Snowboard width sizing is very important and I will outline why in more detail below.
It can seem difficult to get this right but this post should help to make it easier.
There will be width sizing charts further down in this post.
However, anyone can just post a width sizing chart and you wouldn’t know how accurate it is or what the reasoning behind it is.
So before looking at the charts I suggest you read the rest of the article first.
UPDATE: Note that this post has had a major update as at February 23rd, 2018. This has been a long time in the making and I have done a lot of research, using real life data, to update my tables and whilst they were fairly accurate before, I feel like they are now even more fine-tuned. But do note all of the assumptions outlined under the charts below.
How to define the ideal width
There are two schools of thought on the best width of a snowboard.
School of thought #1: The best width for you is where your boots overhang on both the heel edge and toe edge by anywhere between 1 & 2 centimetres (1/4 to 3/4 inch).
School of thought #2: The best width for you is when your feet are roughly exactly the width of the board at the inserts (where the feet will be on the board – i.e. where the bindings are) or a little over. In other words, in bare feet your heel would be right on the heel edge and your toes right on the toe edge (at your binding angles).
It should also be noted that this should be measured using the “underside of the board” as this is the side of the board that makes contact with the snow. The top side of the board is typically narrower due to the angle on the edges of a snowboard.
……………..So which one is correct?
Both!
Yes they are actually both right and are actually essentially the same thing. This is because when your feet take up the width of the board edge-to-edge then your boots are likely to hang over 1-2cm (1/4 to 3/4 inches) on both heel and toe side (for a total of 2-4cm of difference between foot length and boot length) – depending on the profile of the boots.
NOTE: The lowest profile boots I’ve seen add around 2cm total to the length of your feet and the longest profile I’ve measured added 4.5cm compared to the length of the foot.
Both schools of thought are the same for the same reasons too. Which brings me to the importance of getting the width right.
Why Does Width Matter?
School of thought number 2 suggests that the feet should be edge to edge (or a little over) as it is your feet that apply pressure to the edges when you’re turning the board.
Whilst there is a bit of leeway (a little bit inside the edges and you won’t notice it at all), if your feet are too small for the board (i.e. don’t reach the edges) then it is going to be harder to apply pressure to the edges which will make turn initiation more arduous and the board will feel heavy and less responsive.
NOTE: People who are lighter in weight will notice this even more if they are too far inside the edges. People who weight more won’t be as effected by this as they have more force to apply pressure with.
But too much overhang would violate school of thought number 1. The reason there is an upper limit on the overhang in school of thought 1 is that too much overhang and you risk dragging a boot in the snow on hard turns – obviously not what you want!
As a rule, 5mm overhang of feet on both toe and heel edge (max total overhang of 10mm) should be the maximum foot overhang and 4-5mm inside the edge of board total (so roughly 2mm on heel-edge and 2mm on toe-edge) should be the maximum “underhang”.
This translates to boot overhang of around 20mm (2cm or 3/4″) per edge, as the maximum (depending on boot profile of course – a low profile boot means your feet will have the freedom to overhang further and still maintain a boot overhang of 20mm or less – and a boot with longer profile will mean there is less room for foot overhang).
Foot underhang doesn’t change for low profile boots – you still ideally want to not go more than 2mm per edge on your feet, regardless of boot profile.
You can probably get away with up to 2.5cm (1 inch) of overhang on the heel-edge and 2.5cm (1″) toe-edge, in reality – but to be on the safe side it is better to try to stay under 2cm (3/4″) – especially if you like to lay down some deep carves.
If you can’t get your overhang even on both toe and heel edge, it’s better to have extra overhang on your heel-edge than on your toe-edge. This is because it’s easier to get lower on the toe-edge – so drag is more likely. For example it’s better to have 2.5cm (1″) on your heel and 2cm (3/4″) on your toe, if you have total of 4.5cm (1 3/4″) of overhang, than to have 2.5cm on the toe and 2cm on the heel.
TIP: If you can’t set up your bindings so that the toe and heel have equal overhang, always go with more overhang on your heel than your toe.
Width Sizing Tables
Unfortunately the width at the inserts (where the bindings go) of snowboards is not something that snowboard companies publish when they release the board specs. This would certainly make it a lot easier and I can only speculate as to why this information isn’t released.
What is published is the waist width, so this is what we have to go with to make an estimation of the right width (most companies also publish tip and tail width but waist width is a more accurate way to estimate the width at the inserts).
Due to brand variances, differences in side cut, stance width variations and binding angles it is difficult to get this completely accurate in a chart. However as a general guideline the following tables should get you close.
If you would like to know more about these variances and how much impact they can have check out the “extra reading” section below.
Factors such as boot profile (which is essentially how much difference there is between foot length and boot length), thickness of the base plate of your bindings and the bevel on the toe and heel of your boots will also play a part.
Remember that you do have a bit of room to play with and you don’t need to get this exact, but getting close is a good idea, IMO. The charts below should help you to get close.
The further away from the average foot size (i.e. the narrower or wider compared to the “normal” your feet are), the less accurate it will be – and the less board options there will be.
The following charts were created by compiling information from various width sizing charts in addition to intensive research into the average side cuts, reference stances and waist width of hundreds of different boards (by creating diagrams of those boards and measuring different feet sizes against those diagrams). I have also measured the width at the inserts of a number of different snowboards in different lengths and widths and from different brands and part of the process of creating this chart was to find the average ratio of width at waist to width at inserts.
Basic Charts
These are the basic charts. They are pretty much what you will usually see, but I didn’t think they provided enough accuracy. But at a quick glance this is roughly where you might fit.
Men's
Waist Width Range (mm) | US Men's Boot Size | |
|---|---|---|
NARROW | 240-245 | 6-8 |
REGULAR | 245-250 | 8-9.5 |
REGULAR | 250-255 | 9.5-10.5 |
MID-WIDE | 255-265 | 10.5-12 |
WIDE | 265+ | 12+ |
Women's
Waist Width Range (mm) | US Women's Boot Size | |
|---|---|---|
NARROW | <235 | <6 |
REGULAR | 235-240 | 6-7.5 |
REGULAR | 240-245 | 7.5-8.5 |
REGULAR | 245+ | 8.5+ |
Refer to the “what If I don’t own boots yet” chart further down for foot sizes in inches + other boot measurements (UK, Euro).
The Following Charts break it down a bit further but are still subject to the same variances (e.g. boot bevel, boot profile).
Men’s Waist Width Chart
This chart has been updated after further research and I have now created two charts to take into account binding angles, where previously there was just one chart.
Not sure of your preferred binding angles yet?:
>>What Snowboard Binding Angles Should I Use?
NOTE: The Maximum Width is based on foot size. The Minimum Width is based on boot size.
When Back Binding is at 0°
Men's US Boot Size | Foot Size (cm) | MIN at 0° (mm) | MAX at 0° (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
6.5 | 24 | 232 | 237 |
7 | 24.5 | 235 | 240 |
7.5 | 25 | 239 | 244 |
8 | 25.5 | 242 | 247 |
8.5 | 26 | 245 | 250 |
9 | 26.5 | 248 | 253 |
9.5 | 27 | 251 | 256 |
10 | 27.5 | 254 | 259 |
10.5 | 28 | 258 | 263 |
11 | 28.5 | 261 | 266 |
11.5 | 29 | 265 | 270 |
12 | 29.5 | 269 | 274 |
13 | 30.5 | 275 | 280 |
14 | 31.5 | 281 | 286 |
15 | 32.5 | 287 | 292 |
When Back Binding is at 15°
Men's US Boot Size | Foot Size (cm) | MIN at 15° (mm) | MAX at 15° (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
6.5 | 24 | 224 | 234 |
7 | 24.5 | 228 | 238 |
7.5 | 25 | 231 | 241 |
8 | 25.5 | 234 | 244 |
8.5 | 26 | 237 | 247 |
9 | 26.5 | 240 | 250 |
9.5 | 27 | 243 | 253 |
10 | 27.5 | 247 | 257 |
10.5 | 28 | 251 | 261 |
11 | 28.5 | 254 | 264 |
11.5 | 29 | 258 | 268 |
12 | 29.5 | 261 | 271 |
13 | 30.5 | 267 | 277 |
14 | 31.5 | 272 | 282 |
15 | 32.5 | 277 | 287 |
These tables are based on a number of assumptions, including:
- That there is a 3cm difference between foot size and boot size on an average snowboard boot
- That a 27.5cm foot will fit into a US10 boot – which is also consider a mondo print of 280mm. The idea of a mondo-print is that it fits the foot of the same length – so a 280mm (i.e. 28.0cm) would fit a foot of 28.0cm. In reality I have found, especially these days, it’s usually 0.5cm less – i.e. a 27.5cm will fit in a US10 (280mm mondo), a 29.5cm foot will fit in a US12 (300mm mondo). But if this assumption is not the same for you, then simply follow the charts above and base your maximum on your foot size and your minimum on your boot size.
- That the ratio of the width at the inserts compared with the waist width of that board that you are looking at will be similar to the average ratio of the boards that I tested. This shouldn’t make a huge difference unless the ratio of the board you are looking at is significantly different to the average that I used.
- The width at the inserts measurements that I took for the ratios that I used, are based on reference stance. A wider or narrower stance would produce different results. However, this difference shouldn’t be too significant.
- Difference in ratios for wider and narrower boards: A different ratio was used for wide boards, regular boards and narrow boards – based on averages for those sized boards
- Adjustments made for large sized boots, based on assumptions about boot bevel and outersole footprint: An assumption was made about boots that were larger than a US12 that there would be elements about those boots, typically that made them more able to get on a snowboard including being lower profile, and having a reasonable bevel on the toe and heel. This may not necessarily be the case and I highly recommend ensuring that you get low profile boots if you have a larger boot size (in my experience Adidas, Burton, Ride and Vans boots have the lowest profile – DC and Thirty Two are somewhere in the middle and Salomon and K2 Boots tend to have a longer footprint).
- Adjustments for narrower boards and wider boards: Some subtle adjustments have been made to recognize that The total amount of foot underhang allowable is greater for narrower boards as there is less board to have to put pressure on, the overall width of the board is narrower, therefore it’s easier to apply pressure, so the underhang allowable can be greater. The amount of underhang allowable for a wide board is less because the board is wider overall (not just at the waist) and inserts. So your feet need to be closer to the edges to maximize leverage as there is more board to move.
If just one of these things is different it’s not likely to make a significant difference. But if there were a lot of these things (and they were all moving in the same direction) then it’s the accumulation of all of those differences could lead to a significant difference.
Women’s Waist Width Chart
This chart has been updated after further research and I have now created two charts to take into account binding angles, where previously there was just one chart.
When Back Binding is at 0°
Women's US Boot Size | Foot Size (cm) | MIN at 0° (mm) | MAX at 0° (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
6 | 23 | 221 | 231 |
6.5 | 23.5 | 224 | 234 |
7 | 24 | 227 | 237 |
7.5 | 24.5 | 230 | 240 |
8 | 25 | 233 | 243 |
8.5 | 25.5 | 237 | 247 |
9 | 26 | 240 | 250 |
9.5 | 26.5 | 243 | 253 |
10 | 27 | 246 | 256 |
10.5 | 27.5 | 249 | 259 |
11 | 28 | 252 | 262 |
When Back Binding is at 15°
Women's US Boot Size | Foot Size (cm) | MIN at 15° (mm) | MAX at 15° (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
6 | 23 | 213 | 223 |
6.5 | 23.5 | 216 | 226 |
7 | 24 | 219 | 229 |
7.5 | 24.5 | 222 | 232 |
8 | 25 | 226 | 236 |
8.5 | 25.5 | 229 | 239 |
9 | 26 | 232 | 242 |
9.5 | 26.5 | 235 | 245 |
10 | 27 | 238 | 248 |
10.5 | 27.5 | 241 | 251 |
11 | 28 | 245 | 255 |
If you think you are going to need something bigger than a 250mm waist width then you will probably have more options in the men’s snowboards.
These table are based on a number of assumptions, including:
- That there is a 3cm difference between foot size and boot size on an average snowboard boot
- That mondo print is typically a good fit – e.g. a 250mm (25cm) mondo print will fit a 25cm foot. If this is not the case for you, use your boot size for the minimum and your foot size for the maximum
- That the ratio of the width at the inserts compared with the waist width of that board that you are looking at will be similar to the average ratio of the boards that I tested. This shouldn’t make a huge difference unless the ratio of the board you are looking at is significantly different to the average that I used.
- The width at the inserts measurements that I took for the ratios that I used, are based on reference stance. A wider or narrower stance would produce different results. However, this difference shouldn’t be too significant.
- Difference in ratios for wider and narrower boards: A different ratio was used for wide boards, regular boards and narrow boards – based on averages for those sized boards
- Adjustments for narrower boards and wider boards: Some subtle adjustments have been made to recognize that The total amount of foot underhang allowable is greater for narrower boards as there is less board to have to put pressure on, the overall width of the board is narrower, therefore it’s easier to apply pressure, so the underhang allowable can be greater. The amount of underhang allowable for a wide board is less because the board is wider overall (not just at the waist) and inserts. So your feet need to be closer to the edges to maximize leverage as there is more board to move.
Aggressive Riders/Carving
If you’re someone who likes to get really low in a carve, who likes to really get up on that edge, then it’s a good idea to add 2-4mm to these tables to give you that extra room to ensure toe and heel drag is unlikely. If this is you, I highly recommend low profile boots, in order to prevent your feet from being too far inside the edges.
Beginners
If you are just starting out snowboarding you can afford to be overhanging more as you aren’t likely to be getting up on your edges as much. But if you buy a snowboard and plan on keeping it for a while, then you’ll still not want to have too much overhang.
If you intend to upgrade your snowboard after the beginner phase, then you can afford to have a little more overhang than is suggested here.
What If I don’t Own Boots Yet or Don’t know my Size?
If you do not own boots yet, don’t know your boot size or need to convert into US sizes for the charts above, then you can measure your feet and compare them to the table below to get your boot size.
Snowboard boots are made with a foot length in mind and as well as having sizing such as US 10, EUR 45 etc they also have something called a mondo-print which is the foot length that the boot was intended for – more on this here.
Foot Length (cm) | Foot Length (inch) | Men's US Boot | Women's US Boot | Euro Boot | UK Boot |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
20 | 7.87 | 2 | 3 | 31 | 1 |
20.5 | 8.07 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 32 | 1.5 |
21 | 8.27 | 3 | 4 | 33 | 2 |
21.5 | 8.46 | 3.5 | 4.5 | 34 | 2.5 |
22 | 8.66 | 4 | 5 | 35 | 3 |
22.5 | 8.86 | 4.5 | 5.5 | 36 | 3.5 |
23 | 9.06 | 5 | 6 | 36.5 | 4 |
23.5 | 9.25 | 5.5 | 6.5 | 37.5 | 4.5 |
24 | 9.45 | 6 | 7 | 38 | 5 |
24.5 | 9.65 | 6.5 | 7.5 | 38.5 | 5.5 |
25 | 9.84 | 7 | 8 | 39 | 6 |
25.5 | 10.04 | 7.5 | 8.5 | 40 | 6.5 |
26 | 10.24 | 8 | 9 | 41 | 7 |
26.5 | 10.43 | 8.5 | 9.5 | 41.5 | 7.5 |
27 | 10.63 | 9 | 10 | 42 | 8 |
27.5 | 10.83 | 9.5 | 10.5 | 43 | 8.5 |
28 | 11.02 | 10 | 11 | 43.5 | 9 |
28.5 | 11.22 | 10.5 | 11.5 | 44 | 9.5 |
29 | 11.42 | 11 | 12 | 45 | 10 |
29.5 | 11.61 | 11.5 | - | 45.5 | 10.5 |
30 | 11.81 | 12 | - | 46 | 11 |
30.5 | 12.01 | 12.5 | - | 47 | 11.5 |
31 | 12.20 | 13 | - | 47.5 | 12 |
31.5 | 12.40 | 13.5 | - | 48 | 12.5 |
32 | 12.60 | 14 | - | 48.5 | 13 |
32.5 | 12.80 | 14.5 | - | 49 | 13.5 |
33 | 13.00 | 15 | - | 49.5 | 14 |
33.5 | 13.20 | 15.5 | - | 50 | 14.5 |
34 | 13.40 | 16 | - | 51 | 15 |
Conversions to Euro sizes can vary a lot between brands. Below are the conversions of some of the major snowboard boot brands. The Euro sizes in the above table are an average of all the sizings in the table below.
Foot Length (CM) | Euro evo.com | Euro 32 | Euro ADIDAS | Euro BURTON | Euro K2 | Euro RIDE | Euro ROME | Euro SALOMON |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
20 | 31 | - | - | - | - | 33.3 | - | - |
20.5 | 32 | - | - | - | - | 34 | - | - |
21 | 33 | - | - | 34 | - | 34.7 | - | - |
21.5 | 34 | - | - | - | - | 35.3 | - | - |
22 | 35 | - | 36 | 35 | - | 36 | - | 34.5 |
22.5 | 36 | - | 36.7 | 36 | - | 36.7 | - | 35.5 |
23 | 36.5 | 36.5 | 37.3 | 36.5 | 36.5 | 37.3 | 36.5 | 36.5 |
23.5 | 37 | - | 38 | 37 | 37 | 38 | 37 | 37 |
24 | 38 | 38 | 38.7 | 38 | 38 | 38.7 | 38 | 38 |
24.5 | 38.5 | - | 39.3 | 39 | 39 | 39.3 | 38.5 | 38.5 |
25 | 39 | 39 | 40 | 40 | 39.5 | 40 | 39 | 39 |
25.5 | 40 | 40 | 40.7 | 40.5 | 40 | 40.7 | 40 | 40 |
26 | 40.5 | 40.5 | 41.3 | 41 | 40.5 | 41.3 | 40.5 | 40.5 |
26.5 | 41 | 41 | 42 | 41.5 | 41.5 | 42 | 41 | 41.5 |
27 | 42 | 42 | 42.7 | 42 | 42 | 42.7 | 42 | 42 |
27.5 | 43 | 42.5 | 43.3 | 42.5 | 42.5 | 43.3 | 42.5 | 42.5 |
28 | 43.5 | 43 | 44 | 43 | 43.5 | 44 | 43 | 43 |
28.5 | 44 | 44 | 44.7 | 43.5 | 44 | 44.7 | 44 | 43.5 |
29 | 45 | 44.5 | 45.3 | 44 | 44.5 | 45.3 | 44.5 | 44 |
29.5 | 45.5 | 45 | 46 | 44.5 | 45 | 46 | 45 | 44.5 |
30 | 46 | 45.5 | 46.7 | 45 | 46 | 46.7 | 45.5 | 45.5 |
30.5 | 47 | - | 47.3 | - | 47 | 47.3 | 46 | 46 |
31 | 47.5 | 47 | 48 | 46 | 48 | 48 | 47 | 46.5 |
31.5 | 48 | - | 48.7 | - | - | 48.7 | - | 47 |
32 | 48.5 | 48 | 49.3 | 47 | 49 | 49.3 | 48.5 | - |
32.5 | 49 | - | - | - | - | 50 | - | - |
33 | 49.5 | - | - | 48 | 50 | 50.7 | - | - |
33.5 | 50 | - | - | - | - | 51.3 | - | - |
34 | 51 | - | - | - | - | 52 | - | - |
Sources
32 - 32 Wesbsite
Adidas - Adidas website
Burton - Burton website
K2 - K2 website
Ride - measurements from their boot sizing chart
Rome - Rome website
Salomon - Salomon Website
Measuring your Foot Length
To measure your foot length, place your heel flat against the wall and measure along the floor from the wall to your big toe.
Alternatively place your foot on a piece of paper and mark each end of the foot on the piece of paper and then measure between the marks.
NB: Your snowboarding boot size may not be the same as your normal shoe size – and sizing may vary.
Want more Accuracy?
If you want to be completely sure you are getting the right width before you buy and are fussier about this, there are a couple of other options. i.e. if you have narrowed down your choice to a particular board but want to make sure the waist is fine before you buy.
Option #1: You could try measuring your foot and contact a store and ask them to measure your foot length against the width of the board at the inserts and at your preferred binding angles if you know them (if you don’t know your binding angles use this as a guide).
I haven’t tried this so not sure how accommodating they would be – but assuming they want your sale they should do this I would imagine.
Option #2: Go into a physical snowboarding shop and place your feet on the board at the angles you think they will be at. If the run from edge to edge (on the underside of the board) or overhang by up to 5mm on toe-edge and heel edge (10mm total overhang) – or underhang by up to 2mm on toe-edge and heel edge (4mm total underhang) then your good.
Option 2 would be the most accurate way of knowing, of course, it just requires you going into a store physically. Of course, you don’t necessarily have to buy in store if you can find a cheaper price on line (and can resist the sales staff’s charms!)
Option #3: Contact me using the comments below and I can let you know my opinion on the particular snowboard you are looking at.
This won’t be millimetre perfect but should be slightly more accurate than your average width sizing chart.
Buying Snowboards
As the average snowboard boot size for a male is between 8.5 and 11.0 US Men’s (remember snow board boot size can differ to normal shoe sizes – they’re usually the same but can fit 1/2 size smaller or 1/2 size larger (or even up to a whole sizes in some cases). The most common waist widths are going to accommodate for those sizes.
Hence, the largest number of men’s snowboard options fall within a certain waist width range. So there are more options for those waist width ranges than others. And the further from those “normal” ranges you get the fewer the options become.
But there are still plenty of options for those with smaller and larger feet.
Similarly for women’s boards – the more common sizes are more catered for.
Boards too Wide in Your Length
Sometimes a balancing act needs to be made between the best length for you and the best width. Usually there will be a good width in your length. But not always. If you are someone who can’t find a board narrow enough for your feet in your most suited length, it is often necessary to compromise a little bit.
If you decrease the length a little bit then this counteracts the fact that the board might be wider than ideal. A shorter length board is more agile, and a board that is too wide for you is less agile. So going shorter brings some or all of the agility that you loose with the extra width. Also, the extra width adds back stability for landings and float in powder that is reduced by going with a shorter length.
What Next?
Now that You’ve Hopefully figured out your width range, it’s time to find out some other aspects to get you on your perfect board. Check out the following to find a good length range and to find a board that will suit the way you like to ride and where you like to ride.
>>Find Your Snowboard Length Range
>>Find Your Style of Snowboard
Already know your length and style, then check out our Top 10 Snowboard Lists, which are organized by style of board (e.g. beginner, all-mountain, freestyle, freeride etc).
>>Snowboarding Profiles’ Top 10s Lists
EXTRA READING
How Much Margin for Error?
Fortunately there is a bit of room for error in width sizing of snowboards as has been mentioned.
This is a good thing because it’s always going to be hard to tell exactly what the width at the inserts is. This information isn’t generally published and waist width (narrowest point of the board at the centre of the board) measurements (which are published) don’t give you the exact picture.
There are several variances that can affect the width at insert compared to the waist width, namely
- Side cut radius (how sharp the angle of the curve is)
- Stance width
- Binding angles
Thankfully none of these things makes too much difference. Binding angles make the most differences – which is why I now have 2 men’s and 2 women’s tables above, to account for different binding angles.
Sidecut Radius:
I compared the difference at insert for a board with a waist width of 252 and a side cut radius of 6.5m and one with 9m.
