The first time I rode Lib Tech's T Rice Pro was the 2018 model and I wasn't a fan. It felt hard to turn, hard to butter, hard to pop - but still wasn't epic in terms of carving and bombing, so it felt like it didn't really have a strong identity as to what it was. The stiffer flex, with the looser, more easy going camber profile just didn't seem to gel.
While the changes since then don't appear to have been particularly major, the overall feel of the board has improved a lot, in my experience. It feels like its become this nice easy, pretty quick turning board that hasn't lost much of what it had in terms of stability/carving. A much better balance of factors/feel and now a board I really enjoy riding.
In this review, I will take a look at the T Rice Pro as an all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the T Rice Pro a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Lib Tech T Rice Pro 2026
Price: $699
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: Mid-Stiff (7/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6.5/10)
Rating Score: 85.6/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 33 current model all-mountain-freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The T Rice Pro ranked 15th out of 33
Overview of the T Rice Pro’S Specs
Check out the tables for the T Rice Pro’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
All-Mountain-freestyle
PRICE:
$699 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID ROCKER
HYBRID ROCKer - Lib Tech's "Hybrid C2"
SHAPE:
setback stance:
CENTERED
BASE:
Sintered- Lib Tech's "Eco Sublimated Sintered"
weight:
FELT Normal
Camber Height:
2mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
148 | 252 | 75+ | 35+ |
153 | 253 | 100+ | 45+ |
155 | 255 | 110+ | 50+ |
157 | 258 | 120+ | 55+ |
157W | 263 | 125+ | 60+ |
159 | 259 | 125+ | 60+ |
161 | 260 | 130+ | 60+ |
161W | 265 | 135+ | 65+ |
164 | 262 | 140+ | 65+ |
164W | 267 | 145+ | 70+ |
Who is the T Rice Pro Most Suited To?
The T Rice Pro is best suited to anyone looking for a board that can switch between conditions like its nothing. This board handles rough snow, trees, park, well groomed groomer and hard icy conditions a-like. While it's not going to be epic in deeper powder, it can handle shallower powder well.
Even more particularly suited if you like a feel that's just on the looser side, that has the ability to get playful, to an extent, but still want a board that can handle a bit of an aggressive input, stay stable at decently fast speeds and can still lay a decent carve.
Could make a really good one-board quiver for someone who doesn't ride a lot of deeper powder or a daily driver in a multi-board quiver. Would compliment a more specialized powder board and/or a softer, more playful park board well.
Not for beginners. It's fairly easy going, but not easy going enough for beginners, IMO.
TEST/REVIEW DetailS FOR THE T Rice Pro
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the T Rice Pro is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Lib Tech T Rice Pro 2026, 157cm (258mm waist width)
Date: March 3, 2025
Carving
I found the T Rice Pro could rip some decent carves up to moderately fast speeds. It's not an epic carver or anything, and with its C2 profile, I'd never expect it. But it has enough torsional stiffness to hold on to more aggressive carves better than most with a similar profile could.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: Nice and easy to initiate turns and to slash out the tail. Not up there with really easy turning boards. That stiffer torsional flex which is great for more aggressive carves tends to be detrimental to easy turning, but in this case it doesn't suffer as much - likely due to the healthy amount of rocker in the middle of the board that helps to act as a pivot point to more easily get it turning.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Again, as above, that torsional stiffness can make maneuverability slower and harder work, but again, the profile likely helps to offset that here, as the T Rice Pro felt pretty quick to get edge-to-edge and without too much effort. Not lightning quick or effortless, but still really good and coupled with its carving ability, made for a great balance between quick turning and carving.
Catchiness: I wouldn't call it catch-free or among the boards with the lowest catch-risk, but it's still decently low catch-risk and I could only really detect any catch-feel when really looking for it.
Speed
It feels fairly stable up to moderately fast speeds. Pretty decent all-round speed too. It does have its limits and gets wobbly after a certain speed, but can still handle a decent amount of speed.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: I felt like the T Rice Pro handle crud really decently. While it certainly wasn't un-moveable in there and had more of that just above middle of the road feel in terms of stability in rough snow - but because it was decently damp, it helped to absorb the chatter more, so it was a more pleasant ride in those conditions than others that are similar stability-wise, but not as damp.
Trees/Bumps: It's pretty maneuverable at slow speeds and that made ripping quick short turns in the trees pretty fun - even in less-than-ideal off-groomer conditions on the day. Would be OK in powdered trees, without being amazing.
Powder
I would say middle of the road here or a bit under that. We didn't have any powder to test in on the day, but based on feel and specs, I don't think it would be completely hopeless in deeper powder, but likely to give the back leg a good workout when its deeper.
Jumps
Pop: Not ultra poppy but decent total pop and nice and easy to access.
Approach: A good mix of stability and maneuverability, leaning maneuverability over stability, but only just.
Landing: Similarly, a good mix of stability on landing and forgiveness for bad landings. Decent for landing on rougher landing spots and that dampness helps to be more forgiving on the body at the end of the day, if you're hitting a lot of jumps, side-hits, drops etc.
Switch
Felt really good riding switch and transitions were nice and easy and low-consequence.
Spins
Setting-up and landing switch felt good. Its nice easy pop was great for smaller tricks, making it easier to get enough air time to complete rotations.
Completed under-rotations on the snow easily. A little bit of an over-spin feel after landing, but not real bad or anything and was something that was easy enough to get used to.
Jibbing
Not what I would consider the ideal jib-board or anything, but decent enough. As a weak jibber, I had no issues taking it on some smaller features and doing nothing-special! If I can jib with it, strong jibbers will have no issues, but perfectly suited to it or anything.
