style of riding? Seems like I have the bindings picked now just between the bsod and mega merc.
Hi Ron
Both the BSOD and Mega Merc would work for what you’re describing. For when you are buttering (gotta muscle both of these boards to get them to lock into a press but you can do it, just takes really getting your weight into it) the Mega Merc is a little better than the BSOD, just because it’s a more even feeling on tip and tail, but BSOD isn’t like way worse or anything. And for switch Mega Merc a little better, but doesn’t sound like you’re doing it a lot – the BSOD isn’t terrible at it either.
The BSOD a little better in powder and in trees when there’s powder in there. Both are boards you’ve got to work for when it comes to riding trees, especially if it’s quite slow and technical, but they can do it, just not effortless or anything.
For sidehits, I would actually slightly give the nod to the BSOD, though again there’s not much in it. And if you’re spinning off sidehits, the Mega Merc becomes a little better.
Both good at speed and carving, so I think you’re going to be good there.
I think overall I would be leaning BSOD, but the Mega Merc definitely wouldn’t be a bad choice.
Thank you so much for the excellent explanations. I really appreciate your time and attention to detail. Think I’m leaning bsod but wish I could have both since they both seem like amazing boards. Have a great season and stay safe.
You’re very welcome Ron. Hope you have an awesome season too!
Hey Nate, Nate here.
I am torn between the Mega Merc 160w & and Jones Flagship 161. I am 6’2 165lbs size 11 boots. I’m looking for a daily driver. I primarily ride in the Northwest and Pacific Northwest. I am a freeride/all mountain type of rider spending most of my time off piste and in the trees if conditions allow. I rarely, if ever, hit the park. Obviously conditions are never perfect so if there isn’t pow to be ridden I can have some fun on the groomers practicing turns and seeking side hits. I would like my next deck to handle some backcountry and side country too. I think my biggest fears are that the Merc is too playful and not good enough in pow. And the Flagship is maybe too aggressive if I’m not gripping and ripping all day. Curious what your thoughts are? Thanks for the time and response.
Hey Nate
Thanks for your message and great name by the way!
I would go Flagship for what you’re describing. IMO the Mega Merc is actually more aggressive than the Flagship, so I wouldn’t worry about it being too playful – and it’s not bad in powder either. But the Flagship is better in powder and better in trees, IMO. For backcountry, sidecountry, powder of any sort and trees, I’d take the Flagship and since that sounds like what you’ll be doing the most that’s the way I’d be leaning.
However, I’d go 159W for your specs. With 11s, the 161 is going to be too narrow, IMO. The 162W, when taking into account length and width is a little too big. But the 159W is just right, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I just wanted to say I absolutely love your reviews and the site in general. Thanks for all the hard work that goes into making it all happen for us. You guys are always the first place I refer friends to check out.
I’m 5’9 185 pounds size 9.5 boot, going on 24 years of riding. I’m replacing my 2008 yes 2008 158 Burton Custom X, had a 162 burton FL project before that and just found a deal on a 159 mega merc. I pulled the trigger on it but can return it if needed. My snowboard style is hard and fast (but safe on blacks and double blacks) recently hitting 65 mph with a goal of getting to 85 mph gradually without going to hardboots. That being said I know my old custom X is full camber
The mega merc was on my list along with these boards (sorry not all are on the site) but would appreciate any feedback on them compared to the mega merc when it comes to full out speed. I was comparing Jones ultra flagship, K2 alchemist, cardiff bonsai, ride commissioner or another Custom X. I’ve also thought of going Sg or Kessler boarder cross boards.
Looking forward to reading your opinion, thanks
Hi Dave
Thanks for your message and for the referrals – much appreciated!
Of those boards I’ve only ridden the Custom X and the Mega Merc (I rode the old Ride Timeless, which is similar, but not the same as the Commissioner). So unfortunately can’t give any first hand experience on the others there. The Mega Merc is very good at speed, but the one thing, as you alluded to, that stops it from being the ultimate at speed is the rocker in the tip and tail. It sacrifices a little there in order to also be decent in powder.
The Custom X, in my experience is a little better – though they have mellowed out the flex a little in the more recent models – previously would have given it a 5/5.
I found the old Ride Timeless could handle any amount of speed, but not sure if that translates to the Commissioner, which I think was made a little more forgiving than the Timeless, though I suspect, even if it’s not quite as stable at speed, that it’s pretty close.
The regular Flagship is what I would give a 4/5 for speed, so the Ultra Flagship is likely to be at least 4.5/5 given how stiff it’s supposed to be, but having not ridden it couldn’t say for sure.
