Hello and welcome to my list of what I consider the top freeride snowboards for the 2023/2024 season.
Not that due to the number of freeride boards there are these days, we have 2 lists. This one and then another "mellow freeride" which is for softer flexing freeride boards (boards with a flex of 6.5/10 or less). This list is for stiffer, more aggressive boards with flex over 6.5.
As is tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com each board is given a score out of 100.
Some Quick Stats
Of the 40 Freeride boards I looked at:
O.k. let’s get straight into it!
FREERIDE BOARD #10
Board: Nidecker Alpha APX
-
CA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Rating: 85.3/100
Starting off the list at #10, we have Nidecker's Alpha APX. The Alpha APX has the remarkable ability to be both surfy when you want it to - and carve pretty aggressively, when you want to lock it into an edge.
It's a really versatile, high-end one-board-quiver for those who don't really have freestyle in their repertoire or have a separate board for freestyle.
Score Breakdown for the Alpha APX
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 85.3/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #9
Board: Lib Tech Golden Orca
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Rating: 85.9/100
Next up we have Lib Tech's Golden Orca.
Not for those with a light-weight wallet. But if you've got the cash to splash, the Golden Orca is a ride that will ensure that you're ready for every pow stash, but at the same time will treat you well on groomers, when there's nothing fresh to float on.
Score Breakdown for the GOLDEN ORCA
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.5 | 22.5/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 85.9/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #8
Board: Capita Black Snowboard of Death
-
CA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Rating: 85.9/100
At #8 we have the Capita Black Snowboard of Death (BSOD).
The BSOD is one of those boards that's hard to say if it's all-mountain or freeride. I've chosen to categorize it as a freeride board, but it's a freeride board with a very all-mountain feel.
But it's a better carver, better at speed and better in powder than the average all-mountain board, so it fits in - and, as a bonus, it's also a great jumper and better than average at riding switch compared to the average freeride board.
Score Breakdown for the BSOD
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 85.9/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #7
Board: Jones Hovercraft 2.0
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: MEDIUM-STIFF (7/10)
Rating: 86.4/100
New for 2024, Jones' Hovercraft 2.0 is our next pick.
Taking over from where the Hovercraft left off, but with enough changes to warrant a name change, the Hovercraft 2.0 gives you something a little more mellow and snappy than it's predecessor but it hasn't lost any of its powder prowess.
And it does a great job when it comes to messy snow, riding trees and generally cruising the groomers.
Score Breakdown for the Hovercraft 2.0
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 5.0 | 25/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 1.0 | 1/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 86.4/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #6
Board: Capita Kazu Kokubo Pro
-
CA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Rating: 86.4/100
Next in at # 6, we have Capita's Kazu Kokubo Pro. The Kazu is an awesome option for anyone who wants to be jumping in the backcountry/sidecountry but at the same time can carve well on groomers, when the powder is tracked.
Score Breakdown for the Kazu
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 86.4/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #5
Board: Burton Flight Attendant
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7.5/10)
Rating: 86.4/100
Coming in next at #5, we have Burton’s Flight Attendant.
The Flight Attendant has everything you want out of a freeride board. It floats well in powder, carves hard and is fast and stable at high speeds.
It's also above average for jumping for a freeride board, so if you're looking to rock some freestyle off those natural hits, then the flight attendant is a good way to go.
Score Breakdown for the Flight Attendant
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 86.4/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #4
Board: Rome Ravine Select
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: Stiff (8.5/10)
Rating: 87.5/100
Our #4 board, Rome's Ravine Select, is the stiffest on this list and the one that requires the most aggressive rider. If you can find your limit on this board, then you've got to be one epic rider. It could take everything we could throw at it and I'm sure a lot more.
Score Breakdown for the Ravine Select
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.5 | 22.5/25 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 7/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 7/10 |
JUMPS | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
SWITCH | 2.0 | 2/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.5/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #3
Board: GNU Banked Country
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: Medium-Stiff (6.5/10)
Rating: 87.5/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
GNU's Banked Country didn't get a massive overhaul or anything, but we re-tested it after a few changes, and it feels quite different to what it used to be.
It's mellowed out and gotten snappier. And whilst it may not be quite as stable at speed, it's become much more nimble at slower speeds, better in the trees and better for side-hits and jumps, in my opinion. And it's managed to do so without losing any of its carving ability.
Score Breakdown for the Banked Country
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.0 | 20/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
SWITCH | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 87.5/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #2
Board: Jones Flagship
-
CA
-
UK/EU
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7.5/10)
Rating: 90.2/100
In at #2, we have Jones' Flagship.
