Hello and welcome to my Lib Tech Orca snowboard review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Orca as a freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Orca a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other freeride snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Lib Tech T Rice Orca
Price: $699
Style: short/wide freeride
Flex Rating: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Stiff (7.5/10)
Rating Score: 82.1/100
Compared to other Menโs Freeride Boards
Out of the 40 menโs freeride snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Orcaโs Specs
Check out the tables for the Orcaโs specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Freeride (short/wide) |
Price: | $699 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Medium |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | Hybrid Rocker - Lib Tech's C2X |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Setback 64mm (2.5") |
Base: | Sintered (Sintered Knife Cut) |
Weight: | Felt a little heavier than Normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
138 | 247 | 90+ | 41+ |
144 | 255 | 100+ | 45+ |
147 | 257 | 110+ | 50+ |
150 | 265 | 120+ | 54+ |
153 | 267 | 130+ | 59+ |
156 | 267 | 140+ | 64+ |
159 | 267 | 150+ | 68+ |
162 | 269 | 160+ | 73+ |
Who is the Orca Most Suited To?
The Orca is best for anyone looking for a stiffer short/wide board and mainly wants to ride at speed, carve and find powder. Or for those with bigger feet, but still want something 159 or under, that wants that kind of freeride experience.
Also for those looking to ride longer, more drawn out turns as opposed to short/sharp snappy turns and looking for something that is damp and smooth.
Not a beginner or even intermediate board, IMO - advanced to expert.
The Orca in More Detail
O.k. letโs take a more detailed look at what the Orca is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Lib Tech Orca 2021, 153cm (267mm waist width)
Date: February 20, 2020
Conditions: Beautiful sunny day with perfect visibility. Almost too hot!
Off groomer quite crunchy and icy and the steep run I test on was quite crunchy too, but on groomer was really nice - hard packed underneath but with some soft on top.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 530mm (20.9โณ)
Stance Setback: Setback 64mm (2.5")
Width at Inserts: 276mm (10.9") at front insert and 275mm (10.8") at back insert
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 175lbs
Rider Boot Size: US10 Salomon Lo-Fi
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Damp or Chattery?
Really quite damp. Quite far up the damp side of the scale
Smooth or Snappy?
Smooth for sure. Again, quite far down the smooth side of the scale.
Powder
No powder to test on unfortunately, as I think this board would be super fun in powder.
Based on specs, it would be a powder lover for sure. A healthy amount of taper, heaps of setback, a longer nose than tail and rocker in the profile.
Carving & Turning
Carving: Nice on a carve. Not a monster carver, but still really nice. Prefers long arcing carves to shorter sharper ones.
Turning: Again prefers things to be a little more long and drawn out when making regular turns - as opposed to shorter, sharper turns.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Not terrible maneuverable at slower speeds. Takes some effort to switch edges at slow speeds. Starts to purr more when riding faster.
Skidded Turns: Not great for skidded turns. Somewhat doable, but not super forgiving of them.
Speed
Performs really well at speed and prefers some speed behind. It feels like a much higher performance board when the mph is higher. And feels stable at speed too, when you open it out. In once sense this was quite surprising, given the length I rode (153) but in another sense it wasn't too surprising given how stiff it feels (7.5/10, bordering on 8/10)
Uneven Terrain
Felt great in crud - just smashed through it like it wasn't there.
Not as good in bumpy terrain, particularly trying to weave through - not nimble enough to be great in there.
Letโs Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
OK butnot amazing overall.
Pop: There's a good bit there, when you really give it some. But it takes quite a bit of effort to extract, IMO.
Approach: Really stable for faster approaches, but not as nimble as i would like for slower, trickier approaches
Landing: Solid on landings for sure. Can really stomp it when you get it right, but not that forgiving if you get it wrong.
Side-hits: Doable but not great. Not nimble enough for my liking and pop not easier enough to extract.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Best for bigger jumps where you need good stability on approach and landing.
Switch
Doable, as any board is really, but one of the less suited boards to riding switch.
Spins
Being a shorter board, it wasn't too bad getting the spin around, but still not super spinny. Not great for landing switch or setting up switch - or any kind of tricky setup. So not ideal for spins, IMO.
Butters
I found it surprisingly buttery for how stiff it is. I'd say as much as 3.5/5 for buttering, which really surprised me, given how the board otherwise felt.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.5 | 22.5/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.0 | 6/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 3.5 | 7/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 2.0 | 2/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 82.1/100 |
If you're looking for a damp, smooth board for long, drawn out turns but mostly want something that's effortless and floaty in powder.
Make sure you like your board relatively stiff and wide and that you're an advanced rider - and if that all melds together, then this is a great option.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Orca, 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 freeride snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Orca compares to other freeride snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hey Nate
I im 195 cm and 85 kg wearing 27,5 cm snowboard shoes (its EU 9,5)
In past i had nitro prime 162 and now im riding deep thinker 160
So what is your opinion about Orca size ? What is ideal for me
Hi Filip
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 162 and with 9.5s and this particular board, I would size down to the 156. The 153 would be doable too, if you wanted to increase it’s maneuverability – at the cost of some powder float and stability at speed. But I think the 156 is the most “pure size” for you for the Orca.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Adding my thanks to everyone else for your website; it’s a phenomenal resource and I’m sure you put a lot of time and effort into…thx very much!
Another sizing question (sorry!): I’m 6’3/192cm, 90kg/200 pounds and mondopoint 30 / euro size 46 boots.
Been riding a 164 K2 TurboDream for several years as resort board and have a Dupraz D1 6′ for when there is tonnes of powder.
Several friends have bought Orcas and rave about them, and the one thing that interests me is maneuverability in the trees. The Dupraz is great for big long turns, but I struggle to bring it around in the trees or in moguls etc when I have to be on piste. So the Orca is tempting, and there is a 162cm 2022/2023 model on sale here at the moment for a steal.
But everything I’ve read suggests that 162 will feel huge….
Your thoughts please? Would it be too much?
Thanks!
Hi J
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around a 163/164. So I don’t think it’s far off. The Orca is a volume shifted board, so you do typically size down for it and going to 162 wouldn’t be much of a size down. But one of the big reasons you size down is because of it’s width. With mondo 30 feet that’s not going to be as big a thing for you. It is a little wider than a typical wide board but not by too much. You’d be looking at around 278mm at the front insert and 277mm at the back insert. But it’s unlikely to be much wider than your 164W Turbo Dream at the inserts. The waist is a little wider and while the tip is quite a bit wider, the tail will actually be slightly smaller (this is based on the 2018 model of the Turbo Dream). Overall I’d say it’s a little wider, but then it’s also a little shorter, so I don’t think it will feel much bigger than your 164W Turbodream, maybe a 165W Turbo Dream, kind of size. However, it will likely, from my experience with both boards, feel stiffer than the Turbodream, which can make it a little harder to manage especially for tight turns.
Also, while the Orca 162 does have a pretty tight sidecut (7m) for a 162, I didn’t personally find it was something that turned that sharp, at least not at slower speeds. It felt better when riding fast (based on riding the 153 at 6’0″, 180lbs, size 10 boots). Now, if you bomb through the trees, then it should be fine. But otherwise, I would be leaning 159 (if you were to have that option), given that tree and mogul performance is what you’re looking to get out of this board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks very much Nate, helps so much to have someone who’s had personal experience with all these boards! I won’t buy the 162 then just for the sake of it….will stick with the TurboDream for this season after all.
Thanks and have a good season!
You’re very welcome J. Hope you have a great season too!