I haven’t ridden anything Cardiff, Sg or Kessler, so I have no reference for them, unfortunately.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate! I am a fast aggressive rider looking for a new board this season. I am 5’10, 195lbs, size 10 wide burton photon boot, union falcor size medium bindings on a libtech orca 156 ( yes guilty of being a fan of Travis rice haha) I find the orca too slow and not aggressive for my style of resort riding. I’m looking at a new 1 board quiver to cover bombing groomers and hills, riding steep and technical terrain, trees, 1-2ft of powder max since I ride mostly in the resort and do some free ride as well. Mostly ride blues-double blacks on and off piste and not into park, jumps jibbing or riding switch. Just hate getting bogged down on greens or cat tracks with the orca and looking for some speed when I have to get down to the base. Looking at these 2 setups:
1. Capita Mega Merc 159 or 161
2. Jones Flagship 161 or 162W
Please let me know which board would fit my needs better and which size?
Both boards have great warranties. Heard the top sheet on the jones can be an issue from some reviews with it delaminating. I would really appreciate your input and expert advice. Lookin forward to your response! Thank you
Hi Tristan
Thanks for your message.
To me the Mega Merc is the more aggressive of the two boards and given you’re style of riding, I would be leaning towards that.
The Flagship is better for powder, IMO, and I’d personally prefer to have it in the trees but for bombing and carving up the groomers, the Mega Merc is a beast. And it’s not above average in powder, IMO.
Size-wise, I’d be leaning 161 on the Mega Merc, given your style. The 159 is certainly an option and both will be wide enough. But I’d be leaning 161 given you want to ride fast/aggressive. Keeping in mind the 159 will likely feel better in trees.
If you went Flagship I would be leaning 161, to keep it agile for trees and going to be almost as good at speed. It should be wide enough in most scenarios given you have Photon (low profile) 10s. If you were riding with a really flat back binding angle (i.e. 0-3 degrees) and like to really get deep in your carves (i.e. eurocarving) then there’s some risk, but otherwise you should be fine width-wise on the 161. The 162W would work though – and even the 164 if you really wanted to increase your stability at speed and float in powder.
Hope this helps
Thank you so much for your response. It’s a difficult decision since the mega merc is a bomber yet the flagship is better in powder. At least you addressed the sizing at 161. I ride at 18 and -9 but can adjust some if necessary. I’m so torn but leaning towards the mega mercury since I don’t get to ride powder as much as I’d like unfortunately. It’s just exhausting leaning back all day on a twinish board but yet again I could have the orca for that. Mega merc for bombing and orca for powder. Appreciate your time and happy riding
You’re very welcome Tristan.
And yeah, if you were to hold on to the Orca you could certainly use that for powder days.
Hello again, I just checked my new boots and my boots are actually a size 10w burton photon boa. My old pair of k2 boots were 10.5 and I weighed in today at 190lbs. Should I go 159 or 161 for the mega mercury. Again I ride at 18 -9. Not sure if that will
Change your decision? 159
Is 25.9cm
Waist width for 140-200lbs and 161 26.1cm 160-220+ lbs. I ordered the 161 like you mentioned but not sure if I want to change to 159 with my updated specs. Not a cheap board so I don’t want to make a mistake. I appreciate your time
Hi Tristan
I think purely based on specs, the 159 is the more pure size, but given you like to ride fast and aggressive, I think the 161 would still work well for you. Both are going to be wide enough for your boots, IMO, so I don’t think width is an issue. But yeah for 5lbs I’d still be leaning 161 just because of how you describe your riding style. That said, the 159 wouldn’t be wrong – and if I’m assessing your riding style a little wrong (maybe you like to ride slower/in trees etc more often than I’m assuming) then maybe 159, but to give you that extra speed/stability, I’d say you’re still good with the 161.
Hi Nate,
Did you notice much difference between the 2022 and 2023 models?
Cheers,
Spencer
Hi Spencer
Thanks for your message.
I rode the 2022 model and Fraser (my other tester) rode the 2023 model. According to specs and everything else the 2023 model is the same as the 2022 model, bar the graphic. Also see my response to Sergio below.
Hey Nate, please advise if you noticed any differences between 2022 and 2023 models?
Thank you!
Hi Sergio
Thanks for your message.
As far as I know the 2022 and 2023 Mega Mercs are the same (just new sizes 156W, 158W and 160W).
Our score changed quite a bit, but that was mostly down to the scoring system changing this year for aggressive all-mountain snowboards. Which was done to better reflect what this type of snowboard is typically used for. So, the weightings have been slightly altered – and caring and turns/slashes has been separated into 2 separate categories. Crud and trees/bumps have now also been separated, as opposed to having them lumped together as an overall “uneven terrain” category. Both of these changes were to reflect that a board can be better at one than the other and we believe this gives a more accurate insight into the boards performance than lumping those factors together. Also, now that this board has had multiple testers, we averaged out our scores for it – so the rating for jumps went up a little.
Hope this answers your question
Thank you, so much!
You’re very welcome Sergio. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate,
I’ve been riding the 2020 Regular Mercury 155. I love it, but I’ve been wondering if the Megs Merc would offer more ….??? The tech in it sounds amazing. Do you think there is much point ‘up grading’ to Mega Merc?
