Hello and welcome to my GNU Mullair review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Müllair (called the Essential Service for 2021 model. The 2022 Essential Service is a completely different board. Once I’ve ridden that one, I’ll post a separate review for it) as a freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Müllair a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other freeride snowboards.
NOTE: The 2021 model was the last model of the Mullair – and it was renamed for 2021 the Essential Service (not to be mistaken with the 2022 Essential Service which is a different type of board altogether).
Overall Rating
Board: GNU Müllair (Essential Service)
Price: $599 (USD recommended retail)
Style: Freeride
Flex Rating: Medium-Stiff
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Stiff (7.5/10)
Rating Score: 86.4/100
Compared to other Men’s Freeride Boards
Out of the 36 men’s freeride snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Mullair’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Mullair’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Freeride |
Price: | $599 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Medium-Fast |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | Hybrid Rocker (but mostly camber - GNU's C3 Camber) |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | 25mm (1") |
Base: | Sintered (sintered knife cut) |
Weight: | Felt Normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
155 | 248 | 120-200 | 54-91 |
159 | 250 | 130-210 | 59-95 |
161 | 252 | 140-240 | 64-108 |
159W | 260 | 130-220 | 59-100 |
161W | 262 | 140-240 | 64-108 |
164W | 265 | 150-260+ | 68-127+ |
Who is the Mullair Most Suited To?
The Mullair is best for anyone who’s looking for a bomber. Something that can really handle speed and carve with the best of them on hard pack – but that can also ride well in the powder.
Quite a stiff board, so it’s one for those who like that – and not really one for riding freestyle, but great as a hard charging freeride bomber.
Definitely not for the beginner, or even intermediate rider - you want to be a fairly advanced rider to ride this one.
The Mullair in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Müllair is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: GNU Müllair 2019, 159 (250mm waist width)
Date: April 14, 2018
Conditions: With 27cm of fresh snow in the 24 hours prior it was the perfect day for testing freeride boards (which is what I mostly rode on the Saturday). Visibility (at least the part of the mountain where I was riding) was great. There was a bit of wind (which was surprisingly cold for April) but only noticed it on the chair lift. It was around -8 degrees with wind chill.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 580mm (22.8”)
Stance Setback: 25mm (1”)
Width at Inserts: 258mm (10.16”) at front insert and 256mm (10.08”) at back insert (a quite narrow board for a 159).
Powder
I’m always surprised when a board that’s mostly camber, and whatever rocker there is, is between the feet, actually floats quite well. It wasn’t an epic floater – but it was certainly really good and fairly effortless.
It does have a few things going for it that explain it though – it has a longer and wider nose than the shorter, narrower tail – and it has a decent setback.
Carving & Turning
This was one of favorite boards to carve on. It was just so fun railing the edge on this board and getting into deep carves on it. It held on no matter what and just locked you into and held you into a carve for as long as you wanted it.
It was also pretty agile and quick edge-to-edge – something that was fun in the trees. Even managed to be relatively agile at slow speeds, which is something that boards this stiff usually struggle with.
Not easy to skid turns on – there is certainly consequence there. This is certainly no beginners deck – but it wasn’t super-catchy either.
Speed
This board can seriously bomb and feels really stable when riding fast.
It held on and never felt washy no matter how hard I drove it. Good acceleration too – gets up to speed very quickly and glides well over flat zones/slight uphills. cat tracks etc.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Uneven Terrain
It’s pretty good in chopped up resort snow for a stiffer more aggressive board. Not amazing but fine.
Jumps
It’s got good pop in there, but it’s the kind of pop you’ve got to really load up. It’s not easily accessible.
It’s also stable on landings but with that narrow platform, not quite as stable as other slightly wider boards, I found. But the stiffness and the camber makes it a solid landing for big airs.
Pretty good on the approach.
Personally, this is something that would be best for big airs in the backcountry and for me, straight airs. For those of us that are mortals it’s not an easy jumping board – but for pros it’s probably good for that. But not a particularly strong point for this board, for me.
Switch
Not undoable at all, but with the taper (all be it quite a small taper) and the 25mm setback, not ideal either.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
CARVING | 5.0 | 30/30 |
POWDER | 4.0 | 16/20 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.0 | 9/15 |
JUMPS | 2.5 | 5/10 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.5/100 |
Overall the Mullair is a bomber board, that is as at home on groomers and in the backcountry or trees and it’s strengths lie in carving and in bombing the mountain. Not an ideal jumping/freestyle board for me. To me this board was all about carving, speed and powder.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Müllair, are ready to buy or want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
- CANADA
- UK/EUROPE
If you want to see how the Müllair compares to other men’s freeride snowboards or want to check out some other options in that category, check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
I have opportunity to grab some Mullair 2020 for a bargain on sale.
Can you help me about picking the right size?
I am around 185 lbs, 6 foot rider, with 11 size shoes. Would be 159w or 161w be a better choice?
Thanks man, you rock!
Hi Steeve
Thanks for your message.
I’d be leaning 159W personally, but the 161W certainly isn’t out of range for you. I put your “standard all-mountain” length at around 160, so you could go either way, but I typically prefer to err the smaller than longer. But, particularly with a freeride board like this, the 161W wouldn’t be wrong. A great width for 11s, IMO. The wide sizes aren’t super wide but wide enough for 11s.
If you value more maneuverability over stability, then I’d be leaning 159W. If you prefer stability over maneuverability, then I’d go 161W.
Hope this helps with your decision
Tnx man! Your advices and opinions are always helpful. 🙂
I will go with 159w, since I will be stuck to groomers this season, without much oportunity for real freeride.
P.S.
Bonus question, which bindings I should pair Mullair with?
My options are Atlas, Falcor, Cartel X and Katana.
If that is of relevance, I have other frestyle set-up Burton Paramount with Malavitas. So I would like something stiffer, with typical freeride feel.
Hi Steeve
All of those bindings match the Mullair, IMO, but the Katana and Atlas probably have the most freeride feel, IMO – and probably between the Katana and Atlas, the Atlas the most freeride feel. The others would do the job well though – but they’ve got a bit more of that board feel/freestyle feel. You could even step it up to something like the Atlas Pro, to get it a little stiffer – would still be in range to match the Mullair.
Thank you so much, you are the best!
You’re very welcome Steeve. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate!
I am still in love with my gnu mullair thanks to your recommendations.
What fixation would you choose?
atlas 2020, falcor 2019 or stata 2020?
thank you as always
Hi Javier
Thanks for your message and glad you’re still loving the Mullair.
I would personally put the 2019 Falcor on it. But the 2020 Atlas would also be a good match. The 2020 Strata would work, but it would be lowest choice, just because it’s a little on the soft side for that board, IMO.
Hope his helps with your decision
Thanks for the great review!
