
Hello and welcome to my Jones Frontier review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Frontier as an all-mountain snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Frontier a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Jones Frontier
Price: $499
Style: All-Mountain
Flex Rating: Medium (6/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 84.9/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain Boards
Of the 30 current model all-mountain snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Jones Frontier ranked 11th out of 30
Overview of the Frontier’ Specs
Check out the tables for the Frontier’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
ALL-MOUNTAIN
PRICE:
$499 - BUYING OPTIONS
$499 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:

flex:

feel:

DAMPNESS:

SMOOTH /SNAPPY:

Playful /aggressive:

Edge-hold:

camber profile:

HYBRID CAMBER
DIRECTIONAL HYBRID Camber - Jones's "Directional Rocker" - has rocker in both tip and tail (unlike the diagram above) but more rocker in the tip than the tail.
SHAPE:
setback stance:
Setback 20mm
BASE:
Sintered | Jones's "Sintered 8000" base.
weight:
Felt normal
Camber Height:
4mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
---|---|---|---|
152 | 249 | 110 - 160 | 50-73 |
156 | 252 | 120 - 170 | 54-77 |
158W | 262 | 140 - 190 | 64-86 |
159 | 254 | 140 - 190 | 64-86 |
161W | 264 | 150 - 200 | 68-91 |
162 | 256 | 160 - 210 | 73-95 |
164W | 266 | 170 - 220 | 77-100 |
165 | 260 | 170 - 220 | 77-100 |
167W | 268 | 170 - 220 | 77-100 |
Who is the Frontier Most Suited To?
The Frontier is best suited to anyone looking for that board that's on the freeride end of all-mountain but don't want a full blown freeride board. They want something that's more optimized towards riding in one direction, but can still ride switch decently. And something that's pretty forgiving and easy to ride and not overly stiff or demanding.
Not quite complete beginner friendly, but would work well for lower end intermediate riders, looking for a board they can progress with and won't have to update for a long time, if ever, depending on how their riding develops.
Frontier DetailS
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Frontier is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Jones Frontier 2024, 159cm (254mm waist width)
Date: April 12, 2023
Conditions:
Plenty of sunshine and prefect visibility.
Temperature was around -3°C (27°F) - and -8°C (18°F) with wind chill. Though felt warmer than that. In the afternoon was -1°C (30°F) and the same with wind chill.
Morning wind 5kph (mph) northerly, afternoon also 5kph (3mph) but WSW.
24hr snow: 5" (13cm)
48hr snow: 6" (16cm)
7 day snow: 32" (82cm)
On groomer: Choppy in a lot of spots, flat and smooth in others. Hard pack with some soft on top.
Off groomer: Freshies! Largely tracked but some good untouched spots too. Nice and soft and light poweder too.
Set Up

Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 560mm (22) - reference is 600mm (23.6") but that's too wide for me.
Stance Setback: Setback 20mm (0.75")
Width at Front Insert: 268mm (10.55") at 560mm (22") stance (270mm (10.63") at 600mm (23.6") stance).
Width at Back Insert: 272mm (10.71") at 560mm (22") stance (274mm (10.79") at 600mm (23.6") stance).
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Response ADV
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 3220grams (7lbs 2oz)
Weight per cm: 20.25 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.71 grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 250 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 & 2024 models. The Frontier was noticeably heavier on the scales but surprisingly felt normal on snow.
Powder
We had a decent amount of fresh powder on the day, which was nice. It wasn't waist deep epic or anything, but it was decent enough and the Frontier felt good in it. Floats better than most all-mountain boards I've tested.
And no big surprise there - it's got a directional camber profiles, directional shape and has rocker before the nose.
Carving
It's not epic for deep aggressive carves, but it's a decent carver. Holds an edge well and doesn't feel washy.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: Nice and easy to initiate turns on and easy to release the edges to slash with.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Pretty nimble at slow speeds. Has decent edge-to-edge quickness.
Catchiness: Nice and uncatchy.
Speed
It's not an out and out bomber that you can throw any amount of speed at and wasn't expected to be. But it's decent enough for moderately high speeds. You can confidently ride this thing pretty fast.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: It can get knocked about and thrown off its line, but it's not something that happens super easily. Pretty middle of road for crud.
Trees/Bumps: I really enjoyed it in trees. It's decently nimble and easy to weave between obstacles with. And does well when there's powder in the trees too.
Jumps
It was easy to setup with and I enjoyed it for jumping for the most part. But wasn't super exciting or anything.
Pop: It was nice and easy to access the pop that it did have - just didn't have a lot of it.
Approach: A good mix of being stable but also easy to adjust and speed check.
Landing: Solid enough, without being a stomper. Doesn't punish you too badly if you get it wrong though.
Side-hits: Pretty fun for sidehits. That easier pop, all-be-it mild pop, and agility helped it to perform well on side hits.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Medium are its sweet spot.
Switch
Transitions were nice and easy and felt uncatchy. But the board is quite directional and did feel quite different riding switch.
Spins
Decent for setting up for spins. Not ideal for landing/taking off switch but not bad either. Not enough pop to be exciting to spin though.
Jibbing
It's decent enough. Good for setting up on approach and didn't feel catchy on features or anything. But lacking the pop to be really good.
Butters
Was pretty to easy to press both the nose and the tail. Nose and tail felt a little different to press, but not crazy different or anything.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
Factor | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
---|---|---|
Powder | 4 | 12/15 |
Carving | 3.5 | 7/10 |
Turns | 4 | 8/10 |
Speed | 3.5 | 7/10 |
Crud | 3.5 | 7/10 |
Trees | 4 | 8/10 |
Switch | 3 | 6/10 |
Jumps | 3 | 6/10 |
Spins | 3 | 3/5 |
Butters | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
Rails | 3 | 3/5 |
TOTAL (after normalizing): | 84.9/100 |
The Frontier straddles that gap between all-mountain and freeride, but it's more forgiving than the average freeride board - so more between all-mountain and what we would call "mellow freeride". It's two-ender enough to still be OK riding switch, but it's quite directional overall, but without any taper (tip and tail the same width).
It handles carves and speed well enough, whilst at the same time being pretty easy to ride and to initiate turns on.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Frontier, or if you are ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.

If you want to check out some other all-mountain snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Frontier compares to other all-mountain snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
Would the Frontier be too big of a step back coming from a 2012 Ride Berzerker (158)?
I’m a fairly advanced and progressive resort rider. I enjoy speed on groomers in the morning but also like challenging, bumpy conditions throughout the day and even moguls in the afternoon. I don’t do park, tricks, or switch riding. If I make a jump, it’s either a serious bump or to get back onto the piste.
Since having kids who ski, I’ve been doing slower rides alongside my progressive piste work. The Berzerker turns out to be unforgiving at lower speeds or with less input.
So, I guess I’m looking for either an “aggressive all-mountain” board that is more forgiving (requires less input at low speed) or an all-mountain with stability at higher speeds (e.g. 50mph).
PS: I’m 5’10”, 175lbs, with US boot size 11, and a forward stance (+18/+6).
I’d really appreciate your thoughts on this trade-off.
Cheers,
Hi OZ, thanks for your message.
I think it’s doable. There’s definitely a trade off. Based on my experience you should find the Frontier significantly easier/more forgiving at slow speeds. At the cost of stability at speed – which I think you’re aware of that trade off already but just to confirm that will be the case, IMO. The Frontier will handle 50mph, in my experience, but I wouldn’t necessarily say it will thrive at those speeds. Will feel less stable than the Berzerker, but it’s definitely doable.
So yeah, I think the Frontier could definitely work, but if you wanted to look at some other options, then I’d also look at:
– Capita Mercury – > (greater than) Frontier for stability at speed, but < (less than) Frontier for slower speed riding, but still >Berzerker for slower speed riding.
– GNU 4 x 4 and Slash ATV >Frontier for stability at speed and just as good for slower speed turns. Still probably not as good for higher speed as Berzerker, but not as much of a trade off for slow speed as Mercury, IMO, and not as much of a high speed trade off as Frontier. You could also put the Burton Custom Camber and Nitro Team into that category.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your awesome website—it’s super helpful!
I’m looking at the Jones Frontier and need some advice on sizing. I’m 169 cm, 94 kg, and wear US 9 boots. I’ve been riding the Jones Mountain Twin 2020 in 154 cm, which I sized down to help with turning when I was moving from beginner to intermediate. I’d say I’m a lower intermediate rider now.
I’m leaning toward the Frontier since I’m getting more into freeride. I’m stuck between 156 cm, 159 cm, and 162 cm. I feel like 162 cm might be a bit too long and hard to turn, but 156 cm might not be great for my weight. What size do you think would work best for me?
Appreciate your help!
Hi Pat, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 159/160. I think the 159 would be spot on. Even with freeride being your main thing, with US9 boots, I would err to the 159, rather than going up to the 162, which I think is overall too big, especially when combining width and length. The 156 a bit small for you, I would say. The 159 is just right, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
First of all, great review, and thank you for contributing to the community! I’m coming here to discuss the sizing of Jones Frontier:
I recognize myself as an early-intermediate rider (175 lbs, US9, 6’0″) with around 10 days of snowboarding experience. Before purchasing the board, I rented 155cm snowboards, and I can change from green to black on most runs. I tend to focus more on carving techniques, and I can do some fundamental edge ridings in green and blue runs. I bought Jones Frontier 159 during the sale at the end of last season, thought it might perfectly match my riding progress and “philosophy”.
I went to try it in March (the snow was terrible). And OMG, it was the destroyer of my confidence and I’m feeling like a true beginner again… I felt extra hard to initiate the turns, and I kept escaping from the speed and leaning my weight backward, which made it worse. The terrible slushy snow could be one factor, but there is a certain disharmony between me and the board.
I’m now considering selling this one and re-purchasing a 156 to give it a try (yes, I just can’t reject the design of this board, and I still trust that this one matches my “IDEAL” riding style). Do you think this could work? Is 3 cm really that matters? Any opinions are welcomed! Thanks!!!
Hi Ben, thanks for your message.
3cm can make a much bigger difference than you’d think. It’s not so much the extra 3cm of overall length that makes the difference, but rather the effective edge. If you were to add or takeaway 3cm of length outside the contact points of the board (i.e. reduce or lengthen the tip or tail), then the difference would be hardly noticeable on groomers, apart from the weight difference, but even very small differences to effective edge can be quite noticeable. So it’s not so much the 3cm of total difference that you would notice on the 156 vs 159 Frontier, but it’s more the 2.6cm of difference in effective edge that would be noticeable.
Part of what may have been making the 159 hard to turn as well is likely to have been the width. The Frontier is a little wider than typical regular width boards. This means your feet are likely further inside the edges of the 159 Frontier than they would have been on your 155 Rental boards. When your feet aren’t close to the edges of the board, it affects leverage to the edges, which can make it harder and slower to initiate turns on. The combination of that extra effective edge and width would be quite noticeable. The conditions probably made things that much worse too.
So, while the Frontier has a fairly low effective edge overall length ratio, it is wider, so depending on your boot size, is something that you can go up or down in size on. In your case, while I would put your I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 159, you could size down for this as it is wide for 9s. The 159 isn’t wrong as such, IMO, but the 156 is also in a good range for you, IMO.
If part of the problem is catching edges, then another thing you can do is have the contact points detuned.
tldr; yes the 3cm will make a noticeable difference, IMO, and the 156 will be an easier board to ride and suit your boot size better as well.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the reviews. I can’t decide what to get. I am 6’6″ long and only 170 pounds. Shoes size 11,5. For my length I think the 164W will be good, but while I’m not that heavy I’m leaning more to the 161w.
At the moment I’m driving a 162w traditional camber (Burton Honcho). I think I am more of a advanced ride than a intermediate. Being mostly on the groomers. But also loving powder.
Hi Nol
Yeah, I would go with the 161W. The 164W is getting too big for your weight, IMO. It wouldn’t be wrong, but I’d be leaning 161W for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
Awesome website as always! I wrote a while back on the Mountain Twin review and now I’m considering the Frontier as well. The Jones website states that the Frontier (156) a reference stance of 58cm has and the centered stance is 56cm. Do they mean centered on total board length or centered on sidecut? Jones reference stances are quite confusing…
Thanks again in advance!
Hi Philip, good to hear from you again (and apologies for the delay in response – still catching up trying to get reviews etc published!)
Yes, I agree that Jones’ reference stances are confusing. And setback in general can be confusing.
The centered stance in this case refers to centered on effective edge. So you wouldn’t be fully centered on the board, as the nose is longer than the tail. The reference stance is with a 2cm setback. I’m going to use numbers from the 159, as that’s the board I measured, but just to give you an example of how it works.
The 159 Frontier has a 60cm stance width. The measurement (from reference stance) from center of front binding to the nose is 52.5cm and the center of the back binding to tail is 46.5cm (add these 3 together and you get 159).
The difference between the center-of-front-binding-to-nose and the center-of-back-binding-to-tail is 6cm (52.5-46.5). And because the setback is half of that difference, the setback on the overall length of the board is 3cm.
But some of that setback is because of the difference between the nose length and tail length. The nose of the Frontier 159 is 23.5cm and the tail is 21.5cm. This difference of 2cm accounts for 1cm (we have to halve it – it’s confusing!) of that overall setback. So of the 3cm of total setback, 1cm of that setback is because of nose/tail length difference and the other 2cm is the setback on effective edge (which is always what the published setback is).
So if you were to move to a centered stance (e.g. by moving your back binding one set of holes closer to the center of the board) – that would be centered on effective edge, but you’d still have that 1cm of overall length setback.
Hope that clears it up and didn’t make it more confusing!
Hi Nate,
I am trying to figure out my first real big upgrade (in 17 years…) from my 2008 Burton Royale 157cm. I got size medium Burton Step On Genesis bindings with Photons size 10 last year as my old Mission bindings finally broke, now for a new board.
I’m between this Jones Frontier (162cm I think), the Yes Standard Uninc (159cm), or the Cardiff Crane (158cm).
Would love your insight! Looking for a new single board quiver killer for me.