Butters
Decently easy to press the tip/tail and to get to that lock in point and hold it there. Low-consequence on rotations too.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Jumps | 4 | 16/20 |
| Carving | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Turns | 4 | 8/10 |
| Switch | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Speed | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Spins | 4 | 8/10 |
| Butters | 4 | 8/10 |
| Jibbing | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Crud etc | 4 | 4/5 |
| Trees | 4 | 4/5 |
| Pow | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 85.6/100 |
The T Rice Pro is a board that has the rare ability to feel both damp and snappy at the same time. This combination helps it to walk that line between having the ability to both get playful and to handle a more aggressive riding approach.
It's also versatile across conditions, making it a great daily driver for riders with a varied skillset, but err a little to the freestyle side of things.
It didn't make the top 10 this year, but it was really close, and the all-mountain-freestyle category is really competitive, especially since disbanding the aggressive all-mountain-freestyle category.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
To learn more about the T Rice Pro, or if you're ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
To check out some other all-mountain-freestyle snowboard options, or to see how the T Rice Pro compares to others, check out our top rated all-mountain-freestyle snowboards by clicking the button below.
Hi Nate,
Looking for a Lib Tech recommendation. (I get a deal on them so kinda restricted to that brand)
I’m a very exprerienced rider coming from a Skate Banana, which i’ve outgrown…it was fun but it’s a little too loose and unstable for my liking now.
I mostly ride resort, like going fast a lot of the time and take side hits. Some powder and the occassional park jump line. but also sometimes am going slow and playful with the family.
I’m 165 lbs size 10 boot
I’m considering:
T.Rice pro
TRS
Golden Orca
Not Lib but the Capita Mercury also interests me.
What would you recommend? Or anything else from Lib Tech I should look in to?
Thanks!
Hi Charles, thanks for your message.
I really like the TRS for what you’re describing – all except for the powder aspect. If you don’t see much powder or it’s never really that deep, then I’d probably go TRS. The T Rice Pro and Golden Orca would definitely work too, but you wouldn’t get too much more powder-wise from the T Rice Pro, so if you do see a fair bit of powder, I’d be inclined to go Golden Orca, but I think the TRS would be better for side hits and when you’re riding slow/playful vs the Golden Orca – but is still pretty good at speed.
I think the Mercury would be a good bet, if you went outside Lib Tech.
Sounds like you just get the discount with Lib Tech, but if it also extends to GNU, the Forest Bailey 4 x 4 would be a good option, IMO. Or if you wanted a bit more directional/powder leaning, then the Banked Country.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I am 38 years old, 175 cm, 75 kg, boots size 41 EUR. I have been snowboarding for over 20 years, so probably intermediate+.
I have been riding camber boards for my whole life and two years ago switched to Skate Banana 152, which I really like for its switch ability, forgiveness etc.
Now I am looking for something with more carving abilities but still fun and playful. I ride 40 % fast, 50 % messing around with rest of my family, 10 % small park jumps.
I am considering:
Lib Tech T Rice Pro (153?)
YES Greats (151?)
NS Proto Slinger (153?)
Thank you for your help!
Hi Peter
Thanks for your message. Apologies for the slow response, was travelling overseas and haven’t had the chance to get to your message until now.
Of those 3, I would say that the T Rice Pro is the least playful – not because of its camber, as it probably actually has the least camber of the 3, but because, in my experience, I found it the stiffest of the 3 – and while only marginally stiffer than the Greats, I found it a bit more noticeably torsionally stiffer than the Greats.
The Proto Slinger is the most playful of the 3 and softest flexing by a good margin. It is easy to pop and great for side hits and small jumps and not a bad little carver for how soft flexing it is, but for that 40% where you’re riding fast, it’s not super stable at speed. For the other 60% it would be great, though, IMO.
The Greats is in between in terms of playfulness. It’s really good on a carve for a twin, in my experience, and has decent stability at speed, but is something you can still ride more playfully. So, I think it strikes the best balance for what you’re looking for.
I felt the Skate Banana at a 4/10 flex, so the Greats (6/10) and T Rice Pro (6.5/10) should feel noticeably stiffer. The Proto Slinger, to me, was marginally softer (3.5/10). Overall I’d say you’re looking at getting better speed/carving performance from any of those 3 a similar level of forgiveness from the Proto Slinger and less forgiveness but better stability from the Greats and T Rice Pro.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157 for your 175cm/75kg height weight specs. But given your boot size, I think sizing down from that makes sense. So I agree with your suggested sizings. Sizing the Greats down a little further makes sense too, as it’s a wider board than the others.
Hope this helps and hasn’t come too late
Hi Nate,
thank you for the advice. It’s not too late because I’m still deciding. As it seems, all 3 snowboards would suit me in some way and each of them would be a good choice.
So I’ll try one last question – which one do you think is the least prone to edge catching? Or vice versa – is one of them significantly more prone to edge catching than the others? Thank you.
Hi Peter
Personally I found the T Rice Pro the most prone to catching an edge. It’s still nothing I would call super catchy, but more so than the other 2. Then I would say the Greats, but again, definitely nothing overly catchy or anything. Then the Proto Slinger being the least catchy.
hi nate I currently have 159cm t rice pro , ım 85 kg and 1.85 , 11 foot , should i downgrade my board like 157 or 159 is perfect for me , im intermeddiate and like all mountain boards,
Hi Matt
I think the 159 is a good size for your specs. Only question mark would be whether it’s a little too narrow for your boots. The 259mm waist on this board makes it sound wider than it is, but it doesn’t get much wider at the inserts compared to the waist. That said, it’s likely OK, but will depend on your binding angles and the profile of your boots. If you’re riding with a flat back binding angle (e.g. 0-6 degrees) and have bulkier boots, then it’s going to be borderline too narrow. But with lower profile boots and reasonable amount of angle on that back binding, you’re probably OK width-wise.
Hope this helps
In response to my last comment, which do you think is more versatile and better all around for fun, playful all mountain riding in any condition? T Rice Pro or lib tech Box knife?