I picked up a 2021 161W GNU ES. I am 6’ 220lbs with a size 12 boot. The boots I got are low profile ThirtyTwo TM-2s and I have Nitro Team bindings. It’s been a while since I’ve ridden. My last board was a Nitro Suprateam from early 2000s. I am an advanced rider and I have ridden for around 20+ years. I recently took a 4 year break after having kids. I am turning 50 and I might be a little rusty. However, I still skateboard in the warmer months.
Anyways, I did a ton of research before getting this board. I get a little bit nervous about the board’s aggressive nature. My feeling is it will feel just like the full camber boards I have always ridden. Is that a correct assumption?
Hi Robert
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t say that it feels quite like Full Camber. It’s close, but even though the rocker section between the feet is very subtle, it does still make a difference, and offers just a little bit more forgiveness than a full camber board. It’s on the stiffer side, for sure, and it’s certainly more aggressive than it is playful, but not right at the top of the spectrum of aggressive boards or anything. As an advanced rider, I don’t think you’ll find it too much. It was also a board I found surprisingly agile at slower speeds (which isn’t typically the case for stiffer boards I find). Part of that I think was helped by how narrow this board was, which brings me to my biggest concern for this board for you.
It could be on the narrow side. Even though it’s a wide board, it’s really not that wide for a wide board. I would predict that at the back insert is around 268mm. Which is as narrow as some regular width boards. That would give you a 5.8cm total overhang with your boots, by my calculations. The TM-2 are low profile, I measured them at 2.6cm longer than their mondo (in the size 10), so this is based on the size 12 being around 32.6cm long. Assuming perfect centering of boots, that would be 2.9cm on toe edge and 2.9cm on heel edge (with a zero degree back binding angle). Or 3cm heel and 2.8cm toe, which I might be more inclined to go with in this case. With a bit of angle on that back binding this would reduce, but still be quite a bit of overhang. It’s going to depend on how deep you think you’ll want to carve on it. If you’re going to be really railing your carves, I would be concerned about boot drag. If you don’t think you’ll be getting too aggressive in your carves, then you might get away with it. The plus side if you can get away with it, is that you’ll have a ton of leverage on the edges, which should make the board easy to initiate turns on without having to muscle it too much, even a stiffer, more aggressive board like this.
Hope this helps
Thanks for your great response!
I have adjusted the bindings to position the boots as centered as possible over the board. Angles are +15/+6. I set it up for carving. Kinda old school. Might go back to a duck stance if I’m not feeling it.
Great insights on the advantages and disadvantages of the board width. I don’t think I’ll be going horizontal much when carving.
My old suprateam wasn’t very wide either. I think this board is wider than that one was at least. I might be okay. Love your point about leverage over the edges. I think I had the same leverage on my old board(s).
Thanks again! Your site is a wealth of information!!!
I measured. Size 12 TM-2 are 317.5 bevel to bevel. Width of GNU ES board at inserts is roughly 269.875. Leaving approximately 2.3 mm of heel and toe hang. Nitro bindings are also cantered 3 degrees which helps too.
When I place my bare foot on the bottom of the board where the inserts are I get zero overhang. My feet are 11.5 (TM-2 run half size small).
I think I will be okay?
Hi Robert
Thanks for the extra info.
Yeah, by the sounds of it you should be alright, if you feel your Suprateam wasn’t any wider and you’re not going to be doing anything crazy like eurocarving!
2.3cm should be all good, if you’re going to be really getting super low in your carves or anything. And sounds like it’s a great width for your feet.
Would love to hear your thoughts, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow (if you think of it at the time).
Nate,
Thoughts about the GNU Essential Services 2021 instead of the MT and TR? Same details:
Size 10 boot
Union Falcor Bindings
Inter/Adv rider
Carving, trees, groomers, switch, speed. NO park or Jumps
Mostly East Coast riding
What would be a good size on this one?
Thoughts? Thanks for the help
Hi Shawn
Essential Services 2021. I’m guessing you already know, given that you’re mentioning 2021, but just to make sure: The 2022 Essential Service is quite different to the 2021, so everything here is in relation to the 2021 Essential Service.
It has some forgiveness to it – it’s not dead stiff, but certainly a good bit stiffer than the MT or any of the other boards you were looking at previously. Better for speed, powder and carving for sure. But not great for switch. Doable for switch but not great. Less agile in trees – stiffer boards tend to be harder work when riding slower and trying to do sharp turns at slower speeds. But in saying that, I found the Mullair/2021 Essential Service to be quite agile at slow speeds for how stiff it is, so it’s certainly no tank at slow speeds or anything, so it’s still fun in the trees. Definitely a good match with the Falcor, IMO.
Size-wise, it’s a little tricky though. In terms of length, the 155, IMO, would be the best size for you. But it’s probably too narrow. Looking at around 254mm at the back insert. IF you had really low profile boots, a lot of angle on your back binding angle and you didn’t really go too hard on your carves, then you might get away with it, but unless all 3 of those things (and it sounds like you like carving) then I’d say it’s too risky in terms of being too narrow. Even the 159 is narrower than I’d normally ride.
The 2022 Essential Service could be an option though – it’s a little more forgiving (more forgiving camber profiles and softer flexing (6.5/10 by my feel) and the 155 should be wide enough. And better for switch too – it’s less directional. Worth checking out. Also if you are leaning a little stiffer, let me know and I’d be happy to shortlist some 6.5/10, 7/10 flexing boards that would suit what you’re describing.
Nate,
Thanks for the note and great advice on the narrow size.
Love to get your take on a few slightly stiffer boards like the 2021 ES.
Way back in the day I was riding a K2 Podium and last year rode the Assassin
Appreciate the help and looking forward to getting on the mountain soon!
Shawn
thanks Nate! Noted about boot size/fit on the ES 2021.
For sure; let me know any thoughts on a bit stiffer board that ticks all those boxes:
Size 10 boot
Med Union Falcor Bindings
5’9″/5’10”
155-160 lbs
mostly east coast riding
Groomers, carving, speed, in some trees, some powder, trying to progress with switch. Not doing any Park, Rails, or Pipe
Inter med/Adv
Somewhat stiff, but forgiving where you can get some speed, but don’t have to ride hard all the time
Rode the K2 Podium for a long time and rode the Assassin back in 2020 in Big Sky.
Thanks for your advice and looking forward to getting on the mountain,
Shawn
Hi Shawn
Some options that I think would work (taking into account decent switch, 6.5/10 or 7/10 flex, good for carving, speed, but some forgiveness and good edge hold in icy conditions):
– Arbor Bryan Iguchi Camber 155
– Arbor Coda Camber 156 (not that good in powder though)
– Niche Story 156
– Salomon Assassin Pro 156 (if you liked the Assassin but would prefer a bit stiffer and better at speed/carving)
But if you were willing to go with something just average for switch, you could also certainly look at:
– Lib Tech Ejack Knife (154 or 157)
– Capita Kazu (154 or 157)
Could look more closely at sizing for those for you, if you think you’d be interested in them.