Some info about my riding:
WHERE/WHAT: New England, though aspirations to take it with me for pow out west. This means I deal with icy areas. I typically hit groomers, hard pack, try to find powder. Also want it to handle the chunder and spring slush well. I ride blues and some blacks. I don’t ride parks or features.
MY RIDING STYLE: I am a mid-high intermediate, low advanced, not an expert. I have been working on trying to improve my carving lately and expect to want to push more into it. I’m linking these on blues, though skid between on some steep blacks. I don’t do park, don’t need to butter or any of that, no real need for the board to ride switch…some directionality would probably be good I’d think. I do try to hit some speed at times. I want it to handle powder and ideally be able to set back if I bring it out west (goals). Being nimble and turning easily/quickly is good.
WANTS: As mentioned, quiver killer, performing well in all of the above. Let me push the carving, hit pow, deal with ice/slosh and chunder. I definitely do not want it to be unforgiving and difficult to ride, that would be annoying. Ideally some stability at speeds and through rough would be nice.
Would love your input here!
Best,
Jeff
Hi Jeff, thanks for your message. And apologies for the late reply – been working to get the 24/25 reviews out and updating stuff (super late this year!).
I don’t have any experience with Cardiff boards, so can’t say anything about the Crane. The Frontier could work for sure. Not killer at speed or on a carve, but still decent enough. And goes well in pow and certainly not difficult to ride. The Standard Uninc could also work, but it can be a little unforgiving in terms of being something that takes more energy to ride – like if you’re feeling tired could feel more fatiguing kind of thing, because it requires more rider energy to get the best out of it. Also not as good for powder, but not terrible either. It’s certainly got the Frontier on carving and speed though.
Some others to consider (these are all either really good in icy conditions, or at least better than average, in my experience):
– Slash ATV – killer carver, but a little more forgiving than the Standard Uninc – not really better than it in powder though, would be the only thing. But certainly doable in powder.
– GNU Forest Bailey 4 x 4 – again not really gaining anything in terms of powder, but still a good carver and a bit more forgiving than the Standard Uninc, IMO.
– Never Summer Swift – definitely has the powder thing covered. Not quite as good in hard/icy conditions as the likes of the Standard Uninc, but still decent. And is a good carver, despite how easy it is to ride/turn.
Getting a little more challenging to ride, but still nothing too unforgiving, you could also check out:
– Never Summer Valhalla
– GNU Banked Country
– YES Pick Your Line
Hope this helps
Thanks so much Nate! Leaning towards Yes, heard good things and your mention seems to agree with that.
Would the PYL Uninc be a good pick, I know you mentioned the normal PYL? I’ve heard it can have some benefit over the normal PYL, just don’t know if it’ll be overly difficult. Also what size do you think, 159 or 161?
Hi Jeff
From your original comment, I would go PYL over PYL Uninc. The PYL Uninc is stiffer and a little harder/slower to turn – and since you mentioned nimble turning and easy turning but also that you like to ride at speed, I think the PYL is the better balance of those things. The PYL Uninc would give you more stability at speed, but at the sacrifice of some nimbleness. The PYL is still nice and stable at speed and more nimble than the PYL Uninc, in my experience.
Size-wise, if you could let me know your weight, boot size and height, that would be needed to give a suggestion for that. Apologies if you provided those already, I couldn’t see them in your original message.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the reviews.
I’m a solid intermediate rider in Europe, and mainly stick to on-piste, but like to ride fast and play around. I hired a Jones flagship 161 last year, but looking at the Jones Frontier to purchase.
What size would you recommend for 185cm, 168lbs and US11?
I’ve seen a 158W from last season online, I wondered whether I should go for it?
Thanks
Hi James, thanks for your message.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159/160, so I think the 158W would be good for you. Especially given it’s width and you’re not like in 12+ size boots. I don’t think you’ll find it too small or too big. That’s the size I would lean towards with your specs. Depending on a few things (like binding angles, boot profile, stance width), you may fit width-wise on the 159, which would also be a good choice, if those things were in your favor and it didn’t end up being too narrow, but the 158W shouldn’t feel too wide for you either, assuming your feet aren’t swimming in the 11s.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate. Robert here again. I wrote about the Burton Deep Thinker before. I am looking at this board here and it looks like a really good board. Would this compare to the Ride Shadowban?? Size wise on the Jones Frontier I am looking at a 159cm or a 162cm. I plan on keeping my Burton Flight Attendant in which is a 159cm. I am 181cm 198lbs. Boot size 9.5.
Size wise for a Ride Algorythem and Shadowban?? 157cm or 161cm??
Hi Robert. Good to hear from you again.
I think the 162 would be the best match for your specs. It’s likely to feel a similar size to your Flight Attendant 159, maybe a touch bigger, but not by as much as the 3cm difference would suggest. If you wanted it really playful and to feel smaller than the Flight Attendant, then the 159 wouldn’t be wrong, but the 162 is the better size for you from a stand alone perspective, IMO.
For the Algorhythm and Shadowban, I would be looking at the 161.
The Shadowban is similar-ish to the frontier, but they’re certainly not the same boards. More similar than the Algorhythm is to it though – and the Shadowban and Frontier more similar to each other than they would be to the Flight Attendant as well, in my experience.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
According to your help, now i bought the frontier 152. I have a few question about setting up the board. If reference stance (56cm) is too wide for me and wants to narrow it down to my preferred stance at around 53. There are 2 option.
1. If i want to keep the reference set back i need to move front binding 1 hole toward the center and back binding 1 hole toward the center. That will leave me with 52cm stance.
2. If i want to centered the board and narrowed the stance. I need to move back binding 1 hole toward the center. And i will have 54cm stance.
Am i understand it correctly? Or do i have any others option
Thank you again. Your reply helps me a lot last time
Hi Aei
Thanks for the update and good to hear from you again. It depends on the bindings you have. Some have more micro adjustability than having to move a full hole at a time. In that case, you would be able to move both bindings towards the center by 1.5cm in some cases, to get right on that 53cm stance but with the same setback.
But some bindings you can only move a full hole at a time. In that case the 2 options you have listed are 2 of the options. The third option is to move the front binding towards the center of the board by one whole to get a 54cm stance but increase the setback a little bit. Given your style of riding, I would either go with option 1 or 3 and which you go with might depend on whether you prefer your stance at 52cm or 54cm. You could try both and see which you liked the feel of more.
Hi Nate
Thank you very much for prompt reply. Really appreciate it. Now i knew what options do i have and will try it next season.
Hope next season treat you well!
You’re very welcome Aei. Hope you have a great time next season too!
Hi Nate,
Thanks for this great review and your others. I bought the Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker according to your recommendations and I am very happy with it. Now I might add the Jones Frontier to my quiver.
My stats are
180cm tall, 8.5 boots and 79kg body weight.
I would think that the 159 might be the right size but on Jones website they recommend me the 162.
Do you have some guidance on which to prefer?
I mostly ride groomers and off-piste.
Thank you.
Best regards,
Jan
Hi Jan
Great to hear from you again.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159/160. The Frontier is something you can size up for, in terms of effective edge. However, it’s also a wider board and with 8.5s I would size down. So, in this case, I think that brings you back to the 159. I would size up to the 162 for effective edge, but then back down again, as the 159 will be wide for your boots and so going that little bit shorter compensates for that extra width. I think the 162 would feel too big, when taking into account length and width.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks a lot for that detailed response. Makes perfect sense and is a great explanation.
Best regards,
Jan
You’re very welcome Jan. Happy riding!
GREAT REVIEW! Looking at purchasing a Frontier. I ride blue groomers and I am an intermediate rider. I am 6’2” and weigh 210 lbs. Currently wear 10.5 Burton photon step ons. Would the 165 be a good fit for me. I didn’t know if it’s wide enough. My bindings are set at 18/6 and I also ride 18/-9 at times. Would love to hear your thoughts and opinion. Thanks.
Hi Greg
Thanks for your message.
Length-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163/164, so you could go either 162 or 165. Typically I would be erring shorter for an intermediate rider, but the Frontier does ride small (it has less effective edge vs overall length vs a lot of boards) – so you can upsize a bit on it.
You shouldn’t have any problems with it being too narrow, IMO, even in the 162, with 10.5 Burton Photon Step Ons. It’s wider than a typical regular width board and wider than the waist width makes it look. You’d be looking at around 273mm at the back insert (at a zero degree angle) on the 162 and more like 277mm at the back insert on the 165. So the 165 is actually getting a bit wide for your boots, IMO. With 10.5 Photon Step Ons most likely being around 30.8cm on the outsole (note that we measure the actual sole length and not from the longest part of the heel of the boot), you’d be looking at total overhang of around 3.5cm or 1.75cm for heel edge and 1.75cm for toe edge (assuming perfect boot centering) and that’s well under the maximum you’d want, IMO. With a 6 degree angle you’re not saving a lot of overhang, but you’d get a little bit less with that angle.
Because of the width and being an intermediate rider, I would be tempted to err more to the 162, even though it’s a board you can ride longer. But the 165 definitely wouldn’t be wrong.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much Nate! I really appreciate it!
You’re very welcome Greg. Happy riding!
Hello
Thank you, this is a great review. I’m thinking about getting Jones frontier but I’m not sure about my size between 152 or 156. It would be great to get your help. I’m an intermediate all mountain rider, mostly in Japan. I’m 174cm , 60kg and 9-9.5us. Not sure if i should take my boot and binding into account but 60kg is my weight without it.
Thank you and have a great day!
Hi Aei
Thanks for your messages. Given you don’t do any park or jumps and you will get plenty of powder, I think the Frontier would be your best choice. The Mountain Twin does have a little bit of a setback (10mm at reference or 20mm setback at freeride stance or centered at freestyle stance), but the Frontier is more directional and better in powder, IMO. It’s also a great board for an intermediate level, so I think it would be a great choice for you.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 151. So the 152 would be your best bet, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thank you for your response. Really appreciate it.
Aei
You’re very welcome Aei. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
I read through all the comments and I’m still not quite sure what size to buy.
I’m currently riding a Neversummer Snowtrooper 162 that’s 6 seasons old. So, I was gonna upgrade to a Jones Frontier in either 159 or 162.
I’m a solid intermediate who really likes cruising groomers. Never hits the park. Will occasionally ride switch just to become a better rider. I’m mostly on Midwest man made / hard pack , but take a trip out west each season to hopefully hit some powder and trees. I think my current board handles most of my riding pretty well. It did seem a touch long in the trees, but that was a first for me.
My stats are :
5’9”
215lbs
Size 10 Burton Photons
Burton Stepon Genesis bindings
So what do you think. 159 or 162?
I appreciate the help.
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161, so you could go either way, but I would be leaning 162 for the Frontier. While it’s on the wider side for 10s, which indicates sizing down a little, it’s also got less effective edge (vs overall length) than the average board, so you can ride it in a size that’s a little longer. For reference, some specs vs Snowtrooper.
– Snowtrooper 162 – 125cm effective edge, 256mm waist, 300mm tip/tail, 265mm/267mm width at front and back inserts
– Frontier 162 – 116.6cm effective edge, 256mm waist, 300mm tip/tail, 270mm/273mm width at front and back inserts (note Jones has this at 268mm/270mm at inserts)
Both of these are assuming a stance width of around 22″. So while the Frontier is wider overall, it’s also got a lot less effective edge, so I think will feel a little smaller overall. 159 wouldn’t be wrong, but I’d go 162.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the insight.
I was able to snag a 162 from REI. With the end of season sale and my dividend I got it for a steal.
I hope it gets here in time to hit the hill before the end of the season. Not too many days left here in the midwest.
Thanks again for the help!
You’re very welcome Matt. And awesome you were able to pick it up for a really good deal, by the sounds of it. If you get it in time and 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
Thank you for your great review. It helps a lot. I’m still deciding between Mountain twin and Frontier. I think I’m intermediate rider who don’t do park, no jump. I like to ride on groomer and pow with my kid. Most of my ride are in Japan, so expect some more pow.
As i can see there are a set back on both board (pls correct me if i’m wrong). Is it a lot different between those two?
I also still confusing with my board size. I’m 174cm, 60kg and 9-9.5us. My old Salomon scout is 8.5us but my Burton Ruler Step on is 10us. I think my actual feet are around 9 (but i still fit my step on well) I would love to hear your thought.
Thank you!
Hi Nate, thanks for such helpful informative and advice.
I’ve been riding since the mid ’80s. My current boards are a couple of hard boot carvers and a Jones Storm Chaser 142.
I’m looking for an all around soft boot board and my search has brought me to the Jones Frontier. At this point in my life I need a board that’s easy to maneuver and just have fun on when riding with friends. I’ll be at Snowbird soon and the people I’m with do not hard boot, so if there’s no pow and I’m not using my Storm Chaser, I’ll need a conventional board like the Frontier. I don’t do jumps or parks and avoid the trees unless my friends drag me in there haha. I’m a lifelong surfer so I basically like to carve and do surfy turns. (That’s why I like the Storm Chaser so much in the pow!)
Height; 5’7″
Weight: 140 lbs
Boot Size: Salomon Factions BOA 9.5 US
Physical Condition: I’m in excellent shape, but getting old!
1. Is the Frontier 152 a good choice for me?
2. Recommendations for bindings?
3. Any other boards I should consider?
Thanks again for all the help!
Francis D.
Hi Francis
Thanks for your message.
I think the Frontier would be a good bet for what you’re looking for and the 152 would be a great size too. That’s exactly the all-mountain size I would put you on for your specs.
In terms of bindings, I would be looking at something in the 6/10 to 7/10 flex range. something from one of the following would be a good bet.
>>Our top All Mountain Bindings Picks
>>Our Top All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings Picks
Hope this helps
Thanks for the prompt reply Nate. You’re the best!
F.
You’re very welcome Francis. Hope you have a great rest of your season!
Hi Nate!
Thank you for your excellent work!
I am in doubt between 152 and 156 frontier.
I am 170cm, 70kg, 8.5 salomon faction boots and my stance is around 50 cm. I am low intermediate rider, mostly freerider, most of the time in piste (but all terrain lover) and looking for single quiver board.
According to jones size chart I think I am close to 156, but reference stance of this board (58 cm) is wider than stance I usually use (50 cm), that makes it compulsory for me to use the narrower stance available.
