Hello and welcome to my Never Summer Proto Type Two review.
In this review I will take a look at the Proto Type Two as an all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Proto Type Two a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
NOTE: The 2020 model was the last model of the Proto Type Two. It has been replaced by the Proto Synthesis
Overall Rating
Board: Never Summer Proto Type Two 2020
Price: $589 (USD recommended retail)
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex: Medium (5/10)
Rating Score: 87.6/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain-Freestyle Boards
Out of the 23 men’s all-mountain-freestyle snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Proto Type Two's Specs
Check out the tables for the Proto Type Two's specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | All-Mountain-Freestyle |
Price: | $589 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Medium-Fast |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Centered |
Base: | Sintered |
Weight: | Normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
152 | 248 | 110-160 | 50-73 |
154 | 250 | 120-170 | 54-77 |
157 | 252 | 130-180 | 59-82 |
160 | 254 | 145-195 | 66-89 |
155X | 261 | 130-180 | 59-82 |
158X | 263 | 140-190 | 64-86 |
161X | 265 | 145-195 | 66-88 |
164X | 267 | 150-200+ | 68-91+ |
Who is the Proto Type Two Most Suited To?
The Proto Type Two is perfect for anyone who wants to be able to ride freestyle, whether that be in the park or over the whole mountain, but who also wants a board that can carve well.
If you love jumps, spins, hitting natural features, playing with ground tricks and riding switch, but like to carve hard in between, then the Proto Type Two is one of the best boards out there to do it.
It’s not amazing in powder – as you’d expect from a freestyle oriented, true twin, centered board but otherwise you can do everything and do it well.
Not a board I would recommend for an absolute beginner but definitely ok for anyone from intermediate and up.
The Proto Type Two in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Proto Type Two is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Never Summer Proto Type Two 2019, 157cm (252mm waist width)
Date: March 3, 2018
Conditions: The snow had a great medium feel to it. Relatively firm but certainly not hard and not overly soft. Off groomer was nice too and there were a few pockets of untracked powder from snow from a couple of days previous. Sunny and perfect visibility. Temperature was -7 with wind.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Width at Inserts: 260mm (10.2“)
Powder
The biggest weakness of this board is its ability in powder. But that’s not what it’s made for. If you don’t need a board that will go in powder – or if you only go in there occasionally – or if you have another board for that, then the Proto Type Two will do everything else.
And it’s not like you can’t take it in there. Just not going to be as good as some others in there – it has a true twin shape and a centered stance which doesn’t make it ideal. It does have some rocker in the profile so it will have some float, but the tip and tail are pretty short and it’s not overly wide.
Carving and Turn
This board is awesome for carving. For a board that is so good for freestyle riding, this is one of, if not the, best at carving.
It’s also really quick from edge to edge for when you need to be doing tight turns.
Speed
Again for a freestyle oriented board, the speed on the Proto Type Two is more than you’d expect. It’s really very stable when you get up to good speeds, especially given the type of board.
It’s also got good glide for those flat spots.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Uneven Terrain
I found the Proto Type Two to be very good over bumpy terrain. I found I could really hug the bumps and that quickness from edge-to-edge really helped to.
Jumps
The PT2 is awesome over jumps. It’s got pretty good pop for ollies, has great maneuverability for the approach to jumps and really stable on landings.
From anything from the smallest hop to large jumps, this board can handle it well.
Switch
It feels the same in both directions. It has a true twin shape and a centered stance and has that asymmetrical side cut (deeper side cut on the heel side) which also really helps to make this board feel natural when riding in your other direction.
This board was really fun and easy to ride switch.
Jibbing
Not a jibbing specialist but if you like to hit the jib line every now and then, it will do a good job.
It is great for the approach to jibs and this board spins well – just not as good as some more jib specialized boards when it comes to riding jib features.
Pipe
Though I didn’t take it into a pipe it would be an awesome board for the pipe, IMO.
It’s got good edge hold in hard snow, it’s centered and true twin and it’s got enough stiffness and speed to be able to charge between the walls. The camber sections in the profile would also help to drive the board up the walls.
Changes from the 2019 Model
As far as I can tell the 2020 model is exactly the same as the 2019 model, except for the graphic.
Changes from the 2018 Model
From what I can tell the 2019 model is identical to the 2018 model apart from the graphic. This board is essentially the same as it was when it made it’s debut in 2017 as an evolution of the old Proto HD.
There is no 153X for the 2019 model, which there was for the 2018 model.
Changes from the 2017 Model
The 2018 model is essentially the same as the 2017 model, except for the graphic.
Changes from the 2016 Model
This board was new for 2017 so there were no changes to speak of between 2017 and 2016 models. It is the evolution of the Proto HD but it is a quite different (and improved, in my opinion) from that board.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
JUMPS | 4.5 | 18/20 |
SWITCH | 5.0 | 10/10 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 6/10 |
CARVING/TURNS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
POWDER | 2.0 | 4/10 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 7/10 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 4.5 | 9/10 |
BUTTERING | 4.0 | 4/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.6/100 |
Overall, the Proto Type Two is a versatile board that can rip freestyle over the whole mountain - and can lay down a nice carve, when you're not finding side hits or doing park laps.
You can ride this board fast or slow and it will respond to what you're trying to do.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you’re interested in the Proto Type Two check out the links below for more info and for current prices and availability.
If you want to check out some other all-mountain freestyle options or see how the Proto Type 2 compares to others, check out the next link.
Hello and welcome to my Never Summer Proto Type Two review.
Nate, awesome site and excellent reviews. I really appreciate the detailed replies you give to comments and questions. I’m a solid intermediate 5 slowly working toward a 6. I only get to board about 1 week per year. my last visit I rented a burton custom 162. I’m 6’1″, 175 lb. This board was terrible. I caught edges unexpectedly and booted out several times. I switched the board for an NS ripsaw 160w and it was a breath of fresh air, I felt confident everywhere. I think it had union force bindings. I like goofing around on all the runs doing small jumps and stuff and want to learn some buttering tricks. Because of all this I bought a used NS Proto type two 158x. I hope it will ride similar to the ripsaw but more suited to my style. Do you think this was a good choice?
What flex bindings and boots should I be looking for? I’m thinking 5-6. I’m also trying to stay as inexpensive as I can, any suggestions for good budget bindings and boots?
Hi Calvin
Thanks for your message.
I think it’s a good choice. You’re getting the same camber profile that you experienced with the Ripsaw, but in a softer flex (and different shape etc – there are other differences of course, but to simplify it). Given how you describe your riding style, I think the PT2 will be more suitable than the Ripsaw – and I think the size is better for what you’re describing too. I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 160/161 – but for the style your riding going down a couple of cms is a good idea. Also the PT2 is a board you ride a little shorter, IMO, so I think you’re good with the 158X, assuming the width is good. If you could let me know your boot size to confirm, that would be awesome.
Even though it’s not that much over, I think the 162 in the Custom was too big, particularly at an intermediate 5. But most rental places go off height first and foremost. Whilst it’s a factor I like to take into account, weight and boot size (and ability and riding style) are all more important than height for sizing. And also the traditional camber profile on the Custom is prone to being catchy, particularly if you’re not used to it.
I think you’re spot on in terms of boots and bindings flex for the PT2 and the style or riding you’re describing. Something in that 5-6 range.
In terms of reasonably priced, the Burton Cartel would work well for bindings (making sure you get the Re:Flex model as the EST model won’t mount to the PT2). They have decent board feel and the flex will work. The Union Force is another solid option for a good price – and you’ve already had experience with it. Or the Flux DS, if you’re OK with the shock absorption on them. If you can find past season models of those, you should be able to find a good price and they’re already reasonably priced compared to most (good) bindings in that flex range. If you wanted something a bit cheaper again, but with a dip in quality but still decent, then the Burton Mission Re:Flex would be worth looking at.
For boots, looking at something under $300 retail, you could check out the following:
– DC The Laced (6/10 flex)
– Salomon Dialogue (6/10)
– Vans Invado Pro (6/10)
– Vans Aura Pro (5/10 flex)
– Vans Hi-Standard Pro (5/10 flex)
– Salomon Launch (5/10 flex)
– Adidas Samba (5/10 flex)
– Burton Ruler (5/10 flex)
Hope this helps with your decisions
Thanks Nate, great feedback. I’m a size 11.5 or 12 depending on the brand. I ended up getting a (hopefully) great deal on a slightly used set of 2019 union stratas! Based on your reviews, I’m really excited about them.
Regarding the boots, I’m finding some pretty good deals on K2 boundary boots and Salomon Dialogues but I’m hoping to get into a local shop to try them on before buying. Any specific opinions on either of those?
Again, I really appreciate what you do and I hope I’ll be able to help support the website when it does come time to buy the boots.
Hi Calvin
Thanks for the update. Awesome that you could get a deal on the Strata.
I really like the Salomon Dialogue. If you’ve got wider feet, you may find them too narrow, but otherwise, a highly recommendable boot, IMO. Certainly try on in person, if you have the chance – there’s no substitute for trying on when it comes to boots. I haven’t tested the K2 Boundary, but most K2 boots I’ve tried, I’ve really liked – and they fit the flex range that you’re looking for, based on the flex rating for them. If you get the chance to try them on, then go with the one that you feel fits the best.
Sorry Nate, I forgot another consideration, interesting question, do you think on a 155 board the 58 cm stance is too large to use the board? I mean if the tip and tail available after the inserts make you feel little length? Thanks
Hi Carl
I don’t think 58cm is too excessive a stance width on a 155. I ride a 58cm stance on my 156 YES Greats and that’s the stance I prefer over the reference stance of 540mm on that board, so I think it just depends on what you feel most comfortable on. If you prefer the feel of 58cm in terms of a stance width, I don’t think it’s going to affect the ride of the 155X PT2 in a negative way. It will of course feel a little different to riding it at reference, but I often ride at different to reference if the reference on a particular board isn’t comfortable for me. You don’t want to go too far off, but I think 58cm on the 155X PT2 would be fine.
Thanks Nate,
the work you do is incredible, lots of details and always something to learn.
As for the drag of the heel / toe I don’t think I will have problems, I’m almost sure of this, but I wanted to know if having 1.5 cm at the toe and 2.5 cm on the heel and not being perfectly centered can negatively affect the riding freestyle or instead it’s just a matter of getting used to and therefore no problem.
Thanks
Hi Carl
I don’t think it will be a big deal with that kind of difference. I ride with the kind of difference often. If it was a greater difference it might be a problem, but a 1cm difference you shouldn’t notice too much, IMO.
Hi Nate,
when you measure the width in the inserts or in the center you measure it under the insole or above the topsheet. what is the correct measurement?
Also on the pt2 with burton reflex binding I cannot perfectly center the boot, the best solution is to have about 1.5 cm at the toe and 2.5 cm on the heel, will it be a problem?
Thanks
Hi Carl
When measuring width it should be done on the underside of the board. On the base, rather than the topsheet. If you measure at the waist of the board, you will see that the measurement on the underside is the measurement that will match the waist width measurement in the published specs for a board. Also, it makes sense, at least in my head, that this should be the measurement as this is the point on the edge that makes initial contact with the snow. This is the way I always measure the width at the inserts.
If you’re unable to fully center, then I always recommend having more overhang on the heel, because you are far less likely to experience heel drag than toe drag. So having 2.5cm on the heel and 1.5cm on the toe is fine, IMO. Should have no issues with drag or turn initiation in that scenario, IMO.
Hope this helps
Im looking for all mountain freeride board. I like the idea of asymmetrical deep heel side cut, I need help on heel side turns. I tend to skid more than carve on heel side turns. Is Proto right for me?
Hi Todd
Thanks for your message.
You can definitely get away with skidded turns on the PT2. But it also carves well too. If you’re looking for something that will punish skidded turns to force you to carve, then this isn’t it. But if you want something that allows skidded turns (I wouldn’t say it’s the easiest that I’ve skidded turns on, but it’s easier than average, if that makes sense) but also helps you to carve on your heel side, then it’s worth looking at.
Just to clarify though, you say you’re looking for something all-mountain-freeride. More freeride oriented boards are usually quite directional. This is a more freestyle oriented board. It’s a twin. There aren’t many asym directional boards around (because they have to be goofy or regular specific), but if that’s more what you’re after you could check out the old GNU Zoid or GNU Spasym Asym. Don’t think they have a 2020 model for them (most recent Zoid was a 2018 I believe). But if you’re good with a twin, then the PT2 is a really good option. The YES Greats & GNU Rider’s Choice also really good options.
Hope this helps
Spasym only one size 162. I’m 5’7″ 160lbs seems to long for my size. Any thoughts?
Hi Todd
Too long for sure, IMO. I would say more like 154-156 for your specs. Can’t think of any other directional asym boards. It’s a concept I like the idea of, but hasn’t seemed to have taken off. You can definitely still carve well on a twin, IMO. Less suitable for powder, but there are some good twin carvers (like the PT2 & Greats) – so depending on how you’re looking to ride, they could still be suitable.
HELLO NATE, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU FOR A COUNCIL.
MY DIMENSIONS ARE 1.87 CM X 85 KG 11.5 REDUCED BOOT. I HAVE ALWAYS DRIVED SNOWBOARD 156/157 WIDE / MID WIDE. I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THE NEVER SUMMER PROTO 155 X. I HAVE SEEN THAT THE TABLE IS WIDE ALSO IN THE NOSE AND TAIL OF MORE THAN MY CURRENT 157. I AM A PILOT ADDRESSED TO MONTAIN FREESTYLE AND I AM AFRAID THAT THE 158 x SACRIFIES ME TOO MUCH, WHAT DO YOU THINK? ALSO I DRIVE WITH MALAVITA REFLEX AND MY FAVORITE STANCE IS 57/58 CM. ON THE BASIS OF YOUR EVIDENCE THAT STANCE SHOULD COME WITH THE 155x? thank you very much.
Hi Gonzalo
Thanks for your message.
Length-wise, I would normally say that 158X is the better length for you. But if you want to ride shorter, then you could go 155X. It’s certainly not going to be too wide for 11.5s. I would predict the width at inserts on the 155X to be around 269mm, which isn’t massively wide. So even though it’s a little wider tip and tail – it isn’t that wide at the inserts. The waist and insert width is where you’ll feel it most when riding.
Since you’re used to riding 156/157, going 155 isn’t too short, but normally I would recommend the 158X for your specs, for this board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate, incredible work you do.
I am undecided between Nevers summer proto t2 155X and yes the greats 156.
I drive with Burton Malvita reflex, I saw that even when you try the demos you drive with burton reflex. based on this you know that the stance with burton reflex is possible only every 4 cm. Based on your test on these 2 boards which stance would I get with burton reflex following the bushing? On the Yes the greats should come 54 or 58 cm but on the never summer I can not understand the specifications. you can help me, for me this is important. what’s your favorite stance also? Thanks so much
Hi Gonzalo
For the Greats, I like to ride with a 58cm stance vs the 54cm stance. Just my preference – I find I get a more stable landing platform, better in icy conditions and better for buttering. But if you want a more nimble approach, then the 54cm is good for that.
For the PT2, looking back at my notes I don’t seem to have any record of what my stance width was – I always take this measurement, but I must have forgotten to write it down on this occasion, or it got lost somewhere. Never Summer don’t do reference stances, so it’s tough to figure out what the stance options are. So, sorry I can’t be more help there.
thanks Nate, so you confirm that with burton reflex the stance possible on yes the greats 156 is 54cm or 58 CM? Hello
Hi Gonzalo
Yeah, unfortunately can’t run the Re:Flex disc horizontally, so unless you’re on a channel board, and assuming you want to keep your stance centered, then 54cm or 58cm are the options. Well technically I measured it at 53.85cm and 57.85cm, if you want it exactly, but yeah essentially 54 or 58.
Hey Nate,
I am having a hard time deciding between a 157 and a 158X.
Height: 5’11”
Weight: 165lbs
Boots: thirtytwo TM-2
Boots Size: 10.5
Riding Type: 60% mountain & 40% park
I also do not know if I should go medium or large Union bindings.
Thanks!
Hi Max
Thanks for your message.
I can see your dilemma – it’s a close call. The 157 is borderline too narrow, but could be doable. The 158X is borderline too wide, but also doable. For reference the 157 measures 260mm at the inserts. The 158X I would estimate to be around 271mm at the inserts. Personally I find my sweet spot is between 260mm and 265mm at the inserts (with size 10s), and I have ridden anything down to 255mm without issues. For 10.5s that’s roughly the equivalent of 260mm to 270mm as a good range. So I think both would certainly work for you, it’s just whether or not you’re willing to take a chance on going too narrow with the 157 or go for the safer bet at 158X. The 155X could also be an option, if you were happy to go a little shorter.
The TM-Twos that I’ve measured (2018, 2019 & 2020 model) were actually quite low profile (2.6cms longer than the mondo – which is pretty good). So for the 10.5 I would guess they’re around 311mm. That would be total overhang, with boots going straight across the board, of 5.1cm (roughly 2.5cm per edge). With a duck stance, which is highly recommended for this board, that would be a reasonable amount less. So, I think you would get away with it on the 157 but no guarantees. If you like to really rail your carves and ride quite aggressively, then the 158X is probably the safer bet though.
In terms of Union bindings, I just put the TM-Twos that I have with me at the moment (2020 model) into my M Falcor bindings and they fit fine. They were size 10s, but I imagine 10.5 would fit. No problem getting into the heel cup and in terms of strap length I had a couple of holes to work with, so you shouldn’t max the straps out with 10.5s I wouldn’t imagine. No guarantees it’s the same for all Union bindings, but it’s a good indicator. That said, the L would fit fine for too, IMO. I would say go M if you get the 157 as it will fit the board better and go L if you go with the 158X as the L will fit the wider board better.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
First off, great review. Thanks for all the effort you put into the site, it’s super helpful.