Hello Nate! Here my question of all seasons. Lib tech golden orca 153 or 157 for me? 1.88cm tall 84 kilos 44 snowboard boot. Intermediate-advanced level Thank you so much Waiting for your review of the golden orca ๐
Hi Javi
It’s a close call. I think it would somewhat depend on what you’d be using it for mostly and what else you had in your quiver. On your specs alone, I think I would be leaning 157. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161, but this is a board you want to size down for. However, with your boot size, I think sizing down to 157 is enough of a length size down. That doesn’t make the 153 the wrong choice. If you were going to be riding a lot of trees with it, for example and wanted to favor maneuverability over stability/powder float, then the 153 could work too.
Hope this helps with your decision
hank you very much nate
I’m going to test it with burton’s photon step on and genesis step on bindings. In Burton boots I have to increase the size to 44.5 which makes me decide more for golden orca 157 as you recommend ๐
Do you think it is a good combination of board, boots and bindings?
thank you so much
Or do you think that the ion are better for golden orca
Hi Javi
The Photon would work, but I think the Ion are the better flex-match to the Golden Orca
thankยกยก you are amazing
You’re very welcome Javi. Thanks for stopping by and I hope the new setup treats you well.
Hi Nate,
Sorry to jump on the train of sizing questions, but I’m torn between the 150 and 153… I was able to pick up an Orca 153 on sale (no 150s available) but I don’t know if I’ll end up returning and holding out for a 150. I usually ride all mountain in the PNW, hunting down powder off piste and always taking lines through the trees. I’m 5’10 165lbs with a size 10 boot. I normally ride a cambered Burton Process 157, so figured the 153 fit the 3-6cm down recommendation (haven’t ridden volume shifted before). I’m wanting this to be the board I grab for PNW powder days, that can still hold out when conditions aren’t that great. Would you lean towards 150, or do you think the 153 will fit the bill? Thanks a ton!
Hi Zach
Thanks for your message. It’s a tight call and I definitely get why you’re debating between the 2 sizes. I think either could work, depending on what you’re most looking to optimize from the board. If you’re predominantly going to be using it in powder, then I think you’re fine with sticking with the 153, particularly if, when you’re not in powder, that you’d be mostly riding open groomers and wanting to ride faster rather than slower, more playfully. If you were going to be doing a lot of tree riding and favor maneuverability over stability at speed when there’s not a lot of powder around, then I’d be erring towards the 150.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the feedback, it’s much appreciated! Powder or no powder I do tend to avoid groomers for the most part and enjoy the trees. I’ve also got Jackson & Japan on the books for next winter so some criteria pulling in different directions. Going to be a tough call. Thanks again for the input!
Hey Zach, thought I’d chime in just incase you were still debating. I’m the same weight and height with a size 10.5 boot. My Burton Farm is a 154 so I sized down and got a 150 Orca. I went to Jackson Hole back in January, unfortunately we didn’t get a bunch of pow while we were there but I did ride the Orca exclusively. Jackson is super steep and a blast, we dodged the groomers as much as possible and I was extremely grateful to have the extra maneuverability. My buddy was riding a longer Burton Flight Attendant and was regretting the extra length he had to swing around.
Extra tip: check out rendevous bowl to south hoback from the tram, bird in the hand, and moran face. If you’re up for a short hike you might be able to find some left over powder if you do headwall.
Hey Nate, have hugely appreciated your reviews and time you spend responding to questions, really helpful to read through!
Iโm 6โ3, 180 lbs, size 12, fairly all mountain in the PNW. Fast groomers, trees, bowls, and any powder I can find.
I currently daily a Lib Tech Dynamo 162W, and also have an older GNU Btx Carbon Credit which at this point is mostly a slush/park/playing around board late in the season.
Iโm a fan of Mervin boards – Relative to what Iโd had the Dynamo has been a solid overall carver, has been fun in powder and Iโve loved the board overall, but Iโve been interested in trying something shorter and more powder focused, without overlapping too much with the Dynamo.
From Mervin the Orca and MC Wayfinder 2 would both be better in powder, and if it was going to be my primary board think the Orca would be the way to go for all round riding. But when I currently have the Dynamo it seems like there might be quite a bit of overlap there in general feel and where the boards excel?
Long story short, would the Orca feel enough different than the Dynamo to make it worth picking up as my only additional board? Or would the Wayfinder make more sense as a powder focused change up board when I have the Dynamo for a daily?
Thanks again!
Joel
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the MC Wayfinder II, so can’t say based on experience with that one. But the Orca is a very different feel to the Dynamo, so I don’t think there’s going to be too much overlap there. Very different boards. Whilst the Orca (looking at specs vs the Wayfinder) looks to be slightly less powder specialized, powder is still it’s best attribute and main focus, IMO. And adding the length difference to the already different feel, I don’t think you’ll feel like they’re too similar. Size-wise, the Wayfinder only has the 155, but I think that size would work well for your specs for that board. For the Orca, I would be leaning 156. With 12s you don’t have to size down as much. But the 153 is still a possibility, IMO, if you want to go more playful/maneuverable.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate. Not positive what I’m doing yet but I appreciate the feedback, and it’s good to know the Orca would be markedly different than the Dynamo.
You’re very welcome Joel
Hi,
Does the Orca have a reference stance for groomers?
Is it meant to be ridden centrally to the insert holes? Is it ok set-back from the centre holes on hard pack? In powder I set it back anyway.
Hi Knut
Thanks for your message.
I don’t think it has a specific groomer stance. But if I was to set it up for groomers I’d have the bindings centered around the 3rd holes from the middle on both ends (so screws in the 2nd and 4th holes).
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
What Orca size u suggest for me ?
My specs :
193cm
84kg
Wearing 9.5 Ride Fuse boots
Hi Filip
I would be leaning 156 for you in this board. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 162, but this is a board you want to size down on for sure. I would size down more than 3cm, so the 159 is a little on the big side, IMO. But sizing down 9cm likely too much. So I think 156 is your best bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate!
Iโm 5 foot 9 and about 185 lbs and boot size 9.5.
Would ideally like a 153 but can only get this locally in a 156. Do you think this will work well for me? Also considering the EJack Knife.
Hi Joey
Thanks for your message.
I would prefer to see you go 153 for the Orca. The 156 wouldn’t be gigantic, but it’s on the big side, IMO. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 158/159 and with 9.5s I would size down more for the Orca than 2-3cm.
With the E-jack Knife, the 159 is probably your best bet, assuming an advanced level of riding. But you could also go 157. I really liked the 157 (6’0″, 180lbs, size 10 (sometimes 9.5) boots) but both sizes would work for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate. Trying to decide between a Bateleon Party Wave+ and an Orca. Iโm looking for a board that can get between tight trees in Retallack and also manage the powder so maneuverability (having little tail in pow and tight trees is ideal) is key while also needing float. Would also use this in the resorts with the family and all around days.
My daily driver is a 2017 Yes PYL and my powder board is a Arbor Cask 147
Iโm 5-11, 210 and 50yrs looking for a smooth ride.
Can you help with this decision or suggest other boards.
Hi Rouzbeh
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Party Wave+, so I’m not sure with that one. But it looks to be a little softer flexing, which I typically find makes a board more maneuverable at slower speeds – like when you’re doing short/sharp turns in trees. The Orca I didn’t find to be the quickest turner. Not bad, but not super quick. Though take into account as well that the Party Wave+ looks to be seriously wide – even more so than the Orca (and width, if you don’t size down enough, can also contribute to slow turning).
Size-wise for either board, if you could let me know you boot size, that would be great.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate.
Im deciding to get an Orca and need an advice for the size. I am currently on High end intermediate level now. I am 5ft6 and half. Im riding regular stance at 15+/-15. Weigh 176lbs. I am size 9us. I got a union force 2022 bindings (M) and using size 9 DC Control 2019 Boa. Does my boots and Bindings suits the Orca? What size should i get?