Hi Roger
It depends what you want out of it. If you want to be able to charge harder and get more stability at speed out of it and you’ve found the regular Merc doesn’t give you quite enough in that respect, then I’d say it’s worth going to the Mega Merc. But keep in mind that the Mega Merc will be more work when riding slower/more casually. It’s the kind of board that likes to be ridden fast and the kind of board you want to put energy into – it gives it back when you do, but not as fun when you want to ride a little more playfully/casually. For big aggressive carves, the Mega Merc will also give you more. So it’s only an upgrade if that’s what you want out of it. But you do have to give something up to get those upgrades.
Thanks Nate. Great advice as always!
Hi Nate,
Currently I have the Lib Tech TRace Pro with the bindings Union Falcon 2022 and I would like to change the board. I think the Mega Merc is a good option.
What is your advise / opinion concerning this change?
Thank you in advance
Regards
Nuno
Hi Nuno
It would depend on how you like to ride as to whether I think it would be a good change or not.
But some differences between the Mega Merc and T Rice Pro, IMO.
– Mega Merc (7.5/10 flex) is stiffer than T Rice Pro (6.5/10).
– T Rice Pro is better in hard/icy conditions but Mega Merc not bad there
– Mega Merc is a little damper than the T Rice Pro. The T Rice Pro a little snappier
– Mega Merc is more stable at speed and generally prefers to be ridden fast. The T Rice Pro as well prefers a little speed under it I’ve found, but is a little better at more moderate speeds
– Mega Merc better for powder
– Mega Merc better for big, aggressive carves
– T Rice Pro better for riding switch
– T Rice Pro a little easier to slash turns on but not by much
– T Rice Pro a little better for jumps
– Mega Merc smashes crud better
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hello Nate,
Thank you for your answer. I will buy the mega merc but I don’t know if I will buy the 155 or 157. I have 1,74 meters (5.7) and 79 kg (174 lb).
I like to ride fast and some tree’s.
Thank you
Kind regards and happy new year.
Nuno
Hi Nuno
Thanks for your message.
Both sizes are doable. I would say 157 is probably the best size, but it would depend on your boot size. If you could let me know your boot size to confirm. Happy new year!
Hello Nate,
I use the burton photon 10.5.
Thanks
Nuno
Hi Nuno
I would go 157. The 155 wouldn’t be wrong and you’d probably get away with it width-wise, but I think the 157 is the better bet and more safe width-wise. If you had smaller feet, then sizing down to the 155 would have made more sense – and whilst it wouldn’t be wrong, I’d be leaning 157.
Hey Nate,
Think the Union Stratas will be enough to handle the Mega Merc or do you reckon I should go for something stiffer?
Thanks
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message.
I would recommend going for something stiffer. The Strata would work OK, but a stiffer binding would be more optimal, IMO. A similar feeling binding but one that’s stiffer and a better match for the Mega Merc, IMO, would be the Union Falcor.
Hope this helps
Also, I’m riding 2021 Rome Katana bindings if that has any influence.
Thanks
Hi Nelson
Thanks for your message.
If you’re looking for a one board quiver, then the Mercury, IMO, is that. It can cover everything. The Mega Merc is a little more hard charging dominant, IMO, so not going to be as good for when you’re wanting to just cruise and, IMO, not as good in the park. It will give you more at speed and on a big high speed carve, but the Mercury is still pretty good in that area and more versatile in that it’s better in other areas than the Mega Merc. Both are decent in powder, so they won’t be bad there or anything. But they’re not optimal for powder or anything.
I think a multi board quiver will always give you that option to be more optimal for the given conditions, so while you could definitely go Mercury (and I would be leaning Mercury if you want a one board quiver) and it would work fine in Japow, if you could swing it to get a more powder specific board, it will be more ideal, of course.
Size-wise for the Mercury, I think the 160W is your best bet. 158W wouldn’t be a bad choice though, if you wanted to mellow it out a touch for when you’re cruising with your wife and kids and for the park, then you could definitely ride that board. You would, subtly, drop a little in terms of powder float and stability at speed.
I haven’t ridden the Party Wave, so can’t specifically comment on it based on experience, but based on my experience with other Bataleon boards and on the Party Wave’s specs, it looks like it would work well in trees/powder. And be a good compliment to the Mercury – as in be quite different. For the Party Wave I’d be leaning 154 for you for that board, given it’s width. It should still float really well in powder at that size for you and going shorter – because of it’s extra width, will give you that maneuverability for trees. Again, that’s not based on experience though.
The Katana will, IMO, be a really good match for the Mercury. It’s on the stiffer side for the Party Wave (assuming Bataleon’s 4/10 flex rating is accurate) but would still work.
Hope this helps
Thanks again for the prompt response and info.
Much appreciated, yeah I was leaning towards the regular merc, and the Party wave plus in a 154.