252 waist width at 6.5 sidcut radius = 263 at insert
252 waist with a 9 sidecut = 260mm at insert
So that’s a difference of 3mm. This is starting to become significant however this is an extreme case. As boards are designed with a certain width in mind the difference in side cut between boards with a 252 waist width would seldom be this wide.
In fact, out of 175 men’s freestyle boards I analyzed, the largest variance of side cut radii at any given waist width, was 1.25metres and the average variance was only 0.57 metres.
The variance of 1.25 metres was on boards with waist widths of 264mm. The difference in width at insert even at 1.25 metres of variance was only 1.5mm (difference between the width at insert in relation to waist width, caused by side cut variances).
In most cases the difference would be much less (and I suspect with a larger sample size that the variance at waist width 264mm would move closer to the average) – probably less than half of this in most cases. So we’re looking at around a 0.5mm to 0.75mm difference – so not too much to worry about there.
For freeride boards the side cut variances between different boards may be more extreme.
I’m a total geek with this stuff and I know it!
Stance width:
Even a whole inch wider or narrower than the reference stance width (and it’s unlikely that you will be that far off the reference width if you have the right length of board) only increases or decreases the width by 1.5mm with a 6.5metre side cut radius – so that’s with a sharper than average curve.
The lower the radius the sharper the curve and 6.5 is on the lower side. The higher the side cut radius the less difference the variance from reference stance will make.
Side cut radius tend to be a smaller number (so a sharper curve angle and therefore make more difference for stance widths) on shorter length boards and women’s boards. But they shouldn’t make any more difference than 1.5mm per inch (25.4mm) of stance width variance, given that the experiment above was conducted using a 6.5m side cut, and very few boards will have a side cut smaller than that.
Binding Angles:
This probably makes the biggest difference and is particularly the case for certain binding angle set ups.
For example if you have front foot 15 degrees and back foot 0 degrees, the back foot is going to be flat on the board meaning that it will essentially be longer than the front foot.
i.e. if the front foot (at 15 degrees) was to span the board perfectly from edge to edge then the back foot (at zero degrees) could have overhang of up to 4-5mm on both the heel-edge and the toe-edge of the foot (total 8-10mm of overhang).
In some cases though, the back foot might be at maximum overhang and the front foot might have slightly more underhang than is ideal on the front foot. But it shouldn’t be the case that this is too extreme in most cases.
With a setback stance the back binding (always on the same or less of an angle than the front binding) is usually on a wider part of the board and the front binding is usually on a narrower part of the board (closer to the waist width) and can completely or somewhat offsets the differences made by the differing binding angles (depending on the board and the binding angles used).
With a lot of freeride boards the tail is narrower and the nose is wider, however it’s still usually the case that the width at the back inserts is a little bit wider than the front inserts, even as it’s tapering to the back binding.
Other Variations:
Boot bevel, the profile of the boot, and how thick your base plate is (i.e. how high off the snowboard you are) will also have some effect on how wide your snowboard will need to be.
Width sizing is definitely the most complicated part of snowboard sizing and the hardest part to get accurate – but it is also an important part. The width sizing charts earlier in this post can give you some idea but they will never be entirely accurate.
Usually, however, they don’t need to be millimeter perfect and you should be able find something that works for you fairly easily that fits within the margin of error.
Thanks again Nate for the great content I finally know just about everything to know for my next snowboard setup! Also, what do you recommend for socks inside snowboard boots & any brands of socks or brands of pants & jackets & boots & impact shorts I should get? Any info provided is greatly appreciated. Also, a recommendation on best CO resort for All Mountaineer in March that may have powder and some good jumps would be fantastic! This is my dream getaway for 2 days! It looks like my last comment may have disappeared or maybe it is waiting on your answer before it posts back on the website? I forgot in my last comment to mention I use a +15, -15 duck stance on a react 159 or I think more likely 162 snowboard that I got new for between $100-$200 new at play it again sports. I want to choose a good board this time preferably a little stiffer but I think I’d like shorter and wider. Any suggestions? Also, I’m definitely an All Mountaineer style rider!
Hi Andrew
Thanks for your message.
Typically with 10s, particularly with +15/-15 binding angles and lower profile boots, I wouldn’t go wide, but given you want to eurocarve by the sounds of it, you could go a little wider. I’ve never heard of the React snowboard, so I’m not sure if it’s particularly narrow or not.
Given you want to ride powder but also want to be able to ride switch well, want something fast but also want to hit jumps, I think something like an aggressive all-mountain board would be a good bet. You can check out some good options here.
Size-wise, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 163, but given you’d prefer to volume shift a bit (wider but shorter), you could certainly look at going like 158W-160W.
I would be happy to give specific sizing suggestions for individual boards, if you were able to narrow down to your top 2-3 choices.
For socks, I would go with snowboard specific socks for a couple of reasons. a. because they will be made of materials that will wick away sweat and b. they have padding in the areas where you’ll typically want it. My preference for material is Merino wool, but there are other material options that work well too.
For impact shorts, you could check out the only ones I’ve tried are these.
For jackets and pants check out this and this.
For boots, first check out the following:
>>How to Choose Snowboard Boots
>>How to Size Snowboard Boots
Sizing Snowboard Boots: The Different Brands
Then depending on the flex of the board, will depend on what boots you get. But given what you’re describing and for your specs, you’re likely to want to go at least 6/10 flex, and likely stiffer. See below for some options:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium to medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top 5 Freeride Boots
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
Thanks for all the info on the website. I’m going to let everyone know how helpful your information is! This is the closest I have gotten to choosing a board in forever. My old one was a cheap 162 and my toes dragged. I just bought burton step ons large with medium bindings. I am 5’10 240 lbs size 10 burton step on boots andButton step on medium bindings. I am intermediate level and want to carve with my back and stomach almost touching the snow. I also want to go fast and hit jumps. I would prefer a smaller board than my last one and a wider one as well. I would also like to ride regular and goofy. I am going to CO this month and never really got a chance to tide powder but I’m hoping I’ll find it for the first time in Vail. However, I also would like a board that can hold an edge for the ice on the east coast. What board and size and width and shape would you recommend for my burton step on boots and bindings this month and the future? THANKS!
-Andrew
Hi Nate —
Love your site and this article is super helpful. Wow! Such great info. Thanks so much.
Would love your advice on this. I’m not sure how to proceed.
I am a long time skier and a pretty new snowboarder.
I have an unusual body type, in that for a guy, I am average height, but really light: 5’9″, 135 lbs.
(FYI – I usually ski on women’s performance skis and love them… my weight flexes them much better than equivalent men’s skis.)
I was thinking about doing the same thing with snowboarding as I look to buy my first board rather than renting all the time. So, I’ve been looking at women’s boards — two early thoughts were Rossignol Myth (154) or Roxy Dawn (152)
The problem is that I have regular sized mens feet — I own K2 Raskos in 9.5 and they fit well.
But… they aren’t shorter on the profile and seem to be fairly true to the 9.5 size, which means that (based on your numbers above) it looks like I should be aiming for a waist width of around 250, with a little leeway on that.
FYI – I typically ride +18/-3 with my bindings.
250 seems hard to find in a less expensive women’s board. Looks like most are in the 240, 245 max range.
Instead of looking for a women’s board, should I try to size down? (I was aiming for a 152ish length?)
Should I find a more flexible men’s board?
Should I try and find a smaller profile set of boots? (Would prefer not to do this as my boots fit me well.)
Would love your thoughts. Thanks.
Hi Morgan
I think in your case your best bet is to look at men’s boards – and there are plenty of softer flexing options going around. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 152, but as a beginner, and if you want the flex to feel softer, then you could size down a bit from that. Something around 150 would be a good bet, IMO, for what you’re describing.
The width of women’s boards is going to be too narrow for a majority of women’s boards for your boot size. But as I said above, with snowboards, you will find there are a lot of softer flexing options (more so than for skis from what I understand), so you should be good. For some good beginner options, check out:
>>Our Top 15 Men’s Snowboards for Beginners
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
52 yr old female who just wants to enjoy days out w my snowboarding kids.
Goal: To go down greens and not fall too often!
I’ve rented 151, 145, 140, and was only able to handle the 140.
I think I am looking for a Hybrid Camber. Something that stops easy and will help me not catch an edge.
In Southern CA, so packed and some ice, w an annual trip to powder in Utah.
Any suggestions? And thank you!!!
#NoNeedForSpeed
#greens>blues
I wear a size 9 men’s boot (only whole sizes at the rental shop. 8.0 men’s is uncomfortably tight).
Regular women’s shoe size is 9.0
Hi Amanda
Thanks for your messages.
Can you let me know your height/weight, so I can take them into account for sizing. I will take into account your experience on the sizes you mentioned too, and also with how you want to ride and your level etc. But that will give me a more complete picture. Also, can you let me know if you plan to buy your own boots or keep renting? If you plan to buy your own boots, then I suspect you would end up in a women’s 9.5 (men’s 8.5).
Once I have that info, I can do a good search and let you know a few good options to consider.
165 lbs
5’7″
I ride regular. A bit switch just because I end up the wrong way. 😉
I would like to/plan to purchase step-ons or rear entry (not sure which is better/easier?)
I’ve ridden 5x. Was able to progress to very sloppy S-turns w out falling too much.
I really just want to be able to stop, and make it down a green run/groomer with some confidence. 🙂
Thank you so much!
Hi Amanda
Thanks for your message.
In terms of sizing, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” closer to the 151 – but given that it sounds like you preferred the 140 to everything else and because it doesn’t sound like you plan to ride hard/fast at all, ou could definitely size closer to the 140. I wouldn’t go quite as small as 140 though still. And you’ll likely find (unless you tested performance rentals) that the rental board was probably heavier than most boards you’ll buy, so it will be easier to handle something a little longer. With all that in mind, I would be looking in the 142 to 146 range.
I would check out the following:
>>My Top 10 Women’s Beginner Snowboards
Which I think would all be suitable. If you can narrow that down to the 2-4 boards that you think you like the sound of/are available to you and I would be happy to give you specific sizing on each one – and make sure they’re going to be a good width too.
In terms of step-ons or rear entry, I would be leaning Rear Entry – not because they’re easier to get into, but because there aren’t yet any step on setups that are beginner friendly enough, IMO, in terms of not being soft enough to be forgiving enough for beginners. Whereas, there are softer, more forgiving rear entry bindings (and you can put any boot into rear entry too).
From your list, I love the Nitro Electra. It is beautiful, but probably too skinny.
The K2 first lite would be slightly wider, but the Burton Stylus is the widest.
All three of those are nice.
I am also looking at the K2 Dreamsicle or the Rome Royal, both in line w the Burton Stylus width.
Rear entry bindings would be perfect for me as well.
Hi Amanda
Yeah unfortunately the Lectra is probably going to be too narrow for you. Even if you went to the 146, which I think would be doable for you, it’s still a bit too narrow.
The First Lite, in 146, could be doable if you were to be riding +15/-15 binding angles and new for sure you were going to fit a women’s 9.5. But it’s pretty borderline without having certainty over boots – and if you’re binding angles were different (i.e. a straighter back binding angle) or if you wanted to experiment with different angles, it would be pushing it.
I think you would be fine on the Stylus 142 width-wise. It would still be on the narrow side, but I think you would be OK so long as you weren’t planning to be doing any deep carves any time soon. And by the sounds of how you like to ride, I’m guessing you won’t be riding super aggressively or anything.
The Dreamsicle in 146 would work, IMO as would the Rome Royal in the 144.
For rear entry bindings, I think the Flow Juno would be a good bet. For boots, I would check out the following to get some ideas.
>>My Top Women’s Beginner Boots
>>My Top Women’s Freestyle Snowboard Boots
Even though the second list says freestyle, it’s just a naming thing and you don’t have to ride any freestyle in them. But there’s some in a good flex range in there.
HI Nate, awesome site….thank you for everything you do!
Well, I’ve got a few boards and I’m really trying to get sizing down straight. I’m 6′, ~180lbs and a size 11.5 US boot.
I’ve got a 159W in a Yes Basic and it’s pretty much fine. I tried a 156 in Yes Greats and I really liked it, but I know that’s pretty wide at the inserts. I tried a 159W in a freeride board and I struggled with turning it and when flipping it over and doing the barefoot test in my stance/angle, my feet did come up short on it by a bit…it was .5cm wider than my Yes Basic at the inserts.
Ok ,now I’m interested in a 157 Shadowban that is about .5cm thinner at the inserts than my Yes Basic 159W (which I feel fit me best) . My heel hangs over about 1/2 inch with my toes about flush with the board and am not sure if I can fit this board or do I just move up to the Wide version (160W) and deal with the extra 3 cm in length? I’m trying to fit a smaller board as I like it to be a bit playful, turn quick between trees, 180 jumps, etc. I’m honestly not sure if I’m hurting myself by going smaller (less stable? worse for landings?) or if I’m better off given the better playfulness of a shorter board.
Would love to know what you think and thanks again!
Mike.
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
What Freeride board was it that you tried? It might be that part of it was if it was considerably stiffer to what you’re used to. Because that often causes a board to be harder to turn. That extra width will certainly have played a role as well, but it might have been the board as well.
I haven’t measured the Shadowban, but if you say it’s 0.5cm narrower than the Basic at the inserts, then it’s going to be around 26.4/26.5cm. With a regular profile boot, you’re boot would be around a 32.5cm long – which would be around a 6cm total overhang (or 3cm per edge, assuming perfect boot centering). If you’re riding with a 15 degree angle or similar on the back foot, then you’d be looking at around 5cm total overhang (or 2.5cm per edge), which is getting to a doable level (assuming your carves are moderate but not too deep), but at 3cm per edge would be too much, IMO. If you have lower profile boots that would help give you some leeway too. But without low profile boots and straighter angles I think it’s pushing it. The width on the Basic 159W is about the narrowest I would typically recommend for 11.5s.
But yeah, take into account with your Basic that part of the reason it will feel easy to turn is because it’s an easy turning board generally. And whilst the width will also affect, there are other factors too.
The Shadowban isn’t one I’ve ridden but from what I know of it, it’s not supposed to be an overly stiff/aggressive board, so you might find that it’s fine to turn in the 160W. But again, I haven’t ridden it, so couldn’t say for sure.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
It’s great, as usual. I really appreciate you taking so much time to answer in-depth. You’re the best.
You’re very welcome Michael. Happy riding!
Hello Nate
Greeting from Hong Kong.
I love everything of this website and I have spent several evenings on reading your articles.
I am a total beginner on snowboarding. I am just back from a trip to Niseko and I manage to do some S turns on the double green slopes, LoL
I am at a dilemma which may need your opinion. I am abit skinny while I have bigger feet.
height: 178cm/5’10”
weight: 62kg / 126lbs
foot size: US 10.5
bare foot length: 28.5cm
I am looking at the burton instigator flat top. struggling if I should go for 145 or 150 or 150W
Thanks so much for your time.
cheers
Wilson
Hi Wilson
Thanks for your message.
I think the 150W would be your best bet. I think you’d probably get away with the 150 width-wise, given you’re a beginner and probably not railing any deep carves yet, but it might cause some issues when you start to lean into your edges more. And the 150W isn’t super wide either – it’s a really good width for your foot and boot size, IMO.
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 152/153 (assuming 62kg is the accurate weight – which translates to 136lbs, rather than 126lbs). But sizing down, as a beginner is a good idea. I think sizing to 145 would be too far down – and also too narrow for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
I’ve got size 10 Thirty Two Lashed Double BOAs looking for a new all mountain freestyle board. I’ve heard really good things about the Ride Shadowban, but the width of the board has me a little concerned – I’m 5’8″ 145 lbs, so I would imagine the 151 or 154 cm would be best for me, but those board widths are 148mm and 151mm. Would you recommend looking for a wider board? I’ve also considered the Yes Standard UnInc, Capita Mercury, and Rome National which all have either 153cm 253mm or 154cm 254mm options.
Hi Max
Thanks for your message.
I’m yet to test the Shadowban or measure it, so I’m not sure what it’s like at the inserts. But if it’s like other similar Ride boards, then it’s likely around 10mm wider at the inserts versus the waist.
Which would put the 151 at around 258mm at inserts and the 154 at around 261mm at the inserts. I would be confident with the 261mm insert width, and it’s pretty likely the Shadowban would be that or close. If you were riding with a really flat back binding angle it could be pushing but I’ve never had any issues with that kind of width with 10s using +15/-15 binding angles.
The 151 might be pushing it. You could get away with it, but would want to be riding with something like +15/-15 angles for sure, to give you a bit more leeway. I’ve ridden boards as narrow without issue, but using lower profile boots than the Lashed. The Lashed aren’t bulky or anything but not particularly low profile, in my experience, either.
In terms of length, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 153cm. So, I think you’d be good on the 154cm. But it would also depend on what you’re used to riding. If you’re used to riding noticeably smaller, then I would be leaning a little shorter.
I haven’t ridden the National, but the Standard Uninc and Mercury are two boards I really like, particularly the Standard Uninc. Standard Uninc is wider than it looks though, so I’d be leaning 151 (if there was one) for that.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Currently looking at the Ride Agenda size 152.
I’m 5’7”, 150 lbs, US 8 shoes.
The waist width of the 152 is 251mm while the 149 is 250mm. Would the 152 work fine for me? I believe the Agenda has a shallower sidecut but I’m not sure how to read the three sidecut values.
I’m a beginner right now but expect to have a lot of days on the mountain before ending the season and progressing quickly. All mountain freestyle.
Hi Greg
Thanks for your message.
I think the 149 would be the more ideal beginner size for you, given the width and your boot size. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 154cm. But would take off some length for the width. Which would put you good at 152, but because of the beginner factor as well, taking off a bit more length would be ideal. The 152 wouldn’t be wrong and is a size that will last you longer through your progression. So ideally 149, but 152 isn’t anything crazy big for you or anything.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Fellow Canadian here! I’m just wondering if I could get your opinion before I go ahead and buy my gear. I’m a complete beginner, probably rode 3-4 times max on old passed down gear. Wasn’t the best experience tbh. I used a 154 Uninc burton board (from 2004), boots that were a full size smaller and some crusty bindings that went over the top of my feet (not the new ones that covers the whole toe part) So I’ve been spending time reading all of the best beginners gear and came up with some choices. As for the board, I am choosing between the K2 Standard and the Rossignol Evader, size wise I’m still unsure of (maybe around 152-154?) I am currently 5’5-5’6 around 176 lbs. As for bindings, I think I am going with the Union Flite Pros since I found someone selling locally for cheaper. Boot sizing, I will have to try one in store because I really want to get the proper size. I usually wear 9.5-10 in sneakers. Which I think would fit in the medium bindings.
Hey Ralph
Thanks for your message.
Both the Standard and Evader are great choices for a beginner and should feel way easier to ride/progress on versus the 2004 Burton Uninc. Size-wise, for the Evader I would go 154 and for the Standard it’s a close call between the 152 and 155, but I’d be leaning 152 for that easier progression. Though the 155 wouldn’t be wrong. I would put your “standard all-mountain size” at around 156/157, but as a beginner it’s a good idea to size down.
The Flite Pros are a great match to either of those boards, IMO. Assuming you end up in 9.5 or 10 in boots, then the Mediums are your best bet. With 10.5s it would depend on how low profile the boots are (which largely depends on the brand) as to whether you’d go M or L, so if you can I would get your boots sorted first.
In terms of boots, trying on in person is the best way, so good to hear you’re able to do that. Some things to think about when you’re in store trying on:
>>How to Size Snowboard Boots
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
All the information you have put together on this site is awesome. So glad I have found it. Really cool of you to respond to all the comments like you do as well.
I’m looking at getting the Lib Tech Skunk Ape. I have size 14 feet and 6’3″ 225 lbs. I usually ride bindings angles +15/-15. I am wondering if I need to go with the 170UW or if I would be fine on the regular wide version at a shorter length. I’ve never ridden a board as long as a 170 and I’m a bit apprehensive with the extra length.
I am also open to other board suggestions if you have any. I am an advanced rider. I would classify my riding style as all-mountain freestyle. I ride primarily in New England, but I take lots of trips out west as well. Thank you for all the work you do with this site and all the great information you put out there!
Hi Jon
Thanks for your message.
I think something like the 165W or 169W Skunk Ape would be pushing it. I haven’t measured it, but based on other Lib Tech boards, I imagine that the width at inserts at a 22″ stance with would be around 276mm. You might have a wider stance width than that, given your height, so let’s say 278mm. Typical boots are about 3cm longer than mondo. The Mondo on a 14 is 32cm. So the outerboot is likely around 35cm. So that would be around a 7.2cm total overhang. With 15 degree angles you’ll get around 1cm leeway, so that’s around a 6.2cm of boot overhang. Or 3.1cm per edge, assuming perfect boot centering. Which is pushing it. If your boots are low profile and let’s say for example are only 2cm over mondo, then you’d be looking at around 5.2cm of overhang – and if you had an even wider stance, you might be able to get that overhang to around 5cm (or 2.5cm per edge). In that case it’d be more doable, particularly if you aren’t doing any deep carves or anything. But that’s best case scenario and would probably require close to a 24″ stance width.
To get a bit of extra width the following could work (depending on your boot’s profile and your stance width). Note that these are all based on a 22″ stance width – at a wider width you can a couple of mm:
– Nitro Team Gullwing 165W (estimated width at inserts (WAI) 283mm)
– Nitro Team Camber 165W (estimated width at inserts (WAI) 283mm)
– YES Standard 162 (283mm WAI estimated) or Standard Uninc – could also go 167 – it’s not wider, but if the 162 seems too short
– Arbor Element Camber 165W (284mm WAI estimated)
– Bataleon Goliath 167W (288mm WAI estimated)
Hope this helps with some options
Thanks for the reply! So seems like the Skunk Ape may not be the best option. The Yes Standard looks like a good option for sure. I’ve also been looking into the Never Summer Protosynthesis DF for next year if they continue it. Probably 162. I have Burton boots so that should help me a little bit with the lower boot profile. I hate having big feet haha! Thank you for the recommendations I’ll check them all out.
You’re very welcome Jon. Hope you find a good match!
Hey Nate! I’ve only been boarding for 3 or 4 years now but have found your website and info thoroughly brilliant and helpful, so thank you for sharing in such depth! I’m a total addict to it all!
I’ve just returned from a French trip and am nursing an ab injury from falling after turning on to my toe edge. I’ve been trying to work out the reason for the fall, and I think it’s from sizing up on my Burton Step Ons to a US14 (every other size below killed the sides of my feet, I’m usually a US 12-13). I just got my board out and measured with the boots in the bindings, and I think the overhang is way too big, especially on the steeper slopes. Details are:
Burton Instigator board
Front boot at 18 deg has a 3cm toe overhang and 2.2cm heel overhang.
Right (back) boot at 12 deg has a 3.3cm toe overhang and 2cm heel overhang.
I’m now an intermediate rider so was thinking it could be a good time to upgrade, and also get a wider board. I’m 6’2 and 220lbs. I have no interest in park or freestyle at my age (51), just happy on groomers and trying to up my speed and carving game. I’ve been considering the Never Summer Proto FR 166DF, the Bataleon Goliath, and the Lib Tech Skunk Ape although I’m not mad on having a much longer board than the 165 that I have. Obviously the Instigator is a very soft board, but with my size maybe a stiffer board would be better?
