Hello and welcome to my Lib Tech Dynamo review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Dynamo as a surfy freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Dynamo a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other surfy freeride snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Lib Tech Dynamo
Price: $499
Style: Surfy Freeride
Flex Rating: Medium-Stiff
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 83.3/100
Compared to other Men’s Surfy Freeride Boards
Out of the 30 men’s surfy freeride snowboards that I rated:
* note that the "surfy freeride" category is a new category here at Snowboarding Profiles - and represents freeride boards that are in that softer flex range - 6.5/10 or less. They're not necessarily "surfy" feeling boards as such - but "slightly softer flexing freeride" just didn't have the same ring as a category name!"
Overview of the Dynamo’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Dynamo’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Freeride (softer, surfier freeride) |
Price: | $499 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Medium-Fast |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | Hybrid Rocker but camber dominant - Lib Tech's "C3 Camber" |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Setback 25mm |
Base: | Extruded (TNT) |
Weight: | A little heavier than normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
150 | 243 | not available | n/a |
153 | 252 | n/a | n/a |
156 | 255 | n/a | n/a |
159 | 257 | n/a | n/a |
162 | 258 | n/a | n/a |
156W | 265 | n/a | n/a |
159W | 267 | n/a | n/a |
162W | 268 | n/a | n/a |
* note that the 162W is new as of the 2022 model
Who is the Dynamo Most Suited To?
The Dynamo is for anyone looking for a softer flexing, more easy going freeride option. Also great for those who like all-mountain rides, but just want something a little more directional.
Not for beginners, but great option for intermediate riders looking for a more freeride oriented board, but don't want to go too stiff/advanced.
The Dynamo in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Dynamo is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Lib Tech Dynamo 2021, 159cm (257mm waist width)
Date: February 18, 2020
Conditions: Sunny and perfect visibility.
Snow was firm underneath with soft on top on groomers. A little dust on crust off groomer but not majorly icy or anything.
Temp was quite warm in the sun. Supposed to be -1°C (30.2°F) with or without wind. Next to no wind. Felt about that in shade but warmer than that in sun.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 560mm (22″)
Stance Setback: Setback 25mm
Width at Inserts: 265mm (10.4") at front insert and 265mm (10.4") at back insert*
*there is a slight taper and a bit of setback. Taper without setback, or a lot of taper usually gives a wider width at the front insert vs the back insert. Setback without taper usually gives a wider width at the back insert. In this case the little bit of taper offsets the setback and the width ends up the same at both inserts.
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 175lbs
Rider Boot Size: US10 Vans Aura
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 3080grams (6lb 12oz)
Weight per cm: 19.37 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.36 grams/cm*
*based on a small sample size of around 80 boards that I've weighed in 2019, 2020 & 2021 models. So, heavier than average, but didn't feel like a heavy board on snow, which is the main thing.
Damp or Chattery?
More on the damp side. Not ultra-damp, but damper than it is chattery.
Smooth or Snappy?
Slightly more snappy than smooth, but just a little to the snappy side of the middle of the scale.
Powder
Didn't have any really to test it in. But the specs and feel of the board suggest it would be a good board in powder. Not like an epic floater in super deep powder, but really good nonetheless.
It hasn't got a heap of taper, but there's some taper there - and whilst it's mostly camber, there is that subtle rocker in the middle of the board. And it's quite well setback - 25mm on effective edge and a good bit more in terms of the overall length of the board (longer nose than tail).
Carving & Turning
Carving: Good carver. Not epic in terms of big carves, but you can certainly lay a carve on it.
Turning: Really fun board for turning. Quite snappy but also quite an easy turner.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Nice and agile at slow speeds.
Skidded Turns: For a C3 camber board it was actually pretty easy to skid turns on. That quite easy going flex helps there, I guess.
Speed
Good at speed. Never going to be an out and out bomber with its flex, but stable enough at speed.
Uneven Terrain
Good in crud and good in terms of weaving through bumps. A really comfortable board for navigating when it's not smooth or straight.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Had a lot of fun on this board with jumps. Which isn't always the case with Freeride boards.
Pop: It's not massive, but it's there. And what's there is really easy to access. It's an easy, fun pop.
Approach: A good balance between being stable and being nimble.