I’m a bit torn on sizing on the proto type two, so I was hoping to get your opinion. I’m 5’9, around 150lbs (give or take a few), and size 9 boots. I’m having a hard time deciding between the 154 and 152.
I’ve primarily been an all mountain rider, but I’m trying to emphasize a bit more freestyle this upcoming season. Looking to improve my flatground tricks, bigger spins off side hits, etc. Some park but not enough to justify a park board yet – mostly smaller features. Still definitely charge down the hill sometimes though and carving ability is important. I also spend a decent amount of time in the trees and maneuverability is nice to have. I know performance in powder is not great in general with this board but I’ll probably make it work this season and buy a dedicated powder board next year.
I’m sure there’s no wrong decision here, and each will have its trade offs, but I can’t seem to make a decision. This will be my third season, so I’m pretty much a middle of the road intermediate rider.
Another variable here – currently I ride a 154 rome reverb rocker, which has an effective edge of 1210mm. If I downsize to a type two 152, with an effective edge of 1170, that’s a 4cm difference. That’s significant, no? Let me know if I’m overthinking that aspect.
Lastly, I’m just curious about the size chart in the review since I’m basing a lot of my decision on that – NS doesn’t seem to publish official weight ranges in their specs, is the size chart based on generic ranges for those board sizes or the type two specifically?
Once again, thanks so much for your time!
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message.
Typically I would say go 152 for your specs. I would say anything around 154, 155 for all-mountain riding for your specs, but for an all-mountain-freestyle board like this, I usually like to size down a little – and particularly if you’re looking to focus more on freestyle aspects. And I think the 152 would be a good width for size 9s. Though in saying that the 154 is fine for 9s too.
But I totally get your concern with the effective edge side of things. The PT2 actually has more effective edge compared to overall length vs a lot of other boards – and all-mountain-freestyle and park boards tend to in general – they tend to have shorter noses and tails for better spinning, and because powder isn’t a focus. But the Reverb Rocker is even more to the extreme in that respect. It’s not a board I’ve ridden, so I couldn’t say how it feels to ride – like if it feels like it rides bigger than a 154 typically feels – though I suspect it does. So that shifts me a little more towards going 154.
Between the 152 and 154:
The 152 will be subtly better for spinning, flat land tricks and be subtly more agile. So essentially better in trees, the park and general freestyle
The 154 will be subtly more stable at speed, better on a carve and float a little more in powder.
For a 2 board quiver, I think going with the 152 for the PT2 and then going with a longer powder specific board or even freeride board (by my definition a freeride board is usually good at speed, carving and powder whereas a powder specific board is usually not as good for speed/carving but better for powder). Then you can use your 152 PT2 for more casual days/freestyle days and then when the powder hits, you can use your other board. Or if you were to go freeride as opposed to powder specific, you could go for the freeride board on days you feel like charging more.
But if you think it’s going to be your daily driver, and you’ll only really take your other board out on a powder day, then the 154 might be a more all-round size.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Wow, I couldn’t ask for a more thorough answer thanks a lot, it is seriously really helpful.
It’s a tough call but I think I’ll go with the 154. There are times I feel like the reverb rocker is a bit too long so I was looking at downsizing, but I think part of that might just be due to the longer effective edge. Plus I might end up putting on a few pounds and I don’t want to lose too much as far as carving and stability.
Realistically I think over time I’ll pick up a longer powder/freeride board and a shorter dedicated park board and that quiver of 3 should cover all my bases. For now, the PTT will be acting as more of an all mountain daily driver and it sounds like the 154 is a solid choice with all that in mind.
Thanks again for your time!
You’re very welcome Joel. Hope you have an awesome season and enjoy your deck!
hi nate
Got a chance to get a 158x 2020 quite cheap, i think my specs will be good to lean a lil bit more freestyle with the 158x? 6ft 10.5 boot 170
Cheers bro
Hi Tim
Yeah, I think it’s not far off. Going back over our previous conversations, you have Adidas Tactical ADV 10.5s right? In that case, I think the 157 (regular width) would probably be your best bet, though if you want extra width for a larger landing platform and aren’t too worried about it feeling a little slower edge-to-edge, then the 158X would work too. What size do you normally ride all-mountain. You’ve got a custom X right?
Hey nate, yeah I usually ride 156 ghost, and the 158 custom x doesn’t boot out when I lean it over but still get a bit of drag. I think Ill get that 158x as it’s super cheap and I don’t have a hybrid rocker ride, I was just checking if you would think it would be too much board?
Hi Tim
Yeah, ideally going a little shorter if you’re going to be using it predominantly for Freestyle, but overall I wouldn’t say it would be too much board for you. Even though I wouldn’t describe it as an ultra playful kind of deck – it’s kind of in between playful and aggressive, it’s still going to be a little less aggressive than the Ghost, and significantly less aggressive overall and significantly softer flexing than the Custom X. So in that sense, it will feel like “less board” if that makes sense. Perhaps ideally, if you were using it predominantly for riding freestyle, and wanted to go wider, the 155X, but I think the 158X will certainly be doable.
Hi Nate.
Thanks for the advice, man – they are extremely helpful!
Yes basic model 2017 flex is more rigid than proto at least in my feelings. I’m going in 154 because I’m afraid of being disappointed again when I suddenly change the edge. I am looking for a board for fast agile driving but also one that will be fun. I want to learn freestyle on this board or will it be the right board for me? And will it actually be more stable than my yes basic ? Thank you again for your help! Greetings.
Hi Mark
Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I think if you’re looking for something that you can learn freestyle on, but will still be aggressive enough for carving, then I think it’s a good choice.
In terms of being more stable than the Basic, there’s a couple of things. Overall, yes more stable at speed in my opinion. In terms of feel – to me the PT2 is ever so slightly looser feel with that rocker between the feed – but when charging up on edge it’s more stable – and that’s partly to do with the extra effective edge – and by my feels being slightly stiffer. I don’t notice a big difference in terms of flex, and of course you feel it the other way around, and sometimes that can happen, but yeah overall a little more stable at speed, IMO. When flat basing – like coming off the lift, it’s got a bit of a looser feel.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi, Nate.
Amazing page. I’m glad I came across it and I hope you’ll help me. I like to drive aggressively and change gears quickly. Currently I have a yes basic 155 board with an effective edge of 117.5cm and at high speeds this board loses its stability. Weight 160 lbs without clothes, height 5’11, shoes 10 us ride lasso and bindings flux tt. I have a big problem with the choice of size, because I had the opportunity to ride only once on the PP157 but this adventure ended in the hospital. I had an impression that it was hard for me to turn it and I had a problem cutting a corner. Dude, help me!
Hi Mark
Thanks for your message.
The PT2 157 is a lot more board than the Basic 155 for sure, so that might have something to do with it. Going from that effective edge up to 122cm is a big jump. So even though it’s only 2cm longer overall, that’s almost a 5cm jump in effective edge. Would have likely had something to do with how it was harder for you to turn. Also the PT2 is a bit stiffer than YES basic as well. The different camber profile (Hybrid Rocker vs Hybrid Camber) would also have felt different – though hybrid rocker isn’t usually hard to turn, so I don’t think that would have anything to do with it.
Even going to 154 on the PT2, would give you more effective edge (119) vs the 155 Basic, so that’s an option, but you could look at other boards too, if you think this just doesn’t suit your riding. If you looking for that all-mtn-freestyle type board, and want something more aggressive I would check out:
>>Top 5 Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Though mostly they won’t be easier to turn than the PT2, IMO, so I’d also check out:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
But yeah if you’re sold on the PT2, then the 154 might be worth looking at, based on your specs and what you’re describing – and you should still get a bit more stability at speed vs the Basic. Not as much as you would on the 157, but might be a better balance between stability at speed and other qualities.
Hope this helps with your decision
Would you please test a shaper twin vs proto TT!?
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message. I haven’t ridden a Shaper Twin yet, unfortunately. If I get on one this winter I can do a comparison, but winter is a while off. I could give you my opinion based on specs, how the Shaper Twin might perform in comparison to the PT2, given it’s specs, but can’t give you a first hand experience there unfortunately.
Hello,
I have for the last few seasons been riding the Capita DOA 152cm. I am shopping for the next board and have narrowed it down to the Proto Type 2 or the Yes Greats.
I also own a Smokin Awesymetrical in 156cm which I ride occasionally. Personally I seem to enjoy the DOA more for it’s pop, snappiness and it’s stability.
The Smokin seems much looser to me and harder to control, I am sure the rocker is a large part of that. Not sure if the extra 4cm plays a part as well.
With the two boards I am looking at buying, how would they compare to what I currently am familiar with? Since the profile is similar would the Proto be more similar to the feel of the Smokin and the Yes Greats similar to the Capita?
Hi Andrew
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Awesymetrical, so I couldn’t say from first hand experience, but typically boards with rocker between the feet tend to feel looser. I wouldn’t say that the Proto Type Two is super loose – but just on the looser side of stable. Whereas the Greats feels stable – right in the middle of stable. The DOA is what I would put half way between stable and locked in (hope that makes sense – check out the “feel” graphs in the specs sections of the reviews, I think that explains it the best. So, without knowing how loose the Awesymetrical feels I couldn’t say how much more stable the others will be in comparison. But my instinct from what you’re describing, would be that the Greats would be more suited to you.
The longer length of the Awesymetrical shouldn’t make it feel looser – in fact I would expect the opposite – having the extra effective edge on the Awesymetrical should actually help to make it feel more stable – but in saying that I would still expect (based on specs) that the DOA would be more stable feeling, even in the smaller size. That extra length though, would contribute to it feeling harder to control.
Based on the boards you have, I would say that the 151 Greats would be your best bet, but if you could let me know your weight, height and boot size, that would help to give you a more accurate sizing opinion.
Hope this helps
Hello,
Thanks for such a quick response.
I was indeed leaning more towards the Greats but there is so much hype on the proto that made me consider.
Would the greats be a signifcant change in terms of pop, playfulness and carving?
I am 5’5″ and weigh 190. Shoe size is 8.5 or 9 depending on the maker. I currently am wearing thr thirtytwo tm-3.
Hi Andrew
The PT2 is a great board, but based on what you’re describing it sounds like the Greats would be a better bet for your preferences.
I would go 151 for the Greats for you – I think that would be the best balance in terms of width and length.
I would say the Greats is as poppy as the DOA, a little snappier overall, and more playful – especially in terms of pressing the tip/tail. But it’s also a better carver, in my experience. Similar in terms of jumps performance, except that the Greats has it for landings – just with that wider platform. In terms of stability at speed, the DOA maybe just a nudge over the Greats, but not much in it. The Greats more playful but can also get aggressive on it when you want to.
Thank you very much for the advice. I will go with the greats
You’re very welcome Andrew. Hope you enjoy your new gear. Happy riding!
I’m 5′ 10″, 180lbs, with size 10.5 US boot.
The last 2 years I’ve been riding a GNU Metal Guru 158cm. I like it overall. I def like it for bombing, and it’s ok on some jumps.
Prior I road an old Salomon 154 wide. This board felt nicer to practice 180’s on.
For the Proto Type Two (or Proto Type Two X) I’m looking for a board to carve up the mountain, def use in the parks (although not much jibbing, mostly jumps/pipe), and handle an occasional decent downhill bomb.
I’ve seen your reviews & some seem to suggest you don’t recommend wide for this board. However, I think I might like a little wider board.
I’m debating on the Proto Type Two 157cm or the Proto Type Two X 155cm.
What do you recommend?
Thanks for all the great info & feedback!
Hi Fred
Thanks for your message.
With 10.5s I would say you’re right on the cuff between regular and wide. You would most likely get on the 157 with 10.5s – assuming you stuck with binding angles like +15/-15 (which is actually recommended for this board, being an asym). It’s on the narrow side for 10.5s but I think you’d get away with it.
The 155X I would predict to be around 269mm at the inserts (based on measuring a different size). And that’s not overly wide for 10.5s – so whilst it’s obviously wider than the 157 and a little wider than a regular width board, it’s not super-wide. For 10.5s it’s only on the slightly wide side, IMO. The 157 probably the narrowest I would go with a 10.5. So the 155X would give you a bit more leeway, and that would give you a slightly more stable landing platform (overall slighly more surface area than the 157) – and a little less swing weight, being a little shorter. You would loose just a little in terms of stability at speed with the reduced effective edge though – so that would be the biggest downside of going 155X, from what you’re describing. It would give you a little more breathing space for aggressive carves though, in terms of getting up high on the edges. But that little bit more effective edge, I like to have for big wide carves – so there’s a bit of a trade-off there.
Length-wise, for your specs, for this particular board, I would say around 157 is spot on – but given that the 155X is wider, you can drop a little bit of length if you’re going a little wider (keeping in mind the dropping of effective edge).
Hope this helps with your decision.
Hey love the review.
I am a seasoned rider. 49yrs .. since 88..
I am 6.1 210-215lbs. Trying to decide between the NS proto – arbor coda camber- capita DOA – arbor element …. I ride peak to park. East coast .. I have a small quiver. Just looking for something really fun.. carves well and butters and is agressive.. thanks.
Hi Mars
Thanks for your message.
I think you’ve got a good shortlist going there. A few things:
Carving: I rate each of these boards the following for carving.
coda camber 4/5
PT2 – 4/5
DOA – 3.5/5
Element 3/5
For buttering:
The PT2 is the best butterer of the 4, IMO. The DOA & Coda Camber are about as easy to butter as each other – not super hard but not easy either. The Element (even though a little softer flexing than the Coda Camber) felt slightly harder to butter than the Coda Camber – not by heaps but by a little. Not sure if it’s stiffer in the tip and tail and softer in the middle?
In terms of aggressiveness, I would say that the Coda Camber is the most aggressive feeling overall, with the DOA next, then the Element, then the PT2. The PT2 has some aggressiveness to it for sure, but out of these 4, is the most playful, IMO.
They’re all great boards for jumps.
For Hard/Icy conditions, I would say that the Coda Camber, Element and PT2 are all about the same – pretty good – say 4/5. With the DOA being a step down – maybe 3/5
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate: I’m 140lbs, 171cm w/ 8.5 boot size, intermediate level. Looking for resort board. Need your advise on 152 or 154 PT2….? Thank you
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
For your specs/ability and for this board, I would go for the 152 for sure.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate, massive props to you on this site. Your detailed reviews and guides are a snowboarder’s best friend. I wanna ask your advice as I’m looking to replace my current setup and am having trouble deciding.
I’m 6’6″, 205 lbs and wear size 12 boots. Between limited time, icy hills and a very stiff and cambered board I felt really held back. Difficulty turning, catching an edge, and bad responsiveness has kept me mostly on green runs.
I’m looking for a setup that will help my progression and get me more comfortable in steeper blues and move into blacks. Is the NS proto type a good fit for me?
Hi Chad
Thanks for your message.
The PT2 is mid-flex – and there’s some rocker in the profile, so I think those things will certainly help. And I found that it wasn’t a catchy board. Not like super easy, like a beginner board. You can still get a little aggressive on it as well. But definitely intermediate appropriate and going to be much more forgiving and easier to progress on than a stiff, fully cambered board, IMO.
The biggest weakness of the PT2, IMO, is in powder, but if you’re not going to be seeing that much, I think it will be a great option for what you’re describing.
Size-wise, I would say 164X is your best bet, though this is a board you can ride a little shorter, if you think you’d prefer a shorter board. So the 161X comes into play too. I would be leaning towards the 164X but if you really like the idea of going shorter, 161X is a possibility too.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the help! Just picked up a 164x on a great end of season deal, can’t wait to give it a spin.
Any advice on bindings to pair with it? I’ve been using Flow NX ATs the past few seasons and love the quick entry/exit and how the one piece top strap distributes pressure. But they aren’t very responsive and I’m thinking about going to traditional strap bindings. Any suggestions?
Hi Chad
Awesome that you were able to find it with a good deal on it!
In terms of bindings for it, I would check out the following:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Which would all be great matches for the PT2, IMO. There are other options too, but that’s a good place to start.
Thanks, your thoughts are appreciated. 155x it is. I’ll be looking forward to a shaper twin review if you ever get a shot to ride it. Just out of curiosity, if you were to choose a powder board to compliment the PTT what boards would be in your sights?
Thanks again
Justin
Hi Justin
Powder boards is one area that I don’t extensively test, just because I don’t have time to test everything, but here are a few options – some that I have ridden and some that I haven’t:
– YES Hybird (new for 2020, rode this and loved it – not purely for powder, was fun on groomers too, and I didn’t actually get it in any powder, but judging by the specs it would be awesome in pow – this is a Hybrid of their PYL and their 420)
– YES 420 (if you want to ride switch in powder as well – haven’t ridden though)
– YES 420 Powder Hull (haven’t ridden – more directional 420)
– YES Optimistic (wasn’t my favorite YES board, but if you want something powder and stiff, this is an option)
– Burton Skeleton Key (got on this this year and it’s a fun board for sure – and great in powder and trees)
– Jones Hovercraft (haven’t ridden)
– Jones Mind Expander (got on this this year – definitely a powder specialist, IMO)
– Lib Tech T Rice Orca (haven’t ridden)
– Never Summer Insta Gator (haven’t ridden)
– Never Summer Swift (haven’t ridden)
– Rome Powder Division MT (haven’t ridden)
– Rossignol XV Sushi (haven’t ridden)
– Capita Spring Break Powder (haven’t ridden)
– Jones Storm Chaser (haven’t ridden)
As you can see there are heaps of options (and this is just a small selection). Unfortunately I haven’t ridden that many of them, and haven’t done any detailed scoring/comparison between the ones I have ridden, but hopefully that can get you started. I’m hoping to expand more into this area of boards in the future but for now, my experience with them is fairly limited.