Hi Josh
Thanks for your messages.
In terms of versatility, the T Rice Pro is probably more versatile, in terms of being better for bombing, better for powder etc. However, for playful all-mountain riding, I would take the Box Knife any day of the week. Personally I would take the Box Knife over the T Rice Pro, almost every time. Probably the only time that I would take the T Rice Pro over the Box Knife would be if I was going to be just riding open terrain powder all day (and that’s not saying that the T Rice Pro is awesome for powder, but just that little bit better than the Box Knife, IMO) or if I was going to be straight lining it all day. It’s pretty rare that’s all I would do in a day, so 9 times out of 10, I’d take the Box Knife personally. Part of that is my own style. I like things to be a little more playful and maneuverable for getting in the trees, hitting side hits, etc.
From what you’re describing, I think you’d also prefer the Box Knife, particularly as an intermediate rider and particularly as you mentioned “playful all-mountain riding”. That would be my instinct here.
Hope this helps
Thanks a ton! You are out here doing God’s work… I have one more question and that’s all… I was looking around for new boots and I purchased the DC Mutiny online as I cannot try in person due to me being deployed in Japan and currently at sea. Do you have any experience with the DC Mutiny? I heard they size small but others say true to size. I bought 11 when I usually wear 10.5. And if they do run small, do you know if that includes the outer boot, in terms of fitting on my board? Thanks Nate.
Hi Josh
Personally I find DC Boots to run 1/2 size small. i.e. I’m typically a 10 and 10.5 tends to fit better for DC for me. But everyone’s feet are different, so it’s hard to say for sure how the fit will be for you.
In terms of outersole footprint, the Mutiny that I last measured (2019 model), measured 2.9cm longer than the Mondo. So for a size 11, it would measure roughly 31.9cm long. 2.9cm above Mondo is slightly lower profile than average. Average is around 3cm.
Would depend on the size of the Box Knife you got. The 157W, IMO would be your best bet for the Box Knife and be a good width for your boots, IMO.
Hi Nate,
First off you guys are awesome. Thanks for all the help out there. I see a lot of hype surrounding the Travis Rice Pro as an all mountain board, for riding all mountain while also wanting to get creative, I have had my eyes on the lib tech box knife. Which of the two do you prefer for primarily wanting to ride all mountain but also wanting to hit a few jumps, pop a few ollies, intermediate rider..
Hi Nate!
I’m 6’1″ 180lbs and 10 US boot size. I’m thinking between T Rice Pro and Jones Mountain Twin. I have a dedicated pow board and I’m looking for a multi-tool which can handle powder, jumps (riding and landing switch) and butters. Pretty much everything. I also have a park board, so I’m looking for something in between those two.
Which one of these handle powder better in your opinion? T Rice Pro has hybrid camber but no setback and MT is somewhat more or less traditional camber and has some setback and the 21 model has also “spoon” on the tip and tail. I know these aren’t the best boards for pow but I’m pretty sure that these two are the closest thing what I’m looking for. If you have something else on your mind, I’m open for suggestions!
Thank’s for in advance!
Hi Anton
Thanks for your message.
In terms of powder, the MT is better, IMO. I wouldn’t say the Mountain Twin is more or less traditional camber either. There is a reasonable amount of rocker tip and tail, and that helps in powder. The 3D contour base and setback, as well as a slightly longer nose than tail, also help in powder. Like you say, not going to be like a specialist powder board, but 3.5/5 in powder, IMO. For a twin the T Rice Pro isn’t bad in powder, but half a step down from MT, IMO – more like 3/5.
The MT is also a little more buttery than the T Rice Pro, IMO.
I would personally go MT for what you’re describing. If you wanted other similar options you could also check out the following, but I think the MT would work well for your purposes.
>>My Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards
Hope this helps
Hey thanks for the quick reply! I’m gonna go with the Mountain Twin, 160 might be the best size for me?
Hi Anton
I think the Mountain Twin 160 would definitely work for you. The 157 is also a possibility. If you wanted something more freestyle focused and more buttery, then the 157 might be the better option. Some things to keep in mind.
– The 157 will be more buttery, more agile and better of spins, jibs etc
– The 160 will be more stable at higher speeds, have better float in powder and be better for bigger carves.
So it really depends on what you most want to emphasize with this board.
Thanks! Hey, I just saw your review on Kazu Pro. It’s also available in my local shop. So couple of questions about Kazu:
– Is there major difference between powder performance between Kazu and MT?
– I understood that riding switch won’t be as good as with MT due taper? Is there big difference between Kazu and MT?
– Their flex seems to be pretty similar, but I understood that buttering will be harder on Kazu?
I’m willing to trade some amount of switch performance to easier float in powder. If Kazu is better for my needs what size do you recommend?
Hi Anton
Kazu is noticeably better for powder. But most noticeable in deeper powder. In more shallow powder, the difference is less noticeable. It’s when you get into deeper stuff, that you would notice the difference more.
Can ride the Kazu switch but it is noticeably not as good as MT. Landing/setting up switch for spins not as easy/natural feeling.
Kazu is a little stiffer. Not loads stiffer, but noticeably so (MT 6/10 and Kazu 7/10 by my feel) – and yeah a good bit harder to butter with.
If you went Kazu, you could go 157, to make it feel more buttery than the 160 would. You’d get a little less in terms of powder, but it would be good for powder anyway. Less difference in terms of powder performance between the 160 MT and the 157 Kazu than it would be size for size. But if you’ve got a dedicated powder board, then might not need the bigger Kazu as I’m guessing you’d be using your dedicated powder board for deep days? In which case, I’d probably still be leaning MT, given that you have that powder board.
Thanks alot! Yes, I think I’ll go with MT. Kazu is interesting and really good looking board and maybe I’ll buy it one day but I’ll go with the 160 MT for now.
