The Rome Stale Crewzer is the big brother of Rome's Warden and as you'd expect it beefs things up compared to the Warden, so works better than the Warden for more aggressive riders who need more stability for faster speeds, bigger jumps and deeper carves.
In this review, I will take a look at the Stale Crewzer as an all-mountain* snowboard, which we define as the do-it-all swiss-army knives of boards.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Stale Crewzer a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other men's all-mountain snowboards.
* Note that this board used to be in the aggressive all-mountain category, but we decided to make the switch as we feel it's a slightly better fit in this category.
Overall Rating
Board: Rome Stale Crewzer
Price: $599
Style: All-Mountain (semi aggressive)
Flex Rating: Medium (6/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (bordering on mid-stiff) (6.5/10)
Rating Score: 88.6/100
Compared to other Men’s All-Mountain Boards
Of the 32 current model all-mountain snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Stale Crewzer ranked 8th out of 32
Overview of the Stale Crewzer’S Specs
Check out the tables for the Stale Crewzer’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
All-Mountain (semi aggressive)
PRICE:
$599 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID CAMBER
Hybrid CAMBer - Rome's "Fusion Camber" which felt predominantly camber to me.
SHAPE:
setback stance:
Centered
BASE:
Sintered- Rome's "SinterStrong Base"
weight:
FELT Normal
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
151 | 251 | 114-154 | 52-70 |
154 | 253 | 126-166 | 58-76 |
157 | 255 | 138-178 | 63-81 |
158W | 265 | 150-190 | 68-87 |
160 | 256 | 156-196 | 71-89 |
161W | 267 | 168-208 | 77-95 |
164W | 268 | 180-220 | 82-100 |
Who is the Stale Crewzer Most Suited To?
The Stale Crewzer is best suited to anyone who is looking for a do-it-all board that's on the more aggressive side, but doesn't take such an aggressive approach as to make it hard to ride slow and a bit more casually when needed/wanted.
It's super versatile (though if you ventured into deep powder regularly you'd want a separate board for that), so would make a really good one-board-quiver, if you're not in deep powder often.
And would be a great daily driver in a quiver with a more powder/freeride oriented board and/or a more park focused board.
Not suitable for beginners, IMO. And even lower level intermediate riders may struggle, but anyone from solid Intermediate who want a slightly more aggressive than typical all-mountain board should get on well with this board.
TEST/REVIEW DetailS FOR THE Stale Crewzer
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Stale Crewzer is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Rome Stale Crewzer 2025, 158cm (255mm waist width)
Date: March 24, 2024
Powder
Nothing on the day, but on feel and specs, it's going to be pretty average in powder. It does have a longer nose than tail and some rocker in the nose and tail to help with float but not much else going for it for powder performance.
Carving
Felt real nice to carve. It's not going to out carve stiffer boards when carving at higher speeds, but for moderate up to moderately fast speeds, it carves really well and was really fun to carve. Liked long drawn out carves and medium radius carves the most, but you could do shorter sharper versions with it too.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: It's not one that will turn with the slightest of weight shifts or anything and you won't get away with everything on it, but it's also not the hardest to initiate turns on both physically and technically either. But you do have to put in a little effort and can't be too lazy with your technique.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: When you do put that effort in it snaps from edge-to-edge quite quickly, even at slower speeds. It's not effortless, but also not something you have to throw too much into.
Catchiness: There's an element of catch in there but it's not overly catchy overall. And most of what catch is there is felt at slow speeds. Vs the Warden (which I also tested that day and which is kind of like a softer flexing version of this) there was a little more catch, which likely comes down to the stiffer torsional flex vs the Warden.
Speed
Felt reasonably fast and was stable at speed up to some pretty high speeds. Not limitless though - there is a point you can get too where it does start to feel a little unstable. But you've gotta be riding it pretty fast to get to that point.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: I found the Stale Crewzer to be a fairly damp board, which helped in the crud. I didn't feel much chatter when in messy snow and was pretty stable in it as well. It wasn't immune to being bucked now and then, but it took quite a bit to do it.