Just not sure If I’ll be able to find a 160w, might have to go with the 58w or keep hunting
Thanks again and keep up the awesome content.
Hopefully I’ll be able to see a review of the PW or PW+ Soon!
Cheers
You’re very welcome Nelson. Will try to get my hands on the PW and PW+
Hi Nate,
Once again, I write seeking your advice and opinions. Because no matter how many reviews I watch I keep coming back to your site. I’m pretty well researched but you’ve got the board testing prerequisites that I don’t so it’s always fun to ask.
here goes…
So I’m doing an overhaul of the board collection. I’m a dad now and my riding time is less frequent.
I’m Aiming to create a 1-2 board quiver for Australia/New zealand/ Japan riding
It’s always great to have 1 board based on ease of travel weight etc And I’m considering the Mercury/mega merc (leaning towards regular mercury) for one of those options. Or as an entire one board quiver.
So… based on my specs of 83kg/183lbs 11.5 US boot and 6’2”
As someone who is pretty limited with time on snow but has had extended experience over time who, when possible LOVES to charge hard, but Rides mainly groomed runs, and also with the wife and kids, rarely rides park but wants the option (don’t have a lot of park experience) but sometimes it happens and also want to build on my skills in that area. Also Quite often ride Japan pow & off piste – 1/3 of the time I ride.
So,
Would you recommend I get the mercury/mega merc as a one board quiver (possibly in a 160w?)or get it in a 158w and get a secondary pow board for Japan trees like a bataleon party wave/plus or something similar – short , wide, tapered directional etc to compliment it.
Or I’m open to any other ideas altogether.. haha
Not that there’s a huge difference between the two sizes of 58w or 60w but your opinions and expertise are greatly appreciated.
I was also looking at the yes standard in a 159 but do find myself being drawn more to the Mercury for some reason.
Once again, thanks for all the info and time put into your reviews and content I love the detail and love to geek out on it.
Cheers Nate
Hi Nelson,
I thought I would chime in as I spent all of July and early August in New Zealand this season ’22 and visited 10 resorts/private fields in a multitude of conditions from chest deep powder to straight ice. This was apparently one of the better seasons since the 90’s for powder so we got lucky, but it appeals directly to your Australia/New Zealand/Japan question. I did a lot of diligence in making my decision on a one quiver board for this trip as I was on the road prior and decided to buy in NZ as opposed to lug my quiver around the world.
I ended up going with the Capita DOA, and it left nothing to be desired in any conditions other than the deepest of powder. The variable terrain day in and day out of NZ made this board ideal and gave me confidence tackling each day without question. I understand this feedback is singular and I haven’t ridden a Mercury, but thought it would be helpful and definitely relevant as my guess is the Mercury isn’t too far off in general performance.
A few worthy notes:
Height: 5′ 9″
Weight: 190 lbs
Board Size: 156
– There were a lot of DOA’s and War Pigs on the mountain. These had to be two of the most common boards I saw over my 5 weeks. The other most represented brand was Nitro, but of a variety of models.
– A few and seemingly knowledgeable local shop riders I spoke with were keen on the Mercury for the NZ conditions.
– I’ve never charged harder on hard pack and icy groomers with confidence, while popping side hits with ease. Holding an icy hard pack groomer at full bore was sweet.
– The edge to edge both on piste and off piste of the 156 at my height and weight was excellent while still having very good float in powder.
– While the DOA was awesome, I don’t imagine it handles chunder (which you can see a lot of in NZ) nearly as well as the shape of the War Pig, but speed, carve, pop, IMO style, and switch riding was exceptional.
Cheers,
Morgan Nelson
Hi Nate, I’m an intermediate rider looking to buy a board for mainly carving at resorts. I’m contemplating between the mega merc vs the mercury. I heard great things about the mega merc regarding it’s quality and tech, however would it be above my skill level and too difficult for me to handle? Love to hear your thoughts. In addition, I currently ride a lib-tech terrain wrecker, would the regular mercury be too similar to the TW and not worth the upgrade?
Hi Danny
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t typically recommend the Mega Merc for an intermediate rider. Unless you’ve got a really solid technique and like to ride fast/aggressive pretty much all the time. If that’s the case, then you might be OK, assuming you like your board stiff and have the physical strength or size to handle a stiffer board. If you’re a lighter rider, then it could feel a bit too much, particularly as an intermediate rider. The Mercury is likely to be better suited, if you don’t want to have to be really on your game all the time.
The Mercury is quite different to the Terrain Wrecker, so I don’t think you’ll be getting too similar there. Even though it’s not as stiff as the Mega Merc, it’s still noticeably stiffer than the TW and noticeably better for speed and carving. I really like the Terrain Wrecker (I own one and use it as my control board) but in those areas it’s not as good as the Mercury, so if that’s what you’re looking to do mostly, then it’s an upgrade. It’s a more stable/locked in feel, less playful, more precise. And I’m gathering that’s what you’re after. Even though the Mega Merc is even more so in terms of carving and speed my instinct is that you’d probably prefer the Mercury and it would be enough of an upgrade in those areas for what you’re looking for whilst still being more manageable all round.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate.
