Hello and welcome to my Jones Aviator review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Aviator as an aggressive all-mountain snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Aviator a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other aggressive all-mountain snowboards.
NOTE: The 2021 model was the last model of the Aviator (as we know it). There is an Aviator 2.0 to replace it. The 2.0 version is different enough that I will need to test it and create a brand new review for it, once I get the chance to test it.
Board: Jones Aviator
Price: $599 (USD recommended retail)
Style: Aggressive All-Mountain
Flex Rating: Stiff (8/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Stiff(7/10)
Rating Score: 79.8/100
Compared to other Men’s Aggressive All-Mountain Boards
Out of the 20 men’s aggressive-all-mountain snowboards that I rated:
- The average score was 82.6/100
- The highest score was 91.0/100
- The lowest score was 75.8/100
- The average price was $600
- The Aviator ranked 15th out of 20
Overview of the Aviator’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Aviator’s specs and available sizes.
Hybrid Camber (majority camber)
Waist Width (mm)
Rec Rider Weight (lb)
Rec Rider Weight (kg)
Who is the Aviator Most Suited To?
The Aviator is best for anyone who likes an aggressive ride but one that can still ride slow and be agile enough at slow speeds, but still having fast aggressive riding as its core feature.
Certainly not for beginners but fine for a solid intermediate rider with a relatively aggressive style and up to experts.
Not a board for the park for me, but if you wanted to take it down the jump line it’s not slouch there, but not really a jib line board, IMO.
The Aviator in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Aviator is capable of.
Board: Jones Aviator 2019, 156 (253mm waist width)
Date: March 13, 2018
Conditions: Overcast plus a little rain, getting a bit heavier around 2:30 in the afternoon but not too bad. Wet snow higher up the mountain. Visibility all good though. Slushy snow in patches.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 580mm (22.8”)
Stance Setback: 40mm (1.6”)
*note that reference stance is 600mm stance width with a 20mm setback. I rode it on a slightly narrower stance with a larger setback.
Width at Inserts: 265mm (10.43“) at the back insert and 261mm (10.28”) at the front insert
Weight: 2860grams (6lb 5oz)
Weight per cm: 18.33grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.21grams/cm*
*based on a small sample size of 24 boards that I weighed. So pretty much bang on average. So a normal weight board.
Whilst Jones rate the Aviator 8/10 for flex, it didn’t feel that way on snow. It felt closer to the Mountain Twin than it did to the Ultra Mountain Twin (UMT). The Mountain Twin gets a rating of 7/10 by Jones, but I’d say more like 6/10 and the UMT gets a 9/10 but I’d say more like 8/10. The Aviator felt like 7 at most and maybe even closer to 6.5/10. Felt a little stiffer in hand, but still not close to what the UMT felt in hand, but on snow, 7/10 at most, IMO.
I didn’t have any notable powder to test the Aviator on, but it felt like it would do well in the deep stuff.
It’s got a long nose going for it (and quite a long tail too for riding pow switch) and a 20mm setback. It’s also got spoon 2.0 incorporated (Jones’ spooned up edges tech).
It does have a mostly camber profile with just a bit of rocker just before the tip and tail, so that’s not going to help in the powder, but overall I think it would go quite well, without being amazing.
Carving & Turning
It carves quite well, but not up there with the likes of the UMT. Though it was certainly more forgiving for skidded turns than the UMT and easier to maneuver at slower speeds.
For an aggressive board, and one that I was expecting to be more catchy, it’s quite forgiving and not that easy to catch an edge on.
Was a little easier to navigate in tight trees as it felt a little more agile than the UMT at slower speeds. At high speed, felt similar to UMT in terms of edge-to-edge quickness. Overall, quite quick edge-to-edge without being lightning fast.
Feels super stable when riding fast and feels pretty damp too. This board is more forgiving at slower speeds than I expected but that doesn’t take away from its feel when riding fast. Charging is still the preferred speed of this board.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
It does pretty well in most types of terrain, including crud, and bumpy undulating terrain. Pretty versatile in that sense. A little better in uneven terrain than the UMT.
