Hello and welcome to my Arbor Westmark Camber review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Westmark Camber as a freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Westmark Camber a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other freestyle snowboards.
NOTE: This review hasn’t been updated beyond the 2023 model. We haven’t tested it since the 2020 model and it has undergone some noticeable changes since then. We will update once we’ve had a chance to re-test it.
Overall Rating
Board: Arbor Westmark Camber
Price: $549 (USD recommended retail)
Style: Freestyle/Park
Flex Rating: Medium (5/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (5/10)
Rating Score: 82.6/100
Compared to other Freestyle Boards
Out of the 37 Men’s Freestyle snowboards that I rated:
- The average price was $473 (USD)
- The average score was 82.3/100
- The highest score was 91.3/100
- The lowest score was 70.7/100
- The Westmark Camber ranked 17th out of 37
Overview of the Westmark Camber’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Westmark Camber’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
| Style | Freestyle | Flex | Medium (5/10) |
| Ability Level | Intermediate to Expert | Feel | Stable |
| Weight | On the lighter side of Normal (17.82 grams/cm) | Turn Initiation | Medium-Fast |
| Camber Profile | System Camber | Shape | True Twin |
| Stance Setback | Centered | Edge-hold | Good in hard and icy snow conditions (4/5) |
| Price | $549 (USD) | Base | Sintered |
Sizing
| Size (Length) | 150 | 153 | 156 | 158W |
| Waist Width (mm) | 253 | 254 | 255 | 266 |
| Weight Range (lbs) | 106-186 | 112-192 | 118-198 | 122-202+ |
| Weight Range (kgs) | 48-84 | 51-87 | 54-90 | 55-92+ |
* the 2022 model had a 157W and 159 that the 2023 model doesn’t have. The 158W size is new for the 2023 model. The waist width for the 150, 153 & 156 have also changed.
Who is the Westmark Camber Most Suited to?
The Westmark Camber is suited mostly to those that like to spend a lot of their time in the park and when in the park spending a lot of their time on jumps – be they small, medium or large jumps and whether they want just straight air or for spins.
Can certainly ride the rest of the mountain too – but mostly suited to freestyle when outside the park and favors a tighter turn radius than a long arcing one.
Not really a board for riding powder, but (like any) you can, you’ll just get a sore back leg keeping that nose afloat.
Not for beginners. Slightly too stiff – and whilst it’s forgiving for a full camber board, not forgiving enough for beginners.
The Westmark Camber in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Westmark Camber is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Arbor Westmark Camber 2019
Length: 156 (251mm waist width)
Date: March 5, 2018 & March 7, 2018
Conditions: Cloudy with flurries but visibility was mostly good – a couple of times it went fuzzy but mostly good. Nice medium-firmness to the snow. Not soft but not hard. Off groomer doable and groomers nice. (March 5th)
Sunny, short periods of cloud, but perfect vis. Good snow conditions. Getting on the slushy side later in the afternoon but all-round good snow (March 7th)
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 559mm (495mm to nose, 495mm to tail)
Stance Setback: Centered
Width at Inserts: 264mm front, 264mm back
Weight: 2780grams (6lb 2 oz)
Weight per cm: 17.82 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.20 grams/cm*
*based on a small sample size of 24 boards that I weighed
Flex
It is stiffer than a typical freestyle/park board – but not quite 6/10 by my feel. I would say a solid 5/10.
Powder
Not great in powder – I didn’t see much of it on the days that I rode it but you can tell from the feel of it – plus the fact it’s a centered, true twin with a full camber profile – that it wouldn’t be the board for deep powder. But that’s not what it’s designed for either.
Carving & Turning
You can get a good carve going on this but it’s more suited to short sharp carves as opposed to long, wide arcing carves. Naturally prefers smaller radius turns.
Surprisingly ok for skidded turns for a mid flexing all camber board. So maybe the “system” camber that Arbor uses does make a difference in making it more forgiving. And maybe the subtlety of the camber also makes a difference (camber looks and feels subtle on this board – not hugely pronounced).
Speed
Can handle speed pretty well, especially for a centered, true twin board. Not a mega-bomber but handles speed ok.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Uneven Terrain
Pretty good in uneven terrain without being great.