Note also that I felt the Assassin at around a 5/10, maybe bordering on 5.5/10 (riding the 156). Just to give you a reference point, since you’re familiar with the board). I have no experience with the K2 Podium.
Hey Nate
Thanks for a time and effort to run all this.Would you be so kind to help.I am 5.10, 165, 9,5, loved super 8 157, but after the one day 9-16 on groomed runs my legs are done.Can not ride 2 hours day after.Dauly driver nitro team 155 no problem at all with legs, but 8 is more fun surfing carving.I have discover a great discount on mullair 159, hoetown hero 156, nitro squash 153 discounted.8 154 is 258 insted 260 157.I bought this board after I read your and few others opinions but most of April I ride it on pain killers.It does not hurt if I surf fresh snow but I soon as I start carve groomers it is painfull.Loved it and love the widht, sidecut,stability,but do not want to miss a day.Have done some reaserch also, found k2 instrument.Any advice , sugestion please,
Thank you very much, stay safe, well
Hi Amar
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think sizing for the Super 8 with your specs would be 154. 157 is a size that should work fine for you, IMO, if it’s with a narrower width, but the wider width of the Super 8 and with 9.5 boots, you would have been better to go with the 154, IMO. Team 155 is not only a little shorter, it’s quite a bit narrower than the Super 8. 154 Super 8 will be a little narrower, but that smaller length would also help to make it more easily maneuverable than the 157. However, since you’ve had a hard time with the Super 8, it might be a safer bet to go with a different option. The 154 Super 8 would certainly be easier on your legs, no doubt, but I would be leaning something else, just to be sure that it’s even easier on your legs.
I think the Mullair in the 159 is going to be too big. It’s narrower for sure, than the 157 Super 8, but I think overall it’s still too big. I think the Mullair would bea great option if you were able to find it in a 155.
The Hometown Hero 156 could definitely work. It’s still going to be wider than your Team 155, but certainly narrower than the Super 8, which will help your legs for sure. For reference Team 155 is around 258mm at inserts, the Hometown Hero 156 is around 262/263mm at inserts and the Super 8 157 is around 270/269mm at inserts. Hometown Hero is a similar flex (6.5/10) to the Super 8, from my experience.
Nitro Squash is a board I haven’t ridden, so I couldn’t say anything from first hand experience. But on paper, it could definitely work for what you want it for and be a good compliment to the Team. Biggest question, IMO, is the sizing. 153 is getting pretty short for your specs, given that it’s not a wider board. That could affect how well it floated in powder for you. If you’re happy to go that length, then it’s certainly doable, but it’s borderline too small. If there was a 155-157 Squash, I would be more confident in it.
K2 Instrument also a board I haven’t ridden but on paper could definitely work. If you did, I would size to 154 as it looks to be a bit of a wider board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate!
Just saw your comment about the 2022 Essential Service being a completely different deck. Any hints? More playful? Etc.. I mean, on paper of course. Is there some info on this?
I was about to buy a Yes PYL and I am wondering if I should wait for the Gnu ES 2022 review! (I happen to like the 2022 ES graphics!).
Hi Philippe
Thanks for your message.
I rode the 2022 Essential Service last month. Here’s a few things I found.
– The 2022 ES is a little softer flexing, but not by much – I’d say 6.5/10 bordering on 7/10, compared to 7.5/10 for the Mullair/2021 ES
– The 2022 ES is a good bit wider – comparing 159s, the Mullair/2021 ES was around 258mm at front insert and 256mm at back insert (250mm waist). The 2022 ES is 265mm at front insert and 266mm at back insert (255mm waist) – so quite significantly wider.
– It’s now C2 instead of C3 (less camber dominant)
It’s more mellow than the Mullair/2021 ES for sure, but it’s not super mellow. It’s on the stiffer side of medium and has a more smooth/freeride kind of feel to it rather than a snappy/freestyle feel. It’s still a freeride board though, IMO. It’s tapered and has a 1.5″ setback. So it’s not what I’d call all-mountain, though that’s what GNU are marketing it as. It’s mellowed out a little from the previous model, but it’s still freeride, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thanks!
Yes it helps. Seems like it will be more forgiving and better in powder (more surface area).
Hence, probably a good contender against the Yes PYL I was about to buy… I will wait then for the reviews.
Cheers!
You’re very welcome Philippe.
Review will be out later this year – sometime between now and end of year, but I will make a note to make it one of the earlier reviews I publish.
Hey Nate –
Looking at picking up the GNU essential service, I’m aware you haven’t ridden it yet but have seen enough good reviews/testimonial and I’m interested. My question is re sizing.
I’m 5’11, 160 lbs, size 9 boots with union falcor bindings. Looking for a more hard charging board, as I already have a nimble skeleton key for trees and when I’m cruising around having fun. Problem is I can only find this board in 159. Think this is a bit too much? I do wanna prioritize carving etc but I’m not necessarily a speed demon so not sure whether the extra size is particularly helpful or more like just making the board more unwieldy for me. I have ridden a 159 old Burton custom and that was pretty good for just carving groomed runs. I guess my question would be whether 159 is doable as well as being somewhat versatile enough to handle the occasional tree run or something like that.
Additionally I was looking at a ride berserker and I could only find that one in 156. Would that work with my sizing? Or would I wanna look at a 159? Thanks man
Hi Rob
The 2021 Essential Service is basically the Mullair 2020 but renamed (and with a new graphic). The 2022 Essential Service is quite a different board though, so it depends on which one you’re looking at, but assuming it’s the 2021 Essential Service, I think this would be a good compliment to the Skeleton Key as a more hard charging option. Typically I would say 155 for your specs, but given that you already have the Skeleton Key (in 154 based on previous messages) in 154, I think the 159 would work. Would be harder work in trees than if you were to get the 155 but for carving groomers and more hard charging, I think it would work. It’s a narrower board than the Skeleton Key, so going longer and narrower also gives you that difference too (and it’s a good width for 9s, IMO).
If you were getting it as your one board and having it as your daily driver, I would say 155. But for your purposes I think the 159 would certainly work.
Berzerker is also a narrower board. I think 156 is the best match to your specs there – and would be something you’d probably have a better time on in the trees. Would still be very different to the Skeleton Key 154, so definitely an option. Just would depend if you wanted that longer option in your quiver, or would prefer to keep things closer to your more pure length based on specs, or if you wanted the difference of having that longer board in your quiver.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello, Nate! I am going to GNU Mullair 159W. My specs are 84 kg, 185 cm, boot size 10 US. My angles +21 -9. Will 159W be ok for me? And will it be ok with my Burton cartel Re:flex or I need something stiffer (I also like Union Atlas)?