Landings were stable, approach was stable – and approach was also agile enough for trickier approaches to some side hits. Had decent pop – not as much as the UMT but still pretty good, and maybe a little easier to extract that pop.
A little easier to spin than the UMT too, I found.
It felt fine riding switch – and with that longer tail it would be pretty good riding switch in pow, IMO. There’s only a small difference between the tail and nose (nose just 1cm longer) so in that sense its pretty close to the same each way. Though it does have a directional flex and a 20mm setback – so it’s certainly not the ultimate in riding switch, but very doable.
Not my kind of jibbing board – too stiff and too much camber for my liking for jibs. But some will be fine with it.
Changes from the 2020 Model
The only change for the 2021 model, that I can see, is that it has a new base. Now has a sintered 8000 base, replacing the sintered 9900 base on the 2020 model. And a different graphic of course.
Changes from the 2019 Model
The 2020 model for the most part is the same as the 2019 model. A few tweaks here and there but by and large, essentially the same board. Different graphic of course.
Changes from the 2018 Model
I didn’t ride the 2018 model, so I couldn’t say firsthand how different it is, but these are the main changes:
- Jones rated it 7/10 in terms of flex for the 2018 model – 8/10 for the 2019 model, so it sounds like it’s stiffer than the 2018 model.
- The 2019 model has carbon under the top sheet, which is supposed to increase torsional stiffness – and this might just be the reason that they’re flex rating went up.
Otherwise it looks like everything else is the same as the 2018 model (apart from the graphic of course).
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
TOTAL after normalizing
Overall the Aviator is an aggressive board, but it’s more forgiving at slower speeds than I expected it would be. It’s still definitely for a more aggressive rider and a more accomplished rider but it’s more forgiving than the Ultra Mountain Twin and more forgiving than I expected overall.
It’s quite a versatile ride that is solid but not spectacular.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Aviator, are ready to buy or want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
If you want to see how the Aviator compares to other men’s aggressive all-mountain snowboards or want to check out some other options in that category, check out the next link.
Hi what bindings deo you recommend? I have a pair alof strata and and a pair of atlas for my 156 aviator
Thanks for your message.
I would put the Atlas on the Aviator if it was me. It’s a better flex match, IMO.
Hope this helps
Any idea when you might review the new Aviator 2.0? Would love to know how it compares to the 21/22 Ultra Mountain Twin
Thanks for your message.
I’ve ridden the Aviator 2.0 now (and hope to have the review published sometime in the next week or 2). Without having sat down to really compare my notes, just quickly, I’d say that the Aviator 2.0 feels marginally stiffer than the UMT did to me – but very little in it – like 8/10 versus 7.5/10 on the UMT. But I do think the Aviator 2.0 was stiffer than the old Aviator (though I think Jones rates them the same (but don’t quote me on that, I’m going off memory). The Aviator 2.0 is a better carver and bomber than the UMT, IMO, but not going to be as good in powder. Will have more details when the review is done.
You’re very welcome Kevin
I’ve been thinking about this board and the Capita Mercury as a do-it-all solution. I ride in Europe and value edge hold in hard conditions or sketchy freeride situations so mostly camber with some sort of edge disruption is a must. I usually charge the piste looking for side hits and rollers but will head into sidecountry when there’s powder. Might goof around in the park but its not a priority. I’ve ridden the Jones mountain twin but would like something a little snappier and camber feeling in the turns. i.e. a bit less rocker in the profile. People seem to love the Mercury but are somewhat lukewarm about the Aviator. Just wondered if you could shed any light on this, as far as the specs go the Aviator looks great for me.
Thanks for your message.
I enjoyed riding the Aviator but I wasn’t blown away. I preferred the Mercury, personally. The Aviator might have a little bit more edge hold in hard conditions though, but it’s pretty close. Aviator might also be a little quicker turning, but again very little in it. Otherwise I would prefer the Mercury. You could also check out the following:
Hope this helps