Jumps
Great on the approach, good pop, solid landings and great for spins – so pretty much the jumpers board. Only reason I didn’t give it 5/5 is that, whilst the pop was very good, it wasn’t out of this world good.
Approach: 5/5 – maneuverable and could handle speed on the approach
Landings: 4.5/5 – stable and could really stomp landings on this. Being medium flex helped it on larger jumps too
Pop: 4/5 – really good and easily accessible (i.e. didn’t have to really wind up to get the pop out of it) – but I have ridden boards with more pop, so I couldn’t give it 5/5
Switch
About as good as it gets. The only thing that would make it better if it was asym. But otherwise pretty much just as good riding switch as normal.
Jibbing
Was fine to jib with. To be exceptional on jibs I prefer a flat section between the feet or rocker and something softer flexing, but I felt pretty confident jibbing on this board none-the-less.
Pipe
I didn’t take it into a pipe – but it’s got decent edge hold in hard/icy conditions, has good speed for a twin and that speed and camber would help to drive it up the walls – and also had good pop – and being centered and twin and not too soft a flex, I think this would be a good pipe weapon.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | RATING (OUT OF 5) | CONTRIBUTION TO FINAL SCORE |
| Jumps: | 4.5 | 18/20 |
| Jibbing: | 3.0 | 12/20 |
| Spins: | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
| Switch: | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Buttering: | 4.0 | 8/10 |
| Uneven Terrain: | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Powder: | 2.0 | 2/5 |
| Speed: | 3.0 | 3/5 |
| Carving: | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Turns/Slashing: | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| TOTAL after normalizing | 82.6/100 |
Overall the Westmark Camber is a great freestyle board at a reasonable price – a more aggressive freestyle board than most – and that’s mostly down to being slightly stiffer and being all camber. But you can still get playful on it, but it’s certainly more aimed at aggressive freestyle riding.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you’re interested in learning more about the Westmark Camber, are ready to buy or want to research current prices or availability, check out the links below.
If you want to see how the Westmark Camber compared to other freestyle boards or want to check out some other options, check out the next link.
>>My Top 10 Men’s Freestyle Snowboards
Hello Nate! Hope you are doing good! Thanks for this post, it’s very useful. I’m considering buying this board and I have a couple of questions about it. To give you an idea of my level, I’m starting to do 360 on small to medium jumps on the park and I want to get something that helps me progressing on it (I like jibbing but I spend way more time on jumps). Is this board something that would do so? I weight 73 kg and I’m 1,80.
An issue might be my feet size. I currently use adidas Samba size 11. But I’m thinking in going for some boots with smaller footprints (I read your post on low profile boots and I might go for vans hi standard or adidas response). That’s also because this board is not easy to get here in Norway but I found one in 156 (264 mm at inserts). Do you think with mirror duck +15/-15 will do?
Finally I use union force asadachi as bindings. Do you think the boots I mentioned and the force would make a good set together with this board? I mostly ride on hard snow here in Oslo. Whatever suggestion from your part will be more than welcomed!
Thank you so much, have a nice one
Hi Ricardo
Thanks for your message.
I think the Westmark would work well for what you’re describing. It is, IMO, a really good board for jumps, but less so for jibs. But still fine for jibs – just not as good as some others.
In terms of size – I think the 156 works for you in terms of length. It’s the width that’s a tougher call, as you mention. With +15/-15 and low profile boots, you can probably get away with it, depending on how you like to carve. If you like to lay really deep high speed carves on the mountain, then it’s probably going to be too narrow even with those factors.
For reference on the boots measured:
– The last Adidas Response I measured (2021 model) was 1.9cm longer than mondo (really low profile), so for 11s, they would be roughly 30.9cm on the outersole. So around 4.5cm total overhang (roughly 2.5cm heel side and 2cm toe side) with 0 degree angle. With 15 degree angles, that’s very doable, IMO, depending on how you like to carve. If you’re predominantly park, you’ll likely be fine.
