Hello and welcome to my Capita Spring Break Resort Twin review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Resort Twin as an all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Resort Twin a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Capita Resort Twin 2024
Price: $549
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: Medium (5/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (5/10)
Rating Score: 87.6/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 33 current model all-mountain freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Resort Twin ranked 6th out of 33
Overview of the Resort Twin's Specs
Check out the tables for the Resort Twin's specs and available sizes.
Specs
STYLE:
ALL-MOUNTAIN-FREESTYLE
PRICE:
$549 - BUYING OPTIONS
$549 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID CAMBER - Capita's "RESORT V2 TWIN" profile.
SHAPE:
setback stance:
Centered
BASE:
SINTRUDED | Capita's "Powder Drive"
weight:
Felt normal
Camber Height:
5mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
154 | 255 | 105-165 | 47-75 |
156 | 258 | 115-175 | 52-79 |
158 | 260 | 135-195 | 61-88 |
160 | 262 | 150-210+ | 68-95+ |
Who is the Resort Twin Best Suited To?
The Spring Break Resort Twin is most suited to someone looking for a freestyle focused board to take all over the mountain. And for something that's a little on the playful side of the spectrum and better for short, snappy turns and easy pop, than it is for big aggressive carves and high speeds.
Whilst it's a board that I found easy to ride, I wouldn't say it's beginner material but should be OK for a lower end intermediate rider, unless you're a lighter rider, in which case, it still might feel a bit stiff, if you're lower intermediate.
The Resort Twin in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Resort Twin is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Capita Spring Break Resort Twin 2024, 156cm (258mm waist width)
Date: March 20, 2023
Conditions
Overcast to start. But higher cloud. 85-90% visibility. Towards the end of the day there was some rain.
Temperature was around 2°C (36°F) - and -2°C (19°F) with wind chill in morning and 1°C (34°F) (and -2°C (19°F) with wind) in the afternoon. SE winds morning and afternoon at 10kph (6 mph) morning and 5kph (3 mph) in the afternoon.
24 hour snow: 0" (0cm)
48 hour snow: 0" (0cm)
7 day snow: 4" (11cm)
On groomer: Soft packed and bordering on slushy. But not ultra slow or sticky or anything. Got a touch slushier towards the end of the day, but not by much. Was pretty consistent.
Off groomer: Decent enough. Borderline slushy but not quite. Not ideal but OK.
Set up
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 22" (560mm)
Stance Setback: Centered
Width at Inserts: 268mm (10.6")
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Response ADV
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 6lbs 7oz (2920 grams)
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 Resort Twin is pretty much bang on average. And on snow it felt normal too - maybe just a touch lighter than normal on snow.
Powder
We didn't have any powder to test in on the day but based on feel and specs, it's going to be pretty average.
It's got some rocker in the tip and tail, which will help a little, but it's a centered twin, so never going to be amazing in powder.
Carving & Turning
Carving: It does OK at slower speed carves, but doesn't hold a high speed carve super well. More of a snappy turner than an aggressive carving type of board.
Ease of Turning/Slashing: Really easy to turn with this board. Really snappy, easy to initiate turns on and easy to slash.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Nice and quick edge-to-edge when riding slow. Easy to maneuver.
Catchiness: Not catchy. If the most uncatchy board in the world was a 10, it wouldn't be a 10, but it would be a solid 8.
Speed
Stable to a point, but gets wobbly at moderately high speeds. Don't have to be going super fast before it starts feeling a little unstable.
Uneven Terrain
Crud: Gets pretty chattery in crud/chunder. It's good for making corrections when you do get off your line in crud, but is pretty easily thrown off its line.
Trees/Bumps: Nice and quick edge-to-edge so it's fun and easy to weave through trees and bumps.
Jumps
Overall fun and snappy. Best for smaller jumps and side hits.
Pop: Really easy to access its pop and overall pop is decent too, without being super epic or anything.
Approach: Easy to make adjustments but not as stable for faster approaches.
Landing: Overall good but more suitable to small to medium landings than bigger landings.
Side-hits: This board was so much fun on side hits!
Small jumps/Big jumps: Best for small to medium jumps. Not quite stable enough at higher speeds for bigger jumps.
Switch
Naturally good for riding switch, being a true twin. Transitions were easy too.
Spins
Really good for spins. Easy pop, easy setup and landed and setup well in switch.
