The following 10 boards have been selected as my picks for the top all mountain snowboards for the 2019/20 season.
Each board is given a rating out of 100 for easier comparison.
Price has not been considered in the ratings.
Of the 34 different all-mountain boards that I rated:
O.k. let’s get into the top 10, starting with #10.
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #10
Board: Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Rocker
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (6.5/10)
Feel: Semi-Loose
Smart rating score: 84.0/100
The Bryan Iguchi Pro Rocker is technically all rocker, but it has a feel that belies that fact. Whilst it might not be a bomber for speed, it can still lay down a carve well.
And how it performs in powder and uneven terrain, whilst still maintaining a buttery, nimble feel and still being good with jumps, makes this a very versatile, fun surfy, ride that was particularly fun in the trees.
Check out the video for more about the Iguchi Pro Rocker
Score Breakdown for the Iguchi Pro Rocker
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 3.0 | 9/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPINS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
PIPE | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 84.0/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #9
Board: Burton Custom Flying V
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (5.5/10)
Feel: Semi-Loose
Smart rating score: 85.2/100
The Custom Flying V is one of those boards that can ride any style, so it's great if you're after one board to ride the park, groomers, trees and in the backcountry - and however you like to ride in all those areas.
Which is basically my definition of all-mountain riding.
This board is just consistent across all categories - and has a feel that is more on the playful rather than aggressive side. If you're looking for a more aggressive version of this it also comes in a traditional camber model - but that makes it a very different board (and less versatile in my opinion).
If versatile, light and on the playful side is what you're looking for, this is a great option.
Check out the video for more about the Custom Flying V
Score Breakdown for the Custom Flying V
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 3.0 | 9/15 |
SPEED | 3.0 | 9/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 85.2/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #8
Board: Yes Typo
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (4.5/10)
Smart rating score: 87.7/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
Described as a YES Basic on steroids, the Typo just gives you a little bit more aggression than the Basic. It has less rocker in the tip and tail giving it a bit more of a camber feel, and has a harder/faster sintered spec base.
And with a small setback stance it has a subtly more directional feel to it, than the Basic.
But it's still on the more freestyle end of all-mountain and is proficient with jumps, jibs and riding switch with ease, and butters remarkably easily, so it’s a great all-rounder.
Learn more about the Typo in the video below
Score Breakdown for the Typo
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.0 | 9/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 3.0 | 9/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPINS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.5 | 4.5/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.7/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #7
Board: Niche Story
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Smart rating score: 88.3/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
And the number 7 board on the list, we have the Niche Story.
If you like your board a little on the stiffer side, need something that can handle hard/icy conditions really well - and gives you just a bit more for carving/speed than the average all-mountain deck, then the Story should be firmly on your radar.
Not a particularly good jibber and not super buttery but can tear it up on and off groomer a-like, when things are particularly icy or when the snow is dumping.
Learn more about the Story in the video below
Score Breakdown for the Story
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 12/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPINS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
BUTTERS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
JIBBING | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 88.3/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #6
Board: Slash Brainstorm
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (5.5/10)
Smart rating score: 88.3/100
And the #6 all-mountain snowboard on the list – the Brainstorm by Slash.
Alongside the YES Typo (see #8 above) this is the least expensive board in the list.
But price isn't the only appealing thing about the Brainstorm. This is a seriously high quality all-mountain machine ready to tear up the park, pipe, groomers and backcountry a-like.
If you're looking for the ultimate in versatility in a ride that's more playful than aggressive, then the Brainstorm might be the board you've been looking for.
Check out the video below for more on the Brainstorm
Score Breakdown for the Brainstorm
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 12/15 |
CARVING | 3.0 | 9/15 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPINS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 88.3/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #5
Board: Rossignol One LF
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (6/10)
Smart rating score: 88.3/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
Formerly called the One Magtek, renamed the One LF (for “Light Frame”) - for the 2018, 2019 & 2020 models, the One from Rossi, coming in at number 5, is one of the most consistent boards for do-it-all riding in any condition.
The One is also awesome for anyone who often rides in hard and icy conditions, but also excels in powder, is rather buttery and quite nimble. It can handle more speed than you'd think for all that - and you can still play in the park with it.
As far as the definition of "do-it-all" is concerned not many do it as well as the One LF.
Check out the video for more on the One LF
Score Breakdown for the One LF
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 12/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 12/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 6/10 |
SPINS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 88.3/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #4
Board: Nitro Team Gullwing
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (6/10)
Feel: Stable (ever so slightly on the looser side of stable)
Smart rating score: 88.9/100
The Team Gullwing, coming in at #4, does really well at achieving a great balance between aggressive and playful, and the balance between being damp and smooth but also snappy.
It's very consistent across various terrain and capable for any style - as any good all-mountain board worth it's salt, should be.
Check out the video for more about the Team Gullwing
Score Breakdown for the Team Gullwing
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
BUTTERS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 88.9/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #3
Board: Jones Mountain Twin
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (6/10)
Smart rating score: 89.5/100
A mainstay on this list over the years, the Mountain Twin is extremely consistent across all categories. It’s the definition of ride-everywhere, do-everything.
In fact it was only under 3.5 out of 5 for just one of the factors (Jibbing). This is a board I was definitely comfortable with everywhere on the mountain and it’s super consistent across conditions and across riding styles.
Learn more about the Mountain Twin in the video below
Score Breakdown for the Mountain Twin
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 12/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
BUTTERS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 89.5/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #2
Board: Capita Mercury
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (6.5/10)
Smart rating score: 89.5/100
Coming in at #2 is the Capita Mercury.
I used to categorize the Mercury as aggressive all-mountain, but decided this year it was better suited to this category. So, this is probably the most aggressive ride on this list.
But it's still something that you can slow down and play around on to an extent - which is why every year I've debated putting here instead of there.
Whilst not the most buttery or jib friendly, the Mercury more than makes up for it with it's prowess for speed, carving and jumps - and pretty good in the deep stuff too.
Check out the video for more about the Mercury
Score Breakdown for the Mercury
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 12/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SWITCH | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
BUTTERS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
JIBBING | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 89.5/100 |
ALL-MOUNTAIN BOARD #1
Board: YES Standard
- US
- CANADA
Flex: Medium (6/10)
Smart rating score: 92.0/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
The Standard has changed quite a bit over the years and it really has evolved to be the Standard by which all other all-mountain boards are measured against, IMO.
The 2015-16 model was a more aggressive-all-mountain board and then it changed into a great all-round deck capable to do whatever you want it to.
The 2018 model evolved once more – and became even better, IMO. The main changes from the 2017 model being the addition of "Mid Bite" - which helped to make the board more dynamic, better for stomping landings and better in hard/icy conditions - plus some tweaks in the sidecut and effective edge.
2020 & 2019 have kept things essentially the same as the 2018 model, but the core is now noticeably lighter - making my #1 all-mountain board, even better for 2019 & 2020.
You can still get really aggressive on this board and lay down a good carve but it’s also great for jumps, spins, riding switch and it's also surprisingly buttery. And to top it all off, it rides well in powder too - particularly so, when you set your bindings up in the slam back inserts.
Check out the video for more on the Standard
Score Breakdown for the Standard
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 12/15 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
SWITCH | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPINS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
JIBBING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
PIPE | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 92.0/100 |
What Would be Your Choice?
The perfect all mountain board for you in this list is not necessarily the one with the highest score. I encourage you to look at the score breakdowns to see what will be best suited for your own needs.
Thanks for reading and I hope that this list has helped to narrow down your options. Check out the links under each board to learn more about the boards.
Hi Nate,
Amazing tips mate – very informative and quick turns on answers! Super sharp.
I am 5’10 and around 160 pounds. Size 10 boots. Always hard to rate yourself but I think I would be a 6 on your skill chart I have been riding every winter in Ontario, Canada for around 15+ years. Looking for a new All Mountain board ideal predominately for groomed blue and black runs but also one that can perform during the annual trip out West in whatever powder presents itself. I am starting to push myself a little more off the beaten path. Ontario can be icy of course and so I definitely want stability and edge control and performance on uneven terrain (especially with speed). I very rarely hit the park (the odd box to two) but no need to worry about that given I am 46 and need to stay in good shape for my three kids 🙂
My existing board is super old – a RIDE Control board – 158. I was still learning when I got it but I definitely like the stability and length – especially when doing aggressive carving. I have tried shorter boards and understand their specific purpose etc but I feel less comfortable. Anything around 157, 158 and maybe 159 seems to suit me.
After reading a few reviews I feel some of the boards I should consider (in no specific order) include: Burton Custom Flying V, Capita Mercury, Yes TYPO or YES Standard.
Any advice / thoughts which one I should lean to? Other better options?
Thanks mate
Matt
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning towards the Standard and Mercury of those 4, for what you’re describing. The Custom Flying V, and the flying V shape in general, I haven’t found to be that good in hard/icy conditions – so that’s the biggest reason I wouldn’t go there for you. The Typo is doable, but I think based on what you’re describing, something with a bit more in terms of speed and carving might suit you better.
The Standard is very good in hard/icy conditions, in my experience – and it’s decent in powder. Better in powder when you use the slam back inserts, which you could do on your trips out west, if you get powder days. All round a good option.
Not as good in hard/icy conditions, but still OK, the Mercury is another one that will give you more for speed & carving vs the likes of the Typo. And you’re talking a good step up in terms of stiffness. The Typo I would rate around 4.5/10 for stiffness and the Mercury 6.5/10 (the Standard 6/10). I think for how you want to ride a little bit more stiffness is a good idea. That said I wouldn’t go too stiff at 160lbs. But around 6/10, 7/10 flex I think would suit.
The Rossi One, Niche Story (if you wanted to go another step stiffer), Nitro Team Gullwing and Jones Mountain Twin would all also work well for what you’re describing.
If you were to go Standard, I would go 156. It’s a wider board and sizing down a little is a good idea for it, IMO, depending on boot size. But with 10s and your specs, I would go 156.
For the Mercury, I think the 157 would be your best bet.
For the Typo, if you did think you wanted a more easy going option, I would go 158.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate. I will keep you posted on where I land.
Cheers
Matt
You’re very welcome Matt. Look forward to hearing which way you go.
Nate,
I am moving quickly on the YES standard….any bindings you particularly recommend as a good match? I like the sound of Burton Cartel but am open to any ideas.
Also I now see my old boots are 10.5 not 10 but figure you still recommend the Standard 156 given my height and weight (closer to 165 pounds right now).
Cheers
Matt
Hi Matt
Yeah the Burton Cartel would work well with the Standard, IMO. There are others that work too, but Cartel would be one of my top recommendations for the Standard, so a solid choice there, IMO.
I would still go 156 for you, even with 10.5s.
Hello Nate, you are doing a wonderful job here! kudoz!
I am looking for a piece of advice: I am 40 yo 220 lbs, size 14,5 (nitro team boots), am currently riding a Ride Wildlife 163W (2016). I am looking for change of gear, intermediate level, I am doing bunny hops on the slope, started carving both sides, can speed up to 75-80 km/h.
My current conditions of riding are usually groomed and ice runs, seldomly pow-wow (love it, but the conditions here in Romania don’t usually make it dump massive amounts of snow)
Ideally i would look for something wide, xtra-wide, short and fat, for carving, all mountain and powder (if any). I would ideally go down towards 159-ish boards, if I can eliminate toe/heel drag.
any input is much appreciated
Hi Mihai
Thanks for your message.
Given your boot size, and given that you want to size down a little but get that extra width, I think you would be a good candidate for a Never Summer Westbound 160DF – the DF stands for Drag Free, and it’s nice and wide. It’s perhaps a little stiffer than what I would usually recommend for an intermediate level, but sizing down to that 160 length should counter some of that extra stiffness.
I could hunt for some short/fat options too but that DF West Bound would work really well, IMO.
Hope this helps
it helps a lot, thank you!
You’re very welcome Mihai. Hope you’re having a great season!
Hi Nate,
Appreciate you putting all the information out there. I’m a 5 on your skill level chart, 5’10” 174lbs, size 9.5 boot. I’m also long past my prime (46) and have not snowboarded for about 15 years. My equipment predates Y2k! I am looking to ease back into it with a new all-around board that’ll help build confidence back, pop with less effort, while not taxing my aging knees and ankles too much. I don’t see deep powder, I don’t try to go as fast as I can, and I avoid trees at all cost (one bad memory will do), but I am happy to do small park jumps and would like to get better at it. Would it be out of my league to be looking at Burton Custom Flying V, or should I be looking at Process Flying V or Name Dropper? Can you recommend a non-Burton alternative? Much appreciated.
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message.
I don’t think the Custom Flying V would be out of your league. It’s quite an easy going board – easy to turn and forgiving. The pop is easy to extract too, so I think it sounds like it would suit you well. The biggest downsides are when you try to ride it really fast in harder conditions, then it can feel a bit washy, but if you’re not really charging in those conditions, then I don’t think you’ll find that an issue. At your level and how you describe your riding, I think the Custom Flying V over the Process Flying V and certainly over the Name Dropper – which is a more park specialized board, IMO.
If easy going, all-round, confidence building and easy pop is what you’re after, you could also look at the Slash Brainstorm, YES Typo, Never Summer Snowtrooper or something more all-mountain-freestyle like the GNU Rider’s Choice or Capita Asymulator. Those are the first that come to mind for what you’re describing.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I am looking for advice on a board. I am getting back into snowboarding after having taken 6 or so years off. I am 5’7” weighing about 185lbs. I am looking for something all mountain that I can still do entry level tricks, carve, and handles good in powder. Most of my time will be spent on trail. I would consider myself an advanced beginner/intermediate rider. Looking for a nice board that I can grow and advance my skills.
My early research has pointed me towards the Rossignol Templar, yes Libre, yes typo, K2’s raygun, or the Jones frontier. I am open to any and all recs.
Hi Chadd
Thanks for your message.
For what you’re describing, I would say the Typo, Libre & Templar would be your best options. The Jones Frontier doable, but it’s a little more aggressive, a little more advanced than the others. It would be a steeper learning curve. The Raygun isn’t something that I’ve ridden, so I’m not sure there. On specs, it would be doable – though there isn’t any camber in the profile, which means you might find it lacking in terms of carving and pop, particularly once you advance.
Size-wise, I would be looking at something around 155-157 for your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate, thank you for the insight. Your reviews and recommendations are awesome and I greatly appreciate you helping me.
Do you think their is significant difference between the typo and the Libre to justify the price? Are their any other boards that I didn’t mention that you think I should look into?
Hi Chadd
I think you’ve got some good options there. Could add the Never Summer Snowtrooper or Slash Brainstorm into that mix if you wanted, but one of those would be a good bet.
Between the Typo and Libre, there’s not a massive difference, if you were looking to save cash on the Libre. I would say the Libre is a little better than the Typo in powder, with the Typo being a slightly better carver. Maybe the Typo over Libre in terms of jumps too, but otherwise, not a giant difference. You do get the Sintered Spec base (which is kind of in between a sintered and extruded base) on the Typo vs the Extruded base on the Libre. So the Typo has a better base. That’s probably a big part of the extra cost for the Typo vs the Libre.
I am currently using 2017 burton process flying v + mission bindings. I am looking for an upgrade because I think the board loses stability as it goes fast. Is Yes Standard good for me?
What size should I choose? I am 5ft8 and bit shy of 130 pounds.
I ride mostly in Japan, I can carve blues completely with switch and do all 180s when there is enough snow I go into the trees and under the chairlift. I think I am somewhere in between intermediate 6 and advanced 7.
Hi Herrick
Thanks for your message.
I think the Standard would be a good upgrade in terms of something that feels more stable, but without being like super aggressive or stiff or anything like that. I think it would be a good transition up from the Process Flying V. Size-wise, I think the 149 is likely your best bet, but if you could also let me know your boot size, that would be great.
Hope this helps
my boot size is 8.5 (I am wearing the Hi-standard from vans). I recently picked up M size union atlas at a discount because I felt the missions are too soft for me and I always had to strap in too much which affects my blood flow of my feet. Why 149 but not 151? Am I going to see any difference in carving and riding switch?
Thanks again.
for additional information, I am riding a 152 process flying v and somehow you might be right it feels too long sometimes. I think once I get 149 my turn would become even easier but I lose a bit of stability?
Hi Herrick
Typically going shorter, all else being equal, will lead to a more maneuverable board that’s better for freestyle & trees, but will sacrifice in terms of stability at speed and float in powder. However, the Standard vs the Process Flying V will still give you more in terms of stability at speed, carving etc, even in a smaller size.
I would usually say around that 150-152 range for your specs, but the Standard is wider than the average board and going a little shorter because of that extra width is a good idea, IMO. With 8.5 boots and your specs, I think 149 is your best bet. But you could ride the 151 too. It’s definitely an option if you want to get more stability at speed and float in powder, but I would be leaning towards the 149, as I think it would be the best length/width combo for your specs.
Hello, I’m looking into a new board. I’m an all-mountain rider. Currently have an old K2 Ambush 159, which I like quite bit, but it’s about 18 years old now! I’ve slowed down a little at age 54 with creaky knees. I ride mostly in Maine where it can get icy with variable conditions, but we do get some good powder dumps a few times a year when we’re lucky. I’m looking at switching to Burton’s step in bindings to save my knees so the board would need to match up well with those type of bindings. I found good deals on a Burton Flying V 159 and a Rome Reverb Rocker 161 midwide, but I’m not sure if either board will be good for my style and work with the step ins.
Hi Ben
Thanks for your message.
Burton Step Ons are designed to work on any snowboard, so no issues there. They’re not exclusive to Burton’s Channel System – they work for 2 x 4, 4 x 4 and the Channel.
The Burton Custom Flying V (assuming that’s what you’re referring to – or is the Process Flying V?) is quite an easy going board, so I think in that sense it would suit what you’re describing for the most part. The only thing is that it’s not the best in hard/icy conditions and since you ride those a lot, that’s the biggest issue there.
I don’t test Rome gear currently, but from what I know of the Reverb Rocker it is pretty good in hard/icy conditions. But it’s also a more aggressive board by the looks. Even though it has rocker in the name, it’s predominantly camber. Though in saying that, it looks to be not too stiff flexing – and if you’re board is 18 years old, I’m guessing it’s all camber, so you will be used to that. As for the size, being a mid-wide could be a bad thing, depending on your boot size. And can’t comment on the length without knowing your specs. If you could let me know your height, weight and boot size, I can give you my opinion on size, if you’re looking for a sizing opinion.
Some other good options that are good in hard/icy conditions and are easy going to ride would be:
– Rossignol One LF
– YES Typo
– Slash Brainstorm
– Nitro Team Gullwing
– Never Summer Snowtrooper
With the One LF and Typo being the best in icy conditions of those options, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the info. To clarify, it is the Process Flying V I’m considering. I’m about 5-10, 185 lbs. Size 9 boot. The Burton step in system is interesting to me, although a little pricey, but it may be worth it on my knees. I had K2 Clickers on another board, but I didn’t like that system very well. The Burton system seems like it would be more comfortable with the heel support.
Hi Ben
Yeah Process Flying V very similar in terms of icy conditions as the Custom Flying V. That Flying V just doesn’t hold very well in ice, in my experience.
I haven’t tested Burton Step On yet, but from everywhere I’ve heard they are the best “quick/easy entry” bindings around. I can’t say for sure myself, but that’s what I’ve heard.
Great. Appreciate your help Nate. I’ll keep my eyes out for a Typo or the Rossi. Found a good Brainstorm but at 154 I think it’s too small.
Hi Ben
Yeah I think 154 is a bit on the small side for you, for sure. Sorry, I was going to give some sizing opinions and forgot. I would say generally speaking for an all-mountain board, for your specs and given your riding style, I thin k something around 157-159 would be your best bet.
Hello-
Thanks for all your work; I am in the market for a new board and have spent waaaay to much time on this site! I’m A 5’10” 150lbs Rad-Dad type who snowboards ~10-12 times per year and likes to carve groomers, search for powder in and around trees, hit some natural jumps and small park jumps, and basically never ride switch. I have been debating between the YES PYL, Jones flagship, Bryan Iguchi camber, and even the Deep Thinker. The Capita boards don’t seem to match up with me but maybe I’m missing one. Anything I’m missing? Do one of these stand out to you? Thanks again!
Hi Andy
Thanks for your message.
Assuming you’re at a relatively advanced level, the likes of the PYL, Flagship etc would certainly work, given that you don’t ride switch. I’d say the biggest thing for these types of boards, is that they’re not ideal for small jumps in the park, but if that’s not a big part of your riding, then they’re certainly doable.
In terms of Capita boards, the Black Snowboard of Death is the most similar to the likes of the PYL, Flagship etc – and I think that would work well for you.
To me, because of the jumps, I think the PYL & Black Snowboard of Death are probably your best bets. The other board you could look at is the Yes Hybrid, which is a slightly softer, shorter, wider PYL in a lot of ways. Great for trees, powder, and nice for jumps too. Though depending on your boot size, there may not be an appropriate size for that one.
Size-wise, I would be looking at around 155,156, assuming an advanced level and depending on boot size. If you could let me know that, I can give you a more accurate sizing recommendation (if you’re looking for one).
Hope this helps
Wow, thanks for the detailed response. I am a size 9 with boots so pretty narrow. I’m very interested in the PYL or similar but have a hard time buying a board I haven’t touched with my own hands… tough times make that mental plunge. Thanks again for your thoughts!
Hi Andy
Yeah totally get it. Hard to buy before you try, for sure.
But yeah, with 9s, I would say the PYL in 156 is best. For the Flagship, I would be leaning towards 154 over the 158. Bryan Iguchi I’d say 156. Deep thinker probably 154. But of course in terms of sizing, past experiences/preferences should be considered too. Like if you’re used to riding considerably longer or shorter, then I would take that into account too.
Hi Nate,
First things first : happy new year, I wish you a lot of happiness and a lot of powder days for 2020.
I really like your website and your reviews are well written and instructive.
I presently ride a 155 Burton Process FV paired with Burton Genesis as an all-moutain Fresstyle board. I like it a lot, it’s fun, easy to press and rotate, and can carve and go fast surprisingly good.
However, I can see its limits when riding with my skier friends in hard/icy conditions (that are pretty frequent where I ride in France) so I’m looking for a better All-Moutain board with a better edge hold to keep up with them.
My selection is…your top 3 : Yes standard, Capita Mercury or the Jones Mountain Twin. All paired with Union Force or Falcor bindings (depending on the offer I will have). I had the chance to ride the capita 159 just for one piste and the difference with my board was mindblowing. Felt like a train on rails. Even on icy conditions.
Which board and which size would you recommend for a 175cm, 80kg rider, level 6 according to your chart, riding Adidas Tactical ADV size 10 ?
The board should be able to put up with all type of snow (powder, icy) and type of snowboarding (carving, shredding, bad switch) and exceptionnally park for I will keep my Process in my quiver for jibbing and other shenanigans.
Thanks in advance for your input and again happy new year !
Happy new year Julien!
Thanks for your message.