– The last Vans Hi Standard (2020 model) I measured was 2.7cm longer than mondo – still low profile but not as much so as the Response. So that would be more like 5.3cm total overhang – take off some of that with the binding angles, but still more risky. Note that this was the Hi-Standard OG and if I was you I would go with Hi Standard Pro if you were matching with the Westmark Camber
– The last Samba I measured (2019 model) was 2.1cm longer than Mondo – so almost as low profile as the response. That was a size 9.5, so your may not be the same, but if they’re the same or similar, and you have no other reason to change your boots, then you could stick with them as they are pretty low profile from my experience with them
The Force will work fine with the Westmark Camber – they are a good flex match – and they would match fine with the Adidas Response, Vans Hi-Standard Pro or Samba. If you’re riding predominantly freestyle, then, if you’re wanting to be quite fussy, then going with something with a little better board feel is also something to consider. Something like the Burton Malavita or Union Strata would be great options, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
B4 I ask my question, thanks for all your hard work!
So I demo’ed the Westmark Camber last weekend and currently sits at the top of my list. I’m moving from my beginner Raygun (I’m 5’7, 200lbs, 8.5 boot) and the Westmark does everything I expect from my beginner board, just better. More stable, skid turns ok, better pop, faster. The big ‘but’ is that it doesn’t quite excite me. Like its ‘what I know’ vs ‘kick my az’. In terms of other boards, I tried the Mercury (fast, edgy, but the kind of board you have to be on your game for), Jones Mtn Twin (for some reason didn’t feel as stable as other boards), Snowtrooper (prefer camber) and a Rossi Jibsaw (loved the hold, just not as fast as others). Is there another board I should be looking at, from your experience? I’m more of a groomer/carver that dabbles in park and backcountry. I’m supposed to be demoing the Assassin Pro next week.
Hi Derek
Thanks for your message.
The Assassin and Assassin Pro were two of the boards that popped into my head, as I was reading your comment, so it’s fitting that you’re getting on the Assassin Pro next week. If possible I would also look at the Assassin, to see if you prefer the slightly softer flex of it vs the Assassin Pro.
The Westmark Camber not something that I rate in powder, but if that’s not a big thing for you, then other boards I would look at would be the:
– Salomon Assassin (as discussed)
– YES Greats
– Capita Asymulator
Or if you wanted something a little more aggressive, then:
– Salomon Assassin Pro (as discussed)
– Endeavor Clout
– YES Ghost
– Niche Crux
And if you wanted a bit more powder performance, then something like:
– YES Standard
– Rossignol One LF
My instinct is telling me something around 5/10 or 6/10 flex will work best, based on your comments on the boards you’ve tried, and how you like to ride – and is probably a good bet, upgrading from the Raygun.
Hope this helps
Great thank you! How would you compare the Assassin vs jones mtn twin? I tried the ride algorhythm today and the torsional flex was waaaayyyy too much. The demo guy said, based on my feedback, the assassin pro is in the same realm so he recoed the standard assassin. Trying to find something that grips for carves!
Hi Derek
I haven’t ridden the Algorhythm but based on riding other similar Ride boards, they tend to be quite torsionally stiff. I didn’t find the Assassin Pro oppressively stiff torsionally (or over all) but without having ridden the Algorhythm I couldn’t say how much different they would be. Certainly the Assassin is very likely to be softer both torsionally and longitudinally vs the Algorhythym so that’s probably a safer bet.
The Assassin vs the Mountain Twin. The Assassin is softer both torsionally and longitudinally in that case too. Not by a massive amount but a noticeable amount. I would say that the Assassin has a little more personality in it’s carving. It has a bit more snap to it vs the Mountain Twin. The Mountain Twin, I find, you can lay a good carve on – but it’s more of a smooth carve vs a snappy carve, if that makes sense. Just based on your previous comments about the Westmark and not being excited by it, I feel like you might prefer the Assassin – and it’s something that’s a little more forgiving than something like the Mercury – and I would imagine vs something like the Algorhythm. The Assassin Pro is that too, but just with a bit more oomph to it. If you were able to get on an Assassin Pro to see how it felt that would be ideal, but based on everything else I would be leaning towards Assassin.
Awesome ty for the detailed reply! Trying the twin and assassin back to back this weekend! Appreciate it!
You’re very welcome Derek. Awesome that you’re getting a chance to try them back to back! Will be very curious to hear your thoughts after you’ve had a chance to test them.