The Flagship is a powder hound. And while it is good at speed and likes to have speed under it it's, at the same time, something that can still slash and is fairly nimble at slower speeds, particularly for how good it is riding fast/carving.
A really versatile, powder first, freeride board.
Score Breakdown for the Flagship
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 5.0 | 25/25 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 12/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 90.2/100 |
FREERIDE BOARD #1
Board: Yes Pick Your Line
-
CA
Flex: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Rating: 90.8/100
*HARD/ICY SNOW OPTION
And finally at #1, we have YES' Pick Your Line (PYL).
With equally good float in powder, speed and carving abilities the PYL can take whatever you throw at it in the backcountry or on the groomers. It has an uncanny ability to switch between hard snow and powder and still be great on both. This is down partly to the unique tapered underbite.
But besides all of that, the PYL has something that can't be described - that X factor that you just can't put words on.
Score Breakdown for the PYL
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.5 | 22.5/25 |
SPEED | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 3.0 | 3/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 90.8/100 |
Over to You
Even though I’ve scored these boards and put them in order, what you consider to be the best of this list will depend on your preferences. And this isn't an exact science, but hopefully this gives you some options and perspective on some great freeride boards and what might suit you the best.
If you want to learn more about any of these boards or check out current prices/availability, check out the links at the top of each board description above.
Hi Nate,
I currently have a 2022 YES Hybrid UnInc DCP 153 and am looking to add another board to the quiver. I really like the performance of the Hybrid across the board, but am looking for something that I can initiate quicker turns with in tight trees as that’s the only terrain I don’t love taking the Hybrid in. I’m 5’8 155-160 size 9 boots for reference. Some of the boards I’m looking at are the YES PYL and PYL UnInc (I know this is just as wide as the hybrid but allegedly it turns much faster), Gnu Banked Country, K2 Passport, Jones Flagship and Jones Mind Expander, as well a couple other that I don’t think you’ve reviewed (US Cadet and the Cardiff Powgoda). Still looking for a board that’s reasonably fast and stable with good edge hold, but it doesn’t necessarily need to be as good in powder as the Hybrid. Would love your input. Thanks!
Hi Drew, thanks for your message. And apologies for the slow response.
I found the PYL Uninc to be reasonably quick to initiate turns on but it took quite a bit more effort than the average board. Given that you’re particularly looking for something that’s a quick turner for trees, I would look at one of the other options. The Mind Expander is the quickest for turn initiation in that list, IMO, but it’s not as fast/stable as some of the others. It’s not terrible in terms of stability, but depending on how fast you want to ride it, it has it’s limits in that respect.
I would be leaning PYL or Banked Country for a good balance between being quick turners and still being stable with good edge hold.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks a lot for this huge work, very precise and helping for me.
I am a French 32yo riding for about twenty years. My last board since 2014 is the Bataleon Evil Twin, a bit worn but still working 😀
I received for my birthday gift 650€ in order to buy a new board for next season.
As my Evil Twin is more “Freestyle”, I would like to go for a more “Freeride/All Mountain – Powder” board, Bataleon or Burton.
Do you think the Custom X would fit or maybe to stiff ?
I am 1m80 for 94kg.
Thanks by advance.
Best regards,
Julian A.
Hi Julian, thanks for your message and apologies for slowness in reply.
The Custom X will feel considerably stiffer than the Evil Twin – if you want that, it would be fine stiffness-wise, but if you only wanted to go a little bit stiffer, but just more directional, you may find it too stiff. For your size, I don’t think you’d have a problem with it, if you’re fairly strong/athletic – but it will be a big contrast to the Evil Twin and take some getting used to.
However, if you’re looking for something that gives you a good improvement in powder performance, I’d look at something else.
Some other Burton/Bataleon options to consider:
– Burton Flight Attendant – not as stiff as the Custom X, but not much softer – but better for powder
– Burton Straight Chuter – basically a more directional Custom X
note that these two aren’t going to get 2025 models, so you’d need to find a 2024 or earlier model.
– Burton Alekesam – new from Burton for 2025 – stiffer option – not Custom X stiff but on the stiffer end of scale
– Burton Gril Master – a softer version of Alekesam (essentially) – still stiffer than the Evil Twin, but more of a medium flex
– Bataleon Thunderstorm
– Bataleon Cruiser
Both of these are more medium flex – again stiffer than Evil Twin, but still around medium. I haven’t ridden anything from Bataleon that’s felt more than a 6.5/10 flex.
For reference, I found the Evil Twin to be a 4/10 flex, but the first time I rode it was the 2024 model, so the 2014 may have been different.
