Hello and welcome to my Lib Tech Lib Rig review.
In this review I will take a look at the Lib Rig as a Freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Lib Rig a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and also see how it compares with other Freeride snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Lib Tech Lib Rig 2024
Price: $659 (USD recommended retail)
Style: Freeride
Flex Rating: Mid-Stiff (7/10)
Flex Feel: Mid-Stiff (7/10)
Rating Score: 83.2/100
Compared to other Men’s Freeride Boards
Of the 35 current model freeride snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Lib Rig ranked 26th out of 35
Overview of the Lib Rig’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Lib Rig’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
STYLE:
FREERIDE
PRICE:
$659 - BUYING OPTIONS
$659 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID ROCKER
HYBRID ROCKer - Technically Hybrid Rocker, but looked and behaved more like traditional camber. Lib Tech's "C3 Camber"
SHAPE:
setback stance:
SETBACK 1.5" (38mm)
BASE:
Sintered | Lib Tech's "Sintered Knife Cut"
weight:
Felt normal
Camber Height:
6.5mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
153 | 251 | 115+ | 55+ |
156 | 253 | 130+ | 60+ |
159 | 255 | 140+ | 65+ |
160W | 265 | 150+ | 70+ |
Who is the Lib Rig Most Suited To?
The Lib Rig is best suited to someone looking for a smooth, surfy, damp feeling freeride board to cruise and bomb the mountain with.
It's not the kind of board that has a lot of snap/energy, but is super consistent and predictable and the kind of board that won't let you down anywhere.
Could be a one-board-quiver for someone who doesn't really do park/side hits and is on the more advanced side of riding. It's not super aggressive but is at it's best when you lean pretty heavily into carves/turns. As in, it responds better to a heavier more aggressive input from its rider, than a lighter, more casual input.
Not for beginners and even intermediates might find it a little too much board. But intermediates who are bigger or strong/athletic shouldn't have any issues with it.
THE Lib Rig IN MORE DETAIL
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Lib Rig is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Lib Tech Lib Rig 2024, 159cm (255mm waist width)
Date: March 22, 2023
Conditions
Literally not a cloud in the sky. Sunny and, of course, perfect visibility.
Temperature was around 4°C (39°F) - and 3°C (37°F) with wind chill in morning and 5°C (41°F) (and 4°C (39°F) with wind) in the afternoon. So super warm.
SW winds morning and afternoon at 5kph (3 mph) morning and 10kph (6 mph) in the afternoon.
24 hour snow: 0" (0cm)
48 hour snow: 0" (0cm)
7 day snow: 0" (0cm)
On groomer: Hard and borderline icy in spots but soft borderline slushy in others. Got softer and more slushy as the day went on. But to start with had some icy patches.
Off groomer: Crunchy and icy in spots. Soft patches, which increased as the day went on.
Set Up
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 22″ (560mm)
Stance Setback: Setback 1.5" (38mm)
Width at Inserts: 10.5" (267mm) at front insert and 10.4" (265mm) at back insert.
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Response ADV
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita, M
Weight: 6lbs 8oz (2940grams)
Weight per cm: 18.49 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 Lib Rig is a touch lighter than average and felt normal on snow.
Powder
We didn't have a lot to test in on the day, but the Lib Rig is pretty well setup for powder. There's some taper - not heaps, but 5mm, and a 1.5" (38mm setback) as well as a longer tail vs nose. There's not a lot of rocker to speak of, which reduces how well it will float, but otherwise, pretty well setup for powder.
Carving
I found I could lay down a good carve on the Lib Rig. It was definitely a smoother feeling style of carve, rather than anything explosive/springy. But could dig an edge in and rely on it to hold at higher speeds.
Turning
Ease of Turns/Slashing: Was decently easy to initiate a turn and slash on the Lib Rig. Wasn't effortless but also not something you had to throw everything into just to get it to turn.
Maneuverability at slow speeds (nimbleness): Not lightning quick edge to edge, but not slow either. Average. Not a dragonfly but also not an ocean liner.
Catchiness: Whilst it wasn't catch free, it wasn't super easy to catch an edge either. If you got off your game it did feel like it could catch, but it wasn't something super easy to catch an edge on or anything.