Any tips would be massively appreciated if you have time.
Thanks again and all the best, Jon
Hi Jon
Thanks for your message.
First thing to mention is that, if you can, I would try to have more heel overhang than toe overhang. Reason being that it’s easier to get deeper into a toe side carve, so toe drag is more likely than heel drag. So if you could get those toe and heel overhang numbers reversed you would have less chance of boot drag.
Another thing to think about – if the smaller sizes were creating pain on the sides of your feet it could be that you have wide feet? If so, then it might be that a wide boot model – in a 13 potentially – would be a better fit. For Step Ons, I know they do a Burton Photon Wide Step On model. Think that’s the only wide Step On option. Not sure if you have wide feet or not, but something to think about.
But if you’re looking to upgrade your board anyway, then no harm in looking wider. I would say the 165W Instigator is around 280mm at the inserts (assuming a roughly 22″ stance width – a little more if you have a wider stance and a little less if you have a narrower stance). But your overhang numbers make sense for a 280mm insert width from a quick calculation, so it’s likely somewhere close to that.
The Proto FR 166DF would give you around 294mm at the inserts (Again assuming a roughly 22″ stance width) – so considerably more. So much more that I think it would be too big overall, when combining length and width. Also, the Proto FR is a much stiffer, more aggressive board than the Instigator, so it’s a big step up – and then you would stepping up the size noticeably, when taking into account length and width. If you were to go Proto FR, I would go 162DF. I think that would be a much more manageable size and would give you the same kind of width leeway.
You wouldn’t be gaining any width with the Skunk Ape over the Instigator, I wouldn’t think. I haven’t specifically measured the Skunk Ape, but based on other lib tech boards, you would be looking at around 276mm at the inserts on the 165W. So you’d likely actually be going narrower. Even if you went to the 169W, you’d be looking at a very similar width – and that would be going too long, IMO. You’d have to step it up to the 170UWm would give you plenty of width (similar to the DF Proto FR) but again, IMO, overall too big.
For he Bataleon Goliath, you’d be looking at around 281mm at the back insert for the 164W. That’s the length I’d prefer to see you on, but you wouldn’t be gaining any significant width on the Instigator. If you stepped it up to the 167W, you’d be looking at more like 288mm at the inserts, which would be a good amount of extra width – but again overall size on the big side for you, IMO. Though not to the same extent as the Proto FR 166DF or Skunk Ape 170UW.
Some other options to consider (all insert width estimates assume 22″ stance width):
– Nitro Team Gullwing 165W (estimated width at inserts (WAI) 283mm – not much more width but something)
– YES Standard 162 (283mm WAI estimated)
– Salomon Sight 166W (285mm WAI estimated)
– Arbor Element Camber (284mm WAI estimated)
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hey Nate!
Thank you SO much for taking the time to give such a detailed reply. It really is such a minefield out there, and also an expensive game when it’s hard / almost impossible to try the boards out first. Your advice is so appreciated.
Re boots – yep I do have wide feet, and my boots are the Photon wides. I used to have the Ruler a size down in US13 which were fine, but the step ons definitely need sizing up for me.
I might have a go at the Yes Standard – seems to tick a lot of boxes, especially the icy edge hold which will be good for some of the Norwegian slopes that we’ve been to. Seems like a good progression from the Instigator.
I like the idea of the Photo FR 162DF but as you say may be too much of a jump for me, I’m definitely not an advanced rider yet.
I did ride a Bataleon Whatever 162W last year for a few runs which I also liked, but not sure on the edge hold if I’m honest. But that was maybe me and not the board. May give that another go…
Anyway, thanks again and I’m looking forward to progressing and trying one of these new boards.
Take care,
Jon
You’re very welcome Jon.
Yeah, I wouldn’t call the icy edge hold on the Whatever terrible, but it’s not great either, in my experience. Certainly not as good as the Standard (which in my experience is really good in icy conditions).
Hope whatever you end up choosing treats you well.
Thanks Nate, I have ordered the Standard so looking forward to trying it out when it arrives!
Final question for you on Bataleon – would you say the Party Wave + at 157 is also a good / better option over the Goliath for an intermediate rider on groomers mainly?
All the best,
Jon
Hi John
I haven’t ridden the Party Wave + (or regular Party Wave) – just started testing Bataleon last winter, so still working through a lot of their collection. So couldn’t say for sure, but the Goliath is a good resort board. I’ve only ridden the Goliath + but that wasn’t anything too difficult to ride or anything, so the Goliath, which is supposed to be softer flexing, should be all good for intermediate level. The Party Wave + could work for groomers, but from what I can tell is more setup as a powder board. If you’re not looking to ride switch and don’t mind less pop (which I’m only guessing is the case with the Party Wave + since it has Bataleon’s “low camber” vs the “medium camber” on the Goliath), then it could work on groomers. But again, having not ridden it couldn’t say for sure.
Which one did you end up going with?
Hey, sorry only just saw your message on here!
So I ended up getting the Goliath 167w, as well as the Yes Standard 162. I’ve just got back from a few days in Norway, and I only took the Goliath with me as I didn’t want to be going back and forth changing boards, and I wanted to give it a good go for a few days.
The first half day I struggled with the stiffer board compared to the soft flex of the Instigator, but by the afternoon I was flying. I was going faster and more stable than ever, and that extra stiffness (once I got used to it) seemed to suit me. Slightly more effort to initiate turns but after a few runs got to grips with it. I didn’t catch an edge the whole trip, riding flats was easier on this board, no toe or heel drag, and it seems like a great board to improve my riding. Held the icy patches pretty well too.
I’ll be going away again soon where I’ll take the Yes Standard and see how that compares to the Goliath.
Did you choose a board?
Hi Nate!
I am 6’1 180lbs. Riding a 28MP (10US) K2 Ender. I just bought a Lib Tech Dynamo 162 (Waist – 25,8). My back Binding is round -3, -6. Stance 21,5, 22 depends on my mood. Overhang Shoe in Binding Toe – 2,2cm, heel 2,3cm
Just did the Donek Measurement too. I get values between 26.4-26.7 optimal WW.
I want to ride Pow when possible, on piste butters and every sidehit, 180s, 360s just playing around and here and there a lap through the park.
Do you think i can get away with the 162 (25.8)or be ebtter with the Wide (26.8)?
Thanks for your work!
Hi Daniel
Thanks for your message.
The Dynamo 162 should be around 266mm at the inserts (based on measuring the 159) with a 22″ stance width. I measured the k2 Ender (2020 model last I measured it) at 3.6cm over mondo – so around 31.6cm for a size 10. That leaves roughly 5cm total overhang (2.5cm per heel and toe, assuming perfect boot centering). With a -3 or -6 angle, you wouldn’t get much difference to that, but maybe 2.4cm per edge with a 6 degree angle. Oh wait, you’ve measured overhang, sorry, just saw that. With 2.2cm on toe and 2.3cm on heel, I would personally be pretty confident with that. Now, I don’t rail super deep carves, like eurocarves or anything, but I do try to get relatively deep in carves and haven’t had issues with that kind of overhang before. If you are carving super deep though, it could cause boot drag. But if your carves are pretty standard, you should be all good. And unless you’re doing super deep carves, I would go with the narrower option every time, personally.
Hope this helps.
Hey Nate!
thanks a lot. i think what you are doing is great, keep it up!!!
wish you all the best!
Daniel
Thanks Daniel!
And you’re very welcome. Hope you have an awesome season!
Thanks for the most comprehensive Articles on snb sizing I have ever read. I have Just ordered a Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker 156W – I am 180cm 85kg and have an US11.5 boot size. Do you think this was a good choice size wise? I am wondering if I need a wide board or can go with normal size (maybe longer?). I am just a bit afraid of negative impact of having a wide board…
Update: cancelled that and got T.Rice Pro in 157W instead.
Hi Jakub
Thanks for the update. Size-wise, I think you’re good there too.
Hi Jakub
Thanks for your message.
I would go wide with 11.5s. The negative impacts of a wide board are typically only felt if the board is wide for your feet. If your feet are close to the edges of the board, then there are no leverage issues – with 11.5s the assumption is that your feet will be close or even slightly over the edges at the inserts, so you shouldn’t have leverage issues, which, IMO, is the main downside of a wide board. With your size feet you shouldn’t have that problem. And if you went regular width you would be risking boot drag.
In terms of length, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” closer to 160 for your height/weight specs, but given that you’re used to a 154, I think the 156W should be fine. And that sizing down is going to further negate any impact of the board being wide, though as stated above, most negative aspects of a wide board shouldn’t be felt by you anyway.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!!
Amazing article, I need it your opinion please.
I’m about 6’2 weigh around 205 pounds & wear a size 14 boot. I’m having difficulty with the overhang on most boards. I’ve never owned a board but Im a pretty experienced snowboarder & want to be able to get away with a smaller board for terrain parks, spinning, trees off terrain, etc. I also love to carve & cruise had high speeds & I don’t want a smaller flexier board to take away from that. Any recommendations with sizes & board types?
Hi Samuel
Thanks for your message.
Always going to be some compromise if your looking for that variety for things, so looking somewhere in the middle to try to do everything well, if you’re just going to have one board. If you have a quiver you can size appropriately depending on what you would use each board for.
I think a good range to look at in terms of length would be 160-162 for what you’re describing, so it’s not too long for your trees/park/spins etc but not too short for speed/carving.
In terms of width, with 14s, you’ll want to go wider than even a typical wide board, IMO, particularly if you’re going to be carving fairly deep.
I would look at the Never Summer Proto Synthesis 159DF (the DF stands for drag free). It’s got a nice wide width and should suit your riding style well. It’s a little shorter than the length range I mentioned but being as wide as it is, I think it’s still a good length.
The Yes Standard Uninc 162 (you could go regular Standard too, but for what you’re describing, my instinct is the Uninc model) is also an option as it’s pretty wide too – not as wide as the Proto Synthesis in the 159DF but wider at the inserts than you would think by just lookin at the waist width.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
First of all I wanted to say thank you for all your effort you put into this. It was extremely helpful!! I’m finding myself in a position that all my options (for a snowboard) are either slightly too narrow, or too wide.
To give you some context:
Height: 5’10”
Weight: 160-165 lbs (72.5-75 kg)
Snowboard boot: 10.5 US Mens
Current Snowboard: Rossignol Men’s District (159 cm length; 25.2 cm wide waist)
Once I set up my bindings to what feels comfortable (regular stance 15°/-6°), my boots have an overhang of 1 inch on both my toes and heels. So going back to what I saying before: it’s either that, or go to a ‘wide’ board and have the issue of it being slightly too wide on the scale you provided.
What would you recommend is the better option of the two?
Hi Carl
Thanks for your message.
with 10.5s you’ll often find yourself on the cuff between regular and wide. But there are quite a few regular width boards in your length range that will be wide enough (and even some wide boards that aren’t as wide as others), so you shouldn’t need to compromise. If you can let me know your riding ability and you’re riding style (basically anything you can tell me about how you like to ride, e.g. Fast, slow, trees, park, powder etc), then I can give you some options
Hi Nate! I just found this page, and can’t believe that you consistently put in the effort to help everyone here for years!
I’m just getting into snowboarding, finally going for the first time next week. Unfortunately, I tend to hyperfixate and got a bit of a gear bug, along with all the cyber sales this year. The entry snowboard I was looking at went on a half off sale, and I just couldn’t resist lol. However, it’s on backorder until February, so I’m stuck waiting, although I already got bindings in for it. (I’ll be using a rental for the first lesson, then have a coworker lending me a board until mine comes in)
I’m still just a bit anxious and overthinking numbers, so I’d love to have a second opinion if maybe I should change the size of it before it comes in.
Height: 5’5″
Weight: 115
Boot: 7.5 women’s
Board: Chamonix Wolf 146 (WW 234)
Bindings: Chamonix Barrats Medium.
I know these aren’t mainstream brands, but I’m still hoping you can give some advice on whether I’m in the right ballpark, or if I should size down to the 142?
Based on some virtual snowboarding (legit kind, not arcade) and a skateboarding background, I’m pretty confident I’m more interested in more of a freeride/carving style, just cruising down slopes, which is why I went up a little from what I think is my “average” estimate. It’s hard to tell though, since my height/weight combo seems to throw off most size calculators (I had one tell me 128, honestly)
Not quite sure on binding angle yet, I’m guessing I’m going to move away from +15 -15 pretty quickly, getting somewhere in the +12 -3 range, although we’ll see if I go that far in the back.
Thanks!
Hi Alyssa
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard all-mountain size” at around 144. But as a beginner, I would take off 3-5cm, as a rule of thumb. Even with a more freeride carving style, I’d still be erring towards the 142 for the Wolf, given you’re just starting out. The board itself looks, on paper, like it should work well as a beginner board, but I would be leaning 142. But yeah, definitely don’t go 128!
With binding angles I would say to experiment once you’ve got the basics down, to see what feels best for you. A more “forward stance” like +12 -3 is typically better for a freeride/carving style, but everyone’s body’s are different, so exactly what that ends up at will depend on what feels best for you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
Just curious, how do you calculate the footprint length of a boot?
I measured mine (28.5cm US10.5 Burton SLX), it’s like 28cm, even lower than my foot size!
This is because naturally the geometry of boots is curved from foot bottom to upwards, and I measure somewhere close to bottom.
When I measure the points where risk of dragging its like 30.5cm, but these points are really far away from the foot bottom
Hi Ismail
Thanks for your message.
To keep it consistent I measure with the boot to the back of the wall and use a square at the front of the boot to ensure that I’m measuring correctly. Trying to measure the sole at the bottom is tricky as each boot feels different and there’s no obvious way to measure each boot exactly the same. To make comparisons between boots, this is the most accurate way to do it (apart from measuring angles with boots strapped into a board and ensuring the same boot centering etc each time, but that’s too time consuming to setup for each boot, unfortunately – and I don’t even know how I would work that so that it’s a consistent test – there’s likely a way to do it this way, but it’s too time consuming unfortunately).
But every boot has toe bevel (and sometimes a little heel bevel, but usually less pronounced), i.e. is curved – and some have more bevel than others. I try to roughly measure toe bevel as well – but again, it’s not super accurate as to where it’s measured each time, so I take these measurements with a bit of a grain of salt. In terms of boot drag, it’s usually on the end of the toe of the boot (or end of heel on a heel side turn that will hit first) even if that’s higher up, so that’s the point that’s the most useful to measure to anyway. The fact that there’s that bevel, just allows the kind of overhang that we can get away with. Without the bevel, then we’d have to be more conservative with the amount of overhang that we would be able to allow. Which would then mean that our feet would be further from the edges of the board, making it harder to apply leverage to the edges of the board, so the bevel is certainly taken into account.
Hope this helps/make sense
Hello Nate,
Thank you, its pretty much
Hi Nate!
Amazing article. I am facing a little struggle regarding the first setup.
My specs:
Weight: 141 lbs (64kg)
Height: 5,7 ft ( 173-175cm)
Foot size: 7.5 US (40EU) 25.5cm
I ended up choosing Bataleon Disaster + board in 148 length which is perfect for my weight according to the sizing on their website. But the thing is that the width of the board is slightly bigger than is suitable according to my foot size. Could this be an issue?
The boot I am planning to buy is Burton Moto in 40,5 EU size (7,5 US). But since in the boot top chart you have mentioned that the outer footprint is smaller, I could also consider a Burton Mint in mondo 25,5 cm if it is better for width.
The usual Disaster in length 144 seems to be perfect for my specs but, I do not really like the graphics and colours of the board and also I do consider sometimes going though the whole mountain, not only staying in the park, therefore looking towards 148 board.
So yeah, the question I would like to ask you is: would it be a mistake buying The Disaster + in 148 length if the width of the board is slightly (half size) bigger than it should be? And secondly should I look towards the Burton Mint boots according to the issue with the width of the board and Moto boots having smaller footprint?
Forgot to mention, that the stance is (-15:15+) or (-9:15+) goofy.
I really hope you understood what I was trying to say.
Appreciate your time and assistance!
Best wishes,
Richard
Hi Richard
Thanks for your message.
I think the 148 is a good size for you. For your height and weight specs I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 152. The 148 is a little wide to be ideal for your boot size. However, it’s not super wide and given that you’re sizing down from that 152, I think it’s a really good fit. As a beginner, you do want to size down anyway, but I think it’s still enough of a size down and that size should suit you really well, IMO.
I get what you’re saying with the boots. You’re wondering if having a longer outsole would help with the board being slightly wider. I would say it doesn’t (at least not to a significant degree), because ultimately you’re providing leverage on the edges of the board from your feet, more so than from the boots – so with a longer outsole on the boot, your feet aren’t getting any longer – so if there is any extra leverage, I would say it’s pretty insignificant. I would say you can go too wide for your feet, but never too wide for your boots and you can go too narrow for your boots but never too narrow for your feet, if that makes sense.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks so much for this article! I’m a female snowboarder with the following stats:
Shoe size: 8 US
Height: 5’5 (166 cm)
Weight: 100 lbs (45kg)
Skill level: intermediate-advanced
Style: Mainly ride groomers, but looking to advance and do more carving/powder terrain.
I’m thinking about getting a 143cm men’s snowboard with 249mm waist width and a flex of 6 (out of 10). Could that work for me? What size, width, and flex snowboard would you recommend?
Hi Audrey
I think the flex would be good for what you’re describing but the width is pretty wide for your feet, IMO. I think 143 is a good length for you, but in a narrower width. If you were going to go that wide, I would try to go with a shorter length.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I’m a beginner. I have been out snowboarding 3 times now and really enjoyed it, so I’m looking to pull the trigger and buy my own equipment. As someone new to the sport, your website has been tremendously useful, so I appreciate it.
I’m 5’6″ tall, 155 lbs, and I wear a US men’s size 8.5 Burton Ruler Wide. So far I only have the boots, and I’m looking to seek your opinions about boards and bindings before I make the purchase. My first choice board is the 2023 Nitro Prime Raw as I heard it’s good for beginner and I really like the design. The only problem is that the smallest size is a 152 cm with 252 mm waist width, and I’m afraid that might be a tat bit too wide or do you think it’s doable? My second choice board is the 152 cm 2023 K2 Standard with 247 mm waist width.
I would like to hear your thoughts on the above as well as bindings recommendation that you have for each of the boards.
Best,
Mainghor
Hi Mainghor
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 154cm. As a beginner it’s a good idea to go a little smaller, so length-wise, I think around that 152cm is fine, length-wise.
With 8.5 boots though the Prime 152 is a little on the wide side. If you were able to size down a little more, then that width wouldn’t be an issue (e.g. if it came in a 150 or something) but the combination of length/width makes it a little on the big side. It’s not what I would call undoable though. But the Standard 152 is a better overall size, IMO, because it’s a better width for your feet. So that’s what I would go with. Both are very good beginner boards, so I’d go with the K2 Standard as it has the more optimal size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment. I think my setup will be the K2 Standard 152 with the medium Union Flite Pro. I’m actually really excited and looking forward to using my own gear this season.
You’re very welcome Mainghor. Hope the setup treats you well and you have an awesome season!
Hey Nate,
Loving all of your reviews and other guidance, massive help.
I recently got a Jones Mountain Twin, 157. My boot size is only 9, so should have no worries with heel or toe drag. I did reduce the reference stance from 58 to 54, it seemed a bit wide for me.
I mounted the bindings and have the boot mostly centered over the board.
Toe side, I can flip the board almost 90° before the toes touch.
On heel side, it probably gets to around 80°, but it isn’t the boot touching, it’s the back of my Step-On binding.
Is this of any concern? Should I shift the bindings forward a bit, but then have slightly more toe overhang compared to heel (excluding the binding…)?
Thanks again!
If I can post links, you can see what I mean here:
Heels
Binding
Toes
Hi Gareth
Thanks for your message.
I don’t imagine you’ll have any drag issues if you’re getting an 80 degree angle before the heel cup hits. You’d have to be doing a pretty hefty heel-side carve (like eurocarving) to have any issues there, IMO. I mean, if you were able to move it forward a little bit without offsetting your centering too much, you could try it, if you’re worried about it – but unless you’re really going to be eurocarving, I wouldn’t anticipate issues with that. Most of use can get lower on our toe side carves than heel side, so having that on the heelside is preferable to having less angle on the toe side. That said, with the angle you have on the toe side, you can afford to have a little more overhang there, if you needed to. But honestly, if you’ve got your boots centered and you’re not doing any mad eurocarving I would leave it.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I’m on the search for my first snowboard and I am a bit lost of wich width I should pick,
My option for the snowboard would be the Bataleon Chaser, (no idea wich bindings or the size of the bindings either)
My size is 179cm of height and 90kg of weight,
My boots are the Adidas Tactical Lexicon ADV in a US 11.5.
I suppose I should go for the 159cm, but should I go wide or regular?
Thanks so much, your blog it’s super helpful!
Hi Balived
Thanks for your message.
I would say the 159W would be your best bet. Even though the Tactical Lexicon ADV are low profile, with 11.5s, you’re still probably better off going wide. But if you could let me know a couple more things about your riding to confirm. What ability level would you describe yourself as? How do you like to ride, if you’ve developed a style – i.e. deep carves, high speed, casual, trees?, powder?, park? – whatever you can tell me about your riding helps.
Hi Nate,
this is a very helpful guide but I’m not confident still in buying a wide, where there are some XW boards available now, and given my height and feet size.
I’m 6’6, UK size 12.
I’m looking at the Nidecker score 162W, or Nidecker Escape 162XW. These boards because they’re in my price range and I like the shape, but open to more options.
Thanks in advance
… I stand +/- 15 degrees
Hi Rudi
Thanks for your message.
If you could also let me know your weight, which is important for sizing for length. And if you could also tell me some more about how you ride. Ability level? Do you ride fast or more casual? Trees? Park? Big deep carves or not? Whatever you can tell me about your riding helps. If you could also let me know your boots, if you have boots already (some are more low profile than others).
Width-wise, you’re likely good on the Score 162W, with +15/-15 angles, so long as your not in too bulky a boots. On the Escape 162XW, it’s a little wider, as you know, and I’d be more confident on that, even with not so low-profile boots. If you don’t have boots yet, then I’d certainly look at low profile boots. There’s no downside to them and with UK12s, they might help you get on a narrower board.
But yeah, if you can fill me in with more details, I can take a look at some other options and also give you a more accurate opinion on the suitability of the width of the Score and Escape.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate thank you a lot for the answer!
I would describe myself as a beginner, I can do the turns easily now on blacks and I’m about to try and learn how to carve this season. I want to be able to do resort and trees, powder… etc, the park it os something I’m a bit indiferent right now.
Wich binding angle should I pick in your opinion also?
Thank you!
Hi Balived
I’d stick with the 159W with this board, based on what you’re describing and your specs.
In terms of binding angles, most important thing is that you’re comfortable, so experimenting is a good bet, but given the style that your leaning towards, a more forward stance is probably your best bet. You can learn more here.
Thank you so much Nate, you were super helpfull!
Balived.
You’re very welcome Balived. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hello Nate! First, thank you so much for your generosity in sharing all this knowledge with us! I want to buy my first snowboard, bidings and boots. But I have very small feet. Depending on the brand of boot I can wear a 6.0 or a 6.5 US. I’m very interested in jones weaver (formerly dream catcher) and never summer proto synthesis. But I’m not sure which size to choose (148, 145 or 142) and if these models are suitable for me (considering my features)… Could you help me? Below I give the information you need. If you know of another model that fits what I want I would appreciate it.