Hi Nate,
I just picked up a 156 Westmark, but when I just realized my boot size is actually 11 and not 10.5 like I thought. Do you think I can get away with a size 11 boot on the 156 Frank April?
Thanks!
Hi Banks
Thanks for your message.
It’ll be pushing it a bit. The Westmark is fortunately quite wide at the inserts vs the waist width (264mm at the inserts vs 251mm at the waist) so that helps a little in your case, but whether it’s enough is borderline. I have found (with size 10s), that I’ve been able to get away with anything as narrow as 255mm at the inserts. For a size 11, that’s roughly the equivalent of 265mm at the inserts. But it also depends on your binding angles and how aggressive you rail your carves.
I’m not overly aggressive but also not un-aggressive either – and I usually ride with a +15/-15 binding angles. The more aggressive you ride and the straighter your binding angles, the more risk there is of boot drag. So, I think in some cases you’ll get away with an 11 on it, but it is borderline.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Do the uprise fenders give this board the feel that you don’t have edges out at the tips? What I’m asking is do you steer the board solely from the grip tech under your feet? Or does the side cut outside of the bindings still dig in and give you grip when your carving?
From what I’ve heard, people say this board can wash out due to the lack of edge control outside of the bindings.
Do you get a true camber feel, or does the uprise fenders make the board feel short and absent edge control on the outside edges?
Thanks!
Hi Bart
Thanks for your message.
It’s certainly not a strictly all-camber feel. The system camber with the uprise fenders does change the feel vs a traditional camber ride. But I wouldn’t say that there’s a lack of edge control outside the bindings – the effective edge outside the bindings certainly still engages when you’re on edge. But not in the same way it does with traditional camber. I wouldn’t say it feels short at all though. There’s quite a bit of effective edge vs overall length, so not a shorter feeling board.
If you’re really moving on this board – like high speed carving, then yeah it can wash out. It’s predominantly a freestyle board, IMO, and not something that’s designed specifically for high speed carving. It’s not a bad little carver and it’s not terrible at speed, but combine the two and it’s not a bomber. The system camber does really help with making it less catchy vs traditional camber, but if that’s not an issue for you and you prefer the feel of traditional camber or predominantly traditional camber, then that might be the way to go for you.
Hope this helps
Hi!
Im considering this for my freestyle / park board. I`m 6`2 / 195 / 10.5 US.
Would you recommend 156 or 157MW?
Hi Olke
Thanks for your message.
If it’s going to be your only board – I would go for the 159 – that’s still short for you – and more freestyle oriented, but will go better over the rest of the mountain – if you’re treating like an all-mountain-freestyle kind of ride. But if it’s going to be a dedicated park board then I think you can get away with 156/157. It will be quite short for your specs, but as a specialist park board, doable for sure. Especially given that it’s a board with a lot of effective edge compared to overall length.
Between the 156 and 157MW, it’s a tight call. With 10.5s you should be fine width-wise on the 156 – in terms of drag. The 156 is 264mm at the inserts at reference stance. So relatively wide vs the waist width. So I don’t think you’d have too many issues there. But if you wanted a wider, more solid landing platform, then the 157MW is an option. 157MW I would predict roughly around 273mm at the inserts. The 156 would be a more nimble ride, but the 157MW a more stable landing platform.
Hope this gives you more info to go off for your decision
Would you agree it makes sense for me to trade in my 19 jones mtn twin (160) for the (156 westmark)? I am doing a lot less powder and a lot more park, considering my home mtn is big bear/snow summit. I still want an all mtn capable board though. Thanks!~
Hi TJ
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, if you’re doing a lot more park, then you’ll likely appreciate the Westmark Camber, assuming you’re a relatively advanced rider. And sizing down for it is definitely a good idea – not a lot of length in nose or tail, so a lot of effective edge per length (and sizing down for something more freestyle is typically a good idea too).
It can certainly carve still and is OK at speed, without being a bomber, but it’s really not great in powder. But if you’re not worried about that, then it’s likely a good option for you.
In terms of whether the 156 is the best size I would need more info (height, weight, boot size, ability level) but assuming the 160 Mountain Twin is your best size for the Mountain Twin, then the 156 is likely the right choice for the Westmark.
Hope this helps