Landing: Decent. Not an out and out stomper but solid enough.
Side-hits: Fun for side hits.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Works for anything from small to large, with medium being the sweet spot.
Switch
Rides switch OK. Better than a lot of other freeride boards. It's got that in between freeride and all-mountain feel.
Spins
Good easy pop and getting the spin around was pretty easy. OK for landing/takeoff switch.
Butters
Decently buttery. Not super easy to butter, but certainly not hard to butter either.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 24/30 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 14/20 |
TURNING | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 83.3/100 |
Overall, the Dynamo is a nice softer/more forgiving freeride option (or you could look at it like a more directional all-mountain ride), great for intermediate riders looking to get onto a more freeride oriented board or for more advanced riders who just prefer a softer deck, even when predominantly freeriding.
Great price for what you get too.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Dynamo, or if you are ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
- CANADA
- UK/EUROPE
If you want to check out some other surfy freeride snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Dynamo compares to other surfy freeride snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hey Nate,
I am looking to upgrade my current 2010 Rome Agent I’ve been on for years. I have been on full camber and love the pop out of turns. I demoed the 158 flagship in vail and loved it. How does the dynamo compare.. most my days will be east coast and feel a true free ride board may not be best bet (flagship). Flagship was a workout too, but nothing I couldn’t handle. How does it compare as well as ejack knife? Thanks! Is there another board I should look at and size? 5’9 170 size 9.5.
Hi Ad
Thanks for your message.
The Dynamo, in my experience, is softer flexing and a little more mellow than the Flagship. It’s not as good in powder or for carving or at speed or uneven terrain (crud bumps etc), but it’s not bad in any of those areas. I found it quite a bit softer flexing (6/10 versus 7.5/10 on the Flagship). It is pretty camber dominant, so it’s not super mellow or anything, but it’s fairly mellow. It is a little easier to ride switch. It’s got as much camber as the Flagship, I would say, but it’s in different areas. The Dynamo has rocker between the feet and otherwise cambered – it’s Lib Tech’s “C3” camber, which feels pretty camber dominant, but you can notice the rocker between the feet – and I felt the Dynamo was a more mellow version of C3 than others in their lineup. The Flagship has rocker tip and tail and camber between and under the feet – so that creates quite a different feel.
The Ejack Knife is a really nice board, IMO. It’s still a little softer than the Flagship, but pretty close (7/10 by my feel). In my experience, it’s better for caring and speed than the Dynamo and also better in icy conditions. The Dynamo is still really good in icy conditions, so there’s not a lot of difference, but the Ejack Knife that little bit better.
Size-wise, I think 158 is spot on for the Flagship for you. For the Dynamo I would be between the 156 and 159. It’s a close call. For the Ejack Knife, between the 157 and 159, but I’d be leaning 157.
Hope this helps with your decision
Awesome, it definitely does! I demo a Ejack Knife and it can rip! I come from multiple Rome boards, and impressed with the durability and camber profile. To help give me understanding, which boards would the dynamo and ejack knife compare too in the current Rome line? (I want something niddle edge to edge, yet can bomb down steeps, and yet butter the mountain away!) Thank you again!
Hi Ad
I’ve just started testing Rome boards this winter (2023 models), and haven’t had the chance to do a majority of their line, but have ridden a few now. Looking at the Rome line and based on specs, the National looks to be the closest to the Ejack Knife, but still not that similar. The Dynamo maybe to the Ravine. But so many differences, I don’t think you can compare them that closely.
Thanks so much for quick responses! I demoed ejack and like the pop but I’m used to Rome’s camber especially out of turns and very curious on your take on the new models!
Hi Ad
I really liked the Rome’s I tested. I have only done a few so far, but look forward to testing more. For those we tested this winter, the reviews will be coming out throughout the year. Keep your eyes posted for those for more details.
In addition Nate, my current board for the last 18-19 years has been a Ride Yukon 168, with Ride EX 2X series bindings of same vintage.
Thank you,
Brian
Hi Brian
Thanks for your message.
I would go Ejack Knife for what you’re describing. I think you’ll appreciate the step up in carving performance and stability at speed over the Dynamo – and the Ejack Knife still has some forgiveness to it – it’s not uber aggressive or unforgiving or anything.