Hope this helps with your decision
However
Thank you very much ! very helping
What about Family Tree Hometown Hero ?
Best regards,
Julian A.
Hi Julian
Yeah, the Hometown Hero would also work. In terms of flex, I’d say it’s in between the Gril Master and Alekesam. Not as light as them (both the Alekesam and Gril Master were nice and light). But otherwise kind of in between them.
The other one I didn’t mention is the High Fidelity, which is the stiffer option. It’s more Custom X stiffness, so if you did want to go to that level of stiffness, then that’s another one to consider. I wanted to have all my reviews for these out by now, and then could refer you to them, but I’m way behind this year unfortunately, but hopefully they’ll get out soon.
Ciao Nate!
as usual before buying a board I always read your precious advice.
I’ve been waiting for the YES 20/20 review for a while, can you kindly tell me if you’ll try it?
Ciao Fabrizio!
I haven’t tested the 20/20, unfortunately, and it looks like they are going to be making it anymore, when they bring out their 2025 lineup. So, I can be of much help, unfortunately.
Hey Nate!
Thanks for all the content, super helpful. I have three requests I’d love your input on.
Up front, I’m 6’1″ and 210lbs with a 10.5 boot. I consider myself expert level – there’s nothing on the mountain I can’t get down from chutes to small drops to tight trees to moguls, etc. but I spend zero time in the park or doing big jumps and tricks on side hits.
Request #1 – I’m looking an all around all-mountain freeride directional board that I can charge hard and lay deep carves but will take me all over the mountain from soft and hard groomers, to trees, to moguls, to in-resort powder (not backcountry deep stashes).
I’d like to find something that is equally balanced when charging hard and laying deep carves as it is nimble at slower speeds navigating trees and bumps/moguls. I’ve found this to be really hard to find, so would love your input. It seems like from the above list, I’d be in the PYL or Banked Country – is the banked country much easier at slower speeds?
Request #2 – I’d like to spend more time learning how to ride switch and be on something more playful (try to learn side hits, butters, 180’s, etc) for more relaxed days – something that can still carve well both at mid-to low speed, but is still confident as an all mountain board in trees and bumps – less so powder as I would only break this board out on non-powder days.
Request #3 – I’ve been trying to find the best dedicate powder board for my heli and cat trips. I had a Bataleon Surfer which was awesome at wide open high speed powder fields, but most heli runs usually end with a patch of tight trees and the swallow tail made it really hard to navigate tighter trees. I then tried a Jones Storm Wolf and hated it, WAY too stiff to maneuver around. Most recently I’ve been ride a 23 Burton Fish in powder which has been good in the resort but not sure about really deep stuff. Anyway, would love your thought here as well!
I’m also looking for a good set of all mountain bindings I can use on most of these boards – based on your recs I keep coming back to the Now Select Pro’s for good carving but good slow speed maneuverability, but let me know if I should consider anything else.
Thanks!!
Hey David
Thanks for your message.
Request #1: Yeah, I think the PYL or Banked Country would be your best bets. Fit everything you’re looking for, IMO. The PYL and Banked Country are fairly similar at slow speed, in my IMO. The Flagship would work too – but my instinct is that you’d prefer not to go too stiff, and while the Flagship isn’t super stiff or anything, it’s a little stiffer than the PYL and BC.
Request #2: First board that came to mind straight away was the YES Greats. Slash Happy Place is another. I recently rode the 2025 model and I found it to be a better carver than it used to be and better at speed, but still good for what you’re looking for there. Depending on how soft you want to go in terms of flex, there are lots of options you could consider. The Greats is more of a 6/10 flex, with the Happy Place more of a 5/10 flex. If you wanted to go softer than that, but still with decent carving, then you could look at the Arbor Relapse, Burton Good Company, Rome Agent, YES Jackpot, Never Summer Proto Slinger. Or more options around the 5/10 to 6/10 range that would work well include the Niche Crux, Lib Tech TRS, Never Summer Easy Rider, Never Summer Proto Synthesis and GNU RC C3. Sorry that’s a lot of options, but there are a lot of boards that would work well for Request #2.
Request #3: Note that I don’t test a lot of powder specialized boards, because it’s hard to time it to test them in powder – and testing on cat or heli trips is too costly! So, I can only really go on what I think would be good for that kind of deep powder. The Fish 3D could do the job, depending on the size you have it in. I think you’d want it in the 161 to be good for you in deep powder. But in that size, I’d say it would still be ok for the trees, it looks to be a pretty mellow flex and has a lot of it’s length in the nose, looking at the effective edge and contact length specs.