Thanks Nate, I’m leaning more towards the PTT. The ST is very tempting, but not sure I’ve seen enough reviews for it. I see very few powder days and at 46 I feel one of the best things I can do for my riding progression is to try and nail down my switch riding. I don’t plan to focus much on park at all except for small jumps. Would reduced footprint boot get me into a regular board, like a 157. I currently ride a wide endeavor board at 15,-15 and it feels at times to much. The PTT 155X is what I’m leaning toward, but am worried that I will be giving up stability at speed. Also, my current board is traditional camber and I have never ridden anything but traditional camber. Is there going to be much learning curve?
Thanks again,
Justin
Hi Justin
The PT2 157 is 260mm at the inserts, which is pushing it for 11s, even in a low profile option. However, you might just squeeze on there in a low profile boot, given that you ride it +15/-15 and if you’re not doing any particularly aggressive carving. It would still be a risk. It might be the case that the Endeavor is wider than the 155X and 158X PT2s, but if you were able to measure it at the inserts and the waist that would help too (measure on the base of the board from outside of metal edge to outside of metal edge at the reference stance).
In terms of going from traditional camber to the Ripsaw Rocker on the PT2, it will take a little getting used to at first, but the Ripsaw rocker is more camber than it is rocker, so I don’t think it will take long. It will be mostly getting used to the rocker that’s between the feet, which might feel a little strange at first, if you’re not used to it being there. But there’s still camber under your feet and up to the contact points (with small flat sections just before the contact points), like there would be on a trad camber board. It’s hard for me to say because I ride a lot of different profiles all the time, and I find it quick to adjust, but I don’t think it would take too long.
Hi Nate, I’m trying to decided between this and the shaper twin. Do you have any advice between the two? I’m working on my switch game and other than that I’m a mid to high level intermadiate rider. I’m 46 years old so I stay away from the park and my freestyle is pretty much side hits into 180s and buttering around abit. When I get the urge I like to press on the gas pedal and cruise. My boot is a 11 and I’m 5’9 200lbs, so I’m torn between the 156 shaper twin or the 160 PTT, 155X or 158X.
Thanks, J
Hi Justin
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Shaper Twin, so I can’t say much there, but based on specs, I’d say that the PT2 would be a much better board for riding switch. The Shaper Twin is called a twin but it’s really far from it. You are centered on the effective edge, so I’d say it rides switch better than most tapered directional snowboards, but it’s still a tapered directional board, so never going to feel as natural switch than a true twin or asym twin (IMO).
So if you’re looking for the best switch riding option, then the PT2 is going to be the best, IMO. But if you just want something that’s doable riding switch, then I think the Shaper Twin remains an option.
Based on what I see others saying and on the specs, I’d say that the Shaper Twin is a slightly more easy going ride, with the PT2 being a little more aggressive. More of a playful surfy feel on the Shaper Twin I would say. For powder, even though it’s centered the Shaper Twin is likely a notch or two up vs the PT2, with it’s tapered tail, long nose and more rocker in the profile (that’s if you see powder). Landing and taking off switch for 180s, I would prefer the PT2, based on the specs of the Shaper Twin.
Size-wise, for the PT2, I would be weighing up between the 155X and 158X. For this particular board I think 160 is getting too long for you, and pushing it for being too narrow width-wise too. I would predict the inserts on the 160 to be around 262mm wide, which is narrower than I would normally recommend for 11s. Some wides can be too wide for 11s, but in the case of the PT2 155X and 158X I think they would be good widths for 11s.
Between those two sizes, the advantages of going 155X would be, IMO, better for spins and freestyle in general, more maneuverability at slow speeds and better in trees, if that’s somewhere you go, and be more playful feeling in general. The 158X would float better in powder and be more stable at higher speeds.
For the Shaper Twin, it’s harder to say, having not ridden it, but I think the 156 would probably be your best bet, with the 159 also being an option.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks so much for this review – really helpful!! I am currently riding on a Burton Ripcord (162w) snowboard which is ok, but not perfect. Last year I tried the Nitro Team Gulwing and absolutely loved it!! Based on that I love riding on the Team Gulwing one, would you recommend me this board or something else??
If you do recommend me this board, which size would you suggest? I am 188cm, 100kg and got a shoe size of 45/46 eur
Hi Daniil
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think you would like this is, if you liked the Team Gullwing. It has a hybrid rocker profile, the same as the Team Gullwing – and a similar flex – the PT2 subtly softer.
They’re certainly not the same board and there are a few differences, but I think if you liked the Team Gullwing you’ll like this (any reason why you’re not looking at getting the Team Gullwing?). The Team Gullwing certainly better in powder though, IMO, so that’s one thing to consider.
Size-wise, I think the 164X would be the best size for you, for this board. You could also ride the 161X, that’s definitely an option – and if you think you would prefer a slightly shorter ride, then that would work too, but I would be leaning towards 161X for you, overall. However, if you do a lot of freestyle type riding, then the 161X becomes more appealing.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the reply Nate! Really helpful.
A lot of people suggested me the Proto Type two and I just want a board which I’ll be able to use for the next few years so I hope that I’ll enjoy the PT2 :D.
I also talked to the customer support team of Never Summer and they recommended me the 158w. I will be doing about 70% piste, 20% off piste and about 10% messing around. Do you think the 158w will be fine or should I go for the 161w?
Hi Daniil
I would definitely go 161X over the 158X for your specs. I would be debating between 161X and 164X. Personally I think the 158X is going to be too short for you.
Hello Nate,
Not sure if I read what you wrote wrong, but is no difference between the 2016 and 2019 proto type two models?.. Just the graphic? Is that correct?
Thanks,
Todd
Hi Todd
Thanks for your message.
The 2017 (2016-17) model, was the first year the Proto Type Two came out. It was an evolution of the Proto HD, which had it’s last model as the 2016 (2015-15) model.
As far as I can tell every iteration of the PT2 so far (2017, 2018, 2019) are the same, except for the graphic. The specs all look the same, and it’s felt the same to ride. The 2020 model even looks unchanged (apart from a different top sheet).
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Great website and really appreciate your honest reviews.
I currently ride a 154 Burton Amplifier and unfortunately unable to demo prototype 2, is there a significant difference? Worth upgrading?
If so, what size recommend, 152 or 154? I’m an intermediate rider, 173cm tall, weight around 150 lbs (without gear) and wear a size US9.5 boot. I mainly ride groomers and would like a board that can carve well as being able to hit a few natural kickers and maybe eventually perform some flatland freestyle moves. Also are they any other boards you would recommend?
Thanks in advance,
Henry
Hi Henry
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing, I think the PT2 would be a good fit for what you’re trying to achieve. I think the biggest advantage over the Amplifier, IMO, would be when it comes to carving. It’s a considerably better carver in my opinion. Also better stability at speed and more pop, IMO. The Amplifier is just lacking some camber for carving and some stiffness for stability at speed. You would loose a little in terms of jibbing, but that’s about the only thing I would say you would miss changing from Amplifier to PT2, as well as some mellowness. The PT2 a little more aggressive (which can be a good thing or bad thing, depending on what you’re after).
Size-wise, I think 154 is your best bet. You could certainly ride the 152 though. 152 would be easier for learning your flatland freestyle tricks, but the 154 better for carving and speed. I think you would be fine on the 152 width-wise, so long as you were riding something like +15-15 or similar in terms of binding angles (which I would recommend with an asym like the PT2 anyway). But yeah leaning towards 154, but 152 wouldn’t be a bad choice and it would depend on what you valued more between freestyle and carving.
For some other options that would also fit into what you’re describing, check out:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate, Thank you for your advice, I really appreciate it.
Keep up the good work.
Cheers
You’re very welcome Henry. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate,
First of all, great advice here. I’ve been reading through some of your posts to see if there’s someone who fits the same size as me, but even though some are close I decided to post anyway.
This year I decided to upgrade my board as a present to myself and PT2 is going to be the one. I’m coming from a GNU Metal Guru 155 which had been my one and only board so far. I basically ride groomers, some switch and the occasional powder. I do like some playfulness, but you’re not going to find me in the park. Once my skill improves further I might take on the occasional jump, but nothing fancy.
I’m 6’1″, 160 ~ 165 lbs-ish (no gear), size 11 boots (small form factor) and would call myself a advanced beginner (hit 40 mph with my gnu and can handle it well). So far I’d like to improve my carves and want a board that I can manoeuvre with easily. I like responsiveness and basically am less fond of sketchiness at speed. With my stats I would say 154 or 157. I know the PT2 rides big and that even the 154 has a bigger effective edge then my current board. The difference probably is marginal, but it is a big investment…
What are your thoughts on this?
Thanks for your time!
T.
Hi Theo
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning towards the 157 for you. The 154 is certainly doable, but I think you’ll appreciate the extra stability at speed of the 57. And when you do get in powder, you’ll appreciate it to. The 54 would be better for maneuverability, so that’s something to think about, but I think overall, the 57 would be your best bet.
The other thing, is that the 54 is going to be pushing it in terms of width (even with low profile boots and +15/-15 angles – assuming you will ride it with similar angles to that). The 157 is only marginally wider but it gives you a little more leeway. The 57 is still on the limit in terms of width. It think you’d probably be fine though, since you have low profile boots, and assuming you ride something similar to +15/-15 angles (which is recommended with the PT2 as it’s an asym board).
The 155X is also an option, and might be the better bet, if you like to get low on your carves or think you’d like to start getting more up on your edge with your carving. It would give you that bit more leeway in terms of width, and reduce the risk of any drag.
154, 155X and 157 are all option, but I would be leaning towards 157 or 155X for you.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
Thx for the advice! It means a lot to hear from someone with some ‘on-snow-experience’ with the board.
Your assumption about my stance is correct; I do ride with +15/-15 angles. My current board has a 253mm waist and as far as I can recall I never had heel or toe drag. (Or to caught up in the moment to notice :o)) So the few mm’s difference should be fine imo.
I reckon the 154 has more grip since I can put more weight on the edge and, since I’m still an intermediate (level 4 progressing into 5 based on your rating), I’m quite anxious not to oversize and maybe even lose control. My main concern though is the fact that I want to board to work in softer conditions aswell. I know it’s only 3 cm’s between the 154 and 157, and even though the 154 is shorter than my old board, I’m still increasing in effective edge (1160 -> 1190 (154)) making it ride like a 158 in terms of edge when I take the form factor of my old board into account. I did have trouble keeping my gnu ‘locked-in’, but that’s probably the full rocker shape.
Do you reckon the size difference between a 154 and 157 (I don’t want to go wide if not needed) is noticeable enough to to feel it right away? Or, if I would buy a 154 to stay on the safe side, I would wished I was on a 157 after I get used to it? What’s the difference in feel between one ‘board size’ anyway?
I know it’s a matter of feeling, but I’m not planning on buying a board each year. I’m simply curious what your experience with the board, and the people riding it around you, have taught you through the past few years.
Thanks again!
T.
Hi Theo
Certainly, the 154 would give you more in terms carving and stability at speed over the 155 GNU Metal Gnuru, largely because of that effective edge and more camber. But in terms of powder the 155 Gnuru is likely a little better there than the 154 PT2. To gain any improvement in powder, the 157 would be necessary, IMO.
3cm does make a noticeable difference. I wouldn’t say it’s a huge difference, but it’s certainly noticeable. I haven’t ridden the PT2 in different sizes (always the 157), but I have ridden other boards of different sizes, one after the other, and even 2cm is noticeable, even if subtle.
You do loose a little in terms of maneuverability going longer, but it’s also something that would last you longer. Just to be annoying though 😉 – the 154 wouldn’t be a bad choice either, and it’s a pretty close call, but I would still be leaning towards 157.
Nate,
I totally get what you’re saying. Funny thing is that I also spoke to people who describe exactly the same theory, but are leaning towards the 154 instead and are actually quite reluctant to recommend the 157 to me. I think that describes perfectly how close the call is.
I think I’ll go for the 154 so I can progress into carving more easily, without gaining an immense amount of increase in effective edge all at once. I reckon that, even though technically I can’t compare my gnu to the PT2, I can progress more easily because of the almost similar board size. I think the smaller board size of the 154 (compared to the 157) might even help me cut through moguls more easily on those ‘end-of-the-day-groomers’, since I have more pressure on the edges. And besides that… the increase in manoeuvrability might make ‘split second saves’ easier when I am caught off balance.
I still want to use the PT2 for pow, but since it’s ‘merely’ an OK pow board that’s fine. I’ll simply set back my bindings a little on deep pow days and use it in a directional way. As long as I can survive in pow, and just make some fun in the vicinity of the pistes, I’m cool with it. I reckon if I ever attend a full back country tour I would rather be on another board anyway. Curse this one ‘weakness’ of the PT2! (:-P)
I really hope the PT2 lives up to the expectations, can’t wait to try it out!
Thanks again and I think you’re doing some quite commendable stuff here! (I read through the other sections of the site aswell.) I really like the fact that you elaborate about the advice you’re giving.
T.
You’re very welcome Theo.
Yeah, definitely a close call, and if you’re OK with having to work a little harder in pow, then 154 all good.
Hope you have an awesome season and let me know what you think of the PT2, once you’ve had a chance to get it on snow (if you think of it at the time).
Nate,
Finally got the chance to try the board out. The grip is amazing and I really like the responsiveness. I can really feel that the edges are further out towards the tips and I really like that. It’s really fun to apply pressure on the front foot and simply feel the board grip in and carry you across the hill. I still have a lot to learn, but hey… I feel really confident on this board.
I had a lot of fresh snow around me and the float indeed isn’t great. Low speed equals sinking, but I guess that’s even true for more dedicated pow boards. It was doable but indeed nothing special. Only lackluster for me was the severe lack of ‘gliding’ on the more flat area’s. I felt like the board was on sandpaper or something. I reckon the factory wax is to blame for this, but I can’t shake the feeling that a somewhat larger board would help too. Although, like you said, the differences in size are noticeable but not THAT noticeable.
Haven’t gotten the chance to push the board above 30 mph (my own skill, combined with bad weather), but it really stays on edge. (Just don’t flat base it while going fast… but that’s true for all boards.)
Main thing to learn for me is to really focus on putting pressure on my front foot. Even though the board let’s you ride it ‘lazy’, you really do need it on the steeper runs and through moguls.
So yeah… mainly a good experience. Not disappointing at all even though I do have some remarks as listed above. 😉
T.
Hi Theo
Thanks for the update! Glad you’re enjoying the board and awesome that you feel really confident on it.
Certainly a longer board will glide better – but a good wax job can really help there too. Will be interesting to see how much that improves with a good wax job, but yeah longer does help there for sure – but going 157 would only be a subtle improvement there, I would imagine. Hopefully a good wax helps there.
Hi Nate!
Which would be better size for me 157 or 160? I am 6’0 (182 cm)tall and weight around 200lbs (90kg). Boot size 9.5. Current board DC Ply 159. I am intermediate/advanced rider and I mainly ride groomers and treelines. Love to ride switch and do ground tricks. What size do you recommend?
Hey
Usually I would say definitely go 160 for your specs. But for this board, it’s a weigh up between 157 and 160. I would say around 162 for you, for an all-mountain board, but as an all-mountain-freestyle board, I like to ride a little shorter than I would for an all-mountain board. That, plus the fact that the PT2 (as a lot of all-mtn-freestyle tend to do) has a lot of effective edge, compared to overall length, that allows you to go a little shorter.
At 157, the PT2 has an effective edge of 122cm, which is as long or longer than a lot of all-mountain boards around 160, 161. The DC Ply 159 has an effective edge of 118cm, so you would be increasing effective edge, even on the 157.
Also, given that you like to ride trees, it’s nice to go a little shorter, for more maneuverability. That said, going shorter also sacrifices a little in terms of stability at speed and float in powder.
I like the 157 (6’0, 185lbs, size 10 boots). And wouldn’t personally go 160. But with slightly different specs, the 160 becomes more doable for you. Both would certainly work, but I would be leaning towards 157, for this board for you, but only just.
Hope this helps with your decision
What’s up Nate, Found the PT2 & everyone seems to love it, think it’s the one for me hopefully. Read through all the comments and 158X seems to be the best for me. I’m 5’11 190 with size 12 Boots. I’m intermediate skill I’m trying to learn riding switch & how to butter is what I am trying to teach myself now. I can hit some jumps also not the monsters, and cruising n carving always enjoyed but kind of trying to learn more fs stuff now I’ve never had a proper setup and I taught myself on a standard width 155 board with flow bindings so This next setup will be a real treat for me to not be dragging. Planning to pair this board with union falcor bindings and either tactical adv’s or burton ion’s
Hi Nixon
I agree that the 158X would be the best size for you, from what you’re describing. Will take a bit of getting used to sizing up from regular width 155, but once you’re used to it I think you’ll really appreciate it.
Union Falcor would certainly work with this board, but I would also consider the Strata. I would go Tactical ADV over Ion. Just because it’s a slightly better flex match – and the Ion doesn’t have an articulated cuff, which is something I like to have for more freestyle type riding. If you’d prefer Burton boots, then there are others that I think would be a better match for the PT2 (SLX, Imperial, Swath).
Hope this helps
Hi, Nate! Thanks for all of the great info and for taking the time to help. I am almost 5’10” tall and weigh 185 lb. and I wear size 10 boots. I currently ride a K2 Recon 157 from about 15 years ago. My bindings are about as old as well and I’ve replaced too many mismatched straps. I’m an intermediate/advanced rider and am comfortable carving and bombing down in steeps both groomed and ungroomed and also have fun above the treeline. I’m more intermediate in trees/snakes and am an intermediate jibber/butterer. I am ok in the park hitting moderate to small jumps but haven’t tried boxes or rails. This board 2019 stands out to my style and would also allow me to get better int he park now that my kid wants to go all the time.