Thank you Nate. Ive been nerdy reading everything on your site. You help me grow since the beginning of my snowboard days.
Hi Carlo
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 156, but with this board being volume shifted (short/wide), I would size down from that. I’d be looking at either the 147 or 150. I’d be leaning 150, but 147 wouldn’t be wrong, if you wanted to make it a more mellow ride with sharper maneuverability – at the expense of float in powder and stability at speed. I’d go 150, but the 147 wouldn’t be wrong in certain cases.
If you were looking to go to the 147 I think the Control and Force would be fine. For the 150, ideally you’d have something a little stiffer, but that setup would still work fine, IMO.
Hope this helps
Do you have any suggestions for binding placement on the orca? Someone suggested to mount the front binding as far forward as possible and let that dictate rear binding? my other boards are huge back-seat drivers. Any feedback appreciated.
Hi Ryan
Haven’t heard of doing anything like that before. I guess you could, so long as you didn’t end up with a “set forward stance” on effective edge. The Orca is setback a long way, but if even so, if you put your front binding as far forward as it can go, you’re still risking a set forward stance, depending on the stance width you adopt. If you were careful and made sure you only did it to the point that you ended up being centered on effective edge and not set forward, then you could try it. But note that this board has a longer nose than tail, so being centered on effective edge isn’t the same thing as being centered on the overall length of the board. Being centered on effective edge you will still have more board in front of the front binding than you will behind the back binding. My question is why you would want to center up on this board. It’s not the kind of board you get for riding switch or anything like that – half the point is that you’re riding it back seat. If you want a board in your quiver that’s more two-ender, this isn’t the board I’d do it with, personally.
Finally got the orca out in the fresh deep stuff 4x over the past 3 weeks. It’s very fun, bindings need to be back else it feels ‘knifey’. Paired it with union atlas and buton phantoms. It’s a very fun setup! Surfy slashes at a decent speed. The base glide is plenty fast. Carves well but doesnt feel locked in like my XVs. Its unreal in pow, delivers in all aspects with 2-4ft of untouched pow. Even in 6in of fresh snow this board comes to life. I snagged the 159 for $387 no tax or shipping last April – best price I saw all season.
Hi Ryan
Thanks for the update and your feedback. Much appreciated. That’s a great price for the Orca!
Hi Nate!
HERE MY QUESTION LIKE ALL NEW SEASON.
1.88 cm tall, 83 kilos in weight, 44 (u,e) snowboard boot number.
Best orca size for me? 156 or 159??
thanks as always
Hey Javier
For your specs for the Orca, I’d go 156.
I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 161 but you want to size down for this board. Even with 44s it’s wide for your feet. I don’t think the 159 would be wrong, but I would size down a little more than that for this board. If you were going to be doing big mountain, open terrain powder a majority of the time with this board, then I’d be more inclined to go 159, but assuming you’ll be doing a bit more variety than that, I’d be leaning 156.
Hope this helps
THANK YOU NATE , ยกยกยก YOU ARE AMAZING
You’re very welcome Javier. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Paul,
I am 6’1 for 196lbs, and size 11 boots, intermediate/advanced rider.
Looking for advise to chose the right size for this Orca board to ride deeper powder conditions than with my smaller 156cm free ride board…
Thanks,
Thomas
Hi Thomas
Thanks for your message.
Given that you’re getting this for deep powder and you already have another board, I would look at the 159. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 161/162. Whilst typically I would say to size down a little more for the Orca, given that you have 11s and that you’re looking to for powder specifically, I wouldn’t size down too much. It’s still wide for 11s and still a board you should size down for a little, so that’s why I’d go 159 rather than 162, but I think 159 rather than 156 in this case.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, great review!
I am in market for Orca this year, my spec is 6 feet, 172lbs (naked weight lol), US 9/5-10 boots.
Not much selection on Orca size nowadays, but spotted 150cm for a good price, wondering if this would work well as 153?
Also, I currently have Burton Process Camber 157W (love the panda design!) paired with Flux, and Lib Tech Rasman 159 (also great graphic this year) paired with Flow, both a traditional bindings with boots, I was thinking adding Orca (or if you have other recs) with Step on as a lightweight do-it-all board when I travel (can do powder/allMTN/Freeride in resort).
Looking forward to learn from you!
Thanks!
Adding on that I used to ride K2 Party Platter 152 for a season, loved it but returned for warranty given chips, so looking for a short-wide board as a replacement.
Else, also very interested on Capita Spring Break Powder Twin 156, not sure how it would compare to Orca?
Hi Richie
Thanks for your messages.
My first instinct for your specs would be to go 153 for the Orca. However, 150 is doable. We’re a similar size and I felt I could have really enjoyed the 150. I think 153 is probably the more pure size, but 150 is doable.
Note that, versus the 153, you’d be dropping a bit in terms of float in powder and stability at speed, while gaining a bit of maneuverability.
I haven’t ridden the Powder Twin, but I think it would be quite a different feeling ride, based on specs. It’s an interesting one – being a twin but otherwise designed for powder. So a very different feel to the very directional Orca. Also based on their flex rating, will likely be quite a bit softer feeling flex-wise and likely more playful. If you did go with it, I would be looking at the 153 though – was there a reason you were looking at this in the 156 instead?
I gave a second thought on the Powder Twin and realized that I may just use Rasman instead, given review at this site indicated Rasman’s powder experience was great as well (not perfect but doable). So I might go with Orca.
Any other boards that you would recommend given my current quiver/setup?
Thank you for the detailed guide!
Hi Richie
Some other good short-wide options, in a similar flex to the Orca/Party Platter, include:
– GNU Gremlin
– Nidecker Mosquito
There are others, like the Arbor Single and Burton Pow Wrench, that I really liked, but they’re softer flexing.
Also, I didn’t mention in my previous comment. The 152 Party Platter and 150 Orca are probably pretty close equivalents, IMO, size-wise, so given that you liked the Party Platter in 152, I think you would like the Orca in 150.
Nate, REALLY appreciate your reviews. Ready to treat myself to a new board this season. Any advice on size of Orca? Iโm 58 yrs old, over 30 yrs snowboarding. 6โ1โ 170 lb with a size 12 boot. Advanced โwanna be expertโ rider. Currently riding my trusty ole Rome Flag 163 with newish Burton Ion boots and Malavita bindings.
Love to free ride, love powder, and trees, but with family – mainly resort skiing. Live in Tahoe City CA and ride at Palisades/Alpine, Homewood, Northstar 30+days a year Thanks for your help bud
Nate, I guess I should ask also, looking at your Top 10 List, are any of those boards a better choice for me than the Orca! Need a wide one if thereโs one thing I hate itโs toe/heel drag!
Hi Pickman
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise for the Orca, I would be weighing up between the 156 and 159, but leaning 156. I would put your standard length at around 159/160. Whilst this is a board you size down for, given that you have size 12 boots, you don’t need to size down as much. But I’d still size down a little for this board, so I think 156 is your best bet.
Personally I didn’t find the Orca a super turny board, if that makes sense. If you prefer straighter lines to short/sharp turns, then it’s a board I think you could really like. I like to be able to make sharp turns, which I’ve found difficult with anything in the T Rice series. More for straighter lines in my experience.
If you do need something that turns sharper as well as being good in powder, then I’d look at something else personally. From Lib Tech, the Ejack Knife would be a really good candidate. Something like the Capita Kokubo Pro, Jones Flagship or YES PYL would also work really well, IMO. If you were interested in any of those, let me know and I’ll be happy to discuss sizing of them with you.
Hope this helps with your decision.