Size-wise, I’d go 162W. Will take a bit of getting used to, sizing down from what you have, but once you’re used to it, I think you’ll really enjoy that board in that size.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thank you for all the work you put in. I’m trying to decide between the Lib Tech Dynamo and EJack Knife. I ride mostly inbounds and enjoy carving on the groomers, seeking out some powder in the trees, and taking advantage of some side hits. No park and almost no reverse. I would classify my ability as Intermediate to Advanced for the type of boarding I do. Specs: 45 yrs old, 195#, 6’2”, size 13 boot.
Thank you in advance!!
-Brian
Hi Nate from Spain! Congratulations on your review!!!!
For 147 lbs, 5’6″ and foot 8.5 what size would you recommend in the Dynamo?
Hi Pablo
I would be weighing up between the 150 and 153. But would be leaning 150.
As a “standard all-mountain” size, assuming a relatively advanced level and a good width for your boots, I would say around 152.
The 153 would be on the big side for you, IMO, particularly when combing the width and length. Just the length, in a narrower width, I think would work, but the width makes it overall on the big side. That said, if you’re looking for stability at speed and float in powder and value that over maneuverability, this option would certainly work.
But if you wanted a more all round board, that would be more maneuverable at slower speeds and something you could do some freestyle stuff with too, if you wanted, then the 150 would be your best bet, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!! Thank you very much, your recommendation is of great help. I have an advanced level and I like carving, speed and uneven terrain. I had considered 156 but after your recommendation I think I will decide on 153. How about?
Thanks a lot!!
Hi Pablo
Given your level and riding style and that you were considering going to 156, I think the 153 would be your best bet.
Thanks a lot. Have a great year 2022 !!!
You’re very welcome Pablo. Hope you have an awesome 2022 too!
Hi Nate,
I am an advanced beginner/low intermediate with maybe 2-3 years of solid experience, mainly on the East Coast. I’ve always rented but looking to buy my first board that will help me progress and I wouldn’t feel the need to replace for at least 2 years. I’m leaning towards the Dynamo but see conflicting things online about it being fine for intermediates vs only recommended for advanced riders. What do you think?
Also I’m 5’11, 150 lbs size 9/9.5 boots and I would get the Dynamo size 156.
Forgot to mention that the other option I’m considering is the Terrain Wrecker C2X in size 154 which seems more beginner/intermediate oriented. I saw on your review for the TW you said the Dynamo is better for carving which is what I’m mostly interested in – improving my turns and having better control while going faster, no park for me!
Hi Yash
Thanks for your message.
I found the Dynamo to be fairly mellow, but I’ve had others comment that it felt stiffer to them and not as mellow. So, I think it’s a riskier option – you might be OK, but it might be a bit much – I think probably higher-end intermediate for this board would be a safer bet.
The Terrain Wrecker, IMO, would work well for your ability level. I wouldn’t go as far as to say that it’s beginner friendly, but certainly low-end intermediate friendly in my experience. It’s not amazing at hard carves, but you can still do them – and for general turning it’s amazing. Really fun to turn on. I would be leaning Terrain Wrecker for you. It’s certainly not something you would outgrow too quickly. I use it as my control board currently.
Also for your specs, for the Dynamo, I’d say 156 is bordering on too big – I think that size would be fine for you, as a more advanced rider, but for now a little big. The combination of the size being on the longer end of your range and potentially being a bit of a stretch for your level, I’d be leaning 154 TW.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Do you know if they changed the flex for the 2022 model? I got the 159 and this thing is really stiff. Way stiffer then my PYL, Greats and Standard.
The board was really nice for sending cliffs, the landing gear was awesome but the float in lower angle pow was less then desirable. My standard floats way better.
I want to like this board, do you think this board will soften up with time as this was day 1 on the board. Not sure whether to trade it in and get something full camber with a rocker nose instead for better float.
511, 180lbs size 10. 10 years riding.
Hi Tim
Thanks for your message.
Really surprising you found this stiffer than the PYL. Not as surprised versus the Standard and Greats. I would say, by my feel, it’s very similar flex to the Standard and Greats. As far as I know the 2022 model should be identical to the 2021 model, which is why I didn’t retest the 2022 model. It’s not common, but every now and then a brand will change a board up without any mention of it or anything changing in the spec, so it is possible, but I am very surprised. I’ve found that Mervin boards do typically soften up quicker than average, with use. So, it will likely soften up more than you’ve experienced with your YES boards. I’ve had the Greats 2019 for a few seasons now and I swear it hasn’t softened up in the slightest.