Im the other hand with 152 I’m afraid it will be too short for me according weigth and boot size.
I would appreciate knowing which option you think is better for me.
Thanks in advance!
Hi Bronko
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 154, so right in between. So the question is whether to size up a little or down a little. For you I would size down to the 152. The main reason being that with 8.5s (I’m making the assumption that you mean US8.5, but if you mean UK8.5 please correct me), both the 156 and 152 are on the wide side for you. But with the 152 being a bit of a size down, you compensate for it being wider. Note that the Frontier is wider at the inserts than you’d typically expect compared to the waist width.
The 152 Frontier, according to Jones is around 264mm at the back insert and 261mm at the front insert. I find that’s a really good width for 9.5 and 10s. With 8.5s, it’s not super wide, but it’s on the wider side, but sizing down that little bit makes it a really good size for you, IMO.
And with your stance width, you’re going to have a lot of board outside your feet on the 156. On the 152, you’re not that far from reference stance, so your stance width would work much better on that, as you point out.
Hope this helps with your decision
hi Nate, I would like to buy my second board and the Jones Frontier fits the specs very well! I’m a little unsure about the size. I’m 75kg and wear a Thirtytwo TM2 in size 11, which actually fits like a 10.5. Which size would you prefer? 158W or 159? I am an intermediate rider.
The sole of the boot is about 31,5cm.
Thanks and Regards
Chris
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message and apologies for the slow response – have been testing a lot of gear recently and a bit behind on here.
Width-wise, you should be fine on the 159. For this board I wouldn’t go wide with 11s, particularly with 31.5cm outer sole length. The 159 is around 27.2cm at the back insert (assuming a 22″ (560mm) stance width and even if you have a zero degree angle on your back binding, I think you would be all good.
In terms of length, the 159 is probably good, but if you could also let me know your height. While weight and boot size are the most important things for sizing, I still like to take height into account as there is a leverage factor. Also, what is the board you are currently riding? And its size?
Hope this helps
Hello Nate, and thank you for your reviews! I had buy a yes typo 156 wide but I return it because when I saw it and feel the weight of it it seems to me it was going to be a little bit heavy and wide. I’m think to buy a frontier 156 instead. I am 77 kg 1.77 cm and 10.5us Nitro boot. I am a playful all mountain rider who likes to do a little bit of everything. I like to carve too but the really low and aggressive carves are not my priority. Do you think the width of this board it’s going to cause me problems? Thank you!
Hi Stef
Thanks for your message.
I don’t think you should have any issues with the width of this board with your boot size. The Frontier is a little wider than the average board, so you’re looking at around a 266mm at the front insert and a 270mm width at the back insert (assuming a roughly 22″ (560mm) stance width). With 10.5s, even if you were doing low carves, you’d likely be fine. Note that Jones lists the front insert width as 264mm and the back insert at 267mm – so we are little bit apart on that, but even if there measurement is more accurate you would still be fine.
Note that I would predict the 156W Typo to be around 267mm at the inserts (YES has it as 267mm front insert and 266mm back insert – though this doesn’t really make any sense – there’s no taper in the board, so the back insert shouldn’t be narrower – in fact if anything it might be a little wider – because of its setback stance – but the setback on it is so subtle that it didn’t make any measurable difference for me, but maybe 0.5mm difference or something), so in terms of insert width you wouldn’t really be going narrower, or if so, not by a lot, but in terms of overall width you would be quite a bit narrower (7mm narrower waist and 8mm narrower tip/tail) which will make a difference. The Frontier is well suited to the style you’re describing, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate,yes this help a lot.
Frontier or slash happy place as a one board quiver for all mountain riding?
Hi Stef.
The Frontier as a one board quiver for sure, IMO. The Happy Place is more of a freestyle/park board. I just rode the 2025 model and it’s not quite as playful as I remember it – better for speed and carving than I remember, but it’s still not as versatile as the Frontier for all-mountain riding, IMO.
Hello Nate,
Thank you so much for your response. I‘m 1,78cm tall.
At the Moment I‘m on a Slash Happy Place 155W which was my First Snowboard. I learned on that Board and now i want a more versitaill Board. I‘m Not that guy that hit the Park. I normally Ride Piste and a little bit of Sidecountry.
Hi Chris
I think the 159 would be your best bet for the Frontier. And the Frontier should suit your riding style well, IMO.
Hi Nate! First of all, I would like to thank you for the work you have done. And then. I’m torn between 161w and 164w . My height is 184 weight 96 kg boots 11,5us. s I am a intermediatenowboarder
Hi Greg
Thanks for your message. Apologies for the slow response, was travelling overseas and haven’t had the chance to get to your message until now.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163 – which would put the 164W closer, but given you’re an intermediate, I would err a little smaller, so I’d be leaning 161W. It is a board you can ride a little longer, so the 164W is certainly still an option and wouldn’t be wrong, so I would be leaning 161W. However, if you’re style has you enjoying riding fast a lot of the time, then the 164W might be the better option.
Hope this helps and hasn’t come too late
Hey Nate,
Thanks for these reviews, they are super helpful.
as an intermediate rider who doesn’t hit the park, mostly the slopes and pow. I was considering getting Jones Frontier 161w and Union Str L for myself. I’m 187 cm, 85 kg, and wear 9.5 mid-profile boots.
I’m not sure about getting the wide one. Based on my specs & riding style, what do you think?
Best,
Aaron
Hi Aaron
Thanks for your message. With 9.5s (assuming it’s US9.5s) I wouldn’t go wide with the Frontier. The regular width should be plenty wide for your boot size. And your boots should fit fine in the Str M as well.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. So, you could go either 162 or 159. If you’re looking to optimize for powder float and stability at speed, then I would look at going 162. If you’d prefer to optimize maneuverability, at the sacrifice of a little float/stability, then the 159 is in range. I would be leaning 162, but depends on how you want the board to feel.
Width-wise, on the 159, it’s around 272mm at the back insert, which is plenty wide enough. Even for 11s, this would be wide enough in most cases. Let’s say you have bulkier 9.5s, you’re still looking at something that would be plenty wide in the 159, and then the 162 is a little wider again. The 161W, IMO, would be too wide for your feet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
Merry Christmas! I appreciate the content and review. I think it’s spot on. Forgive me if this question has already been addressed (this thread has a ton of great comments and responses going back a few years, well done)…
I just got the Jones Frontier ‘23-‘24, 159cm (Thanks, Santa!) No maiden voyage yet, but soon. The advertised versatility of this board is what sealed the deal for me (I hope it lives up to the reviews and advertising.) I’ve always ridden true-twins with no setback in the stance. This is my first directional with a freeride bias.
On the board, I can shift the bindings to the forward most position on the board essentially eliminating the setback, centering me on the board, and giving me that aesthetic (same length from tip to front foot as the tail to back foot) that I’m so used to being positioned on and looking down at.
I realize by doing this that I’m reducing (if not eliminating) the float, freeride qualities of this board. But my thought is by shifting the bindings fully forward it will enhance the freestyle capabilities of the board on those early season, no pow, man made snow/ice days where I’m doing more park and resort runs instead of the glorious, waist-deep pow days on the peaks, glades, and backcountry (in which I would definitely slam the stance in the back position and cruise).
Question(s): Do you think shifting the bindings this far forward on the board I’ll be doing more damage than intended good? Would I be eliminating other qualities of the board’s design that I’m not considering like balance, stability, board “center of gravity,” edge contact points?
Apologies for the long submission! Would appreciate any feedback.
Peace,
Lance
Hi Lance
Thanks for your message. You could center it up on effective edge, but I wouldn’t center it on the length of the board. If you center it on the total length of the center of the board, you will essentially have a “set forward” stance on effective edge, which would feel weird and you wouldn’t feel centered or balanced. This board has a longer nose than tail. The setback that is published for the board is how much it is setback on effective edge – so that 20mm setback is what it is setback on effective edge. So what you could do is move each binding up 20mm, which would have you centered on effective edge, but you’d still have a little more distance from nose to front foot than the tail to back foot, because the nose outside the contact point is longer than the tail outside the contact point.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
Again, thank you for your reviews, I have bought 2 boards so far based off your reviews!
I was taking a look at the frontier and they way you described its intended use and user are right up my alley. I like riding powder, trees, off piste, groomers, but not so much freestyle or park.
I have ridden a 159W Jones MT and loved how fast it turns. What would be your recommended size for a frontier for me?
Stats:
185lbs
10.5 Burton Ion BOA
181cm height
Additionally, when I rode the Jones MT it had large Union Stratas. What would be a good binding for this board? I am interested how this pairs well with the Nidecker Supermatics.
Again, thank you for all the work you are doing!
John
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160, so I would be leaning 159 for you. The 162 would also work as it’s a board you can ride a little longer if you want to. But given you’re riding trees as well, I would be erring towards the 159. Since this board is a little wider at the inserts than a typical non-wide 159, I wouldn’t go wide for this board. With 10.5s you’re right in the middle and for some boards it’s best to go wide but for others you don’t need to. The 159 Frontier is 268mm at the front insert and 272mm at the back insert (assuming a 22″ (560mm) stance width or similar). That’s a width I would be comfortable with with 10.5s, especially with Ion BOAs, which are nice and low profile.
I think this would pair well with the Supermatics. They make a good flex match, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!
I went looking for a 159 frontier but when I found it, the binding recommendations were an M/L. Do you think I would be okay using a Union Strata L binding on the 159s or should I go with the 158W or even all the way up to a 161w.
Thank you for all that you do!
John
Hi John
The M/L refers to M or L, and it’s brand dependent. So they would be saying this in relation to Jones bindings. But in any case, the Strata L, even though it’s a longer binding should fit the 159 Frontier. I haven’t tested the L Strata but someone measured it for me and said the baseplate was around 254mm and the footbed more like 273mm. While the footbed is wider than the width of the back insert, if the footbed (which sits higher than the baseplate) overhangs a little bit it should still be fine. I would be more inclined to make the bindings try to fit than changing the length of the board that much. Especially with 10.5 boots – going 161W would be too wide – and the combination of the extra length and width would overall make it a little too big, IMO.
Hi Nate!
Thank you so much for your replies these have been super helpful! Last question: I have decided on getting the 159 as per your recommendation, but was wondering if I would be better off to pair this board with a Union Falcor rather than the Strata. If you advise pairing it with a Falcor, would you recommend getting a Large or a Medium?
For context, I have a 10.5 Burton Ion BOA as my boots.
John
Hi John
You could definitely go Falcor on this board, it’s still a good flex match. It’s on the stiffer end of a good range, and I would say the Strata is a better flex match. But if you wanted to go stiffer with your bindings, the Falcor would certainly work, IMO. Going large with the Falcor would be the safer bet with 10.5s. You may fit in the M, but no guarantees. The Falcor have longer than average footbed too, but not as long as the Strata, so you should be fine with L in terms of binding to board to fit, IMO.
Hi Nate, great reviews!
Speedwise you gave the Frontier a 3.5 while I see many reviews saying the Frontier is more stable at higher speeds then the MT. What is the max speed you normally try the boards?
I am looking for a board just like the frontier but it has to be able to feel stable until at least 50mph+
Any advice? male 6ft4 220lbs
Hey Rob
Thanks for your message.
My typical speed test usually gets up to around 45-50mph.
The Frontier used to be a little more stable at speed than it is now, but it’s been mellowed out, by my feel. It’s not better at slower speeds, but does sacrifice some stability at speed. So yeah about the same as what you get with the MT. If Stability at those kinds of speeds is important, then it would pay to go stiffer. If you were looking at Jones, the Flagship or Stratos would work well. Or if you didn’t want a tapered shape, then the Aviator 2.0 or Ultra Mountain Twin would be good bets.
If you wanted to keep your flex to around 6/10 but with a little more stability at speed, then I’d look at the Rossignol One, Capita Mercury, Burton Custom, GNU Forest Bailey 4 x 4, Rome Stale Crewzer, Nitro Team, Burton Deep Thinker, YES Hybrid, Burton Hometown Hero. Note that these are a mixture of Directional Twin and Tapered Directional.
If you mean by board just like the Frontier, as in directional but without taper – then you could look at the Nidecker Thruster (more like 7/10 flex).
But I can’t think of anything with a 6/10 flex, directional (not tapered, but also not directional twin), with its hybrid rocker profile, 3D contour base AND has more stability at speed. But hopefully that gives you more options, but if you could let me know what in particular about the Frontier that you want, that would help to narrow it down.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your reviews. You are awesome!
I am 193cm and 100kg. I wear bots size 14. I am not sure if i should pick 164w or 167w. My next question is do you think frontier is a good choice for me? I prefer slopes dont like park and jumps. I am intermediate level. Sometimes I ride fast sometimes slow it depends on mood. Thank you for your help. I wish you all the best.
Hi Mark
Thanks for your message.
I think the Frontier would be a good bet for how you describe your riding, and it’s a really good board for an intermediate level, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your typical all-mountain length” at around 165W, so you could go either way.
Width-wise, I think it’s a really good pick too, as it’s wider than normal, which will help with your 14s. It’s wider than the waist width would suggest. At the front insert, you are looking at 280mm and at the back insert more like 284mm, on the 164W. This is assuming a 22″ (560mm) stance width. At your height, you’re likely to ride with a wider stance width, in which case it will be even wider at inserts. And the Frontier actually has a 23.6″ (600mm) reference stance. At that stance, you’re looking at more like 282mm at the front insert and 286mm at the back insert (on the 164W). At that stance you’d get 284mm at front insert and 288mm at back insert if you go 167W.
With 14s, it’s highly recommended to go wider than the average wide board, so this should work well for your boots too.
The Frontier is something that you can ride longer, because it’s not got a lot of effective edge vs overall length, so I would be leaning 167W in this case. But if you wanted to err shorter, the 164W is still in range.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate – greatly appreciate all your expertise. Just curious if you can give me any insight on if this board has changed much since it was called Explorer. I have a 2019 Explorer I’ve been on for last several seasons. Mine is still going strong but I’m wondering if the 2024 model is an improvement over the 2019 or basically the same board. Specs on Jones site lead me to believe it’s very similar to 2019 but since you’ve ridden both I thought I’d ask your thoughts. Thank you!
