Jones Hovercraft 2.0 Snowboard Review

Hello and welcome to my Jones Hovercraft 2.0 snowboard review.

In this review I will take a look at the Hovercraft 2.0 as a Freeride snowboard.

As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Hovercraft 2.0 a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and also see how it compares with other Freeride snowboards.

As the name suggests, the Hovercraft 2.0 is an evolution of the original Hovercraft, just as the Aviator received the 2.0 designation a couple of years back. Read on to see what we thought of the new Hovercraft 2.0. 

Overall Rating

Board: Jones Hovercraft 2.0

Price: $629 (USD recommended retail)

Style: Freeride

Flex Rating: Mid-Stiff

Flex Feel: Mid-Stiff (7/10)

Rating Score: 86.4/100

Compared to other Men’s Freeride Boards

Overview of the Hovercraft 2.0’s Specs

Check out the tables for the Hovercraft 2.0’s specs and available sizes.

Specs

* since the Hovercraft 2.0 replaced both the Hovercraft and Women's Hovercraft, they have more extensive sizing to fit more riders.

Who is the Hovercraft 2.0 Most Suited To?

The Hovercraft 2.0 is best suited to someone looking for a board that is optimal in powder. But while you could happily use this as a dedicated powder board, it's so good on groomers and in trees (even if there wasn't powder there) that it could also be a one-board-quiver, depending on your style. 

I mean, if you like to hit rails in the park, do spins, butters and ride switch a lot, then it's not for (or at least it's not for you as a one-board-quiver). But if you seek powder when it's there and when it's not like to cruise the groomers, pop in the trees and hit the occasional side-hit or drop, and you want something that's stable enough for a bit of speed, but don't want anything super aggressive, and you don't do anything freestyle, then it could be a great one-board-quiver. 

Not for beginners. It's not ultra-stiff or ultra aggressive or anything like that but still too much for beginner and even low intermediate riders would likely struggle. 

THE Hovercraft 2.0 IN MORE DETAIL

Bindings angles: +15/-15

Stance width: 22.8″ (580mm)

Stance Setback: Setback 20mm (0.8")

Width at Front Insert: 11" (279mm)

Width at Back Insert: 10.8" (274mm)    

Rider Height: 6'0"

Rider Weight: 180lbs

Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Response ADV

Bindings Used: Burton Malavita, M

Weight: 7lbs 5oz (3,310grams) 

Weight per cm: 21.22 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 Hovercraft has the biggest difference to actual weight and weight feel than I've experienced before. On the scales it's rather heavy (though the extra width is part of the reason for its higher grams/cm) but on snow it feels nice and light. Note also that Jones lists the weight of it at 6lbs 6oz (2900grams). So I may have got a particular heavy one to test. If that's the case, then at its listed weight it must feel super light. 

How it Differs to old Hovercraft

1. New shape. You can visually see the different shape, particularly in the swallow tail.

2. New reclaimed core.

3. New size 144 (which helps to make it unisex) all other sizes are same as before

4. Waist width wider (e.g. 25.5cm on new 148, was 24.9cm on old 148)

5. Contact length a little longer on new model (e.g. on 148 is 94.1cm vs 93.6cm on old model).

6. Effective edge also slightly longer (e.g. 116.1cm on new 148, was 115.6cm on old.

7. Longer sidcut (e.g. 8.4m on new 148, was 7.9m on old 148).

8. Tip length and tail length changes (e.g. new 148 has 39.2cm tip and 14.7cm tail, was 38.9cm and 15.5cm on the old 148).

9. Tip and tail width changes (e.g. new 148 is 30.2cm tip width and 28.5cm tail width, was 29.6cm and 28.4cm on old 148).

10. More taper - 17mm of taper now, where it was 11.5mm of taper on the old model.

11. Now made from recycled boards. 

So lots of changes!

Powder

Felt amazing in powder! We didn't have it waist deep or anything but there some good pockets and it felt so good floating over on this board. 

And that's no surprise given it's specs. Directional camber profile, with rocker in the nose, 17mm of taper, longer nose than tail, a contoured (spoon bevel) in the nose and 3D channels in the tail. 

Carving

Was really decent on a carve, particularly for how much taper it has. Not quite as carvy as the old Hovercraft was, but still decent. 

Turning

Ease of Turns/Slashing: While it wasn't quite as good for carves as old model, it was definitely better for slashes and easier/quicker to turn (despite being wider than the old model).

Maneuverability at slow speeds (nimbleness): Really decently quick edge-to-edge at slower speeds. More so than the older model and, given it's width, better than expected.  

Catchiness: Didn't feel catchy to me. A little more mellow feeling and more forgiving of errors than the old hovercraft (which wasn't super catchy or anything either). 

Speed

Decently fast and really decently stable at speed. Good glide too. 

Uneven Terrain

Crud/Chunder: Handled messy snow well. It's quite damp, but not super damp, but I think the spoon bevel in the nose helps here - as well as the rocker towards the nose. 

Trees/Bumps: So good, especially when there's powder in trees. But that edge-to-edge quickness really helps too. 

Jumps

Got better for jumps vs the old Hovercraft, IMO. Was really fun on drops and hits in trees. 

Pop: Not oodles of pop but not bad. And relatively easy to access. 

Approach: A good mix of stable while also easy to make line corrections and speed check. 

Landing: It's decent on landings when you get it right, but there's not a lot of room for error if you land too tail heavy - not much tail there. This is the weakest part of this board for jumps, IMO. 

Side-hits: Fun for side-hits and drops. Not so much for spinning off side-hits though - and, again, when landing you don't want to get too tail heavy. 

Small jumps/Big jumps: While it's stable enough for bigger jumps, the landing gear doesn't inspire heaps of confidence. If you get it wrong on a bigger jump, there are bigger consequences. So for the park, it's better for smaller jumps, IMO. But if you're hitting jumps into powder, then you can go bigger with less fear - and because of how well it floats in can handle powder landings well. 

Switch

It feels weird riding switch. Like, really weird. Definitely not what it's designed for. I mean, you can. I did. But it's feels weird and definitely not suited to it. There's very little tail going on and the swallow tail and rocker and spoon bevel in the nose, which is now behind you. I could go on, but you get the picture! 

Butters

Not easy to press nose or tail. The nose presses OK flex-wise, but it feels far away and long and awkward. The tail doesn't press much and feels small and yeah, not a good butterer, but again, definitely not what it's designed for. 

I had a blast on the Hovercraft 2.0 and wanted more time on it! 

Personally I preferred it to the old Hovercraft but there could be some that don't. I found that it's not quite as good for carving as the old Hovercraft but got better for trees, tighter turns, slow speed riding in general, slashing and jumps. And even though the old Hovercraft was awesome in powder, I think this has gotten even better. 

And it maintains the same level of stability at speed, IMO. It also feels lighter, despite actually been slightly heavier on the scales on the model I weighed. 

If your mainstays are powder & trees but you also want something that's decent on groomers and has a not-too-aggressive but not-too-mellow-either feel, then the Hovercraft 2.0 is well worth putting on your shortlist. And would do just as well as a dedicated powder board in your quiver.