Speed
Was decently fast. And when up to speed felt nice and stable.
Uneven Terrain
Crud: Handled crud/chunder like a boss. Smashed through it and was nice and damp.
Trees/Bumps: Not epic in the trees, but decent enough and would be good with powder in trees too.
Jumps
Nothing really bad about it with jumps, but not terribly exciting either. Has a smooth, surfy, damp feel when riding, but not a lot of snap, so not super exciting for jumps or side hits.
Pop: Averagely easy to access the pop. Didn't have to put everything into it to extract it, but had to put a bit of effort in. Total pop was decent too, but just somehow felt like it came slow. Not sure how that makes sense, but felt like it popped a good height, but it wasn't an energetic or explosive pop.
Approach: Stable on approach, and not too bad for making adjustments, when necessary.
Landing: Decently solid, but not to the point I'd quite call it a stomper. Tail heavy landings weren't ideal, but not too bad. Somewhat forgiving of errors.
Side-hits: Decent enough for side hits, but nothing too exciting.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Best suited to medium jumps but fine for small and large too.
Switch
Didn't feel too weird riding switch. But not ideal either for obvious reasons, being pretty directional.
Butters
Took a bit of effort to get the nose and tail to press but with effort was able to press and lock in the nose and tail. Nose felt a bit different to tail to press but they weren't worlds apart.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.5 | 9/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 83.2/100 |
The Lib Rig is a smooth, surfy ride that handles a variety of conditions well from icy snow to powder and everything in between. It's really good at tackling crud/chunder too.
It's not as at home for anything super energetic/snappy and whilst it's capable in trees and on jumps, it's not where it excels. Carving up or cruising the groomers or finding powder are the most well suited expeditions for this board.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
Check out the links below for more info on the Lib Rig, where to buy or if you are researching prices or available sizes.
If your keen to check out some other Freeride options or to see how the Lib Rig compares to other freeride decks check out the link below.
Hi Nate, is there any difference between the 2025 model vs last years model? On the 24-25 catalog it doesnt show C3X, instead showing Early Rise Camber? Did they remove the rocker in-between the camber? Cheers!
Hi Danny, thanks for your message.
I can’t say for sure, but my instinct is that it’s just a camber profile name change. The previous model was basically traditional camber anyway. Not quite to the same extent of something like the Off Ramp, which really was full camber, even when it was called C3. With the Lib Rig, there was no visible signs of rocker when you laid it on a flat surface. But when you applied weight at the inserts, you could see some really subtle rocker when it was compressed. With the Off Ramp, there wasn’t even signs of rocker when weighted. So I’m 99% sure the Off Ramp is just a name change to the camber profile and they didn’t really do anything to it. With the Lib Rig, I’m less sure, but maybe 75% that it’s just a classification change, rather than them actually doing anything with the camber profile. But couldn’t say for sure.
Hi, I own the 2024 and had a good look at the 2025 model in a shop as I was curious about the change from C3 to camber. There is no actual change other than the graphics. The camber profile of the 2025 is exactly the same as my 2024. They have just changed the name of the camber profile from C3 to directional camber.
Thanks Kevin
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your review! Would really appreciate your insight!! I’m debating between the 155cm Banked Country and Lib Tech’s 156cm Lib Rig to add to my quiver.
I live near Salt Lake. My daily driver is a 156cm asym true twin ’18 Gnu Space Case (C2X profile, Gnu’s 7 flex, 8-8.3 radius, 116cm contact). I don’t do park, but enjoy riding switch constantly, mostly in bumps and trees. (I’m 5’9” 182lbs, size 8.5 boot, 38 years and athletic, but think I like slightly smaller boards because I don’t usually go that fast and prefer their manueverability in technical terrain.) For fresh 8+” of snow, I have a volume-shifted 153cm Orca (C2X, 7 flex, 7 radius, 110cm contact), which I love for its smeary, slashy, floaty playfulness.