I’m not sure which length to get for this board and if I need a wide or not.
What do you recommend?
Hi Jesse
Thanks for your message.
For the PT2, I would go for the 157 for you. With 10s I wouldn’t go wide for this board. Especially given that riding this with a duck stance is recommended, as it’s an asym board.
So yeah definitely 157, IMO.
Hope this helps
hi , i’m thinking wich size is right for me . I’m 6″1 (1.86) and weight 176 lbs (80) have a 10.5 K2 ashen boots ,and plan to put on this board an union strata L pairs of bindings, i like speed ,carving and some jumps ,and want to learn switch riding more than park and flat trick’s . I ‘m pullin the trigger on the 158x to totally avoid the toe drag but maybe i’m oversizing too much and a 157 board can suite my specs better ,what did you think about ?
thanks teo.
Hi Teo
Thanks for your message.
You’d be close on the 157, but there’s certainly a risk there for some toe drag. The 157 Proto Type Two measures 260mm across the inserts, at the reference point. That’s pretty typical of board that length. With low profile 10s, and at +15/-15 I had no issues but with 10.5 K2s (which in my experience aren’t very low profile) it could be risky. I would be weighing up the 155X and the 158X, to be on the safe side. And I’d be leaning towards 158X for you, largely because you mention you like speed and carving. But you could certainly ride the 155X too, if going shorter was something that interested you. You might be OK on the 157, but it would be risky, IMO, with K2 10.5s.
Hope this helps
What are the biggest difference between this and the salomon assassin?
Hi Raul
Thanks for your message.
There are a few main differences.
1. The Assassin has a different camber profile, which is essentially hybrid camber (rocker-camber-rocker) but it also has a flat section between the feet. The PT2 has a Hybrid Rocker (Camber-rocker-camber) profile.
2. The Assassin has a directional twin shape (slightly longer nose than tail), the Proto Type Two has a true twin shape.
3. The PT2 has an assymetrical shape, the Assassin doesn’t.
4. The Assassin is maybe just a touch stiffer, though they’re very similar flex-wise. I’d say 5.5/10 for Assassin and 5/10 for PT2.
5. A few other things like different side cuts, effective edge per length, etc. The Proto Type Two having more effective edge per length.
In a perforamnce sense, from my experience I would say:
1. The Assassin is better in powder (3/5 vs 2/5)
2. The PT2 is a little better in terms of carving (4/5 vs 3.5/5)
They are both what I would call all-mountain-freestyle boards, but they do have a different feel and different strengths and weaknesses.
Hope this gives you more to go off.
Hi Nate, I’m 5′ 7″ and weight 164 pounds with a size 8 boot. What size board do you think would be best for me? I mainly ride all mountain with a little bit of freestyle. Thanks.
Hi Rhys
Thanks for your message.
For your specs/style, for the Proto Type Two, I would go for the 154. If you were more freestyle focused I think the 152 would also be an option, but I think your best bet is 154.
Hope this helps
That’s great, thanks for the advice!
One other question sorry, do you think the Union Strata Binding would go well with this board? If not what would you recommend?
Thanks again,
Rhys
Hi Rhys
I think the Strata would be a good match for the Proto Type Two. Something with either a 5/10 or 6/10 match would work best with the PT2, IMO. The Strata is a 6/10 (in my opinion), so it’s a good flex match and otherwise a good quality binding. The other thing is, I like to ride bindings with good board feel, especially if you’re going to be doing some freestyle. The Strata has great board feel too. I think the Strata would be a good match, but if you wanted to check out some other potential options, check out:
>>Top 5 All Freestyle Bindings
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I am 5”9’ and weight 172lbs with a size 8.5 boot. What size board do you think would be best for me? Thank you.
Hi Lee
Thanks for your message.
I’d say it’s between the 157 and 154 and I would be leaning towards the 154 for you, for this board. You could certainly ride a 157 but this is the kind of board you can ride a little shorter. That, and the 157 is getting on the wide side for 8.5s.
So, whilst 157 is a length that could work for your specs, I think for this board the 154 is the better option.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Awesome reviews, very helpful. Your articles on sizing are also very informative and well researched, thank you for publishing this info.
I was wondering if you could help me with sizing? I’m 185cm, 85kg and size 11 boots (most of my shoes are actually 10.5, but it depends on the brand).
I’m torn between the PT2 160 or the 158X. My current board is a 2017 Custom 158W (old school camber). I’m an intermediate rider who’d like to learn to ride switch and do butters too, but I don’t want to sacrifice too much speed / carving. With the Custom, it’s awesome for carving, however, even if I moved the bindings into a central duck stance, I still found it very difficult to do butters and pretty much impossible to ride switch. I also lost stability and edge grip with no real benefits, so I moved the bindings back to reference. That’s why I’m interested in the Proto Type Two, I’d like to carve and power down the mountain, but also do some ground tricks and ride switch. I’m not really interested in the park or doing big jumps, although maybe some small jumps and ollies, when I feel more confident.
Which size do you think I should choose?
Many Thanks,
Skyler
Hi Skyler
Thanks for your message.
Sounds like the PT2 would be a great option for what you’re describing.
Size-wise, it’s a tough call. The 160 is really at your minimum in terms of width. Assuming you ride with +15/-15 angles (which is recommended on the PT2 as it’s asym), and your boots don’t have a super long outersole, then I think you would just get on the 160 in terms of width, but no guarantees there wouldn’t be some drag issues on hard carves.
I do like 158 in terms of length for you, for this particular board, which makes the 158X appealing. The only debate there is whether it’s a little too wide. But I think it’s within a good range. It’s likely to be around 271mm at the inserts (based on measuring the 157) and that would be plenty but not too much. The 160 would be 262mm at the inserts. Burton Custom 2017 I would say roughly 269mm.
So, overall, I think the 158X is the best option. It’s the better length for you for this board, IMO and it’s safer in terms of width. The 160 might be pushing it for being too narrow.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
Thanks for the advice! I think I will go for the 158X, it seems the right thing to do. I was worried it might be a touch too wide, but you’ve helped to give me a better idea what to expect.
Cheers,
Skyler
You’re very welcome Skyler. Hope you have a great season this winter!
Hey Nate,
I am currently stuck between the 155x and the 158x for the Never Summer PT2. I am 6’0” tall, weigh 195 lbs, and wear a size 11 boot. I would consider myself an intermediate to advanced rider. The type of riding I do includes all-mountain freestyle, trees, powder, and park. I’m attracted to the 155x for the fact that it would be more playful and easier to spin and do tricks on but I’m not sure if the 158x would be better considering my weight? I would really appreciate it if you could give me some advice on which is the better option for me. Thanks.
Hi Collin
Thanks for your message.
Even though this is a board that I like to size down a little for, I think the 158X is already sizing down a bit for you, so I think that would be the better overall size. Now, if you’re used to riding something closer to a 155, then I would reconsider that, but overall I think you’ll be better off with the 158X. The 155X would be better in trees and for park, but for carving and speed I think you would appreciate the 158X.
One thing to consider is that the 155X does have a surface area of more than the 157, so for powder it’s probably going to be ok for you, but again, the 158X would still be better in powder. If you don’t really like to bomb or do deep carves that much, then the 155X is certainly doable, but if you do, then I would be leaning towards the 158X.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
So my current board is a Ride Agenda Wide board. It is size 157 wide and has a 261mm waist width. The effective edge is also 1228mm. Based on these measurements, would the 158x definitely be the better size? Thanks!
Hi Collin
Yeah I think that does add to the case for the 158X, given that you would be dropping a fair bit of effective edge on the 155X.
Hey Nate,
I really appreciate all the feedback you have been giving me. I have one last question for you though! I have basically come down to either the 155x NS proto type 2 or the 157x NS funslinger. Both of these boards are very appealing considering the type of riding I’m planning on doing. I know the funslinger is a little softer and that the PT2 is a little stiffer and more aggressive. But, out of these two boards and sizes, which would you suggest would be the most appropriate and fun for me? Thank you so much.
Hi Collin
That’s a tough one. The 157X Funslinger is a more appropriate size, IMO. However, even being a little longer, it would still fall behind the 155X when it comes to carving and even more so in terms of stability at speed. If neither of those things are a big concern, then the Funslinger 157X might be the better bet. However, if you like to charge a bit at times, then the 155X PT2 is still going to better than the 157X Funslinger, IMO. It’s still not going to be a bomber at that size for you, but would be a little better.
The Funslinger is better on jibs, IMO, and is more buttery. So that’s something else to consider if you spend significant time doing that.
Hi Nate,
I am looking to get the Proto type 2 and needed some help with sizing. I am 5”10’ and weight 200lbs with a size 9 boot. What size board do you think would be best for me? I will be getting the burton stun gun for powder days and would like this board to be my everyday. I Like charging hard down the mountain, but trees are my favorite. I would like to progress with my switch riding and jumping. I was thinking about the 157 but am worried I am too heavy for it and I will have trouble keeping my speed. My concern with the 160 is that it won’t be as playful as I would like. Any help is really appreciated!
Hi Kian
Thanks for your message.
In my opinion the 157 would be the best for you for this board, given everything that you’ve mentioned.
Yes, the weight recommendations for the 157 are up to 175lbs but honestly those are very rough guidelines in my opinion (and 175lbs is a pretty conservative estimate for that board – I’m 6’0″ and 185lbs and the 157 is my size of choice for this board).
Taking everything else into account (just using weight isn’t very accurate, IMO) including height, boot size, the fact that you will have a different board for powder, that you’ll be riding the trees a lot, and that you want to progress with your jumping and switch, the 157 would be a better choice, IMO, compared to the 160.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for all your reviews and its awesome that you respond to all the comments.
I’m coming up on my third season, and wanted to get your advice on purchasing a new board. I’m 6’2, 185lbs, and have a size 11 US boot size and up until now I have been borrowing my dad’s board, no clue what size it is. I’d consider myself intermediate, but don’t really touch the park much, probably 90% groomers and trees, 10% park. I’m considering either the West or the Type Two. I haven’t ridden switch much, but I’d like to get better at it, so I’d probably move my stance to +15/-15 (currently +15/0). Right now I’m leaning toward the Type Two at 160 or possibly 157 or 158X. If you have any feedback I’d really appreciate it.
Thanks,
Brandon
Hey Brandon
Thanks for your message.
With the Type Two, I’d recommend moving your stance to +15/-15 anyway – just cause it’s an asym board, they tend to ride better with a mirror stance like that anyway. Not 100% crucial but a good idea. If you do go that way, then the 160 would work with your boots, IMO. The 157 would likely be ok, but would definitely be pushing it for being too narrow with 11s. The 158X would also work though for your boot size.
In terms of length, I would say for this board you could go either way between the 157 and 160, but since the 157 would be pushing it in terms of width, I would say the 160 or the 158X would be better. If I had to choose I’d say go 158X, but the 160 would also work.
If you went West, then the 159 would work, if you stuck with those +15/-15 angles, but since that’s not asym and you might want to play with your angles more on that board, if you went that way, then I would say going wide would be better. And also, you can ride this board a bit longer, so I would say the 160X rather than the 157X for you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
Thanks for putting up such great reviews all the time. Appreciate your insight.
Just wanted to ask about prototype 2 sizing (I know your probably sick of this sorry). I’m tossing it between 154 and 157 as it seems the effective edge is relatively long. I weigh 174lbs (79kg), wear size 9.5 burton AMB boots and looking to do about 70% mountain riding and 30% park probably intermediate rider. Looking to improve carving but also butter/natural hits and work on spins. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions for sizing!
Thanks for your time
Eric
He Eric
Thanks for your message.
Based on your weight, ability and your riding preferences I would say the 157 is likely the best bet. But, IMO, height also comes into it (not as important a factor as weight these days but still influences length choice, IMO, largely due to the fact that height influences your stance width), so if you can let me know your height as well, I can give you a more qualified opinion.
The 154 is still doable at that weight for you, IMO. But given that you have that 70% Mountain, 30% Park preference I would say that 157 is the best option, but again, I could change my mind on that depending on height.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply! My height is 179cm which is between 5’10”-5’11”.
Thanks for the reply Nate! My height is 179cm which is between 5’10” – 5’11”. I use duck stance +12/-12 binding angles usually.
Hi Eric
Thanks for the extra info. Yeah I would say that 157 would be my recommendation for you, based on all the factors. Not like you couldn’t ride the 154, but I think the 157 would be the best option.
Alright sounds good. Thanks for the awesome advice Nate!
You’re very welcome Eric.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the great review and the effort and time you’ve put into this site!
I’m coming up on my second season and looking to purchase a true all-mountain daily driver that I can be more playful with as I learn jumps, carving, and speed. I’m fairly novice but have progressed through the fundamentals enough to feel comfortable riding blues. I spend most of my time on groomers but want to dedicate some time to the park and hitting natural features on the mountain. My internal debate is between the TT or the West. With the West I know the setback allows for more float in powder, but I will eventually purchase a quiver for that so I’m not sure if that disqualifies it. To add, I will be pairing the board with Burton Cartels (+15/-15 has been ideal for me), and will be riding in CO, UT, and minimally on the east coast. Also, I’m unsure if the 154 would be a little small for me; 5’11 and fluctuate between 160-170 lbs.
Hi Thomas
Thanks for your message.
The West is the slightly more versatile option – but that said the TT is pretty versatile, just that it’s not great in powder – that’s the biggest area of difference, IMO. The West is better in powder. If you think you could get by on the TT in powder in the meantime before you buy your more powder oriented board, then the TT would be a good choice for what you’re describing, in my opinion. You can certainly still ride the TT in powder (as you can any board) but it’s just going to be harder work and a lot easier to sink the nose in deeper snow.
Both would certainly do the job for what you’re describing but I would be leaning towards TT, mainly as you are considering getting a more powder specific board at some stage.
In terms of size, it’s a touch call between the 154 and 157 for the PT2 (assuming you don’t need a wide). Normally I would certainly say around 157 for your specs/ability, but with the PT2, you can go a little shorter, so the 154 comes into play. I would say the pros and cons would be:
~ 157 would be better at speed and give you better float in powder, more stable in terms of approach and landings for big jumps
~ The 154 would be better for jibs, trees, more agile at slower speeds, better for spins, likely easier for learning small jumps
If you went with the West, the 156 would be the best option for you, IMO.
To note the 154 PT2 has an effective edge of 1190 and the 156 West has an effective edge of 1200 (so not that much more). The 157 PT2 has a 1220 effective edge (which is quite long for a 157).
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I was reading all the comments and I see you’ve given really great advice to everyone. I’m a female rider and looking to by the PT2 as my first board. I consider myself an intermediate rider and like mostly like cruising down the mountain, but I want to start trying park. I’m 5′ 5.5″ (~166cm), 135 lbs, U.S. women shoe size 8. I originally wanted to get the 148 size, especially since I’m seeing better sale prices for that size. However, after reading your comments, it seems like it is better to get a smaller size. Do you think I should get the 148, or would the 145 be better?
Thank you very much for all your help!
Lori
Hi Loree
Thanks for your message. And apologies for the slow response – I have been on vacation recently, and demoing lots of gear, so I’m running a bit behind on replying to comments at the moment.
For some boards I’d say 148 would be a good option for you. For this particular board the 145 would be the better choice. You could still ride the 148 but I think you would enjoy the 145 more – and would be a better board for starting out in the park for sure.
Hope this helps with your decision.
I recently got 155X.. My boot size is 10. Do you think it is an overkill?
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message (and sorry for the delayed reply, have been on vacation)
With 10s, assuming you’re riding with +15/-15 binding angles (which are recommended for this board as it’s asymmetrical), then I think you certainly wouldn’t need to go wide for this board. Personally (and I ride 10s) I wouldn’t go wide for this board. I think the 154 or 157 would be better sizes (which one would depend on your height and weight) personally. If 155 is on the short side for you, then going wider but shorter is doable, but otherwise, I would personally go for a regular width, if I was you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Great review, very informative and helpful.
I’m 5’11, 180lbs, Intermediate Rider. Currently I’m on a 2011 Lib Tech TRS with C2BTX.
Rocking Burton Almighty in 10.5 US and Burton Malavita in medium.
Looking for an all mountain board that’s more playful/flexy and a better carver to add to the collection.
I’m looking to purchase a NS PT2, how would you compare the NS PT2 to the TRS C2BTX? Is the PT2 more aggressive and unforgiving because of the ripsaw profile? I’m guessing the ripsaw profile would be more comparable to Lib tech’s C3x profile.
Also, I used to wear Burton Ion boots in size 10, but switched to 10.5 Almighty because the 10s were a bit too tight. with the 10.5 I have a decent boot overhang on the TRS which has a 250mm waist width. I would say about 1 3/4″ to 2″ on both toe and heel side. I’m thinking of going with the 155x for the PT2 which has a 261mm waist width, do you think that would be too wide for my setup? My bindings are set to 15/15.
Thanks!
Tom
Hi Tom
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the current TRS, even though rated more mid-stiff, is more medium and very similar flex wise to the Proto Type Two. Also the C2X that the TRS now has is quite similar to the Ripsaw in terms of aggressiveness. The C3 is more aggressive than the Ripsaw in my opinion/experience. But the C2 BTX would be less aggressive than the C2X and Ripsaw. I haven’t ridden the 2011 model TRS so I can’t compare to that unfortunately.
Assuming that the 2011 model is stiffer flexing, then I would definitely say that the PT2 is softer flexing and a better carver. But the new TRS is also, I would say based on the specs (and the fact that it’s close to the PT2) likely a better carver than the 2011 model and I’m guessing a little flexier.
Some other options would be the GNU Rider’s Choice and the Capita Outerspace Living.
Length-wise, I think something around 157 for this type of board would be a good way to go for your specs.