Thank you for the reviews! It is very useful!
Hi Max
Yeah I think that would work for your specs. It’s not overly wide for a wide board, so it will work with 10s, particularly going to the 159W. I think that would be a size that works for you. 161 would also be a good length in the regular width, but it’s borderline too narrow, if you’re really laying over your carves. Going a little wider than that and a little shorter works, IMO.
Binding-wise, ideally something stiffer than the Cartel, but the Cartel will certainly work. If you wanted to start out with the Cartel and see how it feels for you, you could do that. And then if you feel like you need something stiffer to drive the board a little harder, then you could go for something else. The Atlas is a little stiffer than the Cartel, but only by a little bit. So if you did want to go stiffer, I would go for something a little stiffer than that, if you were going to change. At least to a 7/10 flex. Something from one of these, that’s around that 7/10 to 8/10 flex, would be a good bet, IMO:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Thank you for help! Already got it!
Hey Nate!
Had a quick sizing question to run by you. Thinking about picking this beast of a board up as gnu discontinued it and it selling it at a discounted price. I’m an intermediate rider but a fast learner, 185-190lbs, 5’10 with a size 11 boot. Stuck between 159W and 161W. I’m coming from a Capita Outsiders 156 which all I rode was groomers and park with. Since moving to the pacific north west I’ve come to find the best riding out here is groomers/ tree runs/ powder. So I’m looking for more of a all mountain free ride board and I think this is the one I’m going to pull the trigger on. Any sizing info helps. THANKS!
Also to add, I understand GNU only gives out contact area spec rather than effective edge and was wondering if you could guesstimate an effective edge if the 159W’s contact area is 1120. Coming from a capita outsiders with an effective edge of 1222 is sort of scaring me but since you say effective edge is usually longer than contact area you may be able to calm my worries. Thanks again.
Hi Braeden
Yeah really annoying that they only publish contact length – and pretty hard to predict the effective edge on it – the ratio of effective edge to contact length differs depending on the board. Could well be a range of like 1180 to 1270 in terms of effective edge. I imagine it’s probably between 1200 and 1230, but that’s really just shooting in the dark.
Hi Braeden
Thanks for your message.
Neither size would be wrong, but I would be leaning towards 159W for your specs. But as a freeride board, you could certainly add a couple of cms to get to the 161W. Main reason I am leaning towards 159W is because it’s going to perform better in trees. But yeah, not a wrong decision between the 159W and 161W, but I would be leaning 159W.
Hope this helps
I went ahead and ordered the 159MW. Talked to a guy who was my size and body weight but had size 13 boots and was on a 154?!? I was pretty shocked and saw a significant amount of toe overhang. Anyways thanks again for the feedback can’t wait to get my board in the next couple of days. GREAT REVIEWS!!!
Hi Braeden
Awesome your board is on its way!
154, yeah that’s pretty crazy even length-wise, but with 13s he’s either getting a lot of boot drag or not really leaning into his carves. But all good. I did talk to one guy with 13s once who was on a regular width board and didn’t have issues, but he did say that he pretty much only rode park and never did any big carves or anything and said he could get away with it. So if it works…. but I wouldn’t be doing it!
Hey Nate,
Thanks for your reviews they are awesome and I love how you reply to everyone with very good advice. I currently ride a 2019 Never summer Proto Type 2 154, my riding ability is intermediate to advance. I ride mostly east coast groomers and I love to carve and the proto 2 is perfect for it. I then purchased a Captia indoor survival 152 for more freestyle riding and I liked the way the camber felt, but I’m traveling more to the west to ride so I’m looking for a board that I can use out west for powder, bowls, trees and groomers. I want something that I can ride fast but also that I can ride slow that is menuvrable. I purchased the Ride warpig 147 for the west coast but I really didn’t like it, I think it was the wide that I didn’t like and wasn’t good for riding slow, but charging with the warpig it felt alot better. I was thinking of either the Gnu mullair 159, Arbor Crosscut camber 158 or NS West Bound 157. I’m 5’10” 175 sz 8 boot. Are those boards good for what I’m looking for and is the size good or should I go smaller.
Hi Peter
Thanks for your message.
I think the 159 would be doable for the Mullair for you, because it is a narrower board, but I think I would be leaning towards the 155 for you. Mostly because of boot size and because you want something maneuverable for trees. I think you’d like the 159 when you were in powder and bowls, but less so for rising in tight spaces and riding slow. But that said, the 159 would be doable – it rides narrower, more like a 246-248 waist and your height/weight specs would work on it. I just think if you’re going to ride trees a fair bit, then there would be a bigger benefit from going shorter than the cons you would get in powder/at speed. But the only counter to that, is that the 159 might look better in terms of sizes in your quiver – but it’s a very different board to the PT2, so I don’t think you need to worry too much about that.
For the Westbound, again the 157 definitely doable, but it’s a little wider than something like the Mullair = both at waist and at inserts. So, again, I think sizing down to the 155 probably makes sense. Again 157 doable and don’t think it would be a bad choice, but leaning towards the 155, based on what your describing/specs.
I haven’t ridden the Crosscut, but based on the Arbor boards I have ridden that are similar, it’s going to be quite wide at the inserts. Wide enough, that again, I think it would be worth sizing down on.
For reference, these are the estimated (or actual) width at inserts for those sizes:
– PT2 154: 258mm at inserts
– Warpig 147: 270mm at inserts (very rough estimate)
– Mullair 159: 256mm at back insert
– Mullair 155: 254mm at back insert
– Westbound 157: 264mm at back insert
– Westbound 155: 262mm at back insert
– Crosscut 158: 267mm at back insert (very rough estimate)
– Crosscut 154: 265mm at back insert (very rough estimate)
So, I would probably be more inclined to go 159 Mullair over the 157 Westbound or 158 Crosscut, if you wanted to get something significantly longer than your PT2. But I think the 155 Mullair or 155 Westbound would work well.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate thanks for the reply and great advice. Now I’m down to choosing between two boards, The Gnu Mullair 159 or the Ejack Knife 157. The Bottom line is I’m looking for a freeride board that I can ride on powder, bowls, trees, rip carves on groomers and that can ollie and do small jumps off side hits and natural features. I’m a beginner at doing ollies and small jumps. I’m mainly going to be doing the ollieing and jumps of my other two boards the proto 2 and indoor survival but I want my freeride board to be able to ollie and do small jumps also. Which of theses two boards would you recommend or if there is another board that would suit my needs for a freeride board.
I forgot to add that I also want the board to also be able to ride slow and that can maneuver while cruising.