As I was reading your comment (before I got to the end), I was going to ask your specs to see if it was a bit big for you, then that might explain it feeling stiffer. But the size is spot on for you, IMO.
Hard to say how much it will soften up over time, but as I mentioned I have found Mervin boards to soften up quicker/more than others. Also to note, when I rode this it would likely have had a handful of days on it already.
Another thing to note is that I had someone test the Dynamiss (women’s version) and she described it as stiffer than I felt it too. Not sure if hers had been ridden less than the Dynamo I rode had.
Hi Nate!
Thanks for the review, very helpful. I’m going with the Dynamo as my first board bought, but i have a sizing question: 208 lbs, 6ft (185 cm), Ride Lasso US 10.5 and wondering between size 162 and 159W. What i read and heard, i think i would love the stability on moguls and uneven terrain, but at the same time i’m afraid that it won’t be as maneuverable on low speeds as the shorter 159W. I’m not that much into park, more like casual all-mountain, but side jumping is always a great addition to everyday’s riding. Can you help me choose?
Hi Charles
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tight call between those 2 sizes, IMO, but I’d be leaning 162. The 162 is bang on length-wise for your specs and what you’re describing, IMO – and the width should be just right too. The 159W is a bit wide for 10s, but as you’d be sizing down the length it would still be an appropriate size for you, IMO. Lighter riders tend to struggle more with boards that are too wide for them (more effort to try to apply pressure to the edges when feet are too far inside the edges, as they can’t apply as much force), so I think you would be OK with going a little wider if you wanted to, particularly as you’d be sizing down.
However, I would say that the 159W and 162 would be very similar, based on my experience, in terms of maneuverability at slow speeds. I find boards that are too wide for me tend to take more effort and are slower to turn, so that kind of offsets the fact that it’s shorter. Taking into account that I’m 175lbs, so you’ve got a little weight on me, that wide effect may be less pronounced for you, so overall it’s certainly possible that you’d find the 159W a little more maneuverable at slow speeds, even if I personally wouldn’t. But I’d say the more pure size would be the 162, and it’s certainly wide enough for your boots, IMO.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Nate,
Thanks a lot! Definately going for 162! Much appreciate you answer and opinion! Thanks a lot!
You’re very welcome Charles. If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Hello Nate,
Much thanks for the reviews! Actually thanks to you (and the community) i happened to decide on my snowboard set: Lib Tech Dynamo and Union Atlas – I believe it’s gonna be a very fun set to ride in Europe 🙂
My only question is about the board(s) and the years: Is it a significant difference between the same model but different year? I mean i can lay my hands on Lib Tech Dynamo 2020 model with good price, but I’m wondering if i will not be missing some new features by getting the 2020 model instead of 2022 model. What do you recommend. Are there big differences between 2020 and 2022 board model? Thanks!
Greetings from Poland! 🙂
Hi Karol
Thanks for your message.
Some boards don’t get updated for several years. Some 2022 models will differ quite a bit from their 2020 counterpart, but some will be identical (apart from the graphic). In the case of the Dynamo, the 2022 model, as far as I can tell, is the same as the 2020 model, so you shouldn’t be missing anything if you get the 2020 model. The only real change that I can see is that the 2022 model has new sizes (150, 162W) compared to the 2020 model.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, I have been looking at this board. I’m 5′ 10″ and around 190 lbs. I have a size 11 1/2 shoe. Would you think a 156W work for me? Also i’m more on the beginner to intermediate side. Been snowboarding a long time but have been on a 10 year hiatus from snowboarding. i’ve always owned lib tech boards back in the day. Grew up in the same as where the factory is. Getting back into this year.
Your thoughts are much appreciated.
Hi Devon
Thanks for your message.