Trees/Bumps: While it takes a bit of effort to whip it from edge-to-edge, it also snaps to that new edge a little faster than the Warden, when you do put that effort in. I didn't get to experience it in powdered trees but I suspect it wouldn't be amazing.
Jumps
Good pop and not too difficult to access and strikes a good middle ground between stability and maneuverability. A board I really liked getting air on.
Pop: It was a little harder to access its pop vs the Warden and my control board (Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker) but still nothing too hard to extract. And total pop was really decent - a good bit more total pop than the Warden and TW.
Approach: A really good balance of being both fairly maneuverable and quite stable. Just leaning on the more stable end of the spectrum.
Landing: Stomper! But at same time I felt I could adjust and speed check when I needed to, without too much difficulty and fairly forgiving of errors.
Side-hits: Really nice. To be picky, I slightly prefer a board a little more maneuverable and with a little more easy to access pop to be a little more ideal for the side-hits I tend to seek out. But it's still really good and there's still decently easy pop access and still decently maneuverable with a bit of effort.
Small jumps/Big jumps: This one is for those who like their jumps large, XL and beyond. I don't test beyond L, but this would for sure be able to handle the biggest of jumps, IMO.
Switch
A little bit of concentration needed on transitions and when riding switch and setting up or landing in switch but felt really similar riding in the other direction and not too punishing of poor switch technique.
Spins
A little trickier on setup vs warden but still nothing too tricky. There's that little bit more catch in there, so you've got to be a bit more deliberate and dialed in, but if you are it's nothing too tricky.
Definitely doesn't over spin after landing and while it's not the easiest to revert/rewind on the snow, when necessary, it's also something that's doable to an extent.
Jibbing
I wasn't quite as confident as I was with the Warden, and it wouldn't be a board that I'd typically take on rails, if I wasn't testing it. But a stronger jibber would likely be fine with it (jibs are for sure the weakest part of my riding).
Butters
I found it took a little more to get the nose and tail to start flexing vs the Warden but it still wasn't too hard and they locked in nicely. Not something I'd personally ever be able to over-flex.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| Factor | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Powder | 3 | 9/15 |
| Carving | 4 | 8/10 |
| Turns | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Speed | 4 | 8/10 |
| Crud | 4 | 8/10 |
| Trees | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Switch | 4 | 8/10 |
| Jumps | 4 | 8/10 |
| Spins | 4 | 4/5 |
| Butters | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Rails | 3 | 3/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 88.6/100 |
The Stale Crewzer is a great do-it-all board for those that want a board that can handle a bit more of an aggressive rider. It's more stable at speed and can hold a deeper carve than the typical all-mountain board and really likes to get air, particularly if you like to go big.
But at the same time, it's not terrible at slower speeds and you don't have to ride it aggressively all the time.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
To learn more about the Stale Crewzer, or if you're ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
To check out some other all-mountain snowboard options, or to see how the Stale Crewzer compares to others, check out our top rated all-mountain snowboards by clicking the button below.
I was thinking about getting this board. I live in the PWN and needed an new “everything” board. I’m just lost when it comes to the sizing. I’m 5’7 about 165-170lbs and I have a size 11 boot. I know it’s weird combo with my height and boot size.
Would it make sense to go for the 158w or would that just been too big of a board for me? I’m just worried about my boot size and the overhang if I wanted to lay down some deep carves.
Thanks for the help and the reviews.
Hi Rodger, thanks for your message.
Yeah, I feel like the 158W would be a bit big overall, with the combination of length and width. But the 157 would be pushing it being too narrow. I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 156/157. If they had this in a 155W, I would like that for you, but unfortunately, they don’t do it in that size. You’re looking at around 265mm at the inserts on the 157 (assuming a roughly 22″ (560mm) stance width – narrower if a narrower stance width and wider if a wider stance width, but not by much) which could cause problems if you’re laying down deep carves. There’s certainly some risk there, IMO.
I am about your height and weight with size 9.5/10 boots. In between a 155cm and 158cm. Would you think that the 155 would be too undersized for me? I tend to prefer boards around that size. Coming from an Arbor Coda 154.