But I feel like I’m missing something in the middle… In steep, ungroomed terrain (e.g. double-black bumpy bowls and steep trees at Snowbird and Park City) 1) I feel like I overpower whichever nose on my true twin and lose stability on turns when speed inevitably increases because of slope angle (I also have a wide stance, so that leaves even less board in front on a twin. My sense is, since I also ski 35% of my time, that my true twin in steeps feels like skiing a ski that’s too short: not enough ski in front to stabilize you and bite/grip the snow from turn to turn). But 2) the Orca feels too wide for firm bumps when it hasn’t snowed.
Thus wanting to add either the Banked Country or Lib Rig in the middle of my quiver. I think it’s mostly splitting hairs (e.g. same 1.5” setback, same C3 camber, etc.), but just wondering your thoughts having tested both? Any notable difference in feel of nose and tail, turn initiation, chatter/dampening, etc.? I may be slightly leaning towards the 156 Lib Rig because it a) is barely stiffer (7 v. Banked’s 6.5), and b) has shorter contact edge (103cm v. 112cm) and shorter turn radius ( 7.8 v. Banked’s 8.2) for easier maneuverability in technical terrain. But your rankings liked the Bank Country more. Any opinion for me and my uses/style?
Thanks so much!
Hi Ben, thanks for your message.
I would say I found the Banked Country easier to maneuver, despite the contact length and sidecut specs – but the Lib Rig certainly isn’t bad maneuverability-wise. But the Lib Rig is certainly damper and that little bit stiffer/more stable through uneven conditions. But yeah, both would certainly be a good bet for what you’re describing, IMO, as a good in between of your other boards, but I’d say that’s the biggest choice between them – the dampness of the Lib Rig vs the better maneuverability of the BC.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m 5″10 ( 178 cm) and weighs 165 lbs and wear size 9.5. I usually ride 159-160 boards as I like to go fast and need stability.
I’m very interested in the lib rig for its carving/stability/floating qualities, and I also like that it has a smoother mtx and a very soft/flat rocker between the feet which makes it quite unique in the Lib tech line.
But I’m a bit concerned with the reduced contact length and the effect of it on the stability of the board at high speed.
I need to change my 2011 Lib tech Jamie lynn ( c2 in 160 with 121 cm contact length) which had nice stability at high speed even with the c2.
I’m a bit scared the the lib rig at 159 will be too small for my style of riding, and that I will loose stability. What do you think ?
I’m not so much interested in the 2023 jamie lynn profile, I would still like a little rocker
Thanks a lot for your help
Hi Olivier, thanks for your message.
Apologies for the slow response. Hopefully this isn’t too late to help. Have been hectically running around testing gear and falling way behind here.
More freeride focused boards do tend to have less contact length and effective edge, as more of it’s length tends to be in the nose, so you can have more surface area when in deeper powder, but not have it that noticeable on groomers. So you can go longer than you typically would for an all-mountain or freestyle board. In the case of Lib Rig, it doesn’t have a longer size in regular width, unfortunately. It’s also annoying that Lib Tech only publishes the contact length and not the effective edge as well. To note, however, that the camber profile on the Lib Rig is closer to traditional camber than anything else. There is a very subtle rocker in the middle, but if you look at it side on, unweighted, you’d never know it. It looks just like traditional camber. When you weight it, you notice it’s there, but it’s very subtle.
Thanks for you answer Nate !
So you agree that the Lib rig in 159 could be a little to small for me ?
I’m thinking the Ejack knife could be similar with the right size, but I would like to keep a bit of that surfy feel I had with the C2, and I’m scared that this C3 profile has none of it.
I’m looking for good all around deck that can charge hard, carves well and float very well with a surfy feel.
The Rasman , with its C2X, could have been perfect for that but it is too wide for my 9.5, even in reg size ( I like waist width between 25.4 and 25.7).
Finding the right snowboard is complicated…
Hi Olivier
Generally speaking I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157/158. Going a bit longer for a freeride board, I think 159 is about right. So not necessarily too small. But since you’re used to a 160 with more contact length (again, not sure how they compare in terms of effective edge), you may find it feels a bit smaller than what you’re used to. That said, with the more camber dominant profile, that will add stability vs C2. But as I noted, the rocker is really very subtle, so may not give that surfy feel you want.