Nate, great info! I do like a turny board, tight trees and following my 2plank family through mogul fields so I think the Orca might frustrate me. As long as my 12โs will not drag all the time Iโll be happy. Those 4 boards at the end, i will do some research on widths along with any advice you have. I saw the PYL you ranked very high. Looking forward to pulling the trigger soon, before season hype really blows up Thanks again
Almost forgot, I read in another reply Malavitas may be too soft for the Orca. Any binding advice for the Flagship or PYL is welcome
Hi Pickman
Yeah, ideally I would go with stiffer bindings for the Orca. The Malviats will work, but to get the most out of the Orca – or the PYL or Flagship, I would go stiffer. Anything from 7/10 to 9/10 in terms of flex would be a good bet for any of those 3 boards, IMO, depending on how stiff you wanted to go. Some good options in that flex range:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
Nate, what would your size recommendations be for these boards?
I found a Ejack Knife 159W
Capita website recommended against Kokomo if over 10.5 do you think the 157 or 160 would work? what u think about the BSOD, they have a 159
Flagship comes in a 158 & 159W
Would PYL 159 be wide enough for me? they have a 160W
Thanks
Hi Pickman
With 12s, the Kazu Kokubo will be too narrow, IMO, unfortunately. Even the 160 will be too narrow, IMO.
The BSOD in 159 would be too narrow as well. It’s a board that’s a little harder to manage at slower speeds as well, but I think you would be fine with it, if you were to go 157W. But 159 would be too narrow, IMO.
The 158 Flagship too narrow, but he 159W would work and a I think that would be a good size for you.
The Ejack Knife in the 159W might be borderline. It’s one of those boards that’s not as wide as it looks based on waist width. It’s going to be around 270mm/271mm at the inserts. Might be enough depending on how low profile your boots are, depending on binding angles and depending on how deep you like to carve.
The PYL would need to be the 160W but that would be borderline too – it’s 260mm at the waist and around 268mm at the back insert – a bit wider on the front insert. Again, might get away with it depending on boot profiles, binding angles and carving, but those things would need to be in your favor, IMO. Since you have Ion’s that helps as they are low profile, but given that toe/heel drag has been a thing for you in the past by the sounds of it, it’s still not a guarantee. The 159 would be too narrow.
Based on all that, I would be leaning Jones Flagship 159W.
Hi Nate!
I am torn between sizes. I am 5’8″ and wear size 9 boots. I currently weight 162 lbs but during the winter I bulk up to as much as 175 lbs so I will be somewhere between those weights. Which size Orca do you recommend for me?
Thanks for all you do for the community ๐
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
I would look at the 150. At your current weight, I would put your “standard length” at around 155/156. At 175lbs, I would put it closer to 157/158, somewhere in between at 156/157. With size 9s, I would size down more than 3-4cm on the Orca personally, so I think the 153 is going to be a little on the big side. The 147 a bit too small, IMO. So I’d go 150 in your case.
Hope this helps
Got the 150 cm 2022 orca. Didn’t think it would earn such poor marks from yourself, switch being irrelevant being its a directional board after all.
5’8 130 lbs 9.5 boots (Vans Infuse) – was the 150 too big of a size to choose? Too late to take it back now and the sale price was too good. I mainly wanted it as a powder day quiver spot board for decent dumps of snow.
What would you consider the absolute ultimate float board for deep powder days out there?
Hi Moases
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t call 81.9/100 bad. I don’t rate it the same as others do overall, but still really liked it for speed and carving. I didn’t get it in powder, but based on specs should be really good. So if you’re using it for powder days, I think you’ll get on well with it. In terms of the switch rating – the weighting for switch is only 5%, so it doesn’t affect the score too much.
Size-wise, I probably would have gone smaller for your specs. Probably 147 or even 144. But if you’re only using it in powder and don’t need it to be super maneuverable or anything, I think it should be fine.
Donโt forget this board needs to be sized down about 6cm from your regular board. Given your weight, youโre probably a 150cm for a normal board. A 150cm Orca is too big for you to control.
Hi Nate, I’m planning a trip to Japan and thinking about purchasing the Orca as my powder board. I’m hoping if you could give me some tips regarding the size. I’m 5’10, 150 lb and wear a size US8.5-9 boot. In addition, I was thinking of pairing the Orca with Malavitas, would that be a good combo? Thanks!
Hi Danny
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, I would say that your “standard all-mountain” size is around 155. But given your boot size and the extra width of the Orca, I wouldn’t go that long on it, even if you’re looking for extra float. I would be leaning to the 150, but if you think you would be riding a lot of trees, then you could even go 147. But if you wanted to get a bit more float for deeper powder the 150 should work well.
The Malavitas would work for sure. But to be picky, going with a slightly stiffer binding would be more ideal. Something around 7/10 flex would work best, IMO. You could even ride the Orca with stiffer bindings than that, but given your weight, I wouldn’t go stiffer than 7/10.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate, appreciated!
You’re very welcome Danny
Hi Nate!
I appreciate your reviews, and have a question on sizing. I’m 5’11 160 lbs and wear a size 8.5 boot. Rad dad styleโadvanced in one direction, I like to open up and lay trenches on groomers and boost off of side hits, but when there is pow that is all that I’ll ride.
Trying to decide between Orca 150, 153, and Dynamo 156. If the BRD 159 or Lost Quiver Killer 154 were in stock, I would grab one of those, but they’re not.
Thanks man!
Hi Cody
Thanks for your message.
For the Dynamo, I think the 156 would work well.
For the Orca, it’s a tough call. The 153 would give you more stability at speed and better float in powder and I’m kind of leaning that way. But it is really wide for 8.5s, so there’s some argument to size down even further to the 150. What would you typically ride in a regular width board? Like, if you’re typically riding like 159/160, then I think the 153 is probably going to work best. But if you typically ride closer to 156/157, then I’d err more to the 150.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks for the reply Nate!
I’m currently on a 157 Salomon First Call, and while it’s fun, I want something more stable, stiffer, and less washy when carving hard. I’ve demoed a 159 Ride Berzerker in the pastโwas super fun/aggressive (felt like a lot of board, but I started to get used to it).
For the Orca, I feel like I’m leaning toward the 153 also, but I’d go as short as possible while still retaining pow shredding qualities.
Between the Dynamo and Orca what would you pick for me? This would be my only ride.
Hi Cody
The Dynamo is more versatile, but doesn’t necessarily mean you have to go versatile for your one-board quiver, if you’re not necessarily doing everything. For your style, I think the one thing you’d prefer on the Dynamo is the side hits. But for everything else you describe I think the Orca is probably better. So if you can take a hit on the side hits (pun intended), then I’d be leaning Orca. If not, then I’d go Dynamo. Size-wise for the Orca, it’s tough, but given you were starting to get used to/like the Berzerker in 159, I would also be leaning 153. The Berzerker is a narrower than normal board, but it’s also quite a hard charger, so yeah, I think I’d be leaning 153, if you went Orca.
Hi Nate,
Thank you so much for the detailed responses. So someone snagged the 156 Dynamo, but there is still a 159 available. Do you think going a bit longer on the dynamo could bridge the gap between the 153 Orca and 156 Dynamo in terms of charging down groomers and powder performance?
The Orca, has a lot of hype reviews, but the reviews of the Dynamo seem a lot more genuine.
Hey Cody
Yeah, I would say the 159 Dynamo is the closer equivalent size to the 153 Orca, so given you were leaning 153 in the Orca, the 159 could definitely work. And given that you rode the 159 in the Berzerker. And yeah, would give you better powder and bombing performance versus the 156 too.
Hi Nate,
I’m 145 lb 10.5 size boots, just picked up a 147 orca. Is the board too small? Was debating if I should be riding a 150. I plan to use it for mostly pow and trees. With warpig as daily driver.
I usually ride a 148 warpig so I’m used to short fats.
Thanks!
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message.
