The Rome Ravine turned out to be quite a unique ride, combining a spongy kind of dampness with an easy-riding, bordering on playful, feel.
In this review, I will take a look at the Ravine as a mellow freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Ravine a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other mellow freeride snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: Rome Ravine 2026
Price: $599
Style: Mellow Freeride
Flex Rating: Medium (6/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 87.2/100
Compared to other Men’s Mellow Freeride Boards
Of the 28 current model mellow freeride snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Ravine ranked 9th out of 28
Overview of the Ravine'S Specs
Check out the tables for the Ravine's specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
mellow freeride
PRICE:
$599 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
Directional Hybrid Camber
DIRECTIONAL Hybrid CAMBer - Burton's "Directional Camber"
SHAPE:
setback stance:
setback 1.5" (38mm)
BASE:
SINTERED - Rome's "SinterStrong Base"
weight:
FELT Normal
Camber Height:
8mm
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
152 | 255 | 114-154 | 52-70 |
155 | 256 | 126-166 | 58-76 |
158 | 258 | 138-178 | 63-81 |
159W | 269 | 138-178 | 63-81 |
161 | 260 | 154-194 | 70-88 |
162W | 270 | 154-194 | 70-88 |
165W | 272 | 170-210 | 78-96 |
Who is the Ravine Most Suited To?
The Ravine is best suited to riders looking for a low-chatter, damp ride that is also easy going. Often that dampness is only found in stiffer, more aggressive boards, so the Ravine gives quite a unique feel in that sense.
You most likely won't be wanting to do a lot of freestyle or want to really bomb and push the speedometer (or you have other boards for those things) - but you will be someone who wants to seek out powder when available, want something to still feel comfortable even when everything is choppy and rutted out and want something that won't be too demanding of the effort it requires from its rider.
It's still a bit too advanced for beginners, IMO, but easy going enough for intermediate riders and really suitable for intermediate riders, IMO, given it's consistent, predicatable nature.
TEST/REVIEW DetailS FOR THE Ravine
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Ravine is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Rome Ravine 2026, 158cm (258mm waist width)
Date: April 4, 2025
Carving
Overall I would say that it's above average and no-more.
But it is something that provides a steady, consistent platform for those who are just getting into carving, and while It's not an elbows to the floor kind of carving board, it can lay down a decent carve and up to decent speeds too.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: It's not on the top tier of ultra easy to slash/turn, but it's still nice and easy. Again, it's got a predictable, steady, even kind of response that isn't necessarily effortless, but not something that makes you need to force it either.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Again, decently quick from edge-to-edge, but not super snappy to change edges. It has more of a smooth rhythmic maneuverability. Not slow or anything, and no delayed feel or anything, just not super quick/snappy.
Catchiness: Nothing really. Just a hint there, but I could only feel it when I was purposely riding in a way where I was trying to feel to see if it was catchy.
Speed
It's not an out and out bomber or anything. It's medium speed and stable up to moderately fast speeds. But it's dampness does help with that stability and means that even when it does start to feel shaky, you don't feel it vibrate your body as much.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: As just mentioned for speed above, I found the Ravine to be nice and damp, almost spongy feeling. So while it's personality didn't scream crud-crusher, it handled crappy snow in a way that belied it's easy going nature, due to its impressive dampness.
Trees/Bumps: Again, while it wasn't super snappy edge-to-edge, it wasn't a sloth either. It gave a smooth almost spungy feel, but still relatively quick and easy to change edges and get it weaving between obstacles like trees and bumps. Effort was minimal and it responded in a way that was very easy to quickly get a feel for. Very consistent/predictable.
Powder
Nothing at all to test in on the day - was pretty icy off-groomer. But based on specs and feel, it should do really well in powder.
It has ample rocker leading up to the nose, camber that's setback right into the tail and a shape that has a nose that's both wider and longer than its tail, in addition to a good amount of setback on effective edge of 1.5" (38mm), setback into that camber zone towards the tail (and an overall length setback of around 2" (53mm).
On top of all that it also has 3D shaping in the base, which should further assist its ability to float.
Jumps
It wasn't a board that I found super exciting for getting air on and not something that's likely to win any ollie contests, but was just fine - and like for other things, it had a feel and predictability you could trust, so certainly something you could be confident taking to jumps, side-hits, cliff-drops etc.
Pop: I found the pop to be nice and easy to access but not really in an explosive way. It had this kind of spongy, slow springiness - the best way I could describe it. Didn't have a huge amount of total pop - most of what was there you could get without too much effort and there wasn't much extra to get out of it, when you really put the effort in to load it up.
Approach: On approach I felt it had a great mix of stablilty and maneuverability.
Landing: Landings were solid but not the kind of board I felt could really stomp landings. That spongy dampness helped landings feel nice and smooth though. And nice and forgiving of errors and pretty easy to make any necessary quick maneuvers after landing too.