Hi Peter
Tough call between the two. I’d say the E-Jack Knife is a little better for jumps and pretty good for a freeride board. I did find the 159 Mullair more maneuverable at slower speeds than the 157 E-Jack Knife though. I didn’t find the E-Jack knife bad at all, in terms of maneuverability at slower speeds, but not as good as the Mullair. And with size 8 boots, I feel like you might even feel that difference more so. The Mullair 159 is 256mm at the back insert and has a 250mm waist. Compared to the E-Jack Knife 157 which is 260mm at the back insert and a 253mm waist. It’s only a few millimeters, but it can make a difference. It’s a tight call for sure, but I think I would be leaning Mullair. You can still certainly do jumps and ollies on it, and I think the maneuverability thing is going to be more noticeable than the difference in jumps/ollies.
Hi Nate!
Your review is super helpful..fell in love with the mullair but I have some doubts size-wise.
I am an advanced rider, mainly ride on groomers and powder, never go to the park. I would use the mullair especially for freeriding and carving.
I am 186cm x 86kg, foot size 10.5 US and was thinking of a 161w or a 164w.
As of now, I ride a Burton custom flying v 158cm and feels too short to me, that’s why I’d pick something longer.
Hope you can help me on this one!
Thanks!
Hi Alberto
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I definitely agree for your specs, for the type of riding you’re describing/ability level, that going longer is a good idea. Also, good call on going wide with this board with 10.5s. It’s quite a narrow board in the regular width and not super wide in the wides – so for this board in particular the wide sizes are really good for 10.5s.
So, between the 161W and 164W is what I would be contemplating too. Unfortunately GNU show contact length and not effective edge, so it’s hard to compare in that sense.
But my instinct is to go 161W. I don’t think the 164W is necessarily wrong for you, but my instinct is that the 161W will be the slightly better size overall for your specs/what you’re describing.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for all the review, comparisons, comments – it’s really helpful.
I will be very happy if you are able to help me with advice.
I am 176cm (5’8) height, 67kg (147.71 lbs), deeluxe empire boots 10US size.
I am an intermediate rider (not advanced at all) (3 seasons, <10 days per season). But I feel pretty confident and strive to learn quickly with an instructor this year.
I will mostly ride resorts on the groomed trails learning to ride carving and switch better, trying to make some very simple tricks and jumps on the way. Sometimes I will go off from the groomed trails to the small unprepared paths in the trees with uneven snow terrain. Of course, if there is powder days I will go to freeride.
1. This season I decided to buy my own snowboard (I rode the rental cambers before) and I need some recommendation with board should I pick. For now, I choosing between GNU Mullair 155 and LibTech EJeck Knife 154. I understand that those boards require advanced level but I hope that I will be able to learn fast (at least I think that it’s better than rental board). Should I choose among these options with my level? Could help me to choose or advise something that is better in your opinion. I am also worried about the boots' feet, I have 10US size and I am not sure that is suitable for the boards listed above.
2. Bindings – I thought about Union Atlas but probably you can advise something in pair to the board.
Hi Vitalii
Thanks for your message.
Those boards, IMO, aren’t going to be ideal for your purposes a. because they are a bit advanced for your level, which will likely hinder your progress and b. because of the way you describe your riding/how you want to ride. The Mullair and E-Jack Knife are freeride boards and aren’t that suitable for riding switch or tricks and jumps, particularly if you’re still new at those things.
Size-wise, in terms of length, something around 154, 155 is a good length for you, at an advanced level. I think I would go a little shorter for your level, but those lengths are doable.
In terms of width, the Mullair is quite narrow, so the 155 might be pushing it being too narrow for your boots. I haven’t tested Deeluxe boots, so I’m not sure if they’re low profile or not. You would probably be OK on the 154 E-Jack Knife, width-wise.
For what you’re describing, I would check out the following:
>>My Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards
OR
>>Top 10 Intermediate Snowboards (and look at the all-mountain options in there).
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate! Your answer is really helpful. Now I definitely go with All Mountain/Freestyle.
Last year I rode with rental Elan Explore C 155 (camber, true twin, 5/10 flex). The size was not mineand I was hard at the first day but then I saddled it very fast and rode without any problem.
BTW, I didn’t find significant difference between, e.g., Jones Mountain Twin (from your “Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards” list) and RC C3 (from “Top 5 Aggressive All Mountain Freestyle Snowboards” list). Could you please explain what the “aggressive” mean in snowboards context then?
I have just researched and I liked the board… Whould do you think about GNU RC C3 2021? Looks like it cover my needs. Could it be good for me?
Thanks for you job!
Remark to the message above: Elan Explore C 160
Hi Vitalii
I think the GNU RC C3 could work for your purposes, especially if you didn’t find it too aggressive. I think it would work better than the likes of the Mullair or E-Jack Knife for what you’re describing.
Typically an aggressive board is one that allows you to carve a little harder, ride a little faster and pop a little harder. The latter being the most relevant for aggressive all-mountain-freestyle (as opposed to aggressive all-mountain). The RC C3 isn’t overly aggressive as far as aggressive boards go – and that’s a little bit of bias from me, in terms of preferring to go not too aggressive, particularly when it comes to not going too stiff for freestyle riding. In terms of speed and carving, the Mountain Twin is about the equal of the RC C3, IMO, but the RC C3 is definitely a poppier board. For getting bigger air, the RC C3 is more aggressive in that sense. Also aggressive often means to tame the board you’ve got to ride it more aggressively, or it will start to ride you instead – or buck you. In the case of the RC C3, it’s not the kind of board that’s too unforgiving in that sense – like I said, it’s not at the end of the scale of aggressiveness, but it’s something you can ride aggressively for freestyle riding – getting big air, stomping landings etc. Hope that makes sense
Hi Nate,
love the site and your reviews! I was wondering if you could give me advice on bindings.
Just bought a 164.5w 2019/20 GNU Mullair for all mountain freeding and I don’t know which binding to pick up.
My boots are the Salomon Dialogue Focus Boa Wide MP 31.0 and I am a pretty big guy (6’5″ 220lbs). Do you think toe/heel drag will be an issue?
I have read pretty much all of your reviews and still can’t decide. I was thinking Cartels or the Atlas and was also considering the Falcor although it is much more expensive were I live and I’m somewhat on a budget. Also, what to do you think about the Bent Metal Cor-Pro or Transfers?
Many thanks for the advice and keep up the great work!
Best,
Phil
Hi Phil
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tight call in terms of width. I think in some scenarios you should be fine with it, but will depend on a few things.
Firstly, what year are your Dialogue Boas? The 2020 model became lower profile than previous models, so if it’s a 2020 or 2021 model, that would really help in terms of width.
Secondly, what binding angles do you ride? With more angle on the back foot, that can give you more leeway.
And finally, it depends on how you ride too. You can get away with a much narrower board, if you don’t carve that hard. But if you’re quite an aggressive carver – i.e. get quite low/deep on your carves (e.g. eurocarves), then you need a bit more width to avoid drag.