It’s a close call between the 147 and 150. On one hand, the 147 isn’t actually really that wide, particularly for your boot size. It’s going to be roughly 264mm/265mm at the inserts, which is a good width for 10.5s, IMO. So, you’re sizing down, without necessarily needing to. But it certainly isn’t outside your range, and if you want to really optimize it for trees, it’s certainly doable. And because it’s a stiffer board it should still give reasonable stability even at that size.
The 150 is probably the more pure size to your specs, given that it’s on the wide side for 10.5s, but not massively wide for them, but some sizing down is warranted. With a “standard all-mountain size” around 153, IMO for you, I think the 150 represents a good size down for the width. But this size would be more optimized for you for open terrain and deeper powder versus the 147 which would be more optimized for trees, IMO.
Also to note, that the 147 Orca is smaller overall than the Warpig 148 (not just the 1cm length but also being quite a bit wider overall), so it also depends if you were wanting to go bigger or smaller than the Warpig for this board. The 150 is a little wider than the 148 Warpig – in addition to the extra length.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the breakdown, I think 150 would’ve been better for carving but 147 was a good deal at $450CAD so that’s part of the reason, also been keen to check out the hype on this thing.
I have just under 20mm overhang on both side with the 147, I’ll give it a season and see how it goes. If it’s not my style might pick up the k2 Excavator instead, hopefully you’ll get a chance to review that board this season!
You’re very welcome Dan. Yeah, hoping to get on the Excavator for sure.
Greetings Nate,
I have the 2021 Libtech Orca and am so confused on what bindings to match it perfectly with. I’m torn between the Burton Malavita, Burton Cartel X, Union Atlas or Falcor, and the NOW Pilots. I consider myself an intermediate riding Southern California resorts which is usually hard packed snow. If I’m lucky I’ll venture to Mammoth about once a year. I don’t do park anymore (getting old sucks and pain hurts more lol). I’m looking for a more freeride focused binding with a slightly surfy feel. I’m leaning towards the Falcor or NOW Pilots but the more I read reviews the more I get confused. Hoping your suggestions and experience will help. Thanks in advance!
Hi Jun
Thanks for your message.
Personally I would be leaning towards something on the slightly stiffer side for the Orca. I think the Cartel X, Atlas or Falcor would be what I’d be leaning to from those options. And from those I’d personally go either Cartel X or Falcor. For how I felt the Orca, I think the Pilots and Malavita just a little on the soft side for it.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much for the reply, Nate!
I went ahead and bought the Cartel X size M for my size 9 boots. I don’t know if it’s just my OCD but I can’t center the boots perfectly. I’m having about 3/16″ to 1/4″ more heel overhang when compared to the toes. I have rotated the disks 180ยฐ. My wife thinks they’re fine. Am I being too obsessive to detail or is that slight heel overhang ok?
Hi Jun
I wouldn’t worry too much about that difference. A little more heel overhang versus toes isn’t a big deal, IMO. It’s better than the other way around. Heelside carves tend to take more effort than toe side (for me at least and most), so having that little bit of extra leverage on the heel side isn’t a bad thing. Of course, you don’t want it to be too far off center, but if the difference is 1/4″ or less, I’d be fine with that. If it was more like 1/2″, then that’s probably too much, but where you have it should be fine, IMO.
Hi, Nate! Great review! I’m 143 pounds, size 8.5 boots, and 5’5. What size board? 144, 147, 150?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Hobbes
Thanks for your message.
I wouldn’t go as big as 150 with your specs for this board, so it’s really between the 144 and 147, IMO. I would say around 151cm would be your standard all-mountain length for a board that was a good width for your boot size. With 8.5s on this board, you’ll need to size down at least to the 147. I think even the 147 is bordering on too big, in this case. I rode the 153 and definitely wouldn’t go longer than that in this board (6’0″, 175lbs, size 10). My standard all-mountain length is more like 159. So I would be leaning towards the 144 for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
D’oh! Meant to post on this page but ended up commenting this on Strata page.
Hey Nate!
Thanks for everything you do here, love the site.
I just copped a 2022 Orca, and am looking for some bindings to pair with it. I know you havenโt reviewed the 2022 yet, but what are your recs for bindings for Orca in general? For context, I live out in Tahoe and ride a bit of everything (drops/chutes at Kirkwood, sidecountry on Heavenly, bombing groomers from time to time, lots of trees). I tend to ride more stiff bindingsโฆdo you think the Union Forces are straddling the line on stiffness?
Hi Patrick
Thanks for your message – and all good. I saw the other comment, but will reply to this one.
For the Orca, I think stiffer bindings work better – and given you already have a penchant for stiffer bindings, I think the Force will be too soft for that board and your preferences. I would go minimum 7/10 flex on the Orca and whilst that’s what Union rate the Force as, I’ve never felt them as stiff as that. 6/10 more accurate, by my feel, for the Force.
If you’re going Union, I would be looking either Falcor (7.5/10 flex) or Atlas FC (9/10). Some other option I think would work:
– Flux XF (7/10 flex)
– Salomon Highlander (7/10 flex)
– Salomon Quantum (8/10 flex)
– Burton Cartel X (7/10 flex)
Or if you wanted to go even stiffer, you could look at:
– Flux XV (9/1)
– Jones Apollo (8.5/10)
– NOW O-Drive (9/10)
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate. Nice review ๐ . I am between 150, 153 and 156. I am 66kg (145lbs) , 6.3′ ft (1.93m height) and 44.5 boot size (11 Us). I am tall and skinny. Which one ?
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
I would say definitely not 156 for your specs. I think it’s too big. The 11s help with this being a wider board, so you don’t have to size down quite as much with someone with smaller feet, but I’d still not go as big as 156 at your weight. So, for me it’s a debate between 153 and 150. If you had size 9 or 10 boots, then I’d say 150 for sure. But with 11s, I would be leaning to the 153. But somethings to take into account:
– If you want to really maximize how nimble the board feels, particularly for tight spots in trees and when you’re having to ride slower/more technical, then there’s more strength to the argument to go 150. It would be at the sacrifice of a little stability at speed and float in powder (though the 150 would still be good in powder for your specs, IMO).
– If you want to maximize float in powder and stability at speed, but still have something that’s not too much of a board to turn when riding slower, then the 153. Sure if you really wanted to maximize speed and float, you could go even bigger, but it would be too much cost to maneuverability, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hฤฑ Nate
Does it differ so much between 150 and 153 Orca? I am asking because there is only 153 at nearby shop.
I mostly enjoy carving on groomers and fresh powder.
I am 165 lb and boot size is 11
Hi Salih
Thanks for your message.
I think the 153 could definitely work for you, particularly if you’re mostly into groomers and powder. The debate would certainly be between the 150 and 153. At 165lbs, if you had smaller feet, I would be more leaning towards 150, but with 11s, you don’t need to size down as much as you otherwise would. So, I think 153 is definitely doable – but if you could also let me know your height. Weight and boot size certainly more important but I still like to take height into account as well.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate,
My height is 5″ 9′. I have Burton boots which has reduced footprint size technology (size 11).
Hi Salih
I think 153 works for you. It’s the kind of board you want to size down from a typical size for sure – but how much you size down depends on your boot size. I would say your typical size would be around 156/157 – and with size 11 boots (or more accurately feet that fit in size 11 boots – as it’s your feet that ultimately provide leverage to the edges of the board) you don’t need to size down as much as you would with a smaller foot size. So I think 153 is reasonable for that board with those specs. The 150 isn’t wrong either, if you were wanting to mellow it out more and/or you were predominantly riding trees with it. But otherwise, I think 153 is a good size for you for this board.
Thank you Nate
Lastly could you please compare Orca with lib tech BRD 159 on groomers and powder ? Which one is aldฤฑ better regarding maneuver especially between tress?