Any of those 3 will certainly help for edge-hold in icy conditions vs the Process FV for sure – as you’ve already experienced with the Mercury. I would say that the Mountain Twin and Standard are even a step better in terms of edge-hold in icy conditions. But the Mercury is pretty good too, so they’re all good options. And for everything else you’re describing they’re all good options, so it’s tough to say which one for sure. There’s not a bad choice there.
Size-wise, I would say something around 157, 158 is a good bet for your specs/how you describe you’re riding/ability. So for the Mercury, I would almost say the 157 is just that little bit better than the 159. The 159 is certainly doable – and if you wanted to stick with what you’ve tried and know, then 159 Mercury is certainly an option. The other advantage to going longer in that sense, is that it gives you a bigger difference size-wise for your quiver. However, I think the 157 would be right on for you and is certainly different enough to have in your quiver, even in that size.
For the Standard, I would go 156. It’s a bit wider, so going a little shorter is a good idea, IMO.
For the Mountain Twin, the 157 is your best bet, IMO. But again, if you really wanted something longer for a bigger contrast vs the Process Flying V 155, then you could go 160. But otherwise, the 157 would be the best size for you, IMO.
I would be leaning towards the 157 Mercury for you, just because you’ve had a chance to try the Mercury and already know you like it. But the other 2 are perfectly good options too, and there’s some room for sizing. But yeah, I would be leaning towards the Mercury 157.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your well argued reply and for the time it took you to make it.
As I said I only tried the Capita for one piste and the settings were off (was set goofy although I’m regular) so I rode one half of the blue run in bad switch and the other half with weird angles.
I wouldn’t say I “know” the Capita. All that I can say is that I felt the improvement in edge hold and carving compared with my board even with the bad settings.
I’m looking closely to the Jones MT as you said it has a better edge hold and as it really matters to me but wouldn’t it be a little too grabby (I know it’s hard to tell since you cannot know my snowboarding skills) ? Has it the same stability at high speed as the Mercury and does the hyperdrive base give a speed advantage to the Mercury?
I saw on your reviews that the mercury has a better score in carving than the MT. Is it really sensible for an intermediate/intermediate+ rider?
I can get a good offer on each of these boards but it all boils down to this :
– Jones MT 157 + Union Falcor / Now drive black (wich bindings would you recommend with my Adidas Tactical size 10?)
– Mercury 159 + Union Force / Salomon Hologram (wich bindings would you recommend with my Adidas Tactical size 10?)
Maybe should’ve started here but I really wanted to know your opinion on theses matters.
Thanks again !
Hi Julien
I definitely wouldn’t call the Mountain Twin grabby, so no issues there, IMO.
The Mercury is something that I would call “solid intermediate” and up. I wouldn’t recommend it to someone who was just entering intermediate territory, but someone with solid technique already and have been intermediate and progressing for a little while, if that makes sense.
Very similar in terms of stability at speed, IMO. If I had to choose I’d say probably Mercury just a hair more stable, but there’s really very little in it, that I felt. I found both bases give a really good glide. Jones boards tend to be very good and the Jones is no exception. Probably not as much as something like on the Flagship, but in terms of speed from the base/glide on flats etc, the Flagship and some of the other Jones 9900 bases are the best in that area that I’ve ridden. The Mountain Twin is a step down there, but it’s as good as the Mercury, IMO. Both very good in that respect.
I would go Falcor over NOW Drive personally and I would go Force over Hologram. But the Holograms are solid too, so both are good options there. The Drive also solid, but I’m just not the biggest fan of their board feel.
I would be leaning 157 MT, mostly because I think it’s probably just a slightly better size for you.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your input. I decided to follow your advice and bought a JMT 157 but with Atlas Union bindings. I know they were out of the equation at first but I thought they would suit me better than the Falcor. Hope I didn’t make a mistake.
Now I just have to wait and test it out.
Hi Julien
Union Atlas very good bindings, IMO and a good match to the MT, so a good choice there, IMO. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to test
Hi Nate,
As requested, here are my firsts impressions about my JMT paired with the Atlas Union.
I tried it out this WE for a few hours. The weather was pretty good and the snow was hard packed with some “wind affected” zones (read icy) and some crusted powder on the sides of the pistes.
My first impression was “I can’t make that thing turn” and then “damn, it’s fast”. After 2 runs I started to get it right. Once on edge it doesn’t budge or wash of. I was able to lay nice carves even on icy terrain which was my main complaint about the Process FV. As you said, it’s not to grabby and I could skid some turns when I was out of my game.
I did not go to the park but I did try some small rotations on side hits. I felt it was less playful than the process but surprisingly lighter too (I believe it was my mind tricking me because I can’t see how a 157 board with Atlas could be lighter than a 155 with Genesis EST).
I didn’t find too much pop neither but it could be I am more confortable with the process ATM. However the JMT is confortable and gave me confidence on some heavy landings.
On the week old powder (with some fresh cm sprinkled on top) it was pretty good. It goes where you want it. I can’t talk about floatability as the snow was pretty heavy.
Just a word about the Atlas : I think I love them. They are super comfy with good adjustability and a nice match with my Adidas Tactical ADV (unlike my Genesis and their weird toe strap). On one or two pistes I think I heard a clicking sound but it was temporary. Will pay more attention to that next time.
In conclusion, the JMT is more demanding than my Process FV but also more rewarding. It’s nice as they are not too much overlapping.
I still need to use it more to handle it better but I feel it’s more of an All Mountain board than the process will ever be.
I’m glad I followed your advices. Thank you again.
Julien
Hi Julien
Thanks for the update and detailed notes on your impressions of the MT & Atlas. Always great to hear. And your comments are pretty much what I would expect from transitioning from the Process Flying V to the MT.
Hi Nate!
I really apreciate your reviews and advices and as it seems i’ve progressed faster than i thought and are developing a love of speed and carving. I’ve loved my Capita Outerspace Living this far and i’m guessing that some of my progress is down to riding the right board for me.
Just back from a week of carving away at speed in Cervinias almost empty pistes i’m feeling however that i might need a board with a bit more edge hold and stability at speed. It’s hard to rate your own skills but i would say that i’m a 6 on your scale. I’ve read your top 10 lists and a lot of other reviews and are a bit interested in the Capita Mercury and Niche Story.
As mentioned i feel i might need a board with better edge hold but i’m a bit concerned that it’s gonna be to “grabby”. Do you think the boards mentioned earlier is a good next step for me coming from the Outerspace Living? I’m still quite new to snowboarding having only started in february 18 and with perhaps 30-35 days riding so even though i prefer carving at speed and perhaps a bit of pow i want a board that is capable of doing a bit of everything.
Hi Magnus
Thanks for your message. Apologies for the slow response – a bit behind after vacation.
I think both the Mercury and Story would be a good next step up from the OSL, particularly if you’re looking for more stability at speed. The Mercury is a step up in terms of edge hold but not as much as the Story, which is a very good board for hard/icy conditions. If you’re in icy conditions a lot then the Story is a good option, but if you’re worried about it being grabby and don’t get icy conditions that much, then going up to something like the Mercury would probably be the call I’d make.
Hope this helps with you’re decision
An informative post..The review and line up of All mountain snowboards is awesome.Kudos to the team.
Thanks Julie. Appreciate it!
Hi Nate,
First a big thanks for sharing your boarding knowledge on this site. Your passion for riding really comes through and you are helping tons of riders, so keep up the good work!
I am in the market for a new all-mountain board. Currently I ride a Rossi One Magtek about 5 years old and it has served me well. But I’d like upgrade to a board with a Sintered base (my Rossi has slower Extruded base).
My current Rossi is a 161cm mid-wide but I’ve added a few pounds over last 5 years so at 6’2/205 lbs. intermed./advanced rider, your length chart is suggesting a 164cm. I am foot size 11. Here are some questions for you:
–are all of the companies making high-quality boards these days or are there big differences in quality. If so, a future article on best quality board-makers and best board features (like Magnetraction) would be helpful.
–are companies still making mid-wides? I don’t see as many offerings and that makes it harder to find the right board for boarders like me with a bigger foot. For most all-mountain boards do you think the regular edition works best for size 11 or should I be using their wide versions?
–I ride in the Northeast on groomers all day, places like Stratton, VT that are usually great conditions in the morning and get icy when it gets cold after lunchtime. I want to go faster with a Sintered base but should I be avoiding your aggressive all-mountain recs since I am not an expert rider, and sticking with all-mountain boards? [Usually once a season I’ll head out west and ride in some powder if we’re lucky but that is only once a season and I don’t venture ever in the backcountry].
–Curious if you’ve ever gone riding with some Flow bindings or reviewed any of them. I’ve used their NX2 GT model (regular version not the Hybrid) for the past 10 years and they are awesome! I put my rear foot down into the binding, reach down push up the highback and in about 3 seconds I’m heading down the mountain. No messing with sitting down and ratcheting straps against the boots (that’s lost riding time!). Your beginners and older readers like me might benefit from learning about Flow’s highback bindings.
I’d appreciate any thoughts on the above!
Hi JW
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, as far as I know the Rossi One has always had a sintered base – at least looking back as far as the 2011 model. Are you sure it’s extruded on yours? How often do you wax it? That might be something to do with it being slow?
However if you are looking for a faster base, I have found that Jones bases tend to glide a little better than most – so going with something like the Jones Frontier or Mountain Twin might be a good option for you.
Quality: Just quickly – most of the brands that I cover have a similar level of quality. I think competition drives brands to need to be at a certain level or they fall out of the market. But I don’t cover budget brands, so I think if you go down to the budget brands then there’ll be a bigger gap in quality. Certainly each brand has a different feel to their boards – and there is a difference in quality between models within a company’s line of boards for sure. But a post on quality and board features sounds like a great idea. I will look into adding that as a future post.
Mid-Wides: You can still find some mid-wides, but it’s a less common term now. Some “mid-wides” aren’t labelled as such. Some are just considered regular width and some are called wide but in reality are more like what you might see as a “mid-wide”. So, I would say that the term is disappearing to an extent, but there are still boards that are a little wider than regular but not as wide as wide – there’s a spectrum for sure. So, for 11s, it really depends on the board. Some boards will be wide enough in the regular widths – and for others it would be better to go wide.
All-Mountain and Aggressive All-Mountain: I would say, based on what you’re describing that going all-mountain would be the way to go. You can still certainly ride them at speed (some better than others in that respect). If you were someone who rides aggressively – like fast in addition to getting some really deep carves in, then I would be leaning towards aggressive all-mountain. So, if you’re someone who likes to carve quite aggressively, then I would look at aggressive all-mountain, but if not, I would stick with all-mountain. You want to be quite strong/athletic for most aggressive all-mountain boards too, as they tend to be quite stiff.
Flow Bindings: I rode some Flow bindings a while back – 2013 model I think. I liked the speed that you could get into them, but I felt there was a performance drop. But I didn’t ride one of the higher end models, so I’m not really sure how they ride – or how the more recent ones ride. It’s not a brand I have easy access too, which is the main reason I don’t test them currently, but if I can get hold of some this winter spring, I’ll definitely looking into testing them. I haven’t sat down to strap in for years – I find it easier to strap in standing up anyway. Still certainly not as fast as Flow (or something like Burton Step Ons) but faster/easier than strapping in sitting down.
In terms of size for you, I think something around 164 is a good bet, as an advanced rider. But if you identify more as intermediate, then you could ride something a little under that – more like 161-162, if you wanted to stick around that size. Generally speaking something a little shorter will be easier to maneuver (and better for trees and more freestyle type things), but longer will give you more stability at speed and float in powder.
If you went something like the Frontier, then I’d say go 165 – just because it has a shorter effective edge vs overall length than the average board, so you can go a little longer. And at that length, it’s basically a mid-wide and should be just right for 11s, IMO. If you went Mountain Twin, then I like the 161W for you. You could go 164W or even possibly get on the 162, but I would be leaning towards the 161W.
If you have any other boards that you’ve narrowed down to, or want other suggestions, just let me know and I can give you my opinion on suitability.
Hope this helps
Nate, you are a gentleman and a scholar! Thanks for the detailed replies, they will really help with my search. I will check back if I come up with any additional questions. All the best for a great riding season!
p.s. I just watched Travis Rice’s movie, “The Fourth Phase” as I had not seen before…definitely fun to watch to get fired up for the season.
You’re very welcome JW. Hope you have a great season too.
I’ve seen bits of the Fourth Phase but not all of it yet – but yeah definitely TR always good for getting fired up for riding!
Thanks so much for the amazing reviews! They’ve been very helpful in helping me choose a board. I’m 35, 6’2” and 175lbs with a size 11/11.5 boot. I’ll be getting my first board for Christmas this year. Every time I’ve snowboarded before its been on rental equipment. That said, according to you level calculator I’d say I’m about a Intermediate 6. I don’t ever really ride park but hit the occasional jump. My main interest is carving and hitting the powder when I can find it. So I think I want an all mountain board. I’d love a recommendation for a board. Should I be paying attention to my height as much as my weight as I’m choosing? I’ve more or less been looking at 162 for length, but that doesn’t always line up with the weight recommendations for specific boards. The boards I’ve been most interested in are: Yes. Standard, Capita Murcury, Capita, DOA Jones Frontier (although I sort of want a twin) and Yes. Libre. I’m concerned the Standard and Murcury would be too “advanced” of boards for me, but I don’t really know the difference and I’m learning a lot of the terms as I’ve been doing my research. Any direction would be very much appreciated!
Hi Isaac
Thanks for your message.
First, in terms of size. I like to take height into account, but weight and boot size are more important. I would say something around 159-161, taking into account your level, how you describe your riding and your specs.
Given that you prefer carving, powder for the most part, then I would encourage going at least somewhat directional. If you think you want to get into more freestyle or are/want to ride switch a fair bit, then going more directional twin than directional is a good way to go. But I wouldn’t go true twin, based on what you’re describing. So, the DOA, in my opinion isn’t that suitable as it’s true twin and also not great in powder, IMO.
So, if you don’t want to go as directional as the Frontier, then I think the Standard and Mercury are your best bets. At an Intermediate 6 level, neither of those boards would be an issue for you to ride.
For the Standard I think the 159 would be your best size.
For the Mercury, probably the 159 too. But if you end up in 11.5 boots, it might be pushing it being too narrow for your boots. Even in an 11 it’s on the narrower side. The 161 would be fine for 11s, but pushing it for 11.5s. Depending on the boots you get (some boots are more low profile than others), binding angles, how aggressively you carve (like how high up on the edges you get) will factor in to whether it’s wide enough for you. And of course, which size you end up in.
The Standard won’t have any issues width-wise.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate, thanks so much for the reply! This helps a lot. I’ve been hemming and hawing over weather the stiffness of the Standard or Mercury would be too much. The Standard is the board I’m finding myself most interested in. Do you suggest the 159 because it’s a wider board overall? I read somewhere that the length should be somewhere between your chin and nose and my chin is right at 164. It’s hard to know what to go off of because there is so much contrary information out there. Also are there bindings you’d recommend to match with either of these board? I’ve been looking as some of the ones on your top 5 list, but also wondering if there are some cheaper options that could work. Thanks!
Hi Isaac
The length between your nose and chin thing is pretty old school. Definitely how length used to be determined, but weight has become a more important factor. Boards around that 164 length are going to typically be too long for your weight. You could ride up to 162, depending on the board, but that would be at a more advanced level. Given your level, that’s why I adjusted the range down just a bit. For the Standard, it is a wider board and even though your on 11s or 11.5s, it will still be on the slightly wider side – so going up to the 162 is going to be quite big in terms of the combination of length and width, so I think the 159 would work best for you.
At that length/width, for your specs, and at an intermediate 6 level, I don’t think you would find it too stiff. It might take some adjustment to begin with, but otherwise I think you’d be fine. The Mercury is a touch stiffer, but still not super-stiff, so I think you’d be OK there too, particularly in the 159, remembering to think about potential width issues on that one.
In terms of bindings, some good options to go with the Standard or similar board, but a little cheaper are:
– Union Force
– Burton Mission
Or if you wanted to go even less than that, the Union STR is a pretty solid binding for the price. Also, see if you can find something that’s past season (like a 2019 model) and you should be able to get it a good bit cheaper than the latest model.
Thank you so much, this is great! For the bindings do I need to about certain types when making the choice? I read something about mini discs not being a good match for the Standard. Are there other things I should look out for?
Hi Isaac
Yeah a mini-disc is fine on the Standard, until you go use the Slam Back inserts. They won’t go on them. So, if you were planning on using the slam back inserts, like for powder days, then I would skip the mini-disc. Otherwise, the only other thing is just make sure you don’t get Burton “EST” bindings – as they only mount to the channel. But Burton “Re:Flex” are fine.
Hi Nate. Awesome post – so helpful when trying to figure out what you want, when you can’t get demo’s of boards. I love how helpful you are in your comments too – amazing and super helpful.
My question was whether you had tested the new Yes Globe NSB in this group and if so, how it compared. I have been deliberating massively over the Yes NSB and Yes Standard, as well as the Jones MT and Capita Mecury (probably in that order). I am 6.0ft, 190lbs with 10.5 US boots and an Intermediate 6 pushing 7. Mainly piste rider, but will ride the pow option if its there, and I enjoy a bit of freestyle and park (but needs work!). I’m generally a charger on piste, but after a full day, the legs don’t want something that will punish me for being a bit lazy. I currently have a 2011 (i think) Lib Tech TRS C2 Power Banana (161.5cm), and it is a great board, but its so grabby/catchy in chop. Brilliant edge but too punishing.
Would love to hear if you have tried the Yes Globe NSB, and what you would recommend? You seem like the man to know! Thanks hugely
Oh, and i would be using Malavita Bindings (prob from about 2011 too)
I would say the Standard would be a better match to the Malavita vs the Globe NSB, but like I said in my other response, I haven’t ridden the Globe, so I couldn’t say for sure
Hi Carl
Thanks for your message.
The Globe NSB is one of the only YES boards I haven’t ridden (I tried to get on one last winter, but my rep didn’t have any).
Based on specs, I would probably put it in the all-mountain-freestyle category, mostly because it’s a true twin with a centered stance. It does have those slam back inserts, like the Standard, which is great for powder days (assuming you’re inclined to re mount your bindings for powder days – well worth it, IMO!). But the Standard also has the Directional Volume Twin shape, which is why it’s in this category, though very close to being all-mountain freestyle too.
The Globe NSB sounds like it’s essentially a YES Basic but with a sintered based, and a different core – and significantly stiffer. Yes rate it 9/10 for stiffness – though it’s unlikely to be that stiff. Most YES boards don’t feel as stiff as their ratings. I couldn’t say for sure, but I would say that it would still be stiffer than the Standard (which is rated 7/10, but feels more like 6/10). For reference the Basic is rated 5/10 but feels more like 4/10 and the Typo is rated 6/10, but feels more like 4.5/10 – to me. The Globe NSB at a guess, based on what I’ve read and the specs will be more like 7/10 I would say.
So, I think it comes down to whether you want that directional volume twin to give you a little more in terms of powder, and whether you’d prefer a more medium (6/10) flex or a more medium-stiff flex. But like I say I haven’t ridden it, so I couldn’t say for sure what the Globe is like, in reality.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
first of all, thanks for the really helpful lists! But i have preferd two boards ´:
– Capita Mercury
– Capita Super DOA
I’m 1.72m, about 89 kg and I have size EU 43 feet. I love carving, speed runs, powder and also jumps ;).
Can you do a recommendation which of these two boards would be a good choice? I’m all ears if you have a better suggestion 🙂
Thanks in advance!
Hi Osman
Thanks for your message.
I think I would be leaning towards the Mercury for you, mostly because it’s more of an all rounder. The Mercury is better in powder than the SuperDOA but equal to it for speed, carving and jumps, IMO. Since you ride powder, I would go Mercury.
Size-wise for the Mercury, I think the 159 would be the best size for you. If you’re used to riding shorter or longer than that, then you could consider the 157 & 161, but based on specs and how you describe your riding, I think the 159 would be the best fit.
From what you’re describing, I think the Mercury is a very good choice. Other’s on this list would do the job too, for sure, but the Mercury is a solid option for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for your advice Nate.
Hi Nate, sorry but I wrote down the wrong body size. My size ist 176-178 cm. Which size would you prefer?
Thank you.
Hi Osman
Based on the new info, I think the 161 is probably a better length for you, but it’s just whether it’s getting on the wide side for your boots to be ideal. That would be my only concern with the 161 for you. If you think you’ll be OK width-wise, then the 161, assuming an advanced level, might be better.
That said, the 159 would still work, if you wanted a more maneuverable option. Would sacrifice a little in terms of speed, carving and float though.
You’re very welcome Osman. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate one last question you say the boots can be maybe a problem is this right. How can i check this? I will also buy new boots.
I think i buy the 161 version of the board.
Hi Osman
Yeah, I just mean boots in terms of width of the board. And what I really mean is foot-size. If the board is too wide for your feet, it can feel slower edge-to-edge or make it feel like you have to make too much effort to turn the board.
The Mercury 161 is roughly 268mm at the inserts. With US10 boots, I typically don’t like anything too much wider than 265mm at the inserts. With UK8.5 (US9.5 equivalent) it might be the case that you find it too wide, but it’s hard to say. Some people don’t mind wider boards so much.
Hello Nate,
the Capita Mercury is everywhere sold out or very expensive. Can you prefer a other board which is also a hybrid camber, maybe not the newest one.
Thank you.
Hi Osman
If you can find a suitable size of the following in a past season’s model, they are also hybrid camber all-mountain boards from this list, which would be most similar to the Mercury:
– Rossignol One
– Jones Mountain Twin
– YES Standard
The Typo and Brainstorm are also hybrid camber, but are more playful vs the 3 above. Since you were looking at the Mercury, I think the 3 above would be the best alternatives.
Hey Nate,
can you say something about the academy team hybrid board?
Thank you
Hi Osman
I don’t test Academy boards, so I don’t really know anything about the Acadamy Team. Looks like a centered directional twin, mostly camber, but a little rocker tip and tail. But yeah, not sure how it rides.
Hi Nate, I’m kinda caught in a quandary. I’m an older rider (55) and learned to ride 5 years ago. I consider myself intermediate but still struggle achieving that fine pencil line carve. My goal is to achieve this and I’m looking for a board to help my progression in this area. I mostly like to ride fast but living in Minnesota we are vertically challenged with plenty of hard snow conditions, rarely pow anymore.
I’m 6”2 210, 12 boots with shrunk tech to 11 (Burton Photons). I’ve had a lot of boards in the last five years and I can’t keep trying to find that perfect one, too costly. Right now I have a Jones UME 58 & Aviator 60W. Both great boards but really for big mountain riding, not Midwest.
I’m looking at Burton Custom 158W. Narrower side cut. Do you think this would help me achieve my goal? My concern with the custom is that it’s full camber and it can punish you if your not on or skidding turns. At my age I have no desire to be constantly thrown to the ground or injured trying to learn techniques. Maybe there is a better board? Also considering ROME National 157W. BTW, I like shorter boards. Longest board I owned was 162, hated it. 155-158 is my sweet spot. Sorry for throwing so much out there. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers!