Jibbing
Really decent. Maneuverable and snappy approach. Easy to setup, felt decent on boxes/rails and popped off nicely.
Butters
The tip and tail press nice and easily. It's not a board that presses even when you're not trying to, but it's pretty easy - don't need to put much effort into it. And you can lock in pretty well too.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
JUMPS | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 3.0 | 6/10 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.5 | 9/10 |
SWITCH | 4.5 | 9/10 |
SPEED | 3.0 | 6/10 |
SPINS | 4.5 | 9/10 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JIBBING | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
POWDER | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.6/100 |
The Resort Twin was a super fun, snappy, lively board that had effortless pop and snap for turns. It's not something that will have you elbow deep carving at high speeds without washing out, but for using the whole mountain as a park (or the park itself), it excels.
And you can still lay down carves on it, just don't expect it to be epic for aggressive high speed carves.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Resort Twin, 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-freestyle snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Resort Twin compares to other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
I am looking for a board to practice my buttering, riding switch and that can also be good for small park jumps and small boxes. Would you recommend The Spring Break Resort Twin or the Outer space Living?
I already have a GNU hyper as my first board.
Also I am 5’’8 and 190lbs., would you go with the 154 or 156?
Thanks and have a great day!
Nic
Hi Nic, thanks for your message.
I would go Resort Twin over the OSL for what you’re wanting to do with it. And you’ve already got your Hyper for more all-mountain/freeride stuff.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 158 but given what you want to be using it for, I would be looking to drop down to the 154. It will be easier to butter and ollie with and easier to spin and for boxes. So for your purposes I would err smaller. But if you could also let me know your boot size that would be great. The Spring Break Resort Twin is a wider than average board, so sizing down more (e.g. to the 154, rather than to 156) makes sense if it’s on the wider size for your boots. You may still want to go to 154, but if ride 11s, then I’d go 156, 10.5s you could go either way and 10 or less and I’d go 154, given your freestyle focus with it.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, hope your day is well.
I’m stuck between 154 vs 156. 5’10, size 9M boots, around 160 lbs.
I feel like 156 with 25.8 waist width seems a little high for size 9 boots? But I don’t want the 154 to feel like a noodle being on the higher end of the weight range esp if my weight fluctuates. I used to be on a mercury 155 at 25.5 waist width, which was fine, but definitely wouldn’t want to go wider. Feel like I’m right in between the two sizes here. What do you think?
Hi Julian, good to hear from you again.
It’s a close one. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157, but with the width and your boot size, it does make sense to size it down. The 156 still won’t be as stable/stiff as the Mercury 155, IMO, so it wouldn’t be too much board in that sense, but that width, with 9s, might slow up your edge-to-edge speed. The 154 is going to be even less stable, but I doubt it would feel like a noodle to you. I felt the 156 was quite playful, but not to the extent of being a noodle (at 6’0″, 180lbs, 9.5 boots). I imagine you’d feel the 154 very similarly to the way I felt the 156.
If you’re looking for a more stable board, closer to the equivalent of the Mercury, then the 156 would be a better bet, but there would be better boards out there for it. If you’re looking for something more easy going, more playful, then I think the 154 would be your best bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for your thoughts, Nate!
I still have the Merc for the more aggressive days. But I’m definitely looking at the Resort Twin for more laid back and chill days playing around the ground, while still being able to carve and boost side hits and jumps with enough stability.
Now that you mention it, you’re right, there are better boards if I was aiming for 156 (almost might as well just stick to the Merc at that point haha).
Opted to try a 154 this weekend. Will hopefully love it!
Thanks, Nate!
Hey Julian
Looking forward to hear what you think of the 154.
Hi Nate, hoping you could help me find a good size in this one. I’m thinking 156 or 158. I’m 6’2’’ 180lbs and 10.5 boot size. Right now I’m teaching my kids and doing a lot of butters, flat ground, and side hits. Alot of start and stop and Midwest slush here. I’m looking to get the right size that would be great for what I’m doing now but as the kids get faster and wanting to explore more could excel in those areas. Ive been riding a 156 Proto Slinger, that you helped me get set up with a couple of years ago.