Foot size: 6 or 6.5 (23.1 cm)
Height: 5’5 (165 cm)
Weight: 122 lbs (55kg)
Skill level: intermediate 5
Style: between all-mountaineer and all-Mountain Freestyler (more to the side of all-mountaineer). I want to improve my carving, I like to enjoy a powder around the tracks when possible and I’m starting to take small jumps and learn some ground tricks.
Thank you!
Hi Andressa
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard length” at 145. However, I would size down to 142 for either of those boards, because of boot size. I think the 142s in both would work well size-wise. The Dream Weaver I think would be the most suitable for you, given that you want to ride powder. It’s a better board for powder than the Proto Synthesis, IMO. It’s not as good as it for riding switch, but can still do it OK, if that’s something you like to do.
Hope this helps
Thank you so much, Nate!
You’re very welcome Andressa. Thanks for using the site. Happy riding!
Hi Nate! Me again…Just one last question…As a third option I also found interesting the abor swoon camber which has a narrower waist (147 – 23.55 and 143 – 23.35) but I would sacrifice a little powder (most narrower boards are not so good in powder )…do you think it would be better because it is more suited to my foot size or wouldn’t it make much difference between her and jones (142-23.6), considering that jones is better in powder? In the case of arbor, would it be better to keep the choice in the smallest size, 143?
Thanks again and sorry for my Englis (I’m using the google translate…😅)
Hi Andressa
The Swoon Camber – and most Arbor boards, are wider at the inserts (where the bindings go) than they look at the waist. The 143 is narrower overall than the 142 Dream Weaver, but not by a lot. And because you want to ride powder, I would still go Dream Weaver. If you did go Swoon Camber, I would go for the 143 for you.
Thanks again!
Hey,
I was wondering if what size you thought would be best for me. I am 6ft tall, size 10 boots, 140lbs, and an advanced rider. Do you think a waist size of 252 on a 161cm board is too skinny or what size waist and board do you think would be ideal for me?
Thanks.
Hi Mason
Thanks for your message.
Depending on your typical binding angles (when you’re bindings have more angle on them, there’s a bit more leeway width-wise) and the profile of your boots (some are bulkier than others) you should be good on most regular width boards of something that length. With a 252mm waist, you should be fine most of the time, unless you have quite a flat back binding angle and bulky boots. The width at inserts isn’t uniform across boards either, so a 252mm waist can mean anything from 257mm at the inserts to 270mm at the inserts depending. So it would depend on the board, but in most cases you should be good with regular width.
Note however, that I wouldn’t typically recommend a board that long for your specs.
Hey Nate,
First of all, thanks again for all of your advice and apologies in advance for this kinda long post. Based on your advice in a conversation in another thread, I just got a Jones Mountain Twin 162W and I’m stoked! I had been debating the 162W or the 165W (I’m 6′ 2″, 230lb) but went down to the lower size since I’m still very early in my progression.
The board arrived today and I figured I would take a closer look at the measurements to make sure there wouldn’t be any issues. I think I can get away with what looks like a slight amount of overhang compared to what’s recommended in this article but wanted to get your opinion.
At the reference stance inserts, the board measures exactly 11in (279mm) directly across. I’m assuming this simulates a 0 degree binding angle. I measured the bottom of the board which is slightly wider than the top.
My feet are Mondo 30 (Specifically they measure 297mm) and I plan to get US12 Burton Step-on Photons when they come back in stock at my local store.
For a 0 degree angle it would appear my feet are 18mm longer than the board which is above the 10mm guidance in this article. But, if I’m reading correctly the real concern with overhang relates to the boots and not the feet.
Your review for the Step On Photons notes that the boot has a 24mm difference between mondo and outer sole (at least for the US10’s you used). Assuming it’s the same difference for US12/Mondo 30, at a +0 angle this would mean the boots would have a total overhang of 45mm (324mm boot on a 279mm board). The article mentions that I can probably get away with up to 50mm of overhang, but ideally it should be below 40mm for deep carves.
So based on all this I think I’ll be okay. I’m between a 4-5 in skill (low intermediate at best) so I don’t think I’ll be laying out the deepest carves for a bit and will very possibly be on a bigger board more suited to my “normal” size when I get to that point anyway. Plus, I’m guessing that if I use basically any type of angle on both feet other than +0 on this board it will likely remove the overhang concerns even when carving.
Do I have all that right?
Thanks,
Terrence
Hi Terrence
Thanks for your message. You understood everything really well. And I think you should be fine. In terms of overhang it comes down to the boots. Underhang is more determined by feet. So assuming your boot overhang is fine, it won’t matter if your feet are overhanging more than the recommendation. You’ve understood it correctly that the foot overhang in this article is used more to predict the boot overhang. In your case, I think the US12 Burton Step Ons should be fine with that level of overhang. And with Burton boots, they have quite a bit of toe bevel which will also help. And yeah, with a bit of angle on your bindings, it will reduce that overhang as well. So yeah, long story short, I think you should be all good width-wise on the 162W MT.
Yo Nate thanks so much for the site! I think I’m overthinking this but I got a good deal this off season on a demo Neversummer Harpoon 152 with 261cm waist width.
I bought the board blind (never tested a short-wide before!) – wanted something freeriderish but not super stiff or anything (once tried a flight attendant and kicked my butt)
Now the bad news: I’m US8/8.5 (26cm mondo) boots. Is the board too wide for me? I’m 73kg/160lbs
I think my normal size is around ~156cm for nice groomer cruising and some carving.
I cannot return the harpoon so fingers crossed it’s not too wide for next season
Thanks brother!
Hey Quentin
Thanks for your message.
Given your boot size, I think ideally you’d size down a little more for a short wide with your weight (and with 156 being your typical size). But I wouldn’t say it’s way too big or anything like that. I think you’ll get away with it. I think ideally you’d go down to a 149/150 with a short wide. Hard to say for sure how much that extra size is going to affect the ride for you, but I don’t think it’s going to be unrideable or anything, but I also wouldn’t say it’s ideal. Would definitely be curious to hear how you find it, once you get a chance to ride it next season.
Shoot. Forgot to include, I’m on the ice coast, artificial/natural snow, hard with icy patches,
Hi Eric
Thanks for your message.
Given you’re looking for something more forgiving, I think those boards would all work – and in terms of width, don’t think you’ll have any issues with a 12 Burton on any of them. The Jones Frontier is probably your best bet – as it’s not super aggressive, but it’s not as playful as the other 2. The Typo is really quite playful, IMO, and might be a little too playful for what you’re looking for. The Jibsaw in between, but yeah, I think the Frontier should work well. The Frontier is the wider of the 3 as well, if you were still worried about width – even though the waist width is only 1mm wider, it’s wider at the inserts versus the other 2. I would say that the Typo and Jibsaw are a little better in icy conditions, but the Frontier is still good in icy conditions, so it shouldn’t be a problem.
Sizing Mondo (i.e. a 28.3cm foot should fit an 11.5) isn’t fool proof by any means, and practically speaking it’s often not accurate, so I’m not surprised you fit best in a Burton 12. My largest foot is 27.3cm and technically that would put me in a 9.5 but for Burton (and most brands) I fit best in a 10. There are a few brands I get in a 9.5, but it’s not the majority.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the info! So how about a non-wide version? Is a 157 or 159 non-wide Jibsaw an option (waist 25.3, 25.4 respectively)?
Just want to say the work you are doing here is truly noble and selfless. Whatever higher being you follow should reward you generously in the afterlife…
Hi Eric
Apologies for the slow reply. Have had some personal things to sort out.
I think they’re going to be too narrow for 12s – or even 11.5s, if you were to fit into those. I would stick with wide for your boot/foot size.
Hey no problem at all. Really appreciate the responses. Hope all is good with personal stuff.
Hi. Wow, great article. I’d love to get your help sorting boots and board widths. I’m 5’11”, about 190 fully loaded, and typically wear an 11 or 11.5 running shoe, though a worn in Burton Moto Boa size 12 is about the perfect length; an 11.5 is too much toe against the end. Where I’m thrown off is my largest foot is measuring about 28.3cm on the ruler.
I’ve been looking at the following boards based on my weight, shoe size / burton boot size
Jones Frontier 161W 26.4 waist
Yes Typo 163W 26.3 Waist
Rossi Jibsaw 158W 26.3 Waist
Typical Stance is +18 / +6 to +9, though I’ve been trying out less forward biased stances, down to like +3 on the rear. I’ve been riding off and on since the early 90s and I’m over the aggressive full camber boards I grew up on. Still like to carve but need some forgiveness. I am looking at Burton Step-on boots/bindings, something with a medium flex.
Would be awesome to get your thoughts (though hoping you don’t recommend against the Jones as it’s on it’s way already)
Hey Nate!
I’m looking at buying the lib tech cortado womens snowboard. I’ve heard that it’s wider than usual snowboards so I’m not too sure if I should buy it. For reference, I am 5’3, 140 pounds, size 8 boots, and intermediate rider.
Thanks!
Hi Iris
The Cortado is wider than usual, but is the kind of board you size down for because of that width. Usually I would say to go around 145-147 for your specs, as an intermediate. But in this case, you could size down to the 142 to make up for the width, if you were happy to go short-wide. The 145 would be doable, but on the big side overall.
hi Hello
I want to buy a lib tech skate bana 2021 snowboard.my first snowboard and im a beginer The store I want to buy has 2 models of 159 cm and 162 wide. my height is 182 cm and weight is 86 kg and foot size is 44.5(us11), what size should I buy?
Hi Kianoosh
Thanks for your message.
Unfortunately both aren’t the best sizing options. As a beginner, for your specs, the 162W is too big. Even as a more advanced rider it’s on the big side, depending on how you want to ride, but for this board and as a beginner, I think it’s too big. But with US11 boots, the 159 is too narrow. The 159W would be the best option – or even the 156W. If you really have to choose between the 159 and 162W, I would go 159 and hope it’s wide enough. As a beginner, you might get away with it width-wise, since you’re less likely to be laying down any deep carves, but it’s pushing it width-wise.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I am looking for the Salomon Sight or a similar snowboard as a beginner (around 7 days experience some years ago). Which size will fit me? 158w, 159, or 162w?
Height: 5’7
Weight: 200 lbs
Boots size: Adidas 43.5 (EUR)
Thanks a lot!!
Georg
Hi Georg
Thanks for your message.
An Adidas 43.5 translates to a US9.5 (sorry my brain works in US sizes), so I think you could go with the regular width fine. So I would be leaning to the 159. The 158W would be fine too – it’s not super wide or anything, but I think the 159 is your better bet. The 162W too big for you, particularly as a beginner, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Looking at Burton Hideaway for my wife, she’s 5’7″ 130lbs and boot size 9-26cm. She’s a beginner and was wondering if size 144 with waist width of 237 will be good for her or better go with the 148cm waist 240.
Her bindings are Burton citizen size L.
Also for myself boot size 10.5 or 28cm 6′ 195lbs with stance +15 -8 what would be the minimum waist and largest waist i should go with?
thank you and great article
Hi Nelson
Thanks for your message.
Length-wise, for your wife, I would be leaning towards the 144 being a beginner. If she was more advanced, she could go to a 148, but I’d err shorter with her being a beginner. I think 144 would be a good length. In terms of width, if she is riding with a bit of angle on both bindings (e.g. not like a 0-3 degree binding angle on the back binding), then I think she’ll be fine with the width on the 144. Even with flat angles like that, she might get away with it anyway as a beginner – as she likely won’t be driving any hard carves at this stage.
There are a lot of factors that go into how wide or narrow you can go (like how low profile your boots are) – and the width at inserts (which differs compared to the waist depending on the board) is a more accurate measure but with those binding angles, I’d be looking in the range 254 to 261, in terms of waist width.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate for the quick reply and advice!
Placed the order for the 144 for the wife. 🙂
As for myself Im an intermediary rider that’s back into snowboard after a long break. Took the kids for the first time this season and they loved. We are getting season passes for next year.My two young boys are shredding on the learning hills. I started to post some videos on IG: fb_xteam if you want to follow their journey.:)
My current set up is Burton moto boots 10.5 and Cartel X bindings L est. Board is Burton Custom 2014 158W. I’m 6feet and 195lbs.
Im looking for a playful and easy to ride board to learn buttering, jibbing and small jumps. Mainly to learn tricks and have fun with the kids. Which Burton board would you recommend and size ?
I could consider other brands if burton does not have any good option. If going to other brand can you suggest bindings as well since my current one is an EST. Thank you so much for all the help!
Hi Nelson
Checked out the vids – great job! My 6 year old is loving his snowboarding this year too – he started a couple of years back, but this is the first year he’s started to really enjoy it and start exploring more territory.
First board I would check out for what you’re describing is the Process Flying V. It’s really playful. Not great in icy conditions, but if you don’t plan to bring it out in those, then it’s really fun and good for jibbing, buttering etc.
But if you wanted a more camber dominant option, the Kilroy Twin (which has a different name for the 23 model – but essentially the same board – but just to note, in case you were going to wait for 23 models) is worth looking at. It’s camber, but it’s soft flexing. Or the Process Camber – though it’s not quite as soft – so there wouldn’t be as big a difference from your Custom. Would certainly be more playful and you would notice the difference, but if this is going to be your dedicated playful board, I’d be leaning more to the Process Flying V or Kilroy Twin.
I’d say the softest most playful is the Name Dropper. Didn’t have a 22 model but if you can find one in a 21 model. But if you did go with the Name Dropper, you’d likely want to change bindings. The Cartel X would over power that board, IMO. Even on the Process Flying V and Kilroy Twin, the Custom X is borderline too stiff, but on those you might get away with it. On the Name Dropper, probably not. Size-wise:
– Process Flying V: 157W would be your best size. And not super wide for a wide board. If you wanted to make things more maneuverable you could go to 157. It’s a little narrow, for your boots, but if you weren’t going to be laying deep carves and rode with angles like +15/-15 or similar, I think you’d be fine with it width-wise in Burton Moto’s (which are low profile). In fact with those angles and the low profile boots, I think you’d be fine on the 157.
– Kilroy Twin: 155 – this would be going quite small for your specs, but if it’s going to be your dedicated playful board I think it could work. Again width-wise, I think you’d get away with this, assuming binding angles of +15/-15 or similar (something that has at least a decent angle on the back binding angle).
– Name Dropper: 158 – or you could go 155 – but in that size, it might feel a bit too noodly – and as mentioned, I think your bindings would be too much for it.
I think those options would work well for what your wanting, but if you wanted to check out other options, also check out:
>>My Top 10 Men’s Freestyle Snowboards
Hi Nate!
WOW amazing info here! You are awesome.
I am a brand new boarder, and have only used rental equipment the two times I have gone. I love it though and want to invest in my own gear to make this more fun.
I am a small person at 5 ft 3 in and 105 lbs. I had a lot of trouble controlling the rental board on turns and esp toe side as it was a 146 and felt very big and heavy. I also had a lot of heel lift in the rental boots.
My foot size is about 24 cm. I am looking at the Burton stylus 138. The waist width is 240mm. Based on the measurements would this board be a good fit for me? I am thinking I am a size 6.5-7 boot based on charts but my foot is very skinny and I want to try on in person to be sure. But trying to order the correct size board and bindings.
Thanks tremendously for your articles, they have taught me so much.
Hi Shawna
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, 146 definitely too long for you, IMO. Rental boards tend to be heavier as well, which would add to the weight. But even ignoring the weight of the board, that length is too long for your specs.
I think 138 would be a great length for you. As a more advanced rider you could go up to like 141/142, but for right now 138 is perfect, IMO. Width-wise, it’s a little on the wider size for your feet, but it’s not anything too crazy-wide or anything. With 24cm feet, I imagine you’ll end up in 7s or 7.5s. But trying on in person is the true test and maybe you’d fit into a 6.5. But I’d suspect 7 or 7.5. With narrow feet, it’s likely that the 7 will be the better fit over the 7.5. But again, trying on is the true measure.
But yeah, in terms of the board, I think it would work for sure. On the wide side, so if you wanted to be really fussy, could look at something narrower, but overall it’s a good choice, IMO. And going to be way different to your 146 rental boards!
Hope this helps
Thank you! This is so helpful. I cant wait to get my own set up and feel the difference from that rental. Went to my local shop and I measured into a nitro boa size 7.5. While I was there they suggested the Capita BOAF in a 142. But with the research I’ve done that feels like it may not be the best board for me at this point.
That being said I was looking at your top 10 beginner boards and saw the nitro Lectra. Its width looks more narrow, and your review sounds like its perfect for my ability and what I need. Would that be a better suited board for me, based on my specs and ability? I found it at a shop somewhat local in a 138.
Trying to make the smartest purchase here, and I cant tell you enough how much I appreciate your help and your amazing site.
Thank you!
Hi Shawna
I think the BOAF would be too aggressive for you at this point, as a beginner. It’s def not a beginner board. And whilst 142 isn’t like way too big for your specs, it is on the big side for your specs whilst your a beginner.
The Lectra would be a much more fun and easier board to learn on, IMO.
The 138 is a great length, IMO, the only concern is if it’s a little too narrow. I think you would be fine with it with the Nitro 7.5s, IF you have binding angles like +15/-15 or at similar. Something with at least a good bit of angle on the back binding (I single out the back binding, because your front binding is typically never going to be super flat across the board – like at the very least 9 degrees, and even then most have it on a greater angle thn that). As a beginner, you’re likely not to have any issues on the width of the Lectra given you’re likely not leaning into any super deep carves just yet – so you’d probably get away with it even with a flat back binding angle (e.g. 0-3 degrees kind of thing) but as you progress and get up on your edge a little more, that’s when it could start causing boot drag problems.
Thank you Nate! your help has been invaluable.
This makes sense about the BOAF. I will definitely go with either the Lectra or the Stylus in the 138. Thank you for breaking down the angels of the bindings. That definitely makes sense. And I definitely want to have the best board for my skill level so I can learn easier and get those skills down. Looking at the waist width of the two there is about a 12 cm difference. Which one would you recommend overall?
Thank you again!
Hi Shawna
I think the Stylus would be the safer bet width-wise and would give you the option to change up your binding angles if you wanted to. And it’s still in a good range for your foot size. I think you probably would get away with the Lectra, but there is some risk of boot drag there, especially if you start to progress quite quickly with carving.
Hey Nate,
Is the capita Mercury size 153 with a waist width of 253 a little too wide for boot size 8 feet? I am 145 lbs and 5’8.
Hi Colton
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, IMO it’s a little too wide for 8s. Doesn’t mean you couldn’t ride the Mercury – but I would size down to the 150 in your case.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for posting all of this helpful info. I’m 5 ‘ 8″ and weigh 155 lbs. My shoe size is 10.5 US (27.5 cm foot length) and I fit nicely in a Ride Jackson size 10 boot. A couple of years ago I bought a Salomon Craft 156 (2019 model). I didn’t pay attention to at any info other than board length when I purchased it. Recently I looked up the specs and it’s pretty wide for a 156. It measures 30.2 at the tip and tail and 25.7 at the waist. It seems like they could have almost listed this as 156W. According to your chart I’m at the max range for my foot at a 15 degree angle. At 15 degrees my foot fits exactly edge to edge on the under side of the board at the inserts, which measures about 26.6 straight across. I’m wondering if you think this is still within my range for an all-mountain board or if I would benefit from sizing down a bit.
Thanks,
Rory
Hi Rory
Thanks for your message.
Firstly in terms of width, I don’t think it’s too wide. I think it’s at the wider end of your range, but still within a good range. I typically like a board width that’s less than 265mm (straight across) – with a right foot 27cm and left foot 27.3cm. But I can ride wider than that – but that’s kind of the ideal for me – that 260-265mm range. If the board is a little short for my specs, then I find it easier to go wider. Waist width – does play a part as well though – typically I find: between boards with the same insert width, the one with the narrower waist tends to be more agile and easier to ride.
I wouldn’t call it a wide though – wides typically start at around 270mm at inserts.
Length-wise, I would consider your “standard all-mountain” size to be around 155cm – assuming a relatively advanced level of riding.
I think in this case, because the width is at the upper end of what I would consider the ideal range for both length and width, then maybe borderline on the big side. But it’s nothing crazy big for you or anything. You could certainly ride a little smaller if you wanted though. This would partly depend on your style of riding too – e.g. if you like to bomb carve hard and hit powder, then I don’t think it’s too big. But if you prefer to spend quite a bit of time in trees and doing some freestyle stuff or simply are just a more casual, playful kind of rider, then I think you could benefit from sizing down a little bit.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks, this is super helpful. I’m glad to know the board isn’t overly wide for my foot length and still within my range overall. I would describe my riding style as more casual and playful most of the time. I live in NYC so I’m usually riding east coast resort groomers. I was planning a trip to Utah when I bought this board and was hoping it would be good for a variety of terrain and snow conditions out there. It felt good cruising at high speed, but I did have some difficulty winding through the trees and getting from edge to edge on the steeps. I wasn’t sure if the board was too big or if I just needed to get used to it. My Craft is a great board, but I think I’ll size down a little next time so it’s is a bit more nimble. Thanks so much for your input!
Best,
Rory
You’re very welcome Rory. And thanks for visiting the site. Let me know if you need any help choosing your next board. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
I want to buy the Rossignol One 2022 board. I wear size 10.5 32 Tw2 boots. I’m about 5’8- 185lbs. What size should I get. 157W or 156 reg. No freestyle just hard charging side hits when possible.
Hi Jesus
Thanks for your message.
I would probably actually look at the 159. Given that you don’t do any freestyle and like to charge hard, I think that extra length would be good to have for you. And the 159 should be wide enough for your boot size. The 156 is bordering on too narrow, but the 157W a little too wide, IMO. I think the 159 would be spot on for your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello!
Thanks for taking the time to make all of these recommendations. It has been interesting just reading through all of the variations. I am considering a return to snowboarding after a decade away. I am 6’4″, 235ish lbs, and wear a US14 boot. I’ll be riding mostly groomers at a beginner level. Last I rode I had a Burton Dominant 160 but I never really knew if it was the right size or not. I’ve looked all over and your article and consequent sizing info is the most helpful things I have found. That said, I am still wondering what length and width I should be after.
I had looked at some options from Salomon, like the Sight 162W and 166W but the waist widths of 260mm and 262mm seem too narrow. I had also seen this brand Niche who has a board called the Pyre which is only 160cm long but has a waist width of 275mm. Is 160 too short?
I’m not sold on any one brand at this point, just trying to sort out what ranges I should be considering. Super open-ended questions so I thank you for your time and patience!
Matt
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, the Sight is probably too narrow – it’s wide’s aren’t particularly wide. For the Pyre, I think 160 is getting a bit too short – if you had smaller boots and needed to size down because of the width, then it would be a doable size, but with 14s, you won’t need to size down. Also, though I haven’t ridden the Pyre, it doesn’t look on paper to be a beginner friendly ride.
Generally speaking, as a beginner (high end beginner?) I would say something around 162-164 in length. With 14s, you’ll want to go quite wide too.