I really appreciate your effort! I have very limited chance (almost 0%) to test boards before buying them so the possibility to get advice is really viable. Especially when you are investing hunders of dollars in a board.
Hope you get awesome season despite the corona!
You’re very welcome Anton.
Hope you’re season is awesome too!
Hi Nate,
Great reviews.
I am thinking about purchasing the Lib Tech Travis Rice Pro.
I am 189 cm long, 84 kg and have my doughts on wether the 157 or 161,5 would suit me best. I am used to riding 162W Custom flying V but am looking for a more freestyle all mountain set up.
Like go allround, so fast, smooth, switch, jumps on natural terrain and powder riding.
Thought 157 would be playful.
Any advice?
Thanks upfront.
Best Youri
Hi Youri
A tough call. If there was an in between size, that’s what I’d be looking at. Something 159, 160. Certainly in terms of being more playful and better for side-hits, the 157 is appealing for you. But it’s sizing down a bit for your specs and in terms of going fast, smooth and riding pow, the longer 161.5 would be a better bet, IMO. So, I think it really depends in this case, if you value it being more playful and better for jumps, or if you value your speed and powder more. Kind of annoying sizing on the T Rice Pro, jumping up from 157 to 161.5.
Hope this helps
Hello, bro. Need help.
I want to take this board. My options: 180 cm 75 kg, size 10.5. Do I need 157 or 161.5? Can 157 Take Me out of deep snow? I Apologize for my English, I use a translator)
Hi Artem
Thanks for your message.
For this board and your specs I would go 157. The 161.5 would, of course, be better in deep snow, but the 157, IMO, will be better for everything else not in deep snow, and should be fine in deep snow for your specs. It’s certainly not a specialist powder board by any means – so it’s not going to be perfect for powder anyway, but it’s OK in powder.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you very much for the reply. I’ll take 157
You’re very welcome Artem. Happy riding!
Hi Nate, thanks for the review! Couple of questions:
1) Is the t-rice pro too much board for an intermediate rider who’s looking to go faster but still appreciates nimble turning?
2) Would sizing down be a good compromise for keeping some of that agility on turns?
I’m an intermediate rider (4 out of 7). Right now I’m riding the rocker Arbor element black at 157. I’m 5’10” at 190 lbs with size 10 boots at +12/-12 angles. I like the rocker and prefer it to back in the day when I was renting big camber boards. Definitely more forgiving and more nimble. I’m riding groomers, doing a lot of turns, and I’d like to up my stability and control at faster speeds. I haven’t outgrown the Element, but there are times it feels a little squirrelly at higher speeds in chop and I’ve found myself washing out on it some.
My main concern is that the t-rice is just for straight and fast. I want to move more in that direction but I’m not sure I’m ready to give up too much in turning. I was wondering if going with a 155 could work to keep a little playfulness. Looking at the specs, the 155 is wider and has slightly more effective edge than my Arbor which doesn’t feel too small for me at all. Would the 155 make sense? Lib tech says it has slightly more flex than the 157. Should I get the 157 or punt on the t-rice entirely?
At this point I don’t need a new board, but I’m definitely curious about what other boards and hybrid rocker profiles have to offer. And those end-of-season sales are kicking in…
Hi Jon
Thanks for your message.
I think you would certainly get a boost in terms of speed on the T Rice Pro vs the Element Black, and a board that is better for more aggressive carves, as well as a little better edge hold in hard/icy conditions.
I didn’t find it the fastest for edge to edge transitions and certainly a little slower in that respect vs the Element Black – particularly when riding at slower speeds. The T Rice Pro turns more naturally and more easily when riding at speed. Sizing down to 155 would certainly help there, and it would still, IMO, at the smaller size, be better for speed than the Element, but less so than what the 157 would be – so you would be getting less of a different board, in that sense, by sizing down. But still a very different feel, and still would be an improvement for speed/carving, IMO. Whether it would also make it as quick edge to edge as the Element is hard to say though. Probably not, but hard to say – but certainly quicker edge to edge than what the 157 would be.
If you’re really worried about edge-toe-edge quickness but still want something that can handle speed better, there certainly are other options out there for that.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
For sure, thanks for the feedback. I also have the NS West and Proto 2 on my radar. Maybe that’d be a better way to go faster and keep a little playfulness.
Hi Jon
In my opinion that would be a better way to go, for you.
Hey there,
I bought t. Rice pro 150 cm, what was recomended were I bought, I am 1.72 tall and 59 kg weight.
My feet size usually is 41 eur.
And for some reason the barton boots thats good for me is 10.5 us size.
I am abeginner rider and I am afraid the board is to short.
I would like to hear your opinion please.
Thanks alot
Hi Shlomi
Thanks for your message.
For your specs and as a beginner rider, I would say something in the range 147 to 149 would be a good length to look at – so the 150 is certainly not too short, IMO. But I would be more worried that it’s too narrow for 10.5 boots. If you were able to get into a 41 euro, then you would be fine width-wise, but if you’re in a US10.5 I think it’s too narrow. Have you tried other brands boots. Sometimes certain brands just don’t fit certain feet that well. If you could get into a smaller boot, then that would really help you to get into a board in your length range a lot easier, without having to go too long for your specs.
The other thing, is that I really wouldn’t recommend the T Rice Pro for a beginner. It’s too stiff/aggressive for a beginner, IMO, regardless of size.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Nate !!!
Whats up man! So I’ve been riding a Libtech Skunkape 161w with ride revolts for about 8 years now. Needless to say its time for an upgrade. I don’t hit rails no jibbing only the fun easy boxes. I like catching air over the rollers and all the natural side hits i can find. I also love ripping around trees and tearing through glades, but speed is something i love as well. My question is … what damn board should i buy !?!?! Id say I’m an aggressive rider i love going fast and carving hard over the groomers, but glades and total mountain performance is key to me as well. I was considering the t-rice pro but there are so many viable options out there and i thought you might be able to help with the decision.