I see that you used the Malavita for the review. Which binding would you prefer on the board. Cartel X or Malavita?
Hi Anton
The Malavitas worked but I’d put the Cartel X on them over Malavita’s if I had the choice. I think they’d do a better job of driving the board.
Hello Nate,
Currently I have a Lib Tech TRICE PRO and I would like to change. I have some doubts between the Capita Mega Merc and the Capita Black Snowboard of Death. In your opinion what is it the best choice comparing the T Rice?
Thanks
Nuno
Hi Nuno
Between the Mega Merc and BSOD, it would depend somewhat on what you were wanting to ride, though both aren’t world’s apart or anything. Some differences to note:
– Mega Merc, in my experience felt a little stiffer than the BSOD
– I would say the BSOD is a little better in powder and the Mega Merc a little better for big carves. I preferred the BSOD a little for jumps and the Mega Merc a a little better for riding switch – otherwise performance fairly similar
Could be that sizing could be deciding factor too, depending on your specs.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, awesome review as always! So I am considering picking up next years meg merc (cause of the black top sheet) I’ve been riding about 5 years now and my style is mostly all mountain/freeride. I’m not really into park or jumps, just mostly going fast and carving. I rode my buddies super DOA and loved it, would you say both boards are similar? Right now i ride a orca, proto type 2 and a dancehaul, do you think it would take a lot of adjusting getting on the mega merc??
Hi Juju
Thanks for your message.
It would take some adjustment compared to your other boards, particularly the Dancehaul (haven’t ridden it but hear it’s quite mellow?) and PT2. I found the Orca relatively stiff, so you’ve already got that stiffer board you’re riding. The camber profile will feel different and take some adjusting, but it’s similar to the Super DOA in terms of camber profile (not the same but similar), so I think you’d get used to it fairly quickly. The Super DOA and Mega Merc aren’t super similar, but they’re not worlds apart either.
The Mega Merc is stiffer and that’s one of the bigger differences in feel. Whilst Capita rates them 6 and 6.5 respectively, I felt them more at 6.5 and 8, so I think there’s a bigger difference there. The Mega Merc is a damper, smoother ride than the Super DOA. The Super DOA a little more snappy. Then there’s some obvious differences, like the Mega Merc being a little wider and being more directional.
Performance-wise:
– The Super DOA does better for jumps, is a little easier to ride at slower speeds, is better for riding switch, spins, and a little easier to butter with
– The Mega Merc can do bigger carves, is more stable at speed and better in powder
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
HI Nate,
Thanks for your exceptional reviews. Very comprehensive and informative. Your passion for the ride shines through. I found that by using your review as a primary and adding two shorter supplemental reviews I can triangulate and get the next best thing to actually riding the board myself. So great job! And thank you!
My question: I find myself working my way back to a camber-dominant board. I’ve learned I don’t love the squirrely effect a rocker-dominant board has at hard charging speeds. I do love the nimbleness of them on cat tracks and picking my way through trees, but sacrificing the stability when dumping into a bowl or using the mountain as my race track is a high price to pay. So with that I found myself gravitating to the Mercury or Mega Merc. What is your experience with trying to pick the sweet spot of nimbleness and high-speed stability? Can it be accomplished by selecting a cambered board, but going with a slightly shorter one? Say moving from a 157 to a 155? Is that adjustment noticeable? I’m 6′-0″, 165, boot size: 9.5. Advanced rider. What’s the magic formula, Nate?
Hi Justin
Thanks for your message.
I like your tactic of triangulating like that! Very cool.
I’m not sure there’s a magic formula, but to some extent what you’re saying works. A cambered board will always feel more stable at speed, all else being equal (important to note all else being equal because a really soft cambered board versus a really stiff rocker board – the rocker board will likely still be more stable) than a fully rockered board – and the same is true, but to a lesser extent if you compare a full camber board to a hybrid rocker and then still true, but even more subtle if you compare a mostly camber, hybrid camber board to a hybrid rocker board. Again, all else being equal is important here.
Also true is that a stiffer board, all else being equal, will be more stable at speed. But then you’ve got to take into account that a rockered board or hybrid rocker will typically, all else equal, be able to turn a little quicker, particularly at slower speeds, with that pivot point between the feet – and also that a softer board will turn easier/quicker at slower speeds versus a stiffer board, all else being equal. At higher speeds, the quickness of turns of a stiffer or more cambered board evens out.
And of course a longer board, all else being equal, will also be more stable at speed and a shorter board better at making short sharp turns.