I think 156W is on the shorter side for your specs, but it’s doable. And if you’re more high-end beginner/low intermediate, then it’s a size that would work for you, IMO. I guess the only thing to consider is how quickly you get back up to speed. If you were at a high-end intermediate bordering on advance level, then I’d say 159W would be the more appropriate size. Also depends on how you’ll be looking to ride. If you think you’ll want to be bombing/riding relatively aggressively in the near future, then you might find it feeling quite short quite quickly, but if you’re thinking you’ll be riding more playful/casual, then it’s a size that you can probably stick with as you progress – at least for a lot longer.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Nate, love your write ups and have read pretty much everything on your site. I’ve been riding a Rome agent 155 for a while now. I’m 5’9”, 185 lbs, with a size 9 boot. I’d say I’m intermediate to advanced with 15+ years riding. I’ve spent my time in the park (almost never head there anymore) and now lean almost exclusively to bombing resorts on the east coast with a 5 day trip annually in search of some powder. The board I’m looking towards now will be my only board and I’m leaning towards a 159 dynamo. Really don’t care much for butterability and figure the 159 would add some stability. Thinking of pairing it with the union atlas and 3XD boot. What are your thoughts on this setup and anything else you would recommend? T.rice pro also looks tempting.
Again, really value your thorough reviews.
Hi Tyler
Thanks for your message.
I think the Dynamo would make a really good daily driver, if you’re not really riding park. And for your specs and riding style, I think 159 is just right.
Should match well with the Atlas and 3XD, IMO, too.
Certainly there are a lot of options for what you’re describing, but if you’ve got your eye on the Dynamo, I think it would work well and the overall setup works, IMO.
Not a fan of the T.Rice Pro personally. Some people like it, but I prefer a board that can turn a little sharper than the T Rice Pro does. Also the T Rice Pro is a little more freestyle focused than the Dynamo, and I think you’ll get better powder performance from the Dynamo – and overall a better board, from my experience/opinion. T Rice pro seems to be an acquired taste – and one that I’ve never acquired the taste for.
Hi Nate,
Very nice review, thanks
I am 6’2″ 200lbs US11
Considering the waist width i am close to size 159
But considering the stance width you advised, better to go for 159W
159W 267cm waist width isnt too much for US11 size? Kindly need your recommendation
Hi Isot
Thanks for your message.
Great question – can be tricky with 11s (and 10.5s) for sure. I think the 159 is probably going to be too narrow for 11s, unfortunately. The 159W is on the wider side for 11s, but it’s still doable for sure. With a width at inserts of around 275mm, I don’t think it’s too wide. With 10s, I like to ride anything up to 265mm at the inserts – and in some cases wider is fine too, depending on the board. Waist width itself, does contribute as well, but width at inserts is a more telling measurement, IMO, as that’s where your feet are providing the leverage. With feet around 1cm longer than mine, I think the width of the 159W should be fine. Especially given that it’s a little shorter, IMO, than what I’d typically recommend for your height/weight specs. Typically I would say more like 162. So with the 159W being shorter, even if it’s on the wider side, that shorter length will make it more maneuverable.
If you were to try to risk the regular width, I would probably look at the 162. Even though it only gives you a very subtle increase in width, I think it’s a better length for you, if you’re going to go with that regular width. But I would only risk the 162 if a. you ride with +15/15 angles or similar b. have low profile boots and c. don’t carve really deep (e.g. eurovarving). If all 3 of those are true, then I think you could get away with the regular width, but I would make it the 162, rather than 159. Otherwise, 159W.
Hope this helps
Well, thank you very much!
For my size, Libtech website also offers 162 or 159w, but not 159.
Even if i reduced my weight, 159 does not show up.
I think this board has an exceptional lower insert/waist width ratio.
Will go with 159W ! Thanks
You’re very welcome Isot. Hope you have an awesome season this upcoming winter!
Hi Nate,
I was on the all mountain page, but thought I should move the discussion over here. After reading through the list of options, I narrowed my choices to the MT 157, Dynamo 156 and Dynamo 159. From your review here, the Dynamo sounds great – the fun turns / somewhat flexible freeride. At 165 pounds (5′-10″, 9.5 boot), just not sure if I want 156 and 159. I am inclined to pull the trigger on 156, but there’s that voice in my head: get the MT, 157, get the Dynamo 159… seems I am at the win/win/win point of overthinking my decision.
Hi Garrett
I think the 159 Dynamo is in your range. I think 156 is probably the most accurate size, but 159 certainly doable. Some differences you’ll feel between those two sizes.