Hi Chad
Thanks for your message – and for throwing so much in there – the more info the easier it is to find the best option.
Given that you mostly like to ride fast and carve, I think you will want a good bit of camber, but I think some rocker in the profile, just to take away that need to be always “on” and lessen the chances of catching an edge, is probably a good idea. Also since you’re not on big vertical drops, probably don’t want to go too stiff. That said, given your preferred range of length, going smaller like that helps to make a board more maneuverable and feel softer than it otherwise would, so I would also be weary of going too soft, given that you want to carve and ride fast.
The Custom is a good option – all but the potential catchiness you might feel from it, like you say.
The Burton Skeleton Key might be a good alternative. The biggest thing would be if the 158 is too narrow for your boots.
Some other options include:
– Endeavor Clout
– Salomon Super 8
– Capita Supernova
All relative aggressive rides, good for carving and speed, but with a little bit of forgiveness.
I don’t currently test Rome gear, so can’t say much about the National.
And certainly something from this list could work well too. A little less aggressive in terms of carving vs the likes of the Custom, and others mentioned here. But still some good carvers among them. The likes of the Story and Mercury, in particular, but also the Standard, Mountain Twin, One LF would be good options too (given an appropriate size). The Jones Frontier is also an option.
The UME is a rather stiff, aggressive ride, from my experience. And the Aviator a little more easy going, but still quite camber dominant. So, potentially if the Aviator isn’t to your liking on the mountains you ride, then I think potentially something from this list (Mercury, Story, Standard, MT, One) might be more to your liking on the smaller mountains.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you for this great review. I’m looking for a all mountain freestyle board. I’m 5’10” and 190lbs. I ride switch, 180’s is no prblem. Some jibbing, cruising and powder. I have a Yes pick your line 161 and a Bataleon Global Warmer 154 which i will sell (don’t like it. Base is slow, cruises quite boring, the pop is a bit nuclear and i can’t get used to the 3bt). I did ride the Salomon Assassin 156 2020 and really liked it. Also had a Nidecker legacy 155 2013 which i loved (with the flexible nose and tail). Now I’m hesitating Salomon Assassin 159 or Yes Standard 158….. what would you recommend?
Hi Daan
Thanks for your message.
Both those are certainly great options for what you’re describing, but I would even look at the YES Greats vs the Standard – just because it’s more freestyle focused and just that little bit more different to the PYL. Standard is still quite different, but the YES just that bit more different, for a more complimentary addition to your quiver.
I would actually consider the 156 if you were to go Assassin. Partly because you have ridden it and know you like it as well as being a bigger difference to your 161 PYL. If you were to go Standard or Greats, I’d go 156 as well, for the same reason.
Also check out:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate.
So I’ve ridden nothing but burton since I started snowboarding. I just picked up the burton step on’s, and I was looking at getting a new board. I was looking at the burton custom camber or the burton paramount. I’m hesitant to branch out away from burton because it’s all I know. There are a lot of boards out there it can be a little overwhelming and they are not cheap. So I really don’t want to pick the “wrong” one. I love on the east coast of the US so it’s resort riding and pretty often a lot of ice. I like hitting jumps and racing my friends down the hill and spending a little time in the park. I hope to make it back out west but those trips are going to be few and far between. HELP!! This decision has been keeping me up at night.
Hi Salomon
Thanks for your message.
Neither are great in powder, but if you’re not going to be seeing much of it, then that’s probably not a big things for you. The Custom Camber is just that little bit better for powder, but still not great. But doable for riding in powder, if you’re just going to be in it rarely, or if it’s not that deep.
I am a big fan of the Paramount and prefer it for jumps, spins, riding and taking off/landing switch. But for everything else, but for everything else about the same with the Custom – maybe the Custom that little better at speed though. So Custom a little better in powder and at speed. The Paramount a little better for riding switch, jumps and spins. All else fairly equal. I would say that the Custom Camber is the slightly more versatile board vs the Paramount, which is more freestyle oriented.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
first of all, thanks for the really helpful lists! I used it to narrow my board search down to 4:
– Jones Mountain Twin
– K2 Manifest
– Nitro Team camber
– Salomon Ultimate Ride
I’m 1.80m, about 75 kg and I have size EU 45 / US 10.5 feet. I ride mostly casual (on groomers) but I do love some speed runs. Can you do a recommendation which of these boards would be a good choice? I’m all ears if you have a better suggestion 🙂
Thanks in advance!
Hi Frederik
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning towards the Mountain Twin from that list. Mostly because you mention that you mostly like to ride casually on groomers, but with speed sometimes. The Mountain will be the best from that list, IMO, for riding casual on groomers, but can also handle some speed. The other 3 are more aggressive. In order from least to most aggressive I would have it in the order you have them, so I think the Mountain Twin would be best.
There are a number of boards from this list that would also fit your description well (better than the Manifest, Team Camber and Ultimate Ride in terms of casual runs), like the Standard, Team Gullwing, One LF & Brainstorm.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for your reply and advice Nate. I’ll look into those other boards aswell. I currently have Burton Custom bindings (6yrs old), would you recommend replacing those with these type of boards?
Hi Frederik
Yeah, I would go for stiffer bindings than the Custom on these boards. I find sometimes that softer bindings don’t have enough power to drive a stiffer board. The Custom I would give a flex feel of around a 3/10. Those boards are more like 6/10 for flex. I would go for something at least 5/10 flex-wise, and up to 7/10. You can check out some of these, if you do decide to upgrade your bindings:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Guess I’ll need to upgrade my budget aswell then 😉 Thanks for your advice!
You’re very welcome Frederik. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hey Nate, wondering if you’ve ridden the Salomon Ultimate Ride and how you would compare it to these boards/which of these is most similar? Also curious what you think of the board in general. Thanks!
Hi George
Thanks for your message.
I got on the Ultimate Ride (2020 model) last winter for the first time – and I loved it. It’s not something that I put in this category though. You can see it in the following list:
>>Top 5 Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
I haven’t completed my full review for it yet, but it will come out some time before the end of the year.
Compared to the boards on this list, it’s more aggressive and stiffer than most here (7/10 flex). But yeah more aggressive camber-wise. And it’s a true twin and just all round more freestyle oriented. But also great for carving and riding fast – just not very good in powder vs the boards on this list.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply! Couple more questions I hope you can clarify for me! I’m 5’11” 165lb and size 10.5-11 boots.
How much of a difference would I notice between a 155 and 158 board?
How would you compare the Capita Mercury and the Ultimate Ride?
I ride pretty aggressively and do a fair amount of glades, but not too much powder or park riding. I’m kinda stuck between these two boards!
Hi George
Between the Mercury and the Ultimate Ride, the Ultimate is a more aggressive ride. You can get relatively aggressive on the Mercury too, but overall the Ultimate Ride is more of a hard charger. The Mercury certainly better for powder. The Mercury is more directional – it’s not hugely directional but it has a nose that’s a little longer than tail, a 1/2″ setback stance and a directional side cut. The Ultimate Ride is a directional twin (sorry I said true twin in my last reply. But it’s mostly twin – just a slightly longer nose than tail. But it’s centered on effective edge. The camber on Ultimate Ride is more pronounced than it is on the Mercury – and the camber sections extend closer to the contact points. There’s just a very slight rocker before the contact points. The Mercury has longer rocker sections, and the camber is a little less pronounced.
I’d say the Mercury is more of an all-rounder in terms of tackling powder, and something that can be ridden slower and less aggressively when you want to. But for out and out charging with heaps of pop, the Ultimate Ride has it, IMO.
Between 155 and 158 you would definitely notice that difference, all else being equal IMO. I usually notice a difference even of 2cm. Between boards, depending on the two boards you’re comparing, that 2-3cm could either mean a bigger difference or less of a difference. But yeah, if you’re comparing 155 Ultimate Ride vs 158 Ultimate Ride, for example then yes, definitely noticeable difference.
For your specs, I would recommend 155 for the Ultimate Ride and 157 for the Mercury. The Ultimate Ride will feel longer than it’s total length vs the Mercury because it has more effective edge.
In terms of width, if you’re on 10.5s, you’ll probably be fine width-wise for both. The Mercury 157 is roughly 264mm at the inserts and the Ultimate Ride 155 is roughly 262mm at the inserts. Those widths would be pushing it with 11s though, especially as you like to ride aggressively. Though if you’re used to regular width boards in 11s and haven’t had any issues, then personal experience is also something to consider.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks for the awesome reply! I think I’ll end up going for the Mercury.
You’re very welcome George. Hope you have an awesome season and enjoy your new deck!
Hi Nate
can you help me choose 1-3 boards because there are too many options and i really dont know what to pick.
i am 183cm high
i have 82kg
and foot 43-44 9-10 US
I will say that i spent 75% time on resort, 15% on some jumps but mainly in the
Backcountry/outside the resort(forest). and 10% in snowparks.
And maybe which you will pick if you were me, and do you think that M-size binding will work for 10 us?
thanks in advance!
Hi Michael
For starters, you’re looking in the right place, IMO. Based on what you’re describing, I think an all-mountain board is the way to go, assuming you just want a one board quiver.
Can you just let me know a couple of other things about your riding.
When on the resort, do you consider yourself an aggressive rider or more casual or in between. By aggressive I mean, do you like to ride super fast, really get deep and low on your carves etc.
Do you typically see a lot hard/icy conditions? Do you see much powder? Basically an idea of type of terrain you typically ride in.
These will help to narrow it down
thanks for reply Nate!
I can say that i am between agressive and casual rider.
I think that moguls and bumps are the bigest issue, but icy conditions happened too and previous rented board was loosing the traction very often.but mostly i ride on the well prepared resorts.
Hi Michael
I would look at the following:
– Rossignol One LF (really good in icy conditions, good in uneven terrain and is a good balance of not being too aggressive and not too playful)
– Nitro Team Gullwing (not quite as good in icy conditions as One LF, but still good, but a little better in uneven terrain – again a good balance of not being too playful or too aggressive)
– Jones Mountain Twin (about the same as Team Gullwing in icy conditions, about One LF in uneven terrain, and in between aggressive and playful)
– YES Standard (as good as One LF in icy conditions and uneven terrain – and also a good balance between aggressive and playful)
Size-wise, I would look at something around 158-160 – and regular width.
In terms of getting into an M binding – it will depend on the brand of bindings and your brand of boots (but mostly binding brand). Check out the following for bindings sizings of most binding brands:
>>Snowboard Binding Sizing
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for your time and help Nate!
Du you think that Union Force M will work with Jones Mountain twin?
and i have a question, can you compere this 4 that you chose for me with Capita Outerspace Living and LIbtech Terrain Wrecker because there is discount in my country for this 2 boards.
Hi Michael
Yeah the Union Force is a good match for the Mountain Twin – or any of these options, IMO. And the Medium Size is good for your boots and the boards in your size range.
The Capita OSL is a more freestyle oriented board – centered and true twin. It does have a slightly longer nose and tail vs most all-mountain-freestyle boards, but overall still more freestyle focused. Not as good in hard/icy conditions as the others either, IMO. Not far off, but not quite there. You can read more in my Capita Outerspace Living Review
I haven’t ridden the Terrain Wrecker, but it’s something that I’ve looked into a lot, and been asked about a lot. I would say that it’s in the all-mountain category. It’s a centered stance, but it’s got a directional twin shape. It’s probably about the same flex as the boards here and is likely good in hard/icy conditions as most Lib Tech boards are. I can’t say much more about it having not ridden it, but I suspect it’s something that would also work for you.
Good Day Nate,
especially helpful post and one of the best review sites I’ve been following out there! I’m looking for an all mountain board and have shortlisted the Capita Mercury vs the Yes Standard. I have the option of the 157 Capita Mecury and the 156 Yes Standard.
My height is 174cm and my weight is about 68-73kg. My boot size is about US8.5. So can be a US8-US9.
All things equal, would you suggest I get the 157 Mercury or the 156 Standard and if I decide to go with the 156 standard would I be struggling due to the width being too wide for my weight and boot size?
Thanks and Sincerely,
Ivan
Hi Ivan
Thanks for your message.
Length-wise, I think around that 155, 156 would work for you. But as you suggest, the width is the biggest concern there. I think ideally, for your specs, the 153 Standard would work better than the 156 (but it sounds like you don’t have availability on the 156). The 153 would still be on the wider side for your boots, but the slight sizing down would balance that out, so I think the 153 would work well, but the 156 might feel a bit big for you, I suspect.
The Mercury 157, despite looking similar in terms of width, based on waist width, is a little narrower. It’s roughly 263mm at the inserts compared to the Standard 156 which is 270mm at the inserts, so quite a big difference there. Though, the Mercury 157 is still overall on the wide side for 8.5s, IMO, so sizing down to the 155 for that board, would be the size I would recommend for you. But again, it doesn’t sound like you have that option.
So, yeah in short, if you had the option then the 153 Standard and 155 Mercury would be the better sizes, IMO. But if you have to choose between the 156 Standard and 157 Mercury, then I would go 157 Mercury for your specs.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
thank you so much for the quick response. I realized i might have gotten my boot sizing wrong. I’m actually a US9-US9.5. Sorry for the confusion. Having said that, would that make a big difference? Between the 156 Standard and the 157 Mercury would you still pick the 157 Mercury? Also in this case, for a US9-US9.5, would the 155 Mercury still be a better pick than the 157?
After reading your reviews I have a slight preference for the Standard actually as I see that you rated the Standard better for butters and switch and i like it being a twin but also having a slam back option. However if the 156 Standard is too big for my boot size, I would rather pick the Mercury as I dont wanna sacrifice too much on response (afterall it is a close second in your list!)
Hi Ivan
Ultimately it comes down to foot size, more so than boot size. As it’s the feet that ultimately apply pressure to the edges. If you have a foot size of 27.5cm (which would be the mondo for a US9.5), then I think you’d probably be OK width-wise for the Standard. It would still be on the wide-side though. I have US10 boots, and that’s what I fit in best, but I have 27.5cm feet, but I’ve never been able to get into a 9.5. For me I like the 156, but also I’m 185lbs (84kg) (or at least I was the last time I demoed it) and 6’0″ (183cm). So for me, going 156 was sizing down more so than it would be for you. It’s a board that I would consider wide for me in the 156, but going down to the 156, when I would usually ride 159-160 for an all-mountain board, makes up for that little bit of extra width. For your specs, I would say more like 156-157 at a good width, so going 156 isn’t really sizing down at all. So, I’m still, even assuming 27.5cm feet, I’m concerned you would still find it on the big side.
For the Mercury, I would still say that the 155 is a better size for you. But the 157 becomes a more appealing prospect with slightly bigger boots (or ultimately slightly longer feet)
Hope this helps/makes sense
Nate, greeting from Belarus and thanks for your post. It’s the best that I found on the internet.
I would like to have your advice.
I do snowboarding for ~9 years. I have k2 lifelike. I want to buy a new snowboard this season.
I ride switch all the time. I’m a fan of jumps (ollie, nollie, 180, 360). So, between soft and stiff, I vote Soft. 🙂 And 30% of the time I do freeride in deep snow OR a forest. No park at all.
Your opinion? What snowboard can do freeride but stay soft for jumps and be comfortable for switch riding?
I change snowboard once in 5+ years. So, it can be overpriced 🙂
P.s. 175 sm, 67-70 kg
Hi Nikita
Thanks for your message.
I think it’s a case of finding a balance between switch/180s and riding in deep snow. For deep snow ideally you want something directional, even tapered and setback a lot – but that’s the opposite of what’s ideal for riding/taking off/landing switch. So, I think you’re in the right place – something with a bit of a setback/direction to it, but that’s still decent for riding/landing switch. Size-wise, there’s also a bit of compromise to be made. For deep snow, going bigger is a good idea, but for riding in the forest, going shorter is better – and for riding freestyle stuff, I usually like to go shorter too.
I think something like the YES Standard could be a really good option – since it naturally has a centered stance, it’s going to be good for riding switch and all your freestyle stuff – but it has just a bit more in the nose to help it in powder. And it has “slam back” insert options, which you could move your bindings to on deeper days. Size-wise would depend on your boot size. If you can let me know that I can give you a size recommendation for that board.
The YES Typo could also fit the bill if you want to go a little softer. Not quite as good for powder, but still good. And it’s softer flexing, so everything else you’re describing works well with it. And whilst it doesn’t have those slam back inserts, you can still choose to set it back on those powder days. I think the 155 (depending on boot size) would be a really good size for you for this board. It’s also a little quicker edge-to-edge vs the Standard, so that would help in the trees.
The Slash Brainstorm (154 – but again depending on boot size) would also be a really good choice.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thank you for your detailed answer. Your advice is very helpful. The size is US 7 / FR 40
Hi Nikita
Thanks for the extra info.
Size-wise, I would put you on around a 154-155, assuming you’re quite an advanced rider – as an all-mountain size. But since most boards around that size are likely not ideal in terms of width (being a bit too wide) for your boots. It might be a good idea to size down from there a little bit. Going a little shorter when a board is a bit wide for your boots, helps with maneuverability (a wide board can feel sluggish edge-to-edge). Sizing down will be good for when you’re in the trees and for your more freestyle stuff – it will impact negatively on your stability at speed and float in powder though, so there is some compromise there. But given all the facts, I think sizing down a little is a good idea.
For the Standard, I think you’d want to size down to around 151, to make the width manageable for your boot size. The 151 is still going to be on the wider side for your feet, but sizing down should counteract the slower edge to edge effects of being wider.
The YES Typo I would size down to the 152. The width is going to be a little narrower (at the inserts) than the Standard 151, but it’s just that little bit longer too. I think this would be a good size for you. Going with a Typo is going to be a setup that mostly favors riding switch and your freestyle stuff and not as good as the other two options for powder, but will be OK in powder. It is really fast edge-to-edge for playing in the forest.
The Brainstorm on the other hand isn’t going to be as suited for riding switch/freestyle as the Typo but will give you a good bit more in powder. Still really quick edge to edge and you can certainly do all those freestyle things on it, and can definitely ride switch. I would go 151 for this board. This will be the narrowest of all 3, in the 151.
Another option that just came into my head is the Capita Outerspace Living. It’s an all-mountain-freestyle board, but it’s something that’s a little better in powder vs a lot of all-mountain-freestyle boards. A good option if you like to ride switch even when in powder. And definitely suitable for your freestyle stuff. It’s a narrower board too, when you get into some of the smaller sizes. So I think the 152 would be a good size and would give you a width that should work well with size US7 boots.
Hope that’s all clear and hope it helps with your decision
Awesome, Nate! I appreciate your help! Cheers!
You’re very welcome Nikita. Hope you have an awesome season!
I love your reviews, they’re very measured and I find them unbiased. I rode the Jones Mountain Twin 157 and Yes Standard 156 last year at Whistler and got some decent varied conditions including some fresh pow.
I liked both boards very much, they’re both extremely capable and playful yet stable, and confidence-inspiring. I found the main difference between those two boards was the Standard is a bit wide, noticeable enough that it was fatiguing by the end of the day. It just wasn’t as quick edge to edge as I’m used to, and certainly not as quick edge to edge as the Mountain Twin.
The other noticeable difference was the base on the Standard is slow! Both had fresh coats of wax, the shop waxed them in front of me both days. I generally don’t have trouble keeping up with anyone, but when riding with my friends they would leave me in the dust if we really stepped on the gas. I had no such problems with the Mountain Twin.
The Standard did have a bit more bite on icy snow. Overall they’re both great and I had a lot of fun but I’d choose the Mountain Twin over the Standard due to the slower turning and slow base.
Hi Sticky
Thanks for your input, much appreciated. Great to hear others insights. I have found with Jones bases that they tend to be faster (and certainly glide more on flats) than most boards, so I’m not too surprised you noticed a difference there.
Hi Nate.
Some awesome reviews. But I’m after some guidance.
I’ve been Snowboarding for about 8 years. I now got on a yearly trip To Japan for a few weeks to ride powder and some Groomers, doing the odd little jump but nothing serious.
I am 60 KG and about 157CM. What kind of length board would you recommend?
I currently ride a 153CM board. But I find I have to heavily lean back in powder. Also any specific board recommendation would be great.
Thanks 😁
Hi Harry
Thanks for your message.
Generally speaking, for your specs, I would say more around 147cm – maybe adding 2-3 cms if you’re riding a lot of powder. So I’m surprised that you have to lean back so much on a 153. That said, if you’re riding something that’s not suited to powder (e.g. if it has no setback, isn’t directional, has no rocker in the nose, no taper etc), then even in that length you will have to work hard to stay afloat.
What board are you on at the moment? Can you also let me know your boot size, and also if you would be happy to go with a women’s boards or would rather stick to men’s. I can think of some options, but if you can let me know those 3 things, I can give you what I think are the best options for you.
Awesome job Nate! Love seeing the updated 2020 snowboards, can’t wait for the snow to fly! Cheers Jason!
Thanks Jason! I’m definitely itching for the snow too!
Hey Nate,
Well overdue to upgrade my begginer board and liked the look of the Yes. Standard, but really open to options within a respectable cost range. I’m 5’11” 205lbs 11.5 shoes (US) and do a yearly trip or two out west for more powder on the mountains and prefer a board more suited to that. I hop between primarily the black/blue routes as well as some fresher routes in the bowls/woods as available. If you could throw out a few recommendations it would be appreciated!
Hi Charlie
Thanks for your message.
I think the Standard is a good next step from a beginner board and could suit what you’re describing well. It’s not the kind of board that’s king in powder – but it does pretty well in there, and even better if you use the slam back inserts on a pow day (note that if you have bindings with a mini-disc then the slam backs aren’t accessible). Size-wise for you, I would go 162. You could also ride the 159 for this board, but I think based on your specs and how you like to ride, the 162 would be your best bet, IMO.
Since it sounds like you’re out East, it’s also a good option, being good in hard/icy conditions (not that you can’t get those out West as well!). Quite a few on this list would also do the job quite nicely, including the Mountain Twin & Rossignol One.
Based on your riding style, you could also check out something from here:
>> My Top 5 Freeride Snowboards
But just note that those are another step up – a bit stiffer and more technical. But also better for speed/powder/carving. If you feel like you’re an advanced rider, then those become options for sure. But if you feel like you’re more bordering intermediate/advanced, then something from this list is probably a better bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate
This is a great site with loads of information.
I’m a bit stuck. I’m 6ft, 88kg, UK size 10 boot and am a beginner/intermediate, I can happily link turns and get down the mountain fairly smoothly, not really been doing jumps but something I’d like an option to do, I like the boarder cross sections, I also like powder but usually just whats to the side of a mountain run. I like to carve and go fast as well. I’ve only been snowboarding for a few years and generally only go once a year for about a week or so. I’ve only snowboarded in Europe. I’ve usually hired a board or borrowed one from a friend. I try to get a size around 159cm, but to be honest I don’t really know whats best for me size wise. I am looking to get myself a board now as its summer and prices’ll be the best they are all year. Could you recommend something which will keep me improving with not too bad a learning curve since it’ll only be used once a year? I’d like an all rounder, mainly for slope riding but with options for the park and powder.