So there’s a bit of compromise with everything. That said, I would guess, based on experience that between a camber dominant board versus a rocker dominant board, the difference in stability at speed would be such that you could ride the camber version at least 2-3cm shorter and still have better stability at speed and you would gain back the lost agility – maybe not all of it but to a great enough extent that it’s worth doing, if a more stable feeling is what you’re prioritizing – and then you get the added benefit of that feeling of spring out of a turn and the extra pop that tends to come with camber.
This was a long winded way (I tend to get carried away and geek out on these things!) to say yeah, I think you can find a pretty good sweet spot by going more camber dominant and sizing down a little, IF the goal is to have a more stable feel underfoot. But it’s not a perfect storm or anything, because there’s always that compromize going on.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate – so i’ve been riding the same board for the past 10-15 years (Dc mlf iikkaa 154) and i think its time to upgrade. I really like its playful, maneuverable flex (probably has softened after all these years) but its not as fast or as poppy as id like anymore. Im 5.8, 140lbs and been riding for 20+ years but just 5-7 days a year. Mostly groomers so would like a board that is fun on piste (fast edge to edge, stable on blacks, bump hugger, maneuverable, butterable, good with sidehits) but i ride a little of everything really (pow usually not that deep, rails/boxes, small kickers). I’ve narrowed my list down to: capita mercury (was going for mega merc but then read this review), ride algorythm, lib trs and jones mountain twin. Also i was watching the olympics today and su yimings board (Burton Family Tree 3D Daily Driver Camber) looked really fun. Which do you recommend? Doesnt have to be one of those, im open to suggestions. Thanks
Hi HT
Thanks for your message.
Su Yiming was unreal (in both slopestyle and big air)! But very surprised he was riding the Daily Driver for that kind of riding. But then again, can’t say I’ve ever done anything that extreme in snowboarding!
For us mere human’s… it could work for what you’re describing, but for things like rails/boxes, buttering etc it’s one that’s going to be more difficult to tame. Again, it’s nothing super stiff or hard to ride or anything, but does take some effort to butter and whilst it’s not a tank to turn or anything, it’s not super nimble either – though that would also depend on sizing.
I haven’t ridden the Algorythm, but I like the TRS or Mountain Twin for what you’re describing. Mercury would also work, but it’s just a little less easy to maneuver at slower speeds than those other two, in my experience.
Between the TRS and MT, I think it depends on whether you want to have a little bit of powder performance (MT) or if you are happy with less powder performance and gain a little in terms of jumps, switch and spins. The TRS would be fine, like any board, in shallow powder, but not great when it gets deeper.
If you’d like my opinion on sizing happy to give it – would just need your boot size as well.
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate! Very very helpful. Im probably going to get a dedicated pow board at some point so i may go with the trs for all mountaIn. I try to go fast on piste (30-40mph sustained speed), i assume the trs wont have any issues right? Besides the ones i listed, are there any other boards you would consider (for example i had the dc ply and capita outerspace living in my longlist but crossed them out after reading some reviews). Final question, do you agree with burton genesis (other options are bent metal transfer and union falcor) bindings and photon boots? Thanks again!
Hi HT
TRS not an out and out bomber or anything, but shouldn’t have any issues for those speeds, IMO.
I think the Genesis and Photon would be a good match to the TRS. I haven’t ridden the Transfer since like the 2017 model, so I’m not sure if they’ve changed, but when I rode them they felt a little softer than medium, so might be a bit soft for the TRS and what you’re describing. The Falcor would be on the stiffer side for the TRS. Doable though – but they would be the stiffest that I would put on the TRS – a small possibility that the board will start to feel a little twitchy with the Falcor, but I think they should be just in range to not feel too twitchy.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the review.
I’m in my 40s, snowboarding for 12 years, 6”/165lbs/10.5.
Riding style, all mountain “just having fun”, not a freestyle not a freeride, powder when possible, no parks.
Currently one the Capita Mercury 53 which fills a bit short for me.
Looking for a new do it all fun board which can speed when I want to and go slow when I’m tired (lol)…
Was thinking about the Capita Mega Merc.
Will you recommend? What size should fit?
Hi Eran
Thanks for your message.
The Mega Merc is quite an aggressive board. For what you’re describing, I think you could go with something a little less aggressive. It will give you everything you want for when you want to ride fast, but it’s harder work when you want to go slow, IMO. I would check out the following:
>>My Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards
And I’d probably even skip the Niche Story and Capita Mercury from that list for what you’re describing. Though given you have the Mercury, if you find it fun riding slow, then it could still be an option. Though keep in mind that a longer size will be more suited to riding fast versus slow as well.
Generally speaking, I would say to go with something around 155-157 for your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate,
I was leaning to the Jones MT., do you think it could fit?
Only concern is it’s behavior on icy slope, can you advice?
For my size (10.5 boot) and riding style, would you recommend the 157 or 156W?
Regards,
Eran.