So with low profile boots, a bit of angle on your back binding angle and depending on your riding style, I think you get away with it.
For reference, I would predict the 164W Mullair to be roughly 27.4cm at the back insert and 27.6cm at the front insert. With MP 31.0 boots, which are likely at least 33cm long on the outersole, that would mean a total overhang on the back foot of at least 5.6cm (2.8cm per edge if boots perfectly centered). With angle on your back foot, then that would lower that overhang. If you could adjust your bindings on your boot so that you had around 3cm on your heel edge and less on your toe edge, that would help too. So, depending on the profile of your boots, I think it’s doable. However, the 2019 and earlier Dialogues (at least the ones I’ve measured) might have an outersole length of more like 34.8cm. Which would greatly increase that overhang and might be too much.
As for bindings, I think the Cartels would work, the Atlas would be slightly better for the Mullair, IMO, and the Falcor would be the best match to the Mullair. But The Atlas would certainly do a good job and some you some cash. The Cartels would work too, if you wanted to save even more. The other option from Union, if you wanted to save more money would be the Force. I would say as good a match as the Cartel.
The only Bent Metal binding I’ve ridden is the Transfer, and I haven’t ridden that since the 2017 model, so I can’t really say that much about them. Based on the 2017 Transfer, I would say it’s too soft flexing for the Mullair. Based on specs, the Cor-Pro would be a better match.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
really appreciate the extensive answer.
I have the 2020 Dialogue model and as you said they do indeed have improved their profile. On my old board I ride 15,-15 and was thinking of using those angles again.
Also, I just measured with my old board and had a little over 6.0cm of overhang but the board is not as wide with 27.0 cm at the inserts. So I guess I will be below 6cm overhang in total with the Mullair and I will try to adjust the bindings the way you suggested. Cheers!
Thus far I carved as deep as I could but definitely no euro carves because that unfortunately just hasn’t worked for me yet. Guess I will have to look for an extrawide board like the West Bound DF in the future.
With respect to the bindings, I will wait and see if I can get a good deal on the Falcors and otherwise just go for the Atlas.
Thank you so much for the help!
You’re very welcome Phil.
Certainly does help that you’ve got the 2020 Dialogues, and riding with +15/-15 angles. And since you’re getting a bit more width versus your old board, if you had no issues on that, you should be good – and if you were having drag issues on that, then this will at least give you a little more breathing space.
Hi Nate,
Congratulations for the web site, love your articles.
I would like to buy a Mullair but cannot decide between the 155 and the 159. I’m 177cm, 68/70 kg and 9 us.
Already have a Ride Machete 158 and the idea is to get a freeride board, there are god deals for the Mullair now.
The Mullair 159 (1120mm) has less effective edge then my ride machete (1216mm), the 155 (1100mm) even less, this make me doubt about getting the 155. On the other and the effective edge of the Mullair 159 is only 2 cm more than the 155. On paper, the 155 should be a 157 no?
What are your thoughts?
Thanks a million
Hi Miguel
Thanks for your message.
GNU actually show contact length, rather than effective edge in their stats (super annoying and it would be great to live in a world where every snowboard company showed both contact length and effective length!), so it’s hard to compare. And there is confusion around the terms and how different people use them – and some use them interchangeably. So it’s a tough one to work with. In any case, effective edge will always be longer than contact length, so the actual effective edge figure of the Mullair, as opposed to contact length will be longer than that. How long? That’s anybody’s guess. Freeride boards do often have shorter effective edges versus overall length than more freestyle oriented boards though – due to having longer noses (i.e. more length outside the contact points – i.e. more length outside the effective edge). Which is one of the reasons you can go a little longer when choosing a freeride board.
Ordinarily I would say go for the 155 for your specs. However, given that you already ride a 158 in the Machete and you don’t really want to go shorter with your freeride board, I think the 159 would be the best bet for you. Purely on your specs, I would say 155 but taking everything into account I would be leaning more 159.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
Love your site! really awesome!
It’s time to buy a new board for me, after owning a bataleon whatever (2014) for a couple of years I am really looking to buy a second board that suits my style a little bit more. I really liked the bataleon whatever and I will probably keep riding it for more creative and chill riding.
Right now I am looking to buy the mullair 2020. I am a advanced rider that mainly does groomers with some side hits and an occasional lap in the park (nothing very spectacular there, just some small – medium jumps). Most of the time I am carving and taking speed on the groomers. When there is the possibility to ride pow I am going for the pow.
I am heavily doubting between the 155 and 159. I’m about 75kg and 177cm. I still have my first boots (Vans Aura 9.5 or euro 42,5).
Besides that I am also looking for a binding to combine with the mullair. I was looking for the Burton Genesis, but really don’t know if this would be a good match up.
I really hope you can help me out here!
Thanks!
Hi Jekke
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise, it’s a close call between the two, but I would be leaning towards the 159. Mostly because a. you’re an advanced rider and b. since you already have a board for more creative and casual riding, then you don’t need the length to adjust for doing that kind of thing. But if you could let me know the size of your Bataleon Whatever that would also help.
In terms of bindings, I would typically go a little stiffer/more responsive for the Mullair than the Genesis. It’s doable if you know you like a softer binding, even on a stiffer board, but typically I like to match flex pretty closely. You will be on softer boots (vs the board), but I would still probably up the flex a little from the Genesis – at least to a 6/10, maybe 7/10 flex, ideally. I rode it with Burton Malalvitas (which are slightly stiffer than the Genesis but not by that much) and it’s still a good ride with those, but ideally I would go a little stiffer, if I was to buy. Particularly because carving and speed are going to be your go to on this board. Check out some options from the following.
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for the reply! My Bataleon Whatever is size 156. Also important to know is that I will be riding this board with the same (new) bindings as on the Mullair.
When I look at the bindings in your top 5 lists I am probably looking at the Union Atlas – Burton Cartel – Union Falcor (colorwise not really a good match in my opinion). Maybe you have some other models in mind?
Thanks!
Hi Jekke
Thanks for the extra info. That makes me lean more again towards the 159 as a the best option to compliment the Whatever in your quiver.
In terms of bindings, I think those are good options to go over both boards. If you don’t want anything too stiff on the Whatever, then I would probably be leaning towards Cartel (or Union Strata) or Atlas. Not that the Falcor is ultra-stiff, but it’s getting on the stiffer side for a 4/10 flex rated board.
Hi Nate,
Find your reviews super useful.
Looking for a size recommendation.
I am 177cm, 74 kg and size 9 k2 maysis boot.
I’ve had a 154.5 GNU Rider’s Choice for a couple of seasons which I loved until I snapped its core.
I’m an advanced rider looking for something that can handle the whole hill but loves carving, goes oright in the steep stuff, powder and can jump a bit too.
Really like the sound of the Mullair. Trying to decide between a 155 and a 159?