– The 159 will be more stable at speed and float better in powder
– The 156 will be more maneuverable at slow speeds and in tighter spots (and easier to butter, and better for freestyle in general, but from your previous comments it sounds like those things are all but out of repertoire?)
I think I would still be leaning 156, just because I think it’s the best balance between width and length for your specs. But the 159 certainly isn’t wrong and if you were looking to optimize stability, then it would certainly work. MT always a solid choice too and 157 def the size I’d go for you.
Thanks again. I’m convinced. I’m going for the Dynamo 156!
You’re very welcome Garrett. Hope it treats you well. Happy riding!
Hey Nate, Thanks for your review.
What size would you recommend for a rider that’s 160lbs, 5’11”? The 156cm?
I see that you were riding the 159, did you happen to try the 156 as well?
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
I only tested the 159. It felt just right for me in that size and that’s the size I would buy if I was to buy the board. But for your specs, I would be leaning 156. The 159 wouldn’t be wrong for you either, and it’s certainly an option if you were wanting to err longer, but I would be leaning 156 for your specs.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nat
How’d the 159 fit for your height weight? I’m similar Specs debating between the 159w and 156w for a Kootenay daily driver.
Hi Dave
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think the 159 was spot on for me for this board. I wouldn’t ride it any shorter. For like a big mountain, open terrain powder day, I’d be happy to have the 162, but as a daily driver, I would go 159 personally. If you have bigger feet and need wide and your otherwise similar specs to me, then I would go 159W over 156W.
Hope this helps
How would this board compare to custom x?
Hi Pat
Thanks for your message.
Really quite different to the Custom X, IMO. Some differences (though not all):
– It’s noticeably softer flexing than the Custom X (I felt this at 5.5/10 and the Custom X at 9/10)
– It’s no where near as aggressive. Even though it has C3 Camber, it’s quite easy riding. The Custom X is ride fast, hell for leather kind of board, IMO, this is more easy going
– The Dynamo is better in powder, better for riding at slower speeds and better for smaller jumps, sidehits, that kind of thing
– The Custom X is better for carving hard and bombing fast.
They really are quite different, from my experience with them
Hi I’d loke to buy this board, could you tell me wich size would be better for me. Im 6’0″ 183lbs and 12 size boots. I cant decide about 156w or 159w. for all mountain and park too. Thx
Hi Jeremy
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, I think the 159W would be a really good size. Just right, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!
I learnt a lot on your website, great work there!
I’m an intermediate rider, 5’7’’, 60kg, 25.2cm foot, currently wear size 7 burton imperial boots.
I’m riding a 150mm Capita outerspace living thanks to your review, I really love the board. Now I’m looking for a new board as a complimentary to it. Something better in carving/speed, steeper slope and powder sometimes, I’m currently looking at the yes standard, lib tech dynamo, burton hometown hero, capita navigator. These are the ones I can find that seems stiffer and relatively narrow since I have a smaller feet. Do you have any advice on these boards? Thank you!
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, the YES Standard, as much as I love that board, is probably one to cross off the list. Partly because it’s not as narrow as it looks based on it’s waist width specs – even in the 149 it’s likely around 257mm at the inserts, which isn’t hugely wide, but certainly wider than the OSL in 150 and that coupled with the fact, that the 151 might be the better length, for your freeride board and the fact that the Standard isn’t that directional/freeride oriented. I think the combination of those things make it less ideal. I think you’d be fine riding the 149, but overall, maybe not the best choice as a compliment to the OSL in your quiver, IMO.
The 150 Dynamo: It’s not any longer than your OSL. But it is more directional and more powder and directional oriented. The width is good for your feet (around 251mm at inserts), IMO, which makes this an attractive option. The biggest downside is that it’s not that much stiffer than your OSL and doesn’t really give you more in terms of carving/speed. Certainly more for powder, but pretty similar for carving/speed as OSL, IMO. Doable though if you wanted a more subtle compliment to your quiver.
Capita Navigator: I think this would be a good compliment to the OSL. Just subtly stiffer than the OSL, but certainly more in terms of powder and downhill abilities. Again, pretty similar for carving as OSL, but a little more in terms of speed, and very powder oriented. Sizing-wise, I would be looking into the 151 for this board for you. The width is going to be on the wider side still – around 254mm at the back insert, so doable, IMO, but still a little on the wider side. But I think it’s a doable size for you.