Any ideas, so many boards I have no idea where to start and want to make sure I don’t buy something which I’m going to struggle with or alternatively be too slow or too much of a beginner board. In the past I’ve looked at the Jones Mountain Twin, the Yes Standard and saw Capitas Outer Space Living looked good, all based on some of the comments here and other things I’ve read on your site, but those comments look to be a few years old. Are those boards still relevant? However I don’t want this to influence your advice so whatever you think would be great thanks.
Thank you
Tom
Hi Nate
Apologies, I’ve just looked at some old photos of several boards I’ve hired and they all look to be 157cm if that makes a difference.
Thanks Tom
Hi Tom
Thanks for your messages.
Size-wise, I would say to go with something in the range 158-160. To give you a size that suits your specs, but works for that beginner/intermediate level and something that won’t take long to get your legs back, given that you’re only be on it once a year. And 157 definitely doable too, if your comfortable with that.
Width-wise, with UK10s, you’re kind of on the cuff between wide and normal width, so it’s best to look at it on a board by board basis, in terms of width.
Those boards are certainly still relevant (this list is updated every year), and I think you’re in the right place for what you’re describing. Something all-mountain/do-it-all would work well, IMO – and most boards here are going to work well for a progressing intermediate rider. Pretty much anything on this list would work – except maybe the Arbor Coda Rocker and Niche Story (which I will be adjusting for flex when I update for 2020 models) which might be a little too stiff.
The Outerspace Living is what I would term all-mountain-freestyle – but it’s a little better in powder than most all-mtn-freestyle boards, so that would be suitable too. Particularly if you weren’t going to be going in any deeper powder. Another that fits that bill would be the Salomon Assassin.
The Mountain Twin and Standard certainly great options too. The 2020 model of the Mountain Twin looks like it has a twin tip and tail now (the tip used to be 1cm longer than the tail) – so if that’s accurate, then it’s a little more freestyle oriented now and not as good in powder, but would still be decent. I hadn’t heard that it was getting changed up but that’s what the specs in the catalog are showing (I didn’t re-ride the 2020 model but I rode the 2019 model). Jones still consider it directional twin, so I don’t think it’s really changed.
I’d say anything like the Standard, West, Mountain Twin, Team Gullwing, One LF would all be great choices for what you’re describing. If you wanted something a little more easy going, you could also check out:
>>Top 10 Intermediate Snowboards
Hope this helps with your decision
Adding to my previous post:
Size 9 boot.
and, how crazy of an idea is the twinpig, or a GNU headspace for me?
Hi Ted
I would be more inclined to stick more with the likes of an all-mountain board. The Twinpig and Headspace are more freestyle/park oriented. The Headspace in particular – which is also quite an aggressive camber profile, and is not going to be great in powder. I haven’t ridden it but based on specs and my experience of similar GNU boards.
I haven’t ridden the Twinpig either, so just basing on specs and riding other ride boards. I would say it’s going to be better than the Headspace for powder, but still not as good as something like the One LF, Standard, West or Team Gullwing. Otherwise it could possibly work. The sizing is a little tricky. It’s a short/wide. I think the 151 is getting too big to be ideal, given the width, so I would say that the 148 would be your best bet size with the Twinpig (the 142 too short I would say). It’s just whether going to 148 is going short enough to compensate for the extra width or not. And also to consider is that you’re looking at less effective edge than the other options if you go for that. Which is fine in powder, and if you were going to be riding mostly freestyle, but might effect you for carving and stability at speed (even if you’re not going to riding super fast). The effective edge on the 148 is 108.5cm, which is 2.1cm shorter than the 110.6cm on the 149 Standard (which is the shortest effective edge of all the other options). And 2.1cm can definitely make a difference there. Finally, since you’re looking for that grip in hard/icy conditions, I would be a little concerned there too. My experience with other Ride boards suggests it wouldn’t be as good as some of the other options we’ve discussed. So an option, but in my opinion a more risky option.
Hope this helps
Wow, Nate, what incredible work you’re doing here. I’ve been reading and comparing boards for hours! My specs don’t seem to fit anyone specifically above, so I thought I’d get your assessment.
5’9 135 pounds
44 years old, fit but not super athletic
Burton custom bindings
Burton ruler wide boots
Been using some wide K2 board from the 90s that is really stiff, long and camber, I think 26.5 width
Been snowboarding for 4 years, probably lower intermediate. Getting better at carving and speed.
I am NOT:
jibbing, park, large jumps or bombing down going super fast
I WOULD like to – (these are not in order of preference):
– handle ice and chop in Crested Butte, CO – there was a decent amount of this last year and a problem for me
– explore learining powder (CB has powder, I’ve stayed mostly on groomers)
– ride switch, I enjoy doing that
– carve,
– have fun at slow speeds (learn to butter), but be plenty stable for CB rougher conditions
– learn tree runs
After reading, just to show that I’m paying attention, I think you might recommend:
151 Yes standard or 153 Rossi One?
But I’m open to anything!
Ted
Hi Ted
You have been listening! 🙂 – those two I would certainly recommend for what you’re describing and those sizes are good options too.
For the Standard I’d almost be looking at the 149 for your weight and considering the width is still going to be plenty for 9s, IMO, with the width of the Standard being a little wider at the inserts than the waist width would suggest. And also since you’re not looking to ride ultra-fast. But the 151 is also a good size for you, will be a little better for powder, and since you’re used to a bigger board by the sounds of it, it’s still going to feel smaller than what you’ve got. So, I’d probably still go 151 over 149 – but the 149 would certainly be an option. The One LF’s smallest size in 153, so no real room for debate there. Both are quite buttery and both are still fun at slow speeds. I would be leaning towards Standard, only just, just because I like the size options are a little better for you.
The Nitro Team Gullwing (152) and NS West (152) would be great options too. Not quite as good in hard/icy conditions as the Standard and One LF, in my experience, but still good.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you so much for all the consideration of specs and recommendation!
The Nitro Team Gullwing (152)
is looking really good right now price-wise
I may go for that!
Is the Nitro Team Exposure Gullwing the same board as the Nitro Team Gullwing?
Your review links to the Exposure version, and the exposure version is less expensive.
Hi Ted
Yeah same board – the only difference is the graphics. The “Exposure” part of the name is in reference to how the graphic has been created.
Ordered, using your link. Thanks so much for your help!
It’s going to be a while before I can report back on it though, we just hit summer here in CB…
Hey Ted
Awesome! And thanks for going through the link. Much appreciated. If you do remember when winter rolls back around, let me know how you get on.
Hi Nate,
When i had my last time on the slope, i got rossignol “one” and i liked it, but i think it was small for me (153), sometimes i had speed and didn´t have stability. I´m 1,77 m and 74 kg with 9,5 boots. I started looking Burton Process V, but when i knew your review i think the Burton Custom V is more appropriate. Sometimes i like speed and powder too, i´m search a real all mountain. My friend said that my size is 158. I don´t have much experience but i like challenges. What board do you recommend and size?
Thanks,
Gustavo
Hi Gustavo
Thanks for your message.
Yeah 153 is a bit small for you, IMO. I would say something around 157, 158 at an advanced level. But if you don’t have much experience, then I would go smaller than that. Assuming an intermediate level, I think something between 154 and 156 would be your best bet. The Rossignol One would be a good choice, but I would go for the 156 for you.
For the Custom Flying V, if you went with that one, then the 156 is likely your best bet there too.
Most of the boards on this list should be appropriate, assuming an intermediate level, at around that 155, 156 length. The Arbor Coda Rocker and Niche Story might be bordering on being a little too stiff, but otherwise, the rest are great options. You could also check out, if you wanted:
>>Top 10 Intermediate Snowboards
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate!
What do you think about Burton Process (Camber) instead of these? I asked you because i would like to buy a board that i can use for a long time…
Hi Gustavo
Firstly, just for your info. The latest versions of the Process camber are actually Burton’s “PurePop camber” which is slightly different to traditional camber, where there are flat sections before the contact points. So, a little more forgiving than traditional camber, but still a little on the catchy side. As an intermediate rider (assuming that’s a correct assumption) it would definitely be doable. Older versions of the Process camber are traditional camber (like the Custom camber is). Traditional camber can be very unforgiving if you’re not used to it, or if you’re still learning. But also has it’s advantages.
The Process is quite soft though as well, so if you’re wanting more of an all-mountain option that will last you a long time, then it might be a bit soft for what you’re after. And performance in powder for traditional camber and purepop isn’t that great in my experience, so if you’re looking to getting into riding powder later or already are, then that’s a downside.
My instinct tells me that, in your case, you would be better off looking at something with a more forgiving camber profile but a stiffer flex (a medium flex ideally). Something with a lot of versatility – which is what this list is all about. So I would go for the Rossignol One before the Process Camber – or other options like the Standard, West, Mountain Twin, Team Gullwing. These are all boards that are very versatile and that would stay with you for a long time, IMO.
Thanks Nate!
It was great! I’m thinking about rossignol one now!
Gustavo
You’re very welcome Gustavo.
Hi Nate,
At 80kg/175lbs would 159-160cm be too long for all mountain, say for the Yes Std or Jones Mtn Twin?
Cruising and carving mostly, popping off bumps here and there.
Pretty limited board choices where I live :-/
Cheers,
Jimmy
Hi Jimmy
Thanks for your message.
To give an accurate recommendation, I would need your height and boot size too. I suspect with the Standard that 156 would be better, but it would depend on boot size for that board. For the Mountain Twin, depending on height, the 160 could work, but if you could let me know height and boot size, that would help to make a more accurate recommendation.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate really appreciate it.
That would be 178cm (5-8) & Mondo 26.
Also found a place online with a Niche Story 159 and a Nitro team GW 157 so maybe a bit more choice there after all.
Been great reading through all the reviews on your site, thanks for sharing the info.
Cheers,
Jimmy
Hi Jimmy
Thanks for the extra info.
Yeah I would say definitely 156 for the Standard. For the Mountain Twin, I think 157 would actually be better – both 157 and 160 are a little wider than ideal for your foot size, but going a little shorter can compensate for that extra width. For that same reason, I would be leaning more towards the Team Gullwing 157, over the 159 Story. Also, if you only have Standard 159, Mountain Twin 160, Story 159 and Team Gullwing 157, then I think the Team GW 157 is your best bet.
Thanks!!
You’re very welcome Jimmy!
Hi Nate,
I have read some reviews about Yes Stadard board and Union Flacor bindings, and i have one doubt…
Can you set this bindings (mini discs) in the slam back inserts of my yes standard?????
Hi Mario
Thanks for your message.
Unfortunately with Union bindings with the mini-disc they won’t go on the slam back inserts of the YES Standard. Union bindings with their Universal Disc will, but not the mini-disc. Something like the Union Atlas or Union Force would be a great choice for the Standard, if you’re using the Slam Back inserts and wanting to go with Union.
Hope this helps
Nate
I have read a few of your posts and you provide straightforward info. I have a few questions, been riding since 90, last board I purchased and am still riding is a 1996 burton supermodel, 162, have been thinking about getting a new board. I have ridden everything(parks, pipes, back country) and everywhere(Tahoe, van b.c, alps, to big bear) looking for an all mountain board. It appears that so much has changed regarding board technology and needing some help. Looking for a board that it a litttle more forgiving than the supermodel especially later in the day when I begin to get tired at 48 years old, but still want to ride with my two boys. The burton still rides well and works great but have been hearing about the shift in technology and has me thinking of adding a new board to my quiver. I am an advanced rider.
Also was looking for a single board that can do anything I need it to do, more of a replacement for the burton. Also I am 5-7 and weigh 175. Was looking at the Lib Tech as well as the Yes board that you listed as the number 1 and the Never Summer West, thoughts?
Lib tech is the t.rice pro model. I know burton and libtech have been the standard of boards in the past but I am not married to that. I do like the idea of the mag-edges on the lib tech, but the rocker, camber, rocker on the yes seems like a more forgiving board, given that layout, thanks in advance. Dave.
Hi Dave
Thanks for your messages.
Yeah definitely tech has come a long way since 1996.
In terms of rocker-camber-rocker (hybrid camber), I wouldn’t say that it’s necessarily more forgiving that camber-rocker-camber (hybrid rocker). In some ways hybrid rocker can feel more forgiving – having that pivot of rocker between the feet. But it also depends as not all hybrid cambers and hybrid rockers are the same. Some have more exaggerated camber sections, some have more exaggerated rocker sections – and some have longer sections of camber and longer sections of rocker – so it really depends (a lot more complicated than everything being traditional camber I know!).
The T Rice Pro has quite a forgiving hybrid rocker profile, but overall it’s relatively aggressive (quite stiff). So, in this particular case, I would say that something like the YES Standard is a little more forgiving.
Another thing I would say is that Hybrid Camber has a more similar feel to Traditional Camber vs Hybrid Rocker, IMO – in most cases. Some exceptions – some Lib Tech/GNU boards have a hybrid rocker called C3 Camber, which is very close to traditional camber, with a very subtle rocker section between the feet.
But all that said, I think since you’re looking for something a little forgiving, and since you’ve been riding traditional camber since 1990, I think Hybrid camber would be the way to go.
Burton and Lib Tech still make great boards, but there are a lot of other brands making really great boards now too. YES being one of those brands that’s got some great decks.
So, in terms of the Never Summer West – that’s a hybrid rocker, so would be a bigger adjustment to what you’re used to. It’s a hybrid rocker that’s heavier on the camber, which certainly makes it doable, but would be a more different feel than what you’re used to, IMO.
I think the YES Standard, Jones Mountain Twin or Rossignol One LF would be your best bets. These 3 are also good in hard/icy conditions, which I’m guessing is what you like the sound of the Mag-tech edges for. Certainly not writing others off, but I think these would be the best bets.
Size-wise, typically you ride a little shorter these days than with older boards. So you could certainly size-down as well – and that would also make things more forgiving too. Normally I would recommend something around 157 for your specs, as an advanced rider, for an all-mountain board. Since you’re used to a 162, you might want to go for something in between, so that you’re not making too big an adjustment. For the boards mentioned, I would say:
– YES Standard 156 (this is a wider board, so depending on boot size, I’d probably stick to the 156, but if you’ve got larger boots, the 159 could be a possibility too)
– Jones Mountain Twin 157 or 160 – or 158W depending on boot size
– Rossignol One LF – 156 or 159 – or 157W or 161W depending on boot size and how much you are willing to size down
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
nate
thanks for all the info i think i am going to go with the yes board, decade basic seems to be a good fit, has the rocker/camber/rocker that you. suggested. i have opted for the 161 in size as i was looking for the 158 but have had no luck finding it so the couple inch diff should not be a big deal . hoping to get on it and have some spring time fun in the next month. will let you know my feedback, have you rode this board?
dave
Hi Dave
Thanks for the update. Look forward to hearing what you think. The Basic Decade is actually one of the only YES boards I haven’t had a chance to ride.
Hi Nate,
First of all thank you so much for your reviews!
Following your recommendations I bought a Yes Standar (156) this season. My riding style is all-mointaneer and backcountry whenever I can (not very often), closer to freeride. I’m 178 cms and my weight is 76kgs, do you think the Stendard 156 is the right board and size????
I want to buy new bindings for the next seasons too, according to my riding style and this board what ones would do you recomend me???
My first option is Burton but I dont’t know what model. Anyway Burton is not the only option.
Thanks so much!!!
P.D.: sorry if the english level is not appropriate!!!
I forgot to add that my boot size is 9.5.
Hi Mario
Thanks for your messages.
I would say that the Standard is more on the freestyle end of the all-mountain scale, rather than freeride, but certainly can handle freeriding/backcountry – especially if you put it into the slam back inserts when you get out in the backcountry. Size-wise, I think the 156 is a good size for you. I think the 159 would be big overall (taking into account length and width) for your height, weight and boot size. In fact you could even consider the 153 for this board. But that’s getting a little short. If you were going to be riding a lot of freestyle I would be weighing up 153 and 156 – but given your style I think the 156 is the best size for you, for sure.
From Burton, I would pair the Standard with either the Malavitas, Cartels or Genesis X. Given your style is more freeride oriented, then I would go more for the Cartels or Genesis X. For other options check out:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Thank you so much for your advices Nate.
You’re very welcome Mario. Happy riding!
Union Falcor looks great too…and a bit cheaper.
Falcor would definitely work, IMO, with the Standard, especially if you’re leaning towards the freeride end of all-mountain riding.
Hi, Nate! I love your website! Thank you so much for helping me find my gear. I bought my set of board/binding/boots based on your recommendation last season and loving them!
Now, I’m looking for a set of board and binding for my friend’s for his upcoming bday. Can you please help me out again? His riding skills: he has been going down black and double black diamonds at Heavenly and Toas Ski Valley this season. Most of his riding is just downhill and speed. He doesn’t do park much. He says he likes riding 172cm boards, but he had never owned one before.
He’s 6’2. Currently, he weights 180lbs, but his weight fluctuates between 170-190lbs. He wears size 11 in the K2 Maysis boots.
Thank you so much in advance for your advice and I look forward to hearing from you.
Sydnie
Hi Syndie
Thanks for your message.
Since your friend is into speed and steeps, and doesn’t really do any freestyle, then he might want to look at a freeride board or an aggressive all-mountain board. Depending on if he rides powder/off-groomer a fair bit or mainly just likes to bomb the groomers. Check out the following for some good options (assuming, based on what you’re describing that he’s quite an advanced rider).
>>Top 6 Aggressive All Mountain Snowboards
>> My Top 5 Freeride Snowboards
Size-wise, I would usually say something around 162 for an all-mountain type board – but certainly can add some length for a freeride board if he’s just riding fast and not doing any freestyle or any technical trees or anything like that. 172cm sounds really long, but some prefer to go really long. There aren’t too many options in that kind of length, but there are certainly some. I think something around 165 might be a better bet, but if he knows he prefers that, then a couple of options in that kind of length:
– Jones Flagship 172 (and should be a good width for 11s too)
– Ride Timeless 167 (even though it’s not up to 172, this is the stiffest board I’ve ever ridden and is quite wide too)
– Burton Flight Attendant 168 – also not quite 172, but still a lengthy board and should be wide enough for 11s.
– Rossignol XV 174W – on the wider side for 11s though, and even longer than 172, even for him this might be getting a bit big
– Salomon Speedway 170 – should be good for 11s
Hope this gives you some options
Hi, Nate,
Thank you so much for your detailed recommendations! I’ll look into these boards.
You’re very welcome Sydnie (and apologies for spelling your name wrong in my last message).
Hi Nate,
Absolutely fantastic to read all your reviews and detailed answers! But same time all this knowledge is giving me a hard time to seek out the right board. I’m spending 80% of my time in European resorst and occasionally in treelines or powder and 20% in bigger slopes. Don’t like the parks or pipes, just some basic small jumps and ollies for time to time. So mainly what i’m looking for is good board to handle in the carving with all speeds. I would say i’m intermeditiate and I have rided last years Burton Parkitect 2015 with SP Labtec bindings and and quite stiff Burton shoes. I like the current board easines in turns and ok grib in carvings, but it starts to flop in higher speed and its not stable in those Saturday evenings bumpy conditionings.
So I have been looking more stiffer board, but still wan’t to handle quite easy in slower speed with children or nice day cruising. I wonder if the Slash ATV is too stiff this kind of use, so i was thinking the Brainstorm or Jones Mountain Twin. Any good recommendations?
I’m 175cm tall, 85kg and shoesize 41.
Hi Pete
Thanks for your message.
The Slash ATV is quite an aggressive board and not necessarily the best for slowing down and playing around with. It’s pretty good at that for it’s flex and camber profile, compared to other similar boards, but all round that’s not really what that board is intended for. The Brainstorm is definitely something you can slow down and play around – not as good for carving and not as good at speed as the ATV, but definitely more easy going. The Mountain Twin is a good in between of those 2. A little stiffer, and a little less playful than the Brainstorm, but something that you can still slow down and play around on a bit. I think that would be your best bet, from what you’re describing.
Size-wise, I think the 157 would be the best size for you, for the Mountain Twin – and for the Brainstorm, if you decided to go for that.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks!
I think I will leave the Slash models this time and try look the Mountain Twin, all thought I´m quite late in this, so there is not much appropriate sizes available. I also looked the review of Capita Mercury and interested about the stability with some forgiveness. For that I founded good bargain for 157 size, so might go for that as well.
Hi Pete
Yeah, the Mercury would suit what you’re describing as well, IMO – and is something that’s more forgiving than the ATV but less playful than the Brainstorm. It’s probably a little more aggressive than the Mountain Twin but not by that much. The 157 would be a good size too, IMO.
Hi Nate,
I’m wanting to upgrade from my 1st board that I lean’t to snowboard on – a 161W Rome Mechanic. Although it was a great board to learn on, I feel like I’ve outgrown that board (particularly as it doesn’t seem to want to carve and is pretty washy when not on an edge) and am looking at these 3 All-Mountain boards:
• Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker
• Jones Mountain Twin
• Never Summer West
I’m wanting a general do-it-all board, which I can carve, ride switch on, hit kickers, bomb groomers and take through the trees. I don’t care much for the park and would prefer a more medium-flex feel than stiff – for the sake of my knees on those chopped up resort days! I also spend a fair bit of time under lights night boarding, which more often than not is on hard crusty snow/ice.
I’m 6’2’’, pushing 220lbs with my gear on and have size 10 Thirty-Two Lashed boots. I guess my 1st question is what board from the above 3 do you recommend (or some other board) and then my 2nd question is what size do you recommend for me, especially in relation to whether you think I need a wide board? I tend to ride a 15/-9 binding set-up, however I’ve noticed on my Rome Mechanic that my bindings are on the bottom rung of the 3 set of screw holes (Burton Mission Re-Flex) and my boots are still not quite flush with the edge of the board yet – does this mean my board is too wide?
Thanks for your website and all the help/tips that it gives to us newbies and veterans, it is very greatly appreciated!
Chris
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, with size 10s and +15/-9 binding angles (or pretty much any aangles really) I don’t think you need to be going wide. And if your boots aren’t overhanging the boards edges at all, then it sounds like your current board is too wide. Some boot overhang is a good thing. Obviously you don’t want so much that you get boot drag when carving, but it sounds like your feet (which are ultimately what is putting pressure on the edges) are quite far inside the edges of the board. Ideally you want to get your feet as close to the edges or even slightly over, to get good leverage on the edges. If your feet are too far inside the edges, then it’s hard to initiate turns (the exception is with short/wide boards – but they make up for that lack of maneuverability by being ridden at a shorter length).
In terms of length, I would be looking at anything from 162 to 164 as a good all-mountain length for your specs.
The 3 boards you’ve mentioned are all good options. I’ve yet to ride the Terrain Wrecker (I was meant to ride it on the weekend but it fell through, but hope to get on this month or in April) but I’ve heard good things. In terms of hard/icy conditions, I would say the Terrain Wrecker is likely to be just above the other 2, but the MT and West both have decent edgehold in hard/icy, so I think you’d get on with all 3 in that sense – just the Terrain Wrecker potentially a notch above.
You can’t really go wrong with any of those 3.