Hi Justin, thanks for your messages.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. However, given that you’d be riding with the kids and doing a lot of butters, I would size down. This board is also wider, but with 10.5s, I don’t think you would find it wide, assuming your foot length is around 28-28.5cm. For right now, having it be playful and with lots of buttering, I think the 156 would work well. However, in the long term, I’d say that the 158 would be the better bet. Just won’t be as playful and easy to butter for right now.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the response. Sorry for the double post unsure if it actually made it through the first time. Im torn a little o what to go with. If I went with the 156 what would be the pro and cons vs the 158. I’m stuck in the Midwest on smaller hills so not really bombing anything and it’s all pretty much slow speed would like to get into the park more but still want something that would bring down the mountain if I can ever get the chance to ride out west. Boots are the Adidas Samba in 10.5. Seems like the effective edge will feel different as well as they are somewhat longer than the Proto Slinger. Would it be a huge difference at slower speeds. And would it feel a lot longer in length for both the 156 and 158. Thanks again.
Hi Justin
The main pros and cons, IMO, are the 156 will be better for slower speed riding, agility, ease of pop, ease of ollies, ease of spins, jibs etc. A more playful feel overall, but less stable at speeds, less stable in messy snow, less stable for landings from bigger jumps and less floaty in powder. These differences will be relatively subtle but still noticeable, IMO.
Yeah, I would say that you’d find the 156 feels a little longer than your 156 Proto Slinger, because of both effective edge and being wider. So on the 158, that would be even more so. If you didn’t feel like you wanted to go much bigger than the Proto Slinger 156, then the 158 might feel a bit big for what you want.
So, for park and slow speeds, which sounds like is going to be your predominant riding, the 156 would do better. The 158 would do better for bigger mountain, bombing, etc, but whether it’s worth it, depending on how much time you’d spend doing that. The 156 Resort Twin would still do better for bigger mountain bombing etc, vs the 156 Proto Slinger, IMO, if that has any bearing on your decision.
Thanks Nate for the break down. I felt like the Proto slinger rode short but that might have been in my head or just the fact that it felt slower due to the rocker profile. Another question about long term use with the weight being capped at 175lbs for the 156 Resort Twin. This wouldn’t shorten the lifespan or feel of the board. Trying to think long term as I would want to keep this one for a while. Thanks again.
Hi Justin
Great question in terms of lifespan. And I’m not really sure if it would shorten it’s lifespan or not. I don’t imagine it would have a major effect though. In terms of feel of the board, I rode the 156 and I’m also 180ls, and this board didn’t feel small to me. It’s more playful than it would have been if I’d ridden it in the 158, but due to its width, I would go 156 for this board, if I bought it.
Hello Nate,
I’m looking at this board in 158 or 156. I’m 6’2’’ and 180 lbs with 10.5 boot. Wanting something that is playful for butters and will be doing slower runs while helping my kiddos learn.
Thanks.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking at this board to be my all mountain freestyle board. I am looking to get better with jumps / butters while still being able to take this all around the mountain. Would you recommend this board if I was only able to get in 156? I am 5’9 / 165 LB, with a 9.5 boot size.
Thanks!
Hi Chi
Thanks for your message and apologies for the slower than usual response. Flat-out testing gear at the moment! I have no problem with a 156 in terms of length for you, in general, but as your all-mountain freestyle board and because of the wider width on this one, I think it’s a little too big to be optimal overall. Doable, but I think the 154 would be much more optimal, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
You recently helped size me for a Yes Greats and suggested a 154 as I want a board which can be my daily driver and on the playful side.
I am 170 lbs, just under 6’ tall, and wear size 10.5 Burton boots. I have a stance of about 21.5-22” and like a 12, -12 or so duck foot stance (still experimenting with stance width and angles).
I ride mostly in NH and VT, but do get to ride a bit in Lake Tahoe each year. I have a board for powder already. I am not much into park yet, but am getting stronger at riding switch and learning some basic tricks.
Which size resort twin do you think would be best for me?
Thank you.
Hi Paul
I would probably go 156, but the 154 isn’t out of range, if you wanted to keep things even more playful. Note that this in 154 would be more playful than the Greats in 154. I would say this in 156 would be more the equivalent of a 154 Greats – and we sized that already to be playful, so I’d probably be leaning 156, unless you want it really playful. I found the 156 quite playful already (6’0″, 180lbs, 9.5 boots).
Thank you. I was thinking 156, but wasn’t sure if I should go 158 based on their size chart and that it would be brought out west for a week each year. For my size, would you still pick 156 over 158? Thank you.
Hi Paul.