Lastly boot size 11 does it suit BRD 159
Hi Salih
I wouldn’t recommend the 159 BRD for 11s. It’s 255mm at the waist, which on some boards would be OK for 11s, but the width at the inserts at the back insert of the BRD, isn’t that wide. It’s only 5cm wider than the waist, so you’re only looking at around 260mm at the back insert, which, IMO, is pushing it for 11s. I wouldn’t risk that on 11s.
Size-wise otherwise, I would say the BRD 159 is around the equivalent to around a 154/155 Orca (if that existed) but with more effective edge than a 154/155 Orca. If not for width, I think that size would be doable for you – given that it’s a freeride board and you can go a little longer with a regular shaped/widthed freeride board like that. The 156 would also be an option for your specs, if it wasn’t too narrow. If there was a 157W or something like that, then I think that would be the size you’d really want for the BRD.
Hi Nate,
What size shall you recommend if both my wife and I pick up Orca? I have relative small foot men size 8, and 165-170 lbs, 5’10”, my wife wears women boot 7, her weight is 110 lbs and height 5’5″? We initially think of 147 and 138 because of volume shift, shall we choose one size larger?
thanks,
Tim
Hi Tim
Thanks for your message.
For you, I think it’s a debate between the 147 and 150. The 150 is considerably wider than the 147, so with 8s, it will feel very wide. I reviewed previous comments and it sounds like you have the Standard 151. If you think that size works for the Standard, then I would be leaning 147 for the Orca. The Standard 151 is around 260mm at the inserts. The 147 Orca would be around 266mm wide at the inserts – so significantly wider, The 150 Orca more like 274mm at the inserts. So, if you find the 151 Standard good, then I think the 150 Orca might feel too big. If you feel like the Standard 151 is on the small side (I think we discussed between the 151 and 153 when you were looking at the Standard), then the 150 Orca is doable. Note that the Orca will be stiffer, and considerably wider than the 151 Standard. I think I would be leaning 147 Orca for you, unless you find the Standard 151 really small.
For your wife, I definitely wouldn’t go any longer than 138. I think it would be more a debate between 135 (if it existed) and 138. I definitely wouldn’t go any longer than 138 for the Orca for her specs.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, I am really really appreciated your help and so glad you still remember our conversation. Yes, I got 151 standard last year and has been riding it all season this year! I also got 157 Terrain Wrecker C2 last season model (which I shouldn’t, but cannot resist a good deal, LoL). Another update is, like I wrote, I down size my boots from 8.5 SLX to 8 Ion SO, it is a sort of correction and realization after my riding skill improved. I feel now i am true size 8. So, i am very comfortable for this pair 8 Ion and 151 Standard. For the TW, i feel like the board is hurry me out of carving and sometimes the riding path became unpredictable, I am not sure if it is because the board is too long for me, or it is because of the nature of Mage-traction (TW is my 1st wavy edge board)?
Back to my new question, the Orca. you are obsoletely right. From the specs, 150 is noticeable bigger than 147. I am also toward 147, but only concern about its powder performance. I already got Standard as all mountain board, getting 147 for Orca is more like getting another all-M board. Maybe i am wrong, 147 could be surfy for me? I do not want this board to be 100% powder only board, I still want it to be ridable in resorts.
Last, you helped us put on 138 for my wife’s specs, she was a bit concern and scary to go that short, even though both of us believe it should be the right size.
Hi Nate, after your reply, I had some deep thinking. My question will be is that really necessary to get 147 Orca in the case that I already have 151 Standard. The reason I am confused is that I look at the specs for both boards. From Surface Area, Contact Length, Tip/Tail Width and Sidecut, two boards are at the same level, the different is mainly from flex and tapered? Only if 150 Orca were picked, there will be more differentiated. But I do not believe 150 will be a good fit for me, right?
The same situation on my wife’s specs, too. She already got her Hel Yes 146 and LibTech Cortado 148. It seems Cortado is a bit too long for her but it is in mid flex on board feel and is very easy to tweak. So Cortado will be more like the surfy board for her better than 138 Orca?
Hi Tim
The Orca 147 and Standard 151 are very different boards in a lot of ways. The contact length on the Orca 147 is 105cm versus 100.3cm on the Standard 151, which is quite a big difference. We don’t know what the effective edge is on the Orca (effective edge not to be confused with contact length), but the ratio of effective edge to contact length also really affects the feel of the board too. That taper makes quite a bit of difference too – the contact point at the nose on the Orca 147 is a good bit wider than the contact point on the nose of the Standard 151. But the tails are quite similar widths. The width at inserts is bigger on the Orca 147 versus Standard 151 too, as discussed previously. In addition to that add the extra stiffness, very different camber profile, the difference in nose length versus tail length (same length on the Standard, very different lengths on the Orca) and the large setback on the Orca and no setback on the Standard, and you have 2 very different boards – and they feel that way on snow too. That doesn’t mean that the 150 is wrong for you at all – as discussed in the previous comment, but just wanted to point out that in the 147 Orca versus the 151 Standard, they are very different.
Not sure of the surface area on the 147 Orca versus the 151 Standard, but even if they work out to be the same, the Orca would still be better in powder, mostly due to the taper, the longer nose and the large setback stance.
For your wife, the Cortado is very big for her specs, IMO. Not just in length but it’s also a very wide board. It is a freeride oriented board though, and if she is happy riding that for powder days, then I don’t see any need to get another freeride board. But purely based on her specs, taking into account sizing down the Orca, which is designed to be ridden shorter, then 138 for her specs is the best size, IMO. But certainly if she’s happy with the Cortado in that size, then I don’t think there’s any need to get the Orca for her. If she does find it to big and wants to replace her freeride board, and wants to go Orca, I would still go 138. Even the Hel Yes as an all-mountain length is on the big side for her, IMO. I’d put her more at around 143cm for an all-mountain length. But 146 isn’t huge, given that it’s not as wide as the others, but if I was to recommend an all-mountain size for her specs, it would be around 143cm. So I think the idea of 138cm seems particularly small for her, given the size of boards that she has currently.
Hi Nate, thanks again! She also read your review and she will consider to replace her Cortado to Orca 138. For me, I will pick between 147 Orca and 153 Hybrid as my pow board (i think i am influenced by your review so much haha, Standard truly work for me perfectly, so will Hybrid?) .
TW did not give me good feel on riding so i am not sure Orca could be similar or better board feel? But before i make any decision, my plan is to test my Standard with slamback setting in a powday (at Big White) to see if i really need another pow board or not.
Hi Tim
Good plan trying out the Standard in the slambacks and see how you feel with that.
Hybrid also super wide for your boots, so the only question there would be whether going to 153 would be short enough to compensate. Certainly for powder, you’d be getting great surface area and that would help with powder float. It’s just whether you’d find it to much of a boat in hard pack conditions. But would give you a more similar feel to the Standard (but in a more powder/directional orientation) versus the Orca, because you’ve got a similar (not the same) camber profile and flex. Certainly not the same feeling board, but more similar feeling than what the Orca is.
Hi Nate, I think I got your point. Both Orca and Hybrid will be too wide to my boots. I have to size down drastically. I occasionally met a Jones Flagship 154, what do you think about this board and size for me, comparing to Orca and Hybrid?
Hi Tim
I think the Flagship in 154 would be a really good fit. The Flagship is another of those boards where the waist width is a little deceiving. The 154 is probably around 257mm at the back insert and 262mm at the front insert. So a fairly similar width to your Standard 151 (a little narrower on the back insert and a little wider at the front insert). Still on the wide side for your boot size, but 154 is a little on the shorter side for your height/weight. But I think it’s a good amount of size-down for the width. And gives you something bigger than your Standard. I think for the Flagship you could certainly go up to 156 (if it existed). 158 doable, but IMO getting a little big, when you factor in both length and width. I think the 154 would work.