Hi dd
Yes, on paper it is a very similar board. And in reality it’s pretty similar too, but I would say that it’s mellowed out. When I first rode the Explorer it felt a little more aggressive/stiffer than what I felt the 2024 Frontier. To me, it now feels more like how Jones market it.
Now, on paper all I can see that’s changed is two things. Firstly, the base was a sintered 7000 on the 2019 Explorer and the 2024 Frontier is a sintered 8000 base. I haven’t double checked this, but this was one thing from a quick bit of research. The other thing that I noticed is that the 2024 Frontier mentions:
Which the 2019 Explorer doesn’t. So I also wonder if potentially, it’s just that the Frontier comes more broken in now. That said, both the Explorer 2019 and Frontier 2024 were both broken in by the time I rode them, so I’m not sure that would explain the more mellow ride, at least not completely.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Thank you Nate. I appreciate the information and sounds like no need for me to replace my 2019 at this point. Hope you have a great season (come on snow)!
You’re very welcome dd. Hope you have a great season too and yes, bring on the snow!
Hey there! I am 5’10” 180 pounds and wear a size 11 boots. I have Large Union strata bindings. Would a 156cm of this board fit my shoe size and be a good size for me? I am a lower level intermediate rider. I found a good deal off of Facebook marketplace but don’t want to buy a board I won’t be able to ride
Hey Joshua
I think you get away with it length-wise. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at closer to 159, but as an earlier intermediate, you could ride it in 156. The width is the biggest concern. This board is wider than most regular width boards, but it’s still pushing it a bit. I measured the 159 at 272mm back insert and 268mm front insert, with a 22″ (560mm) stance width. And I’d be confident that that would be wide enough. The 156 isn’t too much narrower, so I think you’d get away with it. Should be around 270mm back insert and 266mm front insert. That front insert width is pushing it for 11s, IMO, but given that you’re likely to have at least a 15 degree angle on that front insert, you should be OK. But no guarantees, width-wise, but I think it’s probably doable.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate.
Appreciate the reviews. I’m currently looking to buy a board for my first time, and I am hesitating on what to pick so some advice would be greatly appreciated. I get major analysis paralysis.
After looking at your skill chart, I feel that I am in the intermediate 5 category. Last season was the first time I had a season pass with season rentals, and I progressed a lot. I got to the point where the gear I had (especially the boots) were hindering my progress, so I’m wanting a setup that’ll let me get better for years to come. For reference I am 5ft 11in, 185Lbs, and 8.5 mens for boot size (per someone specifically sizing me for snowboard boots).
I mainly have done groomers but towards the end of last season, I started experimenting with small jumps and boxes in parks, going more through trees, hunting for deeper powder, and very simple tricks. This upcoming season my goal is to progress in all these areas along with learning how to ride switch and be more confident at higher speeds. With all that in mind along with the research I’ve done, I’ve been directed towards an all mountain directional twin with mid to higher flex since I want a single board that is competent (I understand not perfect) in all areas of the mountain. I have narrowed it down to 3 due to the tech, reviews, and graphics which are the Jones Frontier, Jones Mountain Twin, and Salomon Assassin. Any advice on these, along with good sizes for me, would be greatly appreciated. I am also open to suggestions for other boards that could be a better fit.
Not sure if this helps as well, but I am going to be getting step on boots and bindings since I’m lazy and like the idea of not having to sit down all the time to strap in.
Hey Alec
Thanks for your message.
Because you’re including tricks/park in your repertoire I would be leaning Mountain Twin or Assassin. The Frontier would certainly work but its more directional. While it’s better than the other 2 in terms of powder performance, it’s not as good for the more freestyle stuff. Between the Mountain Twin and the Assassin, there’s not a bad choice between them, IMO. I would personally lean Mountain Twin, but you can’t make a wrong choice between them, for what you’re looking for, IMO.
Size-wise size, I would be looking at:
– MT: 157
– Assassin: 156 or 159 – it’s a close call. I would say 159 is probably your best choice in the long run, but you might appreciate the 156 more now. But given you want the board for years to come, I’d be leaning 159.
– Frontier: 159
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hello Nate! Your insight has been very useful!
I want to make a choice between 2 boards. I have to asap as the Jones Frontier is one left.
Between Rome Warden 147 and Frontier 152.
I am 130 lb, 5’8, boot size 8. Intermediate rider, but i progress quick.
I want to go between trees, a little powder if available but not super super deep, some carving, and just fun quick turns. Very rarely a jump in the park here and there, but if board is horrible for that then I don’t care. I just want fun, quick turns and carves.
Do you think 152 Frontier is doable for me or is Warden 149 better?
Hi Tony
Thanks for your message.
We haven’t tested the Rome Warden, so I can’t say how it rides but on paper, I think it would work well for what you’re looking for. And, IMO, it’s the better size. Size-wise, I would go Rome Warden. But again, having not ridden, can’t say how it is to ride.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m thinking to get the Frontier but not sure the size, 152 or 156.
I’m 167cm 66kg US9.5
I was more towards to 152 but not sure if will be ok with my boot size.
I’m low intermediate not riding park much and going to Japan next season.
Thanks in advance.
Zac
Hey Zac
Thanks for your message.
I think the 152 is the best length for you. The width should be fine. You’re looking at roughly a 263mm front insert width and 267mm back insert width. This is assuming a 560mm (22″) stance width). But even with a narrower width, say 520mm – you’d still be looking at around 261mm front insert and 265mm back insert, which again, is plenty for 9.5s, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Awesome, thank you very much.
You’re very welcome Zac. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi,
First of all, thank you for your website, it is very helpful and I found a lot of information !
I would like to have your opinion please: I have been snowboarding for 10 years on rental boards for one week per year, I would say my level is between intermediate and advanced. I am 181cm tall, wear size 11 shoes and weigh 70kg (154lb). My board settings are +15/-6.
I’m looking for an all-mountain board for the slopes, having fun at the edge of the piste, and enjoying the powder. I don’t go to the park very often. I want a playful board that is not too difficult to use but is also reliable.
I’m hesitating between the Jones Frontier, Nitro Gullwing Team, and Rossignol Revenant (I found one at a very good price). For the size, I don’t know if I should go with a wide board. I would say the best size is 159 for the Jones Frontier, but I’m not sure with my settings, and 157w for the Gullwing ? 158 for the Revenant ?
What do you think ?
Thank you for your advice !
Hi Ali
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Revanant so can’t say for sure on that one, but based on specs it looks to be quite a bit stiffer than the other 2 – so not going to feel as relaxed/playful riding them as the other 2.
Size-wise, I think the Frontier should be just right in the 159. Width-wise (I recently rode the ’24 model in the 159) I measured the back insert at 272mm and the front insert at 268mm. Which works out really well with your binding angles – given that you get the extra width at the back, where your angle is less. Width-wise, I think it would be a great match for your foot/boot size. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” more at 157, but the Frontier is a board you can ride longer, so I think 159 is spot on.
For the Team Gullwing, I agree that the 157W is your best bet. It’s going to be too narrow in the regular lengths for that board.
The Revenant is likely to narrow in the 158, but hard to say for sure, having not measured it at the inserts before.
Hope this helps
Hi
Thank you for the answer, i’m going to found one of them and will give you a feedback when i will can use it ! (will stay on the frontier or the GW)
You’re very welcome Ali. Look forward to hearing feedback when you get a chance to test out whichever board you go with.
Hi Nate!
I’ve mostly rented but I’ve been looking to purchase a board and came across this Jones Frontier. For context, I’m 6’, 175-180 pounds and have a size 11 boot. I would consider myself beginner to intermediate.
There were a few things I was considering – my ideal board size seems to be 158-160, however place I’m looking to buy only has the frontier available in 162. I would ideally get the 159, but would the 162 be too much and hard to learn? I’m conflicted if I should just get the 162 or find a different board entirely.
Also, I was curious if I needed a wide board. The community seems to be divided on if my build and boot size needs a wide board, and the frontier at 162 seems to be just at the baseline on if I would get toe or heel drag. I don’t do any deep carves currently, but would like to eventually progress to be able to.
Thank you!
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
In terms of width. If you were to go 162 on the Frontier, I think you’d be fine. A lot of boards with a 256 waist are probably a little narrow for 11s, but the Frontier is wider at the waist than it looks, so it should be wide enough for 11s. I would be confident with 11s on it width-wise. The 162 would be around 270mm at the back insert and 273mm at the front inserts, assuming a roughly 580mm (22.8″) stance width. A little narrower if you were to ride with a narrower stance on it than I did, but still should be good with 11s.
In terms of length. Whilst this is the kind of board you can ride a little longer, making the 162 within range, I would recommend the 159 for you. For a particular style of riding, and if you were a more advanced rider, then I think 162 could work well. However, as a high end beginner/low intermediate rider, I think it’s going to be a bit too much board – especially given that it’s not what I would call a board that is that beginner friendly in the first place.
So, I think you would be better off looking at something else. If you could get it in the 159 (which would be a little more risky on the width, but probably still OK, depending on your binding angles and the profile of your boots (some are more low profile than others), then it would be more doable – but in that size and with it not being a super beginner friendly board in the first place, I think looking at something else would be the better choice, IMO.
You could try the following for some ideas:
>>Top 10 Intermediate Snowboards
If you can narrow down your choices (from that list or elsewhere) to 2-4 boards, I would be happy to give my 2 cents on specific sizing for each.
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate! I appreciate the insight – I went ahead and got the 159 frontier, but am now considering bindings. I was thinking about the Union Strata, but in another review you note it being quite long with its baseplate. Seeing that I would likely need large bindings, are there any bindings you recommend for this setup? I was also looking at the Union Force, Jones Mercury, and possibly the Union Atlas as well, but any recommendations that would fit my skill level and board width would be greatly appreciated!
Again, thank you for your information and advice!
Hi Alex
The Force would definitely work. The Mercury and Atlas would work on the Frontier too, but less suitable for your ability level, IMO. So would be leaning Force out of those. Some other good options that would be a good fit with the board and your level include:
Burton Cartel
Burton Genesis
K2 Lien AT
Hello,
I’m wondering your thoughts on sizing down on this board. I spoke online with Jones and they said 10 to 15 lbs over recommended weight was ok. I am only 5’10” with size 8.5 to 9 boots but I weigh 185lbs. I was wondering if I would be ok on the 156? I have ridden the 159 and I love the board but I’m really wanting something that is better for riding slow and being nimbler through the trees and ridding with my kids and popping off of side hits. I am a higher intermediate rider trying to progress to advance. I’m a strong rider so I don’t mind the stiffness and I do like to ride blacks with some speed and hike to terrain when I don’t have my kids, but I never just bomb hills. I am more of a laid-back rider that likes to explore the whole mountain, trees and hit all natural features. No switch or park.
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message.
I think you’d be OK on the 156. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” more at 159 and this is the kind of board you can ride a little longer if you want. But that said, it’s also a little wider than normal and with 8.5 to 9 boots, so I wouldn’t go as long as the 162 in your case. The 159 would still be a good option, but the 156 isn’t out of range, if you’re looking to gain more maneuverability. You will of course sacrifice a little in terms of stability at speed and float in powder but for what you’re describing, I think the 156 would be fine. I’m similar specs and rode the 156 and it didn’t feel super small or anything, so I think you should be fine for the style of riding you’re looking for. I’ve also ridden this in the 159 and I enjoyed it in that size too, but given what you’re looking for, no problem going 156, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate!
My girlfriend just bought me a Rome Ravine in 155. Will that work for the type of riding I will be doing? I’ve always rode cam rock boards so not sure if the camber all the way trough to the tail will feel in comparison. Will it be catchy on the back foot? I can still return the board but though I would get your opinion first since I was sold on the fast bases and 3d shaping of the Jones.
Hi Dan
We didn’t find the Ravine too catchy and it fits how you describe your riding style, IMO. And sizing it on the small side for your specs, in the 155, will help to make it nimble and will help make it more mellow overall. But it’s not an overly aggressive board to begin with, so I think you should be good with it. Hoping to have our Ravine review published early next week – keep an eye on the website for it, for more details.
Hi Nate
How are you?
First of all, I would ask your opinion about the MT and Frontier, because they have a big difference in your score.
I’m 6’1 tall, boots 11 or 11,5 and 177 pounds.
My ride level is intermediate to advance
Most of time I’m ridding groomed tracks or looking for some pow/off pist in the mountain , go sometimes to park but is not my main goal, but at the same time I like to hit small jumps at the mountain, ride switch and buttering.
What board and size would you recommend for me?
Thanks a lot man!
Hi Marcello
Because both boards are in different categories the weightings and scoring factors are different, so the scores are further apart than they might be if they were under the same scoring system.
That said, I would go with the Mountain Twin for what you’re describing. Even if you’re not often in the park, I think you’ll appreciate the Mountain Twin more for when you’re hitting those side-hits, riding switch and buttering. The Frontier would give you a little bit more in powder, but I think all-round the MT would be the best option for you. Size-wise, I’d look at the 159W. If you were definitely in 11s, I think you’d get away with the 160 width-wise though, so that’s an option. It would be more risky in 11.5s though.
Hope this helps
Hi
i’m doubting between 2 boards, the Flagship vs Frontier.
now i have a Nitro Pantera, and i want my next board to be little less aggressive, little more forgiving. mostly (>90%) i ride on prepared slopes.
i like to ride fast and look for effortless turning.
which one you would advice for me (size 44, 65kg’s, 15+ years, 2 weeks each year)
thanks
HI Jeroen
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t tested the Nitro Pantera, so I can’t compare them directly but from what I know of it, it’s pretty darn aggressive. So, I imagine both the Flagship and Frontier would be less aggressive. So I think it would depend on how much less aggressive you wanted to go. The Frontier is the more playful of the 2, naturally, so you would notice a bigger difference there. It’s still not what I would call a super playful board or anything and can certainly handle some speed and decent for carving too. The Flagship does offer a little more stability at speed. It’s a better board for riding fast, IMO, and it’s actually pretty easy to turn for it’s stiffness, even at slower speeds but the Frontier is still an easier turner, when it comes to slower speeds.