The Ejack Knife is even more camber dominant, locked in and aggressive. So, I’m not sure that’s the right direction, given what you’re looking for. I would look at the GNU Banked Country. It’s a touch softer, in my experience, vs the Lib Rig and Ejack Knife, but it still carves really well and while it’s also C3, the rocker is more obvious, in my experience and has more of that surfy feel. The Lib Rig definitely has some of that, definitely more than the Ejack Knife, but the Banked Country has a little more. There’s the GNU Hyper, which is C2X, but I think you’d find that a little too soft and surfy – it won’t charge hard or carve as well as the Banked Country.
Hi Nate, Thanks a lot for your time and for your help.
I took you advice and finally went with the Lib tech Goldmember in 159 ( found one of the very last available for sale online).
That way I can keep that surfy feel and that great float I had with my old jamie lynn, but with a more agressive profile for carving ( c2x), and a little more reactivity ( being lighter with the firepower construction) which was what I was looking for.
Thanks again !
Best regards
You’re very welcome Olivier. Hope the Goldmember treats you well!
Hey Nate,
I’m thinking of adding this to my quiver. Right now I daily a Never Summer SnowTrooper or yes Typo pending if it’s icy or not. I’m looking to add more of a powder / big mountain board for riding bowls. I still want the board to rip groomers and dabble in the tress. I’m torn between this, Gnu Hyper, and Burton Hometown Hero. I am 6ft 195lbs size 9.5 boot. I would get these boards in 156 (157 for the gnu). Which would you add to my quiver?
Hey Mike
Thanks for your message.
I would say the following between them:
– The Lib Rig is stiffest (7/10 flex) and Hyper softest (5.5/10 flex) with HH in between (6.5/10 flex)
– All pretty comparable for powder
– The Lib Rig is a smooth, damp feeling board vs the Hyper which is a snappier ride and the HH in between. The Hyper is, IMO, the best for trees of the 3 and the the most agile. But it will also feel the most chatter and be the least stable in crud/other messy snow – the Lib Rig will be the best in messy snow, IMO.
– Lib Rig will likely feel most stable at speed, with HH close behind and then the Hyper. Lib Rig and HH also a little better for carving vs Hyper.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160/161, so going 156/157 is going quite small for you, for this type of board, IMO. Though, if you wanted something like the Lib Rig to be better in trees while sacrificing a little in terms of stability at speed and powder float, then the 156 could work. But I would be leaning 159 for that otherwise – and 160 for the HH and Hyper. Certainly doesn’t mean you have to, but those are the sizes I would go with, given the purpose, but if you are really looking to prioritize trees/agility over stability/float, then the 156/157 are in range, just at the very small end of your range, IMO. Though it does depend on what you’re used to riding as well. i.e. if you’re used to riding shorter boards, you may be more comfortable with those smaller sizes.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the quick reply! I was focusing on the 156/157 due to some waste widths. I found that I like to keep below 256. With that the lib rig fits.
I was just reading some more your reviews and now I’m wondering if the GNU banked country should be in the mix? With your previous response I was leaning lib rig but curious to your thoughts between the Lib Rig and Banked Country?
Cheers,
Mike
Hey Mike
Yeah, I think the Banked Country would be a good bet. In some ways it’s also in between the Lib Rig and Hyper, like the HH, but, in my experience it was a little snappier than the HH and a little better in trees and in crud.
Note that while the Hyper 160 is 256 at the waist, it’s width is less at the inserts than you’d expect. Assuming a roughly 22″ (560mm) stance width, you’d be looking at around 263mm at the front insert and 264mm at the back insert on the 160 Hyper, which is less than some boards with 252mm waists. There’s less of a difference between waist and inserts on it than is typical. This is pretty normal for Lib Tech/GNU boards. Though the Lib Rig, not so much. The 159 is 267mm at the front insert and 265mm at the back insert, which is pretty average in terms of that difference. But that is the other advantage of going Banked Country, is that you get a little smaller waist width and a little smaller inserts widths, if you wanted to still be able to go to the 159. It’s 264mm at the front insert and 262mm at the back insert – so a little narrower. The Hometown Hero is a little wider, and I think you’d likely find that one too wide in the 160 – which would be more like 269mm at the front insert and 268mm at the back insert.
Thanks Nate for the quick response-helpful information.