The 158 would give you better float in powder for sure. But overall I think the 156 is going to be better for you in everything but powder. So, if you were riding powder a lot, then you could go 158, but then there would be better boards for powder for you. If you’re main thing isn’t powder, then I would go 156.
Thank you so much for your help.
You’re very welcome Paul. Happy riding!
What would you recommend for a 6ft3 210lbs snowboarder, Europe pistes? Been riding for 15+ years (1 week per year) Never in the park, always on piste or in the powder next to it. Not absolutely bombing everything at like 90km/h but I am quite fast and into carving. Every now and then some switch riding when I got to wait on people.
Was looking at the resort twin 158/160 or Mercury 159/161 or Mega mercury 159. Would the mega be too stiff?
Hi Koen
Thanks for your message. I think the Resort Twin will likely be a bit too playful for what you’re looking for and not that great in powder. The Mercury and Mega Merc would both work, for sure. I would be leaning Mega Merc for what you’re describing but if you did want to keep things more balanced between slower speed riding and higher speed riding and have the ability to ride a bit more casual, then the Mercury would be a good bet. Still good at speed/carving but not as good as Mega Merc, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 164, so would probably be leaning the 161 but if you could also let me know your boot size, that would be great.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’ve battled trying to find a new all mountain – freestyle board. And I think I have settled on this board.
I’m a little worried about the width of the board as I have small feet.
I am 170lbs, 5.7. With size 6 men’s boots.
What size would you recommend for me?
Thank you!
Hi Ivan
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 154/155, based on your height/weight, but with size 6 boots, you’ll want to size down from that a fair bit in pretty much any men’s board, IMO. Unfortunately I don’t think this board has a size that is suitable for your specs. You could try the 154, but I think it will feel quite a bit too big.
Some options you could look into more:
– Bataleon Evil Twin 151 or even 149
– Bataleon Evil Twin+ 151
– YES Greats 149
The 2025 model of the Resort Twin may be getting a 152, which would be more doable for you. It will have a 250mm waist and is likely around 260mm at the inserts, assuming a 22″ stance width. For your height, I would say that you probably have a narrower stance than that? If so, then you’d be looking at a slightly narrower width insert. But even so, you’re still looking at something that will be quite wide for you and even sizing down to 152 probably still isn’t enough, unfortunately. But if you were set on this board, I would wait for the 152 because it will be quite a bit better for you than the 154, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, I just purchased this board today in a 58. Wanted a softer board that’s easier to ride than the rest of my quiver. Not sure which bindings to put on it. I’m between the the new force, ultras or stratas (I’ve owned before. Which would you recommend?
Cheers
Tim
Hi Tim
I would probably go Ultras. I think they’d be a really good flex match and if you’re going to be doing freestyle stuff, or in general like a really good board feel, then I think those would be best. If you’re not worried about freestyle/board feel as much, then the new Force would be a good bet. The Strata would also work well, so I don’t think you can make a bad choice between them, but I’d be leaning Ultra, in this case, if it was me.
Been wanting to try out this board but could only find it in 156 so I wanted some input on how it might perform with my gear: nidecker rift boots size 8US/union strata medium (5’9 155 lbs), 15/15 stance. Width is 258mm which is more than my current assassin 153, do you think I could still ride this board size freestyle if my mechanics are good enough? Thanks again for all the great info, gave me a really good starting off point
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 155/156. However, with size 8 boots, I would size down from that a bit, particularly with the Resort Twin, which is a little wider than average. I think the 154 would be doable, but the 156 might feel just that bit too big to be great for freestyle. I think it would be doable for sure, but not optimal. You’re likely to feel it harder to setup tricks, especially spin tricks, harder to butter, harder to extract its pop/do ollies.
Hope this helps
Appreciate the advice! I figured I might be able to power through the small size differences of the 156 but I’ll hold off on the resort twin for now.
Any recommendations on something with similar pop/spin access as my assassin but in a true twin and a little more jib-friendly? Also for a freestyle focus should I stay around 153 or size down to ~151?
Hey Nick
If the board is going to be one you want to focus on freestyle with, then I would size it down a little more – ~151 would be a good bet, IMO.
I would check out this list here. Be sure to check out the score breakdowns, and full reviews, to make sure the board has the things you want. But I think you’ll find something in there that will fit what you want. Or if you wanted to go a little more all-mountain freestyle, then check out this list. But as a compliment to your Assassin in the same quiver, I would probably err more freestyle specific.