Some options include:
– Burton Instigator Flat Top 165W – this is going to be borderline too soft for you though, even as a beginner. But being a little above that size recommendation we set, I think it would work
– K2 Raygun 164W
– Never Summer Snow Trooper 164X – it’s a bit more than a beginner board – but pretty easy going and certainly could handle as a high end beginner, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I was wondering if you could help me with seeing if my set up is proper 🙂
I currently just upgraded my board to the Salomon Lotus Women board 142, My current binding are the Union Juliet 2017 binding in size Small. I’m wearing a size 7 Vans Aura boots.
The size small binding fits my board and boots well at the moment (but I’m on a 130 board which is why I upgraded. ) I was wondering if my binding is still fine for the Salomon Lotus board or would I need to upgrade ?
Ps Love your website 🙂 Its so helpful!!
Hi Christy
Thanks for your message.
Ideally you’d be on medium union bindings for your new board. However, the small should be doable. The Medium would give you a little more leverage on the edges – being a longer binding on what I assume is a wider board compared to your 130. But so long as you can center your boots OK (as in even heel and toe overhang) – which you should be fine with, given that you’ll have heel cup adjustment on the Juliet and can run the disc vertical in addition to that, if the heel cup adjustment isn’t enough for centering – then you could stick with the small Juliet. If you’re not able to get proper boot centering (doesn’t have to be perfect), then it’s more worth it to upgrade bindings.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Amazing info, thank you.
Can you help me also a bit.
I am 179 cm and 72 kg with boot size 9.5-10.
7 yo of riding a week per year, all-mountain with still begginer+ level i think (can do some ollies, smal popups, powder, but never park, pipe and can’t switch 🙂
15 / -10 guffy
Last 5yo riding DC focus 149 (my small love) never had any issue with width (or just did not recognize it).
Now need to change the board and looking for bathaleon Whatever, as the reviews are amazing, but lost in size. better 154 or 157 for me?
Appreciate your hardwork!
Hi Vlad
Thanks for your message.
I’d put you at around 157 as your “standard all-mountain” length, but that typically assumes a relatively advanced level. Given that you’re still high-end beginner/low intermediate, taking off a bit of size makes sense – and given that you’re used to a 149, it also makes me err shorter. So whilst the 157 certainly wouldn’t be way off, I’d be leaning 154 for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
My brother told me about your awesome website! It’s amazing how much detail you go into and everything you do to help the community, thank you!
I didn’t know if you’d mind just offering a bit more advice..? Me and Bro are heading to Austria next month boarding and this will be the 6th/7th time I’ve been snowboarding and would class myself as an intermediate.
I’m looking to treat myself to buying my first ever snowboard as I’ve always rented previously. The options I’ve been looking at are the YES Typo and one of the Burton Customs, however not settled on which model yet.
I’m really struggling what size board I should be looking at. I’m 6ft 5″ tall and about 90kg with a boot size of UK12. With my height and weight I’d imagine I’d be looking at maybe the tallest board they do and wide, but I wouldn’t want a board that’s going to be a pain to turn and not very nimble. I’d like an all mountain board that gives me more performance over a rented board and can help me gain ability on the mountains and become a better snowboarder.
If you had any suggestions or comments on snowboards I should be looking at and any bindings recommendations I’d be grateful appreciative!
Cheers dude.
Dave.
Hi Dave
Thanks for your message.
I think the Typo would suit what your describing. Only question mark would be width. Even the wide options aren’t super wide and with UK12s, even the 163W is pushing it in terms of being too narrow. For the Typo I think the 163W would be the best length too – in this case it’s the longest/widest, but generally speaking you wouldn’t necessarily go with the longest/widest board. I would say something 161-163. Some boards come in much longer sizes and I wouldn’t go longer than 163 for you.
In terms of getting on the Typo width-wise, I think it’s risky for your boot size. If you were riding with binding angles +15/-15 or similar, had low profile boots and didn’t really carve that deep or want to carve that deep, then you’d probably get away with it – but otherwise I’d look to go wider.
If you were to go Custom, then the 162W is probably your best bet. It’s a little wider, though not hugely, so it’s still borderline.
For reference:
– Typo 163W around 271mm at inserts
– Custom 162W around 275mm at inserts
These are both assuming a 560mm (22″) stance width. If you ride with a wider stance width (which you might well do at your height), then you would get more leeway there. E.g. with a 600mm stance (23.6″), you’d more likely be at:
– Typo 163W around 274mm at inserts
– Custom 162W around 278mm at inserts
In which case the Typo is probably still borderline, but the Custom I think would be doable.
Between the Custom Camber and Flying V.
The Camber version is more advanced. I’d say you’d want to be a solid intermediate rider with good technique. The Flying V is an easier rider.
The Camber version is better for carving, has more pop and has better edge hold in hard/icy conditions. The Flying V version is better in powder, feels softer flexing, more playful and quicker edge to edge.
Bindings will depend on the board you end up choosing.
Hope this gives you more to go off – and if you want any other suggestions, let me know.
Hi Nate
Such an amazing website – so helpful! I’m on the cusp of Beginner level 4/Intermediate level 5 in terms of ability, and I’m looking for a new all mountain board that’s easy to ride, fairly loose and catch free but provides enough performance for me to progress into once my confidence builds (probably something on the freestyle end of all mountain). I’ve found a Never Summer Snowtrooper (2019 157W) and wondered if you thought it would be a good choice? I’m 5′ 11″, foot size 28.5cm (UK 10 boot) and weigh ~72kg. Any thoughts/suggestions would be much appreciated!
Cheers!
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
IMO the Never Summer Snowtrooper is a great choice for what you’re describing.
Size-wise, I think the 157W works too. I would put you roughly at around 158cm for your “standard all-mountain length” – as a beginner/intermediate rider, it’s a good idea to size down the length a little, but given your not a complete beginner, doesn’t have to be too much – and with an easy going board like this, I think you’d be fine sizing down just 1cm. And with UK10s, you do need to go wide, IMO. And the 157X isn’t ultra wide or anything – a good width for UK10s, I’d say.
The Snowtrooper makes my list of top intermediate boards – which was created precisely for what you’re after – something still easy enough to ride, but with more performance than a pure beginner board – something that take you further into your progression than a purely beginner board can.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much Nate, that’s super helpful – looking forward to giving the Snowtrooper a go! If you have any thoughts on compatible bindings, suitable for my level that would be be great. I currently use a pair of strap ins but open to trying speed entry.
Cheers
Chris
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
I would be looking at something around 5/10 to 6/10 in terms of flex. For the Snowtrooper you could even ride something 4/10 flex, but I’d be leaning 5/10 to 6/10, that way if you go to a stiffer board sometime in the future you may not have to change up your bindings – and 5/10 to 6/10 match this board well too, IMO.
Something in that range from one of the following would work well, IMO:
>>Top 5 All Freestyle Bindings
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Thanks Nate, that’s so help!
Cheers
Chris
You’re very welcome Chris. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
I started the season after a long hiatus by buying a volume-shifted powder board that ended up being way too wide for my liking and I realized that powder is far and few between here where I am located. I’m trying to find a good all-around mountain board that I can throw around way easier but still charge hard on steep groomers and lay down some deep trenches. I’m a male, US size 7 boot at 135 lbs and 5″4′ (163 cm). I would put myself at an intermediate-advanced level. I can certainly handle wider boards but the powder board I was using was about 261 mm at the inserts; it was like carving with a boat. A few good deals I’ve picked up and available local to me:
Burton Custom Camber 150
K2 Outline 149 (I have this one on hand – 249mm @ front insert, 251 @ back insert)
Yes Ghost 149
Thoughts on these? Other suggestions? Thanks, Nate!
Hi Jeff
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t tested the outline (or had anyone test it), but the size sounds the best to me. I would put you right at 149 as your “standard all-mountain” length, so all good for length, and the width would be really good for your boots, IMO. So size-wise, I’d say it’s the best option. But otherwise can’t say much about the performance of the board.
For what you’re describing, assuming your not hitting too much deep powder, the Custom Camber and YES Ghost would work really well, IMO. And length-wise the 150 Custom Camber and 149 Ghost are great lengths. But they are on the wide side for you, IMO, and without downsizing at all for the extra width, they are overall borderline big. But it would also somewhat depend on what you’re used to. But purely based on specs and how you describe your riding they’re borderline too big.
For reference:
– The Custom Camber 150 is likely to have a width at inserts around 257mm. That’s assuming a 530mm (20.9″) stance width. If you ride with a narrower stance width, it would be a little narrower than that.
– The Ghost 149 is likely to have a width at inserts around 256mm. That’s assuming a 540mm (21.3“) stance width.
If you think those sizes could work, both of those boards would work well, IMO. They won’t be great in deep powder, but will be fine for shallow powder.
Hope this helps
Nate –
I just purchased the Gentemstick Spoonfish 152 – and I’m a little concerned about the toe/heel drag on the back foot. I’m 5’9” and 150ish lbs and wear a size 9 boot (Vans Verse). The spoonfish 152 has a 252 waist, so I thought I’d have no issues – but it’s a very directional tapered board with a set back stance (what I was looking for) and the back insert width is essentially the same width as the waist (252) with maybe a mm or 2 more depending on binding placement. I would preferably like to set my stance with back foot at 0-3 degrees. When I measured the overhang on the board with my boot, I got varied results – but somewhere between 1.5 – 1.75” of total overhang (3.81 – 4.445 cm). I’m an advanced rider and like to get moderately low/aggressive with my carves. I was hoping to keep the overhang at 2cm or less on both heal and toe side. Based of your experience should I be concerned about that extra .445 cm (.22 front and back) or do you think I’m good to go? I appreciate your advice and sorry if I’m getting too nit picky on this!
– Jonathan
Hi Jonathan
Thanks for your message – and worth getting a little nit picky to make sure you get it right, IMO.
Surprising to hear that it’s the same width at the inserts! I haven’t come accross a board like that (except in a couple of cases where there was a magnitraction bump right at the waist, which made the waist sound wider than it was – and in those cases only seeing around 3mm of difference. Just to make sure – did you measure the width at the back insert from the base side of the board (outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge) or on the top sheet?
I’ve never had any issues with drag from anything less than 2.5cm of overhang, so I’d say it’s OK. Ideally 2cm or less, but more to be on the safe. In reality I haven’t experienced issues going a little over 2cm. I would say that I carve relatively deep, but nothing crazy – not getting down to eurocarve or anything.
With 9s and a 252mm back insert width, I think it sounds doable, in any case. If the Verse you have measure the same as what I measured, and in 9s, then they’re likely around 29cm, which would suggest total overhang of 3.8cm, assuming a zero degree angle.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Appreciate the info on your site! Great work! Hoping to get a little advice on what size board to consider for upgrading my set up. I’m 47, rode about a dozen times back in college, took a break for 25 years, then got a used board last year and went a dozen times in one season. Fell in love with boarding again. I definitely don’t feel like a beginner skill wise, maybe more intermediate – ride greens and blues in the Midwest, some blacks, hit smaller jumps and the occasional rail. Mostly love to carve and do side hits. Plan to get out west a few days each year also.
My used set up is just a low end 5150 Stroke 164W – 26.2cm waist I believe. I’m 6’2” 220lbs. I have new Nitro club hybrid boa boots size 13. Love the boots but want a new quality board and bindings. I’ve been looking into the Never Summer PS or Harpoon, Burton Custom FV and the Ride Warpig. From what I can see they all seem to be good options for a variety of riding styles and have wider options. A couple questions related to that.
For the NS PS with my boots etc would you recommend going with the drag free option or could I get by with just the standard wider version?
Any feedback or advice for either fit or performance on the other boards I’m considering?
Thanks for anything you can pass along.
Jason
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, in terms of length, I think you’re good around that 163/164 size for an all-mountain board. Something like the PS, which is what I would call all-mountain-freestyle, is the kind of board you can ride a bit shorter – it has quite a bit of effective edge versus overall length. So, if you can get on it width-wise, the 160X would certainly work. In terms of fitting on it width-wise, a couple of things. I would say it’s around 274mm at the inserts. This is borderline too narrow, depending on a couple of things:
1. binding angles. If you’re rocking something like +15/-15 or similar, then you’ve got a bit more leeway
2. boot profile – a lower profile boot will help you to get on a narrower board, naturally. I haven’t tested any Nitro boots, so I’m not sure how their profile compares to other boots.
3. how deep/hard you carve. If you’re rocking eurocarves or similar, then it might be pushing it for width, even if the above two things are in your favor. But if you’re not carving super deep or anything, then you don’t have to go as wide
Another clue is the board you’re currently riding. I haven’t tested anything 5150, so I don’t know what it’s like at the inserts – could be anything between 266mm and 280mm. But my guess would be that it’s fairly close to the PS. But if you wanted to check, you could measure it – take the measurement from the base of the board, from the outside of the metal edge to outside of metal edge, where the center of your bindings would be. If you haven’t had any boot drag issues on it and it’s around 274mm or less, then you’re probably pretty safe on the 160X PS.
If you have a straighter back binding angle and like to carve really deep, then you could look at the DF size. I would almost go to the 159DF if you did that though – with that extra width it’s getting pretty big, so you’d probably be good on the shorter of the 2 DF sizes.
Some things to note about the PS:
– It’s not great for powder. Anything less than a foot or so and you should be fine, but when it gets deeper, can be an effort to keep the nose above the powder (a back leg burner in deep snow).
For the Custom FV I’d say 162W. Probably around 274mm at inserts as well – so the above width conversation applies. Is a very versatile board but note that the Flying V profile, I have found, is not very good in icy conditions. Also, it has a looser feel to it. That’s not a good thing or a bad thing, but more of a preference thing. Some prefer a more stable feel – some even a really locked in feel, and others a looser feel. I would say that the PS is more stable than it is loose, but just bordering on the semi-loose side. The Custom FV is loose. I’d class the Custom FV an all-mountain board.
The Warpig and Harpoon are more what I would describe as Freeride boards. All be it, more mellow than your typical stiff freeride board. So more geared towards powder, speed, carving etc more so than anything freestyle. You can still hit side hits with them of course, but just not quite as good, IMO and less park/freestyle geared than the other 2. To help make sense of that think of it like a scale of street/jib | freestyle | all-mtn freestyle | all-mountain | freeride | powder – all-mountain boards are the most versatile, with all-mtn freestyle being almost as versatile but typically not great in powder and freeride also being fairly versatile but tend to lack the freestyle side of things.
The Warpig I would go 159 and you shouldn’t have any issues with width on that one, it’s really very wide – probably around 287mm at the inserts – so more like the DF sizes of the PS.
The Harpoon, again, I’d go 159. It’s not quite as wide though, so it’s getting on the small side for you. Width at inserts I would say is around 272mm at the back inserts and 279mm at the front inserts. It’s borderline in terms of width on the back insert and also given that it’s not wide for your boots, sizing down to 159 doesn’t really make sense. And it’s not like the PS, in terms of effective edge versus overall length – for example the 159 has a 119cm effective edge versus 123.6cm effective edge on the 160X PS.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks Nate! I’ll mull over your info, gives me several options to consider. I did also look at the list for top 10 all mountain boards since that’s really what I think fits my style best. Seems like several are on the edge of being too narrow for me. Are there 2 or 3 boards you would recommend in the all mountain intermediate category that should fit a 13 well? I have been riding +15,-9 most often. Thanks.
Hi Jason
The YES Standard is the first that springs to mind – in the 162. It’s wider than it looks. Assuming around a 560mm (22″) stance width you’d be looking at around 281mm at the inserts on that one. With a slightly wider stance, it would be even wider. I think that would be a great fit for 13s.
The Mountain Twin is also a bit wider than it looks. If you were to ride the 162W at the 600mm (23.6″) reference stance on it, it would be around 278mm at the back insert (277mm front insert). Narrower if you were to ride a narrower stance than that though, of course.
The Nitro Team Gullwing 162W is 270mm at the inserts and around 280mm on the back insert, 278mm on the front insert (assuming a 560mm (22″) stance width.
Thanks man! Will definitely check those out. Really appreciate the feedback and the website.
You’re very welcome Jason. Happy riding!
Nate, got a follow up based on your recs. I am looking into the Yes Standard, very interested in it, seems like size and design has a lot of what I’m looking for. However I’ve noticed it’s seems to be categorized as more of and advanced/expert board. I’m definitely intermediate, is this still a board that I should consider? I’m debating between this and the NS PS 159DF – really want a wide board so I don’t have to worry much about toe or heel drag. Thanks.
Hi Jason
To me, the Standard is very much an intermediate and up board. It’s still fine for more advanced rider’s but I’d consider it fine for intermediate riders. I would say mid-level intermediate riders – rather than that space of just transitioning from beginner to intermediate. But I’d say the same about the PS. The Standard is no more advanced than the PS, IMO.
Thanks a ton! Been very helpful!
You’re very welcome Jason. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
All of your reviews & feedback are amazing!! Thank you!
I was interested in getting the Gnu Gwo 159cm. I can find much information as per the sizing chart and boot sizing. I am 5″11 about 175-185lbs. My mondopoint is just between 28/28.5 so I can wear a size 10.5 or 11 boot. Would you recommend getting the 159W if I were to get the size 11’s? Thanks again for all the great work!!
Hi Sean
Thanks for your message.
With 11s, I would go to the 159W, yeah. I haven’t measured the GWO, but GNU boards typically have a small difference between waist width and width at inserts. That said, the GWO is wider at the tip and tail than other GNU/Lib Tech boards. That doesn’t always mean wider at the inserts, but usually does. So for a typical GNU twin, I’d say around 262mm at the inserts, but with the GWO, it’s likely a little wider than that. If I had to guess around 264mm at t inserts. But still narrow for 11s, IMO. You might get away with it, if you weren’t going to be doing any really deep carving, had +15/-15 binding angles or similar and had low profile 11s. Then you’d probably be fine, but otherwise it’s risking it a bit.
If you were to end up in 10.5 boots, then I think you should be all good. Only case when it might not be, is if you were really railing your carves (e.g. eurocarving) with bulky boots and a fairly flat back binding angle.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Looking at getting the Never Summer west bound in 160cm. Has a waist width of 25.7. I wear a UK 12/ US 13 boot – do you think this will work? On the website says should take a 8-12 boot….
Previously have ridden a 159cm (26 waist width) Burton bullet and havent had any issues with this.
Thanks!
Hi Tom
Thanks for your message.
Typically I’d say that it’s too narrow for US13 boot for sure. But given that you rode the Bullet with no issues, you might get away with it.
You’re looking at around 267mm at the inserts on the 160 West Bound (WB), which is likely less than on the Bullet (haven’t measured the Bullet, but based on other Burton boards, I’d say it’s at least 270mm at inserts. With 13s, you’re looking at at least a 33cm outsole, so you’re looking at a total overhang of around 6.3cm (or roughly 3.1cm for heel side and 3.1cm toe side, depending on centering of boots). That’s more than I’d typically recommend. But if you’re not railing your carves super deep, have a reasonable back binding angle and low profile boots (the 33cm prediction is based on low profile boots already though), then you might get away with it, given that you didn’t have any issues on your Bullet.
However, it’s pretty risky, IMO. Going with one of the wide sizes (if you could find one) would be recommended.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the great info. I just picked up a 2019 ride twinpig 148, I am a size 8 in boots, 5’6, and 133 lbs. I was wondering if the union stratas size M would work well with this set up? I feel like my feet may be too small so if you could help clarify things I would really appreciate it. Do you think I should have gone with a 142? The main reason I went with the 148 was because I plan on making this my daily driver and I felt like the 142 would be too playful. Also if you have any boot recommendations for this set up I am all ears!
Thanks, Seiyu
Hi Seiyu
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I probably would have said 142 for your specs. Even like 145, if that was a size. I’d say around 150 for your specs for a daily driver, if in a better width for your feet. As a wider board, sizing down is recommended. You are sizing down subtly by going to 148, but ideally would size down a bit more.
In terms of Strata, I would go with the M. You should be fine in terms of fitting your boots in there. And it’s the better size for the board. You would likely be able to get into the S binding, but given the width of the board, having the extra length in the baseplate of the M, will help to give you a little more leverage on the edges. So yeah, M for sure, IMO.
In terms of boots, I’d be looking at something around that 6/10 to 7/10 flex range to compliment both board and bindings and given you want to use it as your daily driver. Whilst the Twinpig is a little softer than medium, from what I hear (haven’t ridden it yet, but have one on the way), I think it will feel a little stiffer for you, in the 148 size. If you were to change to the 142, then a 5/10 or 6/10 flex in the boots would likely be a better bet.
Some good options in those flex ranges:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium to medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I am thinking about buying a Jones Twin Sister or Mountain Twin. I am not sure which to pick and what size would be best… I am 5’9” 150 lbs with a women’s size 10 boot.
If I go shorter I think the 151 MT might make more sense for the slightly increased waist width 24,8 (as opposed to the 152 Twin Sister with waist width 24,6). Or is it fine to ride a women’s size 10 on either of these?
And if I go longer, would it make more sense to do the women’s 155? Or men’s 154? Seems like according to the specs either should work for my boot. So maybe the women’s board would make more sense then?
I am getting conflicting advice on length generally. I am intermediate to advanced, riding weekly in Michigan and 1-2 trips out west per year. I’d love to have one board that does it all. Is 154/155 too big for me? 15+ years ago I rode a Ride 154 but boards have changed a lot since then. For the past few seasons I’ve rented or borrowed gear of varying sizes. I am just riding for fun and to get outside, athletic but risk averse as I’m getting older 🙂 Seems like most people I talk to in the midwest advise going shorter… but I’m hesitant.
Thanks in advance!
-Tanya
Hi Tanya
Thanks for your message and great questions.
I would say your length maxes out at about 153 for your specs. So, it’s not far off going to that 154/155 range, but I think 151/152 for the MT/Twin Sister makes the most sense for what you’re describing. Boards have changed a lot since then – and also sizing has changed too. It used to be mostly based on height, but weight and boots size – and how you like to ride, ability level are all, IMO, more important than height. Though I do still take height into account, it’s less important than those other factors.
Between the Twin Sister and MT in those sizes, I would say go Twin Sister 152. IMO it will be wide enough for women’s 10s. Even just based on waist width, you should get away with it width-wise, but on top of that the Twin Sister is wider at the inserts versus the waist, than the average board, so you get a bit more leeway there. The 152 will be around 260mm at the back insert and 258mm at the front insert at reference stance. Plenty wide enough for women’s 10s, IMO. Even if you were to ride it narrower than reference stance it should be all good.
I think that size would be pretty much ideal for you. The 151 MT is doable as well. But I’d be leaning 152 Twin Sister for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi really good article. I am a beginner I lean towards freestyle. I weigh 62kg, my height 5’7. Size 10 feet
and snowboard length 151.
What snowboot size should I get?
And what binding angles is ok for me? Thanks
Hi Steve
Thanks for your message.
Boot size will depend on what boots fit you best. If you’re a 10 in normal shoes, then you’ll likely be a 9.5, 10 or 10.5 in snowboard boots, depending on the brand. If you’re able to try on in person, check out the following to get an idea of what the right fit should be:
>>How to Size Snowboard Boots
If you’re unable to try on in person, the following might help:
Sizing Snowboard Boots: The Different Brands
For binding angles, it depends what feels most comfortable to you. But given that you lean towards freestyle, some kind of duck stance is a good idea (+15/-15 or similar) or even a slight duck (e.g. +18/-12). Something that makes riding switch more comfortable/natural.