Cheers
Hi Anthony
I agree, it sounds like the Mullair would suit your needs well, based on what you’re describing.
Size-wise it’s a tough decision. Both would work for both your height/weight and boot size. With the Mullair vs the Rider’s Choice you can afford to go a little longer if you want – as it has a longer nose – i.e. more board outside the contact points – which is good for powder, but not really noticeable on groomers. Going longer would give you better stability at speed and more float in powder. And more edge for big carves. But the shorter 155 would be more nimble, easier to control and better for jumps.
I don’t think you could go wrong on either – I think it comes down to your preferences. Usually I wouldn’t recommend a 159 at your weight/boot size, but this particular board is a great width for size 9s, in the 159, IMO and it can be ridden a little longer, so the 159 is certainly a possibility. It’s just whether you want to sacrifice a little maneuverability for more stability and float – or if you want to sacrifice a little float and stability for more maneuverability.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
I have a doubt.
I want a board for turns, carving and speed.
I am doubting between gnu mullair and lib tech ejack knife.
I measure 188cm (6.1) weight 86kg (189.5 pounds) and my foot number is 44 eu (10 us)
I think the best option for me is gnu mullair 161 (not wide)
thejack would not know if legir 159 or 162
What do you think?
any advice is grateful
Thank you
I had also thought of gnu Billy Goat. but I don’t know if in 159 or 162
thanks¡¡¡¡¡
Hi Javier
Thanks for your message.
All 3 of those options suit what you’re describing, for sure. If you’re not riding powder that much – or never really get in any deep powder, then the Billy Goat is a great option – but if you are, then I would go Mullair or Ejack Knife. My personal favorite out of those for carving/speed would be the Mullair, but all 3 are great options, IMO.
Size-wise, assuming you’re an advanced rider (which I’m guessing you are if you’re looking at these boards – if not, then a different board might be more suitable), then I would go 161 for Mullair, 162 for E-Jack Knife and 162 for Billy Goat. And I agree that you should go non-wide for all of these options.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you very much for the reply 🙂
The problem I see in the 162 knife ejack is that its width is 25.6. Do you think it’s too much for my 44 European?
I see that for carving and speed you prefer the mullair 161. I think 25.2 width is perfect for me .. What do you think?
Thank you very much and greetings from Spain!
he jack knife 159 is 25.4 … do you think it’s an option?
Any other option or suggestion I appreciate it
Hi Javier
If you wanted you could go down to the 159, but based on your specs and how you like to ride, I think the 162 would be the better size. As per my other comment, the width of the 162 should be a good fit for Euro44 (US10).
Hi Javier
The E-Jack Knife, like most Lib Tech boards, isn’t that much wider at the inserts vs the waist width. So the 162 E-Jack Knife would be roughly 263mm at the back insert and 262mm at the front insert. Which isn’t too wide for Euro 44 (US10) at all. It’s a good width, IMO.
The Mullair 161 (252mm waist) will be roughly 258mm at the back insert and 260mm at the front insert. So it is narrower for sure. But still doable for Euro44 (US10). I ride US10s and rode the 159 Mullair which is 250mm at the waist and 256mm at the back insert and 258mm at the front insert. This is quite narrow for US10s, but I didn’t run into any issues. So, I’d say that the 161 would be fine width-wise for you (and the 161 length better than the 159 length for your specs for that board). So yeah 161 Mullair a great option for you, IMO. But the E-Jack Knife 162 would also work well.
Thank you very much for everything Nate.
Last Sunday I tried my Gnu Mullair 161 and it is fantastic. fast, stable, great carving ….
Now I feel that I have found my perfect board with the right measures that suit me.
thank you very much
Hi Javier
You’re very welcome – and awesome to hear! Glad you’re digging your new ride.
Hi there, I just found a good deal on the Müllair 159. I have some Falcors in M and 9,5 adidas tactical advs. Do i risk some drag if I go 15 front 0 back ?
Thanks for the great reviews !
Hi Matthias
Thanks for your message.
Hopefully these details can help with your decision.
I measured the 159 Mullair at 25.6cm on the back insert (at reference stance) and 25.8cm on the front insert.
The Tactical ADV that I measured (in a different size) was only 1.7cm longer on the outersole than the mondo of the boot (the shortest outersole profile I’ve measured so far). If that holds true for your Tactical ADVs, then I would predict they are 29.2cm on the outersole. With a zero degree back binding angle, that should mean around 3.6cm of total overhang – with perfect centering that would be 1.8cm of overhang for each edge, which is absolutely fine, IMO. Even if you had a little more heel overhang, if you couldn’t get perfectly centered, would be all good too.
The Falcor Ms that I measured were 25.2cm long on the top of the footbed and 22.5cm on the underside of the base plate (angles up to the footbed). So I don’t think you should have any issues with fitting the bindings on it.
There are never any guarantees, but I would be confident that you would be fine width wise with those boots and bindings on the Mullair 159. Some boots I’ve measured are up to 4.5cm longer on the outersole vs mondo print, in which case there would be a much greater risk, but having one of the lowest profile boots (if not the lowest profile) really helps in this case.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
thank you so much for you answer, this will help me a lot.
Keep up the good work and keep on shredding !
Best, Matthias
Ok, the 159 is not available anymore, I am 1,80 cm high at 70 kg, will the 161 work as an all mountain board ?
Thank you in advance.
Best, Matthias
Hi Matthias
In my opinion 161 is getting a bit long for your specs as an all-mountain board. I would be looking more around 157 for your specs. The 159 close enough to work, but the 161 maybe getting a bit long, IMO. Using it as a freeride board, you can ride it a little longer – but even then 161 is a little longer than ideal for your specs, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi , if i am 180 cm tall, 84 kg and size 10.5 US what size you recomend ? 159 Wide or 155 Wide ?
Or other?
Thanks
Hi Tomas
The 159W would be a really good size for you, IMO. It’s a good length and a really good width for 10.5s, IMO. I would estimate (based on measuring a different size Mullair) that the width at inserts on the 159W to be around 266mm on the back insert (and 268mm on the front insert), which is a really good width for 10.5s, IMO. I think 155 would be too short for you (and I don’t think the Mullair comes in a 155W?) – and I think the 159 would be just a bit narrow for 10.5s.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate ! Best snowboard advisor !!
You’re very welcome Tomas – thanks for using the website and I hope you have an awesome rest of the season!
Hi Nate , since i am not able to find the 159 Wide … you think that the standard mullair 159 would still work well and dont have toe drag ? Usually i set bindings around 15 front and -10 Back.
Imagine that best is to have enough width to carge aggressively on this board so dont wanr to risk.