In terms of width, with +15/-15 angles and Burton boots, I would say you should be able to get onto something around 250mm at the waist, but there a lot of factors involved – and if you are getting overhang of 1 3/4 to 2″, on both toe and heel side, then that sounds like way too much. And sounds like more than it should be for Burton 10.5s, at +15/-15, on a 250mm waist. Can you confirm that it’s 1 3/4″ to 2″ on both toe and heel – for a total of 3 1/2 to 4″ of overhang? Or is it total of 1 3/4″ to 2″?
Also, make sure that you’re measuring that overhang based on the metal edge (the edge at the base of the board). Check out the image below for an accurate way to measure for overhang. (the image below is measuring 2.6cm overhang on my heel side (roughly 1″).
If you’re still measuring that much overhang, then I think you’ll probably need to go for a wide for the PT2. And the 155X is probably your best bet, in that case. But I would be surprised if that was the case. I rode the PT2 157 again (2019 model) recently (with 10s) and definitely no overhang issues.
The only other thing would be if the 2011 TRS was particularly narrow at the inserts. I measured the latest TRS at the inserts and it was 258mm (which is on the narrow side compared to other boards with a 253mm waist for sure, but not super narrow). The 157 PT2 (2019) was 260mm at the inserts (252mm at the waist).
Hope this gives you more info to go off.
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the quick and detailed reply!
So the 2011 TRS I have currently actually has the C2 power BTX, I think it’s somewhere between the C2 BTX and the C2X. So it’s probably just a tad less aggressive than the PT2.
I was actually looking at the Rider’s Choice/TRS as well, but since I will be keeping my old TRS setup( TRS/Union Force-SL/Burton Ions) I wanted to get something that’s a little different. The idea was to hop on the TRS when it’s icy/hard packed(i’m on the East Coast so we get that a lot) and switch to the PT2 when there’s some soft stuff.
As far as the overhang, I was measuring from the bottom/metal edge. I was just kind of holding the board up and using the tape measure and eyeballing though, I was getting about 1 3/4″ to 2″ on both toe and heel for a combined 3.5″ to 4″ I will definitely try the method in your picture tonight when I get home and get a more accurate reading on the overhang.
So if the 157 PT2 has a 252 waist and measures 260 at the inserts, would it be safe to say the 155x PT2 with a 261 waist should come in around 269 at the inserts?
Thanks again!
Regards,
Tom
Hi Tom
Yeah the 155X will likely be roughly 269mm at the inserts, give or take a millimeter or two.
Let me know what you get with your new overhang measurements
Hey Nate,
Turns out I was way off on the overhang measurements, when I used your method I got about 1″/26mm on each toe and heel side for a combined overhang of 2″/52mm. I also measured the 2011 TRS which is 253 at the waist and 258 at the inserts. So it sounds like the 157 PT2 should be wide enough for me.
I’ll have to try out the PT2 to see how aggressive it is. If it is more aggressive than I’d like, would detuning the contact points toward the tip and tail help mellow it out?
Hi Tom
Glad your overhang measurements aren’t as bad as you thought. It did seem strange they would be that much.
I haven’t tried doing anything like detuning the contacting points, so I’m not sure how much difference that would make. Can’t really help there, sorry.
If you do find the PT2 too aggressive you could look at the Snowtrooper or Warlock, which are both very playful – and the Snowtrooper better for powder than the PT2 IMO – but they’re not as good for carving as the PT2 (and I think you were looking for a good carver right?). The YES Greats or YES Standard are also options worth looking at.
Hey Nate,
First of all I’d like to say thank you for all your awesome reviews and advice. Really appreciate the time and effort you put into everything.
I am 5’10 and 165lbs buying my first board. Snowboarding level is Intermediate and looking to learn and progress futher on the PT2. Which length do you think is most suitable for me.
Also, I am looking to purchase boots and bindings as well. What do you think is the perfect combination for the PT2.
Thank Nate!
Regards,
Hi Tom
Thanks for your message.
For you, and for this board, I think the 154 would be the best size. But if you can also let me know your boot size, to make sure it’s an appropriate width.
In terms of boots and bindings, something from one of the following lists, would be a good match, IMO.
>>Top 5 All Freestyle Bindings
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
But ideally a flex of 5/10 or 6/10 for both boots and bindings for this board. I have flex ratings for each of the bindings in those lists.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your reply.
Boot Size is US 9.5
So for example how is the combination of Burton Genesis and Burton Almighty?
How about Burton Ion or Burton Imperial?
Hi Tom
Thanks for the extra info. With 9.5s, the 154 would also be a good width for you, IMO.
Burton Gensis and Burton Almighty would be an awesome combo for this board, IMO.
The Ion and Imperial, not as good a match, IMO, just that they don’t have an articulating cuff – which is something that I personally really like to have for riding this type of board, particularly if you are going to be doing more freestyle type riding. The other thing is that the Imperial and Ion are stiffer boots, particularly the Ion, so they’re not as suitable in that respect either, or as suitable for an intermediate level. Imperial would be the slightly better option, in this particular case, out of those two – but the Almighty would be better again for this setup, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!,
Thx for all the great info! I just got a smoking deal on a Grassroots PT2 but the only size available was a 160. Im intermediate riding mostly groomers and Im 6′-0″ 200lbs with an 11.5 boot. Is this board to narrow? Thinking about sending it back??? Thx man!!
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
I measured the width at inserts on the 157 and it was 260mm at the inserts. Based on that the 160 is likely to be around 262mm at the inserts. IMO, that’s going to be quite risky for 11.5s, in terms of boot drag, IMO. For 11.5s, I would want to look at at least 270mm at the inserts, if I was you. I can usually get away with 255mm at the inserts with 10s – which would roughly translate to 270mm for 11s. You might get away with it – and I’ve had some people comment with larger boots that ride regular boards without issues. But then others who have boot drag issues. If it was me with 11.5s I would send it back. If you don’t really get up on your edges for carves or anything, there’s a chance you’ll get away with it, but there’s a reasonable chance for boot drag, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m 6’1 205lb and would like to have some pop from the board.
Based on feedback on the internet it leaves me with only one option of 164X.
Yet I’d like to go as small as possible. I do have my 164 powder board and am looking for a board for everything but powder. My skills are intermediate apart from riding switch, which I’m learning now.
Do you think I should go for 164X or is there a better option for me in proto two lineup?
Regards, Vol
My boot size is 10.5
Tganks
Hi Vol
I would actually go for the 160 (non-wide) if I was you (assuming your are talking US boot size).
I would put you on around a 163 for an all-mountain board, but for a an all-mountain freestyle board like this, I find it’s good to size down a bit – and especially so if you’re not going to be using it for powder – and if you already have a 164 for powder.
In terms of width, I think you will be fine on this board with 10.5s, assuming you adopt a +15/-15 stance on it. A mirror duck stance like this is recommended anyway, because of the asymmetry in the board. If you were to ride with a straight back foot, then it would probably be too narrow (but I wouldn’t recommend a straight back foot for this board anyway).
That’s my opinion anyway – if I had your specs (and your quiver), then I would ride the 160 for this board.
Hope this helps
Thank you.
I’m riding +15/-15 now, so I’m gooid with width.
And as I’ve been riding wife boards since I’ve started snowboarding, I really want to try non wide board for those quick turns etc.
Thank you once again 🙂
You’re very welcome Vol. Let me know how it goes for you once you get a chance to ride it
Whats up Nate!
Weight: 185lbs
Boot: 11.5 (maybe 11 depending on brand)
Like many others here am stuck between 155x or a 158x
I orginally wanted the funslinger, but now I’m leaning towards the proto just for added versatility.
I dont really ride park at all, I mainly just cruise down the mountain, but I do want a board that I can learn ground tricks, such as spinning and butters and just mess around and have fun,not looking to do any big jumps……. what do you think?
Also I plan on pairing this board with Burton Cartels
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, Cartels would pair well with this board, IMO.
In terms of size, I would say 158X most probably, based on weight. But height also comes into (IMO anyway). Weight is the most important factor, but height is one of the secondary considerations. Just going by weight, I would say 158X, but if you can let me know your height, I can give a more accurate opinion.
That said, you could definitely still ride the 155X (irregardless of height – as long as you’re not like 6’4″ or something) – it would just be a more playful ride – which would be good for learning your ground tricks – but would be less stable. There are pros and cons to both, but on balance, I would say 158X. But depending on height, I could change that opinion.
Hope this helps
Height: 5’10
Hey Nick
Thanks for the extra info.
That’s a tough one, I am probably leaning more towards the 155X than I was before, but both are definitely still options. For me, the ideal length for this board is 157 (I’m 6’0″ 185lbs size 10s). Since you’re very similar (except needing a wide) it’s tough to say – but because you are getting some extra width because of the wide option, that makes me slightly lean to 155X more so than before. The only reason I would be weary of going 155X if you were too tall is because of stance width, but you should be fine in terms of stance width on the 155X, if you decided to go with that.
But yeah same goes in terms of pros and cons – the shorter 155X will be more agile, better for leaning tricks, and better in the trees, but the 158X will be more stable at speed, more stable landings, better float in powder.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m 6’0, around 190Ibs and US 9,5 feet. is 157 cm proper for me?
I’m looking for All Mountain Freestyle snowboard, with proper carving but also easy to turn and have fun.
I was thinking about Gnu Space Case, Never Summer Prototype Two, Yes Standard or Yes The Greats.
I guess the most universal one is Never Summer?
Please advise.
Thanks,
Michael
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I would say something between 157 and 159 would be a good length range for you for an all-mountain-freestyle board like this. If you were going for an all-mountain board, then a little longer, and a freeride board a little longer again, but for this type of board, then yeah around that 157-159 range would be my recommendation. Of course, personal preference comes into it as well, but taking that aside, that’s what I would recommend.
So for the Proto Type Two 157 would be the best size for you, IMO.
For the other options you have there:
Space Case: 159 (but you could go 156 if you felt like you prefer smaller)
Greats: 158
Standard: 156 (this is a wider board and I wouldn’t go to the 159 in this case)
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Great review, I want to get this board but unsure whether I should go for the 161x or 164x. I’m 6’4, around 250lbs and us 13 feet. I’d class myself as a beginner/intermediate. Which do you think would be the best for for me?
Cheers
Hi Bruce
Thanks for your message.
I think you could ride the 164X and it’s a slightly safer width for size 13s too. But for this board I think I would be leaning towards the 161X. And you shouldn’t have any problems width-wise, and I think you’d get on the 161X too in terms of width, especially if you stuck with +15/-15 binding angles, which are recommended for this board (being an asymmetrical board).
You’ll be a little over the weight recommendations on the 161X but that would just make it feel softer than it is, which isn’t a bad thing for a beginner, as I’d usually recommend something softer than this for a beginner anyway.
But I think you’ll feel it a little softer on the 164X as well – and since you’re more beginner/intermediate, that size would work for you too, in that respect. But the effective edge is getting pretty long on the 164X.
I would put you on a 168, as an advanced rider. But sizing down as a more beginner/intermediate rider is a good idea – and sizing down for this board is a good idea too. So, for a lot of other boards, I would definitely say 164 over 161, but for this one I would be leaning towards 161 – mostly because you might be going a little shorter in terms of overall length, but in terms of actual effective edge, you’re on more like a 164, with the 161 anyway, if that makes sense. For example take something like the Jones Mountain Twin – which has an effective edge of 123.2cm for the 164W compared to the 127cm effective edge on the 164X Proto Type Two – and the 161X PT2 has a 124cm – which is still longer than the 164W mountain twin. That’s just one example but illustrates why I think going a little shorter for this board is a good idea.
I don’t think the 164X is completely wrong and it would be something you could ride, but on balance I would be learning towards 161X – especially at your level – if you were an advanced rider, then I’d be more inclined to say 164X.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
That’s great, thanks for the feedback. I have been using a Nitro team 162w for the last couple of weeks which I have got on with fairly well, how does one of these compare to that? I also looked at the t rice pro hp but from what I have read it seems as though it is more aimed at the advanced more aggressive rider?
Cheers
Hi Bruce
Yeah T.Rice Pro definitely quite an aggressive board – and more suitable to advanced riders who like to ride aggressively.
The Nitro Team is different to the Proto Type 2 in a couple of ways but similar in others:
1. It has a traditional camber profile (all camber) whereas the PT2 has a “Hybrid Rocker” which is rocker between the feet and camber from under the inserts (where the bindings go) to the tip and tail. Traditional camber is typically more catchy than other profiles, so not usually recommended for a beginner – but if you’ve been getting on well with that, then it’s probably not an issue for you. Unless it’s a “Nitro Team Gullwing” that you’ve been riding which has a different camber profile – more similar to the PT2 – a Hybrid Rocker profile. From what I can tell it’s got a little less camber than the PT2s version of the Hybrid Rocker though – so a little more mellow in that sense.
2. The PT2 is a mid-flexing board (5/10, IMO) and the Nitro sounds like it’s similar based on the specs
3. The 162W Team and Team Gullwing have a 270mm waist on them – the PT2 161X a 265mm waist – however the Team 162W has a 311mm tip/tail width with the 161X PT2 a 313mm tip/tail width. I imagine that the Nitro would still have a bit more width at the inserts but they’re probably not too dissimilar at the inserts. But this does illustrate a slightly different shape.
4. The Nitro Team (and Team Gullwing) have a 15mm setback stance – the Proto Type Two has a centered stance
5. The Nitro Team (and Team Gullwing) have a 121cm effective edge on the 162W compared to the 124cm effective edge on the 161X PT2 – effectively the PT2 has more blunted nose and tail compared to the Team.
6. The Team has a directional twin shape and the PT2 has an asymmetrical true twin shape.
Overall the Team is a little more all-mountain oriented, whereas the PT2 is all-mountain-freestyle. The Team will be a little better in powder and the Team Gullwing especially. The Team Gullwing is probably, just based on specs, the easiest to ride for a beginner/intermediate rider, but the PT2 is definitely doable for an intermediate level. The Team, just being full camber, is probably the most difficult ride – though if that is what you’ve been riding and you’re ok with it, then it’s probably fine.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hey Nate thanks fore the review got a few questions for you … I’m like 5’7” – 5’8” 190lbs also new to snowboarding I recently bought a 154cm skate banana under the advice of my friends and guy at local shop but I haven’t ridden it yet recently went to another shop and they carry the never summer Proto type 2 in 155x but I’m hesitant on returning skate banana and getting never summer because of experience level and the width of the never summer that they have …they few times I’ve gone I rode camber boards like a Burton descendant 155cm and I can do blue squares and black diamonds hit some jumps and boxes …I’m looking for all mountain freestyle to hit the park with also but nothing to advanced cause I’m still new …any advice is greatly appreciated
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
The Skate Banana is definitely an easier ride for a beginner. But it’s also going to feel looser than the Descendant (and the Proto Type Two). I’d say the Proto-Type 2 is still on the looser side of stable but the Skate Banana is looser again. The Descendant, with it’s mostly camber profile is more stable in that sense – but also more catchy.
The Proto Type Two, on the other hand, IMO, is a little on the stiffer side than both the Skate Banana and the Descendant. I’d say that the Descendant is probably the softest, but probably pretty similar to the Skate Banana – and whilst the Proto Type Two is still not that stiff, it’s a little stiffer. It also has a camber profile that’s not ideally suited to beginners – there’s quite a lot of camber in there – but since you’re used to that, that’s probably not as much of an issue. But maybe the extra stiffness combined with that.
The Skate Banana is basically all rocker – there’s some subtle camber tip and tail but it’s very subtle. The Proto Type Two on the other hand has rocker between the fit and camber tip and tail – same as the Skate Banana, but the rocker is a lot more subtle and the camber a lot more dominant.
Length-wise, I think you’re good with something around 154, 155 at your level.
In terms of width, it’s hard to say without knowing your boot size. But if you’re a good fit width-wise on the Skate Banana 154, then the Proto Type Two 155X is likely to be too wide for you.
Overall, I think the Skate Banana would be the better choice for a beginner and the size is better too, assuming you don’t have size 11 or up boots.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate I have size 9.5 boots yea I was concerned about the width being too wide I guess I’ll stick with the skate banana I already have thanks for the advice much appreciated
Hi David
You’re very welcome. Good call, I think the 155X PT2 would definitely be too wide.
Hey Nate I’m fairly new to snow boarding and picked up a 154 cm skate banana with cartel bindings from my local shop haven’t ridden it yet but went to a different shop that had the never summer Proto type 2 in 155x I’m not sure if I should return skate banana and get the never summer I’m hesitant because of my skill level ..also hesitant because of the width of the board…I’m looking for all mountain freestyle I can take in the park …I was demoing a Burton descendant before I bought skate banana so I learned on a camber board I guess …also im 5’7” -5’8” and 190lbs any help is appreciated thanks man
Hi Nate,
I’m 5’11 180 lbs, Size 11.5 Burton Photon Step-on boot and Large Burton step on bindings. I currently have two boards in my quiver. One is a 2015 Proto HDX 158 set at 12/-12 22.5″ and the other a 2017 Burton Flight Attendant 159W set at +3/+15 22.5″.
Most of my riding is all mountain (very little park though I might want to change that) and I do most of my riding in Mammoth. (23 days this season so far)
I’m looking to replace my old Proto HDX with a Proto Type Two.
If I get a 155X to be more maneuverable and agile am I going to regret not getting a 158X or if I get a 158X is that too similar to my old Proto HDX and my 159W Flight Attendant and the boards will be too similar?
Basically, I need an expert to reassure me in my decision between 155X and 158X, keeping in mind I will have two boards total in a locker on the mountain that should complement each other and be “all I need.”
Thank you
Hi Giles
It’s a tough call. I would be leaning towards the 155X, just for more of a contrast in terms of size. I mean, the 158W, even though similar in size to the 159W Flight Attendant, is still a very different board in a number of ways, so there’s definitely still two different boards, even if you went with that size.