I’m not sure if you’re also asking about whether the width of the board will be OK? If so, can you let me know your what board (brand, model) you have.
Hope this helps
Hello! This information is awesome! Thanks for the research! I have size 12 burton photon boots, they are a bit tight, toes feel the end but doable. Like 0 deg on back foot and looking at the NS 2022 Harpoon in 157cm length and 26.4 waist. This will be my powder, easy small park jumps, cruising with the kids board but a little concerned on width at back foot on a hi speed carve on hard snow if I take it there. That board looks sick! Thoughts? Thanks a bunch, Mike
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
I rode the 156, which was 270mm at the back insert. Which is pretty borderline for 12s, IMO. The 159 would be around 272mm at the back insert, which is still be borderline for 12s, IMO. Having Burton boots does help your case though, being low profile, but that 0 degree back binding angle doesn’t help.
I measured the Photon at around 2.6cm longer than mondo, making the 12 likely around 32.6cm long. With the width at inserts being around 272mm on the back insert, you’re looking at around 5.4cm of overhang. Depending on how you get your boots centered that’s roughly 2.7cm (just over 1″) of overhang on the heel and toe. Which is pushing it, if you’re going to be carving quite deep. One thing that’s in your favor with Burton boots, other than just the shorter profile, is that they have a higher toe bevel on the boot than the average boot – meaning you can carve at a deeper angle than you’d be able to with a lesser toe bevel (average of all the boots I’ve measured for toe bevel is 2.4cm – the Photon I measured was 3.4cm – this isn’t a super accurate measurement, but there is definitely more toe bevel on them than the average boot). Whether that’s enough to let you get away with it is hard to say, but that does work in your favor.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hello Nate,
im a 191cm 90kg guy looking for a new board. I had the burton instigator 165wide and it just feels way to long. Im curious what is the smallest size that wont be to short for me. Currently looking at 157w burton freethinker or 159 killroy. Im just concerned that the board will be impossible to handle at higher speeds although i feel the 165 is way to big and hard to manouver. Thanks for the reply.
Hi Jure
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think 165 is a little big. I’d say 163 at most, assuming an advanced level, for an all-mountain board. But you could definitely size down from that for a number of reasons – 1. personal preference 2. if you’re riding freestyle a lot and/or trees, then sizing down a bit can help 3. Beginners and to lesser extent intermediate riders can benefit from sizing down a bit.
I probably wouldn’t go shorter than 158 – and only that short if you’re going to be predominantly riding freestyle and/or trees. The smaller you go the more you will affect your stability at speeds. But that said, there are other factors that can affect your stability at speed – like how stiff the board is. With the Instigator being a very soft board, going to a stiffer board, even if you go shorter, you want loose any and probably still gain some stability at speed, depending on how short you were to go.
The Freethinker is quite an aggressive board – a big step up from the Instigator. Going down to 157 would mellow it out though – and for your specs, I think you’d feel that size a little softer flexing than I did. It’s getting on the small side for you, but doable, just. Just don’t expect it to be quite as stiff/aggressive as I found it (which might be a good thing, depending on how stiff you wanted to go). The Freethinker is also full camber, so you’d be getting that more technical ride – less forgiving of errors than something like the Instigator. But if you feel like your technique is in a good enough place it’s an option – and going 157W would, as I said, certainly mellow it out a bit.
Which Kilroy model are you thinking? Kilroy Twin? Kilroy 3D? I take it you’re looking for something with a freestyle flavor?
Also if you could let me know your boot size? That would help to confirm sizing as well.
Hope this helps
Thanks a lot for the reply you’re a true gem. My style consists of a lot of mid to high speed rides with buttering, hitting side jumps and I got solid on riding switch thats why I want a true twin. I basically wanna ride with style and integrate butters to all my rides as best as I can. I also like the occasional powder and tree run but its not the main thing for me.I am not a big fan of ultra high non stop carving speed rides and big jumps. . With the instigator I could feel the softness not helping during higher speed runs and I couldnt butter with confidence because of the directional shape. Also I feel my technique is good enough to handle a more advanced board and am ready to move forward.
I was looking at killroy process but I find it a bit too soft as I dont mind putting in a little bit more effort to bend a stiffer board If that means getting more stability on the faster runs.
I wear a US size 12 on BURTON MISSION EST BRKY L.
I want to add that I stumbled on this page and I cant stress enough how grateful I am. You really are a uniqe person and page to reply to all shreders in need of advice and been doing this for years. Hats off to you sir and your org thank you in advance for your intake.
Hi Jure
Thanks for the kind words!
Yeah for what you’re describing, the Kilroy Process would be a bit too soft, IMO. And it sounds like you should be able to handle the Freethinker fine, particularly as it won’t feel super stiff to you in the 157W. With 12s, definitely the wide version.
It’s certainly on the smaller side for your specs, but for your riding style it could work. I’d say it will be fine in the trees, because of that smaller size, it should be maneuverable enough. But when there’s deep powder (whether in the trees or not) it’s probably going to be hard work. Even in a bigger size it wouldn’t be a great powder floater – and going smaller will only make it worse in that sense. But in shallower powder it should still be OK and if you’re not worried about how it performs in deeper powder, then I think it can work in that size.
Hello Nate,
I just bought a Burton Ripcord Flat Top 159 cm for my boyfriend as present. We are both beginners and have rode only rented boards previously. He is 180 cm, 72 kg and wears boot size 9.5 us (43 eu).
According to the specs on Burton site, size 159 cm for this board goes with binding size L, however it looks like an M would fit him better. I’m not sure how the binding size affects the board stability and so on.
Do you think it would be a problem to use bindings size M on this board or should he go for L? I would really appreciate your input, I’m at a loss on this one.
Thanks,
Ioana
Hi Ioana
Thanks for your message.
When looking at binding sizing, I first look at the boot to binding match. If you could go either size based on your boot size, then I look at the board. When it comes to matching with the board, if it’s a wider board, then the large binding tends to work better. A longer baseplate just gives you a bit more leverage on the edges of the board. When it comes to Burton bindings, they tend not to be that long in the baseplate, so I would also say L for a Burton binding on the 159 Flat Top, ideally. For some other brands an M would be fine. But for a 9.5 boot, he is better off going Medium in the bindings, IMO. It will be a better boot fit – and that outweighs the advantages of the little bit of extra leverage he would get from going with the large binding, IMO.
As a side note, I think he would have been better going with the 157 Ripcord. 159 isn’t way off, so he should be fine, but ideally I would have gone 157.
Hope this helps
Thanks a lot, this is really helpful.
Ioana
You’re very welcome Ioana.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking at a Salomon Sight 153, I have UK size 10 feet and I’m using Burton Ruler UK 10 boots, however with the Shrinkage Reduction Technology the footprint comes out at a UK size 9.
With a pair medium bindings (Burton Mission)-would this be ok???
Many thanks,
Lewis
Hi Lewis
Thanks for your message.
Even with lower profile boots in that size, it’s still borderline too narrow. If you’re a beginner and not really going to be railing your carves yet or anything and you’ve got +15/-15 binding angles or similar, then I think you should be fine, you’ll get away with it, IMO. If you’re really leaning into your carves and/or have straighter binding angles, you could be risking boot drag there. No worries with the binding size on their, but the bindings won’t make your boots any shorter.
Hope this helps
What a nice article. Looks like having US 7 boot size my “dream” to ride the Jones Mountain Twin (248 waist width) won’t come true.
Hi Max
Thanks for your message.
The 151 Mountain Twin would be wide for your boots, IMO. But depending on your specs it might still work. For boards that are too wide, sizing down length-wise often helps. If you could let me know your height and weight, your ability level and how you like to ride (e.g. aggressive or more playful? Trees? Park? Butters? Powder? High speed mostly or more slower speeds? etc – anything you can tell me about your riding helps) – then I can give you my opinion as to whether the 151 could work in the Mountain Twin. And if I don’t think it would work, I can look for other options that I think would work, if you’d like?
Nate,
I’m 136 lbs, 5’6″.
By the way. I can’t center my boots with burton cartels size S perfectly. I have 2cm overhang on the heel side and 1cm overhang on the toes side. The bindings just can’t be shifted towards toes more. I don’t feel buch problems with it but if it makes sence I can switch to Union which are more ajustable. What do you think?
Thank you.
I’m considering MT as an all-mountain daily driver. I have specific boards for park and pow days.
Hi Max
For your specs, I think 151 is a good length, but with it being wide for your boots, overall it’s on the bigger side. But if you’re an experienced rider and are used to a certain size, it could still work. What are the sizes of the boards you have currently?
In terms of that overhang, I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Ideally centered, but if you’re going to have more overhang on one edge or the other, I personally prefer to have a bit more on the heel, so I’d be fine with that kind of difference. I wouldn’t want any more difference than that. If it was like 2.5cm heel and 0.5 cm toe, I wouldn’t be comfortable with that personally. So I think that’s the biggest “off center” that I’d go, but I’d be fine with that.
Great, I thought any “off-center” is bad. I have Jones Hovercraft 148 (ww249) for pow and carving. It is relatively slow edge to edge. It’s not playful. I’m so happy in pow.
Never Summer Evo 147 (ww 241) for flat tricks, jib, kickers, and so on. It feels like slippers. I don’t even notice I have a board on my feet. I’ve been using it as an all-mountain. Now I want smth more stable, a bit stiffer and with camber under feet.
Aside from the MT I’m considering Capita DOA which appearance I like more and specs fit me better (150/ww246). But I’ve heard many opinions that the MT works better for the way I want to ride.
Hi Max
Centered is the ideal, but a little off I find is OK.
Yeah DOA is better size for sure. Could work, depending on what you’re after. MT is better in powder, uneven terrain and is more buttery (IMO). But both are similar for speed and carving. DOA a little better for jumps and riding switch. DOA is what I consider all-mountain-freestyle, with the MT more all-mountain (aka do-it-all).
Another all-mountain option worth looking at is the YES Standard, which comes in a 149. It is on the wider side for you still. It’s 245mm at the waist, but roughly 257mm at the inserts. For reference, I’d say the MT 151 would be roughly 261mm at the inserts and the DOA 150 more like 254mm at the inserts. This all based on a roughly 22″ stance width. With a narrower stance width, you could take some length off these. Roughly 2mm for every 1.5″ of stance narrowing. So, If you were riding at more like 20-21″ for your stance width, then the Standard more like 255mm, DOA 252mm, MT 259mm.
The Hovercraft is likely (haven’t ridden it or measured it, so can’t be sure but at a guess based on other Jones boards) more like 260mm+ at inserts and the Evo (again a guess as I never rode it) more like 248-249mm based on other Never Summer boards. I think that Evo is a really good width for you – and you could even go a little narrower than that too. But given you probably want to go a little bigger for your all-mountain board, I think something like the Standard 149 could work – I think you could definitely ride 151, if it was in a good width – around that 250mm or less at the inserts. With the Standard it’s a little wider than that, but you get that little bit of a size down in the length.
The other option is the Capita OSL 150 (242mm waist) – roughly 253mm at the inserts – but that’s based on a 22″ reference, so more like 250-251mm probably, assuming your stance width is a little narrower than that. It’s a little softer flexing than the others (MT, Standard and DOA I felt all at around 6/10 flex, the OSL more like 5/10 flex) but the sizing is really good.
Other option is looking at women’s boards, if you were OK with that. But all good if you didn’t want to, as I think one of those (DOA (depending), Standard or OSL) should work well in your quiver.
Nate – Thank you for the great information. Apparently I’ve been on a slightly too narrow board for the past 15+ years & would love your input/advice for my next purchase. I’m 49 years old, looking for an all-mountain board for groomers, trees + some park, in that order.
I’m 6’3″ 215 lbs with a 11.5 boot (Ride Boa, not sure the model name). I’ve been on a Ride Timeless which, as I said is old, and is old school true camber. I’m just a little over 3/4″ overhang heel and toe.
Considering Jones Mountain Twin 165W, Arbor Crosscut Camber 165MW, possibly Arbor Brian Iguchi Pro Camber 163MW… and am open to any all suggestions. Thanks in advance! Keep up the great work!
Chris
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
Around 3/4″ of boot overhang actually sounds OK to me. What size Timeless do you have?
But if you were looking to change anyway, I think the sizes that you’re mentioned for those boards should work well for your specs and how you describe your riding. I haven’t ridden the Crosscut Camber, but based on other Arbor boards I’ve ridden, that (and the Brian Iguchi Pro Camber) will feel the closest to full camber, if you were looking to stick with a similar feel in that sense. The Mountain Twin is still camber underfoot, so the feel isn’t going to be as different as if you went for something like a Hybrid Rocker (rocker between the feet and camber to tips and tails) but you get some rocker towards the tips and tails – which gives a more forgiving feel – and also improves powder float.
Of the 3 boards, the Mountain Twin is the softer flexing (6/10 by my feel) and the most easy going/forgiving. The Brian Iguchi Camber, more like 7/10 and based on specs of the Crosscut Camber, probably around 7/10 as well. Sounds like you’ve quite an old model of the Timeless – and I think they’ve been around since the early 2000s, so I don’t know how yours feels. I rode the 2018 model of the Timeless (the 2019 model was the last time they made it), which was the stiffest board I’ve ridden. So that model I found super stiff. Not sure how your model would compare to that – and of course it won’t be as stiff now after riding it for so many years. But if it was close to as stiff as the 2018 model was, then just wanted to note that you’d be looking at a big difference in flex going to something like the Mountain Twin and all round just a way more forgiving, easy going ride. Whether that would be too much of a chance from what you’re used to is the big question.
I think it depends on how aggressively you want to be riding. If you want to really bomb and lay down big carves, then it’s probably going to be too forgiving for you, but if you’re riding more casual (doesn’t have to be super casual, the MT can handle some speed), then it could be a good fit. If you’re still looking to ride quite aggressively and don’t want as drastic a difference to your current board, then Crosscut Camber or Bryan Iguchi Camber would be your better bets, IMO. Between those 2, I think it depends on whether you want to prioritize stability at speed over maneuverability at slow speeds (e.g. trees) and park. Size for size, they’re probably pretty equal, but with the Iguchi being a little smaller, it will be a little easier to maneuver and take through the park. You wouldn’t loose much in terms of stability at speed, but you’d loose some versus the Crosscut Camber 165W, I would imagine. But again, this is based on specs and experience with other Arbor boards, as I have yet to ride the Crosscut Camber. Also overall, the Iguchi would be a little better for park, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the reply! My Timeless is a 164 & is a 2004 model (give or take a year). It has really held up over the years.
Lots to consider here as I didn’t think about the Jones MT being not stiff enough, as I would like to stay somewhat within the same range of my current board. Also, it seems with an 11.5 boot I’m kind of right in the middle of the standard vs wide or mid-side decision… and agree the 3/4″ hasn’t been a problem, so maybe a standard width is actually the right call for me.
I probably need to check them out in person and/or demo before pulling the trigger.
Thanks again – really appreciate the advice.
You’re very welcome Chris.
If you liked the idea of the Mountain Twin but wanted stiffer, check out the Ultra Mountain Twin – it’s pretty much literally just a stiffer version of the Mountain Twin.
First off, thank you for this post it has been super helpful. I am looking at getting a 159 Gnu Antigravity and am having a hard time deciding between the 257 and 267 waist width.
Here are some of my specs:
Height – 6-1
Weight – 185
Shoe Size – 11
Boot – Vans Hi-Standard Pro
I am currently riding a 156 Skate Banana with a waist width of 265 (which I ride with a duck stance). I know its only 2 cm larger, but 267 seems like a pretty wide board to me. I probably won’t ride this switch too often, and am going to set my bindings neutral; 15-18 degrees for the front and somewhere around 0 for the back. To me, the 267 is going to make it hard to initiate turns, but on the other hand, I may have too much toe and heel drag with the 257. I am leaning towards the 257 because that is bigger than most regular boards and I don’t think I will have too much overhang? I figured I would get an expert decision before making the purchase!
Thank you!
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
GNU/Lib Tech boards tend to have a small amount of difference between the waist width and width at inserts and the antigravity is no exception. At the inserts, the 159 is around 265mm at the front insert and 264mm at the back insert, so it’s not as wide as the waist width suggests (on average boards are around 10mm wider at the insets compared to the waist). IMO, that’s too narrow for 11s, particularly given that you’ll be riding with a 0 degree back binding angle.
The 159W, though sounds quite wide with a 267mm waist, is likely around 274mm at the back insert, 275mm at the front. This isn’t massively wide for 11s, IMO. With 10s, I tend to ride boards with insert widths between 260mm and 265mm – sometimes a little narrower and sometimes a little wider. With 11s, that’s the rough equivalent of 270mm-275mm. So I think the 159W is the better bet, based on that.
Your Skate Banana will likely be the same thing. I haven’t had a chance to measure the Skate Banana yet, but it’s very likely to have a similar difference between waist and inserts (though the inserts will be the same width at front and back, being a twin). So you would still likely be going a couple of mm wider at the inserts versus your Skate Banana (if you wanted to double check, measure at the base of the board, from outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge, at the middle holes that your bindings surround). But with that flat back binding angle you go with, I think that should be fine. The 159W Antigravity is in a good range for 11s, IMO, even if at the wider end of that range.
Note also that waist-width itself can also affect how turns feel, but width at inserts is important as that’s where your feet actually are – and it’s from your feet that you apply leverage to the edges.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you so much! I am glad I reached out before buying the board, could have been bad!
Again thank you,
Matt
You’re very welcome Matt. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hello,
I rode the article and I’m happy to found it.
I have a 12 size Burton Photon Boot with 32,5-33cm profile. My new Never Summer proto synthesis df 162 has a waist around 29,5 cm where the boot will be attached.
My overhang with the boot at the toeside is around 2cm and at the heelside around 1 cm.
Someone told my, the board is too wide but in some videos or tutorials the guys are standing in the same way or it looks like.
I’m very tall, 198cm…
What do du mean, is the board perfect for me or too wide? I don’t want to get a bootout.
Eurocarving is not importend but I like to make some good deeper carves, also I wanna ride some rails and boxes…
Thx and greetings from Germany 🇩🇪.
Sven
Hi Sven
Thanks for your message.
So you have the 162DF then, if it’s that wide at the inserts. It is on the wide side for 12s, but that said, I think you could get away with it. With lower profile boots like the Photon, when there is no concern with boot out, it’s really your foot size that matters the most in terms of it being too wide or not. If your feet are around 30cm, then I think you will be fine. Some people end up in boots too big for them – or just the fit only works in boots that are quite long for their foot size. If you have a foot size around 29cm, then I think the board will be too wide for you.
If you do end up keeping it, I would try to shift the overhang a little bit though – if your bindings can do it – so that you’ve either got even overhang (1.5cm toe, 1.5cm heel) or a little more towards the heel (e.g. 2cm heel, 1 cm toe), rather than the other way around.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
thx for answer!
My Boots fits me very good, they are not too big. I guess I’m a bit between this wide board and other boards with my foot/boot length. I have the Burton Genesis Binding and i can try to shift the binding a bit more to the heel. But with the Combo-Disc I’m quite limited with the setting.
If i compare my Boots on the Proto Synthesis DF to the setting help in this article, i would say it goes well togehter. 1.5 cm overhang on both sides should be working…my feelings.
If i would take this board (163x) in a less wide size, it would be 26.6 cm width waist, and i dont know how is the width at the inserts. Maybe 1.5cm more like the DF?
I’m also interesting in the Capita Superdoa in 163w with 26.3 cm width waist and the GNU Riders Choice 162w with 26.8 cm width waist. But i dont know the width at the inserts. I guess the width will be too short for me and i risk a bootout or feel the boot in the snow…
Do you know the width at the inserts (last inserts to noise and tail) for these bords?
Should i try the DF?
Sven
Hi Sven
Firstly width at inserts for the boards you mentioned, roughly:
– PS 163X: 275mm at inserts
– Super DOA 163W: 273mm at inserts
– Riders Choice 162W: 276mm at inserts
But those are all based on a narrower width than you’re likely to riding those sizes. So you can add at least 2mm to those and depending on stance width could potentially add more.
– PS 163X: 277mm at inserts
– Super DOA 163W: 275mm at inserts
– Riders Choice 162W: 278mm at inserts
With Burton boots (which have a fair bit of boot bevel, as well as being lower profile, I think you’d likely get away with those widths, depending on binding angles. If you’re riding like +15/-15, then I think you’d be fine on the PS 163X and RC 162W. The Super DOA might be pushing it though. I would err towards the narrower width of these over the 162DF PS. If you were going to be Eurocarving and especially if you were going to be Eurocarving AND had something close to zero degrees on your back binding angle, then I’d be leaning more to DF.
Also, I would predict the 162DF to be more like 290mm, plus at least 2mm for a wider stance width = 292mm. So if it’s more like 295mm, then you might even be at 280mm on the PS 163X, which I think would be wide enough.
Hi,
thank you very much for your point of view. It could be that the PS is less as 29.5cm width.
Did you rode the Never Summer PS and the GNU Riders Choice or GNU RCC3?
What Board is more fun for butters, rails, little jumps, carving, agressive ride, forgiven board ?
The PS has a rocker in the middle and camber under the Bindings. How is the nose and tail? Will I not get stuck with this board so quickly?
Sven
Hi Sven
I have ridden all of those boards.
The RC C3 is the most aggressive ride of all 3, but it’s still not ultra aggressive. The Rider’s Choice is the most playful of the 3, with the PS in the middle. The Rider’s Choice is quite playful and the most forgiving of the 3, but you can still ride it relatively aggressively. I’d say that the Rider’s Choice is also the best for butters and rails. RC C3 best for jumps, IMO, but all 3 are great for jumps. For more details, you can check out my reviews of them:
>>Never Summer PS Review
>>GNU Rider’s Choice Review
>>GNU RC C3 Review
The PS has rocker between the bindings, camber under the bindings and towards the tip and tail, then goes flat just before the contact points. The RC C3 and Rider’s Choice also have rocker between the feet and then camber underfoot and towards the tip and tail. But on the RC C3, the rocker between the bindings is very subtle – it’s mostly camber. It’s also pretty subtle on the PS – it’s more camber than it is rocker for sure. The Rider’s Choice I would say is also more camber than rocker, but it has the most rocker of all 3 options.
I didn’t really understand what you mean by “Will I not get stuck with this board so quickly?”
Just wanted to thank you, the charts were a big help in purchasing my first set of new boots and new board prior to this season.
Yours seems to be the most in depth treatment of this issue out there!
You’re very welcome Nate. Hope you have an awesome season when it rolls around!
Hi Nate,
I first want to say thank you so much for this article. I am on my second time reading the entire article just trying to digest all the amazing information. I feel I am in a very difficult situation and I am hoping you can help me with finding the best snowboard that I can buy as my first snowboard.
Here is my specs;
Weight: 190 lbs (90kg)
Height: 6’4”
Boots: Size 15 (Burton Freestyle imprint 2)
Bare foot size: 32cm
I did some researches and got some informations from people who works at the ski rental shop or somewhere similar and they did not satisfied me enough and I realized that I need some pro advice from somebody like you. I usually cruise around but I have always rented a different boards at different places. Time to get a good one for me!! So I know I definitely need a “wide” board but I am not sure if should I go “double wide”.