Size-wise, I would say:
• Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker: 160
• Jones Mountain Twin: 162
• Never Summer West: 162
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Do you think the 160cm Terrain Wrecker will be slightly undersized for me or can it be ridden “shorter” due to the wider specs of the board?
I was also looking at the Lib Tech TRS and Travis Rice Pro models which come in 161.5/162cm models – do you think either of these would be a better fit for me or close to that of the Terrain Wrecker? I’m pretty keen to try that MagnaTech edge technology from Lib Tech.
Thanks heaps!
Chris
Hi Chris
Yeah sizing down when it’s a little wider is definitely something you can do. With the Terrain Wrecker, it’s wider at the waist, but Lib Tech boards tend to have a smaller difference between the width at inserts and waist width – based on measuring other sizes of the MT and West, and other Lib Tech boards, I would say the Width at inserts of each of those is likely to be:
• Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker: 160 – 265mm
• Jones Mountain Twin: 162 – 269mm
• Never Summer West: 162 – 264mm
In saying that though, the overall width is a little wider on the Terrain Wrecker, so prob a little more surface area overall there.
The MT & West 162 are probably slightly better sizes, IMO. But the 160 Terrain Wrecker could work for you too.
The TRS and T Rice Pro are slightly different boards. More freestyle oriented and less directional. The TRS is a true twin and centered. The T Rice Pro is also centered but directional twin, so a little more all-mountain-ish. But it’s also medium-stiff flex, IMO, and it sounds like you were more looking for medium. The TRS is more medium, but more freestyle oriented. Not necessarily something you wouldn’t suit you though. Biggest weakness would be in powder I would say. But you can check out more on what I thought of those two below:
>>Lib Tech TRS Review
>>Lib Tech T Rice Pro Review
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate,
I also agree that 160cm is prob not ideal for me, as I demo’d a 160cm NS Chairman on the weekend and it felt too small (and far too-stiff) to me.
Your reviews of the two Lib Tech boards pointed me towards checking out the top 5 Freestyle-All Mountain boards, where I found the GNU Riders Choice which is available in 161.5cm. From the specs, it seems to me that this is almost identical to the Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker, except being an Asym Twin vs True Twin shape. I would think GNU and Lib Tech boards would be very similar given both share the same tech and are made by Mervin.
Anyway I’m going to check out them all this weekend at my local shops, as there’s some good deals getting around now.
Hi Chris
Yeah definitely very similar tech between Mervin boards.
Terrain Wrecker and Rider’s Choice quite similar in a lot of ways. The Terrain Wrecker is a Directional Twin, rather than True Twin though – the nose is a little longer than the tail (past the contact points) I believe, so it should float a little better in powder vs the Rider’s Choice, especially when set back. But otherwise, they both have C2X, similar widths, similar sidecut, similar contact length etc. So yeah, quite similar, like you say.
Let me know what you go with.
Super great detail on all your posts…beyond amazing and the devotion and time you put in is above excellent. With a but of a time crunch i did settle on a Capita DOA due to convenience, price and it did have some good reviews. Its the first time i’ve ridden a a true twin, I’m 48, been riding since 1984 but so many years after college dropped of a bit but now picking it up. I do like big strong carves and jumps but now trying my hand at the park. The twin is taking a bit to get used. A couple questions: did you demo the DOA? Wondering your thoughts on it. Also why do a lot of sites leave out the Yes brand out of their top list for all mountain boards? I really want to get a Yes Standard in the off season hopefully on a good deal. So many boards and I truly got analysis paralysis…seems the only true test is to ride them. Unfortunately we can’t and have to just decide. I’m 6’0″ 195 got the DOA 160 with K2 Lein AT bindings. You would for sure recommend the Yes Standard? and in what size? I’m up for anything that would have a learning curve. Thanks in advance. Oh and my previous board was a Lamar Mission…yeah I know, I can’t believe what i’ve been missing. Quality boards are sooooo much worth it.
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
I have ridden the DOA, and I like it – you can see my review here. It’s something that i like to ride a little smaller and certainly ride mostly freestyle on it.
No idea why anyone would leave YES boards off their lists. They make some of the better boards I’ve ridden. Perhaps, they see the Standard as more all-mountain-freestyle – and there is an argument that you could put it in that category – or maybe they just haven’t ridden YES boards? Who knows.
I would say that the Standard is a little more snappy/lively than the DOA. No such thing as a perfect board, but it does most things very well – and I really like the feel of it. In terms of size, I would say probably the 159, but if you can also let me know your boot size, I can give a more accurate recommendation/opinion on size. The Lien ATs would be a good match for the Standard too – so you wouldn’t need to change bindings, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Size 9 1/2 boot. There is a review that put the DOA in the top freestyle list. So I”m assuming theres a fine line with some of these boards from freestyle to all mountain. I cant wait to try to Standard. Do you recommend waxing it over the factory wax?
Hi Ryan
Yeah definitely a fine line for some of the categories and depending on who you talk to, different boards will belong in different categories, for sure.
It’s a close call between the 159 and 156 for the Standard for you, IMO. Usually I would say 159 for sure or even 162. But since the Standard is a little wider, it’s sometimes a good idea to go shorter, depending on boot size. For an all-mountain board, I would usually go around 159, but for the Standard I like the 156 – I find it’s the best balance of length and width (I’m 6’0″, 185lbs, size 10 boot). So you could definitely ride the 159, but it is going to be quite wide for 9.5s. The 156 is short for your specs, but it’s still on the wide side for 9.5s – so sizing down is certainly an option. 159 is already a bit of a size down for you, IMO. So it’s just whether to size down to 159 or 156.
The advantages of 159 over 156 include more stability at speed, more float in powder, a larger landing platform.
The advantages of 156 are more maneuverability, better for freestyle type things, better in trees.
In terms of waxing, I usually ride the factory wax for a couple of days and then give it a wax. I don’t rewax that regularly but I tend to give it a first wax earlier, when it’s straight from the factory wax. No harm in giving it a wax straight away as well. But I personally don’t bother until I’ve had a couple of days on it.
Hope this helps
Great info. What about the Never Summer West size? Is that a size down type of board as well?
Hi Ryan
I wouldn’t size down for the West. It’s a regular widthed board (in the non-wide sizes of course).
For the West, I would be weighing up between the 159 & 162 for you – again which one you go for will depend on the qualities you want to augment – go longer for more stability at speed, more float in powder, a larger landing platform. And shorter for more maneuverability, better for freestyle type things, better in trees.
Hope this helps
Nate,
Great site.
Looking for a new board to work on riding switch and just playing around a bit more.’
Stats: 6’2″ 175 lbs. 30 years of boarding. Freeride guy.
Currently on a NS 25X. Great board, may need to try the PYL next year.
So I could stay NS, and go with a West or a Type II.
YES Standard possibly, or Brainstorm?
Thoughts?
Hi Jim
Thanks for your message.
Yeah the 25 was a great board – shame they took it out of the line (though the Chairman is a good replacement). If you were to stick with NS, I think the PT2 would be the best compliment to the 25. It’s the most different. It’s a freestyle oriented ride, and more suitable for switch than the West (though the West is pretty good for switch too). But yeah, just a better compliment I reckon. Not as good in powder, but if you’ve got the 25 for that, then you’ve got that covered. And you’re still not going like super soft or like going with a really loose ride with the PT2. It’s still aggressive enough and mid-flex. Certainly not a noodle or anything.
The Brainstorm is quite a playful all-mountain ride. If you want something a lot more playful than the NS 25, but still want something that’s a little more directional, then the Brainstorm would be a good choice, but not going to be as good riding switch as something like the PT2 or Standard.
The Standard would be a good option. Good for switch, particularly when on the centered stance – and something you can play around with a bit more. Not ultra-playful – can still get a little aggressive on it.
You should also check out the Greats, if you’re looking for that more playful ride, without going too playful, but being great for riding switch. And also check out the following:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
If you don’t need something for powder, then that list is a good place to start, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate
I just realized posting questions here instead of in emails is preferable to you. Please ignore my email and my apologies for any inconvenience!
I’m 5’9, 135 pounds, boot size 9 and on the lower end of advanced rider. I currently ride a down sized box knife 148 which works well enough for an all mountain freestyle ride(with more effort to keep it stable at high speeds of course). But for my riding progress I’d like to see a more stable platform at speeds and bigger jumps/more pow riding, same carving ability, similar edge hold, quick edge to edge transition, lastly doable for ground tricks/jibbing. I live in asia so for my needs the available options are(based on my research) :
longer box knife at 151
typo 152
standard 149
Which one you think suit my needs better or if you have other recommendations?
Sorry about duplicated/length message and I’d love to hear your thoughts
Also big thanks to your effort on building such a wonderful site, can not thank you enough for educating us snowboarding lovers!
Hi Adrian
Thanks for your message.
From everything you’re describing, I would say go for the Standard. But I would maybe even be looking to go up to the 151 Standard, if you have it available.
The 151 Box Knife and 152 Typo are going to give you a little more in terms of carving, powder and speed vs the 148 Box Knife, but the difference will be greater with the Standard, IMO – even the 149.
The 151 Standard is a little wider than what you’re riding now (at the inserts) but not a huge amount, and I think it would work fine with 9s (and not that much wider than the 151 Box Knife). And will give you even more in terms of stability at speed, stability on landings off big jumps, powder and carving. The 149 would be quicker edge to edge and easier for ground tricks/jibbing, so there is a compromise, but the 151 would still be doable for those things. So both are options depending on if you want a more pronounced difference in terms of stability at speed etc, or if you’re happy with a less pronounced difference there, and maintaining a quicker edge to edge transition/jib/ground trick ability.
The 149 would still give you more in terms of speed/pow/stability on landings, IMO, vs the 148 Box Knife and I would go with that over the 151 Box Knife and 152 Typo for what you’re describing, but the 151 is also a good option, if you’re wanting even more in terms of stiffness/speed etc.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much for your time and patience! Your input is very helpful/insightful. Thanks again for your great effort replying so many questions and such a wonderful site. Good luck with everything Nate
Hello again Nate
Based on your helpful input now I’m definitely going for a standard. It’s somehow difficult for me to choose from 149 and 151 since trying one on is not an option. I had a west mark rocker in wrong size 153 which was a chore to turn or maneuver. Not sure if it was the profile or length tho. Also my boot size is 9 in Burton but actually 8.5 in vans aura (my current boots). You still think I’ll be able to drive the 151 with agility?
Hi Adrian
A couple of things to consider.
1. The rocker profile on the Westmark rocker, if anything should have made it easier to maneuver, so I would say that it wasn’t the camber profile.
2. But the Westmark does have a lot of effective edge vs overall length. I’m guessing the Westmark Rocker you had was around 2015 or prior (just because since then they haven’t had a 153). The effective edge (EE) on the 2015 and prior 153 Westmark rockers was 119.6cm – which is a lot for a 153. The EE in comparison on the 151 Standard is only 112.3 – so the 151 Standard, in that sense should feel significantly less than the 153 Westmark rocker.
3. It’s more the length of your feet that drive the board, so a different sized boot won’t change your leverage, at least not significantly. But yeah, I think the 151 would still be fine in the 8.5 Auras.
It’s a tough one, but i would be leaning towards 151 still, especially if you’re looking to keep the 148 Box Knife – then it also gives you a bigger contrast in your quiver.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Sorry to ask another question here I’ve actually realized my boots are 11.5 Salomon dialogues (not 11) as per my earlier thread. I ride normally -15/+15 angles and so far have not had any issues with heel or toe drag on the Salomon 158w, this has a width of 258mm. Just checked and the 162 explorer has a width of 256 so it’s slightly narrower but not sure it would be an issue or not? The other alternative is a get the 161W explorer as this has a width of 264mm but it’s only up to 200lbs weight vs the 162 at 210lbs. I’m currently 194 without gear. What do you think? I’m not doing super deep euro carves (I’m 43 so just want to get down intact 😉 would appreciate any thoughts as I can get either size currently… cheers
Hi Martyn
Typically I’d say go a little wider than the 162 Explorer with 11.5s. However, given that Jones boards are usually wider at the inserts vs waist width than Salomon boards are, I would suspect that the Explorer is actually as wide as your Salomon 158W at the inserts. Potentially even a little wider. So, since you haven’t had any issues on your Salomon and since you ride with +15/-15 angles and aren’t doing any massively deep carves I think you’ll be fine on the 162. I wouldn’t worry too much about the weight guidelines. Think weight wise you would be fine on either (and they typically go off weight without gear, anyway).
Both would work, but if you’re used to the width of your Salomon and don’t have any issues on it width-wise, then I think you’ll be fine on the 162.
Hi Nate
I’m going to upgrade from a Salomon sight 158w to a Jones explorer but had a question on sizing. I’m 194lbs (without gear), 180cms tall and wear a size 11 boot.
I think I’ll need the 162 rather than the 159 as it’s a similar width to my current board and I’m poss a little heavy for the 159. Wasn’t sure if I’d notice the extra length? I’m mainly cruising groomers, carving and a little powder when I can get it in the alps. Any help appreciated before I pull the trigger online….
Hi Martyn
Thanks for your message.
For the Explorer, I agree that the 162 is likely the best size. The Explorer is something that can be ridden longer as it has a shorter effective edge vs overall length than most boards (actually has a very similar effective edge to the 158W Sight) – so I don’t think you’ll notice that length until you’re in powder, at which point that extra length is a good thing. And in any case sizing up a bit from 158W is probably a good idea for your specs, especially if you’re just carving, riding groomers and powder. And I’m guessing your 158W Sight was sized for you as a less advanced rider than what you are now – so with more experience sizing up can also be a good idea.
So all round, I think the 162 is a better option. And should be fine for size 11 boots, assuming you don’t ride with too straight a back foot binding angle. But yeah, likely to be about the same width as the 158W Sight in any case, and if you didn’t have any issues there, then I’d say you’ll be fine width-wise.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate
Appreciate the fast response. Your site is a really great resource and your hands on advice is amazing !
Thanks again… off to do a bit of internet shopping now 🙂
You’re very welcome Martyn. Hope you have a great rest of your season and enjoy your new board!
Thank you for anwering Nate.
I ordered 152. Tell me what wax you would use on her. And what bindings to it (I think about Burton Malavita) but it’s hard to get size S (25cm) but I think shoes would take 25 + 1cm (Adidas Reaponse ADV Boa). What do you think about this statement.
Hi Peps
The Malalvita would be a good match, IMO. With 8.5 boots, the Medium would actually be the best size for the Malavita, rather than the Small. You could also check out the following, which would all match well with the West.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Hey! A great guide. I wonder about the purchase of Never Summer West, but its minimum length is 152. Only the Never Summer version of West Lady has a length of 149. What would you advise on the increase of 167cm, weight 68kg, foot US 8.5.
Hi Peps
Thanks for your message.
I think the 152 would actually be a great size for your specs. Assuming you are a relatively advanced rider (at least solid intermediate), then it would be a good length – and the width should be fine too for 8.5s. Width at inserts is likely around 256mm (estimated, based on measuring different size), which is good for 8.5s, IMO. Unless you are a beginner (in which case the West probably isn’t the best option), I think the 152 is fine for you.
Hope this helps
Great site and incredible effort in responding to comments. Looking for a board primarily for groomers, occasional off trail hits, and some powder. Holding speed is important. Have been considering the NS West X. Does that seem like a good fit? If so, what would you recommend size wise? 6′ 3″, 170 lbs., 13 boot. I have been riding a 158W for the past several years, but think I probably need to move up the scale.
Hi Stephen
Thanks for your message.
I think the West would certainly fit what you’re describing. Speed-wise if you’re an out and out bomber, then there are better options if you wanted to maximize that aspect. But for most levels of speed, I found the West to hold well.
Size-wise, I think the 160X is the best bet for you.
Width-wise, it’s potentially borderline for 13s, but if you’ve had no issues on the 158W (depending on the make and model), then you’ll probably be fine.
Hope this helps with your decision
Many thanks for the speedy response(s), Nate! My old board was a Ride Fleetwood, which sported a 265mm waist on the 158. Looks like I’d be giving up a couple mms of waist with the WestX, but I’m not certain how big of a difference that would be. Also interesting insight that the Story may actually be narrower though listed at 265. I may need to see if I can step on one of these in person, but it’s always a bit tough to find them locally.
Another board that caught my eye is the Gnu Rider’s Choice Asym. The Wide appears to have a 268mm waist, and it seems to hit a lot of the all-mountain boxes though it may be more freestyle oriented than I need. Any thoughts?
Last question, would the Union Strata pair well with these boards?
Hi Stephen
Yeah the Rider’s Choice is certainly more freestyle oriented, but what I would consider all-mountain-freestyle rather than out and out freestyle. You would be giving away a little in terms of carving, speed and powder, when it comes to something like the West. GNU boards don’t typically have a lot of difference between waist and width at inserts. Based on measuring a different size, I would say that the Rider’s Choice 158W or 162W would be around 273mm at the inserts (vs the West 160X which I would predict to be around 271mm at the inserts). You could measure your Ride Fleetwood at the inserts (at reference point) and see what that is (measure it on the base of the baord, from metal edge to metal edge). And if it’s similar, then you’ll have a good idea that you’ll be OK with the widths.
The Strata would work really well with the West, Story and the Rider’s Choice, IMO. A good flex match. I would say the Rider’s Choice is a little softer (5/10 flex) but not by heaps and would still pair with the Strata.
Hope this helps
Thanks, Nate! On your recommendation, I just picked up a West 160X. Still a little bit torn about the Story, but I was a bit worried about the width and the magnetraction being overkill. I’m also picking up a new pair of boots to pair with the whole kit. Any thoughts on how the Ride Trident would work with the Strata and West? It seems like a bit more of an aggressive/freeride boot, but I’m making the leap to Boa and that appears to be one of the best options in that market. Thanks again for all the input!
Hi Stephen
I actually just rode the 2020 Niche Story on the weekend. I rode the 156 – it was 263mm at the inserts (and 258mm at the waist). So yeah, not a big difference there. The 162, likely to be around 270mm at the inserts – so not far off the West X. But both are great options. The Magnetraction has also been mellowed out a little for the 2020 model (but that doesn’t apply if you were looking to buy now). I would say that the Story 2020 also felt a little stiffer than what I’ve rated it here – and will be upping it to 6.5/10 or even 7/10, depending on what the rest of the boards I demo feel like. But will be upping it a little anyway.
As for the Ride Trident, they are getting on the stiff/aggressive side for that setup. Good boots for sure, but there are a lot of good BOA options out there. I would say the Tridents are about an 8/10 flex.
Some good options that are around that 6/10, 7/10 mark.
– K2 Maysis (7/10 flex)
– Adidas Response (6/10 flex)
– Ride 92 (6/10 flex)
– Ride Deadbolt (7/10 flex)
– Thirty Lashed Double Boa (6/10 flex)
To name a few. The Trident is a great boot though, IMO, just whether or not it’s just on the too stiff side for that setup or not.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Excellent site!
I’m looking for a new board, I’ve never really found one that feels right. I’ve tried custom Flying V endeavour colour, custom camber, but not hit it off that well yet. I always go back to the Flying V as my default.
I’m intermediate, ride 5-10 days a year, tend to stick to groomers, but like to find the pow when I can. Location wise, Mainly europe, but I’m heading to Whistler in April this year, so want to get the board right.
I’m 6’1”, roughly 190lb without my gear, size 10 Uk books (ions)
I’m interested in board size and type.
Thanks
Adrian
Hi Adrian
Thanks for your message.
Since you haven’t clicked with either a full camber, a flying V or a hybrid camber (Endeavor, Color), then you’ve covered a few bases there. A hybrid rocker will feel a little different from the Flying V – but closer to Flying V than the others. So, if you feel that the Flying V is the closest to what you’re looking for that you’ve found so far, then I think going Hybrid Rocker is a good idea. If you preferred the Custom Camber or Endeavor Color to the Flying V, then I would suggest looking at a hybrid camber. Going with a different brand is probably a good idea too – as all brands tend to have different feels, even if they have some similar specs.
If you feel like the Flying V is the closest so far, then I would look at hybrid rocker, like:
Never Summer West
Niche Story
Nitro Team Gullwing
If you feel like you would prefer a hybrid camber, then the following would be good options to look at:
YES Standard
Jones Mountain Twin
Slash Brainstorm
Rossignol One LF
YES Typo
Length-wise, I would be looking at something around 159 to 161 as an intermediate rider.
Width-wise, with UK10 Ions, you could go as narrow as 254mm at the waist width, depending on the board, if you ride with something like +15-15 binding angles. With a very straight back binding angle, I would move that minimum to 260mm. Anything up to 264mm waist width would work as a maximum. It does depend on the board too, as some have much different width at inserts compared to waist width, so those numbers are only rough. If you narrow it down to 1 or 2 boards, I can give you my opinion on best sizes for those, for both length and width.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
Thanks so much for the response. I always thought my Jamie Lynn was a 157 Wide, but I just measured the waist width and it’s approximately 25cm across. I’m not sure of my current binding angles, but I’d hate to leave myself limited. I currently wear a size 11 2015 Burton SLX boot which I believe might have a reduced footprint. Based on further research i’ve research I’ve narrowed my choices down to the Terrain wrecker 157 (25.7 waist width) and the Jones Mountain Twin 158W(25.8 waist width) I’ve already went ahead and ordered the Genesis bindings after you mentioned how comfortable they are. Just deliberating which board will check all the boxes for me and provide me with the diversity I am looking for. I’m a 45 yr old male and I’m not looking jump off cliffs or win any races down the mountain. I’m lucky to get 15-20 days on the mountain each year and I mostly ride in the northeast with a trip or two yearly it to Utah or Colorado. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and thanks again for the advice and helpful info.
Regards,
Erik
Hi Erik
Based on other Lib Tech boards I’ve measured, there isn’t typically a big difference (compared to average) between waist and width at inserts on Lib Tech boards, so I would imagine that the Terrain Wrecker would be around 263mm at the inserts, with the 257mm waist. The Mountain Twin on the other hand has a larger than normal difference. So even though the waist is similar, the Mountain Twin 158W is likely to have around a 271mm width at inserts (based on measuring a difference size Mountain Twin) – so the Mountain Twin 158W is likely to be a good amount wider at the inserts. But if you’ve been riding on a 250mm waisted Lib Tech, and you have Burton boots, then I think you would still be fine on the Terrain Wrecker.
Also, to note, that width for the Mountain Twin is based on the reference stance, which is 600mm (23.6″) which is quite a wide stance width – if you were to ride it narrower, then it wouldn’t be as wide, where your bindings go.
The Mountain Twin, for me, is about one of the most versatile boards out there. It feels consistent in any terrain, and can ride any style. I haven’t ridden the Terrain Wrecker but based on specs and what others are saying, also seems very versatile.
Most Lib Tech boards I’ve ridden are very good in hard/icy conditions, so there’s that, given that your on the East Coast. But the Mountain Twin is pretty good too. At a guess I would say the Terrain Wrecker is likely a little better in that area, but not a huge difference.
Terrain wrecker it is. Thanks for all the helpful info and insight. Keep up the great work. I enjoy your site very much.