Thanks Nate
Hi Tomas
I think on this board the regular width would be too risky with 10.5s, especially if you want to carve aggressively. I rode the 159 and the width at the back inserts was only 256mm (258mm at the front insert). I ride with low profile 10s, with a 15 degree angle on the back foot, and I was a little concerned. I didn’t have any issues in the end, but I think it would be too risky for you, IMO.
Also, are you sure your back binding angle is 10 degrees? Most bindings rotate in 3 degree increments (with Burton EST bindings being the only exception I can think of). But that’s a moot point anyway, since even at 15 degrees with a 10.5 I think the regular 159 would be risky.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate .. will search the Wide. You are right was a typo my angle varies from -15 to -17 .. but still agree with your feedback .
Cheera
Nate – Your website rocks. Thanks for all the work you put into it.
Any thoughts on this vs. the burton flight attendant? Trying to finalize a choice between the two for my new board.
I generally ride in Tahoe, so pow, groomers, through the trees, some chop. I don’t really do jumps or freestyle. thanks for your help!
Hi Spencer
Thanks for your message.
Both are awesome boards, IMO, so, assuming you’re an advanced rider (which you’ll want to be to ride these bad boys), then both would work well for what you’re describing.
But some specifics, that might help you decide:
1. The FA is a little better in powder, IMO
2. I preferred, only just, the Mullair for turning/carving. I loved the feel of it on a carve and it was actually pretty good for quick short turns (e.g. in trees)
3. Both as good as each other for speed – which is up there
4. Mullair has slightly better edge-hold for hard/icy conditions, IMO, but FA isn’t bad either
5. Mullair just a touch stiffer – but again, fairly similar for flex – 7/10 for FA 7.5/10 for Mullair
Hopefully this gives you more to go off for your decision – also check out my Flight Attendant Review, if you haven’t already for further comparison.
Hey Nate,
Trying to decide between the Gnu Mullair and the Jones Explorer for my new board. I already have a K2 Flastplant for playing around.
I like to bomb, do big carves, quick carves, natural jumps, play in the trees (tight and open) and of course pow whenever I can. I’m an Advanced rider using Union Force bindings, and ThirtyTwo Tm-Two XLT size 12US boots. 6’3 and 240 pounds, so both boards are going to be the 164W.
I hear the Explorer is supposed to be forgiving in the end of the day chop and chunder, but the Gnu is supposed to be a ton of fun and rips. Is there a huge difference between the two in forgiveness or are they pretty comparable? Which would you prefer personally, and for my style of riding?
Hi Jared
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the Explorer is a little more forgiving than the Mullair, and better in chop/chunder. But the Mullair isn’t as unforgiving as some and not terrible in chop/chunder. And whilst both are good carvers and good at speed, the Mullair is a step above in those aspects. It’s a more dynamic feeling board. I would say the Explorer over the Mullair for jumps. The Mullair isn’t bad for jumps but it’s just more challenging, IMO. Good for larger jumps and straight air. And good pop, but I found it to be the kind of pop that you’ve really got to load up, if that makes sense. It’s not easy pop. If you’re quite athletic it may not be a big issue, but for me, I found it took a bit of effort.
I did find the Mullair nice in trees and it does have the ability to slow down and be quite agile when you need it to.
Overall, I think the Mullair would prob work best for what you’re describing, but the Explorer a little better for jumps and in the chop/chunder.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Thanks a bunch, man, I went with the Mullair and I absolutely love it. This thing freaking rips, and carving is so much fun I don’t think I’ve ever enjoyed powerful turning as much as I have on this board.
You rock.
You’re very welcome Jared
And thanks for the update. And awesome that you’re loving your new setup!
Just bought a 159w and wondering if my Malavitas will be too soft for this board? if so, what other bindings would you recommend: Atlas, katana?
I ride a very stiff boot already.
thanks
Hi Jon
Thanks for your message.
You could certainly ride the Mullair with the Malavita (it’s what I rode it on). But you would, IMO, get more performance out of a stiffer/more responsive binding.
The Atlas would certainly work but if it was me I’d ride this board with the Falcor. Just that it has better board feel than the Atlas, and you might notice that difference going from the Malavita to the Atlas. Or the Ultra, but that’s very expensive.
Something like the Flux XF or the Burton Genesis X would also be a good match, IMO.
But if you want to ride it with the Malavitas though and see how it feels, I’d say that’s a good idea and then see if you feel you want something with a bit more stiffness to drive it.
Not sure about the Katana, as I don’t currently test Rome gear.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I’m curious how you got that 22.8″ stance set back 1″.
Their site says the inserts are already set back 1″ so it seems like you could be a little under 22″ or go up to about 23.5″.
Although honestly when I try to find the center of sidecut on the board it almost seems like it’s shifted forward compared to running length. But, I may be thrown off by the early rise in the nose.
Any thoughts or insights? I hit up Mervin and they just reiterated what the website says.
Take care and think snow
Hi D
Good spotting. Just looked at my notes and looks like I setback to 50mm (2″) to accommodate a wider stance (but didn’t want to go as wide as 595mm (23.43″).
Would be nice to get nose and tail length specs – and also what GNU considers to be the reference stance, rather than just a range. But I’ve always been an advocate of brands publishing every spec they have. Some show tail/nose length, which is nice. And some show effective edge, some running length – some both. I’d like to see all specs published – especially when typically they don’t divulge this stuff, even on request.
Thanks!
How did you feel over sidecut? Particularly on groom- did you ever feel too far back?
Hi D
It felt fine over sidecut to me. Didn’t feel too far back. But I did have a lot of fresh snow that day, so was nice to be a bit further back.
Hi Nate
Enjoying your reviews
Quick question can this charge (bomb ), rail as Good as the Jones Flagship and be just as stable and solid on groomers etc..
Im looking at the 161w Mullair 2019
Hi Bill
Thanks for your message.
I found the Flaghip was just slightly more stable at speed – but that thing is about as stable as they come at speed, IMO. So whilst the Mullair isn’t quite there in that sense, compared to the Flagship, IMO – it’s still definitely something you can really bomb with. I liked the Mullair for carving over than the Flagship – just a little more dynamic, if that makes sense? Flagship better in powder but again, Mullair pretty good there too. So yeah, I’d say the Flagship a little more stable on groomers, but the Mullair still really stable there – but the Mullair more fun to carve on.
Hope this helps
Hey thanks Nate
My get a bit boring just charging all day on some of the mountain with the jones FSP . Reminds me of surfing with my longboard
Where the mullair will handle the whole mountain with a bit more fun factor (short board)
I’m getting the mullair
Once again appreciate your thoughts
You’re very welcome Bill. Hope you have a great season!
Hey Nate, just a quick thing – I think you got the weight chart mixed up. If not, I didn’t say anything!
Hi Yannick
Yeah I had the whole size chart wrong! (fixed now). I forgot to edit it. It was the first of my new review format, so some teething issues there – thanks for pointing it out!