I have a rental guy that send me this board and sent this message “ The board is a 154 because of the blunted tips at each end meaning the cut off with the square ditch the board is actually a 159 effective edge which means it’s a 159 just the tips which never have contact with the snow have it cut down to 154 to give the board a shorter feel without sacrificing any of the actual length of the effect of edge of the 159.” The board is “Gılson” brand. I can send you the pictures thru e-mail if you like to check it out. I could not make sure on the dimensions of the board.
I would be so happy to get some board advices from you.
Thank you in advance.
Hi Mehmet
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, with regards to the blunted tip/tail board. For sure a 154 can sometimes have the effective edge of a typical 159 (and can also be the case visa versa) – and that can be fine, depending on what you’re looking for. Typically blunted tip/tail boards are best for riding freestyle – you get that same effective edge, but have less board to swing around for spins etc. The biggest downside to blunted tip/tail, is riding powder – or slush or chunder or anything like that. The tip/tail of the board doesn’t have contact with the snow on a perfect groomer or nicely groomed park. But when things get messier – and particularly for powder, having a really blunted tip and tail can have you sinking pretty quick. The 154 with an effective edge typical of a 159, might ride like a 159 on a nicely groomed run, but get it in powder and it will feel like a 154 in powder!
So it kind of depends if you’ll be wanting to ride this board in powder or not – or even slush or anything like that. Also to note, that a lot of boards differ in effective edge versus length. There’s not like a set effective edge for a 159 or anything like that. There’s a wide range of effective edges for 159s depending on the board. There’s a typical range, but it’s not like “most 159s have xx effective edge” or anything like that.
Now to sizing:
With 15s, you will want to go quite wide. Wider than a typical wide, unless certain factors play in. e.g. if you ride with +15/-15 angles or similar, have low profile boots (which you do), and don’t really carve that deep/aggressive (i.e. not getting that high on your edges), then you can get away with something a little narrower.
But I would be leaning going wider than a typical wide board.
Given that your boots are going to be around 35.5cm on the outersole, I would try not to go narrower than 29cm at the inserts of a board, which means, depending on the baord, going at least 275mm at the waist, and likely at least 280mm. Even then you don’t want to be someone that carves too hard (e.g. euro carving) or you could still run into issues.
I’m going to infer that you’re about an intermediate level. But correct me if I have that assumption wrong.
Some options for boards that I think will be wide enough and suit your height/weight specs and your riding style:
– Never Summer Proto Synthesis 159DF (280mm waist width) – you could also look at the 162DF as well – DF stands for Drag Free – it’s there ultra wide sizing. This is what I’d call all-mountain-freestyle – but you certainly don’t have to do any freestyle on it. It’s good for just riding groomers. Doable in powder, but if you’re riding deep powder, not as good.
– Never Summer West Bound 160DF (284mm waist) – this isn’t getting a 2022 model, so you’d have to try to find a 2021 model. This would be the better option, if you were riding more powder.
– Ride Warpig 158 (277mm waist width) – this could be borderline too narrow still, but might be doable.
– Lib Tech Stump Ape 160W (283mm waist width) – this is a more powder oriented board though
There are other options too, but they tend to be more powder specialist. There’s also other options that are a little more advanced. So, if you’re more of an advanced rider, let me know and I can show a few more there.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate thanks for the excellent advice. Yes, as you guessed, I’m at an intermediate level.
First of all, I really liked Never Summer Proto Synthesis. I was particularly attracted to the fact that it was drag free, but I was not sure about its size. I think it feels like I can stay more balanced on the 162 than 159. But the other thing is that the waist width is 280, which made me a little worried. Do you think it will have a big impact? But I loved the board.
Secondly;
Never Summer West Bound 160DF is my second favorite board and has a 284mm waist which is wider than Lib tech stumb ape but the board literally out of stock in almost everyshop. I will have to look that up again.
You also mentioned that Lib tech Stumb ape is more powder oriented.. Would that be problem on groomers ? Also you know big size is means more weight so do you have any idea which board is would be the ligthest ?
Hi Mehmet
For your boot size, I wouldn’t be too worried about a 280+ waist width. You will have plenty of leverage on the edges of the board, so it shouldn’t feel like a boat. If you’re really worried about maneuverability, then sizing to the 159DF, I don’t think you’d have any maneuverability issues. And it should be stable enough at that length for you (the PS has quite a lot of effective edge versus overall length – not super blunt tip and tail, but quite blunt). Also, if you’re worried about weight, going 159DF will be a little lighter than 162DF. You will sacrifice some stability at speed with 159DF versus 162DF, but you will gain maneuverability and ease of riding. And the 159DF definitely shouldn’t feel unstable at your specs, IMO.
Yeah no 2022 model for West Bound, so it will be harder to find – I haven’t seen any DF sizes in the West Bound available.
Stump Ape has quite a lot of taper and is super directional. The downside on groomers is that it’s harder to ride switch (if you ride switch at all or want to learn) and with all that taper some people find that the tail can wash out a little, when you’re doing big carves. It’s great for in tight places, like trees when you’ve got to quickly kick the tail out – but when you’re properly carving on groomers, you don’t want that tail skidding out.
Neither Lib Tech nor Never Summer have super light boards and I haven’t weighed the PS, West Bound or Stump Ape, so I can’t say how they compare to each other. If you’re worried about weight, then erring on a slightly smaller of the options – like PS is probably the way to go.
another board would be the k2 party platter the largest version is 28 width and still below 160 in length. If you want a true twin check out the spring break powder twin.
Hope it could help
Hey Nate,
Important details I left out…..6’2 170lbs size 10 boot.
So I measured the backside of the board, straight across the width of the board, between the inserts. So 3 sets of inserts above the tape and three sets below and I got just a hair over 27cm, a bit narrower in the back. Not really worried about the back foot. When I put my foot on the backside of the board across the inserts at about 15 degrees there’s maybe 1cm tops of space. With the boot strapped into the board it looks to be about perfect. Seems to be a bit more heel overhang than toe but I can adjust the binding. Honestly it looks to be a good fit I’m not too worried about it anymore. Only problem is that I have to stare at it for another four months before I can ride it lol.
Thanks for taking the time to respond man. I really appreciate it.
Joe
Hi Joe
Thanks for the follow up.
In terms of length, I think your right on for your specs for that length for that board, so all good there, IMO.
In terms of width, it’s on the wider side for 10s, and if it was a wider wide board, I’d be more concerned, but with the 2021 Essential Service being not that wide for a wide board, I think you’ll be fine. Around that 27cm at the inserts is definitely at the wide end of the range, IMO, but you probably get away with it. If you find it an effort to change edges, then you might want to consider going narrower, but I think you’ll prob be OK.
In the case of too much overhang, I would usually say having a bit more heel than toe overhang is a good thing (because toe drag is more likely than heel drag), but in your case with too much overhang not being an issue, if you can center up the overhang, I would do that. If you can’t then a little more on the heel edge is all good – just get it as close to centered as you can.
Hope you have a sick time on it, when the snow starts falling again!
Hey Nate,
I just bought a Gnu Essential Service 159w from a local shop. I went there three different times and two of the sales people led me to this board and a third salesmen said it would work just fine for me. After finding this page I’m a little concerned that the board may be too wide for me. I snowboarded for close to ten years through my teens and am now just getting back into the sport at 36. I bought a pair of 32 TM-2’s that fit me well. I havent bought bindings yet. When I stand on the board with bare feet at 0 degrees my feet are just about flush from toe to heel with maybe a 1 to half cm total overhang. However when I put either foot to about 15 degrees there’s probably a solid cm of underhang between toe and heel on both feet. However with the boots on the board, and tilted roughly 15 degrees there’s maybe a total of about 1cm overhang between the heel and the toe, so maybe 0.5cm on each side. The board measures about 27.75cm straight across the front inserts and about 26 and a quarter across the back inserts, board measures 26cm at the waist. Did I buy too wide of a board?
Thanks for the great website.
Joe
Hi Joe
It certainly sounds on the wide side to me but nothing outrageously wide or anything. If you could clarify a few things for me.
1. When you observed the overhang and underhand of your feet – did you observe it compared to the top sheet of the board or the base. The important measurement here is at the base, rather than the topsheet (and there’s an angle from the top sheet to the outside of the metal edge on the base). If you measured to the top sheet’s edge, then there’s a stronger chance that this board is too wide.
2. Your measurements for the width at inserts, I just want to clarify, because I have quite different readings. For the 159 (non-wide) version I have measurements of 256mm at the back inserts and 258mm at the front inserts. So I would predict that for the 159W it would be more like 266mm-267mm on the back insert and 268-269mm on the front insert. You have around 262mm on the back and 278mm on the front insert, so it’s a much bigger difference between front and back insert than I would be expecting.
a. did you measure at the base of the board or the top sheet?
b. at what location did you measure? I would typically measure at around the reference stance, which is likely where the center of your bindings will be. So when you look at the inset pack (set of 2 x 6 holes) the set of holes that are the 3rd in from the center of the board on both front and back insert. If this isn’t where you measured from, if you can measure from there (but on the base side of the board), that would be great.
3. Can you also let me know your boot size. I can work out roughly how long the boots are from the size and the model of boots (I have measured TM-2s fairly recently). Also if you could measure your feet that would be helpful too.
The Essential Service (2021 model) isn’t super wide for a wide board, so depending on those measurements and on your boot/foot size, it might be OK, but if you can clarify those things that would be great.
Note that the 2022 model is a completely different beast (but I’m assuming you’ve got the 2021 model there, as there isn’t a 159W in the 2022 model and also because the 2022 model isn’t tapered, so there shouldn’t be much difference between front insert and back insert).
Hey Nate,
Thanks for an incredible article! I’ve been reading through your comments about your recommendations but was curious your thoughts about my next setup. I’ve been riding for about 15 years and I’m 6’2” 185 pounds with a size 12 foot. I ride mostly park, but love to charge the groomers and escape to the back bowls on powder days.
I’m currently looking to purchase some Burton Ion’s and having a really tough time choosing the size of my next board. The nitro team pro 162 wide looks perfect for my foot size, but a little worried about the board size for the park. I’m also considering something around 160 wide as well, but unsure about the minimum waist width. I typically set my bindings 10, -5 but that can change depending on the type of snow i’m riding.
Cheers!
Hi Sam
Thanks for your message.
I think, given that you’re predominantly riding the park, that sizing down a little in terms of length from 162 makes sense. I think that would be a good all-mountain size, and I think that you’d like that size for the powder days in the back bowls, but like it as much in the park. Given that it sounds like you spend more time in the park than anywhere else, I think sizing down from that a bit is a good idea. I think around 159/160 would work.
In terms of width, you can get away with going a little narrower if you’re going to be getting Burton Ions (quite low profile). And it will also depend on your riding style. If you like to get really deep into your carves (e.g. eurocarves), then you’ll need to go a little wider than if you don’t go super deep. It’s pretty tough to put an exact minimum waist width on it, since boards differ at the width at the inserts versus waist width, so the charts are a rough estimate.
For the Team Pro I would go 159W for what you’re describing, and for that board, it should be fine width-wise particularly with Ions. I would be confident on that board with those boots. I’m not hitting any eurocarves, but I like to try to get relatively deep on carves. So yeah if you like the Team Pro and your only concern is the size, then I think that’s a good option, but I’d opt for the 159W in your case, based on how you describe your riding.
This is assuming you’re looking for a one board quiver of course. I think that’s the best balance size-wise for everything you want to do, given you spend more time in the park.
Hope this helps with your decision
Awesome, thanks so much for that Nate! I’ll shoot for something around 159-160W. I’ll put the eurocarves on hold until I can afford two boards. Thanks again for your thoughts!
You’re very welcome Sam. Hope you have a great season!
Hi Nate
Thanks a lot for this very helpful article. I’m uncertain a bit by choosing the right Jones Solution Splitboard in terms of if I should go for the wide version or not. And I would be very happy if you could tell me your opinion.
I’m around 82kg / 180 lbs and have a Deeluxe Spark XV Boot from year 19/20. The boot has a bigger footprint than my past boots, the boot is size US 10 (EU43, Mondo 28cm). I also ride in late spring on hard snow and steep terrain and I want avoid heel or toe drag.
Would you go with the Solution 164 (Waist Width 254, Tip 299, Tail 286) or the 162wide (Waist Width 263, Tip 307, Tail 294)?
Thank you a lot in advance and best regards
Renzo
Hi Renzo
Thanks for your message.
I would personally be confident width-wise on the 164, with 10s. But I haven’t ridden Deeluxe boots, so I’m not sure how big the footprint is. If it’s really big then it might be pushing it. You definitely won’t have any issues on your front foot. The 164 Solution is around 271mm at the inserts (assuming using the reference stance width of 600mm). The back insert will be more like 266mm. That’s a width I’d certainly be comfortable with personally with average or low profile boots, depending on binding angles.
If you’re riding with a very straight angle on the back foot (e.g. 0 degrees, 3 degrees), you’re leaning hard into your carves and the Deeluxe Spark have a particularly large footpring, then I would go 162W. If you ride with a good bit of angle on your back foot (e.g. 9-15 degrees), then that gives you a bit more leeway. Still if you like to really lean into your carves and those boots have a large footprint, it’s still borderline though. If you can let me know the length of your boots (by placing the heel against a wall and using something to form a straight line down from the toe of the boot and measuring from the wall to that point – hope that makes sense!) that would help too.
(note that this is all based on the Flagship as I haven’t ridden the Solution, but with the Solution being the split version of the Flagship, the same dimensions apply)
Hello Nate
Thank you a lot for your answer and your expertise, I appreciate it a lot.
I’ve measured my boot, and the footprint of it is 317 mm / 12.5 inches. My backfoot angle is +14 degrees (front foot 25 degrees).
Would you recommend the 164 with this footprint and binding angle?
Thank you a lot for your time and best regards
Renzo
Hi Renzo
With a 14 degree angle I would be confident on a lower profile boot, but that is quite a bulky boot. I find the average is around 3cm over mondo. With a mondo of 28, that’s 3.7cm over Mondo, which is quite a lot. You’re looking at total overhang of around 5.1cm (straight across). With your binding angle, you can take a bit off that, but you’re still borderline. If it was more like 4.4cm overhang (i.e. 3cm over mondo for the boots), then I’d be confident to pull the trigger on the 164. I think you probably still get away with it, but it’s riskier for sure.
I would probably still go 164 over 162W, if it was me, because I’ve ridden with that kind of overhang and haven’t had issues – and because I don’t typically like the feel of wide boards, but I would be setting it up so that I had a bit more overhang on the heel edge than the toe edge (can tend to get a deeper carve on my toe edge). Not so that it’s too much different, but a little extra on the heel edge.
Hello Nate
Thank you a lot for your answer and opinion. You helped me a lot and I will go with the 164.
It is really a bulky boot, but very comfortable for my feet.
Thank you and best regards
Renzo
You’re very welcome Lonzo. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hi Nate,
I first want to say thank you so much for this article. I cannot thank you enough for this as it has given me some hope. I am on my second time reading the entire article just trying to digest all the amazing information. I feel I am in a very difficult situation and I am hoping you can help me.
I am a 33 year old male and Beginner-Intermediate snowboarding level. Body, Shoe, Foot, and Board Specs:
Height: 5’3
Weight: 115 lbs
Boot: Nike Zoom Kaiju size 7.5 (25.5cm Mondo)
Right now I have a Never Summer Harpoon 142cm (245mm waist width), but I am looking for a freestyle/park board and am having a ton of trouble finding something.
After going to a few shops and talking to a bunch of customer service sites I have been recommended a few boards:
Capita Birds of a Feather – 140cm-146cm (226-235ww)
Bataleon Stuntwood – 140cm (241ww)
Salomon The Villian Grom – 138cm-143cm (238-240ww)
Can you please HELP me?
Thank you in advance
Hi Kenyon
Thanks for your message.
Firstly in terms of size, I think you could ride as long as 145/146 for your all-mountain board, but since you’re looking at getting a freestyle/park specific board, I would look at around the 139-142 range.
In terms of width, assuming you’re going to be using a duck stance given that it’s a freestyle board, then I think you can go as narrow as 234mm at the waist and potentially even narrower depending on the board or up to around 245mm waist. But again it depends on the board. Some with a 245mm waist might end up being a little wide at the inserts, but some will be fine.
I don’t have any experience with Bataleon boards, but in terms of sizing, the Stuntwood does look like it would work.
Birds of a Feather: To get one that’s wide enough, I think you’d have to go to the 146, which I think is getting a bit long in terms of your freestyle/park board. Also, depending on what you’re after, it could be on the stiffer side. If you still looking for something around that mid-flex for your park board, then it could certainly work, but if you’re looking to go for something quite soft and playful, there are better options.
Villain Grom: I don’t really deal much with youth boards, but size-wise I think the 138 could work well. The 143 would also certainly be a doable size too. I haven’t ridden the regular Villain, but by all accounts it’s a good freestyle/park board and based on other similar Salomon boards, this is certainly an option, assuming it performs similarly to the men’s version.
Some other options that could work:
– Arbor Cadence Camber 140 (232mnm waist). Whilst this is narrower than I’d typically look at if you’re just looking at the waist width, it should be wide enough at the inserts. There’s a quite a big difference between the width at waist and width at inserts on this particular board (and this is pretty typical of most Arbor boards). Looking at around 246mm at the inserts on this one. A mid-soft flex – around 4/10.
– Burton Rewind 141 (237mm ww). Also mid-soft – around 4/10
– Rossignol Meraki 140 (240mm ww). Mid-soft – probably closer to 3/10 to 3.5/10
– Salomon Oh Yeah 138 (238mm ww). Something if you wanted something really soft, forgiving, easy going. 3/10 flex.
– Salomon Gypsy 138 (238mm ww). 4/10 flex – maybe bordering on 4.5/10. Equivalent to the Villain
Hope this helps
Thank you so much for the response. I ride my stance at +15/-15 (-12)
It definitely helps a bunch because I almost pulled the trigger on Capita Birds of a Feather in a size 142 or 144.
I hope I am not asking for too much, but do have any Male board recommendations that would fit my size profile? All of the boards listed were Women’s and I do not mind a women’s board, but I would like for the graphic to be a little less on the feminine side.
Also again thank you so much for all the help. I truly appreciate it.
Hi Kenyon
With the search I did for the 139-142 range, there weren’t any men’s freestyle boards that fit the bill (within the brands that I search). Extending the length to 144, I found the following:
– K2 WWW 144
– YES Basic 143
– GNU Money 144
Note that there isn’t going to be a 2022 model for the K2 WWW so you’d have to find a 2021 model (or earlier) in that size). There is going to be a new K2 Geometric which comes in a 144, and it’s a pretty similar board, but stiffer. So depending on how stiff you wanted to go, that could be an option. The WWW was rated a 4/10 stiffness. The Geometric is rated a 6/10 stiffness.
And there are plenty of youth boards in that 139-142 size range. I don’t really know youth boards that well. But of course you’ve already looked at the Villain Grom. There are lots of other options in that size range there, if you wanted to go shorter but not women’s.
Hi,
I have a 25.2 waist 153 Lib Tech Dynamo and 32 10.5 Boa’s on a size Large Union Atlas binding. Medium bindings are tough to get into. Do you think I will have drag at 15 degrees + 15- on Union Large bindings? Thanks
Hi Jamison
Thanks for your message.
You’re looking at roughly 260mm at the inserts (straight across) on the 153 Dynamo, which is pretty narrow for 10.5s, IMO. With +15/-15 angles that certainly helps give you a few more millimeters of leeway.
I haven’t measured a Large Union Atlas, so not completely sure their length, but the Medium Atlas is 24.4cm on the top of the footbed and 23cm on the bottom of the baseplate (when gas pedal not extended). Based on the difference between Medium and Large with some other Union bindings, I would guess that the Large Atlas would be around 26.3cm on the top of the footbed and 24.9cm on the baseplate (with no gas pedal extension). Depending on where the binding is setup you’ll probably be OK in terms of binding overhang (remembering we’re talking overhang over the metal edge, not over the edge of the top sheet), but hard to say for sure without setting them up. You certainly shouldn’t have any baseplate overhang – only thing would be footbed overhang, which is higher up, so you’ve got more leeway there, if there is minor overhang. If you already have the bindings you could measure them and set them up yourself and see. But yeah, if you’ve got no baseplate overhang, and none or very minimal footbed overhang, then you should be good in terms of binding overhang not being an issue for drag.
In terms of the boots, they’re borderline on that board. I like to go 265mm plus for width at inserts with 10.5s. That said, I have ridden 260mm insert width boards with 10.5s and haven’t experienced drag, but it’s cutting it close. The +15/-15 angles help. Can you let me know the model of 32 boots you have. Even within brands some models can be lower profile or more bulky. If they’re lower profile then that certainly helps. 32 boots tend to be either a little low profile or about average.
The one other thing to think about is how aggressively you like to carve. If you like to carve really deep, then you have less leeway for overhang. If your carves aren’t that aggressive, then you can get away with more boot overhang.
Hope this helps
That’s a lot of research, but my question is why don’t snowboard boot manufacturers publish the actual size of the boot footprint like they do on ski boots. A size 9 is different from company to company. I think a boot footprint chart would be more beneficial in determining what width of board is comparable.
Hi Dan
For sure it would be great if they did publish a boot footprint! Wasn’t aware they did that with ski boots. I’m probably missing something here, as I’m not a skier, but what would be the benefit of publishing the footprint of a ski boot? Without giving it too much thought, I can’t see a reason why you’d worry about how long a ski boot was – to me it would be more beneficial to know this for snowboard boots.
Hi Nate,
The amount of work you did to compile all this data is incredible.
I just got back into snowboarding this season after a 20 year hiatus. Thankfully I was able to pick it back up quickly.
Back in the day I rode a nitro pyro 161 (wide…I think) . I didn’t think too much about dimensions, pretty much trusted what the guy at the shop said.
This season I rode the burton LTR 160W and an M-3 158 ( don’t know the model name but it had fireworks on it). The 160 W felt a little “boaty” and for the 158 I definitely dragged my heals a few times.
Since there are a bunch of boards on sale now I’ve been itching to get one.
The ones I’ve been looking at are:
Rome agent 160 (25.6 ww)
Capita outerspace living 160 (25.6ww)
Ride machete 159w (26.1ww)
Lobster stomper 159 (25.63 ww)
K2 afterblack 160 (25.7ww)
I’m 6’0, 208lbs but working my way below 200 and wear the DC scout boots in size 10. Based on my stats and your guide, these all seem like good choices.
When I use the automated board sizer on some of the websites they suggest the regular width boards mostly. I figured it might be better to get some human input so I reached I reached out to two different sellers but got two different answers (specifically about the Rome sizing. ) one said go regular with a M/L binding and the other recommended the wide width board within L/Xl binding.
That confused me a bit and since I’ve seen you give a bunch of advice on this topic I figured I’d reach out.
At age 41, ride wise, I’ll spend most of my time on the trails with some butters here and there. I’ll occasionally hit the terrain park but only for the smaller jibs and jumps.
Look forward to hearing from you.
Thanks again for setting up this guide.
Hi Ken
Thanks for your message.