Erik
You’re very welcome Erik. Thanks for visiting the site and glad I could help. Happy riding!
P.S: If you think of it at the time, let me know what you think of the Terrain Wrecker, once you’ve had a chance to ride it. I’m hoping to ride it this spring, but good to get as many opinions as possible.
Hey Nate,
I’m starting to research new board and bindings option after about 10 years on my Lib tech Jamie Lynn Phoenix blond. I am 45 yrs old 165 lbs and 5 ft 9′ I wear a size 11 boot. I’m an advanced intermediate rider looking for that one board to do a bit of everything. I really don’t want any limitations and I’m hoping my next set up will last me as long as my Jamie Lynn. I’m not too knowledgeable on the latest technologies and board shapes, which leads me to looking to you for some advice. So far based on a few recommendations i’ve narrowed some of my choices down to the Lib Tech Terrain wrecker 157, Lib tech T Rice pro 157 Jones ultra and standard mountain twin 155W or 158W, and both Burton customs(standard and rocker) For bindings I’m deciding between Burton Genesis and Union Atlas both size Lg. I’d appreciate any helpful info and I’m open to any suggestions you might have. Also in regards to sizing, what do you suggest in terms of board length and whether I need a wide board.
Thanks!
Hi Erik
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, length-wise, I would say something around 157 is a good way to go, give or take.
Width-wise, with 11s, I would say wide in more cases than not, but in some cases you can get on a regular width board. If you ride with angles like +15-15 (i.e. with a reasonable amount of angle on the back binding), then that helps to get on a narrower board – as does low profile boots. If you could let me know the size of your Jamie Lynn Phoenix too. The width of that, assuming you haven’t had any drag issues would also help to make a call. But generally speaking roughly minimum of 254mm waist width, with 15 degrees on the back binding – and min 261mm waist width if a completely straight back foot. This is only roughly speaking as the width at inserts can differ compared to waist width depending on the board.
The Ultra Mountain Twin is quite a different beast to the Mountain Twin. They do have a lot of similarities, but the UMT is significantly stiffer. It would be the most different from the options you’ve got there, just because of that stiffness. It’s not something that I really enjoyed slowing down and playing around with. It’s a more the kind of board that wants to go fast all the time, from my experience. If that’s what you’re after, then it’s aweseome, but if you want to slow it down and play around sometimes, then the others you’ve mentioned are better options. The T Rice Pro the same to some extent. But if you were wanting something similar in flex to your Jamie Lynn Phoenix, then those 2 would be the closest in that sense. But if you’re looking to mellow it out a little, then the other options are likely better.
The Burton Custom Flying V is likely going to be going too mellow – and with that Flying V profile will probably feel too loose compared to what you’re used to, IMO.
The Custom Camber certainly an option, as are the Terrain Wrecker (not one I’ve ridden yet but heard good things) and Mountain Twin.
If you were to go with something like the UMT or the T Rice Pro, then I would say to pair them with the Atlas for sure. Just going to give a bit more response and drive to those boards, than the Genesis, IMO (the Genesis X would be more suitable).
For the Custom Camber, Terrain Wrecker and Mountain Twin, both the Genesis and Atlas would work – which one would depend on whether you were more looking for response or wanted something that had better board feel. The Genesis, IMO, are more comfortable and have considerably better board feel, but the Atlas are more responsive.
Depending on boots and angles, I would say:
Terrain Wrecker: 157
T Rice Pro: 157 or 157W
Mountain Twin: 158W
Ultra Mountain Twin: 158W (or 155W to mellow it out a bit)
Custom: 158W
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
I also forgot to mention that I certainly would like to mellow it out a bit from the Jamie Lynn. If I did go with the the mountain twin should I consider the 155w as well as the 158w? Just trying to cover all my bases.
Thanks again,
Erik
Hi Erik
Yeah you would certainly fit into the range for the 155W. And width-wise I imagine it would be fine. Further to my last comment, re the 158W having a width at inserts of around 271mm. The 155W is likely to be a little narrower than that at the reference point, even though it has the same waist width as the 158W, as it has a narrower reference stance. But still plenty wide enough for you, I would say.
Some pros of going 155W are that it would feel more mellow than the 158W (which is a good thing if that’s what you’re looking for) – better for trees, more agile at slower speeds, feel softer flexing/more playful. Better for freestyle in general. Downsides is that it will be a little less stable at higher speeds, and won’t float as well in powder. But that said, it’s likely to be similar in surface area to the 157 Jamie Lynn – as it will be a little wider. And overall, I would say that the Mountain Twin probably has slightly better float than the Jamie Lynn anyway.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi Natee!
I have a question about rossignol Onel LF 153 2018.
I try to buy one on second hand and I’m 169 cm, 75kg and 42 EU Burton.
You think 153cm is correct for me? I make all mountain, a little pow a little groomers.
I have a burton cartels 18.
Thanks
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
I think you could definitely ride the 153. I would be weighing up the 153 and 156. Both sizes would be a good width for your boots, IMO.
For float in powder and stability at speed, the 156 would be better, but the 153 better in the trees and more maneuverable at slower speeds and better for freestyle. Also the 153 would be more suitable if you are more of an intermediate rider. If you’re more advanced, then the 156 is likely the better call, unless you also ride a fair bit of freestyle/trees. You could still ride the 153 as an advanced rider who does no freestyle, but I would be leaning towards the 156 in that case. In other cases, the 153 should be a good size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for all the information on your site. I’m trying to decide between out what size the 159/162 on the Never Summer West.
I’m 5’11”, 200 lbs, 10.5 boots. Currently ride an old NS T5 Premier 165, a remnant of my time living out west. I do a bit of everything except park, mostly in the Midwest now.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Thx
Brad
Hi Brad
Thanks for your message.
You could certainly ride both, but I would be leaning towards the 162 for a few reasons.
1. It’s better suited for your weight
2. Both should be fine width-wise for your boots, but the 162 gives you a little more leeway
3. You’re coming from a 165. The 162 will be less of an adjustment than the 159 – but you would still be sizing down a little both in terms of overall length and effective edge, which I think would be a good thing.
4. You don’t ride park – that would have been one argument for the 159.
Hope this helps
Good morning, Sir!
I am 6-1, 180 pounds, size 12 boot.
I ride an old High Society Empire (165w) – big mountain board, very stiff. Love bombing runs and hitting the trees.
Knowing that, what are the major differences between the West and the Standard? Are both of those boards going to give me something a little different compared to what I am riding now? Very interested in both, but I would hate to snag something similar to my board now. Also, would you recommend the 159 in the standard? What about the west? Would i need to look at the wide boards? (west X)
Thanks,
Matt
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
I don’t know the High Society Empire (and struggled to find detailed specs on it), but based on what you’re describing both the West and Standard are quite different from it.
From what I can tell the Empire is a traditional camber profile. The Standard is a hybrid camber (camber between the feet and under the feet but rockered towards tip and tail) and the West is a hybrid rocker (rocker between the feet and camber under the feet and towards tip and tail).
Both, I imagine would be softer. By my feel both a 6/10 flex. The Empire sounds like it’s quite stiff.
The Standard is a directional volume twin – basically a twin, but with a bit more volume in the nose. The West is a directional twin – a little longer nose vs tail and a bit of a setback. The Empire sounds like it’s probably more directional, given that you describe it as a big mountain board. The Standard and West are both what I would describe as “do-it-all” kind of boards, that can take you anywhere and do a bit of everything.
Size-wise, for the Standard, I think the 159 would be a good size for you. I actually like the 156 (6’0″, 185lbs) but for a few reasons I would go 159 for you, even though those specs are similar. 1. because you have 12 boots. I like to size down in length for this board because it’s wide for my boots, but it’s not wide for your boots, so going 159 makes more sense. 2. You are used to a 165W and going down to a 156 would be too much, IMO 3. I like to ride quite a bit of freestyle, so like a shorter board for those aspects. You could even look at the 162, given that even that is shorter and less effective edge than what you’re currently used to. The 162 would be better for you in terms of stability at speed and float in powder. The 159 on the other hand will be better in the trees, and better for slowing down and playing around with (if that’s something you ever do).
Size-wise for the West, yeah definitely wide with a 12 boots. Usually I would say go for the 160X, but since you’re used to a 165, the 164X becomes an option. Again, the longer 164X will be less of an adjustment from your current board, offer more in terms of stability at speed and float in powder, whereas the 160 will be more agile, better in the trees, better at slower speeds, better for freestyle etc. I personally like the 159 for the West (with size 10 boots).
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi there. I love your website. 2 questions for you. 1) I am 5-10 and 160 pounds with a 10.5-11 size boot. I think a 158-159 works best but would love your thoughts.
2) Would also love your thoughts on what board you recommend. I mainly snowboard on groomers, powder, and resort chop. Not doing any tricks or jumps. Looking for a board that can handle high speed carving, even in heavy and choppy snow and float on powder. thanks!
Hi Spencer
Thanks for your message.
Given your style of riding and your specs, I think something around 157, 158 would be a great size for you. And you could even ride 159 for an all-mountain board, given that you don’t do any tricks/jumps. Width-wise, you’re kind of on the cuff when it comes to going regular width or wide, with 10.5s to 11s. If 10.5s and you ride with binding angles like +15/-15 or similar (i.e. with a reasonable angle on the back binding), then you should be fine with regular width. But for all other scenarios, especially given that you like to carve, I think going wide would be a good idea. If you really want to stick to regular width boards, then going with a low-profile boot and really trying to get into a 10.5 would be a good idea.
Board-wise, you could possibly look at Freeride boards too, assuming you’re riding at a relatively advanced level. They are more focused on speed, carving and powder, and aren’t designed to also be able to do freestyle stuff like all-mountain boards are. So they’re more specialized to what you’re describing. You can check out some options at the following, to see if that’s something you’d prefer.
>> My Top 5 Freeride Snowboards
But if you’re looking for something a bit more forgiving (which can often mean better in chop), then this is a good list to look at.
Or you could also look at the following:
>>Top 6 Aggressive All Mountain Snowboards
Which don’t tend to be as good in powder as all-mountain or freeride – and can be hard work in chop, but I think the Mercury and Explorer would be great options for what you’re describing.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!
I am going for the Yes Standard. Unsure if I should take the 156 or 159. I am 5,11 and 160 lbs, 8,5 in shoe size, intermediate and going for carving and freeride. What size would you redommend?
Hi Mats
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, I would definitely go 156, even for a carving/freeride oriented style. The 159 would be too long and too wide to work well for you, IMO. If you were going to be doing more freestyle type stuff, I would even say go 153 for this board. But for what you’re describing, I think the 156 would be a good size. It’s still going to be quite wide for 8.5s, but that extra width will help with powder float.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you for this amazing site and all the information regarding this sport.
I began riding 2 years ago with Burton Clash and at this moment the board starts to feel little bit sloppy in our Finnish conditions which are mostly hard snow/icy resorts, powder is pretty rare to us and something to keep dreaming about. Clash is very forgiving (and amazing for beginners) board but the edge hold is quite bad in our typical conditions. I’ll keep the Clash for the snowy days, for sure.
Do you have a board in mind that would work for me? I don’t care too much riding in the park or doing any extreme backcountry, mostly on-trail. Just wishing more hold doing the harder snow/icy parts and picking up some speed. I would consider myself as an (almost) intermediate rider.
Thank you in advance!
Hi Tuomas
Thanks for your message.
Not surprised that you’ve had edge-hold issues with the Clash. Like you say, a great forgiving, beginner board – but not one for those Icy conditions.
At a beginner going on intermediate level, I would look at something like:
YES Basic
YES Typo
Rossignol Templar
Also, check out the following (all the boards that I consider the best in hard/icy on that list is listed above, but this will give you some more info on the boards.
>>Top 10 Intermediate Snowboards
If you want a little step up in quality – but at the same time probably a little bit of a steeper learning curve, you could also look at the likes of:
Rossignol One LF
YES Standard
YES Greats
GNU Rider’s Choice
Lib Tech TRS
If you can’t find any of those, let me know and I can give you some more options, that are still better than the Clash in hard/icy conditions, but maybe not quite as good as those.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
and thank you for your answer. I was looking at the YES Standard few times, but it seems that it’s unavailable here in northern Europe and if I were to order it from States, the price goes too high with the taxes, importing and everything. I’m also going to ride on the Alps like once or twice a year so the next board needs to handle all of this. I don’t mind the bigger learning curve if it gives me a board that I can use for a longer time, I’m worrying that i’ll have to upgrade the next board after two to three seasons.
I’m 5’7ft, 175lbs and 9/9.5 size boot. I also have the Burton Custom bindings and Burton Moto boots. Do you think these would work with the stiffer board or do they become the achilles heel when riding with something more challenging?
Do you have any boards you would recommend from Burton with a size in mind? I like The Channel -system which I have on the Clash.
Thank you!
Hi Tuomas
Having softer bindings and boots isn’t ideal for a stiffer flexing board. I find that softer boots and bindings make it harder to drive a stiffer board, so ideally, you would want to upgrade those too. If you did, you could still use them on days when you take out your Clash (which you can then just leave the bindings attached, which is convenient for days when you do take the Clash out). Of course, you don’t have to upgrade those, but it’s highly recommended with a stiffer board.
Size-wise, I would look at something in the range between 154 and 156.
From Burton, I would say that the Custom Flying V would be a good option. Though it’s not the best in hard/icy conditions. Can’t think of too many Burton boards that are, that don’t have camber dominant profiles, which might be a bit too advanced at this stage. Though you might get away with something like the Burton Process (non-flying V) which has Burton’s “purepop camber” which is still camber dominant but not full camber. Or The Family Tree Trick Pilot (though the shortest size there is 158).
Hope this helps
Thank you again for you insights. It seems to me that in this range the Burton is ruled out considering my skill level and riding conditions here. I found the Yes Standard in UK for sale with correct price range so I’m ordering that and will be using the Custom bindings and Moto boots for now when searching for the correct bindings and boots to match this setup.
Any advices on these would be also appriciated, thank you very much for all the info!
Hi Tuomas
Awesome that you were able to find the Standard. When you change bindings, I would go for something with either a 6/10 or 7/10 flex. Same for boots. Some good options at the link below.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this gives you some good options
Thanks Nate!
Nate, I just want to say THANK YOU for putting all this great info together in one place. I’ve read almost everything over the past week and have learned a ton, but am definitely overwhelmed at the number of options out there. I’d like your opinion on my unique situation. I’m 30 (5’8 155lbs), been snowboarding casually since I was 13, primarily in the Canadian Rockies. 4 years ago I hurt my back (not on the hill) and haven’t been out since, but I’d like to get back on the horse here now. I recently sold my snowboard I grew up on, no idea what type of board it was but I know it was too small for me now. Before I hurt myself I’d consider myself on the low end of advanced riding, loved bombing the mountain, cautious carving on the blacks, but I could tear up the blues as fast as I wanted. Loved powder as well, so I want a board that will have max fun factor in powder. I’m rarely in the park, not comfortable switch, and any jump would be off natural features.
My caveat is I want a forgiving board, that’s not too easy to catch an edge on. I want to set myself up for success and give myself the best chance of not having a costly spill. So in your opinion, what would be a good performing beginner board for my style or a forgiving more advanced performing board. I’m not opposed to buying new to get exactly what I want, but there’s a couple good deals I’ve seen locally on a Jones Mountain Twin, Ride Wildlife, Niche Story, Capita Mercury, Rossignol One, and Burton Flying V boards. Could you recommend one of those for my situation I would I be better served with something else? Thanks for your time Nate, I really appreciate it.
Hi Jeff
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing, I would be leaning towards something like the Mountain Twin, Wildlife, One and Custom Flying V. The Story from my experience is a little stiffer, and the Mercury a little more aggressive – and since you want something forgiving.
The Wildlife, One and Custom Flying V would all suit what you’re describing really well, IMO.
I think for your level I wouldn’t go for a strictly beginner board, as boards like this are still forgiving but offer more performance than beginner boards.
The Slash Brainstorm, Never Summer West (or even Snowtrooper if you wanted even more forgiving), or Nitro Team Gullwing would all be good options too, IMO.
Size-wise, I would be looking at around 155, 156 at an advanced level, but you could go a little shorter than that too, if wanted to get a slightly more forgiving feel. Not too short, so as to eat into powder performance, but certainly 153, 154 would work for you, IMO. So I’d say a range between 153 to 155 would be a good range to look at.
Hope this helps
Thanks very much Nate, (sorry for the original double post as well) I hope you had a great holiday season. I’m super close to grabbing a last years model 156cm Wild Life (no bindings) for a good price, however there’s a lightly used 158cm Wild Life with Ride Revolt bindings for the same price. Do you think that’s too long? There’s also a 155cm Endeavor Board of Directors near me as well, do you have much experience with that one? Finally, what are the old Burton Customs like? There’s a good condition 2007 156cm Burton Custom (pre flying V I guess). Thanks for all your insight, will be grabbing something here shortly, and I’ll report back.
Hi Jeff
Thanks for your message.
IMO, the 158 Ride Wildlife would be too long for you, based on your specs and what you’re describing. Sounds like a good deal, but I think you’d find it a bit long.
I’m not familiar with Endeavor boards, so I can’t say much there. Based on specs, it looks like it could work for you, but I’m not sure there.
The 2007 Custom would be all camber I would imagine. And not likely to be very forgiving, so I don’t think that would be suitable for you, from what you’re describing.
I would go for the 156 Wild Life from all those options (without really know the Endeavor BOD well enough but that could also be an option).
Hi Nate, sorry to bug you again on this topic, but I had an additional question on the Rossi One. Recently had the opportunity to ride the Rossi XV, and while I managed it ok, it took some extra effort to muscle it around the slopes. Assuming you’ve ridden both, is the One a decent bit softer? I did find the XV super stable and hoping the One shares some of that stability but in a softer package. Thanks again and Happy New Year!
Hi DD
Yes the One is noticeably softer flexing and also has more rocker and less camber, making it noticeably easier going than the XV. Certainly more suitable for an intermediate level than the XV. Whilst not the same level of stability at speed as the XV, the One is still a very stable feeling ride.
Happy new year!
Sorry Nate – meant to include my boot size is us10.5 on my prior question/post. Thanks
Hi DD
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing the One LF might be your best bet. It’s a very smooth turning board that’s quite damp feeling. The Standard is a little snappier in feel. Still not un-damp, but not as damp as the One LF – and the One LF is probably, just, an easier turner.
If you did go Standard the 156 would be your best bet.
For the Rossi One, I would usually say the 159 for your specs, but as an intermediate rider, and if you wanted to make it an even easier turner, then the 156 would definitely work too, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the quick reply, I will look more at the one lf. on sizing, if I went to the 156, do you think my us10.5 would be ok? I think the waist on the 156 is 252 and on the 159 is 254. my angles are usually 18/9. I’m not a “lay it over” carver by any stretch, but still wanted to check. Thank you again.
Hi DD
Yeah, I think the 156 should be fine for 10.5 boots for you, with those angles. It’s probably the narrowest you would want to go, but should be fine.
Thanks Nate! Have a great season.
You’re very welcome. Hope you have a great season too!
Hi Nate – appreciate all your great information and patience answering questions! I posted prior and am still trying to decide between the rossi one lf and one of the yes boards. the new typo appears to have widened their ref stance too much, but I’m intrigued by the standard as you reviewed it quite well. I’m low intermediate, not a bomber, but cruiser looking to add some speed and ride steeper slopes, and no park. also have dodgy knee (old man) so looking for something stable/damp but with easy turn initiation and quiver of one type. am I on the right track with one lf or standard? if not, any other suggestions? I’m 5’10 about 185 and was looking at 156. thank you in advance!
No mention of the Yes Basic Decade in any of these categories. Did you test that board for 2019? If so what is it about the deck that kept it off any of your top lists
Hi Alden
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t had the chance to test the Basic Decade yet. If they bring it out in a 2020 model, I hope to test that one. I’ve heard good things about it and it could potentially make it. Though I would likely consider it all-mountain-freestyle, given that it’s a true twin with a centered stance.
Hello Nate, I left a lengthy comment yesterday but I don’t think it went through. First of all, thank you very much for your reviews, they are very helpful! I followed your beginner board review, and I got a 157W Ride Agenda 2 years ago which I love but now outgrew. I am looking for an all mountain board in the intermediate level, that can be more stable at higher speed. I am 43 yo and do not plan on doing backflips or anything park related, just like to ride down blues and blacks in a cruisy/surfy way. I am 6’1″ and 215 lbs, so the size is also something we need to consider increasing. I was looking at the Burton Custom FV, NS West and Proto Type 2, and Jones Mountain Twin. Any thoughts on these or any other recommendation? Thanks for your help!
Hi Carlos
Please see my response to your previous comment above. Comments just have to be moderated before being published. Though it should mention this once your comment is submitted, so I’ll have to look into that to make sure it’s working properly as I’ve had a couple of people mention this recently. Thanks for pointing it out.
i dont see my previos post … checking if it saved in the back end till you respond
Hi
I received your message and replied above. All comments just have to go through moderation before they’re published.
Hi Aaron,
Am happy i found your site; Excelent reviews and detailed feedback. Well, please find below a brief of my case and appreciate your support
I m around 185 Pounds ; 5.6 Ft and 5.95 feet and boots 10.5.
My level is intermediate to advanced riding; I ride any kind of terrain pretty confident, but generally not good to cruise through quickly in bump areas. I usually think that the board i have is not the best to go throguh quick around turns but most prob is my level 🙂 is not good.
In the past i had a Travis Rice Pro 157 (or 59 dont remember) for 2 seasons (3 weeks in total aprox/ 1.5 per season) but i find out that has to be charged to make it work well. So i wantes something a little more playfull and thought that the Lib Tech TRS Firepower 159 would work. I m happy with it but not on Powder; Its not super playfull either but overal is very good but for sure not in powder since it sinks the nose to the point of getting trapped; I have set it back as much as possible, but still not working performing well in powder. Also since i m 10.5 i m just in the limit so i think that sometimes i might be touching the snow iwth the boots and slashing on groomers. What i like most is powder, and i use to seek for powder …. but also love to carve on groomers and would like to have a board more playfull for no powder days. I like riding switch and playing with simple ground tricks and intermediate jumps (red – would love to kick bigger black kickers but getting old /40). Last but not least, to be on the safe side for big powder days (Japàn or Heli days / not often) i bought last year a sale of a Jone Storm Chaser 159 which is incredible for big powder days … but if its not that deep is a little too big and stiff .. though it carves very well on groomers. I might have had to buy the smaller version 154 but its done . (should i try to change / reduce size).
Having said that and after reading your reviews of all Mountain i m now thinking between the following boards – Standard; Yes Greats;Slash Brainstron; Jones Mountain Twin or Never Summer West.
What would you recommend my as my number one all mountain quiver ; Except for big Granted Powder days where I take the Jones Storm Chaser
Hi Dalton
Thanks for your message.
I was a little confused about your height there. Just to confirm that it’s 5 foot 6 inches? I wasn’t sure what the 5.95 feet part meant?