Waist width is midleading on this (and the Indoor Survival which is identical in shape) due to the Death Grip. Take off 3mm to get the ‘true’ waist width.
However, the tip and tail widths on the 156 are 304mm, so going to be huge for your specs. I’m a US10, 200lbs and looking at the 154 or 156.
What did you go with?
Same build as you. What did you go with?
I just rode a DOA 154 and even with an inch of toe overhang had fun. Not sure if relevant but thought I’d share
Hi Nate,
Want to grab this one for mostly freestyle/playing around the resort. I have a Lib tech Rig and Yes PYL UnInc for more bigger mountain/carving/pow days. I have a size 8.5 boot, I am about 5’8, and weigh close to 190lbs. Should I be going with the 54 or 56?
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 158. But because of your boot size vs the width of this board I would size down at least to the 156, but in this case, given you are going to be using it predominantly for freestyle and playing around, I would size down again and go to the 154.
But I’d also take into account the other boards in your quiver. If you ride the PYL in a 162 for example, then sizing down to 156 for the Resort Twin might make more since, given the length board you might be used to. But if you ride the 156 or 159 PYL, then I’d go 154 for this board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m looking to get the Capita resort twin but I’m concerned about it not being wide enough. My current board isn’t a wide and it’s fine but it’s a 160. I would like to size down for the board to be more nimble and playful for the park (and the 160 seems to be sold out where I live). I’m a boot size 11.5, 6’1” and 165 lbs. Do you think the 158 will work?
Thanks so much!
Hi Aaron
Thanks for your message. Apologies for the slow response, was travelling overseas and haven’t had the chance to get to your message until now.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159, so I think length-wise, the 158 should work well.
Width-wise, it’s borderline, IMO, but could well be doable. It’s wider than the typical regular width 158. You would be looking at around 270mm at the inserts (assuming a roughly 22″ (560mm) stance width), which is as wide as some wide boards. If your boots are the average outersole length, then you’d be looking at around a 32.5cm outersole length. In that case, that would leave you with a total overhang of around 5.5cm (or 2.75cm per edge, assuming perfect boot centering), which, if you’re looking to carve fairly deep would be a little more than I’d be comfortable with. However, this is assuming a 0 degree back binding angle.
If you were to ride with +15/-15 angles, then you’d be looking to save around 1cm worth of overhang, meaning more like a 2.25cm overhang per edge. This I would be comfortable with.
A wider stance width would give you a little leeway too. But only around 2-3mm per 1.5″ or extra stance width.
But if you have a lower profile boot, you might be OK, even with a straight back binding angle.
If you could let me know your binding angles and stance width (if known) and the brand/model of your boots. And also how deep you like to carve. This will all help to make a more accurate determination. Also if you could let me know the board that you’re currently riding. If it’s one I’ve measured at the inserts, then that would give a clue as to how the 158 Resort Twin compares width-wise.
Hope this helps
Hello,
Looking for recommendations on sizing. 154 vs 156. 165lbs with a 10.5 boot so not worried about width. Riding smaller east coast mountains and parks with this board. Mostly just playing around, buttering, side hits, park laps as I chase my smaller kids around the hill. Currently riding a 5 year old 154 DOA. 40 year old dad. Lol. I have a Lib Tech Orca for my powder /carving board.
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message. Could you also let me know your height. While weight and boot size are the most important factors, IMO, I still like to take height into account for the leverage factor.
Hi Nate – i’m 5’10” 165-170 size 10.5 boots. you think 156 or 158 makes more sense?
Hi Zach
Thanks for your message. Both would work, for sure. I think it depends on how you’d use the board. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157/158. If you wanted to use it for a bit of everything, but did more carving groomers, kind of thing than anything else and wanted decent enough float in powder, then I would be leaning 158. If you wanted a more freestyle focus and/or wanted to favor maneuverability over stability, then I would be leaning 156.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
6′ 190 lbs. Should I go for 156/158/160 with this board? Gonna be the sole board in my quiver after a couple seasons of rentals. Looking to ride it all around the mountain but don’t have an urge to bomb down runs – more of a goof around on groomers and take in the park.
Thanks!
Hi Alex
For your specs and described use, I would be leaning 158 for you. But if you could also let me know your boot size, to confirm. E.g. if your feet are on the small side for the board, then it might be better to go with the 156, but if they’re a good size for the board’s width, then I’d go 158.