Typically with a 10, I would be leaning towards regular width, and I think that holds true in this case. For some boards, it’s better to go wide for a 10 and depends on a few things. But For those you’ve listed, I think you should be good on the regular width board. The DC Scout isn’t the lowest profile boot (quite bulky) from when I measured the 2018 model. But even with that bulkier boot, I think you should be OK. Not sure of the width at inserts of the Rome and Lobster boards there, as I don’t currently test those brands, but with that waist width, they’re likely fine. For the OSL and Afterblack 160s, I would say you should be all good. And for the Machete, the regular widths are probably too narrow, so going 159W would make the most sense in that case. Probably bordering on being too wide though, is the only thing, but the regular widths risking being too narrow.
I’m not sure about M3 boards (never tried one), so I don’t know typically how narrow they tend to be at the inserts compared to the waist. Also, there’s a chance that your bindings were setup too close to the heel edge (i.e. not centered properly). Everyone’s different, but I personally find it more likely to get toe drag than heel drag.
Length-wise, I think you’re good at those lengths.
Some other things to take into account apart from the low profile-ness of the boots are binding angles and how deep you like to carve. If you like to really rail your carves and you have a very straight back binding angle, then you increase your chances of boot drag.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply! That definitely helps.
Best regards,
Ken
You’re very welcome Ken. Happy riding!
Hi Nate
Thank you so so much for your work.
I have narrowed it down to a Gnu Riders Choice with A Salomon District HPS binding in size L and Ride 92 boots in Size 11. Would the Riders Choice in 175.5 with a waist width of 25.5 be a good fit ?
I have reached out to Salomon and Gnu and a local shop and all of them say it is perfect, yet I have had such a bad experience buying stuff last year, that I really want to make sure.
Thank you so so much in advance
Flemming
Hi Flemming
Thanks for your message.
GNU/Lib Tech boards aren’t typically as wide as their waist width suggests. Versus the average board, they tend to have less difference between the waist width and width at inserts (where your boots will actually be). So, whilst the waist width sounds a little wider than normal, the width at inserts on the Rider’s Choice is only around 262mm. So a difference of 7mm between waist and inserts. Some boards have as much difference as 17mm, so waist width can be really deceiving.
Personally, I’m comfortable with anything around 260mm at the inserts with size 10s. And to be fair, I’ve ridden as narrow as 256mm at the inserts and didn’t have issues. But the equivalent with 11s is 270mm (or 266mm if you want to risk a little narrower). So, IMO, the 157.5 Rider’s Choice would be too narrow for your size 11 boots. Ride are relatively low profile, but even then I wouldn’t personally risk going that narrow. The 158W sounds really wide, but in reality the width at inserts is probably around 275mm, which is fine for 11s, IMO. Waist width does also make a difference to the maneuverability of the board, so that’s worth taking into account and I can understand having 11s and not wanting to go too wide, but you also don’t want boot drag and there’s certainly risk of that with the 157.5, IMO.
There are other boards that have a narrower waist that would be wide enough at the inserts for 11s. But for the Rider’s Choice, I would go 158W if I was you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the reply. I went to the local shop and performed all of your tests.
I definitely don’t want to go too wide, since I had a wide board last year and it was nothing short but horrible riding it. It would’ve been the same width as the 158W.
I decided to go for the 157.5 and it looks fine with the boots and everything attached. I wanted to go as minimal as possible. I decided to trust the local shop guy that said it is fine. I hope I won’t regret it. It is definitely on the narrower side. About 26.6 at the inserts. I will try it on the weekend and will let you know. I really hope I won’t regret it.
Thank you again and best regards.
Flemming
Hi Flemming
Thanks for the follow up. I’m surprised you got 26.6cm at the inserts – was that at reference stance. Sounds like it’s at a wider stance than reference, but if it’s at the stance that you’ll be riding it at, then that’s the main thing. Look forward to hearing how you get on.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking to buy Yes PYL and confused between the 156 or 159 size. what will you recommend.
weight: 145lb
Boots size – 9/9.5
height-5’8″
Hi Yogi
For your specs, I’d go 156 for sure. And width-wise, should be all good for your boot size, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!
Dude thank you for all the time and effort you put into all this, we appreciate it.
I just picked up a Lib Tech Orca 144 and I’m a size 8 boot. I’m leaning towards Ions or Acerras for boots, but I’m pretty positive I’m going to pick up some Malavitas. My question is whether I should go small or medium on the bindings. I like to go fast and be on my edges a lot, and I’m worried small bindings will make it tough to go toe/heel on such a wide waisted board. But I also worry about getting more binding than I need and having excess weight and drag.
Thanks so much man!
Hi Aaron
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning Medium for bindings. I think for the best boot fit, probably small, particularly if you end up in Acerra’s, but Medium will still fit 8s and the Medium will be a better fit to this board. The main reason I say medium, is that the small will be well inside the edges of the board and that will reduce leverage on the edges. Medium will be a little heavier than the small, of course, but I think the extra leverage you gain from the longer baseplate will outweigh that. Definitely no issues with drag with Medium Malavitas on the 144 Orca.
Hope this helps
Hello Nate,
I love your site! Thank you for posting all this amazing info.
I was hoping you could help me figure out if the Rossignol Gala 146cm is a good option for me based on my specs. I am concerned this board might be too narrow for me. I’m a beginner, been riding for two years and starting to feel comfortable connecting turns. I currently ride a wildflower Morrow 148 I bought from a friend but this board feels too stiff and perhaps too long for me.
Female
Boot size 9US (Salomon Scarlet)
Height: 5’ 6”
Weight : 132
Also, if this is not a good option what would you recommend? Thinking about getting the Burton citizen bindings.
Thank you!!
Hi Karina
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think 148 is a little long. It’s not way off and as a more advanced rider and depending on the specific board, it could be a suitable size, but as a beginner, I’d go a little shorter. Something around 143-146, would be a good bet.
But yeah unfortunately, I think the width would be pushing it and going a little wider would be a good idea, IMO. I’d try to go at least 238mm in terms of waist width to be on the safe side.
Some good beginner options:
>>My Top 10 Women’s Beginner Snowboards
Or if you feel like you want to step up just a little bit – and feel like you’re getting to that high-end beginner level, then you could also consider:
>>Top 10 Women’s Intermediate Snowboards
Hope this helps
Nate, thanks for your response, I truly appreciate it. I’m trying to decide between the niche minx 146 and the Yes Emoticon 146. I mainly ride groomers, and don’t see myself venturing to the park anytime soon, do you think one of these two might be a good option?
Thank you
Hi Karina
I think both would work. The Minx is a little more park focused, but still good for groomers. The Emoticon is also a really good groomer board, IMO.
Hi Nate,
What board size, bindings, etc would you suggest for a 5’3, 153lb beginner female with a sz 8 shoe?
Thanks,
Christy
Hi Christy
Thanks for your message.
As a beginner I would say to look in the range 145-147 and even 148 should be fine, in terms of length.
For a size 8 shoe you should be good with a majority of the widths of boards in that length-range. As a rule of thumb I would look at roughly 232mm to 242mm in terms of a waist width.
For bindings sizing, it will depend on the brand of bindings you go with and in some cases can depend on the width of the board too. I find it’s a good idea to choose the board and boots first then the bindings to match both. In terms of flex of bindings (and same goes with boots), try to match the flex of the board (or at least close to). In your case as a beginner, a medium-soft board bindings and boots works best, IMO.
Hope this helps
I forgot to mention the width vs boot size is what I’m concerned about.
Hi Al
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I would be most concerned about the width on the 157 – and even if you’re not riding that aggressively and roughly +15/-15 angles, I still think it’s too narrow. At 157, I think it’s also a little short for your specs too, even at an early intermediate stage. The 159W would be the ideal size for you for the Afterblack and unfortunately, IMO, the 157 is going to be too narrow.
Nate,
Awesome read!! I have a tendency to over research and sometimes over think decision, no always a bad thing. So your in depth articles on board sizing (actually all articles) are perfect for my mind set.
Anyway, I am relatively new to boarding. Ski’d my entire life but just got board with it. No monster mountains here in the Upper Midwest. I made the switch last season. I’d say I’m in the early intermediate stage riding normal and beginner rising switch. I need to work on that. I was told I picked it quite a bit faster than most. I’m currently 46 so you won’t see me in a terrain park. I’ll leave that for the younger generation who heal quicker. I enjoy carving down a slope at a leisurely pace just enjoying it.
I have been renting and was looking a directional board, but honestly, I don’t like 90% of the graphics out there. I found a board that would fit my style that had ok graphics, the K2 broadcast. While kicking that around, I stopped by the shop for another reason and wondered back to look at the boards again and found the one (looks anyway), the K2 Afterblack. The camo/blaze orange combo os me, I love bow hunting. It’s a twin and more of a freestyle board, but the graphics sold me.
Here’s the issue, the only one they have is a 157. I am 5’11” and 205ish lbs (need to ditch the food baby and get down towards 185, but that’s another story). K2 is sold out of the 159w and I wasn’t having luck finding one on line. I have test fitted boots and want to go with the K2 clickers. I am always with skiers. My boot size is 11.5. I can squeeze into an 11 bur i feel the toe has too much contact with the boot. In the 11.5 my toe just lightly touches the boot tip when standing straight. Based on everything I have read of yours and looking at the board specs, the 157 seems to be boarder line with the 11.5 boot. I have not measured my binding angle, but I am closer to the +15/-15 stance.
I want to continue to work in riding switch so I’m ok with the twin board. I plan on keeping the board for a long time. Based in my long rambling note, what’s your opinion on the 157 Afterblack for me?
Thanks in advance and keep up the writing/research.
Hi Nate!
I was hoping to get my first set of snowboarding gear this year and really needed help with it all. I would say I am a beginner level 4 and looking towards improving. I have always rented gear so am unsure of what to buy. I am 5’7 and fluctuate around 148 lbs. My shoe size is woman’s 9.5 wide and I ride goofy footed. If you could recommend the length of the board and width with what bindings to get that would be amazing. I also would like to know more on what angle you would recommend for my level to angle my bindings at.
Hi Lewie
Thanks for your message.
Length-wise, I would look in the range 148-150 for your specs/level.
Width-wise, roughly speaking around 240mm minimum waist width is probably a good bet. But it does depend somewhat on the board, you binding angles and the particular boots you get.
I think this list, given a progressing level 4, would be a good bet to look at for boards:
>>Top 10 Women’s Intermediate Snowboards
But if you wanted to go for a more beginner board, also see:
>>My Top 10 Women’s Beginner Snowboards
For bindings, I would try to decide on the boots and the board first – as they bindings you go with will partly depend on those. Boots first, is a good way to start. Because if you end up in 9s or 10s, rather than 9.5s, then can make a difference to the width of board you go with. But if you’re unable to try on first, then we can certainly still choose a board in a good size. The size of bindings you go with will also depend on the boot size and the brand of bindings you go with.
Some good boot options to check out:
>>My Top Women’s Beginner Boots
>>My Top Women’s Freestyle Snowboard Boots
>>My Top Women’s All-Mountain Snowboard Boots
For binding angles, it largely depends on how you feel most comfortable riding – and I always encourage people to experiment a little to see what feels most comfortable for them. Roughly standing in different stances and imagining yourself riding. Bending and straightening your knees. And then try that in a few different options can help figure out where you might be inclined, so you don’t have to keep remounting your bindings too often to experiment when actually riding.
The most common beginner setups would be +15/-15 and +15/0. Setting up +15/-15 has the advantage of making switch riding easier to learn. So if you have interest in being able to ride in both directions, then that’s something to consider. If you think that doesn’t interest you, then a more forward stance would be worth going with, if it’s comfortable for you. The most important is what feels best.
More on binding angles:
>>What Snowboard Binding Angles Should I Use
Hope this isn’t too much info at once, and hope it helps. Let me know if you narrow down to some gear choices and want a sizing opinion for specific boards.
Nate thank you!! This info was amazing and I read multiple articles in your website to help me out. I was able to go into a store to test boots out but because I have wide feet only came across one pair that felt perfect. For boots I ended up going with the Rossignol Alley Boa in a size 9 and the board I got was a hello yes in a 152. I have yet to get the bindings so would love recommendations!
Once again thank you,
Lewie
Hi Lewie
Awesome that you have boots and board sorted!
For bindings, I would look at something with around a 5/10 flex. Anything from the following with a 5/10 flex would be a good bet:
>>Top Women’s All-Mountain Bindings
>>Top Women’s Freestyle Bindings
In terms of sizing the bindings, check out:
>>Snowboard Binding Sizing
If you’re unsure about the bindings fitting the board or sizing or are debating between options, let me know.
Hey Nate. Great article!
I’m 6’2”, weight 165-170, size 12-13 boot. Intermediate all-mountain resort rider.
Looking at a Solamon Dancehaul which is a wider board apparently. Can’t decide between 152 vs 157.
Hi Doug
Thanks for your message.
That’s a tough one. If it was me, I would go 152 (6’0″, 175lbs), but I wear 10s (sometimes 9.5s), so for me I would want to size down because of the width of this board. However, since the width of the board is actually well suited to your boot size, I’m not sure if sizing down that much works. Which makes me want to say 157. But this board has obviously been made to size down on – and Salomon’s weight recommendations suggest more 152. But with the board not being wide for your boots, that’s going pretty short for your specs. So I’m inclined to say 157, but it’s a tough read on this one. I haven’t ridden this board either, so I don’t know the feel of it, which would help to give a more accurate opinion. If there was something in between, like a 154, 155, I might be more confident in recommending something, but this one is a tough call.
Hope this somewhat helps
Nate,
Great article but I could use some additional guidance. I’m 15, a high-beginner looking to buy an all-mountain board. I’m 5’10”, 130lbs and wear a size 12 boot. I’ve been renting at the mountain until now and they have me in a wide board but I don’t remember the length. The only wide board I can find in my local shops is a Salomon Craft 157W. The shop owner advises I would be fine with this board despite the weight range on the board being 145-210. I am mostly interested in carving turns and not much in terrain park. Would appreciate your thoughts on this board and generally appropriate size board for me.
Thanks
Hi James
Thanks for your message.
IMO 157W is definitely too big for you. I don’t think the Craft would necessarily be a bad option, but in that size it would be a bad option, IMO.
I would put you at more like 150,151 – and potentially even less as a beginner. But given there aren’t many wide boards in that size-range, you could compromise up to 152, but I wouldn’t go longer than that at your weight.
Some options that I think would work well, and are wide in shorter sizes:
– GNU Money 150W
– Burton Instigator 150W
– Capita Horrorscope 151W (though it’s more of a freestyle board than an all-mountain board)
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Great Article. I recently bought a Capita Horrorscope 155cm board. I am 6’1 145lbs. I got fitted for a 10.5 boot and am really worried I got the wrong width of board. Barefoot my toes and heels are right on the edge. I am heading to Colorado next weekend and need to calm my nerves to see if I need to return my board and get a wide board instead. I am a beginner so not too much action from me on the slope. Please share your knowledge and help me put my anxiety at ease.
Also, I am getting union flite pro Size Large as my binding if that helps with anything.
My heel hangs off about half an inch off the back side.
Scratch that last comment, my heel barely hangs off, less than a 1/4 of an inch
Hi Alex
Thanks for your comments. I don’t think you will have any issues width-wise with the 155 Horrorscope with 10.5s. I think that should be a good width. And Large Flite Pros should be fine to fit on the board too. I haven’t measured Large Flite Pros, but based on the Medium Flite Pros I’ve tested/measured and using the difference between M and L for other Union bindings, I don’t think you should have any issues there.
Hope this has eased your anxiety and hope you enjoy your trip!
Hey Nate!
I need to buy a board in the next 2-3 days and im not sure what width to choose (10.5 boot size).
My weight is 80kg/176lbs and im a beginner. I’ve been looking at these 2 boards:
Capita Outerspace Living 158cm: 25.3 waist width
Capita DOA 158cm: 25.4 waist width.
Would these work or will they be on the upper limit? Looking to hearing your thoughts!
Thank you!
Hi Andi
Thanks for your message.
I think the Outerspace Living (OSL) is doable. It’s what I would call suitable for high-end beginner bordering on intermediate, rather than complete beginner, so if you’re more at the start of the beginner specturm, then it will be a steeper learning curve than a pure beginner board for sure, and at the upper limit, but potentially doable, if not ideal.
The DOA is a more technical board, in my experience, so between those 2, I would go OSL for sure.
Size-wise, if you could also let me know your height. Weight and boot size certainly more important for sizing, but I like to take height into account as well.
Width-wise, the 158 should be wide enough with 10.5s.
Hope this helps
Hi!
Height: 181cm
Weight: 80kg
Bootsize: well i bought a pair of romes that i thought will be fine which are 11 size. I’ll return them tho cuz i feel pressure points on one of my foot. Do you think 11 is too big for the standard version?
Thanks!
Hi Andi
Thanks for the extra info.
With 11s, the regular width is probably a little wide. Not sure how Rome boots typically fit as it’s not a brand that I test, so I’m not sure what you would fit in other brands, but assuming you end up in an 11, I would go with the 155W in the OSL, if you have that size available. That length is still within your range, and the width should be good – wide enough but not too wide. When you’re in that 10.5 to 11 range some wide boards can be too wide, but for the 155W, I think it would be a good width for 11s and that would be a good length for you right now too. Overall that’s the size I would go with if you have it available.
I’ve looked in all available shops from where i can buy and the only wide version is the 157W which has a waist width of 262mm. Now the thing is i have to order it online and im not sure what my boot size will it be (10.5 or 11). 26.2 is a bit too wide for a 10.5 or is it safe to order it for both boot sizes?
Dont know if this matters but my bindings size is L.
Thank you, Nate!
Hi Andi
Binding size could matter, if you didn’t go wide, but it would depend on the brand/model of your bindings. If you can let me know that I’ll have a better idea.
If you could get in 10.5s, I would try to go regular width, but in terms of it being too wide – that really comes down to foot size, so which boot you end up in doesn’t really matter. For being too narrow it comes down to boots – i.e. if your boot is too long and could cause boot drag. A board can’t really be too wide for your boots, but can be too wide for your feet, if that makes sense. It’s your feet that ultimately apply pressure to the edges of the board. With 11s you kind of need to go wide to reduce the chance of boot drag. But with foot size, you can be over hanging the edges, so long as your boot doesn’t overhang the edges. But you don’t your feet underhanging too much (a little is fine). I think if you’ve got a foot size of 28-28.5cm, you will be fine on the wide board regardless of boots you get into. But if you’ve got shorter feet than that, I would try to get into a smaller boot and go for regular width.
Hi Nate, love your site, all this information is extremely helpful! Would greatly appreciate your input as I look to buy my first board. I’m 5’10, 160, size 9.5 boot – looking for an all-mountain board. Definitely a beginner now (started this season, have only gone twice and am able to link turns and do S turns decently) but looking to progress quickly to an intermediate level and want to buy a setup for the long-term. I’ve decided on the Lib Tech Cold Brew but unsure if I should go with the 153 or 157. I don’t play on hitting the park and 157 seems to be standard based on my metrics, but what’s leaning me towards 153 is the fact that I’m still a beginner currently (though I don’t mind using rentals for 4-5 more days or however long I need to improve to use it) and primarily that the board seems to run pretty wide (keep reading that the Orca, for example, needs to be sized down significantly but not sure if this is solely due to volume-shifting vs width). Any help / input would be appreciated, cheers!
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
As a beginner and with the width being a little wider than normal, I would be leaning towards the 153. Lib Tech boards tend not to be as wide as they look based on waist width – but with 9.5s, it’s still on the wide side and waist width itself does affect maneuverability too. So those 2 things combined I would be leaning towards the 153.
Hope this helps
Appreciate it! Cheers
You’re very welcome David. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the article – this is the best one by far that I’ve found on this subject. So here’s my situation – I have a new board, boots and bindings downstairs, a little Christmas present I got for myself. I’m 5’11”, 176 lbs. I’ve been riding a couple times a year on rental/borrowed stuff, but this year I decided to send it on a season pass and some gear so that I can actually spend some time and progress. I don’t know exactly what kind of riding I’ll do the most – I’m initially drawn to the park but my friends like backcountry/trees/pow when we have it, and I’ll be riding with them a decent amount, so I researched a board that could do everything, possibly with a little lean towards the park and I settled on the Burton Process 157. I figured the 157 would be a little easier to maneuver than the 159 or 157w which would help in the park/trees, but just for context I rode a borrowed K2 163w last year which was like riding a door for me lol but I made it work without a ton of trouble. Anyways, I had to order the board online because it was sold out at my local shop, but I went in and bought the boots and bindings in person – K2 Darkos size 11 and Burton Reflex Cartel X’s size L. The K2’s were the most comfortable/best fit for my foot and the Cartel X’s were just going to look the best with the board lol. Didn’t even think about heel or toe drag when I got them, just made sure the bindings would fit on the board and took off. Today before I put them together I decided to do a little research, and learned that I was for sure going to be cutting it close.
So I found out that the 152 waist width is a bit narrow for size 11 boots, and the Darkos that I got are one of the larger footprints that you can get apparently. I tried to measure the angles by setting the bindings on the board at +15 -15 and got the angles
Front: Heel – 50*
Toe – 77*
Back: Heel – 57.7*
Toe – 68*
but those are approximate because I didn’t mount the bindings just in case I end up needing to return the board, I just lined them up and held them in place. I’m not going to be laying down euro carves tomorrow, but I want something that isn’t going to limit me and definitely don’t want to be in a steep spot, carve hard, boot out and hurt myself. I’d prefer to just put my stuff together and ride, but if I need to make some exchanges then I’d rather do that than be kicking myself for not doing it next season. Also, if it is a problem, I’m not sure what the best route for fixing it would be – sizing up to a 159 or 157w, moving to est bindings for better adjustability, (the reflex ones are terrible for the front/back adjustability that would be nice, especially on that front heel), or trying to find a lower profile boot. Any advice?
Thanks
(Also, sorry if this is a duplicate comment, my first one didn’t show up)
Hi Braedon
Thanks for your message.
Got your first message here too – just had to be moderated before being published – but I deleted it, just so there wasn’t a duplicate.
At 50 degrees that heel side front foot is a concern for sure, even that back heel side could be an issue. And with K2 11s on the 157 Process, even without knowing those angles, I would typically consider that a too narrow.
All the options you suggest would make a difference for sure. Getting better boot centering would allow you to get that heel angle better, it’s just whether you’d end up with too little on the toe side then. Lower profile boots would definitely help, for sure. But I think you’d want to do both of those things in order to make it doable – and even then. I think getting the 157W is the best bet. It’s not a super wide board for a wide board – a good width for 11s, IMO. And certainly would be narrower most likely than the 163W K2 you borrowed – and at that length and width combined, I’m not surprised you found a board of that size like a door. I think the 157W Process is just the right size for your specs, IMO. That’s the size I would have suggested in any case. And that seems to me the easiest solution in this case too.
Hope this helps
Thanks! That does! I did read up a little bit about boot sizing too and I think I will be downsizing my boots – I wear a size 10.5 shoe and everything I’ve read is saying that an 11 is way too big, and after trying them on with my thinner snowboard socks I’m not sure what I was thinking when I bought them (or the guy who fitted them for me). If I downsize to a 10.5 would you still recommend going with the 157W?
Hi Braedon
Low profile 10.5s and keeping at those +15/-15 binding angles and I think you would be fine on the 157. If you go for the Darkos again, might still be better to go with the 157W.
Sounds good! Also just one other question I thought of – I would consider myself an