I imagine, based on specs of the Pantera, that the Flagship will be a little flexier (I felt it at 7.5/10 and is rated 8/10 – Pantera is rated at 9/10) and it does have some rocker in the profile which helps it to be more forgiving versus something like the Pantera with a full camber profile. The Frontier I felt at a flex of 6.5/10 (and has rocker too).
Happy to give you my sizing suggestions, but if you could also let me know your height as well. Weight and boot size are the most important factors, but I like to still take height into account as it’s still a factor, IMO, because of leverage.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate! First of all, I would like to thank you for the work you have done. And then. I’m torn between 164w and 167W. My height is 188 weight 102 kg boots 12us adidas tactical and I have a binding union force for this board and should I change them to satin? My level is beginner and my previous board was burton process flying v 162w which had an effective edge length of 126.5 cm. Please help me decide on the size of the board
Hi Umar
Thanks for your message.
As a beginner I think your best bet is the 164W. Even though you would be technically dropping effective edge it’s going to be a more stable ride than the Process Flying V and I think 167W is getting a little big for you as a beginner.
The Union Force are a good match for this board, IMO. I didn’t understand what you meant by “should I change them to satin?”
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I have had trouble deciding whether to purchase the Jones Frontier or Jones Mountain twin. I am a intermediate snowboarder who sticks to resort runs and trails, usually nothing too groomed though. I like to carve and have more of a surfy feel, and I definitely value performance in powder and ungroomed/bumpy conditions. Also, I generally stray away from any type of tricks and parks. Thank you!
Hi Tate
If you’re not really doing any freestyle stuff and not really riding switch and want that little bit more powder performance, then I’d be leaning Frontier. The Mountain Twin would still certainly work for what you’re describing, but I’d be leaning Frontier.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the quick response. Do you think the mountain twin has any benefits over the frontier besides park capability in this case?
Hi Tate
The Mountain Twin is lighter and just has a more dynamic feel – more pop/snap. But for the most part, it’s freestyle stuff, not just park – like it’s better for butters & sidehits as well, but yeah generally better in terms of freestyle and just that lighter/snappier overall feeling.
Hi Nate, thank you so much for the quick response. I just discovered the mind expander board, would you recommend this at all over the frontier? Also, at 6’1, 185 and a 10.5 boot size, would a 162 frontier be ideal?
Hi Tate
Yeah, I really liked the Mind Expander – particularly now that it has a little bit of camber in it (previous to the 2023 model was an all-rocker board). You can see my review on it here. Note that it’s even more directional than the Frontier – and even less suitable for switch and freestyle. But if you’re not doing any of that, then I would personally choose the Mind Expander (2023 model) over the Frontier.
Size-wise for the Frontier, I think the 162 is your best bet. The 159 is doable if you wanted to keep things more agile and easy going, but purely on specs, the 162 is the more pure size for you for this board, IMO. For the Mind Expander, I’d go 158 though. It’s a wider board – and also the Frontier is something that can be ridden a bit longer. For the Mind Expander I’d say the 158 is spot on for you.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking to purchase my first splitboard and am in between the Jones Frontier and Solution (aka Flagship). I’m 6’1″ 200 lb and was thinking either 162 Frontier or 158 Solution. I’m buying the board mostly for PNW Volcano spring skiing (i.e. variable ice/chunder, corn, moderately steep, open terrain (not double black couloirs).
I’ve been boarding for about 2 years and can hit most black diamond runs, depending on conditions. I currently ride the Orca as more or less a daily driver and love high speed carving, pow and trees.
Someone at the store recommended the Frontier over the Solution for my skill level, but I’m worried that the Frontier might not do as well on the volcano terrain as the Solution. What are your thoughts?
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
As I don’t test splitboards, this is only based on the snowboards versions of those boards. The Solution is essentially a split version of the Flagship – so this will be comparing the Flagship to the Frontier snowboards.
The Flagship is better for speed and powder versus the Frontier and just as good for carving. IMO it’s a little better for uneven terrain as well – so IMO would perform better in the chunder, corn etc. It’s a more challenging ride than the Frontier for sure, but it’s something you can get away with as a high-end intermediate rider bordering on advanced. If the Orca is your daily driver, then I don’t think you’d have any issues riding the Flagship (aka non-split version of the solution).
The 158 is pretty small for your specs though. I like the Flagship in 158, but I prefer to err a little on the small side for my size. I’m 6’0″, 180lbs, US10 boots. I could ride the 161, but I do like to err smaller, so I really like the 158. Having 20lbs on me, the 158 becomes quite small. I would be leaning 161 for your specs. Going 158 would mellow it out for you though, if you wanted that. But it would lessen it’s stability at speed and powder float, compared to how I found it.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much for the quick response, Nate! Your advice is super helpful and I really appreciate your entire website. Your reviews have been very helpful/informative for me as I’ve continued to grow and buy more advanced boards.
You’re very welcome David. Thanks for using the site
Hi Nate,
I appreciate all the work that you put in this page.
After seeing all coments i’m also torn between the 156 – 159 (or maybe 158W)
My specs are:
Height: 176cm (5’9″).
Wheight: 76kg (167lbs).
Boots: 27.5cm (9.5US) – Model – Northwave Decade SL 2021 model.
I already know that i want the frontier, the only that i doubt is the sizing, i am low intermidiate rider, i ride 90% of the time groomers, i am doubting because i want the board to be stable, and not sink in pow, i like to go fast and learning to carve, but i also want the board to be playful to do side hits 180’s, and some presses (and eventualy some trees).
What size do you think i should go with?
Thanks in anvance!
Alex
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t go 158W. With 9.5s it will be too wide for you, IMO.
Between the 156 and 159, it’s a tough call. For most all-mountain boards, with your specs, level and how you describe your riding, I would say go 156. But the Frontier is a board you can ride longer. If you were a more advanced rider, I would say go 159. As a low intermediate rider. I would put you at round 157 as your “standard” length. As a low intermediate rider going to 156 makes the most sense, but with this board being shorter in effective edge versus the average board, you can ride it longer, the 159 would work in this case. For most I wouldn’t recommend going to 159 for you though. That said, the 156 wouldn’t be wrong in this case either. I would almost think of it as debating between 154 (156) and 157 (159). So the 156 would be sizing down a bit but that would help with ease of turns, trees, side hits, 180s etc. But it would be at the cost of some stability at speed and float in powder.
Sorry, that was kind of thinking out loud reply, but long story short – neither would be wrong, and it would really depend which you value more, float in powder/stability at speed, or maneuverability at slower speeds/freestyle stuff. Not like the 156 would be so unstable at speed or so sinky in powder that it would be bad or that the 159 would be terrible for maneuverability/freestyle stuff or anything, just that each would be more optimal for one or the other.
Hope this somewhat helps – it’s a really close call, which is why the answer isn’t super definitive.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the reply, it means a lot!
The thing is that i don’t go to the park at all.
I have been riding a 160 Rossignol Circuit until now, and for what i saw in your page i’m between level 5 and 6 Intermediate.
But i will progress of course so maybe a 159? ( I need size to progress with )
Or do you have any othe board you recomend?
Thanks!
Hi Alex
Based on the extra info, I would be leaning 159. 156 still not wrong, but I’d say 159 will suit you best in the long run, particularly as you’re used to a 160 all be it a much softer, easier going 160.
Hi Nate,
Just one last question, do you think this is a good board? Or how it compares to a Rossignol One LF (2020).
Tanks a lot,
Alex
Hi Alex
Yeah, I think it’s a good board. Not one of my all time favorites or anything, but still really good board and for the riding you’re describing, I think it’s a good bet. I would say I prefer the One LF but mostly because it’s a little more buttery and rides switch a little better which I like to have. In terms of carving, I preferred the Frontier on a carve – and both pretty similar for speed and powder. Both would work well for how you want to ride, IMO.
Hey Nate,
159 or 162? I’m 6′ 175lbs size 10 boots. Solid intermediate progressing to steeper runs, better carves, trees/glades and bigger hits (level 5-6), mostly resort riding with a little off-piste and the occasional park run (all-mountain leaning freeride with freestyle influences). <10% switch. I've honed in on the Jones Frontier and just need to nail down the right size. Since the effective edge is relatively short (as noted in other comments) I'm on the fence between the 159 and 162 models. I tend to ride with skiers most of the time so speed is a consideration. (Sidebar: I'm looking to run Flow Fuse Fusion rear step-in bindings for quick entry for those shorter East Coast runs with lots of on/off lifts – any thoughts on those?)
Thanks for all your prodigious thoughts about snowboarding, it's super helpful for the 'weekend-warrior' types like me.
Hey Mark
Thanks for your message.
I can see your hesitation between the two sizes, as it is a tight call between both for your specs and how you ride. Typically I would say 159 for sure but as you say, you can ride this board a little longer. Since you’re doing trees, but also want speed, some freestyle but also bigger carves – they kind of cancel each other out, in terms of using those to err one way or the other. I think the tie breaker in this case is that you tend to ride a smaller hill, by the sounds of it – with those smaller runs, there’s not as much chance to build up speed and open out for long speed runs – so I would (just) err to the 159. But the 162 wouldn’t be a wrong choice. I don’t think you would find the 159 bad at speed or anything – so it’s not a case of going 159 and getting something that’s going to be too wobbly – for your specs, I think it will hold up fine to speed – the 162 would, of course, be better at speed, but the 159 should be enough, I reckon.
Again, if you were to go 162, I don’t think it would be wrong, but I would be leaning 159.
I haven’t ridden the Fuse specifically, but I did ride the NX2-TM and the Fenix-Plus recently. I think if you wanted to get that quicker entry they’re certainly an option. One thing I would say with them is to really take your time to tweak the setup and be willing and ready to do some more adjustments on the hill on the first day you ride with them. It will take a bit of tweaking to get them in that sweet spot – but when you find it, you can leave them setup and then get that quick in and out. Just be aware that your first day on the hill with them, unless you can really nail that setup good at home, will likely have you slower than usual on the first day. Will have more details when I put out my reviews for them, but I liked them when I eventually got the setup right – it just took quite a bit of time to get that sweet spot. Either I had them feeling good to ride with, but not easy to get my foot in – or I had them easy to get my foot in, but not tight enough to ride with. When I got them right though, I thought they performed pretty well.
Hope this helps
Circling back after the season, the Frontier 159 worked out awesome and is a sweet board for all-mountain shenanigans! I got it out 6 or 7 times in varied conditions (from bluebird to full-on powder), and the performance was superb overall. Definitely glad I went with the 159, as the slightly shorter board made glades and bumps much easier to maneuver and it felt controlled and smooth carving some steep lines. I was impressed with the edge hold in icy conditions, much better than other boards I’ve ridden (mostly rentals and older freestyle boards). Surfing through fresh pow on the Frontier was just heavenly! You can feel the camber underfoot for ollies and jumps (with a bit more snap in the tail). The rocker and 3D shaping in the tip and tail definitely help reduce catchiness for landings and make for some really smooth edge-to-edge transitions. (In a separate comment I noted that the Frontier reference stance is too wide, and I went 1 insert toward the middle in front and back.)
For the Flow Fuse step-in bindings, it took most of the first day to get the settings and rhythms down, as you noted. I often need to make some minor tweaks when I step into it, partly since the binding straps don’t stay perfectly locked in place. After that it’s party time! So much faster to get strapped in and performance was great, no complaints. I would definitely recommend them to anyone frustrated with the repeated rite of strapping in. They work great for my needs and I’ll never go back to regular strap-in bindings again.
Hi Mark
Thanks for the update and the insights – much appreciated. Only problem now is the wait until next season to get back out there!
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the great review!
I am currently looking for new all-mountain snowboard to give my 6 year old YES Typo (156w) its deserved retirement. I came across the Jones Mountain Twin and the Frontier as the most suitable options for me (feel free to recommend different boards) considering my level and my riding profil.
I would categorize myself as an intermediate driver with only steep black and icy slopes giving me some real troubles resulting in sliding heavily on my backside/ not catching the board’s edge. I ride primarily on the slopes (which can get quite icy in the austrian alps) with some off-piste excursions into powder every now and then. I would like to ride a bit more in such off piste terrain plus making my first experiences in the park/ doing some small jumps. So i am basically looking for a board that can do a little bit of everything but mostly does well on the slopes and can manage higher speeds, as i feel like my YES gets a little chattery when going at higher speeds.
Would you say the Frontier and/or the Mountain Twin are suitable for it? I tend to go with the frontier as it is a little stiffer than the mountain twin
Which would bring me to my next question – board size. I like the maneuverability of my YES, but i think a longer one would help me with riding a bit faster, however i am a bit afraid the Frontier 161W feels a like a ship on the slopes. I am 186cm tall (6 feet 1), weigh around 76kg (168lbs) and wear a US11.5/12.
Thanks in advance!
Hi Oliver
Thanks for your message.
I think the Mountain Twin or Frontier would be a good step up from the Typo for you and would work for what you’re describing. The MT will be better for learning in the park, riding switch etc, but the Frontier, IMO, will give you a bit more in terms of carving and powder.
Size-wise, I would look at:
MT: 159W
Frontier: 161W
The Frontier rides short for it’s size. So the 161 is the equivalent of more like 158/159 in something like the Mountain Twin.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Could I please ask a small clarification about the measurements you’ve taken?
>> Width at Inserts: 266mm (10.47″) at front insert and 269mm (10.59″) at back insert.
Is this to be read literally, ie the first insert at the front foot and the last insert at the back? Or is it the widths at the reference stance/ your preference stance?
Thanks so much!
Hi David
Thanks for your message and good questions.
The width at inserts measurements I take are at the reference stance. If I ride a different stance to reference I usually note what it is at reference and the width at the stance that I rode it. To further clarify, the width is measured at the base of the board (rather than the top sheet) – from outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge.
In the case of a board with a setback stance but no taper, the back insert width is always wider (as the back insert is on a wider part of the sidecut, because it’s close to the widest part of the board). A board with taper and setback it really varies – if there’s not much setback, then the back insert is typically narrower – sometimes it can still be a little wider – or it can end up being the same. It depends on how much taper and how much setback there is.
So yeah, long story short, it’s the width at reference stance.
Hope this answers your questions
Yes, that’s great, thanks.