Any insight would be much appreciated ! Thanks man Happy shredding !
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
I think the T Rice Pro would certainly work for what you’re describing. You could also check out:
>>Top 5 Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
And also the Salomon Assassin Pro would be another one to look at.
These are all less directional and more freestyle oriented than the Skunk Ape, so if you were looking for something a little more directional you could also look at:
>>Top 6 Aggressive All Mountain Snowboards
Hope this helps with your search, and let me know if you want to bounce any more ideas off
Hi Nate can you help me size up a t rice pro? I was thinking about getting the 157 or the 157w. My foot is 28.5 cm long. I ride k2 thraxis 10.5 us and large malavitas. I am 5 11 195 lbs. I like to carve:) My stance is +18, -6.
Hi Ed
Thanks for your message.
Usually I’d say go a little longer than 157 with your specs. More like 161, but this is a board you can ride a little shorter, IMO. So 157 could work for you.
It’s a close call width-wise. Usually with a 258mm waist, I would say is fine for 10.5s. But Lib Tech boards typically don’t have a huge difference between waist width and width at inserts, so the 157 is likely (I didn’t get a chance to measure it) around 264mm at the inserts, which is more typical of a board with more like a 254mm waist. Which could still be doable with a -6 back binding angle, but given that you like to carve and that you have K2 boots (which aren’t the most low profile going around), I think the 157W would be the better call and the better width for you, in this case with this board. And it’s not overly wide for a wide board either.
Hope this helps with your decision
I wanted something with with double BOA and looked at burton ION but GOD DAMN they are $550.
Im looking at adidas tactical ADV and they look poor on heel hold in your ratings with 3.5/5 but yet you rated them nr 1 on the list, how is this, how are they so responsive on toe side turns for example? might sound stupid but i need to understand this. If i don t find something with double BOA at around 300 350 dollars i ll look at something with traditional laces because i don t have a good feeling with speed laces.
Were the boots softer at the shin back in the day? a guy at the shop told me that these days they are making the boots harder in front so you don t have to get much up on your toes but rather push forward in the shins, is this true? i tried a pair and while flexing forward it felt like my feet were lifted up and all the weight relying on the shin/tibia, didn t feel right for me.
Hi Lucian
Heel hold is something that some people really like to be super good, and for others it’s not as important. I wouldn’t say 3.5/5 is poor. Those that I rate 4.5/5 or 5/5 are basically giving no heel lift whatsoever. It’s that’s something that you like the feel of, then there are better boots in terms of heel hold than the Tactical ADVs (at least for my feet/ankles) but I didn’t find the slight bit of lift I got to affect there response too much. I mean with better heel hold they would likely be more responsive for sure, that would certainly make sense, but they are nice and responsive despite a bit of heel lift.
Have you looked at the Response ADV. If you want something with better heel hold but similar to the Tactical ADV, you should look at the Response ADV, which is a double boa boot and has better heel hold. Or something like the K2 Maysis (but if you have wide feet, I would go Adidas over K2). The Maysis (for my feet/ankles) had no detectable heel lift for me. That’s not to say that it will be the same for everyone as everyone’s feet are different, but K2 in general tend to have really good heel hold, in my experience.
For me heel hold isn’t everything in a snowboard boot, but if it is for you, then I would check out those options, depending on the width of your foot.
Hope this helps
Hi nate, i have some concerns about boots fitting my board. So my T rice has a waist of 25.8 cm and i measured my foot and it s 27.5 cm or 28, that s size 10 US ( EUR 43 ) right? I m yet to buy boots so when i picked the board at the store i tried a Deluxe boot with a mondo of 28, size 10us, i felt a bit of heel lift and i want to try a few more before buy, but i put them on the board and for me it looked like they overhang too much. Did i made the right choice, are these numbers looking optimum? because if i don t like the T rice and i ll get the Hot Knife which is 25.5 wide the overhang will be worse, i looked at other people and for the majority their boots rarely goes beyond the edge, should i consider a wide board? maybe it was the profile of the boot too big, should i consider low profile boots like burton?
Can you provide me some weight ranges? like what is the maximum rider weight for the 157 t rice too work optimum? because i gained some pounds and i’m 198 lbs now, and if you can tell me the same for the Hot Knife in case i ll get that 159 vs 162. Thanks
Hi Lucian
Thanks for your message.
I would be very surprised if size 10 Deluxe boots were too big for the T Rice 157 or the Hot Knife 159. It’s true that with Lib Tech boards, the difference between the waist width and the width at the inserts isn’t typically a lot, but they have wider waist widths, so the width at the inserts should still be sufficient for 10s. It depends somewhat on binding angles too – if you put the boot flat across the board, it will overhang more than if it’s on an angle. If you’re riding with a 0 degree angle on your back foot, then you’ll need more width, but even then, with 10s you should be OK. If you do ride with a 0 degree back foot and really like to carve deep, then you might want something a little wider, but otherwise they should be fine.
There should be some overhang. If your boots aren’t overhanging at all, it means that your feet are well inside the edges of the snowboard, which means you’re having to work a lot harder to get leverage on to those edges. Ideally you would have at least 1cm of overhang on heel edge and toe edge and up to 2cm. But even as much as 2.5cm (per edge) is usually fine, in my experience. Also remember that this is compared to the edges on the base of the board not the top sheet.
But there’s no reason not to go with a low profile boot, if you want more leeway. Something like Burton, Adidas, Vans or Ride are good bets, in my experience.
For a size recommendation, if you could let me know your height and your skill level, and also how you like to ride – park, powder, groomers, jumps, spins, butters etc, then I can give you a more accurate recommendation.