Shoot I’m either a 9 or a 9.5 boot size. I want to say size 9. I know we’re talking a couple of cm, but do you think I go 156 or 158?
Hey Alex
With a 9, it’s on the wider side, IMO, so it makes the 156 more doable. If you were a 10 or 10.5, I’d say 158 for sure. But with 9s, especially given you don’t want to bomb and want to ride it in the park, I’d be leaning 156. I’m 6’0″ 180lbs, 9.5 boot. I would go 156 personally for what you’re describing – i.e. not needing too much speed and wanting park performance. You’ve got a few pounds on me, but not a lot, and if it’s a 9, then a slightly smaller boot, so I’d say 156, but the 158 is possible too.
Hi Nate, huge fan of your work!
I just want to ask a question. I’d like to get the resort twin as my first do-it-all board with a special focus on freestyle cause I finally feel super confident in riding free ride or in resort, and I would like to approach properly the park.
I am 178cm/82.5kg/US10.5 and at the moment my two best choice are the bataleon whatever 157 (which I think is the best size for me) and the resort twin.
Just for pure aesthetic, I prefer the resort twin, however capital’s size chart is a bit odd cause I’d say my size is 156 but the 158 it seems a better fit in terms of weight. Again I just want a good board who can guarantee me a nice park experience and the freedom to switch to offride and resort rides without too much effort.
If you have any recommendations that would great, even for other boards/brand.
Cheers and thanks in advance!
Hi Andrea
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t be too concerned about weight recommendation charts. There’s too much that goes into sizing to just go off weight, IMO (weight, height, boot size in relation to the width, strength/fitness, how you want to be riding the board, ability level etc) so while I give the weight recommendations a glance, I don’t given them much more than that.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159, so the 158 probably is your more pure “do-it-all” length, in this case. However, if your focus is going to be on freestyle, then sizing down isn’t a bad idea. In my case, I preferred the 156, but I have US9.5 boots and this was on the wider side for me. But in your case, that doesn’t mean you can’t go 156. Note that the 156, for you, will make the Resort Twin more freestyle optimized, but with a small sacrifice in terms of speed/stability and powder float compared to if you were to go with the 158.
I agree that the 157 would be your best bet in the Whatever.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Love the website and all the effort you put in to help us snowboarders.
I’m wondering if you have any binding recommendations for this board. Maybe a few that you think will work well with what this board wants to do .
Thanks!
Hey Nathan
Thanks for your message. I would look to pair this with bindings of either 5/10 or 6/10 flex, ideally. If it was me I’d be looking for something with good board feel as well, to take full advantage of the freestyle attributes of the board. Some good options, IMO, include:
– Union Ultra
– Union Strata
– Burton Malavita
But lots of other options that work too. You could check out more at the following (pay attention to score breakdowns to help make sure they’ll have the attributes you’re looking for):
>>Top 5 Freestyle Bindings
>>Top 10 All Mountain Bindings
Hope this helps
Hey, Nate, just getting back into boarding after a ten year hiatus, and have been eyeing this board based on your’s and a couple of other recommendations (looking for a versatile all-mtn board). I am 161 lbs, 5 foot 11, and wear closer to a size 12 boots. Do you think the 158 would be a good size for me (I know this board runs a little wider, which might work in my favor)? Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
It’s a close call with 12s, IMO, but doable depending on a few factors. You’re looking at a 270mm width at inserts on the 158 Resort Twin, assuming a 22″ (560mm) stance width. Let’s say your boots are around the average profile (3cm over mondo), so you’re looking with 12s to have an outersole of around 33cm. That leaves 6cm of total overhang – or 3cm heel side and 3cm toe side, if you can get perfect boot centering. This is a little more than I’d be comfortable with.
However, this is assuming a zero degree back binding angle. If you were rocking something like +15/-15 angles, then that gives you leeway of around 1cm. Which would mean, again assuming perfect boot centering, more like 2.5cm per edge, which I would be more comfortable with personally. If you really like to lay down your carves (e.g. eurocarving) then this still may not be enough, but if not, it’s probably OK.
Also, if you have lower profile boots that would give you a better chance as well.
Also if you were to ride with a wider stance width, that give you 2-3mm per around 40mm of stance width increase. But if you were to ride at a narrower stance, that would reduce the width at inserts, so give you more chance of boot drag.