Sorry if it’s a stupid question but for a set back twin board like this one with a 2cm set back, if you want to ride it centered is it just a case of moving the bindings up one insert towards the tip? And what happens if you want to use a different stance?
For example the 162 is listed as 60cm which is quite wide. If I wanted 58 or 56 but keep it relatively centred do I keep the front on reference but move the back foot in one or two holes towards the front?
Thanks
Hi David
No such thing as a stupid question, in my books.
To center up the Frontier, you have two options – either move the front binding one set of holes towards the nose or move the back binding one set of holes towards the center of board. Doing the first option, you would be increasing your stance to 62cm, which isn’t what you want to do, by the sounds of it. So, moving your back binding one set of holes towards the center is your best bet, as this would give you a 58cm centered stance.
Note that this would be centered on effective edge. Because the Frontier has a longer nose than tail, you’ll still be setback on the overall length of the board, but you’d be centered on effective edge.
If you wanted to keep the reference setback and go with a 56cm stance width, you’d simply move the back binding one toward the center of the board and the front binding one set of holes towards the center of the board.
Hi Nate,
First of all, thanks for the work you’ve been putting to give us some advices about snowboarding.
To talk about my stats, I’m an in between level 4 and 5 rider who would like to buy the 2021 Jones Frontier.
I am 184/185 cm tall and weight around 83/84 kg (athletic I would say) . I wear US size 10 Vans implant pro boots (feet measurement = around 27,3 cm) and more inclined with resort and freeride snowboard style with some freestyle here and there.
Is this board (Frontier) a good choice for me to progress and if so, which size would you consider for me? I am torn between 159 and 162 and can’t decide.
Best regards,
Maxime
Hi Maxime
Thanks for your message.
I think the Frontier could work really well for you. It’s something that’s freeride leaning all-mountain and a good choice for your level too, IMO.
Size-wise, for you I’d typically say around 157-160 for your specs, level and how you like to ride. But the Frontier is a board that you can ride a little longer (less effective edge versus overall length than the average board – the 162 would ride more like a typical 160, the 159 more like a typical 157). So both are options really.
The 159 will be a little easier to ride – particularly in terms of maneuverability at slow speeds, butters, easier pop etc. The 162 will give you more stability at speed, more float in powder, better for big higher speed carves.
I think both would be fine, but depends on what you think you’d like to maximize. Given you’re athletic and sounds like you’re leaning more to freeride than freestyle? (but correct me if I’m wrong), then I’d be leaning 162.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for your answer!
It helps me a lot and encourage me in my choice.
My last concern was about the flex of the board as my more experienced friends told me that it would be too stiff for my level of ability.
What do you think about that?
Hi Maxime
I think it is bordering on being too stiff, given it sounds like your mid-level Intermediate (if I have that right?). I felt it at a 6.5/10 flex. If you’re a solid intermediate rider, with good technique you should be OK. Hard to judge someone’s ability level from description, but a between 4 and 5 intermediate, I’d say you’d be OK. Given that your concerned about it, going 159, if you do choose this board, might be the way to go. The shorter size will be easier to ride and will have a softer flex feel less than the longer 162.
Hey thanks for all the reviews! Im currently stuck between a jones frontier 159 or 162 or the yes standard in i guess 159 according to the charts. Im 5 ft 10 180ish and size 10 boot. Right now im riding my old k2 slay blade 156, which is fun and all but looking for something more stable at speed and can handle my weight better, ive had that board for arpund 10 years.
I rarely ever ride park and would only be riding switch if landing switch off side hits and things like that. Id consoder my self an intermediate rider just looking for a board to get me to the next level i guess and handle steeper terrain better than my old board.
Thanks in advance
Hi Jrainey
Thanks for your message.
For the Standard, I would be looking at more like 156 for you. 159 doable, but it’s getting on the big side, IMO. Mostly because it’s a wider board. I’m similar specs to you and really like the 156. The 159 will be quite wide for your boots. I think something around 158/159 typically for your height/weight specs, in a regular width board, but he 159 in this board is more like a wide. I haven’t ridden the Slay Blade, so I can’t compare how they are in terms of stability at speed compared to one another. Based purely on looking at specs, I don’t think the Standard would give you more stability at speed, in the 156 than the Slay Blade 156. Again, couldn’t say for sure, but if I had to guess, I’d say you wouldn’t be getting much of a boost there, if any. Going to the 159 you would, but I have my doubts about that size for you, given the overall size, when combining length and width.
The Frontier, opposite of the Standard, is a board you can ride longer than typical. And I would be having that same debate between 159 and 162. If it was quite a narrow board, I’d likely be leaning 162 for you. But it is actually also quite wide for a regular width board. The 159 certainly not as wide overall as the Standard 159, but still wider than the average regular width board, which kind of tempers the fact that it has a smaller amount of effective edge versus overall length than a typical board. Taking roughly a 22″ stance, you’re likely looking at around 277mm at the inserts on the 159 Standard (which is wider than a lot of wide boards) and around 269mm at the back insert and 266mm at the front insert. The 162 more like 271mm at the back insert and 268mm at the front insert, which is bordering on being wide versus a typical board (that said, the narrower waist does help with maneuverability, even with wider insert widths). Sorry, that got long!
Long story short, the 162 is doable for your specs, for sure, if you want to maximize stability at speed and float in powder. The 159 will be easier to maneuver at slower speeds, easier to butter, easier to setup for ollies, sidehits, etc. Versus the Slay Blade it’s really hard to say, but I’d say you’d get more stability at speed with both. I think the 159 would give you a bit more and the 162 considerably more.
Thanks for the reply, the slay blade is also a flat camber board so i assume the camber under foot should help a bit more. any other boards youd recommend over the frontier or standard?
Thanks Again
Hi Jrainey
Yeah, that camber will definitely help, for sure versus flat.
Some other options, that I think would work well:
– Capita Mercury 157
– Rossignol One 159
– Nitro Team Gullwing 159
– Jones Mountain Twin 157
– Arbor Shiloh Camber 159 (if you’re not too worried about powder performance)
Or if you wanted to go a little more aggressive (but not super aggressive) and weren’t too worried about powder, then:
– Arbor Wasteland Camber 158
– Abor Coda Camber
– Arbor Brian Iguchi Pro Camber 159
– Burton Custom Camber 158
And more options again, if you wanted to go even more aggressive.
Since you’re not that worried about switch, if you wanted to get more powder performance you could even look at some freeride options:
>> My Top 10 Freeride Snowboards
>>Top 10 Surfy (mellow) Freeride Snowboards
The first list for stiffer options. The second list for more mellow options. Also not the second list has some more powder specialists in there, so just pay attention to the score breakdowns to make sure.
Sorry for so many options, but there are a lot out there that would be suitable!
Hi Nate,
Thanks for a great site! I’ve always found it super helpful and informative. Keep up the good work.
Here’s the challenge: My partner and I are close enough to ride the same boards, albeit slightly small for me and slightly large for her. All good as I’m probably low-intermediate and she’s high-intermediate. We’re looking for another board to add to our mix. Our favorite right now is the Yes. Basic in a 155. It’s fun, playful and super forgiving. We’re looking for an all-mountain board that tends more towards the Freeride end of the spectrum. I was narrowing down to the Yes. Standard before someone pointed out the advantage of the directional Jones Frontier.
So, what board do we get? A 153 Standard (I know… not truly directional) or a 156 Frontier? According to the specs, that puts the Frontier below my weight. How big a deal is that?
Details:
Partner: 135 lbs, 5’10, 8.5 mens boot
Me: 175 lbs, 6’0, 9.5 mens boot
Boarding: East coast, lots of ice, often on the edges seeking untouched snow, occasionally in the tress, never in the park, often out all day
Note: I’ll be the one riding the board most of the time as I go out more often. She will just take the board she likes more when we’re both out and I’ll grab the other one. So, slight edge to edging to my sizing.
Hi Rob
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, I like to take into account weight recommendations from brands (I like to take everything into account!, but I certainly don’t see them as the only factor or that if you’re outside the range that it must be wrong. That said, the Frontier is a board you can ride a little longer, so the 159 probably would be the better size for you, even as intermediate rider, IMO. However, that doesn’t make the 156 wrong – and given that your partner is going to be riding it sometimes, I think 156 is the only option. It’s on the smaller side for you, but it’s not like crazy small for you or anything like that.
Note however, that personally I see weight as being a very important factor in sizing (and boot size), and height is really the most minor factor (though still something I take into account. Even as an advanced rider, I would typically say more like around 150cm length for your partner. And particularly when you put together the length and width of the Frontier, I think 156 is too big for them. However, that said, I would say that the 155 Basic is also quite a bit too big for them, and it sounds like they’re comfortable on that? So, in that case, they’re probably fine on the 156 Frontier (but I certainly wouldn’t go any longer!) but typically I wouldn’t recommend that size for their specs.
The Standard is better in icy conditions, but the Frontier is still pretty good there. The Standard isn’t as directional, but it is more all-mountain focused than the Basic. I would say it’s more all-mountain bordering on all-mountain-freestyle, whereas the Frontier is more all-mountain bordering on freeride, which sounds like it’s more what you’re looking for, so I would be leaning Frontier.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate !
Thank you (a lot!) for all of your work, it helped me more than you imagine.
I’m about to buy my first board, and I think the Jones Frontier is a good choice giving my skill level and what I want to do.
I only snowboarded for 1 week but I would describe myself as a level 5 according to your guide. I control my speed and can link turns without any real issue on red runs. I even did a few black runs and some off-piste to find untouched pow. However that was 2 years ago, but I intend to snowboard a lot more the years to come, so I would like to buy a board that will accompagny me during this time.
Last time I had a very old board a friend gave me and the cheapest rental boots I could find then. The board was too big for me, but very, very flex (according to my very, very advanced friend…) I am 180cm for only 58kg (128lbs)… I’m super light for my height but very athletic as well.
The board I had was 164cm and pretty old so probably heavier than what we find today, with I think a simple camber profile. It was nice as it was very stable and flex, but not so very stable at high speed or while trying to carve…
I plan to do mostly piste and a bit of off-piste for pow when possible (80%-20% I would say), so an all-mountain freeride like the Jones Frontier seems perfect. According to my height and weight, I’m between 152cm and 156cm. My feet are 26,2cm long (41,5/42 UE size or 8,5/9 US size).
What would you advise me ?
I’m also looking for advice for bindings and boots, so if you have any it would be great !!!
Thank you very much !!!
Hi Moha
Thanks for your message.
I agree that the Frontier sounds like a good choice for you, given everything you’re describing.
Usually for your weight, I would say go closer to 152. However, the Frontier is a board you can ride a little longer, so length-wise, the 156 is certainly doable. With your foot size though, I would be more inclined to err back to the 152. So, I think overall I would be leaning 152. The 156 is certainly doable though. Especially given that you rode a 164 previously and sounds like you didn’t completely hate it! And being athletic, makes a longer board more doable, even if it’s on the wide side for your feet. I wouldn’t usually say there isn’t a wrong choice for sizes 4cm apart, but in this case, I think you could ride both, but I would still be leaning 152.
Reference stance width on the 152 is still 560mm (22″) – and you can wider if you want to as well – so stance width isn’t going to be an issue for you on the 152 either (sometimes stance can be too narrow on a shorter board for people who are tall but light, but not an issue with the Frontier).
In terms of bindings and boots, I would look at getting something around that 6/10 flex, both for your weight and in terms of matching the board. I would say around 6/10 to 7/10 to match the board, in terms of flex, but I would be erring to 6/10 rather than 7/10 for your weight. But if you feel like you’d prefer something stiffer, the board can definitely match with 7/10. For options in that flex range:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>My Top All Mountain (medium to medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this helps
It helps a lot !!
Thank you so much for your quick and precise answer !
Really appreciate it :):):)
You’re very welcome Moha. Hope you have an awesome season when winter rolls around!
Nate your reviews are awesome and I enjoy reading them. My first board was probably to much for me and I think I got the wrong size. I currently have a 2018 Burton Custom X, 156. I’m 5’11 and between 190-195. Size 11 boot. Currently I’ve been to Breckenridge 4 times and whistler once. I can go down any slope but I’m very timid on blacks and not really linking turns well on those. So probably an intermediate rider. Took my lumps that first week out with the custom X. I’m still wondering if it’s to much board for me at this time. I love riding the mountain not doing much at all in the parks. I was looking at getting a 2022 Jones frontier or mountain twin and can’t decide. I would like to get to the point where I can bomb the mountain but I’d say at the moment when I get going to fast I’m quick to slow myself. Any advice on board would be awesome and on bindings as well. I have the burton cartels on my custom X and I’m using ride anthem boots. But was going to buy separate bindings with new board?
Hi Ronnie
Thanks for your message.
As an intermediate and for what you’re describing, I think the Custom X is a bit much. It’s a really aggressive, advanced board – and something that you really want to wait until you’re advanced and even then only if you want to really bomb a lot of the time. Sounds like it could work for you in the future, but right now I agree it’s a bit too much. It’s a small size for your specs, so that will have helped to mellow it out and not be quite as much of a beast, but still a lot of board.
Going to the Frontier or MT would be a good move, IMO. Given that it sounds like you’re not really interested in riding park/freestyle or switch (but correct me, if I’m wrong), I’d be leaning Frontier for you.
The Cartel, IMO, are too soft flexing for the Custom X, but they’re a good match to the Frontier or Mountain Twin. So I would put the Cartel’s on your new board – and then when it comes time to get back on the Custom X, if you plan on keeping it, then you could get new, stiffer bindings for it. The Anthem are also too soft (4/10 flex, by my feel), IMO, for the Custom X. Also a little too soft for the Frontier and MT, IMO, but they’re a better match to those boards than the Custom X. I would keep them for now, but when it’s time to get new boots, I’d go for something a little stiffer, even if you’re still riding the Frontier/MT.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi, I’m trying to decide which Frontier size to get, either the 158W, 161W or the 162. I have progressed out of the rental scene and am purchasing my first all-mountain board. I am
5’11 and 1/2″, weight fluctuates between 190-200 lbs, sz 11 Nitro El Mejor. Please advise.
Hi Ned
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, for this board, assuming at least at least an intermediate level, I would say 162 or 161W. 158 is certainly not a wrong length for you depending on the board and style of riding, but for this board in particular, I would look at 162 or 161W.