The Hometown Hero would be a great compliment to your quiver, IMO. Giving you more for speed, carving and powder and being a good step up in terms of stiffness. I think this would compliment the OSL well. The only question here is the size. The 148 is probably your best size, but then you would be sizing down from your OSL, and preferably you want to stay about the same size or slightly longer for your freeride board. The 152 would be a good length, IMO, but it’s getting pretty wide for your boots. Probably around 258mm at the inserts. I would probably go 148 if you were going to go Hometown Hero, as I think the length and width combo of the 152 makes it just a little big.
I think you should also take a good look at the Burton Family Tree Sensei. This board was made for smaller feet. The 151 I think would be a really good size for you, and the width would be really good. Around 250mm at the inserts. I measured the 156 at the inserts (I didn’t ride it as it’s too narrow for me) at 252mm at inserts, so that 250mm is a guess based on that. I think this would be a really good size for you and a really good compliment to the OSL – and should give you more in terms of carving, speed and powder. Again, I didn’t ride it, so I couldn’t say for sure, but on paper, I think this would be a really good option for you.
Hope this helps
Wow! Thank you so much for the great details! I will definitely check out the tree Sensei. I stumble upon the Flight Attendant the other day at Sports Basement, they are running a 20% off, look closer I found the 152 has a 244mm waist, would that be a potential fit? Although I heard it’s a pretty advanced board so that’s another concern. Thanks again for your answer, huge help on my decisions.
Hi Jason
I think the 152 Flight Attendant (FA) would work for you in terms of size, both length and width. The 152 FA likely to be around 252-253mm at the inserts. It is a more advanced board, but it’s borderline high-end intermediate. Not for a low intermediate, but if you’re close to being up to that advanced level, I think it’s doable. Not really any more advanced than the Hometown Hero though, IMO. And probably not really more than the Sensei either. Just a touch stiffer I think, but not much in it all.
Thank you for the help, really saved me a lot of headaches! I was able to get the FA at a very good price. Really interested in the Sensei, but it would be $300 more than the FA in my area.
You’re very welcome Jason. Hope the FA treats you well. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Ah sorry, and another board I forgot to mention is Jones flagship 2021, 151, waist at 24.3
Hi Jason
Similar to the FA, the Flagship is a slightly more advanced board, but it’s not so advanced that it’s undoable for a high-end intermediate rider, IMO. But I think again you’d want to be at that really solid intermediate level. The Flagship has quite a big difference between the back insert and front insert – there’s quite a bit of taper in the board. Taking into account the narrower reference stance on the 151, compared to the 158 that I rode, I would estimate the width at inserts at the reference stance of 540mm, to be around 251mm at the back insert and 256mm at the front insert. So, I think the size is doable, if you think you are good with the level of board and the stiffness. It’s another little step stiffer than the FA. Though it’s also less camber dominant than the FA, so that mellows it out a bit.
Thank you for your informations. I wanna ask you another question, I rode DOA for last 3 season. I wanna dive in powder and carving more then last seasons. On the other hand side i’m a huge camber fan, i dont wanna give up from Camber profile? What do you think ist it a good choise?
Hi Ugur
Yeah, I think it’s a good compromise based on what you’re describing. You’ll get better powder performance versus the DOA for sure, IMO, but you’re not going too far from camber. The Dynamo has Lib Techs C3 Camber, which does have some rocker between the feet, but that is a very short section of rocker, and it’s very subtle – feels closer to a full camber board, than a Hybrid Rocker board, IMO. You still do notice that little bit of rocker (or at least I do, but I’m paying attention to these things very closely) but it’s subtle. So yeah, I think it could work well, in terms of giving you more in powder, but still having a good bit of camber to work with.
Hi Nate, I would like to buy this board for this season. Can i combine it with Union Strata ? Do you suggest any other Union binding ?
Hi Ugur
Thanks for your message.
Yes, I think this board would work well with the Union Strata. You could also ride it with the Force, Atlas or even Falcor (if you wanted a harder driving binding). But I think the Strata would be a very good match.