Hope this helps
I ll copy and paste from above, i guess you receive a lot of messages and maybe forgot, no problem. ” i ride mostly groomers, i like charging and carving, ride some trees and a bit of powder and do some jumps and some 180s, 360s so no park for me except jumps, i think i m more into charging and backcountry and honestly next year i plan going to around 180 lbs. I just read your article on skill level and i m at intermediate level 4 more on the 5 side, i feel i pick up quick, i started riding last year and i have only 7 days on the mountain which 3 of them were a disaster with rocker boards where i didn t learn nothing those days and the last few days i rode a 152 camber board while weighting 230 lbs, i m yet to learn carving, jumps and 180s 360s but i lost weight now i m around 197 195 lbs and trained legs for 2 months and i plan snowboarding every weekend this winter and more, close to about 30 days, i would have liked more but i live 2 hours drive from the mountain.
What flex would you recommend me for boots? i was looking at something between 6 and 8, not going lower or higher.
Hi Lucian
Thanks for the reminder.
I’ve looked back at our old messages now.
I think for what you’re describing and for this board, the 157 is definitely doable for your specs at 195 – and if you plan on going to 180lbs it’s probably the best option. You could possibly go up to 161.5 but for this board, at your level, I think it’s going to be too long for you. And if you do drop more weight then it’s going to feel even longer. I think the 157 is your best option.
For the T Rice Pro, I would recommend boots of around a 7/10 flex, so I think you’re looking in the right place.
Check out the following for some good options:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this helps
I will read your reviews again on the atlas and falcor and i ll decide, but i think i will go with falcor, you said it has a better board feel too. Nate i bought the board today and on the top sheet it has some tiny holes in one spot, i m afraid that might crack when doing ollies or who knows, i ll send you the pics over the e-mail to see if that look like a problem.
Hi Lucian
I got your pictures on Facebook and I’ve replied to you there. I’m really not sure if those little dents would cause issues at some stage, but it might pay, to be on the safe side, to get a replacement.
I talked to my dealer and i ll buy the T rice 157 tomorrow and if i don t like it i can return it in january and get that 159 hot knife. Last question Nate, what bindings would suit me? they have union at the store, i was thinking at force/atlas/falcor or something from union, would be ok an L size for my 10 foot size? i m yet to buy boots, maybe first buy boots and then bindings, thanks you helped me a ton with your advice.
Hi Lucian
Awesome that your dealer is allowing you to do that.
In terms of bindings, I would go either Atlas or Falcor. They would be a better flex match for the T Rice Pro than the Force. And they would still be appropriate for the Hot Knife if you were to switch to that. Personally I would go Falcor, mostly because they have better board feel and just because they’re one of the better bindings going around full stop. But the Atlas would certainly work too.
Just to clarify – you’re boot size is US10? If so, then you have the option to go either M or L. I have US10 boots and I prefer to go M, so if you can that’s what I would go with, but L works too. If it’s a UK10, then the L would be the most appropriate.
Got another question Nate, how the t rice has a speed rating 4.0 out of 5 and the hot knife 3.5/5 if the hotknife is more stable/locked in that the t rice? it confuses me a bit. And i saw that never summer ripsaw has the same profile as the t rice and you described it being locked in, why one is semi stable and the other semi locked in assuming both has the profile and stifness?
Hi Lucian
Stiffness has a lot to do with stability at speed, in my experience. The T Rice Pro might have a slightly looser feel overall, particularly at slower speeds, but when you’re bombing you don’t get as loose a feel, particularly when you’re up on edge which you want to be really if you’re really bombing – if you’re flat basing at those speeds you might notice that semi-stable feel more. And that extra stiffness really helps to keep the board from getting wobbly.
The profile on the Never Summer Ripsaw (Ripsaw Rocker) is quite different to that on the T Rice Pro. They’re both Hybrid Rocker but not all Hybrid Rocker’s are the same. The rocker section on the Ripsaw is shorter than it is on the T Rice Pro and the Ripsaw also has more aggressive/pronounced camber than the T Rice Pro. On top of that the Ripsaw is a little stiffer feeling, IMO – I’ve rated it 7.5/10 but I was very close to rating it 8/10. Whereas the T Rice squarely feels 7/10 and no more. It’s not an exact science but I got a more locked in feel from the Ripsaw than from the T Rice Pro. Also these are finite measurements. If there was more detail in the sliding scale, then the T Rice Pro would be more on the stable side of semi-stable and the Ripsaw (which I considered rating as stable rather than semi-locked in) more on the stable side of semi-locked in. I don’t want to include more terms or it could get confusing. But yeah, different types of hybrid rocker and the Ripsaw is stiffer.
Hope this makes sense and helps with your decision
I ve been to the local shop and they only have the hot knife 156 or the T rice 155/157, i would have liked the hot 159, but now i have to choose between hot knife 156 or t rice 157, what would you say between these two?
Hi Lucian
Yeah I think the 159 would have been a better size. Can you find a 159 online? If not, then the T Rice Pro in the 157 is the better size for you, IMO, based on your weight. But if you could also let me know your height (weight is the main thing but I like to take everything into account).
I m 1.78m, i think that s around 5 feet 10 or 11, so you re saying between 156 hot knife and T rice 157 go with the T rice? how about the edge hold between rice and hotknife and it s the t rice good for hard charging and carving? it seems that i can t find a hot knife online, i m from europe, maybe look at a capita DOA ? i heard it s similar to the hot knife, i read your review on that and it didn t atracted me too much, i think i ll buy the T rice and if i don t like it i will sell it and buy a hot knife mid january because i talked to the dealer and that s when they will get more boards, thank you for your detailed responses.
Hi Lucian
Yeah, I think T Rice in the 157 is going to be a better bet than the 156 Hot Knife at this point, for your specs. In terms of edge-hold both are very good. The Hot Knife has a more mellow magnetraction but it has more camber, whereas the T Rice Pro has more pronounced magnetraction but less camber. They both even out, but both are very good in hard/icy conditions, in my experience. But the T Rice Pro maybe just that little bit better in hard/icy but pretty close.