Between the 2, in terms of width, it will depend. The 162 will be around 270mm at the back insert (around 273mm at front insert) and the 161W more like 278mm back insert and 281mm front insert. If you can get on the 162, that’s what I would go with, but a couple of things to make sure it will be wide enough.
1. What are your binding angles. With more angle on that back foot, will give more leeway to go for the narrower option. E.g. angles like +15/-15 will give you a better chance than if you were riding with something like +18/+3 or something like that
2. How deep you like to go on your carves. If you like to really rail your carves (e.g. euro carving or similar) or if that’s something you really want to get into, then you’ll need a bit more width to avoid boot drag
3. Boot profile: I don’t test Nitro boots so I don’t know how low profile they are. From what I’ve heard from others they aren’t that low profile, but not super bulky either, but I can’t confirm that.
So yeah, long story short, if you can get onto the 162 width-wise, then that’s what I’d go for. If not, I’d go 161W.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Hoping to tap into your encyclopedic snowboard brain here as I survey the field to upgrade from an older setup I’ve long outgrown (2010 Skate Banana, 159cm) and a similar-era pair of Burton Cartels that are falling apart.
A bit about my riding style: I’m an intermediate/advanced rider that spends a lot of time in the trees, riding powder (or looking for it, anyway), and dealing with bumpy/choppy terrain. When it hasn’t snowed in a while, I’d love to be able to rip down groomers at high speeds (something the Skate Banana is not exactly designed for haha). Not much interest in riding park, though I do enjoy finding side hits and small drops here and there.
Measurements:
Height – 6’2″
Weight – 195lbs
Boot – Burton Ruler size 10
I’ve narrowed my search down to something in the all-mountain category, and both the Jones Frontier 165cm and Jones Mountain Twin 163cm seem like great options. Based on my style, would you recommend one over the other? While I know it shouldn’t be the deciding factor, I think I’m partial to the Frontier artwork. That said, it seems like you see the Mountain Twin as a better overall board.
I’d also be curious if you have any other recommendations in that price range that might be a good fit.
Look forward to hearing your thoughts, thanks!
Hi Ben
Thanks for your message.
I like the Mountain Twin more overall, but that also factors in riding the park and riding switch. I did find the Frontier a little better for carving, speed and powder though, which sounds like it’s the majority of what you’re doing. Frontier not as good for riding switch or jumps or jibs or that kinds of thing, but for what you’re describing, I’d be leaning Frontier.
Size-wise, usually I’d say 165 is a bit big for your specs, but the Frontier is a board that can be ridden longer, so I think 165 would certainly work. The 162 would also work. 162 would sacrifice a little in terms of float in powder and stability at speed, but gain agility for slower more technical sections (like in trees). So there’s a bit of trade off there.
Overall I think the Frontier would work well for what you’re describing. You could also check out the following, if you weren’t too worried about riding switch.
>> My Top 10 Freeride Snowboards
>>Top 10 Surfy (mellow) Freeride Snowboards\
The first list is only if you were happy going a little stiffer than the Frontier.
The second list is quite eclectic, so you’d want to pay close attention to the score breakdowns to make sure they’re suitable.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks so much for the response. The reason I threw out the 165 number for the Frontier is that’s the only size I’m seeing it available in from 3rd party retailers (sold out on manufacturer’s website).
Do you think that’s too big? I do like the nimble feel of the 159 (even as I curse its stability at times), so my only concern would be finding myself on something noticeably less maneuverable in tight spaces.
And thanks for the links – super helpful. Based on your reviews and descriptions, two other boards that stood out to me were the Pick Your Line and Hybrid from Yes. PYL obviously a bit more expensive, but has rave reviews everywhere I look and certainly sounds like it would fit my riding style. I’m seeing PYL available in 159, 160W, and 165. Of those options, which would you recommend?
Finally, I’m also planning to upgrade bindings. After lots of research, I’ve got my eye on the Union Stratas. With a size 10 boot, do you think a size medium would be fine? And I know the Strata baseplates run a bit long, would that affect your rec for board width?
Thanks again — really appreciate your insight!
Hi Ben
Yeah, I would say 165 Frontier would be like the equivalent of a 161 or 162 Skate Banana (if there was one). The 162 would be more like the equivalent of the 159 Skate Banana. So a similar feeling size. But you would still get more stability at speed from the Frontier 162 vs Skate Banana 159, IMO. So you’d gain there anyway. So, I’m thinking probably 162 in the Frontier, just to give you that extra agility in the trees versus the 165.
If you went PYL, ideally, and I know this isn’t what you want to hear, I think the 162 would be the best bet! But of those options, I’d almost be leaning 160W. It’s not super wide for a wide board, so should be fine in your 10s. The 159 would be the most maneuverable for sure. But also going to be the least stable at speed. That said, probably still better at speed versus the 159 Skate Banana, so you’d still be gaining something there. It’s just bordering on being too small. I think it would be just wide enough, depending on your binding angles. The 160W though isn’t super wide and I think you’d appreciate that extra 1cm of effective edge. 165 is probably something you could ride fine bombing it down groomers or in powder. But in trees, I think you’d find it too big. So I think I’d lean 160W out of those 3 sizes.
You should be all good getting the Ruler 10 into the Strata Medium, so no issues going medium there. And yeah certainly for some of those sizes, the large could potentially be too long – so I’d go medium for sure in the Strata.
Thanks, Nate! Very helpful all around. I think I’m going to upgrade my bindings for now, then look to snag a new board in the 162 range at beginning of next season when more inventory is available.
You’re very welcome Ben. Good plan, I think. Happy riding!
Hi Nate, you helped me out a few years back with some questions about the Yes Basic. Been a great board so thanks for that but now I’m looking to upgrade and hoping you can help again please.
About me: I’m 185cm, 90ish kg, US10-10.5
On a bad day I’m lower intermediate, on a good day a solid intermediate. Ride in Europe so long, varied pistes in all conditions. I do about 70-80% on piste and the rest side/off-piste/pow. Focus on carving and riding with the terrain. Don’t really ride switch and no freestyle (although I would like do some small jumps and side hits).
Currently ride a yes basic 161 with union contacts (I have some 2020 cartels ready and waiting but unridden due to the pandemic). It’s been great for my progression, I like the camrock, I like how quick it is edge to edge plus it’s decent in icy conditions. I’ve had fun on it in powder too (set back a little) but it’s not optimal.
What I don’t like: it doesn’t inspire confidence to ride at speed eg on uneven terrain and when I do feel confident to let it go the speed isn’t there. I also find it easy to overpower (feels like the nose is folding over).
So I would like something more stable (stiffer/damp) and directional. Feels like the sensible option for an upgrade would be a mountain twin or a frontier, and out of those the frontier makes most sense being more directional. However all the reviews I have read make it sound a bit too sensible. I’m wondering if I should take a bigger step up to something like a Stratos or a PYL. The stratos sounds most appealing (how I want to ride!) and the PYL sounds like it’s pretty accessible for an intermediate.
So my question is: how much of a step up is the frontier (eg 165cm) from the basic 161? And the same question for the stratos (say 159 or 162) and the PYL (162 or 165)? Are there any other boards you would recommend instead? Many thanks again!
Hi Andrew
Thanks for your message.
The Frontier or Mountain Twin would certainly make the easiest transition. Still a good step up in terms of speed and powder and carving versus the Basic – and should definitely inspire more confidence to ride faster. You would get more again out of the Stratos or PYL, for sure. The only question mark is whether, on your lower intermediate days, they feel like too much board. I’d say both are doable for high-end intermediate but not as suitable for low-end intermediate. Cartel’s, IMO, would be a better match to the likes of the MT or Frontier. The PYL and Stratos will give you more, but will also be a steeper learning curve and push you harder to improve – the danger there is that if they feel too much it can dent confidence (there would always be the option to get back on your Basic for a bit, if you feel your struggling) – so really it’s up to you if you feel like taking that larger step.
Size-wise, I would say:
MT: 160 (or 163)
Frontier: 165 (it’s a board you can ride longer – feels short for it’s length)
PYL: 162
Stratos: 162
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate. Decisions decisions!
What you say makes sense and based on that I think the Frontier will be most suitable and is currently the front runner.
I would love to demo the others though before ruling them out for certain!
You’re very welcome Andrew. Can be a tough decision. If you think of it at the time let me know what you go with and how you get on, once you get a chance to get it out on snow.
Hey Nate, just a quick update: in the end I went a bit leftfield and picked up a Salomon Dancehaul 157. Just had my first week on it and loved it. Definitely a step up from the Basic in terms of stability, speed and carving and probably a more fun, playful compromise for me than the PYL or Stratos.
Thanks for your original advice: you gave me pause for thought on the stiffer boards, which I don’t think I would have enjoyed quite so much (certainly not on the first couple of days back after 2 years away).
Hi Andrew
Thanks for the update. And great to hear that you’re enjoying the Dancehaul. I haven’t had a chance to ride it yet, but it seems to be very popular and I’m very curious – will certainly try to get on one this winter. Happy riding!
Hi! Thank you very much for the work done! Please help me with some advice: I bought a Frontier 167w and now I doubt whether I should replace it with a 165 or 164w? My parameters are height 195cm, weight 103kg and foot size us12 (Vans Aura pro boots). I like to cut arcs on the slope and my level on a scale of 5 or 6. Still ordered new Unit Atlas, is this a normal choice? Thank you in advance for your opinion. You’re very helpful.
Hi Peter
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, I think the Union Atlas should be a really good match for the Frontier, so bindings-wise, I think you’re good there.
In terms of the length of your Frontier, I think you’re in range for both the 164W and 167W with the Frontier. It really depends on how you’re going to be riding it predominantly, IMO.
If you’re mostly going to be bombing and carving hard and seeing a bit of open terrain powder, bowls, etc. Then I think the 167W works for this board for your specs.
If you were going to be riding some of that, but also a fair bit of trees and/or any kind of freestyle stuff, then I would be leaning more to 164W.
Hope this helps
Hi, struggling with sizing decision and interested in an opinion!
Strong intermediate level 6, maybe 7 in elements but coming back from an injury, so may be a bit more laid back than previous aggressive, fast, hit every sidehit approach.
Boot size UK8.5 = US 9(.5?), nitro team bindings,
Height 5’10=178cm, 70ish kg
Previously mostly rode twins eg Salomon Assassin, but likely to ride less park now and never did that much switch apart from in&out airs, do powder as much as possible but only get a couple weeks a year now so rarely heaps of epic stuff. So think a move to Frontier makes sense over MT which was my initial thought.
I rode my Assassin 2016 at 158cm, not sure on sizing on Frontier?? 156 vs 159, bang in the size guide for both. Initial instinct was go up.
Want to do well in the powder but coming from an Assassin maybe even the 156 will feel easier there. Quite like to be able to turn quickly for the trees but also carve. Not sure on the boot sizing, if 159 is a bit wider. Thanks!
Hi Dom
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, typically I would say 156, but 159 in this case might make more sense for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the Frontier is a board you can ride a little longer (it feels a little shorter for it’s size). It has less effective edge versus overall length than the average board. And secondly because you rode the Assassin in a 158. The Frontier in the 156 will feel quite a bit shorter and even the 159 will likely feel a little shorter than the 158 Assassin 2016.
For reference, when looking at the effective edge on the 2016 Assassin 158 it’s 1190mm. Compared to the 159 Frontier which is 1170mm. Going to the 156 Frontier would be going down to 1144mm – almost 5cm less effective edge than your Assassin.
I don’t think the 156 Frontier would be wrong for you, and would certainly give you more in terms of quick turning in the trees. So it’s still a consideration, but based on everything, I would be leaning towards the 159, purely based on length.
The Frontier is a wider than typical board for a regular width board, so that is something else to consider. With 9.5s the 159 and even the 156 is on the wider side. So that might be one reason to consider sizing to the 156. It’s not like super wide for 9.5s, but it’s on the wider end of the scale for 9.5s, IMO. A little wider than what your 2016 Assassin would be. If you were happy to drop that much in effective edge the 156 could work.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the effort you put in reviews.
My specs: 6 ft / 195 lbs / size 11 boot (Burton Ion) / L size bindings (Burton Malavita)
I’m torn between 161w and 162 models. I’m usually riding with 0 back foot angle, so I’m wondering if 162 is wide enough? Also is there a noticeable difference in terms of edge-to-edge between these sizes?
Thanks
Hi Oleh
Thanks for your message.
Typically with 11s and 0 degree back foot angle I would say go wide, but in the case of the Frontier, I think you will get away with the regular 162. The 162 will have roughly 270mm at the back insert, which is as wide as some wide/mid-wide boards. I think it’s actually a really good width for 11s, as some wide boards can be too wide for 11s. The 161W on the otherhand would be roughly 278mm on the back insert and 281mm on the front insert, which is getting quite wide for 11s, IMO.
I do find a noticeable difference edge-to-edge between wide and regular boards, but it is relative. Someone with bigger feet on a wide board won’t feel it as sluggish as I do. If you had 12s and were on the 161W versus the 162, you wouldn’t feel as much difference in edge-to-edge transitions, I imagine it would be very subtle and maybe not even that noticeable. But with 11s, I think you would definitely notice it.
So yeah, in short, I think the 162 should be fine for you width-wise, and if it was me, that’s the size that I would go for.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the advice!
Will go with 162
Cheers
You’re very welcome Oleh. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
I’m Henry and I’m planning to get my first gear this season! I’ve been rental for the past two years lol. Currently, I’m intermediate level, feel confident to ride one side, so gonna practice back foot this season. But I also addicted to carving and become more and more aggressive. Could you recommend some options that satisfy both needs? (easy to switch and turn but still capable of carving at high speed and stable)
I’ve watched many reviews and videos and I guess a hybrid profile is what I want. I already narrow down some of the options:
1. Capita DOA
2. Capita Outerspace Living
3. Yes Typo
4. Burton Process Flying V
5. Jones Frontier
If there are better options, please let me know! It will also be great if the price is under $500, poor students haha~
Hi Henry
Thanks for your message.