Hi Eran
Yeah, I think the Mountain Twin would work well for what you’re describing. For icy conditions it’s pretty good in my experience. It’s not like the best board I’ve ridden in ice, but it’s not bad either. I would say 4/5 for icy conditions. As good as the Mega Merc, IMO.
Size-wise, I would go with the 157. With 10.5s it should be wide enough – it’s wider than it looks at the inserts, so you don’t need to go to the wide, IMO.
Hi Nate,
I bought the 157 and have the burton malavita size M with burton ion size 10.
Im 170 lbs and 5’11 in height. Im wondering if it is too small .
I havent changed my board in a really long time and in that sense im a newb but have been riding mainly on the alps. My previous board was a ride machete 158 from 2010 which was one of the best at its time for allmountain freestyle.
Please let me know what you think.
Hi Greg
Thanks for your message.
For this board and your specs, I think 157 is spot on. You could ride a 159, but with this board being a little wider than average, I think 157 is just right. If you’re going to be just bombing all day, you could go up to the 159, but otherwise, I’d stick with 157. I’ve got similar specs and the 157 felt just right for me – and riding the Mercury (non Mega), I found the 155 too small, the 159 too big. The 157 just right.
Hope this helps
Hey There! Thanks for the review. Quick question about sizing. I am 6’1″ 175-180lbs (pretty similar to your stats) and a size 10 or 10.5 boot. I noticed you rode the 157 for your review. I recently bought a Mega Merc 159 and am wondering if you think I should return it for a 157? I am downsizing from a rather large TRice Pro 161.5 from a few years back. I upsized that board because I felt like my 2008 TRS 159 felt too small.
Based on Capita’s sizing guide and other guides around the internet I went with 159 but am now wondering if I should have gone a bit smaller.
Hi Nick
I found the 157 the sweet spot for me for the regular Mercury (after having ridden both the 155 and 159). So the Mega Merc 157 made sense for me, and I think it was spot on for me. But given you’re coming from a 161.5 T Rice Pro and given you found the 159 TRS too small, I think the 159 should work well for you. The TRS will feel smaller size for size than the Mega Merc for sure, so the 157 probably feels as big or even slightly bigger than the TRS 159, but might not feel that much bigger.
For my style of riding, I like the 157 TRS, so my instinct is that the 159 will be the best bet for you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for all your reviews. Curious your thoughts on this in 157 for me? 5’9″ 175 lbs, size 9 boot, advanced rider (in my 30s, with 20 years of riding). I am coming from a traditional camber, Rome 154 (pretty stiff) that I bought when I was shorter and lighter. I was only able to find the Mega Merc 157 in stock. I am leaning towards this board (first board purchase in ~10 years) from your review and others. Would the 157 length vs 155 really cut back on the maneuverability in trees and on tight trails?
I mostly ride out east (not necessarily icy/hard conditions as we get plenty of snow, though sometimes slow from man made snow), but then take trips out west every year to CO/UT. Looking for something lighter that can better handle higher speeds and carving (some glades too) in any conditions, with some fun popping rollers and side hits thrown in, but also will not be lost on a powder day (not looking to have a dedicated powder board or rent out west). This seems to fit the bill for a one board fits all charging and carving type, which is my main focus now.
Also, how important is it to add new bindings? I am not opposed to buying new, but my current ones are in fine shape and were top of the line Burton 10 years or so ago. I am sure tech has changed?
Thanks!
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
I think 157 is doable for your specs and what you’re describing. If it was a little narrower, I’d say 157 would be perfect and wouldn’t even be debating the 155. But it is wider than average for a regular width board and with 9’s, I think the 155 is within range, but the 157 is still an option. I rode the 157 and I think that was just right for me (my specs 6’0″, 175lbs, size 10). I previously rode the 155 Mercury (regular Mercury) and I felt that was just slightly too small. I also rode the 159 Mercury previously and that felt too big. So 157 for the Merc and Mega Merc are just right for me. Weight and boot size are the most important factors (as well as riding level and how you like to ride), so I could certainly see 157 working well for you.
Between the 155 and 157, the 157 will be harder to maneuver at slower speeds. And it’s not really the kind of board that’s easy to ride at slow speeds in the first place. I didn’t find it a tank at slow speeds, but it really prefers speed. So 155 would be better when you’re in trees and, IMO, a little better for popping rollers, sidehits etc. But the 157 will give you more stability at speed (not that I think the 155 would lack in that area, with this board) and better float in powder. Just better for bombing and hard carving, IMO.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Nice to finally read another review of this new board. I snagged a 157 from REI that I can return if I don’t like it, but it sounds like a 155 would be better suited to someone 5’8″, size 9 booth, 165 lbs? I’ve been riding for 25 years, but I really only like to bomb groomers at my age. Is this going to be way too much board for me, or a better alternative than a true freeride board that would be even more stiff and less forgiving? Also thinking about the YES Typo. Thanks!