My boot size is a 10US, apologies for not mentioning that.
I was on a Sims Nub 58.5 that has a 26.7 waist which was an awesome deck but way too wide for me, moved over to a Capita Mercury 58W (26.3). The Merc was not my type of ride-the glide was excellent… and I’ll leave it at that.
So, 59 or 60W?
Hi JF
I would go with the 159, if I was you. With 10s, I’d personally be confident on it at pretty much any binding angles. I don’t eurocarve or anything like that, but I do try to get relatively deep with carves and haven’t ever had any issues with 10s with that kind of width at inserts. I do ride with +15/-15 binding angles most of the time, so that helps. But even with a straighter back binding angle, I’d be confident on the 159 Lib Rig in 10s, personally.
For reference:
158W Mercury: 269mm front insert, 271mm at back insert (estimated based on measuring the 157)
159 Lib Rig: 267mm at front insert, 265mm at back insert (not the back insert is narrower than the front in this case – this is often the case when there is taper in the board).
So, you’re looking at around 6mm narrower at the back insert vs the 58W Mercury, assuming the same stance width.
Also for reference:
Assuming your boot is around 31.5cm in length (taking into account it’s a longer profile boot – I didn’t get a chance to measure the TM-3XD when I had them, unfortunately), you’d be looking at around 5cm of total overhang (or 2.5cm per edge, assuming perfect boot centering) with a zero degree binding angle (on the back insert). A 3 degree binding angle doesn’t make much difference, but the more angle you add, the less overhang you’ll have. Roughly 1cm less overhang at a 15 degree angle, depending on different factors.
Personally I’m typically comfortable with 2.5cm of overhang on any one edge, but it depends on how deep you like to carve.
Hi Nate,
I wish this was offered in a 26-26.3 waist, but it is not. That being said, I’m 6’1, weigh 190lbs, and am boot’ed with 32 TM-3XD.
Personally, I feel like I loose the drive off a board if I go wider than 26.3 on the waist width. However, given that the 59 Rig is a 25.5 waist (seems really narrow?) and the 60 is a 26.5 I am at a loss on which way to go. The last thing I want to do is get on a deck with gross over hang (as I’ll be using this for 85-100 days for the upcoming season). And the 32’s don’t have the smallest footprint, like a Salomon boot… Do you think the 60W would work or be too wide underfoot?
Any advice on which Rig to lean towards? Or, should I look at something else (no Capita, please).
Thanks,
JF
Hi JF
Thanks for your message.
Can you let me know your boot size? The 159 is around 265mm at the back insert and 267mm at the front insert. I would be pretty confident with that width in 10.5s or under, but if you have 11s or longer, would be pushing it, particularly if your boots have a longer profile and also depending on binding angles, but in most cases I wouldn’t recommend it for 11s.
In terms of the 160W being too wide or not, would depend on your boot size. One thing to note is that the Lib Rig is wider at the inserts vs the waist compared to most Lib Tech/GNU boards – most have a less than average difference. To clarify what I mean by that. The average difference between inserts and waist is around 10mm (e.g. with a 255mm waist the width at inserts would be around 265mm). But with Mervin boards, that difference tends to be more like 5mm-8mm, difference. The main reason is that typically there is quite a big magnetraction bump right at the waist, making it seem wider at the waist. In the case of the Lib Rig though, the magnetraction is pretty subtle from what I could tell, so either the bump at the waist isn’t as pronounced or the waist sits slightly off a magnetraction bump (I don’t usually measure the waist width as it’s something that every brand publishes).
So given that the Lig Rig has a typical difference between waist and inserts, if you typically don’t like anything over 263mm at the waist, then my instinct is that the 160W may feel a little wide for you.
But yeah, if you could let me know your boots size and can look at it again.
Apologies on the very late reply. I am a size ten on 32 Grenier’s.
Hey JF. No worries. Yeah, long story short, I think you’d be fine on the 159 and that’s what I would go with if you think it’s not going to be too narrow. In most cases, I’d be comfortable with a 10 on the Lib Rig. I mean, if you ride with a zero degree back binding angle and like to euro carve, that kind of thing, then you might be pushing it, but otherwise I’d be comfortable with that, even with longer profile boots.