But going off 5’6″, I think the 157 TRS would have been a better option for you. And for the Storm Chaser, I would have gone down to the shorter 152. It’s the kind of board that’s designed to be ridden shorter – and the extra width helps with float in powder (as well as a few other things on that board). I’m guessing you have the 157 for the Storm Chaser? I can’t see it in a 159. I bet the 157 has awesome float in the powder for you though!
From the boards you’re looking at, the only one I would cross off would be the Greats. Don’t get me wrong that’s one of my favorite boards, but it’s one weakness is powder. It’s a little better in powder now that it’s a little wider, but it still won’t offer any improvement in powder compared to your TRS, IMO. The Standard is an option, and if you were to ride it in the slam back stance, it would be a good option. The West would give you something just on the surfier side, so that’s also a good option. The Brainstorm and Mountain Twin would also work for what you’re describing too. Though I don’t think any of those boards would be more playful than the TRS, from what I’ve experienced, if you were to go for something around 159. But if you went for more around 156, 157, then they most likely would feel a bit more playful. Size-wise for those boards, I would say:
Standard: 156 – and this is a wider option too, so you wouldn’t have any drag issues with this.
West: 156 – but if you’re worried about width, then the 157X is also an option for sure (and would give better powder performance too)
Mountain Twin: 157 or 158W
Brainstorm: 157 – though this might be too narrow, so the 159W is the next option which could be getting a bit on the long side
If i had to narrow it down further, I think I would be weighing up between the 156 Standard and 157X West.
Of course this is based on 5 foot 6 inches. Please correct me if I have that wrong.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate ,
sorry i not make it clear … but yes i mean 180 cm height (5´9″ if i m not wrong) and weight average is 82 to 85 Kg .
Seems that Yes Standard is the way to go … now if i take the 156 you think it would be good on Powder ? or very similar to the TRS ? Setting it back would be a must right ? Does it has a good turn initiation for Tree lines ? I read that with a foot of 10.5 US is not that slow … right ?
Which one would you take ? And you recomend the 2019 Model right ?
thanks and sorry for so many questions …
PD: a petty i dont bought the Storm Chaser in a smaller size to
Hi Tomas
Thanks for the clarification. 180cm is around 5’11”, so I would change some of the sizings from before. I would say that something around 159 for an advanced level
I still think the 156 Standard would be the best option for that board. In the 156 I don’t think you would have any issues with edge-to-edge speed. I have size 10 boots, and I’m 183cm and 83kg – and I didn’t find it too slow edge-to-edge. It’s not lightning fast but it’s medium-fast, IMO. In the slam back stance, I think it would still float more than the 159 TRS. For a couple of reasons 1. Because it’s a wider board and 2. because it has a directional volume shape which helps the tail to sink and the nose to lift. I wouldn’t say it would be worlds better, but I think it would be an improvement. Yeah I would recommend the 2019 model, just because it’s a little lighter than the 2018 model (otherwise they are basically the same).
For the other options, though, I would change it to look at:
Standard: 156
West: 159 (previously I was saying 156) – but the 157X is still an option for sure (and it actually has slightly more overall surface area than the 159 – not by heaps but by a little bit)
Mountain Twin: 160 (previously I said 157. The 158W is also still an option, if you want to go wider. Though I prefer the 157 for this board, but I like it to be a bit more playful. So that’s still an option if you want more playful – but the 160 or 158W will be better in powder.
Brainstorm: 159W
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hello Nate, your reviews are awesome! Based on your recommendations for beginner boards, I bought a Ride Agenda 2 years ago. After 2 full seasons, I think I am ready to upgrade. I am 43 yo, and I don’t think I will ever do back flips or anything like that. I just love to ride the slopes on are more cruisy/surfy way. My 157W Agenda is an awesome board to learn, but now that I am picking up a little more speed coming down blues and blacks, I feel it is very unstable, and I understand it is due to the soft flex and perhaps the board being a little short for my size. I am 6’1″, 210lbs and size 12 boot, and I have Burton Step-On bindings & Ruler boots. I ride mostly in the Northeast, but we go west and/or Europe at least a couple of times during the season. I have been looking at these intermediate level boards: Burton Custom Flying-V, Never Summer Proto Type 2, Jones Mountain Twin. Would you recommend these and/or any other board for what I need? Also, what size would you recommend? Most size charts recommend 162W and up for my size and weight, but I am not sure if I should make the jump to +5cm larger from what I ride now? I still want something that is not difficult no initiate turns. I appreciate your advice and thank you very much in advance!
Hi Carlos
Thanks for your message.
Sounds like your progression is coming along nicely.
Size-wise, I think something around between a 160W to 162W would be a good way to go now. That extra length, in addition to a stiffer flex and a profile with some camber in it, will make a big difference when it comes to stability at speed. And having a bit of camber in the profile will help to give the board a bit of extra liveliness/spring too. But I wouldn’t go all camber as that can feel catchy and also you mention you want a cruisey/surfy feel, so having some rocker in there will definitely be a good way to go.
Of course, since you want that cruisey ride and are looking at intermediate boards, we don’t want to go too stiff either. Something between a 4 and 6 out of 10, would be a good place to look, IMO.
Because you’re out east I would go Mountain Twin over the Custom Flying V, just because it’s better in hard/icy conditions. Though the Custom Flying V is a little more of a surfy feel.
I would be looking at the West over the Proto Type Two for you, just because it doesn’t sound like you’ll be getting into freestyle riding, I think the West would be a better fit. The West has a slightly more surfy feel compared to the Mountain Twin, with as good edge-hold, so I think that’s sounding like a good option. If you wanted to go even more surfy/easy going the Never Summer Snowtrooper would work too. It’s a little softer flexing (4/10) and has a more mellow, more surfy camber profile. It’s still a little stiffer than the Agenda and would give a bit more stability at speed – though the difference would be more subtle compared to going West. Though going longer would also improve stability too.
Size-wise, I would go with the following:
West: 160X
Snowtrooper: 160X
Mountain Twin: 161W
The Nitro Team Gullwing would also suit your purposes well, IMO. The 162W probably the best size, though it is getting quite wide. The 159W is also an option if you didn’t want too much of a step up.
You could also look at the Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker. It’s not a board I’ve ridden but have heard good things. And based on the specs and other Lib Tech boards I’ve ridden, I think that would suit what you’re describing also. The 161W would be a good size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you very much, Nate!
You’re very welcome Carlos. Hope you have an awesome season!
That helps a lot, thank you!
Have a great season on the slopes!!
You’re very welcome Aaron. Hope you have an awesome season too!
Hi Nate!
I’m having a lot of trouble picking out a good board and bindings for me. I want one that I could ride for a long time, even as I progress. I’m 6’, 190lbs and where size 11.5 DC Judge’s. I consider myself to be high beginner. I really just stick to cruising the groomers. Blues and some diamonds with friends. Slower on greens when I’m with the kids. Could you please give me some board and binding recommendations? With sizes? Thank you for your help!! Much appreciated!
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
Since you’re a high level beginner, and want something that’s good for just cruising, but still want it to progress with you, I would look at one of the following. This are what I would consider good all-mountain boards that are just that little bit softer and more cruisy and more highend beginner/low end intermediate appropriate. I’m looking at creating a list for this type of board when I get the chance but in the meantime, check out the following for some options.
Length-wise, I would look at something around 158-160 for your specs/skill level.
In terms of width, you’ll need to go for a wide board with 11.5s. I’ve included the sizes that I think would be best for you, in the list below.
~ YES Typo – 159W
~ Never Summer Snowtrooper – 160X – or even 157X to go even more cruisey
~ Burton Process Flying V – 159W
~ Capita Outerspace Living – 159W (or 157W)
~ GNU T2B – 158MW
~ YES Libre – 159W
~ Arbor Whiskey – 159MW
~ Rossignol Templar – 159W
Hope this helps
Hey Nate!
Wow! Found your reviews on this website today which are an excellent way to pare down the decision tree… there’s so many boards out there!!
I’m 5’9″, 165 lbs, boots 9.5/10 US size and based on your skill levels write up I’d put myself at a 6/advanced though my switch game is weak, I’d like to improve it. I love the carves, occasional glading, small jumps, and when the powder is good it’s to the top to hit the bowls (and maybe out of bounds area depending on resort). I rarely go through the park but might do a few smaller jumps here and there. I’ve been riding a 2013 K2 raygun 157 since I started back in 2013.
All that said I think I’ve settled on the Yes Standard though I’m also looking at the Rossi One, Never Summer West, and Slash Brainstorm. Think you can help me narrow it down? I’m also not sure if I should size up from the 157?
Thank you,
Aaron
Hi Aaron
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise, I think sticking with something around 156, 157 would be a good bet for specs and how you describe your riding.
Since the Raygun 2013 has a flat-to-rocker profile and a softer flex, I would say that there isn’t really one board here that is more similar (which might be one factor to help decide between them), though the hyrbid rocker profiles of the Standard, One LF, and Brainstorm are probably just a little more similar in feel than the West, but not a big deal for your decision, IMO.
Any one of those would serve you well, IMO (and will be a nice step up from the Raygun, IMO). Size-wise for the Standard, since it’s a wider board, it’s sometimes a good idea to size down a little, depending on your boot size. So for that board, it would be a toss up between the 153 and 156 for you.
For the others I would say:
Mountain Twin: 157
West: 156
One: 156
Brainstorm: 157
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Any of these being a set-up from the Raygun is exactly my reasoning as well, there’s just so many choices!
I learned to snowboard on the Raygun and have definitely put it through the wringer. Part of the reason I was looking at these is to try out a different rocker/camber profile as I’ve only ever ridden on the K2. Any reason you’d suggest sticking to the flat-to-rocker profile?
Likewise I was thinking a slightly stiffer board would be a plus now that I’ve got more experience, let me know if my thinking is amiss there.
Hi Aaron
You’re right on point in both cases. Going a little stiffer now is a really good idea. And going to a profile with camber is also a great idea. It will give you a more lively, dynamic ride. At your level, you should really appreciate that for sure. I wouldn’t recommend sticking with flat-to-rocker. IMO, flat-to-rocker is a good profile for jibbing, good in powder and a good profile for beginners. So, for a jib specialist board or a park board that’s mostly focused on jibs it’s good and for beginners it’s good. That’s my opinion anyway. It’s good in powder too, depending on other specs. But for carving, pop for jumps, general spring and liveliness out of turns, I really like to have camber in there.
Thanks for the tips Nate, much appreciated!!
I guess one last question, I noticed that West is Camber/Rocker/Camber whereas the other 3 were all Rocker/Camber/Rocker. I’m not sure what which would be preferred for my riding style (or if it matters at all?). Any advantages to either profile or is it just individual preference?
Hi Aaron
My stay just individual preference. Rocker between the feet typically means a slightly looser/more surfy feel. But in the case of the west it’s only very subtly so. Sometimes having rocker tip and tail can help with butters but not necessarily. And often rocker tip and tail is a little better for float in powder. Though rocker between the feet certainly does help with powder float. But yeah mostly personal preference, imo, but I like riding boards with both profiles, so you can certainly like both as well.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi Nate,
I am looking at getting a NS West X. I am 191 cm, 115 kg and size 12 US boots and looking for some help with sizing the board. I ride a lot of treelines, bowls and some groomers. I never go to the park but like to hit naturals frequently.
Also, could you recommend a binding to pair with the board?
Hi Kirby
Thanks for your message.
It’s between the 164X and the 168X, and I would be leaning towards the 168X for you. But to help with your decision, these would be the advantages and disadvantages of each size:
The 164X will be more agile at slower speeds, better in the trees and better for your natural hits, IMO. It will also likely feel a little softer flexing than the 6/10 that I rate the West at.
The 168X will be more stable at speed, have better float in powder and be better for when you open out with wider/longer carves. The flex at this size should feel closer to around that 6/10 flex mark.
In terms of bindings, I would look at the following list. I think something with around a 7/10 flex for you, for this board would be a good range to look at:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Wow thanks for the fantastic reply. I’ve just been down to my local shop, turns out my boots are 9.5, sorry didn’t realise.
Anyway shop helper said the Mountain Twin was not good for powder, more for park and riding switch, also said the Standard wouldn’t be any good in the park or riding switch mainly for powder and groomers? I’m very confused 🙂 They said the Standard would be best in a 156 and for the Mountain Twin a 157 or 160 would be good length, up to me. Thing is I don’t know if I want longer at 160 or shorter? I currently have always ridden a 157 whenever I’ve borrowed or hired. Would I struggle on a longer board given my experience as an intermediate? would a longer board be something I spend a lot of time getting used to again before I have to come home? Sorry just want to make sure I make the right choice, just want something I can pick up and ride without too much re-learning but also I can enjoy all of the mountain whichever bit 🙂
Thanks, I’ll leave you alone after this 🙂
Cheers
Rob
Hi Rob
If you’re worried about the 160 being too long, then I would look at the 157. And it’s a size that you’re used to. The 160 would take a little bit of getting used to, since you’re used to a 157 and the 157 would be a crusier, more casual length for you. And for the Standard, the 156 is likely your best bet, based on the same reasoning.
I’m going to take a guess that whoever you were talking to in the shop hasn’t actually ridden these boards (and possibly haven’t looked at the specs or have confused their specs with other boards). But even just looking at specs, the Mountain Twin has a 20mm setback (not ideal for switch and good for powder) and has a longer nose than tail (good for powder). Maybe because it’s Jones’ most freestyle oriented board (they are overall far more freeride oriented) and maybe because it has “Twin” in the name. It’s certainly something you can take in the park, and it’s not bad for riding switch, but it’s not predominantly a park board, in my books.
The Standard is practically a twin and in it’s normal stance is centered (both good for riding switch). Yes it’s got a little more volume in the nose than the tail (which helps in powder) but you only notice that when in powder. And if you use the slam back inserts, then the ride is improved in powder too. And the Standard is awesome for jumps. It’s lively, poppy and has a nice wide platform for stability on landing jumps. And it butters really nicely, especially for a 6/10 flex. It’s even not bad on jibs (though not it’s specialty).
Whilst I agree that the Standard is good on groomers and in powder (especially when in the slam back inserts), it’s also great for jumps, buttering and riding switch.
Similarly, whilst the Mountain Twin is fine in the park and fine for riding switch, it’s also good in powder and on groomers.
Both these boards are what I would call “do-it-all”, with a slightly freeride taste. That’s my definition of all-mountain.
I would say that the Standard is actually more freestyle oriented than the Mountain Twin, but they both fit in the do-it-all category in my books.
Everyone has their own take, but I hope this gives you another perspective to help make your decision.
Thanks so much Nate, you’re a legend! 🙂
I don’t know which board I’m going to get but will definitely be one of theses two, I’ll let you know when I finally decide!
Thanks again
Rob
You’re very welcome Rob. Look forward to hearing which you go with.
Hi Nate
Firstly this is a fantastic site, I’ve been having a good read through. The time and effort you put into this is awesome!
I’m looking for a new board as I don’t currently have one. I generally borrow or hire.
I’m a 6ft size 10 english burton boots and weight 88kgs. Reading your site I would class myself middle to maybe top end intermediate.
I mainly enjoy groomers, a bit of powder and have done a very small bit of park and boarder-cross (not very good) also enjoy hitting small natural kickers etc.
I would like a board which would be happy doing the above (basically an all rounder) and also be something I could pickup a couple of times a year (not too steep a learning curve) and will keep me improving my riding and that I hopefully won’t catch an edge too much on.
I’d also like something which doesn’t chatter or get squirelly too much at speed. A board which won’t fizzle out on the flats. there are so many boards too choose from! 🙂
I ride in Europe mainly the resorts in the Alps. What would you recommend?
Thank you so much
Rob
Hi Rob
Thanks for your message.
Definitely sounds like an all-mountain board is the way to go for you.
Since you’ve highlighted speed as a thing, I would cross off Typo – not terrible at speed but a little below the others on this list. And highlight the Standard, West, Mountain Twin and Rossi One. All of which would fulfill your other requirements, IMO.
In terms of dampness, I would say that the Rossi One and Mountain Twin would be the dampest, but the others aren’t not damp either.
From what I’ve heard about the Alps, it can get icy quite regularly? If that’s the case, then the Rossi One, Niche Story and YES Standard would be your best bets, but the Mountain Twin, West, Brainstorm & Team Gullwing not too far behind in that aspect.
Size-wise, something around 159-161 would be a good bet for your specs, IMO.
Hope that gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
Thanks for your reply. I think I’d like to go for either the Yes Standard at 159 or the Jones Mountain Twin at 157. Do you think these lengths would be OK? Is there much difference with these boards? Reading your description of a high end intermediate (here What Are the Snowboarding Skill Levels?) basically describes my exact level perfectly. I also generally ride with bindings set at 15 15 but I don’t really understand stance width, I just ride equal, I guess this is something I will hone with more experience?
Thanks for all your advice and a great site
Rob
Hi Rob
I forgot to mention width in my last reply. Since you’re on a UK10 boot, I think you should be looking at 254mm at the waist as a bare minimum – and only that narrow as you are riding with +15/-15 angles. The Mountain Twin is quite wide at the inserts compared to the waist, so you’d probably get on the 157 fine, but I would say that the 160 would be a better size and a safer bet width-wise. But if you like your boards shorter, then if you wanted to play it safer width-wise, the 158W would also be a suitable size for you.
With the Standard, it’s the kind of board that you would want to go smaller not longer on. That said, the 159 is still appropriate for you. But if you like shorter rides, and think that the 157 is the more appropriate length for you for the Mountain Twin, then I would consider the 156. The 156 Standard is 270mm at the inserts so even that’s getting quite wide (but a good width for your boot size). That’s compared to the Mountain Twin 157 which is 266mm at the rear insert and 265mm at the front insert. The 158W Mountain Twin is likely to be roughly 270mm at the inserts. The 160 Mountain Twin likely to be around 268mm at the inserts. The 159 Standard likely to be around 275mm at the inserts. Which is getting on the wider side for your boots, IMO.
All that said, I think if you like your boards shorter, then the 157 or 158W Mountain Twin and the 156 Standard – but usually I would say 160 Mountain Twin for you. And for the Standard I would go shorter than what you would for the Mountain Twin, if that makes sense. So, if you like the look of 157 Mountain Twin, then the 156 Standard would be appropriate. I think the 159 Standard could work for you too, but not so much if you prefer something shorter.
But yeah either one of these would be ideal for your ability level, and suit how you ride from what you’re describing. It’ just a matter of choosing the most appropriate size.
Hope this helps/makes sense.
Hi There,
I would be interested to know if you could also drive the YES basic Decade. But it doesn’t look like it…
Cheers
Berne
Hi Bernhard
Thanks for your message. I’m not sure I understand your question but if you’re asking if I’ve ridden the Basic Decade, then no, I didn’t get a chance to ride that yet.
I would consider the Basic Decade more of an all-mountain-freestyle board. I have ridden the Basic, and from what I can see from the Basic Decade it’s a more powerful version of that. I would say it would make a very good all-mountain-freestyle board but I wouldn’t put it in this category.
Hope this answers your question but let me know if that’s not what you were asking
Love the updated post. What would you recommend for board size for Yes Standard? I wear size 12, 6’ 0” and weigh 220 lbs. thanks
Thanks Rasheed – glad you like the update!
For you, for the Standard, I would say the 162 (a new size for the 2019 model) would be your best bet. You could also ride the 159 – and width wise would be fine for your boots, but I think the 162 would be the better length, overall. But if you like shorter boards, or if you were to be using a lot for more freestyle oriented stuff or a lot in the trees, the 159 would work well. But to get more float in powder, stability at speed and better carving, the 162 would be a better choice.
Hope this helps
Im 5’8”, weigh 155, size 8 boot. Cant decide between the Never Summer west or the Never Summer prototype 2. I already own a 2012 Salomon drift rocker, which points me toward the west since I already have a park board. Thoughts on which board, and the sizing. Also totally open to other boards.
Hi Drew
Thanks for your message.
I agree that going West would be a better option since you already have a park board – it gives you a more all mountain option – but it’s still something you can take through the park, when you want to.
Sizing-wise, I would be weighing up between the 154 and 156. Both would do the job with the 156 being more stale at speed, better float in powder and better for deep carves (IMO) – the 154 more maneuverable at slower speeds, better for trees and better for freestyle/park stuff. I would be leaning towards the longer 156, since you already have a park board.
It also depends on the size of your Drift Rocker. If you’re riding the 152 or 154, then I would say go 156 but if you’re riding the 148, then the 156 might be too much of an adjustment and the 154 might be a better option.
Also, one more consideration, is that the 154 would be a better width for your boot size – but there isn’t a huge difference in width between the 154 and 156, so I would consider the other factors first.
Hope this helps
Hello!
I am looking to buy never summer proto type two 2019. I wonder between 154-157 height 180cm weight 71 kg. I mainly drive on designated straights and I like to go out of the road
Hi Mark
Thanks for your message.
If you are mostly just riding groomers and a little bit off piste, then I think the 157 would be your best choice.
But if you spend quite a bit of time in the park, doing little jumps, spins, etc and also a fair bit of time in the trees, then I think the 154 would work well. But it sounds like you’re mostly on the groomers, so I think the 157 would be the best size for you for the Proto Type Two.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Great site! This is a fantastic read with loadsd of information. I noticed you last updated this page last month, what changes have you made? Has your top 10 changed at all from an earlier posting?
I have a question, I’m 6ft, 90kg, UK size 10 boot and am a beginner/intermediate, I can confidently link turns and get down the mountain fairly smoothly but not really been doing jumps or much powder. I’ve only been snowboarding for a couple of years but generally try and go twice a year but often 9 or 10 months a part. I generally hire a board or borrow one from a friend but am looking to get my own now as prices are looking fairly good. Could you recommend something which will keep me improving but I can jump straight on even after having a fair bit of time off?. I’d like an all rounder, mainly for slope riding but with options for the park and powder.
Any ideas, so many boards I have no idea where to start and want to make sure I don’t buy something which I’m going to struggle with or be too much of a beginner board.
Many thanks and keep up the great work on an awesome site.
Thanks
Nick
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
It was just a minor tweak. No changes to the boards in the list. It’s stayed the same since the start of the 2017-18 season. I will soon be updating it for 2019 boards, but I’ll keep this on the site, so people can refer to it, if they’re looking for 2018 boards.
From what you’re describing, I think one of the following would work well for you (I’ve linked each board below to a review of that board):
~ Never Summer Snowtrooper – really easy going ride but still good for intermediate going on advanced, but also a board that a beginner can ride. And nice and versatile
~ YES Typo – again easy going but still not strictly a beginner board. More freestyle oriented but still good over the whole mountain
~ YES Libre – similar to the Typo but a little different (and really reasonably priced)
~ Ride Wildlife – more freeride oriented. Not as park suitable but doable in the park if that was going to be your least traveled area
~ Burton Process Flying V – playful and easy going but still beyond just a beginner board. Good for intermediate to advanced as well
~ Arbor Whiskey Rocker – more all-mountain-freestyle but still would be a good match for what you’re describing, IMO
You could also go for something like the Mountain Twin, Brainstorm, West or Standard, but I think the above boards would be a good fit for that beginner going on intermediate level and someone who isn’t up the mountain that often.