Hey Matt
I don’t think it would be too undersized. I think it’s on the small side for you, but within a good range. If you’re coming from a 154 Coda and didn’t find that too small, you shouldn’t find this too small.
I rode this most recently in a 158 and I liked that size, but I rode an older version in the 156, when it had a 156 and I didn’t find that too small.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m debating between getting this or the Warden, the only thing I’m concerned about is that you put this board in the aggressive category. I would say I’m a solid intermediate rider and want a nice one quiver board for everything but I wouldn’t say I want to ride extremely aggressively. You also say that the Warden is on the mellower side so what I want is kind of in between the two.
Any advice would help, Thanks
Hi Matthew
I wouldn’t say the Stale Crewzer is super aggressive, but it’s on the more aggressive side. As in, it feels at its best when ridden more aggressively. It’s not something that you have to be ultra aggressive with for it to feel good or anything – and you don’t have to be aggressive with it all the time, but it does feel at its best when you ride it with higher energy, than when you ride it more casually.
For a one-quiver-board that’s right in between mellow and aggressive, the best examples that I’ve ridden are the YES Standard and Jones Mountain Twin. If you wanted to go slightly more to the higher speed/slightly more aggressive than average but a touch less aggressive than the Stale Crewzer, the Capita Mercury is a good bet, IMO.
But as I say the Stale Crewzer isn’t anything ultra aggressive and the Warden is pretty close to being right in the middle, but it’s just that little bit more on the mellow side of middle, if that makes sense.
Hope this gives you more to go off
hi Nate,
I’m the intermedia rider, focusing on carving and jump compare to the jones mt and stale crwezer and yes standard which one you recommend . Btw may i know what ur point to say between mellow and aggressive, the best examples that I’ve ridden are the YES Standard and Jones Mountain Twin.
Hi Jialong, thanks for your message.
The Standard and Mountain Twin would be easier riders for an intermediate rider than the Stale Crewzer, IMO. I find the Stale Crewzer a bit stiffer than the Standard and MT and while it’s not super catchy, it’s more prone to catching an edge than the other two. In terms of mellow and aggressive – the Standard, in my experience, feels the most mellow of the 3. It’s still not super mellow – it’s got some ability to handle a more aggressive rider – but I felt it to be a little bit more mellow than the Mountain Twin, but not by too much. The Stale Crewzer is the most aggressive of the three, in my experience – and what I mean by that is that it takes a more aggressive riding approach to get the best out of it. The advantage of that is that it can handle a more aggressive approach, if that’s how you like to ride. But it’s not super aggressive – as in, you can ride it a little more mellow and it responds fine and is still fun to ride – but you want to be a little more aggressive with it to get it feeling its best and can be harder work, if you’re not used to riding like that. Most intermediate riders aren’t riding super aggressively, so I would say that the Mountain Twin or Standard are a better bet, if you’re intermediate, unless you’re particularly strong/athletic and ride with a more aggressive style already.
Hope that makes sense/helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I got a Service Dog as my first cruiser board…
And looking to step up with a more all-rounder.
I quite like Rome products (use the Vice bindings), so looking to maybe stick with the brand for a more all-rounder/all-mountain board.
Do you have any experience with the Rome Freaker? Looks kind of similar to the Crewzer, but a little cheaper, so a little confused which to choose.
10.5 boots, 200lbs, PNW conditions. Thinking 158 should be a decent size… or do you recommend a wide?
Thank you!
Hi Tim
Thanks for your message.
We haven’t tested the Freaker, so can’t say from experience the differences. On paper, the Freaker looks to be a little stiffer and with a slower, lower quality base (which is likely the biggest factor in the price difference – two major things which tend to make boards cheaper or more expensive are flex (stiffer usually more expensive) and base). The Stale Crewzer is likely a little lighter too. But in terms of how they feel in reality, hard to say, having not tested it.
I think the Stale Crewzer would be a good compliment to the Service Dog (again, haven’t ridden the service dog, but based on specs).