Yo, im 6′ size 11 boot weigh 240, chubster
I just picked up a 159, ? If I should have gotten 162 ?
Hi Brandon
Thanks for your message.
With 11s, the 159 and 162 are still both wide for your boots, but they’re not super wide – but a little wider than ideal – so sizing down a little bit is still a good idea with this board. I would put you on something around a 165 typically, but you can size down with this board. That said, the 162 is probably sizing down enough, given that it’s not miles wide for your boots, if that makes sense. I think if you had 10s or less, then sizing down to the 159 would have made more sense, but in this case, I think ideally 162. Not sure I’d go as far as to say the 159 is a wrong choice, but I think the 162 would be the better choice. With the 159 the stability at speed and float in powder will be reduced, but it should be a more nimble option than getting it in the 162. The 159 will make the board feel softer flexing too. So if you do stick with the 159, you’ll very likely feel it softer than I’ve rated it and not as good in powder or at speed as I did, but more maneuverable than I found it.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate !
Greetings from Bulgaria !
Your website is just AWESOME! There is so much information. Thanks a lot!
I still ride (for the last 3 years) my first snowboard – Rossignol Circuit 155. I use to think that I’m intermediate, and (only) trying to get to advanced. I like to ride mostly on the slopes in our resorts. Maybe just a little powder (once or twice per year) and a few small jumps (not necessarily) just for fun. I`m 174 cm., 75 kg., riding with Burton Ruler.
Can you please give me an advice for a snowboard + bindings ? I really want something good and in the same time applicable for me and my style.
I`ve looked at Lib Tech Orca 153 and Burton Process FV 157, but of course any other suggestions from you are welcome. I prefer to stick to these two brands, because they are easier to find here. About the bindings – I have no idea what (make and model) to choose – Union, Fix and Drake…
Could you please give me some advice for snowboard and bindings, because I`m the only (for now :D) snowboarder in our group.
Thank you very, very much !
Regards,
Hi Kristian
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, the Orca and Process Flying V are very different boards! The Orca is quite stiff and is very directional – a freeride board bordering on powder board. The Process Flying V an all-mountain board but bordering on freestyle. Much softer flexing.
I think from what you’re describing, something in between. If you’re not really riding switch, then you could go with something that’s mellow freeride, but unless you know you really want a stiff board and are at an advanced level, I wouldn’t go for something like the Orca. Some options from those brands, that I think would work well.
– Burton Skeleton Key 154 (not great for riding switch if you were planning on doing that regularly)
– Burton Process Camber 157 (though not that great for powder)
– Burton Hometown Hero 156 (not great for riding switch if you were planning on doing that regularly)
– Lib Tech Dynamo 156
– Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker 157
– Lib Tech TRS 157 (not great for powder)
That’s based on going for something around mid flex (between 5/10 and 6.5/10 for those above). But if you did think you wanted to go stiffer
If you were wanting to go stiffer, you could look at the likes of the Burton Flight Attendant or Lib Tech Ejack Knife, but those would be a bigger step up from your current board – and not great for riding switch or jumps, if you’re not hitting bigger jumps.
For bindings, it kind of depends on the board you go with, but if you go with something mid-flex, then the likes of the Union Strata, Atlas or Force would be good choices. I don’t test Fix or Drake bindings, so don’t really know a lot about them.
Hope this helps
Hi nate,
As always, your website is a good and reliable source of infos and my go-to source when I’m searching for shopping tips.
I’am actually hunting for a pow board to ad to my quiver. I’m interested in a surfy feeling, to slash those windlips but stable enough to be confident in the steep. The board should be able to float effortless, and be “freeridey” enough to lay a good carve on the piste (as pow days are rare in my area).
I already own a Jones Mountain twin 157 as my do-it-all (bought following your advices) and eventhough I love it in powder, I would like something more specific, with not much overlap.
I can get a good deal on an Orca, an Ultracraft or a regular Hovercraft. What would be your best bet? Which size for each?
I am 175m tall and weight about 77 kg, size 10 Adidas Tactical boots (bought following your advice too)
Have you an other board recommandation?
The board will be paired with Union Atlas from last year (bought following … ๐ )
Thanks in advance for every
(Woops looks like I hit send too soon)
Thanks in advance for every info you can share.
Julien
Hi Julien
Thanks for your message.
The Orca and Ultracraft (haven’t ridden Ultracraft, but based on specs) are rather stiff, and aren’t what I would call “surfy” – but very good in powder (and surfy enough when it comes to powder)- and definitely no major overlap with the MT, IMO. If you like the idea of stiff, then they’ll definitely work. If you did want to go with the more easy going option, the Hovercraft would be the way to go. Haven’t ridden the Hovercraft yet either but based on specs and everything I’ve heard about it, it’s going to be the surfiest and most easy going of those options for sure. And again, no real overlap with the MT. A closer flex to the MT (but still a little stiffer) I would say, but everything else about it is quite different.
From what I’ve heard it can carve the groomers well too.
Size-wise, I would go 156 if you went Hovercraft. Often you go longer with a freeride board versus your all-mountain board, but in this case with the Hovercraft it’s wider and with your boot size, I would size down a little. It’s designed to be ridden a little shorter. Same goes for the Ultracraft.
Same deal with the Orca in terms of sizing, except that I would probably size down even further, to the 153. It’s an even wider board.
Hope this helps
This helps a lot !
I’m guessing if I want to go steeper, a stiffer flex may be a good choice (just need to do some squats during summer).
What bindings would you pair with these boards?
I’m thinking Union Falcor, Union Atlas or Burton Cartel but I’m open to any suggestion. Is the Now skate tech any good with these boards?
Thanks again.
Julien
Hi Julien
For the Hovercraft I think the Falcor, Atlas or Cartel X (rather than normal cartel) – and they’d work with the Ultracraft and Orca too, but I’d potentially even go stiffer with those 2. Something from here:
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
I think NOW bindings would work on these boards, given the type of riding you would be doing on them. My biggest issue with NOW bindings is the butterability/board feel, but with these kinds of boards, that’s not really an issue, so yeah, NOW bindings would work well, I think (you’ll see a Jones (pretty close to NOW for bindings) and NOW binding in the link above).
Hi Nate,
Amazing website, love your detailed reviews and advice, thank you!
Iโm 6โ0โ, 165, size 12 boot. Looking at the Orca or Apex Orca mainly for Tahoe pow and trees, some groomers. Which size you would recommend?
Thanks in advance,
Bruce
Hi Bruce
Thanks for your message.
It’s between the 153 and 156. I would be leaning 156 for you, just because it’s not really a wide board for you. Sizing down a little bit is still a good idea, but with 12s, it’s actually a good width for your boots, so I would be hesitant to size down too much. 153 is doable, if you wanted to make it more nimble and less bomby/reduced float in powder. But I would be leaning 156.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I ride a couple times a year most, but have no issues stepping on the board and riding blues most places first run of the trip, so I would categorize myself as an “advanced beginner” or “boarding on intermediate” rider.
My local shop is suggesting I give the ’21 Orca a try, but I see soo many mixed reviews it is hard to decide. I don’t do park and rarely even ride switch… just like surfing down the hill and love powder (no trees).
Would you recommend this board? If so, any help on the sizing? I am 5’11”, about 210lbs (give or take 5 lbs either way), and fit size 10 Adidas Tactical Lexicon’s.
TIA for any help you can provide!
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
Personally I wouldn’t recommend this board for a high-end beginner/low intermediate rider. It’s pretty stiff and prefers to point pretty straight down the hill. Not really something that likes to be ridden slow, in my experience. If you were riding powder all day everyday (we can only dream!) then you’d likely be fine, but this is quite a lot of board on hard pack, if you’re not at an advanced level.