Tail heavy landings not as bad as you might think. There's a more solid feel in the tail than you think there'll be, but still certainly not the best for landing tail-heavy either.
Switch
With the directional camber profile, tapered directional shape and just everything being highly directional about this board, riding the other way was assumably not a design purpose for this board. And it proved to be quite strange feeling riding it backwards.
That said, transitions were pretty smooth, all things considered.
Spins
Better than I would have thought but not ideal, naturally. But being only minimally catchy, not having a tendency to over-spin after landing and being fine for completing under-rotations after landing, meant it wasn't all bad.
Take-off and landing switch was naturally not ideal and a lack of explosiveness also made spins less appealing. But overall definitely doable and like with the board's general personality, it was predictable, so you knew how the board was going to respond to what you gave it.
Butters
Given how directional it was the nose and tail felt relatively similar. Now that's not to say they felt the same to press, but more similar than most with this much directional-ness (that's a word right?.....right!?).
While they did feel a little different from each other, both the nice and tail were quite easy to press. There was some resistance there, which can be nice, and had that same overall spongy-ish feel to them when pressing them that this board showed elsewhere.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Powder | 4.5 | 27/30 |
| Turns | 4 | 12/15 |
| Carving | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Trees | 4 | 12/15 |
| Crud | 4 | 8/10 |
| Speed | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Jumps | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Switch | 2 | 2/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 87.2/100 |
I found the Ravine to have a smooth, spongy/damp feel, but over top of a relatively playful/easy going ride.
Typically the kind of dampness that it displayed would be on a stiffer, more aggressive ride, so it was a really interesting combo.
It was really enjoyable to ride - something that was both unexciting, but unique at the same time. And I say un-exciting in the nicest possible way. As in, it wasn't super snappy/explosive and it was really predictable and consistent. That doesn't sound too exhilarating - and it wasn't really, but it does make for a platform that you can trust and you can just really enjoy the ride and that dampness also meant for low chatter, meaning it was just overall a really pleasant, comfortable ride.
Kind of like driving a Buick/Mercedes around Monza as opposed to a Ferrari or McClaren - it's not going to spike the g-force meter or be overly adrenaline inducing, but it will be super enjoyable and comfortable.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
To learn more about the Ravine, or if you're ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
To check out some other mellow freeride snowboard options, or to see how the Ravine compares to others, check out our top rated mellow freeride snowboards by clicking the button below.
Hi Nate,
What Rome Ravine board size do you recommend?
Here is my spec：
* Height 6′2
* Weight 172lb
* Boot US11
Thank you!
Hi Ethan, thanks for your message.
I’d say 159W is probably your best bet. You may be able to get on the 161 width-wise – it would depend on a few things like your binding angles, your boots profile and how deep you like to carve. The safer bet would be the 159W, but if you could let me know those things, I could give my opinion on how you’d be width-wise on the 161. Generally speaking I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 159/160.
Hi, what size would you recommend?
Height 6′
Weight 170lb
Boot US10
Thank you!
Hi Leung, thanks for your message.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159, so I think the 158 would be your best bet. I’d say the 162 is getting too big, especially when looking at the combo of width and length. If you are riding a lot of trees without deep powder and you don’t tend to ride super fast and want more maneuverability, then the 155 is certainly an option too, but I’d say the 158 is your best “all-round” size.
Hope this helps with your decision
Could I ride this board with a size 12 boot? The waist seems narrow on all their sizing.
Hi Alex, thanks for your message.
Would be pushing it with 12s – and only from the 162 and up. If any shorter length, and probably too narrow, regardless. But with the 162, it would depend on binding angles, brand/model of boot (i.e. how low profile it is) and how deep you like to carve. If the 162 (or 166) is an appropriate length for you, if you could let me know those things, I can give you my best guestimate.
Hi Nate,
I am checking out this Ravine and seems like is an awesome board. I havent started freeride yet but really want to pick up in the coming season.
Height: 5’8 1/2”
Weight: 150 lbs.
Boot Size: 8
What board size would you recommend?
Thanks in advance
Ed
Hi Ed, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 154/155, but with size 8 boots I would size down from that. For the Ravine, I think the 152 would be a really good size for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Disagree. I ride a 155 select (now pro) with a size 8 boot. I wouldn’t size down on the regular ravine. 155 will be plenty fine. 152 will be lacking.
Hi RTC
Thanks for your input. I appreciate it. Could be lacking for some, but depends on the rider. If you’re an experienced rider and depending on your height/weight specs, then maybe, but for most, IMO, with an 8 and Eddie’s specs, the 152 will be plenty and more enjoyable for certain things (e.g. trees). The 155 is good for you, by the sounds of it, but that’s not necessarily going to be the case for everyone. I would stick with 152 if I was Eddie, but everyone has a different perspective and I appreciate you sharing your experience.