Length-wise, something around 159, 160 would be a good length for you, IMO. So whatever length is closest to that in the board that you choose.
Width-wise, with UK10s, I would say you should be able to get on most of the regular widths, in that 159, 160 length range, unless you ride with a very straight back foot (e.g. binding angles +18/-3 or something like that, where your back foot isn’t on much of an angle). More specifically, with UK10s, I would say something as narrow as 254mm at the waist would be fine if you ride with something like a 12 or 15 degree angle on your back foot. But minimum 260mm if you ride with something like 0 or 3 degrees on your back foot. And take off a couple off mm if you have low profile boots (e.g. recent Adidas, Burton, Ride and Vans).
Hope that helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for the reply. I was hoping to get the Jones Mountain Twin but last years model has gone now and the new ones out which doesn’t look quite a good fit. I like the look of the Ride Wildlife. Given the fact there are now new boards out would you add anything to your recommendationabove? Also what should I be looking for in terms of flex and type of board bottom? I like going fast and would like to minimise chatter, so would I want something fairly stiff? I’m thinking mid stiffnes around a 5 or 6 out of 10?
Thank Nick 🙂
Hi Nick
Stiffer doesn’t necessarily mean damper/chatter. To an extent but not always. But certainly stiffer helps with a more stable feel at speed. As does a longer length (or more specifically more effective edge). But I wouldn’t go too stiff as you might not enjoy the ride/might find it difficult unless you’re a more advanced rider and are physically quite strong. Also, stiffer usually means being less maneuverable at slower speeds. But saying that, something around that 5/10, 6/10 flex isn’t overly stiff, so I think that would be a good balance between stability and still being a fun and agile ride.
For speed you’ll certainly want a sintered base – but most all-mountain style boards, except for cheaper models, come with that.
In terms of camber profile, you’ll want at least some camber in the profile for speed, preferably. Hyrbid profiles are the best way to go, IMO. Full camber is quite a technical ride and can feel quite catchy if you’re not used to it and aren’t at a certain level. Hybrid rocker or hybrid camber would be the way to go, IMO. Fortunately all the boards we are discussing have one of those profiles.
However, given the new info about your need for speed, the likes of the Snowtrooper, Typo, Process Flying V may not be your best options. The Wildlife still an option though. Not a demon at speed but hold its own.
But I think the Rossignol One would be a good option for you. It’s a quite smooth/damp ride and quite stable at speed. Again not a speed demon but a little better than the Wildlife and it’s quite damp.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for your reply, I’ve been doing some more research since I mailed earlier.
I’ve decided against the Ride Wildlife as I’d prefere a board a board which I can go switch on if necessary and don’t have to worry about catching. I’m trying to decide between the Yes Libre (which you suggested) I read your review on the Jones Mountain twin and still really like that board and finally the Capita Outspace. Given what I’ve told you already about my style and what I’m looking for, which do you think would be the best board and then consequently the best size? I normally ride a 157.
Thank you so much, I’ll stop bothering you after this 🙂
Thanks Nick
Hi Nick
The Outerspace Living is more what I would categorize as all-mountain-freestyle, but I think it would be a good fit for you. It’s a good option for a high-end beginner/intermediate rider and will keep you progressing. Loose a little bit in terms of powder (just being true twin centered isn’t ideal there) but it is one of the better centered twins in powder, so it’s doable there. It’s a good all-rounder. Certainly good for riding switch.
Mountain Twin not as good for riding switch and just a little more advanced. I would still say it’s intermediate suitable but a little more of a learning curve than the Outerspace Living and Libre. The Libre is in between in the sense that it’s more freestyle oriented than the Mountain Twin but as much as the Outerspace Living. Though I wouldn’t say it’s as good at speed. The Mountain Twin best for speed, then the Outerspace Living, then the Libre.
Size-wise:
The Libre I would go 158. As I mentioned in my other reply it has a 267mm width at the back insert which should be fine for your boot size (usually I wouldn’t recommend a boad with a waist as narrow as 252 for a UK11 but in this case it should be fine, unless you ride with a really straight back foot).
The Mountain Twin I would say 157 – this is again a case of being wider than the waist suggests. I measured a 266mm width at inserts for the rear insert for the 157. It does have a wide reference stance though and if you were going for a narrower stance it wouldn’t be as wide at the narrower stance.
For the Outerspace Living, you would need to go for a wide option, IMO. The 156 that I rode was 259mm at the inserts (which is pretty standard for a board of that waist width). So, I would say the 157W would be the best size for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
PS
The Rossignol One does look like a great board, could I add that to the boards I’m looking at at the sec too, what would you think size wise for me?
Thanks
Nick
Hi Nick
It’s a tough one. I think the 156 would be too short and too narrow. The 157W probably too wide to be ideal. I think the 159 could work though. It’s 265mm at the inserts, which, if you ride with relative angled binding angles, I think you would get away with. Straighter binding angles, probably not though. I think the 159 would be a good length for you in any case, so I think that length works. It won’t be as good for learning freestyle stuff at that length but it will be good for speed, powder and carving – and still certainly doable for riding freestyle (I own the 159 – 6’0″, 185lbs, US10 (UK9) – and I use it as an all-rounder).
Hey Nate! Been reading a lot of specs and comments on various boards and have been attracted to a few. I’m on the low side of intermediate and 5’9″, 170 lbs, 10.5 boot. I’ll be living in Japan for next few years and will have access to excellent snow. For the past few years I’ve mostly used rentals but bought a 155 Rossi District secondhand and have played on it the past two seasons. I don’t ride switch, but would like to be able play around a little and also enjoy groomers with my family. Interested in all mountain, but really found the tree runs fun this past season which was a first for me. Hope you can weigh in an opinion. I’ll be using Burton Mission bindings. The boards I’m thinking of are:
157 Jones MT, !59 Jones Explorer, Yes Standard, and Yes PYL
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
The only one I would cross off the list for you, is the PYL. It’s an amazing board, but I don’t think its suitable for what you’re describing. a. because it’s more of an advanced board, not really suitable for intermediate, IMO and b. because it’s not something that’s the easiest to slow down and play around with.
But the other 3 would definitely be suitable for what you’re describing.
In terms of size, I think you’re in the right place with 157 for MT and 159 for Explorer (the Explorer is something that you can ride a little longer). I wouldn’t go longer than that. The debate would be between 154 and 157 for MT and 156 and 159 for Explorer but I think 157 and 159 would work well. Pros and cons to going shorter and longer, but on balance those sizes would be good for you, IMO.
For the Standard, the 156 is probably the best bet. You could even look at going down to the 153, but the 156 would work. The 153 (or if you were to go 154 for MT and 156 for Explorer) would be a great size for the trees (more agile at slower speeds) – and also good for learning jumps, playing around and riding park. But the longer options will give you more stability at speed, better float in powder and better for carving, IMO. So, those are some things to weigh up, in terms of sizing.
Hope this helps
Thanks so much for the input on sizing and will take your suggestion to avoid the PYL at my level. Since I don’t have a local snowboard shop, I feel more comfortable purchasing online now. The 156 Explorer is on my wish list! Thanks again!
You’re very welcome David!
I decided on the 159 Explorer and it arrived today. Looking forward to this winter! Thank you for the recommendations and information you provide on your site!
You’re very welcome David. Thanks for visiting the site! If you think of it at the time, let me know your impressions once you get the chance to ride your new Explorer. Bring on winter!
Hi Nate,
I’ve been checking out lots of your reviews and think the Jones mountain twin is the board for me.
I am intermediate and i am looking for an all mountain board that i can keep and grow my skills with for a few seasons.
I want a board that would suit the conditions of Australian snow which can get a bit icy but also be able to take it with me when i travel to Japan, Canada, Colorado in powder conditions etc.
I enjoy a mix of carving groomed runs, off the tracks through the trees and hitting natural jumps are drops along the way. Currently learning to ride switch a bit better and hitting some smaller jumps in the parks.
Do you think this board would suit my needs? Or any other recommendations?
I am 185 cm tall, usually sit between 88-93 kg and boot size is 11.5 which are Burton rulers so i believe their sizes are known to be a bit different.
Thanks in advance, your reviews have been a big help already!
Matt.
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
It sounds like you do a real mix of everything, which would make the Mountain Twin a great option – it’s really consistent across all sorts of terrain and is really versatile for different aspects of riding, so as a one board quiver I think it would suit your needs really well. It’s also intermediate level suitable but something you can ride as a more advanced rider too, so it ticks that box as well, IMO.
In terms of size, I would say the 161W would be a great size for you.
Burton boots (as well as some other brands, like Adidas, Vans and Ride) tend to have a smaller outersole for their size, so you can get on narrower boards, but with 11.5s, I would still go wide even with Burton boots. However, if you really want to go with a regular width, the 162 is an option, but only if you ride with certain binding angles – i.e. if you ride with something like +15/-15 – something where you have your back binding on a reasonable angle.
You could also go for the 164W, it’s an option – and would be better in powder, and provide a little more stability at speed, but I think the 161W will be the better all round size for you for doing a bit of everything.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply Nate! It was a great help, espscially with the recommendation on a wide board.
Would you have a recommendation on good all mountain bindings? I have looked at your top 10 and in terms of price and rating the burton cartels seemed like a good option.
Are there any others you think would compliment the mountain twin?
Hi Matt
The Cartels are a great all round binding, especially for the money, IMO. They would go well with the Mountain Twin, IMO.
Another great option outside of that list (which are just coming out in a 2019 model), would be Union’s new Strata bindings. I haven’t published my review on them yet, but rode them in the spring and they’re a great all round binding, IMO. And they’re the same price as the Cartels. So, the Cartels would work well, IMO and the Strata’s another great option at the same price point.
Nate, thanks a lot man!
Taking a while to think it over. So far NS Snowtrooper attracts the most.
A pint is on me, if happen to be near by.
Cheers mate! Great advises!
You’re very welcome Dan!
Don’t think we’re on the same continent, but definitely appreciate the offer of a pint!
We are indeed on different ones. However catching different snow around the world is a plan.
Hi Nate!
I am getting closer to mid level (not pro yet), however want to acquire board, I could go forward with, as well as keeping it for longer time in terms of progression and its quaility.
Universal, all mountain, classic camber. Mid price.
What do you think of these ones ? Brands itself?
ROME GANG PLANK
or
ARBOR SIN NOMBRE 2018
or
GNU
or maybe (not sure)
BURTON DESCENDANT 2018
Also your own most reliable brand advise would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Dan
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message.
As far as brands go, everyone you mention there are good brands, IMO.
However, the boards you’ve mentioned, I wouldn’t consider them to be all-mountain strictly – not by my definition.
The Sin-Nombre would be the closest. But is a centered all-mountain board – closer to what I would say is all-mountain-freestyle. All-mountain is what I would consider the most versatile, and I sometimes refer to them as the do-it-all boards. All-mountain-freestyle is still very versatile but tend to be weaker when it comes to riding powder – and stronger for riding switch and often for jumps, than all-mountain boards. So a little more freestyle focused.
The Gang Plank is what I would consider a park/freestyle board – and a more jib than jump focused park board.
The Descendant I would also consider a park/freestyle board – but more bordering on all-mountain-freestyle than something like the Gang Plank.
But also the Gang Plank is flat-to-rocker rather than classic camber. And the Descendant has Burton’s Purepop camber, which is closer to classic camber than flat-to-rocker but still not classic camber. The Sin Nombre is pretty much classic camber (but they way Arbor do it makes it less cathcy). Not that I think you should necssarily stick to traditional/classic camber – just that you mentioned it as one of your things.
The boards you’ve mentioned also vary quite a bit in terms of flex, with the descendant being medium-soft, the Gang Plank Medium and the Sin Nombre medium-stiff.
Sounds to me like you’d be better off with something medium flex.
If you’re really looking to stay with classic camber (which I’m assuming you mean a board that is all camber), and looking at those brands, and something with a medium flex, then I would say:
~ Burton Process Camber
~ Burton Custom Camber (though more expensive than the Process)
~ Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber (centered stance but otherwise pretty much all-mountain)
~ Arbor Element Black Camber (centered stance but otherwise pretty much all-mountain)
~ Rome National (also centered and not fully camber, but close to)
~ YES Ghost (again, centered, and probably what I would call all-mtn-freestyle, but very close to being categorized all-mtn, it’s on the cuff)
There are of course more options outside of going with traditional camber – it’s a camber profile that isn’t used a lot these days.
Hope this helps
Nate! Thanks for reply! Much appreciated!
Went to the store today and went through various stuff.
The sales assistant recommendation of course increased the price, which are
LIB TECH ATTACK (didn’t like much)
and (due to my desire getting closer to mountains)
NEVER SUMMER CHAIRMAN 2017 (serious stuff, but the price … )
What do you recon?
Thanks!
Hi Dan
To me, the Chairman would be too advanced and stiff. It’s also what I would consider Freeride, rather than all-mountain. Great in powder, for carving on groomers and great for bombing fast. But not as good at other things like jumps, riding switch, buttering etc. And not that easy to maneuver at slow speeds. A great board, IMO, but I think you would want to be at quite an advanced level to enjoy it – and you would want to ride the style that it’s suited to.
The Attack Banana would be suitable, I would say (more all-mountain-freestyle than all-mountain, IMO, but still pretty versatile). It’s on the pricier side, but if you’re ok with that it’s doable.
The TRS would be another good option from Lib Tech – a little more aggressive in camber profile but overall a better board than the Attack Banana, IMO. But also not cheap. The Terrain Wrecker is another Lib Tech option.
Neither the Attack Banana nor the Chairman are traditional camber boards though. If you’re willing to look outside camber, you’re a mid-level rider and you’re looking for an all-mountain board, then I would consider the boards on this list over either of those. Unless I’m understanding your preferred style of riding and your ability level, incorrectly?
Nate, again – thanks for your time and such a detailed explanation!
Confused among such a variaty of brands and purposes, which have been just moved from all-mountain towards freeride )
Ok – freeride, mid level >>>
BURTON 2017-18 CUSTOM FLYING V
Never Summer Snowtrooper 2018
Jones Aviator 2018
FLOW RUSH (would you consider at all?)
Salomon 17-18 Super 8
Also what do you thin of Capita? Any advises?
Thanks,
Dan
Hi Dan
You’re very welcome.
I would say that the Custom Flying V and Snowtrooper are all mountain – but to be honest all-mountain is what I would recommend for mid-level freeride anyway. Most freeride boards are too advanced and usually too stiff for a lot of people. The Super 8 however, is probably one exception to that – I would say it’s technically a freeride board, but easier going than most freeride boards. I know it gets confusing! But yeah, something all-mountain is a good choice, IMO, for freeride for the average rider. Higher level riders get more out of what I would consider full-on freeride boards, if that makes sense.
So, yeah Custom Flying V, Snowtrooper would do the job. The Aviator is another that I would consider kind of in between all-mountain and freeride – but a little more aggressive than the other 2 mentioned.
The only Flow board I’ve ridden is the Era in the 2013 model (which I own) so I’m not too sure about the Rush.
Capita have some great boards. In terms of all-mountain/freeride, the Mercury is a great option. It’s on the stiffer/more aggressive side compared to the Snowtrooper (very easy going) and the Custom Flying V, but still ok for a high-end intermediate rider.
A more easy going but also more freestyle rather freeride oriented Capita option is the Outerspace Living but it sounds like you want something a little more freeride oriented.
But also, anything like the Jones Mountain Twin, Slash Brainstorm, Ride Wildlife, Rossignol One LF, NS West would all fit the bill too.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking for a new board and I was hoping you point me into the right direction.
I’ve got my park/slight all-mountain board, the Descendant, which I am pretty satisfied with. Looking for a second board now.
I’m an intermediate rider. I’m looking for something poppy for jumping of natural hits and parks, that can carve when I get to that level and float reasonably well in powder. I won’t be going into the pipe or jib very often but the occasional jib can be done with nearly every board, right? Haha.
I was looking at the West and the One Magtek. Any pointers you can give me?
I am 6″1′ and weigh in at 169lbs (+- 11lbs, depending on the type of training I do).
Hi Yannick
I think you’re looking in the right place (all-mountain boards), given everything you’re describing.
I would go for West over the Rossi One in your case, mostly because you’ve specifically singled out pop as being an important factor. Whilst the Rossi One doesn’t have too many weaknesses, pop is one of them. It’s not completely devoid of pop, but its not its strong point either. So, yeah the West would be a good match for you, IMO.
Or Slash Brainstorm or Niche Story – I think those two would also fit the bill and be a good compliment to your existing Descendant.
Yeah the occasional jib can be done on most boards – there are some that I wouldn’t but you can certainly hit jibs with something like the West, Brainstorm, Story and Rossi One.
At 6’1″ and around 170lbs, I’d say something around 160 would be a good bet, at an advanced level. So at intermediate, you could come down a couple of cms if you wanted. In any case, I think the 159 would be the best size for the West. And a good compliment to your Descendant (which I believe is a 155, based on our previous discussions).
For the Story I would also go 159. From our previous discussion, I think you had size 10 boots, right. The Story, sounds like its quite wide in the 159 but from what I’ve measured with Niche boards, they tend to have a big magnetraction bump right at the waist, that makes them sounds wider than they are. At the inserts they aren’t as wide as their waist width would suggest. In saying that I haven’t measured the Story particularly at the inserts, so I couldn’t say for sure.
For the Brainstorm, I’d say 160, as it would be the best compliment to your 155 Descendant, but if you felt that was too long for you, you could definitely ride the 157 as well.
If you are still considering the Rossi One, then the 159 would be the best size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!
Thanks again for this very helpful comment of yours.
I have decided to go with the Never Summer West. The Story seems kind of hard to get here in Germany 🙁
Should I wait and get the 2019 West model when it comes out or should I just go ahead and grab the current one? Sure, saving a bit would be great but if there are some changes that make the board better, I might wait for the 2019 model. Do you know of any changes (besides artwork)?
Hey
As far as I’m aware, the 2019 West is identical to the 2018 West, except for the graphic of course – so I’d go for the 2018 if you can’t get the 2018 model in your size. I’d only wait for the 2019 model if your preferred size wasn’t available in the 2018 model.
Hi Nate,
it’s me, I’m back and I changed my mind, again. Haha!
I decided to go with the Brainstorm after reading through all your reviews (again). I got a really good deal on the 2017/2018 160 version of it, so I am excited to take it on the mountain this next season.
Just so you know!
Thanks very much!
Hi Yannick
Thanks for letting me know. Hope the Brainstorm treats you well. Let me know what you think, once you’ve had a chance to ride it.
Hi Nate,
looking for some advice on what board to go with next, this will be my 3rd stick and now I have a lot more budget to play with now i’m older.
I’ve had my last board which was a k2 world wide weapon for almost 5 years, it has taught me a hell of a lot about what I like and would want in a board, it was great as a board when I was intermediate rider as it still had the flex and suppleness , never rode too fast for me and turned really nice, was also super light which I loved, and that would be a big factor again in my choice. what I also now know though, is I’m not too much about park stuff as I used to be, I’ve grown into more backcountry riding, but still riding groomed piestes with my mates. I love hitting a natural kicker, and like to use the mountain as one big park. my wants would be something stiffer now, with a lot more grip/ bite in harder snow/ice, something that I can make it through the powder with, but would still love the quick turns, finally has nice stability at speed. I know I’m asking a lot here, but that’s where you come in!
my stats are;
5ft 6, 64kg ( 141 llbs) , inter – experienced rider, 15 years riding, 7 on my own boards) reg stance, I ride on burton mission bindings.
my old board is a 147 I think off the top of my head, but I know I could ride longer now something up to 151/153.
thanks for the advice in advance.
Lewis.
Hi Lewis
Thanks for your message.
In terms of size, I think something around 151 for your specs, experience and style would work well.
As I was reading through your message, the YES Standard definitely came to mind. It’s on the all-mountain-freestyle side of all-mountain, but that sounds just like what you are, in terms of using the mountain as a big park. And something you can setback and still be really good on powder days. I guess the only thing is that it’s not like really light – not heavy either, but about normal in terms of weight. I started weighing some of the boards I demoed this season and the 156 YES Standard (2019) that I demoed was 2880 grams. Which is 18.46 grams/cm. The average of everything that I weighed was 18.21 grams/cm. But note that this was a small sample size of only 24 different boards. The heaviest was 20.63 grams/cm and the lightest 16.21 grams/cm. But importantly the Standard didn’t, to me, feel heavy on snow at all. It feels light and snappy. But also note that the 2019 version is supposed to be lighter than the 2018 model.
If you did go with the Standard, I think the 149 would be the best size for you. Whilst there is a 151 for the Standard, the Standard is a little wider than normal, and sizing down a little is a good idea for this board, IMO.
You could also look at some all-mountain-freestyle. The following would fit the bill, the biggest drawback for these, would be when you’re in powder. But they’re all quick turners, stiffer than the WWW for sure, but not overly stiff, good grip in harder snow/ice, great for riding the mountain as a park:
~ Never Summer Proto Type 2 (I haven’t weighed it but felt about normal)
~ YES Greats (slightly heavier than the Standard but not by much – the 156 I demoed was 2920 grams)
~ GNU Rider’s Choice (not sure of the weight but felt light on snow to me, just a small step behind the others in terms of stability at speed, but a little better in powder than the PT2 and Greats – but not quite as good as the Standard)
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
And some other all-mountain options – these ones probably not quite as quick in terms of turns but still quick. Not really sure of the weight of these, but none of them felt heavy:
~ Never Summer West (not quite as sharp in turns as the PT2 but better in powder)
~ Nitro Team Gullwing
~ Jones Mountain Twin (the Ultra Mountain Twin I weighed was quite light, not sure about the regular Mountain Twin though)
One more thing about weight. Since your WWW is 147 then going to something around 151 will naturally add weight. That said, since your WWW is 5 years old, the newer boards might counteract that somewhat. I’ve never weighed a K2 board, so I don’t really have any gauge as to what they weigh compared to others.
Hope this gives you some options to look into.
HI again,
thanks for the super in depth reply,
given me a lot of food for thought, I was already looking at the YES Standard, based on your top 10 selection, never ridden a YES board, but always heard good things, is the 2019 YES standard out then, or will that be dropping soon and you just know some info on it, since you say it will be lighter?
only reason I was looking at 2018 version now, for next season as there is some big discounts on last season stuff, which is what I tend to do, but I gave my self a healthy $700 budget for this next stick so if its coming out before the next season starts I can probably hold out?
Cheers
Lewis
Cheers.
Hi Lewis
The 2019 model will likely be coming out August-ish in the Northern Hemisphere (already out in the Southern Hemisphere but I’m guessing you’re not down there!)
I demoed the 2019 model in the spring (March). It has a new core (as do a few of the YES boards) and it’s supposed to be lighter/snappier – which I can attest to. It’s not like they felt heavy or anything last season at all, but I did notice a slightly lighter/snappier feel to the boards that got that new core (Standard, Greats Uninc & Ghost).
So yeah, the 2019 YES boards will come out before next season but probably not until late August/early September.
Cheers