Hi Nate can you help me choose a board please? I m an intermediate rider, 191 lbs, size foot 10 and i ride mostly groomers, i like charging and carving, ride some trees and a bit of powder and do some jumps and 180s 360s, i was looking at capita mercury, jones mountain twin, t rice pro or the hot knife, but i m more set on lib tech and i can t decide between t rice or hot knife, can you tell me please more about how they compare? and why t rice is 100$ more. I m afraid of that rocker of the T rice that it will be too loose because i rode a full rocker board and a full cambered board and i couldn t control the rocker one, no edge grip no stabillity at all, but i loved the camber one, stable precise and control. Is the T rice stable? does it feel like a camber board? Thanks and sorry for bad english, i m from europe.
Hi Lucian
Thanks for your message.
Between the T Rice and the Hot Knife:
1. The T Rice does have more rocker than the Hot Knife but it’s certainly not like a fully rockered board.
2. The Hot Knife does have some subtle rocker in between the feet, but it feels pretty much like an all camber board
3. The T Rice is stiffer than the Hot Knife
4. The Hot Knife, in my experience is quicker edge to edge than the T Rice, which you might prefer in the trees.
5. The T Rice Pro is better in powder than the Hot Knife
From what you’re describing, I think the Hot Knife would be the better choice as it’s more of a camber feel, which sounds like what you’re going for and I think it would be better in the trees for you. The T Rice is quite stable but it’s just on the looser side, IMO. The Hot Knife has a more locked-in feeling.
As far as the price difference goes, I could only speculate on that, but it might be partly to do with the core – which is Horse Power (60% aspen, 40% Paulownia) on the T Rice Pro and Original Power (75% Aspen, 25% Paulownia) which is likely to make the T Rice Pro a lighter core. Also stiffer boards do tend to cost more in general with snowboards, so that’s likely a factor too. There are probably a few other things with the T Rice pro that contribute to that cost as well.
Just a note that the T Rice Pro, as well as the Mountain Twin and Mercury, will be better in powder than the Hot Knife – which is the Hot Knife’s biggest weakness.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Sorry forgot to give you the length of my previous board. It is 156 Burton Blunt and my bindings angle are +15/~15.
Burton boots are indeed low profile but I find it quite comfortable.
Thanks for the reply and the information. Cheers
Hi Jackson
Since you were getting drag on the 156W (257mm waist), then I think the 157W would be the better bet for the T Rice Pro. I would estimate that the Blunt probably has around a 267mm width at the inserts (but you could check this yourself if you still have the board (measure on the base of the board, not the top sheet and measure at the reference stance on the board)). So, based on that I would go with the 157W.
Hi Nate
Thanks for the reply it is very helpful. My boots brand is Burton and got it at 2016 and my previous board is Burton Blunt. Cheers
Hi Jackson
Thanks for the extra info.
Can you also let me know the size of your Burton Blunt – is it the 157? Do you have set binding angles that you always use? If so, can you let me know what they are.
Burton boots are pretty low profile, so that’s in your favor for getting on the 157 T Rice Pro. But if you could let me know the size of Blunt and your binding angles, if known, then I can give a more accurate opinion.
Hi Nate
Great reviews and very helpful. I plan to get this board but confuse about the size which one better? I am 1.8 about 82kg and my boots are 11 looking either 157 or 157w? Just bought a new binding with size Large. My previous board bit narrow when I’m going toe edge my shoe touched the snow. Need some advise from the boss. Cheers
Hi Jackson
Thanks for your message.
I agree that 157 would be a good length for you for this board.
Whether to go wide or regular width is a tough one. The T Rice Pro is wider at the waist than a lot of boards but there is also typically less different between the waist and the inserts with Lib Tech boards than other brands (though I haven’t measured the T Rice Pro specifically). My best guess is that the T Rice Pro 157 would be around 264, 265mm at the inserts and the 157W would be around 269-270mm at the inserts.
Assuming binding angles that are relatively angled on both feet (e.g. +15/-15) or similar, then I would say that you’d get on the 157. But if you ride with a straighter back foot, then it might be pushing it too narrow.
But if you could let me know your boots brands and the year you got them. And also if you could let me know what your previous board is, and I can estimate if the 157 regular is going to be wider than it. That would give me a better idea.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for the advise. The previous board the I am using is the Burton Blunt and for my boots also Burton and I wore it for 2years got it at 2016.
Hey, thanks for the great review. I am seriously considering buying one of these. I am a US13 boot, 83kg and 186cm tall. I think I need to go the wide and maybe the 157cm or 161.5cm. Which would you recommend?
I also read some reviews that this board was not very playful or maneuverable, especially in a big and wide size. What’s your thoughts on that please?
Hi Jonny
Thanks for your message.
I did find this board to feel quite heavy and relatively slow edge-to-edge, especially when riding slowly. Definitely feels better riding faster – so not a playful type of board, IMO. I do like my boards light and I definitely prefer a softer flex for getting playful and for maneuverability at slower speeds. So, for me, it feels too heavy/stiff on snow to be a good board for getting playful on – so even though the camber profile isn’t overly aggressive on this board, I still find it quite an aggressive board. If that’s your style of riding, then it’s a great board for that but if you like to get quite playful, it’s not the best for that, IMO.
In terms of size, I would say that the 157W would be the better length – and sizing down to that would help the board to be more playful and maneuverable too. Ordinarily (for an all-mountain board, assuming a relatively advanced level) I would say something around 161, 162 for your specs but for this board, especially if you want maneuverability/playfulness, I would size down to the 157W.