What are good bindings for this deck? I have a Salomon district team pro for my freestyle deck. Would they work or would something like the new union force be better? I don’t think I want the heel with Shadow texh(whatever it’s called) for my big mountain board. Thanks!
Hey Brett
Thanks for your message. I think flex-wise, the District Pro would be a good match but if you didn’t want that shadowfit baseplate, then something like the New Force would work. Or the old Force or something like the Atlas.
I would personally pair the Ravine with bindings with a 6/10 to 7/10 flex ideally, which they all, more or less, fit into. The District Pro, I felt at a 7/10 flex. Salomon rates it “stiff”, but I’d say more mid-stiff. Not sure what you’re experience is with it, flex-wise. But if you wanted to look at some other 6/10 to 7/10 flex options you could check out the following:
>>Our top All Mountain Bindings Picks
>>Our Top All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings Picks
But if you’ve got your eye on the new Force I think it would work. I wouldn’t go softer than that, but I think it’s in range and I like the re-design overall.
Hope this helps with your decision
Awesome, exactly what I needed. As I wrote this, I got an offer from my buddy at my local shop for DOD on sale (this year). How does that compare, I didn’t see a review but the DOD I see similar to Atlas category? If not I like the Atlas for all-mountain, but need to keep in mind the flex of the Ravine. Thanks!
Hey Brett
We haven’t tested the DOD, so can’t say for sure, but on paper, they look like a good match to the Ravine, IMO. And we’ve liked other similar bindings from Rome, so it’s probably a good bet. The Atlas a really good choice for the Ravine, IMO.
Last suggestions because my buddy at my local shop has one for but if discount is the katana. Just not sure about the flex bc I’d want a “stiffer” one bc I have a 155 and probably could’ve sized up. If that matters at all!
Hey Brett
The Katana at 6.5/10 (by my feel) should be stiff enough. If the 155 is on the smaller size for you, then it will likely feel less stiff than a longer version, so I’d say the Katana is a good match.
Hi Nate,
What Rome Ravine board size do you recommend for me? Here are my specs:
Height: 5’8”
Weight: 175-180 lbs.
Boot Size: 8.5
Riding Style: Mostly groomers, bombing, lots of carving, no park, no jumps, no freestyle.
I think based on my specs my “standard all-mountain length” is around 157/158. Would the Ravine in a size 158 be ok for me or do you think I should go down to the 155? I see on Rome’s website that the Waist difference between the 155 vs 158 is only 0.1 (2.56 vs 2.57).
I am currently ridding a 2010 Ride Concept TMS in a size 159. That Ride board feels great to me in that size and it feels very nimble and easy for me to carve. However, the 159 only has a 25.1 waist.
Thanks,
Erik
Hi Erik
Thanks for your message.
Yeah the 155 has a 25.6cm waist and the 158 has a 25.76mm waist (I round up to 25.8cm) so it’s closer to a 0.2cm difference. But still, not a big difference. I would be leaning 155 for your specs. The fact that you’re riding a 159 makes it a closer call, for sure, but given the width of the Ravine vs your current board. In terms of waist width you’d be looking at around 27cm at the front insert and 26.9cm at the back insert on the 158 Ravine vs likely around 26.1cm on your current board (I haven’t measured the Concept TMS at the inserts so not sure of that exactly, but based on other Ride boards I’ve measured, it’s likely to be around that). So that’s quite a big difference. The 158 Ravine is likely to feel bigger than your current board (but not by much given the effective edge of the Concept TMS). With the 155 you’re still lookin at around 26.8cm at the front insert and 26.7cm at the back insert, so still quite a bit wider. Whilst it may not feel quite as big as your 159, it will feel closer than the 4cm difference suggests (mitigated somewhat by the effective edge difference). So, I think it depends on whether you want it to feel slightly bigger or slightly smaller than what you’re currently riding. Taking effective edge into account also, looks like the Concept TMS has a lot of effective edge vs overall length, which can make it feel bigger, so if you’re looking to get a similar size feel, then the 158 would be closer to it than the 155.
Hope this helps
Hope this helps
Thank you for the response and for the great explanation and details.
I just measured my Ride Concept TMS and here are the measurements:
Front/Tip Inserts: 25.5
Rear/Tail Inserts: 26.2
Waist: 25.0
Based on those measurements, it sounds like the Ravine 158 would feel much bigger than the Concept TMS, right? I definitely don’t want something that feels bigger than what I am currently riding. Going with your suggestion of the 155 Ravine seems like my best choice and it should give me quicker response for carving and maneuverability, right? Hopefully the effective edge on the 155 Ravine will still give me the same solid and stable feeling at high speed like the Concpet TMS gives me.
I could not find any information regarding this but is the Ravine considered a volume shifted board or standard?
Thanks for the help.
Hi Erik
I’ve never heard it officially been labelled as volume shifted, but it is to an extent, IMO. It’s not super wide like some volume shifted boards, but it’s wider than typical regular width boards.