And the Proto Type Two is different from the Proto HD in a couple of ways too, so you’d still be getting a different (and better, IMO) board going with the 158X but obviously the 155X will be more different.
The 155X will give you a bit more maneuverability and agility, especially at slower speeds, it will be better for trees, and better for spins and butters – and for jibs if you get more into the park.
The 158X will give you a bit more float in powder (but it’s not really a strong powder board anyway, IMO) and give more stability at speed.
But given that you’re going to have the 159W Flight Attendant, you’re going to have that board for those powder days and for bombing days, I would be leaning towards 155X. But 158X wouldn’t be wrong, I just think as part of a quiver the 155X would be a better fit.
Hope this helps with your decision.
You’ve helped a lot. My buddy was trying to convince me the 155X would be woefully short, but I was drawn towards it so I could have a board that’s agile and fun and stands in contrast to my 159W. I’m also planning on taking a weekend “park workshop” at Mammoth and the 155X is probably best suited for that.
I needed someone to reassure me that 155X is fine for someone my size and you’ve done that. I will go with the 155X.
If I love the board enough I could always add the 158X in a season or two.
Thank you.
You’re very welcome Giles.
Definitely not woefully short for you, IMO. If I had bigger boots, that’s the size I would go for in that quiver and I’m 6’0″ and 185lbs. And if you look at the effective edge, it’s actually longer than the Flight Attendant in the 156 in terms of effective edge. A 155 in the Flight Attendant would be short for you, for that board, and for the style of riding it’s suited to – but for the Proto Type Two it’s a good size IMO, especially given your quiver.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the review. I have decided on a Proto Type Two, but I am unsure of which size to get. I’ve been riding a 155 custom, and I feel that it is a little too short for me.
I am 5’6″, 180lbs, size 10 boot, and I do a bit of everything (all mountain, trees, small jumps, ice, powder). I am worried that a 157 would be too long, due to the longer edge, but 154 seems a bit too low for my weight.
Also, because of the camber under foot, I don’t know if having my stance width at the shortest setting will be good, due to it being at the edges of the camber, and not in the middle (which points me towards the smaller board).
Would you be able to offer any advice on this?
Thanks!
-Joe
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message.
Ordinarily I would probably say go down to the 154 for this board. I would put you on around 157 for an all-mountain board, but this is the kind of board I would usually recommend sizing down for – as you mentioned, it has a longer effective edge compared to the length. It’s also a little wider overall.
However, since you’re feeling like your 155 is too short, there’s an argument to go for the 157. Which year is your Custom 155? Just that as far as I can remember it’s come in 156 rather than 155. Either way, you’re probably looking at a similar effective edge on the 154 as you have with your 155, 156 – so going to the 157 you’ll be getting more effective edge (which it sounds like might want). You’ll also be getting more board, in terms of width (301mm tip and tail vs around 295mm for the Custom tip and tail) – though waist is a little narrower on the PT2 (252mm vs 253mm on the 156 Custom) – but overall slightly wider.
But you also make a good point about stance width. You would be more likely to fit the 154 better in that sense. Unfortunately Never Summer don’t publish reference stance info, so I’m not sure what the reference stances are for the different sizes – but I’m guessing you ride with around a 20″-21″ stance? Which is more likely to be closer to reference on the 154 than the 157. So this does tip it back to the 154 a bit. Not that you have to ride reference – but I personally do prefer reference as that, to me is where the board is designed to be at it’s best.
If you did go 154, you wouldn’t be going down in terms of effective edge, and you would be gaining a little in terms of width, even on the 154 (250mm waist is narrower but the 299mm tip and tail, give you more width overall). Since you would be over the weight recommendations, the 154 might feel ever so slightly softer flexing – but I don’t think it would be that noticeable – and those recommendations are only guidelines, not hard and fast rules, IMO.
Also, you should be fine on the 154 in terms of width. It has a 250mm waist which should be fine for 10s assuming you’re on something like +15/-15 or +12/-12 angles. And it’s recommended to be on a mirror duck stance with asym boards like this so that would be the best way to go anyway.
So yeah, I think there are pros and cons to each size for you, but I would be leaning towards 154 on balance.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
Thank you so much for your very detailed reply. It has helped me a bunch, and I really appreciate you taking the time to do that.
It looks like I’ll go with the 154. I’m sure that it’ll be awesome!
And I actually have a 2005 Custom 154 (sorry for the typo), and I have a stance of around 20″.
Take care, and all the best to you,
-Joe
You’re very welcome Joe.
Yeah, even more inclined to say 154 now, given that you’re Custom is a 154.
Hi nate,
Thank you for perfect review and info.
I read some comments here and I am considering to buy 152 one. But just to be sure … I’m 169 cm and 66 kg. What do you think?
Now I’m riding old (10+years) hand made board from unknown rider. It’s smaller and pretty unstable at high speeds. But it’s very playful. And when I ride with board flat on ground (don’t know if there is terminology for that) I tend to catch edge and fall quite often. Maybe it’s just because of me, but I can’t ride flat with this board.
Anyway PT2 has great reviews and I wanted to try it. I was also considering Capita DOA or GNU Riders/Space
Thanks for help!!!
Hi Jakub
Thanks for your message.
I think the 152 would be the best size for you for this board, for sure.
Without knowing any details about your current board, I couldn’t say why it doesn’t ride flat very well, but I didn’t have any trouble flat-basing the Proto Type Two, so it should be ok there.
The DOA is a slightly more aggressive board – it definitely shouldn’t have any problems flat basing – but it’s something that’s a little different, in terms of being a little more aggressive (in my opinion). But you can check out more in my review at the link below:
~ Capita DOA Review
The Rider’s Choice and Space Case have a little bit of a looser feel than the PT2, which sometimes makes them harder to flat base on, but still doable.
>>GNU Rider’s Choice Review
>>GNU Space Case Review
Hope this helps
Thanks for comment.
I’m still inclined more to PT2. Also was considering YES Greats.
Anyway I have 8,5 US (41 EU) size boots and know exactly nothing about bindings. What should I look for? I heard Unions are good and of course Genesis. But they seem to me too expensive.
And again, thank you so much for great help!
Oh and my current board has camber profile (what can I see)
Hi Jakub
Yeah a fully cambered board is very easy to catch an edge on, so it doesn’t surprise me there. The PT2 will be more forgiving in that sense for sure. As would the Greats.
In terms of bindings, for the PT2, I would look at the following lists. Usually I wouldn’t go softer than the board for bindings – but also not too much stiffer – so 5 or 6 in terms of flex would be best, IMO.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All Freestyle Bindings
Something like the Malavita would work well with the PT2 and is a little cheaper too. But the Cartels (cheaper again) would also do the job, with Burton – but something like the K2 Lien ATs or Flux DS are also a good match and are also around the price of the Cartels.
If you went Greats, then the 152 is also the size I would go with for you. And the same in terms of bindings applies there too.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, thanks for the great info! I have a few questions as I’m planning to purchase my first board(tired of rental fees).
I’m nowhere near advanced or expert but I can handle most of the blues easily and a few easy blacks in Colorado(Vail, Breck, Keystone, etc). I still get sketchy when the terrain gets steeper though. So I guess I’m intermediate.
I only get three or four days per year on the mountain and this will be my 5th year straight since my first attempt on a snow board so probably 15 times or so on a board. I’m goofy but I want to work on switch this year and start getting into a bit of the park. I’ll mainly stay on the groomers though as I like carving and running downhill but I want to try and get a little more tricky and switch there as well.
I’ve used a variety of basic rentals but they all seem soft and unstable at speed. I know I want a twin to work on switch and need something that will carve well down hill. From your review it seems the Proto Type Two is the board.
I was looking into the Proto Type Two, the Yes Basic, and the Saloman Assassin. This will be my first purchase and it seems most of the rental places don’t have these options so I’m sort of flying blind as I won’t really be able to try it out.
What do you suggest for a board? Also what size? I’ve mostly been on 158-163 range. I’m 6’2″, 185lbs. I have my own boots and bindings. Ride Lasso in a 10.5 and Burton Cartel medium bindings.
I was probably looking in the 160+ range again as I recall the shorter boards being wonky for me going downhill. I also recall some toe drag from last year but I can’t remember which board it was.
Should I look into wider boards(e.g. the Proto Type Two X) or just a regular board in the 160+ range?
Thanks for your reviews and I appreciate the info.
Oh, and my stance is generally 15/12 but I’ll probably go 15/15 to work on switch.
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
I think you’re on the right track looking at something all-mountain-freestyle based on what you’re describing and the PT2 is definitely a great option, IMO. The Assassin Pro is also a good option. Slightly stiffer than the PT2, but only by a little bit, in my experience. Both boards would suit what you’re describing well. The YES Basic would also work, but it’s not as stable at speed or as good for carving as the other two, IMO.
In terms of size, I would say around 162 is a good length for you, for an all-mountain board and at an advanced level. At an intermediate level it’s a good idea to go down a little from there, and also with an all-mountain-freestyle type board, coming down a little in length is also often a good idea. So, proabably 158 to 160 is a good way to go, IMO.
The PT2, due to quite a blunt tip and tail rides longer than the overall size suggests – e.g. the effective edge on the 157 of 122cm is often the kind of effective edge you would see on a 160+ all-mountain board. Just as an example from a Never Summer all-mountain board, the 157 PT2 has a 122cm effective edge and the West 159 has the same 122 effective edge.
The PT2 is also a little wider – e.g. it has tip/tail width of 301mm for the 157 – on the West you’d have to go up to the 162 to get to 300mm tip/tail. So despite the 252mm waist width on the PT2 it’s wide than that suggests. So because of this effective edge and extra width, I think the 157 would actually be a good size for you for this board. The 160 would also work but it will feel longer than the 160cm overall length suggests.
The width on either the 157 or 160 should be fine for 10.5s – especially Ride 10.5s (Ride tends to be low profile) – so long as you ride with that +15/-15 (or even +15/-12 would be fine but it is recommended to use a mirror duck stance (e.g. +15/-15, +12/-12) on an asym board like the PT2). Make sure when you set up your bindings that you have even heel and toe overhang – or if you can’t quite get it even, or if you feel like there’s too much, then a little more overhang on the heel than the toes is better than the other way around (much easier to drag toes than heels).
For the Assassin Pro – I think the 158 would be your best bet for that board. A 160 would work for the Assassin Pro – but the only 160 option id a wide option – and I think for Ride 10.5s with +15/-15, the width of the 160W is getting too wide. The Assassin Pro is also a little wider, in terms of tip/tail width (as all-mountain-freestyle boards tend to be) so you get that extra stability from the width there too. It doesn’t have the same kind of effective edge as the PT2 (119cm) but I think the 158 Assassin Pro would still work for you – and it’s a little stiffer too, which adds to stability at speed for sure.
Even though your rental boards might have felt a bit wobbly in the shorter sizes, I don’t think you’d get that with these boards at those sizes. I rode the PT2 157 and the Assassin Pro 158 and I loved those sizes (I’m 6’0, 185lbs, size 10 – so not exact specs, but similar). But if you are worried about that then you could go up to the 160 for the PT2. I wouldn’t go to the 160W for the Assassin Pro though – I just think that’s getting too wide.
Hope this helps with your decision.
Hi Nate,
I am 5’5″, 145-150 lbs, 8 boots, age 45. I threw the age in there because I like a damp board to help with the NW chunder and body. I am currently torn between the PT2 152 or Ripsaw 153 or West ??. I’m an advanced rider that is used to stiff board with a narrow waist. Looking for a board that can rail carves, playful and damp. I have a 156 Billy Goat for the steeps and powder. Here is a list of current board I have.
2018 Nitro Victoria 155 – fun, quick edge to edge but not very damp nor edge hold
2017 BPro 152 – just did not like this board, too quick edge to edge
2017 Assassin 153 – great board but seems to autobutter unless I make the stance super wide
2009 Billy Goat 156 – Awesome backcountry board but not playful on groomers
2007 Burton SW – Used to ride more park back then but still love to ride on groomers
Rode all boards with 2015 Cartels.
I was leaning towards the Ripsaw but have a feeling that it is too stiff.
Thank you!!
Hi Leeshen
Thanks for your message.
I would say go with the PT2. The main reason for that over the Ripsaw and the West, is that it sounds like you already have something stiffer (Billy Goat) and for riding backcountry and that you state that you’re looking for something more playful. The PT2 would be the bigger contrast to what you currently have (most similar to the Assassin but it could be the replacement for the Assassin). If you’re worried about it being too soft, then the Ripsaw is definitely an option, but as a compliment to the Billy Goat, I would say PT2. And in terms of dampness, the PT2, West and Ripsaw are pretty much the same in that department, so no advantage for one over the other – except that the Ripsaw perhaps feels less damp because of its stiffness.
In terms of size, I would go 152 (as you said you were looking at) – you already have a 156 for powder/backcountry so something in a more playful length is a good option. Also that’s about the size I would put you on anyway for your specs. It’s also the best suited size for your boot size.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate!!!
I ended purchasing a new 2017 NS PT2 154 monster edition for $300. Rode my friends 154 Proto HD for most of the day today and like it a lot. Little rough in powder but so much fun on groomers and side hits. Hopefully the PT2 154 isn’t too big.
Thanks again.
Hi Leeshen
Awesome! And great price on that too. If you liked the 154 Proto HD, then you shouldn’t have any issues with the PT2 154. I’d still say 152 would be the ideal size for you – in terms of fitting into your quiver, just as more of a contrast in terms of size – but the 154 isn’t a bad choice either, and for that price hard not to!
Hi, Nate!
Thanks so much for this website, you’re such a big help!
I’ve been due for an upgrade for a while now and think I’m going with the Proto Type 2.
I’m 5’5 and 145lbs, riding with boots of size 10 and L/XL Rome 390 Boss bindings (unless you recommend other bindings for this board).
According to Never Summer West’s size chart, I was going to buy the 157 because the 154 they say only fits up to a size 9 boot.
Reading through all the comments, however, you’ve been saying that the board runs a little big?
What size would you ultimately suggest? I love carving down the mountain and occasionally getting in some powder, but I’m hoping to improve on the park with this board.
Thank you so much!
Hi Rob
Thanks for your message.
For your specs and for this board, I would even say that the 152cm is more appropriate. I think the 157 is definitely going to be too long for you for this board. You could get away with the 154, for sure, but I think that the 152 is the better size for you.
In terms of width, I think saying up to size 9 only for the 154 (or 152) is quite conservative – and I get why they would recommend up to 9 – because if you were to ride a 10 or up with a zero angle on your back binding, then it would definitely be pushing it too narrow. But assuming binding angles of +15/-15, you should be fine on either the 152 or 154 in terms of width, IMO. And because this is an asym board it’s highly recommended to go with a mirror duck stance – in which case you would be riding something like +12/-12, +15/-15.
But if you’re still worried about the 152 or 154 being too narrow, then I would go 153X before I went 157 for you. IMO that would be getting too wide for 10s on a +15/-15 angle but that would be the better option than the 157, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate ,
Thank you for all the info you publish.
I’m about to buy a Proto type 2 and can’t figure out the best size. I’m 5’11” 164 pounds, boot size about 11-11.5(depending on the brand). I typically ride on a 156-157 board and thought that a 258mm width is ideal. Not sure which board would fit me best between the 157, 155w or 158w ….
Hi Rz
Thanks for your message.
Ordinarily I would say around 157, 158 for your specs for an all-mountain board – but as an all-mountain freestyle board and as something that has a long effective edge compared to length, I think you could go shorter than that.
In terms of width, I think something with at least 254mm with 11s is probably the minimum – and that assuming binding angles something like +15/-15. With the PT2, because it’s an asym board, it’s a good idea to go with a mirror duck stance anyway – so something like +15/-15 is recommended. That, and since you feel like arouind 258mm is your sweet spot in terms of waist width, then I feel like the 157 (252mm waist width) is pushing it in terms of being too narrow.
Based on all of that, I think the 155W would be the best size for you – it’s a little shorter than what you’re used to – but that effective edge is likely to be similar to what you’re used to (depending on the boards you’re riding of course) and also with that little bit of extra width, sizing down a little bit is also a good thing too.
So yeah, 155W would be my pick for you.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Im torn b/w a Proto & the West. Ive been snowboarding off/on for 18 years, so Id consider myself an intermediate. I live in SoCal and spend most my time at Bear, Summit & occasional Mammoth. With that said, there is not a ton of powder or as much offroading as Id like, so really looking for a do-it all board I can turn laps on, carve, improve switchfoot, learn some jumps and spend some time in the terrain park with an occasional b/w the trees on better snow days. Im not bombing down runs or hitting the double blacks too often. Any suggestion b/w the 2 boards and if so, which length? Im 6’3, 205 & size 13 Burton. Ive been riding an old school 2001 K2 165 Fat Bob and time to update. Also, should I do Ultra bindings or Falcor? Current ones are K2 FS Liens. Thx a million
Hi Paul
Thanks for your message.
I think I would be leaning towards the Proto Type Two. On powder days it’s going to be more effort in terms of keeping the nose floating, but if you don’t see those days regularly, then the PT2 is what I would go for. It will be better for jumps, in the park and for improving switch and it’s still a great carver. The West would definitely still be a good option for you and would be better on powder days, but on balance I’d say PT2.
In terms of sizing, I would say:
PT2: 161X
West: 164X (266mm waist)
The reason I would go shorter on the PT2, is that it has more effective edge per length (blunter tip and tail) than the West. That said, you could go still go 164X for the PT2. But personally, I’d go 161X with your specs/level.