If you did go Orca, I would size down quite a bit from what your typical size would be – probably 153 for this board for your specs and what you’re describing.
Certainly other directional options that are easier boards to handle than this one, IMO, that are probably more suitable, e.g., some from the following:
>>Top 10 Surfy (mellow) Freeride Snowboards
That’s quite an eclectic list and some are more powder specialized and some are a little more advanced, but a lot of those would suit what you’re describing well. If you decide against the Orca, and want any particular recommendations from there, let me know.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I was wondering which size you would recommend for someone who is 6’1 190 size 11 boot?
I am mainly getting this as my pow and tree board
Hi Rob
For you, for the Orca I would look at the 156. For this board, given it’s width, I think the 159 is going to be too long. You might really like the 153 in the trees, but I think the 156 strikes a good balance between float in pow and maneuverability in trees. However, if the pow you see is pretty much always in the trees and not open terrain, deep pow, then I might lean more towards the 153, particularly if you already have a longer Flagship in your quiver. Actually thinking about the fact you have the Flagship in your quiver already, makes me more likely to lean 153. What size is your Flagship?
My Flag is a 164, which is why I was leaning 153 for the Orca. I don’t want too much overlap in my quiver, and I figured the 164 flag would be more than fine in wide open powder bowls. I’m getting the Orca to be my short/fat & playful powder board, but I’m hoping I won’t be sacrificing too much float with the 153?
Most of the pow I see is in trees, but I do more rarely get into the wide open & deep terrain
Thanks for answering all my questions btw!
Hi Rob
Yeah for the quiver I think I would be leaning 153. The Flagship 164 will do very well in open terrain pow – and I think that will give you a greater difference in the quiver and more maneuverability/playfullness in that shorter size.
I decided on the 153! Thanks for all the help. I was also wondering where you would put the upper weight ranges for the 153 size? I donโt plan on gaining that much weight but with holiday cooking and all…
Hi Rob
At a guess, I would say around 200lbs as a max. I think you should be good. A few extra turns after holiday cooking will help ๐ – a good excuse to ride more, right!
Hi Nate,
I am getting a new board for the 2021 season. I am 5’11 and float around 220-230 pounds with size 11 boots. (32’s) and Union Atlas bindings.
I live in Vancouver, BC and get to ride 50 to 70 days per season on the local mountains, Whistler and Interior BC. I would say I am an advanced/expert rider in all disciplines except park.
I am a powder hound and tree dweller. I spend 80% of my time hunting down powder stashes in the slack country and trees. I love tree riding and linking fast, smooth turns. I also go on occasional back country adventures using snowshoes. Apart from that I like natural jumps, side hits and medium drops. I hit the park occasionally to do jumps and easy rails/boxes (But I don’t want park to have much influence on my board selection) I also bomb down groomers when there is no powder to be found.
I am looking for a board to deliver in all those fields if possible. I rode the 2020 Orca 153 on a demo day last March and loved it. I found it to be nice and light when turning and it felt great in chopped snow. The snow on the slackcountry that day was mediocre but I got a chance to ride it on some short hits of powder and the board felt amazing. I don’t know if my experience was biased from being a T Rice fan boy but I loved the board. Is there anything else you would recommend that would be better suited for my riding style?
I rode a Ride War Pig last year for 15 days and loved it until the top sheet peeled off. (Returned it under warranty)
My friend is pushing me to try a Yes PYL. I have also been recommend to check out the Kazoo….
Any help much appreciated my friend!
Chat soon,
Paul
Hi Paul
Thanks for your message.
Since you’ve experienced and really like the T Rice Orca that’s definitely a safe bet for you, so I would be leaning towards that. Size-wise, the Orca is definitely a board to size down with, but I would probably be leaning towards 156 for you, even after sizing down. However, since you liked how the 153 rode, again, that experience I would maybe lean there. And maybe that size is OK for you, given you’re in the trees a lot. I think 156 would work for you as well, but you might not find it quite as nimble/light feeling. At 175lbs and with a size 10 boot, I didn’t find the Orca that nimble – not un-nimble either, but not that nimble. So my biggest concern with going to 156 for you, is that you found it less nimble. Going longer would give you more stability at speed and more float in powder, so that’s the trade off. But if you liked the feel of the 153 in powder, then again, I think that would be where I would lean for you.
The Kazu was the first board that came to mind when you were describing everything there, so I do think that would be a great option for you. If you hadn’t tested and really liked the Orca, I would probably be saying Kazu 160, but there’s no substitute for experience, so given your experience I would still be leaning Orca.
The PYL would also really suit what you’re describing. You’ve had some good recommendations, IMO. Based on specs and taking into account how you describe your riding, I would say the 160W would be the best size for you – going a little shorter for trees, and the 160W isn’t that wide for a wide board. But you could probably also get away with the 162 width-wise, if you wanted to go a little longer. But I would be leaning 160W for the PYL for you. I think both the PYL and Kazu would work for sure, but the safe bet would be Orca. Given you’ve had a good experience on it. If you did get the chance to test other board, then I would certainly try out the Kazu and PYL though.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the speedy reply man. Much appreciated!
I shared your same thoughts on the sizing, the pros and cons between 153 and 156.
I did have a great experience on the Orca for sure but also feel that I may have been slightly biased and I was wanting the board to perform so that may have affected my judgment. Sometimes I feel like there is a lot of hype in regards to this board. Some people love it and some people find it not so great.
What concerns me is how you rated other boards in regards to quick turns and turn iniation etc. From your experience you did not think the Orca performed as well as others.
If I was to take the Orca out of the equation what would you be leaning towards.
Looks like we ride similar terrain as you are located in Vancouver too.
I am mainly hitting the trees on Cypress and slack country off Sky chair, along with 5 -10 days in Whistler and 10 days in the interior.
I am open to any board that performs well in powder and trees most importantly but can also be a daily driver for groomwers and average snow.
Thanks man!
Hey Paul
Yeah sounds like we have pretty similar seasons alright! I split my time between the locals, Whistler and interior also.
Taking the Orca out of the equation, I would probably lean towards the PYL, but it’s a very close call between that and the Kazu. Both would definitely do the job well though, IMO. The main reason I would take the PYL, is that it’s subtly better for speed and carving, for when you’re on the groomers. In the trees/powder, they are equals, IMO. So definitely not a bad choice between them, in my experience.
For the Orca, given that you’ve got a bit of weight on me and a larger foot, the 153 would certainly feel different for you than it does for me, so there’s definitely that to consider too. It could even be the case that the 159 would feel for you how I felt the 153 – or maybe something like a 157, 158 if it existed. Hard to say for sure of course, but weight and boot size on a given board does make a noticeable difference.
Thanks Nate. Much appreciated my man! I can get a killer deal on a 2019/20 Never Summer Westbound (480 CDN) in a local shop. I might be leaning towards that as the price is great.
In reality I could get the NS and still have $400 ish leftover to pick up another full on powder oriented board to add to a quiver for the same price of one board below.
The other options that we chatted about were the PYL (815 CDN) or Orca (700 ish CDN).
Would you rate the NS for all the type of riding we chatted about before?
Hi Paul
I think the West Bound would suit what you’re describing, for sure. I would say it’s got a bit more of an easy going feel compared to the Orca – it’s a bit softer flexing, but not soft by any means (7/10). But it’s one of those boards, that I really liked to carve on, but still found quite maneuverable at slower speeds. And really good in uneven terrain. So based on what you described, I think it would work well. Can work for side-hits etc too – and whilst not ideal for park riding by any stretch can take you in there – and I know that wasn’t a major factor for your decision.
For more details on what I thought of the West Bound, check out:
>>NS West Bound Review