With US13s, though, even the wide could be pushing it, especially if you like to get low on your carves. The 161.5W in that sense would be better. If you have low profile boots and binding angles like +15/-15, then that would give you a bit more leeway width-wise. Also, if you’re not doing any hard carves, then you can afford to go narrower too.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Very cool blog and reviews!
I’ve just bought a T Rice Pro 161.5 to shred down here in Chile and I’m wondering how would a Burton Malavita perform on this board, I’m not very much into park, more an all-mountain guy and freerider wannabe 🙂 so I know Malavita is not for freeride but would it work out for me as all mountain binding?
Thx in advance
Hi Mauricio
Thanks for your message.
The Malavita would work, but personally I would prefer something a little stiffer/more responsive for this board. It’s quite a powerful board (in my experience) and a more powerful binding would work better, IMO.
Something from the following would be a better match, IMO:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Thx man! I´ll consider those bindigs and try to make a trade with my Malavita!
You’re very welcome Mauricio.
Hi Nate
I m a good intermediate of 48 years riding a Jones Mountain Twin 158 , I m 1,76 tall , 12 of imperial boots and 77 kg .I m happy with that board but sometimes between the trees a bit difficult to maneuver . My bindings are malavitas large of course.
I can buy a lib travis rice hourse power 155 2017, and as I can not prove it I m wondering what do you think about this board.
Definitely not very fun of park , I like groomers , pow , the hole mountain .
This is not my first time hear , I m from Argentina and ride here in South America and really appreciate your opinion.
Thanks
Hi Diego
Thanks for your message.
Going shorter can definitely help between the trees, IMO. So I don’t think it’s a bad idea to size down a little bit if you’re looking for maneuverability in the trees. The T Rice Pro is a board you would size down for anyway, so I would probably recommend the 155 for this board for you anyway. However, the 155 would be really pushing it in terms of being too narrow for size 12s. I wouldn’t risk going that narrow. Going narrow will give you better edge-to-edge speed but you also run the risk of toe drag if you go too narrow.
Also the T Rice Pro is quite aggressive and stiff, I would definitely rate it an advanced to expert level board. I wouldn’t recommend it for an intermediate rider, even a high level intermediate rider, unless you are very strong/athletic. I wouldn’t say it was quicker edge-to-edge than the Mountain Twin either – the 155 would likely be quicker than the 158W Mountain Twin – but it would only be the size in this case that would make it that way.
If you’re looking for something that’s quicker between the trees, and that’s sizing down a little in length from the Mountain Twin, and still good in powder, for carving an at speed, I would suggest:
~ YES Standard 156 (258mm waist) – though it’s a 258mm waist, it’s wider than most 258mm waist boards – because of their mid-bite tech which cinches the waist in. But it’s quicker edge-to-edge than MT, IMO
~ Never Summer West 157W (261mm waist) – this is a little wider than your current MT 158W, but also takes off a cm in length – and is a little quicker edge-to-edge overall, IMO, than the MT
~ Rossignol One 157W (264mm waist)
Or you could look at something that’s designed to be “volume shifted” – these boards are designed to be wider and shorter – some are designed to be ridden up to 8cm shorter than your normal length – I haven’t ridden too many of these to be honest, so I’m not an expert on them, but the ones I have ridden are great in the trees. Some options could be
~ K2 Simple Pleasures 151cm (261mm waist)
~ Never Summer Instagator 151cm (265mm waist)
~ YES Optimistic 154cm (262mm waist)
Great in trees and still generally match it in powder with longer, narrower boards – but from my small amount of experience with these types of boards you sacrifice a little in terms of carving and stability at speed (when you’re on an edge, that extra width doesn’t help for those things). So you would likely make some sacrifices for speed/carving for improved perforamance in trees. The Optimistic less so, in that it’s not designed to be ridden as short as the other 2 mentioned. But I haven’t ridden any of these – this is just based on experience with some other short/wide boards and what others say – and their specs. If you haven’t tried something like this before they are a riskier option – but if you wanted something to ride in the trees and kept your mountain twin for other riding, then I think something like this could work well – not really one-board to it all type boards though, IMO.
So yeah, I would look at the West 157W, Standard 156 or One 157W if you want to replace your Mountain Twin – if you want to get a board that you can use for the trees and keep your Mountain Twin for other things you could look into a short/wide option.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate as usuall very very helpfull , you re the boss
No worries Diego. You’re very welcome
Hi Nate,
Great review! Thanks!
Quick question about sizing as you mentioned you would have prefer riding a 155. How tall are you how much do you weight? I plan to buy this board but was wondering about sizing. I am 1.83m tall and weight around 70kgs, mainly riding pow when possible or grooming otherwise. Would 155 be a great fit?
Thanks and cheers,
Hi Joseph
I’m 183cm also but more like 80kg. I would say the 155 would be the best bet for you. Though you’re carrying 10kg less, I think going to 153 might be getting a bit short. But I would probably recommend 157 for most all-mtn-freestyle boards for you, but for this one I wouldn’t go that long.
That also depends on your boot size. If you’ve got something in the range 9.5 to 11, then you should be good on the 155. But if you’ve got bigger or smaller boots than that, then we’ll have to re-think it.
Hope this helps
Thanks a lot Nate for the quick feedback! My boot size are 9 so I should rather go for a 155 otherwise the board might be to wide for a good control, is this you mean? I was hesitating between 155 and 157 as I love to spend time in the pow and thought I would get a better floating feeling with the 157.
Thanks for the feedback!
Hi Joseph
The 157 would certainly give you more in terms of powder – and the extra width on this board gives extra float too. But I wouldn’t say that this board is particularly made for powder – it’s ok in deeper snow but not amazing.
But yeah the 157 is probably getting a bit wide for size 9s. The 155 would be a better match width-wise. But the 255mm waist on the 155 is still on the wider side for a 155 (and on the wide side for 9s), so you’ll get a bit more float out of the extra width.
Hope this helps