The width on both this boards should be ok, given that you have Burton boots (low profile). For regular profile 13s, it might be pushing it, but you should be ok with Burtons. If you do have like a really straight back binding angle though (like 0 degrees, 3 degrees or something like that) then it might still be pushing it. That said, it’s recommended to go mirror duck e.g. +15/-15 on the PT2, because of the asym tech in it – so I’d recommend it for that board anyway, in which case you should be all good width-wise. Also, taking into account the width of your current board – if it has a similar waist width and you’ve never had heel or toe drag issues, then that’s also something that would indicate that you’ll be sweet.
For either of these board, I think the Ultra would be the preferred binding over the Falcor – just a better flex match. That said, the Falcor isn’t a bad match, but I think the Ultra better, particularly for the PT2, which is a tad softer than the West, in my experience.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
I’ve gone snowboarding a couple times now and have really enjoyed it. I’m planning on buying this as my first snowboard and hoping it will last me a long time. But you mention that it is suited for intermediate riders+. Just wondering what aspects of this board make it unsuitable for beginners and whether you think I’ll be able to grow into it.
Thanks
Hi Jeff
Thanks for your message.
There are a couple of things about this board that make it not ideal for a beginner.
First of all, it’s what I would consider a medium flex (5/10). A softer flex is easier to learn on – it’s more forgiving and easier to initiate turns on – so something around a 3/10 or 4/10 is better. Something more medium-soft to soft. I don’t like to recommend too soft as then you’d grow out of it really fast.
The other thing is that the Proto Type Two has quite a lot of camber in the profile. It’s got some rocker between the feet and then is camber to tip and tail (with some transition areas before the contact points). Put more simply, it’s got a relatively aggressive camber profile. Something with a more mellow camber profile, with more rocker and less pronounced camber is an easier ride, easier to initiate turns on, less catchy and just more easy going in general.
Getting this as your first board, would be a steeper learning curve for sure. In my opinion if you learn on a more difficult tool, your learning ends up more crude. But that’s not to say this is the worst for beginners – it’s not like super stiff and with a traditional camber profile (which would be worse!) but it’s not the ideal way to start out. Certainly if you ended up riding the type of style that this board is most suited too it’s a board you could have for as long as it physically lasts – but it will be harder to learn on than more beginner friendly boards.
If you want to learn more about boards for beginners and what I think are the best beginner options check out the links below:
>>How to Choose A Snowboard Suitable for Beginners
>>My Top 15 Men’s Snowboards for Beginners
Hope this helps and answers your questions
Hello there Nate and thanks for all the great insight and reviews you are putting out. Much appreciated!
I’m a 95kg 191cm with US 12 boots-guy who have been riding all mountain since 1997. Coming from a skateboarding background I have always enjoyed doing tricks, in the park and jumping. But I also love doing backcountry riding where I go fast and hit natural jump and features.
I have a Jones Ultra Mountain Twin 164w that I find perfect for the backcountry, but i find it too stiff and lacks playfulness and Ollie pop for the park and for mucking about at slower speeds doing side hits etc
I have found the Proto Type Two really interesting as seems to be softer, is great switch and jumps really well and at the same time has a good carve. (Some say it’s got great pop some says it defines hasn’t).
Would you recommend this board to supplement my UMT as a playful board for no powder days? In that case the 161 or 164? Or do you have another board suggestion?
Any input will be greatly appreciated!
Hi Edvin
Thanks for your message.
I think this sounds good for what you’re describing and to compliment your UMT.
In terms of size I’d say go with 161X for sure. For a couple of reasons. Whilst something around that 164, 165 is a great size for you, IMO, for all-mountain riding, I think you’ll appreciate something a little shorter if you are going to be using that board predominantly for the park and doing tricks.
The other reason is that this is the kind of board that is good size down for anyway – it’s got a high effective edge relative to its overall length, due to a blunted tip and tail. E.g. Jones UMT 164W has a 1232mm effective edge. The PT2 effective edge on the 164X is 1270mm. The effective edge on the 161X is 1240mm – still more than the 164W Jones UMT. So you’re not loosing any effective edge going for the 161X but you would be adding to it going for the 164X.
Also, the 161X is going to feel softer and more playful than the 164x would, which is what it sounds like you want out of your 2nd board.
Just note that the PT2 isn’t like super-soft – but will definitely be softer than the UMT.
I think this would be a good choice for you, but if you wanted to look at other options, also check out the following. The second list are typically softer, more playful boards that are more park/freestyle specific.
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
>>My Top Freestyle Snowboards
Hope this helps
Hi Mate
Iv just bought one of these at 154 but put the order on hold. I currently weigh 177lbs and am just about 6″. I recently rode a skate banana at 154 and loved it. It took my boarding to the next level on the jumps but did wash out on me a few times (may be because it was a rental). Looking at the charts and all the advice on here it seems i should go 157 but sometimes indicate this board i could get away with 154. I bought this board because i enjoy every part of the mountain. Park, kickers, pow, trees, and shreding a piste… i really cant decide which would be best for me because i do prefer smaller boards for having fun but im worried i might be too heavy for the tech in this board to work right? Would i lose this playfulness on the 157?
Any advice you can give me on this would be much appreciated 🙂
Dan
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, usually I would say that 154cm would be too short. However, for this board you can definitely go a little shorter. I felt like the 157 was right for me (though I haven’t ridden the 154) and I’m 6’0″ and 185lbs. Given that you’re a little lighter, you could go 154 – and I definitely think I could ride the 154 of this board, just not necessarily what I would go with.
But compared to the Skate Banana 154, this would be a lot different. The Skate Banana is something that I found very loose and was something that wasn’t at the level of the PT2, in terms of Carving and Speed. Don’t get me wrong the Skate Banana is a fun board, but for those aspects it’s not as good as the PT2 – partly because of the loose feel, quite a bit more rocker in the camber profile compared with the PT2 and because it’s a little softer flexing than the PT2. So if you did go 154 PT2 vs 154 Skate Banana – it would be better in that aspect.
But the 157 would be even better for speed, carving and also give more float for powder. However, the 154 would be better for things like trees, jibs, ground tricks like butters, and have a bit more maneuverability, particularly at slower speeds – and yeah be more playful overall.
So, it would be a weigh up of what’s more important for you. But yeah, I think you could get away with the 154 if that sounds like the better option for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
Thank you for the advice and feedback. The board arrives to
tomorrow but iv been seriously concidering returning it for a 157. Because this is an all mountain board I feel like I should get used to the bigger board and hopefully it will still be good then for tricks and playfulness? Been getting so stressed out because I can’t decide out of the two sizes ?. My stance is +15/-12 but could adjust. With what I hear about this board it does ride longer but with all the tech that’s put into it maybe i should go for the 157 for my weight (81kg) and hopefully will still be able to send it on the jumps and get a beater snowboard for the rails and park only. Sorry for being a pain. Your advice is very useful
Hi Dan
If you wanted to go 157, you would get a bit more out of it in terms of speed, carving and powder. You would loose some playfulness – but if you were going to get something else for rails etc, then the 157 would probably make more sense – the 157 would still be fine for you for jumps, IMO.
It’s recommended to ride a mirror duck stance on the Proto Type Two since it’s an asym board, so something like +15/-15 would be ideal. But you could still rock +15/-12 on it if you really wanted.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks again. You have helped. I think I’m going to return the 154 tomorrow and get the 157. If I can spin and jump the same as a 154 on it then the extra float will be a bonus too me. It sounds il gain more than il lose if I go 157 over the 154.
Thanks for your help I’m sure it’s tyresome having so many board size questions so appreciate your patience mate. Your a top lad
You’re very welcome Dan.
I’d say that the 154 is going to be easier to spin – but you should still be able to spin the 157 fine.
Hope you have an awesome season!
Uncle was VP at Morrow Snowboards during the early-mid 90’s, during their heyday. Was fortunate enough to be gifted a 155 Morrow Rail and a 159 eScape and bindings…and all the t-shirts, bags, and sticker I could handle! Was about 15 at the time and the 59 was always more comfortable. Rode a couple times a year for maybe 8 years here in the Midwest (Illinois). Was never more than an intermediate rider; unable and mostly uninterested in the terrain parks.
View Pics on imgur
Life had me busy in other ways until last year (~12 years off) when I was able to get back into it. Slapped on the now 20+ year old 159 (and even older bindings) and hit a small slope in Southern Wisconsin. Felt great! At 36 I’m significantly older but was able to thoroughly enjoy riding and the setup was fun.
Was able to snag a great deal on some 2017 Union Force bindings in anticipation of getting fully back in to the sport. Put those on my 159 and hit up Northern WI for a trip with some friends and it was an absolute disaster. The modern bindings with the ancient board were impossible to turn. Went through many different stances/widths throughout the day and couldn’t get anywhere near the comfort and ability I had had a few weeks before with the old bindings. Seriously…had almost 0 maneuverability.
So! New board this year!
The stats:
Midwest mountains
Moderate riding – Going down oft-hardpack Midwest slopes with friends at fun speeds and fun maneuverability. Would like to get into light freestyle.
5’10
130lbs
9.5 Burton Ruler boots
Your help would be much appreciated!
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
I wasn’t riding 20 years ago, but from understanding boards from that time were stiffer and more of a “plank of wood” in terms of their feel – and I’m guessing that meant stiffer bindings and boots to get them to turn more effectively. These days, in comparison, boards are more flexible both torsionally and longitudinally, but also have added tech that make those boards still responsive and snappy, despite being more flexible. That’s my understanding anyway and I would say that the Force probably don’t have the rigidity to drive a stiffer board like that – it’s more designed for modern boards. I’d say the Force are 6.5/10 flex-wise – so they’re not the softest bindings going around either – not the stiffest either but certainly not the softest.
Boards tend to be shorter these days too, so in terms of length, I would go shorter than 159 for your specs. Even though you were more comfortable on the 159 compared to the 155 on your other boards, I think you’d appreciate something a little shorter on a modern board – especially if you want maneuverability and aren’t just going to be bombing flat out down the mountain.
In terms of length, I’d say something around 152cm for your height/weight (sizing largely based on weight these days, though height does come into it) – but if you feel like that’s definitely feeling too short, then going a bit longer would be fine – particularly if you’re used to longer boards. But maybe no longer than 155cm would be a good bet.
For the Proto Type Two I would say the 152cm is your best bet, as this is something I would usually recommend going shorter on, however, you could also go 154cm if you felt more comfortable with that. Both would be fine width-wise with 9.5s.
I think the Proto Type Two would be a good choice for what you’re describing, and is good on hard pack so would suit your conditions too. If you wanted to check out other options in the same category as the PT2, you could also check out the following:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Great review. Looking to purchase the Proto type two but not sure which size I should get. My stats – 6’2 – size 12 (US) – 225lbs. I was leaning towards the 161 w version. What do you think?
Many thanks and Merry Christmas.
Hi Luke
Merry Christmas to you too!
I think the 161X would work well for you. Ordinarily for your height/weight, I’d say around 164 to 165, but the Proto Type Two is the kind of board you can size down for, so I think the 161X would be a good length for you.
It will be a good width for size 12s too. Particularly if you have binding angles like +15/-15. Which is recommended for this board as it’s asymmetrical. Doesn’t mean you have to – but it’s recommended. If you have a binding angle of like 0 or 3 or something on your back foot, then it might be pushing it too narrow, but with +15/-15 something 260 to 266 at the waist is an ideal range for 12s, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Great article, I found it really helpful. I’m really interested in all mountain boards. I spend most of my time charging down hills in all conditions, but I really love to throw tight tree runs and butters/presses in whenever possible. I don’t do much massive park or rails. I’ve been conflicted trying to find a board that is both great at charging steep hills while maintaining the flexibleness to have fun playing around. This seems like a great fit, can you recommend any other boards that would fit the description?
Thanks in advance,
Hi Reid
Thanks for your message.
I think you’re definitely on the right track with this one. I would also check out the following:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
I’d say everything there – except maybe the Assassin Pro, which is a little harder to butter/press, would be suitable for what you’re describing.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, I am intermediate to advanced rider that rides all mountain. Everything thing from the park to groomers to tree runs and the backcountry. I currently ride the ride machete 157 wide. I am getting the never summer prototype two and can’t decide on what size. I am 5’10” 200lbs and wear size 11 boots. What size would you recommend for me?
Also, I am thinking of getting union bindings and Adidas boots. What models would you recommend for my size and riding style?
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tough call, as there’s a few things to weigh up here, especially since you ride everywhere, do everything. (note: this is all based on the 2015 Machete)
In terms of a good “all-mountain” length, I think something around a 161 for your height and weight. But usually I would recommend sizing down a little bit for this board, just due to the larger effective edge compared to the length.
In terms of width, assuming you’ll have +15/-15 angles (and it’s a good idea to have a mirror duck stance like this on an asymmetrical board) and with Adidas boots (low profile), I’d say you’d be fine getting on something down to as low as 252mm in terms of the waist, but that’s certainly the narrowest I would go.
Which means you could get on the 157, if you wanted to keep a similar length. However, I’m thinking this is maybe getting a little too small overall, especially given that you like to ride the backcountry too. You would be loosing surface area over your current board and I think at that length and width, it’s getting a bit small for your specs. Also since the Type Two isn’t amazing in powder (but the Machete is similar), then going too small will hinder that performance in powder further.
So I think it’s between the 158W and the 160.
Pros of the 160 is that you would be getting on a narrower board which would give you a bit more maneuverability and edge-to-edge speed – though, since you would be going up in size as well, that will be negated at least somewhat. The extra length will also help with float in powder but again, the narrower width will counter-act that either entirely or at least to some extent.
The 158W will certainly give you a bit more in terms of float compared to the 157W Machete. It’s only marginally longer, but it’s also a little wider, in terms of both Waist Width and tip and tail width (263mm waist, 312mm tip and tail vs 261mm waist and 308mm tip and tail on the Machete). So there’ll be a bit more stability and float going on there.
I’m leaning towards the 158W – for a couple of reasons – a. whilst you’re not going narrower, which maybe you wanted to do, you are used to a wide board and I think it’s a good balance of width and length for your specs and style. b. the 158 through the trees is going to be better (IMO) than the 160 c. For the park 158 is going to be better than 160 and that extra width adds stability for landings. I think it’s the best balance overall and it’s not going to far different from the size you’re used to.
I think the Proto Type Two is a good option for what you’re describing, so I agree with your choice there – just note that it will be harder work in powder than some boards – but similar to the Machete (and a little better in the 158W size) so you’re used to that. And I think, on balance the 158W is the best size for you.
In terms of Adidas boots – I would say either Tactical ADV or Response – if you like Boa lacing systems (or the sound of them), then the Response, otherwise the Tactical ADV is the best option. These boots will both be an appropriate flex level for the Type Two as well, IMO.
For Union Bindings, I think the Ultra is a great choice (but very expensive so I understand they’re probably out of the price range). Another option would be the Falcor. It’s getting on the stiffer side for the Type Two – but if you like the idea of a stiffer binding/are used to that, then the Falcor is very responsive and has great board feel (thanks partly to their mini-disc). Other options are the Atlas or the Force, though you sacrifice some board feel there. Finally you could look at the Contact Pros too – great board feel and would be great when you’re in the park but I’d be concerned about their responsiveness for you in the backcountry. Just on the softer side of medium, and I think a little stiffer than that would suit you a little better.
If you think you would be ok with stiffer bindings in the park, then I’d say go with the Falcor, otherwise maybe the Force are a good bet.
For your info, in terms of flex, the following are what I would personally rate the gear we’ve discussed (not necessarily the same as what their rated by their respective brands):
Proto Type Two: 5/10
Adidas Tactical ADV: 6/10 maybe 6.5/10
Adidas Response: 6/10
Union Falcor: 7/10
Union Ultra: 5/10
Union Atlas: 7/10
Union Force: 6.5/10
Union Contact Pro: 4/10
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate, seems like you give great advice! I am 6ft tall and weigh 165 lbs, with a size 10.5 foot. I have been trying to pick the perfect size board for me along with the right bindings and boots. I am an intermediate rider and plan on riding for a few months to get really good. In the past I have ridden smaller boards around 153-155 and never had many issues. Concerned about the width of the board I need, if the 155x or the 154- 157 board would be best for me. I plan on gaining about 15 pounds over the next couple years not sure if this matters. I have looked at the Burton Cartel bindings, no clue on the boots yet. Previously I had burton size 10 boots but the padding inside worn out. started to stub my big toe so can’t use them anymore. Any advice or suggestions? Maybe a good boot that keeps my budget around 1k for the whole package?
Thanks!
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message.
In terms of size, I think the 157 is probably the best bet for you. You could go 154 with your specs too – especially given that you have enjoyed shorter boards in the past. But I think the 157 is probably the best option – and if you do put on 15 pounds, then the 157 will be an even better match.
In terms of width, assumming you’ll be riding it with a +15/-15 or +12/-12 or something like that (and a mirror duck stance is highly recommended for an asym board like this), then the width of the 157 will be fine. With a +15/-15 you could even ride the 154 in terms of width – so if you did want to go shorter you should be fine there too. If your angles start to get a bit straighter then the 250mm waist on the 154 will start to risk being too narrow. The 155x would be ok in terms of going a bit shorter, would counter some of that extra width – but assuming +15/-15 binding angles, it would be on the wide side.
The Cartels would certainly work on this board – as would anything from this list:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
In terms of boots, check out the following:
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Assuming you’re looking at getting the 2018 models, you’re looking at around 850 for the Proto Type Two and Cartel Bindings. So to keep things close to that 1K mark, then something like the Vans Aura (250), DC Mutiny (200), Burton Ruler (260), 32 Lashed (240 to 260, depending on lacing type). Typically anything cheaper than that will be softer flexing and for the Proto Type Two/Cartel combo, it would be best to make sure your boots were at least medium flex.