I think the main thing, depending on how fussy you are about base speed (and potentially lightness) is how stiff you’ll want it. The Stale Crewzer looks to be a little stiffer than the Service Dog and then the Freaker a little stiffer again. So, if you were wanting something more of an all-rounder but similar/not too much stiffer than the Service dog, then the Stale Crewzer would be the way to go.
Length-wise, I think you’d be fine on the 158 of either. But if you could let me know your height as well. Weight and boot size are the most important sizing factors, but I like to take into account height as well, because it does have a leverage factor. Also the size of your service dog would be helpful too.
Width-wise, I think you should be fine with 10.5s. If you ride with really bulky boots, have a flat back binding angle and like really carve deep, then it could be pushing it, but in most scenarios, I wouldn’t go wide with either the Stale Crewzer or Freaker.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the reply!
Sometimes all these manufacturers play word salad in naming their base materials, so it’s a little confusing how much “more” speed you’re getting from a more expensive base.
Anyways, I’m 6ft 1, riding Vans Infuse 10.5. I hear that Vans are smaller footprint… but idk. It’s smaller than the 32s I’ve had before… but they still look bulkier than say Ride/K2 boots. When I tested them at the shop.
I had this random discussion about overhang with a buddy recently… which pretty much summed up as: if overhang was so “bad”, then every board would be a wide! Do wish more manufacturers publish widths at insert packs so it’s easier to calculate the ideal width of a snowboard to get.
Appreciate all the work, effort and advice you give back to the community.
Hope you have a great season!
Hi Tim
Firstly, yes some overhang is a good thing for sure. If you’ve got no overhang at all, then the board is likely too wide for you. But too much overhang can lead to boot drag. And yes, I totally agree that more brands should publish width at inserts. We try our best to get as many boards measured so we’ve got the info for as many as we can.
On average I’ve found Vans to be low profile – in terms of length, which is what we’re concerned about when it comes to boot drag. I found the Infuse was quite bulky around the top of the boot, but length-wise a shorter footprint. Ride tend to be fairly good in terms of footprint too, though on average not quite as short as I’ve found Vans to be. K2, in my experience, tend to have a longer than average footprint. I think so long as your not eurocarving with a flat back binding angle, you’ll be fine on the 158.
I’d consider going to 158 for your specs to be sizing down a little, but given you already have the Service Dog in your Quiver, it might make sense or even if you just prefer to go a little shorter.
Hey Tim…Great review! How do you think this compares up to the Burton Custom? Mostly what it does better Vs worse?
Nate* (not Tim). Got sidetracked reading haha
All good David.
Thanks for your message.
I would say the following:
– Stale Crewzer has to be ridden a little more aggressively. Both are boards that like to be ridden a little aggressively, but a little more so with the Stale Crewzer I found. Neither are boards that you have to be riding fast/aggressive all the time – they have some ability to slow down and still be OK to ride, but prefer to be ridden a little aggressively, with the Stale Crewzer a little more so.
– Custom a little more snappy than the Stale Crewzer – which is a smoother feeling ride. A little less energy, particularly if you don’t put energy into it.
– Stale Crewzer a little better in icy conditions, but it’s pretty close.
– For easy turns/slashing I slightly preferred the Custom – again really going back to how much energy/how aggressively you need to ride each board to get the most out of it. The Custom turns a little easier with less effort input versus the Stale Crewzer, in my experience.
– Slightly preferred the Custom for jumps. Breaking that down further. I found it was easier to pop. They both had a similar amount of overall pop – maybe the Stale Crewzer a touch more. But the Custom you could access that pop with less effort. With the Stale Crewzer there wasn’t a lot of easy pop. You had to wind it up to get it. When you did it gave back in spades. But the Custom was easier to pop – and then when you wound it up, it gave a little more. Also preferred the Custom on sidehits overall. But both very good on jumps too, so this is nitpicking a little bit.
– Slightly preferred Stale Crewzer for crud. It smashed through it or over it and it did really well to remain stable and carry on. Custom wasn’t bad there either, but not quite as good as Stale, IMO.
For everything else (speed, carving, powder etc) they were as good as each other, in my experience.
Hope this gives you more to go off