But yeah, I would say you’re OK, if you have angles like +15/-15 and preferably low profile boots.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
What size for someone 5’8 210lbs size 10.5. Need it to do alittle bit of everything. Was eyeing this and the ride benchwarmer in a 154w don’t know which route is better…. Benchwarmer has a better weight range in a 54w then the 58 resort twin
Hi Frankie
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160, but with this board being a little wider, even for 10.5s, IMO, I would be leaning 158. I wouldn’t worry too much about the weight recommendations. There’s a chance you might find it a touch softer than what I experienced with the 156, but would only be very subtly, I would imagine, if at all.
We haven’t tested the Benchwarmer, but size-wise I don’t think it would work as well. It’s a very similar width to the 158 Resort Twin but it’s a bit short for your specs, IMO. I’d be more inclined to go with the 157W for your specs, with the Benchwarmer.
Hope this helps
Could I go 156
Hey Frankie
I think the 156 would be pushing it. I think the width would be fine for you, but the length a bit short. You’d likely find it softer than the 5/10 flex I found it. Probably more like 4/10 flex, if you went down to 156. And stability at speed would be down, as well as powder float. Ollies and butters would probably be easier, but in terms of landings, you’d have less stability. Spins would be easier, but you’d probably get less carving performance and worse edge-hold as well as not as stable in crud/chunder. I wouldn’t recommend it but if you wanted to make it really easy to butter, spin, ollie and really maneuverable at slower speeds and were willing to sacrifice those other things (noting that it’s not really a good speed or powder board to begin with), then you could try it. Note also that going down to the 156 would likely increase the chances of the board breaking.
Will I have trouble doing Ollie’s on the 158 compres to the 156? I’m use to a 156 but have gained a lot since last time I rode. Will the 158 still be playful?
Hi Frankie
I don’t think you’d find it hard to ollie/spin the 158. Should still definitely feel quite playful – as playful as I found the 156. Noting that the board is something that feels right in between aggressive and playful overall. It’s not like ultra playful, but you can definitely get reasonably playful on it.
Even though I’m only 5’9 the 158 will be ok?
Hi Frankie
IMO, yes. Snowboard sizing is more about weight than it is about height. I like to take height into account, because there is a leverage factor, IMO, but it’s less important than weight. It used to be all about height, but we’ve learned more since then. Some places, particularly rentals still go purely off height, but it’s not accurate, but it’s the easiest way for them to do it. If you’re used to a 156 and really want to, you could go 156, but just, as I said in a previous reply, don’t expect it to feel quite the same as it did for me.
Hi Nate! Thanks for your detailed review.
I realize that this board is wider than your traditional all-mountain freestyle boards. I currently ride a 157 board with a waist width of 25.5. I’m 5’9, 185lbs. Can I get away with the Spring Break Resort Twin 156 (waist width 25.8) even if the recommended rider weight for this size is 130-175lbs? Or should I go with 158 (waist width 26)?
Hi Hub
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think you’d be fine with the 156. I rode the 156 over the weight recommendations (I’m 180lbs) and that weight limit is fairly conservative for a 156, IMO, particularly a wider 156. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” closer to 159, but given it’s wider, depending on your boot size, and for the style of board, I would size down to the 156, personally.
To confirm, can you also let me know what your current board is and what your boot size is?
Hope this helps
Thanks for your response!!! I’m currently on a GNU Rider’s Choice 2021, the regular version, size 157.5 and my boot size is US 8.5.
I know you’re also a fan of the Rider’s Choice, how does the ride differ from the Springbreak Resort Twin? I’m really looking for something a little bit softer with camber that I can take with me to the park but also still be able to play around the resort generally. I just felt that the Spring Break Resort Twin might be a good fit for what I am looking for.
Hey Hub
Yeah, I think the 156 is your best bet then. Based on your boot size and the fact that the Resort Twin is wider. Also given how you describe how you want to ride it, the 156 will work better than the 158 for your purposes, IMO.
I found the Resort Twin to be a little softer flexing and overall a little more playful than the Riders Choice, so I think it will fit what you’re looking for. There are of course even softer, more playful boards around, but if you’re looking to go a little more mellow/more playful, without going too soft, then the Resort Twin should work well.
Thank you so much for your advice!!! You’re the best!
You’re very welcome Hub. Hope you have an awesome season!