From those options, I think the DOA, Outerspace Living and Typo would work for what you’re describing. The Process Flying V isn’t the greatest carver, certainly if you’re getting more aggressive on carves. The Frontier is good for carving but not as good for riding switch. Some other potentials in that under 500 range:
– Capita Asymulator
– Salomon Assassin
– Niche Crux
– YES Ghost
Hope this helps
Thanks for the advice and I really appreciate it!
Sorry for the multiple comments because I didn’t see my post after I submitted it. I will check up on those options
Again, big thanks!
You’re very welcome Henry. Happy riding!
Hi Nate
Henry again, I finally decided to go for the Capita Asummulator!
It seems a great option and other people’s reviews are also very good.
One more final question, I’m5’9 (176cm), 148lb (68kg) which one should I go for, 152 or 154? Because I saw the spec 152 is arranged from 110-150lb and 154 is from 120-180lb. However, I saw lots of other people taller and heavier than me but still ride 152 and it makes me a little confused.
Also, my feet are 7/7.5, it locates between the small and medium binding as well. Does that really matter? Thanks!
Really appreciate your advice and good content all the time!
Hi Henry
Foot size does matter (if your feet are too far inside the edges of the board it can affect how easily you can apply pressure to the edges).
Purely based on height and weight, I would go 154 for the Asymulator for you, but taking into account foot size, I think the 152 is the better bet. The 152 is still on the wide side for your feet, but sizing down a little helps to compensate for that. So yeah, I’d go 152 for you, for sure in this case.
Hey Nate,
Great review. I am an intermediate level rider currently riding a all mountain board, but am looking to jump into more of a freeride as carving, powder, are more my preferred styl;e of riding, and and have been eyeing the Frontier as it seems to be a good crossover board between being an all mountain and freeride. Would you say the Frontier is a good gateway into a Freeride board? Are there any other boards that you would recommend that fit in this category, i have also been looking at the Salomon Super 8?
Also I am trying to decide on sizing. I am 5’11, 168, size 10 boot and am leaning towards the 156. I currently ride a 158 all mountain board and feel at times that it is a little too long. But being that the Frontier is more of a Freeride board not sure that the 156 is the best fit?
Thanks,
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
The Frontier is a really good crossover/gateway into freeride for sure, IMO. The Super 8 is also, but it’s more freeride than all-mountain versus the Frontier.
The Frontier is a board that can be ridden a little longer due to it having less effective edge compared to overall length versus the average board. It rides small for it’s size, in other words. That’s not to say that the 156 would be the wrong size for you, but I would be leaning 159 for this board still. The 159 will feel more like a 157. If you really wanted to go shorter though, the 156 isn’t wrong.
Hope this helps
Hello Nate,
Thanks for all the detailed reviews.
I am also torn between sizes, 156 and 159
5ft7, 170 cm
175 lbs, 80 kg
8,5 foot size
Based on weight i fall under 159 but the reference stance width seems a bit too wide for me. I also think waist width of 156 suits me better for my foot size but i seem to be out of its weight range.
I and intermediate targeting to ride groomers, carve, have fun on powder when available and hit small natural kickers with some switch riding.
No park for me and not fond of tree runs.
Which size would be your recommendation?
I was also looking at libtech ejack knife, yes typo, slash brainstorm and capita bsod.
In the past I rode full camber and never summer hybrid rocker boards.
Should I consider c3 camber of ejack knife or full camber like bsod again?
Thanks.
Hi Korer
Thanks for your message.
I can certainly see your dilemma between the sizes. I would say 159 for your height/weight, assuming a relatively advanced level, but the 159 is going to be quite wide for your boot size. In terms of the reference stance, you could always narrow your stance on the 159, but it’s the width at inserts for your foot size, that would be my biggest concern. Given boot size and intermediate level, I would be leaning to 156. Certainly 159 isn’t wrong for you, but because of those factors I would be erring towards 156.
The BSOD isn’t full camber – there is some rocker in the nose. But it is predominantly camber. If you were to go BSOD, then I would say 156 for sure for that board. Again you could certainly be riding 158, 159, but at that width, I think 156 would work better.
Ejack Knife, I’d say 157.
Both the BSOD and Ejack Knife are a little more advanced boards – just with that extra camber and being stiffer too. The combination of those two things make them more advanced. I think if you’re a high-end intermediate rider and given the style you like to ride, they’re doable, but I’d say they’re at the higher end of your ability. If you’re more lower end intermediate, then I would be wary of those two boards.
The Typo and Brainstorm are a good bit more playful than the BSOD and Ejack Knife and more playful than the Frontier, particularly the Typo. If you want something more easy going, then those are certainly options. But not going to be quite as stable at speed or as good for big, more aggressive carves.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for these reviews, super helpful.
I’m torn between Frontier & Mountain Twin. I see you’re recommending 2021 MT over the 2021 Frontier most often, so I’m leaning towards the MT, but like the Frontier’s lower price point. Based on my specs & riding style, what do you think?
What would be the best board size for me:
Frontier – 159?
Mountain Twin – 157?
My specs:
Height: 5’10 in (178) cm)
Weight: 173 lbs (78 kg)
Boot brand/size: Burton, 11
Bindings brand/size: Cartels, L
I’m between intermediate & advanced, looking for more all-mountain (no parks) easy turner that can be nimble in trees.
Cheers.
Hi Jules
Thanks for your message.
If you were looking at old Mountain Twin (2020 and prior), then I’d say maybe the Frontier in terms of being an easier turner. But 2021 MT versus 2021 Frontier, that the 2021 MT is easier/more nimble in trees. Otherwise, it’s a close call. The Frontier is subtly better for speed, carving and powder, IMO. And since you’re not doing any park, it’s then it’s got a little more going for it in that respect. However since you’re looking for an easier turner, I would be leaning more MT. That’s not to say that the Frontier isn’t terrible in terms of maneuverability, but the MT is better there, IMO.
Length-wise, I think you’re on the right track around that 157 for MT and 159 for Frontier. The only question there really is width.
Frontier 159 I think you’d get away with it. It’s quite wide at the inserts compared to the waist and with Burton boots, their low profile nature helps there. If you’re riding with a flat angle back foot (e.g. binding angle of like 0 degrees or 3 degrees or something like that), and are quite aggressive with your carves, then it could be pushing it being too narrow. But getting on the regular width would give you more agility for quicker/easier edge-to-edge for when you’re in the trees.
MT 157 is also quite wide at the inserts versus it’s waist, but overall a little narrower than the 159 Frontier. And depends if you ride on the quite wide reference stance of 600mm or narrower. On a narrower stance you’re on a narrower section of the board. Could still be doable depending on binding angles and how deep you carve, but borderline.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I got a Jones Frontier last year and just want to get your opinion on new bindings for it. I was looking at Union Atlas’ or Union Falcors. I am mostly into carving and freeriding the whole mountain and maybe play a little and jump off natural features. In the future I will probably prioritize freeriding and get a Hovercraft or Flagship so I want a pair of bindings that will work good on the Frontier for the next few years but will able be good on a future more freeride board. I am mostly riding on the east coast with a trip or two out west every year.
Thanks!!
Hi Brian
Thanks for your message.
Both would certainly be a good match for the Frontier, IMO. With my preference being the Falcor, but the Atlas not far off and would certainly work for it.
For a future board like the Hovercraft or Flagship, again, I would be leaning slightly towards the Falcor. Again, both would work, but the Falcor is a little harder driving, and for a stiffer board like the Hovercraft/Flagship, I would personally lean towards the Falcor.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Great review on this board. Just received it as a gift (152) and was wondering if you think I should size up to 156. After to doing a little research and seeing what others picked I’m thinking I might. I’m an intermediate/advance rider that mostly rides all mountain (minus the parks). I’ll hit some jumps as they come up but mostly groomers, powder and trees. With my height and weight i’m at the high end of the 152 scale so my main concern is that the board will be too small.
Weight: 160-165lbs
Height: 5’7″
Boot: 8.5
Thanks!
Hi Jesse
Please see my reply on your other comment you made on the snowboard length post – Comment reply 1023917
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the in-depth advice. I am 54 years old, I have been riding for 20 years, level 6. 78 kg. I like carving and powder snow, I don’t jump a lot and I go gently in the trees.
I hesitate between the frontier 156, the yes Hybrid 157 and the lib tech dynamo 156. Can I have your good advice to make my choice?
Thank you.
Hi Al
Thanks for your message.
All 3 boards would work for what you’re describing, IMO. They’re all suited to carving, powder and trees. I would say the Hybrid is just a touch better in powder than the others, but not much in it. I think it will come down to the most suitable size. If you can let me know your height and boot size that would be great, and then I can more accurately determine the best size. Weight is important for snowboard sizing but so is boot size (and to a lesser extent height).
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate.
Boot size US 9.5 (Vans Aura).
I was thinking to the Capita Mercury, too, after reading your last review.
And height 5,61.
Thanks!
Hi Al
For the Frontier, I think the 156 would be the best size.
For the Hybrid, the 153 would work better with your specs (it’s a wider board and with your boot size, you would be better to size down, IMO).
For the Dynamo 156 would be best too.
For the Mercury, I would go 155. Or potentially even 153, if you wanted a shorter board for more maneuverability in the trees. But probably 155.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the detailed Jones Frontier 2020 review. It is beneficial to me.
I am between level 5-6, according to your snowboarding skill level.
I am getting cleaner lines when I am carving, going into trees, and having fun there.
Here is my profile.
175 cm/ 77kg / US 8.5 boots.
I think I should get 156 because I want to get more fun in the tree.
But base on my weight from your table, maybe I should get 159.
I am so confused about it, could you give me some advice?
Many thanks,
Scofield
Hi Sco
Thanks for your message. Apologies I didn’t get to your initial message a couple of days ago. I have been in the midst of changing hosting for the website, so it’s been a bit frantic – and couldn’t make any changes to the website in the process.
I think the 156 would work well for you. This is the kind of board you can size up for, and you could certainly go to the 159 with your specs, but the 156 also works. And since it sounds like you want to incorporate a lot of tree riding, the 156 would give you a little more agility in there.
Generally speaking, going 156 you will sacrifice a little in terms of stability at speed and float in powder – and for big carves. But you gain in terms of maneuverability at slow speed and in tight spots – and if you were doing freestyle stuff like buttering, side hits, spins, jibs etc, then it would also be the better option for that.
So yeah, I think either would work, it just depends on what you want it to be stronger for.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thank you so much for all the detailed info on your website, love the geek stuff! I know it’s not even close to winter yet but I can make some sweet deals in this time!
I’m already kind of dialed in on the frontier but torn in sizes. I’m between level 4 and 5 according your skill chart.
I’m kind of in a weird spot measurements wise:
183 cm (6 feet)
73 kg (161 lbs)
27 cm shoes (size US8,5/9)
So due to my relative small feet, should I go for the 156 of 159?
I’m kind of athletic and tend to ride powerful and want to really progress. Mostly ride groomers but want to progress to freeride and trees.
Thanks in advance!
Arjen
Hi Arjen
Never too early to think about snowboarding!
I can’t definitely see your dilemma. On the one hand, the Frontier is a board that you can ride a little longer – and because of the fact that you are athletic and strong rider, then that leans even more towards going 159. However, the width of the 156 is better for your boot size, and going a little shorter to compensate for the wider width is often a good idea, IMO. So that leans back to the 156.
I don’t think there’s a wrong decision here, but I would be leaning towards the 159 for you. Personally, if I had the same specs as you, I’d probably go 156, but I’m probably not as strong/athletic. Not un-athletic, but not super-athletic either. I’d prefer the maneuverability of the 156 over the power of the 159. But for you, I think I would lean slightly to 159 – again, though, I don’t think the 156 would be a bad choice (which is why it’s a tight call). Just some general things to consider:
– The 156 will feel more agile, better in trees, better for side-hits and other freestyle stuff – more buttery etc.
– The 159 will float better in powder, be more stable at speed and be better for big arcing carves
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the quick reply! And the advice to. Still a bit torn between the two sizes. Because I’m not that experienced I’m having a hard time figuring out what kind of rider I want to be. Don’t really care for the freestyle stuff. Maybe later when I’m not caught up in learning the right technique. Just really want to get good at this (only had 2 seasons under my belt and some indoor days)
So the goal is to get better at the groomers and venture of the trail when I’m confident enough.
Got some thinking to do I guess…
Thanks though!!
You’re very welcome Arjen. Thanks for visiting the site and hope you have an awesome season when the snow starts falling again!
Hello,
Great review !
Did you prefer the Jones Frontier or the Jones Mountain twin?
Thank you
Hi Pat
Thanks for your message.
Overall, I would say I prefer the Mountain Twin overall vs the Frontier. But I did prefer Frontier/Explorer (pre 2020 name for the Frontier) for powder and for more aggressive carves. Mountain Twin for overall ride and for jumps, spins, etc.
I’m torn between these two boards too.
As an intermediate rider who had an old 2004 Burton Omen 171 camber and a Rode Warpig 2020 that split last season (so I have store credit to pick a new board for this season), I am looking for a new board, the Warpig seemed too sketchy under foot and when I was carving it didn’t seem to hold my poor technique and 220lbs, size 12 feet.
I’m looking to learn switch, learn to do some small jumps and fun stuff outside the park. I love the most crusing blue runs and want to be more comfortable on steep blue and black runs turning and keeping in control.
When there is powder I could stay riding that all day lap after lap, up and down the chair but often relegated to chopped up resort terrain.
I was thinking Mountain Twin? But then someone said Frontier is easier to turn on?
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning Mountain Twin for what you’re describing. If you go 2021 Mountain Twin, then, IMO, it’s easier to turn on than the Frontier. Not as good for more aggressive carves (though not far off either), but for regular turns, I would say the new 2021 MT is easier than the Frontier. Comparing 2020 and previous MT, the Frontier was maybe a little easier to turn. But overall, for what you’re describing, I would say Mountain Twin and if you’re going 2021, then the MT is also the easier turner. The Frontier a little better for powder, IMO, but there’s not heaps in it there.
Oh and if you want a sizing opinion, I would be happy to give one, would just need your height (already have your ability, weight and boot size and desired style of riding, which are all more important aspects of sizing than height, but I like to take everything into account). Most likely I would say the 165W though.
Hope this helps with your decision