Hi Chris
If you’re only really bombing groomers and aren’t doing too much at slower speeds, it could be doable. I think I’d still prefer to see you go 155 for it though. I think that’s the better size and should still be plenty stable enough for your specs – but just with a little more maneuverability and forgiveness.
The Typo isn’t quite at the other end of the spectrum, but it’s a long way away from the Mega Merc on the spectrum of aggressive to playful, if that makes sense. The Typo is a much more playful, easy going board – a lot softer, by my feel and just really easy going. Not going to give you heaps of stability when really bombing. It’s not terrible, but it’s not a bomber. But super easy to ride, easy to maneuver at slow speeds and super quick edge to edge. I think if you’re really bombing a lot, then it’s probably a bit too soft/playful. But if you’re worried about the Mega Merc being too aggressive/unforgiving, then there are a lot of options that are in between the Typo and Mega Merc. The regular Mercury being one of them.
But yeah, again, if you liked to really bomb, then I think you should really like it, but better in the 155, IMO.
If you’re thinking it’s going to be too much, then I would check out the following:
>>My Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards
Or if you wanted something Freeride oriented, but not too stiff, you could also check out:
>>Top 10 Surfy (mellow) Freeride Snowboards
Not everything in those lists will necessarily be suitable, but check out the score breakdown’s to see what you think might suit your riding the most (and then check out the full reviews for more details).
Hope this helps
Thanks for your review on the Mega Merc.
Between the Union Falcor and Atlas, which binding would you choose for the Mega Merc?
I am 215 lbs and my style of riding is mostly freeride/all-mountain and powder. I ride heavy & wet PNW snow at Whistler, Baker, Stevens Pass, Crystal and Snoqualmie.
Hi Mike
Personally I would put the Falcor on the Mega Merc. Mostly because I find the Falcor a stiffer binding and think it’s a better flex match for the Mega Merc. And also I like the more explosive response of the Falcor versus the smoother response of the Atlas. Both would work for sure, and if you think you’d prefer that smoother response over a more explosive response, the Atlas would be OK. But personally I’d go Falcor.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you! Have a great 21-22 winter.
You’re very welcome Mike. Hope you have an awesome winter too!
Hey there, I’m coming from a 156 custom x camber and I’m wondering if the 155 or 157 would suit me better? I’m 5’8 160lbs with 8 US mens. I’m a bit worried the camrock profile would make the 155’s edge feel a bit too small, although at 1199 it’s still longer than the 156 custom x.
Thank you and great review as always
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
Based purely on your specs, I’d say 155 over 157 for sure. Partly because it’s quite wide for your boots.
Taking into account that you’re riding the 156 Custom X, I’m still leaning 155, but 157 becomes a possibility. When the Custom X changed shape for the 2018 model, they changed the effective edge on the 156 to 1195. Previously it was 1212. Not sure if the effective edge actually got that much shorter or if they just started measuring it differently? I would still say that the Custom X rides a little longer than the Mercury, size-for-size. But that said, the Mercury, particularly compared to the 2017 and prior Custom X’s is a wider board – so I think sizing to 155 still makes sense in this case. But if you wanted to keep the same effective edge feel, my instinct says that the 157 will be more similar to the 156 Custom X.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Appreciate the response. I have the 2021 custom x for what it’s worth. Would the 2mm of waist width and 3mm in the nose/tail of the 155 & 157 mega merc make that much of a difference in terms of maneuverability? This is a board to potentially replace that board as my daily driver. I love the custom x but would love to have something a little more maneuverable while keeping most of the speed/stability. I know the 157 will be more stable and have more float but would the 155 cause any stability issues at high speeds? I’m assuming the camrock profile would make the edge feel like it’s only the length of the camber profile of the board which is just past the inserts, right?
Thanks again!
Hi Jason
In my experience 2mm/3mm can make a difference. Subtle but still noticeable. But also the shorter length/effective edge also adds maneuverability. For your weight, the 155 should still be stable at speed. I think you would loose a little in terms of stability at speed versus the Custom X, but that’s going to be the case with most boards. My thing with 157 in the Mega Merc is that I don’t know that you’d be gaining anything noticeable in terms of maneuverability. The 157 is Mega Merc is 5mm wider at the waist, 7mm wider at the tip/tail and at the inserts you’re looking at 265mm/267mm (front/back) on the Mega Merc versus roughly 262mm on the Custom X. That’s not an insignificant increase in width, particularly for 8s. Even though the Mega Merc you get something that’s fractionally softer and you get the camrock, I still don’t think it’s going to be a lot, if any, more maneuverable for you, in the 157. Hard to say for sure, but that would be my biggest concern, going to that length.
I wouldn’t say that the camrock makes the edge feel like it’s just the length of the camber profile. Maybe when flat basing or doing pretty casual turns, when you’re not really up on edge all that much, but when you’re properly carving and really laying into turns, you’re still going to get the full effective edge to the contact points on the Mega Merc.