If you were able to find at least one of your items in a 2016-17 model, then you could bring the cost down that way.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, really enjoy reading your insights and responses on this! I’m getting rid of my Proto HD 154 and just picked up a ’57 TT. I just feel like at 175lbs w/no gear, 5’10”, 9.5 boot it’s a bit small for my all mtn go to and bombing runs. Plus, I’d like a bit more float. I bought a 153 Funslinger and it just folded in the middle at speed, but that’s not what’s intended for. How similar are the West and TT in edge to edge? Similarities in responsiveness? I love the flex of my Proto and liked the quickness of the Funslinger with ASYM, but am afraid if I just go with the West, I”ll loose that playfulness.
Local shop has a 25 in a ’58 I’m thinking about grabbing for powder days and I’ve seen many comments stating that it’s a directional Proto. Which I find hard to believe due to it being stiffer.
Thanks Nate!
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
I think that the 57 Type Two is a good size for that board – but yeah if you’re also wanting something for powder then that’s not that boards prowess.
I’d say that the West and TT are pretty much the same in terms of edge-to-edge response. The West is also still reasonably playful – it’s not a super aggressive board – but you can definitely get into a good carve on it. The biggest differences between the West and TT, IMO, are:
1. They have the same Rocker/Camber profile
2. They have different sidecut radii
3. They have a similar flex – though, I would say the West as marginally stiffer 6//10, whereas the TT more like 5/10)
4. The TT is centered and true twin (and asymmetrical), whereas the West is directional twin and setback 20mm
Overall I’d say the West is definitely better for float in powder, the Type Two has it for jumps & spins and for riding switch and otherwise they are fairly similar performance wise – the West a little better at speed too.
If you were going to go West, I’d say the 159 would be a good size.
I would say that the West is more similar to the TT than the 25 – so if you wanted a bigger contrast between your boards – and you were looking for something that was more specialized towards powder, speed and carving, then the 25 is more that. The West is more of a do everything kind of board. The 25 will be less playful compared to the West, with the West being slightly less playful than the TT. But as far as freeride boards go, the 25 certainly isn’t the most aggressive going around – there’s still some playfulness in there. The 158 would be a good size for you I think, but you could also go to 160 if that was available.
So, if you want something to use for just carving, speed and powder and you would be using your other boards for other things, then the 25 is a good option.
But if you want to keep a fair bit of playfulness but still get advantage of better float in powder (even if not to the same extent as you would on the 25), and still wanted a board that can do a bit of everything, then the West.
Hope this helps and answers your questions
Hi Nate,
Great review, just had a few questions for you as I’m looking to buy a new board this year. First off I’m 6’3/4, 220 lbs and wear a size 12/.5 shoe. What size would you recommend for this board? And in general?
I would consider myself somewhere between an intermediate and expert boarder as I’ve been boarding for almost 10 years now (I’m 21), and I normally board in the Northeastern US or Canada (unfortunately), so I mainly ride hard packed terrains. I mainly stay on the slopes instead of the park but enjoy buttering, natural jumps, want to progress riding switch, and my specialty is hard carving and bombing down a run. Although, I am now looking to further my freestyle skills.
My old board is a Burton Freestyle 157 and I loved this board as it was my first reasonably nice and non-beginner board, but now that its 4/5 seasons old I really need a new one. I’ve attached the link in-case you haven’t tried it out before.
Burton Joystick 2012 at evo
Would you recommend the Never Summer Proto Type Two board for me? And if not what would you recommend? $600 or so is probably around the top of my budget. I love your reviews and hope to hear from you soon.
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
For the Proto Type Two for you, I would say that the 161X would be a good size for you.
As for an all-mountain size, I would say that something closer to 164 to 165 would be what I’d go for with your specs. But since this is all-mountain freestyle and has the effective edge of some other types of boards, then the 161X would be the better size for this board.
I’m surprised that you got away with the Burton Freestyle in terms of width. It’s pretty narrow for a size 12. But I’m guessing you’ve probably grown since you bought it. Any toe drag issues?
Going up to the 161 and going to a wide board (which I definitely think you need), will feel like quite a big change but I think you’ll appreciate the advantages of it once you get used to it – especially since you like to bomb it. The new camber profile will also take a little getting used to. Coming from an all-rocker profile, you are going to be getting a fair bit of camber underfoot now – but again, for your carving and for edge-hold and speed, and pop – and pretty much everything, I think you’re really going to appreciate that, once you do get used to it.
I think the Proto Type Two sounds like a great option for what you’re describing, and yeah 161X is the size I would choose for you.
Hope this helps.
Hi,
Intermediate-Advanced rider here looking at buying the Proto Type Two this year. My stats are 6 foot, 160lbs. I’ve been riding the NS West 159 for the last two seasons and loving it, but my riding is leaning more towards all mountain freestyle, natural hits, butters, riding switch and fast carving. I think the true twin would be better suited to my style and the conditions I’m riding in. Looking for sizing advice between the 154 and 157. Also, does it makes sense to have a West and Proto in the same quiver or are they too similar?
Cheers,
Hi Blaine
Thanks for your message.
Usually, I’d say 157cm for you for an all-mountain-freestyle but with the Proto Type Two (PT2), you could go either 154 or 157. The PT2 has a long effective edge to length ratio. So, for example, the effective edge on the 157 is the same the West’s 159. So, if you went for the 157 you’d be riding the same effective edge as your current board but with a shorter tip and tail. But that’s not to say it would feel like the same ride – they do feel different.
The advantage of going 154 is that you would be sizing down a little (which I like to do for all-mtn-free) in terms of both effective edge and length. The 154cm effective edge is just under that of the 156 West – but more than the 154 West.
The advantages of going longer here would be for carving, speed, and powder – and the advantages of going shorter would be for your butters, switch, trees. Since you already have the West in the 159, then perhaps the 154 is the better bet, just to get more of a contrast.
In terms of how different they are:
1. They have the same Rocker/Camber profile
2. They have a similar flex – though, I would still put the West as marginally stiffer
3. The Proto Type Two is asymmetrical – which helps getting sharper/lower on those heel edge turns and for riding switch
4. The Proto Type Two is centered and true twin (asymetrical twin), whereas the West is directional twin and setback 20mm
5. They have different sidecut radii
Overall I’d say they’re not like the opposite ends of the spectrum by any means – but they feel different enough to ride and have different strengths and weaknesses.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the detailed answer. Absolutely. I’m going to keep the West for those days in the deep snow and steeps and pickup a 154 Proto for the majority of days I’m having fun buttering down blue runs and hitting jumps in the park. Now, I just have to decide Genesis or Contact Pro. Ideally the Ultra’s, but those are way out of the budget :).
Thanks,
B
You’re very welcome Blaine.
I think either the Genesis or Contact Pro would work on that board. I’d be slightly leaning towards the Genesis, just that they’re a little closer to matching the Proto Type Two for flex (the Contact Pros a little softer). But yeah Ultra’s are nice – but not the cheapest that’s for sure!
Hi Nate,
I have been snowboarding 4 times and took pretty quick to it. I’m can do Indy grabs off small jumps and can keep up with my friends that have had season passes their whole lives. (Not trying to toot my own horn but they are advanced riders and were all very impressed.) I now finally have health insurance and plan on going with them every weekend this winter. My friends are always in the park and I enjoy jumping and hitting boxes so I will be there a lot but I also want something that can go down the hill with. I’m 6’0” and 180 lbs with a size 13 boot. The two boards I was looking at is the Never Summer Proto Type Two size 158w and the Salomon Assassin 160w. Which board and size do you feel would be the best fit for me?
P.s. my friends and I are known to have an occasional drink while riding. Im good at turning but I read the Proto type’s response is a aggressive. Will this make me less sloopy down the line or should I find something more forgiving for landings?
Thanks for your help!
Hi Cambo
Thanks for your message. Sounds like you’re progressing really quickly. That’s awesome!
Usually I wouldn’t recommend either of these boards to a beginner, but since you seem to be progressing so fast, you should be ok on them. The Proto Type Two is probably a little more aggressive than the Assassin – but I still wouldn’t call it an overly aggressive ride. What I would say for it though, is that it does have a lot of effective edge for it’s size – so size-wise it’s good to size down on it (you still get that same effective edge of a longer board but you’ve just got less tip and tail going on). Also, I would typically size down for the types of things that you’re doing. If you’re going to be spending a lot of time in the park for example. At well, I would size down as a beginner – but since you’re progressing so quickly, you probably don’t need to go down as much.
So, I would say you’re about a 160 all mountain size – but I would look at 157 to 158 for the all-mountain-freestyle type riding you’re going to be doing. And for the Type Two you can size down again. As an example the Proto Type Two’s effective edge on the 155X is close to the effective edge of the Never Summer West in the 157X. So, long story short, I think the 155X would be the better length for the Proto Type Two for you. You could get away with the 158X but I think that’s going to ride more like a 160, which I think is bordering on being too long for the type of riding you want to do.
For the Assassin, it has a more traditional effective edge to length ratio – but as I say, I think 160 is getting a bit long for the type of riding you want to do, so I think the 157W would be the better bet there.
The only other thing is the width.
Usually for size 13s, I would recommend going at least 265mm for the waist width. Neither of these boards have that option in the lengths we are looking at, unfortunately. I think you will get away with the 261mm waist on the 155X Proto and the 157W Assassin, but it’s pushing it. To make these widths less risky, I would recommend going with Adidas, Burton or Ride boots, if you haven’t bought boots already. The reason for this is that they have the lowest profile outersole that I know of.
Hope this helps.
Sorry for the late 2 year response lol. I was able to size my boots down to 11.5 with the Adidas tacticals and paird them with malivitas on the 155x. This combo is literally perfect for me. Thank you for the recommendation on the 155x size, the 26 waist is a perfect fit with my 11.5 boots. Board is nice and short for the park but carves like a beast because of the longer edge. They say this isn’t a good board in powder but this thing floats for me. Not sure if it’s because my board is wider and shorter or because of the rocker in between my feet but it takes me barley any effort to lean back and ride over everything. I can also hold presses for days, I’m assuming that’s gotta be because the rocker too? Anyways thanks again for the rec. It was an epic season out here in Cali, cheers!
Hi Cambo
Thanks for the update! Awesome that you were able to get in smaller boots – and even more awesome that you’re loving the PT2!
Hi, I recently bought this board and can’t decide on the bindings between the Burton Genesis and Malavita. Which one would you recommend?
Hi Lawrence
That’s a really tough one. There’s not much in it – both would be suitable for this board. I would lean towards the Genesis if money isn’t an issue but if wanted to save a bit of money the Malavitas are pretty close.
Hope this helps
Hi, I have the Prototype two and want to upgrade my bindings. What would you recommend for hitting jumps and going really fast that would compliment this board? (looking for something that has a lot of shock absorption)
Hi Mo
I would check out the following list. It’s labelled all-mountain, but they’re what I would consider all-mountain-freestyle (i have another list for all-mountain-freeride).
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Check through the score tables and find the ones that have good shock absorption, since that’s something you definitely want. Most things Burton or Union, tend to have great shock absorption – probably the only non-suitable option on that list would be the Flux DS, just because of shock absorption. And the best options would be the Genesis and the Ultra, IMO.
These aren’t the only options, so I can give you some expanded options if for some reason, nothing there works for you.
Hope this helps
Hi there im a fan from brazil, i need a luttle help with the size im 511 180lbs boots 11, i m in a dilema with the 155x and 158x, so i wanna a board allmontain freestyle oriented cause i intend to practice freestyle more but never forgetting carving, so being the board wide and with an efective edge longer then normal would i be ok with the 155w or would i need a 158w
Hi Juliano
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tight call between those two sizes for you and ordinarily I would be leaning towards the 158X for you. But I think in your case, given that you are looking to up your freestyle game and, as you’ve pointed out, the Proto Type Two has that higher than normal effective edge-to-length ratio and there’s the extra width in there, that the 155X in this case is probably the better bet. Both would work, but in your particular case and this particular board, I would be leaning towards the 155W.
Hope this helps
You helped me a lot thank you so much bro
You’re very welcome. Hope you have an awesome season!
Thanks again for another detailed reply Nate!
Hey Nate,
Big Fan of the site! Keep the content coming 🙂
Quick question – do you think the type two 154 or 157 would be best for me? I’m a size 10 boot (US), 164lbs, 5’10. Like riding a bit a of everything.
P.s. I am heading out to do a season in Whistler this year. Hope to see you out there some time!
Jonny
Hi Jonny
Thanks for the message.
That’s a tough one. Either size would definitely be suitable (each with it’s own pros and cons) but I’m leaning towards 157 – but only just. If you were more freestyle focused I’d say go 154 – but if you like to ride a bit of everything, then I think the 157 will just give you a bit more in powder, a bit more stability at speed and a bit more in the carving stakes. The 154 would be slightly better in the trees, on jibs, butters and riding switch (unless you’re a real pro at riding switch – in which case it wouldn’t matter).
The other thing would be that I’m assuming you to be at a reasonably advanced level. If you are more of an intermediate or beginner level, then the 154 would be the best bet.
Hope this helps with your decision and hope to see you on the hill! You won’t regret doing a season in Whistler, that’s for sure!
Thanks for the detailed response Nate. Really appreciate that, it is a real tough one isn’t it! I’ve been going back and forth for ages..
I think I’m also leaning ever so slightly towards the 157, for that slight powder and Carve advantage over the 154.
Hopefully I make the right choice!
Thanks again man
You’re very welcome Jonny. I think either which way you go you’ll enjoy the Proto Type Two – it’s an awesome board!
Hey Nate,
Me again! I’ve been reading in a few places that this board actually rides like a longer one because of the blunted shape and longer effective edge. Would you say that’s accurate? Does that mean the 157 would ride like a 159? If so I feel that could feel a bit too big for me? Would you say that it would make the 154 as effective as say a 157 in the carving stakes? For powder I guess the 157 would still be noticeably better just because of the larger surface area right?
Btw, I rode a 154 when I started out, then most recently a 156 Burton Custom. Certainly appreciated the enhanced stability at speed and on landings with the 156, but again maybe that is because the 154 was a crappy beginner board!
Sorry for all the questions!!
Thanks man, really appreciate it.
Hi Jonny
Yeah it does ride a little longer – it’s got quite a long effective edge for its length (122cm on the 157 and 119cm on the 154). Certainly that does make the 154 carve more like a typical 156 maybe, all else being equal. The Custom has an effective edge of 119.5cm on the 156 – so that’s just a touch more than the Type Two’s 154. The 158 Custom has a 121.5cm effective edge – comparable to the 157 Type Two.
In terms of powder you will certainly see some difference with the 157 compared to your 156 Custom. I’d say that the Type Two is better in powder than the Custom – but only just really as both are average in powder. If you went to the 154cm I don’t think you’d see a huge decrease in powder performance over your 156 Custom.
Yeah, definitely if you had a beginner board, especially if it was soft flexing and with heaps of rocker in it – which beginner boards often have – then that would have been a large reason for that lack of stability on landings and at speed – so whilst size does help things in those areas – other factors also play a part.
Great review! As far as sizing; I am 5’8″ and 145 lbs, intermediate rider that loves hitting the tree runs and powder in Utah; would you recommend a 154 or size up to 157? Thank you!!!
Hi Vrad
Based on your height/weight and preferences, I think that the 154cm would be your best bet for the Proto Type Two
Hi Nate,
I was wondering after reading your review if you could please suggest a sizing for the Never Summer Proto Type Two?
I am 5’4 and weigh 145 lbs. I wear 7-7.5US men’s snowboard boot.
I am torn between the 152 and 154.
Thanks!
Hi Brady
Thanks for your message.
For you, for this board, I would go with the 152cm. I think that’s the best match in terms of both the length and the width.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the help Nate!!!
Hi,
Thanks for all the work you do. I really enjoy all your content, it’s high quality stuff. I’m looking at getting a new All-Mountain-Freestyle Board. I do a bit of everything and love hitting natural features. I don’t get to ride in pow enough for it to effect my decision. I’m from Baltimore and often the conditions are pretty terrible, either lumpy slush or ice. This seems like the board for me, but I’m a little concerned about how the edge holds in ice. I’ve heard that the edge does fine in hard snow but is kinda poor in icy conditions. You mentioned there were icy patches in the morning when you rode this but didn’t really talk about how it preformed in those areas, would you mind sharing your experience?
Also, I didn’t see anything about the Oz Woody on the website but it’s getting a fair amount of buzz in my area. Right now the Woody and the Proto Type Two are at the top of my list, with Yes The Greats as a close third, but if there’s something else you think I should look at I’m all ears.
Thanks for any insight you can provide!
Hi Nate
Thanks for your message – and great name by the way!
I found that the Proto was good on the ice. I’ve ridden boards that are more ice friendly. If I had to rate it’s edge-hold on ice I’d say it’s about a 4 out of 5. Better than most but not as good as some. The Greats I would say would be similar on ice too.
OZ isn’t a brand that I currently demo so I can’t really say much about the woody, except that from the quick research I just did it seems to be about the same as the other 2 when it comes to ice. But I couldn’t say that for sure. The Woody is highly regarded by some it seems. Definitely a board I would like to demo if I get the chance.
The Lib Tech TRS, YES Basic and the GNU Eco Choice (or Rider’s Choice) would be the best all-mountain-freestyle boards that are also really good in ice – IMO.
Hope this helps
This is awesome, thanks!
I’ve ridden some magne-traction boards in the past, I love them on icy days, but they felt kinda off and a bit too grabby in soft snow and slush. It’s not a deal breaker, but it’s more of a feature I would look for if I were building a quiver.
The Yes Basic and the Yes Typo have been on my radar for a while, and if I were to prioritize icy performance I think I would end up with one of those.
A 4 out of 5 is right about where I was hoping it to fall. No one is claiming that it was made for charging down icy slopes, but I’m glad to hear it didn’t just wash out for you like I feared.
Thanks Nate!
-Nate
You’re welcome Nate!