One option to consider include the Never Summer Swift in the 163. I found the 158 super agile – like one of the more agile boards I’ve ridden and I was worried it was going to feel a little too big for trees. I’m 6’0″, 180lbs, 9.5 boot. I would be confident taking that size in deeper powder and it was super nimble. As you have a bit of size on me, I think the 163 would be a good bet, and in that size, I don’t think you’d have issues with it being too sinky in the deep stuff and while you may not find it quite as agile as I did with the 158, I think it would be close for you, given your specs and I would happily take that in tight trees in a 160, which I think would be my equivalent of a 163 for you, roughly. Though sizing would also depend on what you’re used to riding, given that you’re an expert and will be used to certain sizing.
Another is the Salomon HPS Wolle Nyvelt Fish. Was also surprisingly nimble and feels like it would be great in deeper powder. I managed to get this one in a decent amount of powder and my instinct is that it would do just as well in deeper powder.
And the Jones Hovercraft 2.0. Found the new 2.0 version to be nice and agile and it should translate to deep powder. I haven’t yet tested the Storm Wolf, but I have one sitting in my office right now – will be getting it out on Tuesday – so can’t say for sure how I would compare the flex of the Hovercraft to the Stormwolf, but I will know by end of Tuesday. But the Hovercraft was a more a mid-stiff to me than stiff-stiff. I have heard the Stormwolf is stiff, so I suspect it will be stiffer than the Hovercraft, but will have to confirm.
Bindings-wise, the Select Pro would be a good bet. I would also consider the Flux XF, if you’re not too worried about shock absorption. Or the NOW Drive Pro.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate! Impressive guide and even more impressive interaction with all the people asking questions. I have some of my own 🙂 and hopefully you can help me with them.
For context: I consider myself intermediate-advanced rider (5 seasons, 100+ days), 180cm, 70kg, EU42~43/US9.5. I already have a nice playful freestyle board (Nitro Cheap Thrills) and now I am looking for an agressive Pow/Freeride board.
The idea is to start going to more technical terrain, tree runs, some small drops, and so on. I don’t have much experience here, but I think I’ll pick it up quickly.
I’ve been looking at Jones Flagship (JF), the YES Pick Your Line (PYL) and the Lib Tech T.Rice Orca (Orca), but I really cannot decide. The JF seems to me more broad, versatile and generic for most freeride/pow runs, so I’m tempted to go with it. But I’ve also been reading that the volume-shifted boards (like the Orca) also behave amazingly well. Have you ever tried? What’s your verdict?
And among those three boards, could you try to summarize your experience with them and maybe try to help me understand which one would be better to progress my freeriding skill with?
And lastly, as I said, I’ve been leaning for a JF158. But because of the volume-shifted paradigm, I was also considering a JF156W. What’s your opinion on normal vs wide boards for pow/freeride terrain? Note that my foot length clearly doesn’t need a wide setting, it’s mostly because the wider board may give it more stability. I wonder if you tried this in some boards and I’d love to hear your feedback.
Sorry for the long text! And thank you for your time and public service.
Keep on pow!
Hi Pedro
Thanks for your message. Apologies for the slow response, was travelling overseas and haven’t had the chance to get to your message until now.
I would personally be leaning PYL or JF. I liked the Orca but not as much. Personally I wouldn’t go wide, if you don’t have too. Yes, it will give you more stability and powder float with a wider board, but the same is true with a longer board. So, if you go shorter to compensate for the extra width, then you you’ll often end up with the same surface area. And in terms of stability at speed, you’ll actually, in my experience, get better stability at speed with the longer board, when you’re on edge (e.g. carving). Yes a board with the same surface area, all else being equal, should provide the same amount of stability when flat basing, but when on edge, the width of the board doesn’t come into play, but the effective edge does, so 2 boards with the same surface area, but one of them longer/narrower and the other shorter/wider, the longer narrower board, assuming some of that length is adding to the effective edge, will be more stable at speed, when carving. Hope that makes sense. In deep powder the same surface area, as far as I can tell and all else being equal, should give the same or similar float.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157, so the 158 is probably your best bet. However, you could go up to the 161, if you wanted to optimize for stability and powder float. That’s within range for your specs for a freeride board like this, which you can ride a little longer than you’d ride an all-mountain board. The only real downside to going longer, rather than wider, to get extra float, is that it means you have more length that you have to fit in between trees.
While going 156W with the FS would give you a little more surface area, so would probably float better, than the 158, it won’t be as nimble and not quite as stable at speed when carving. The 161 would give you a little more surface area than the 156W – but just by a little bit.
If I was you I’d go FS 158 or PYL 159.
You can see my full, detailed reviews on all those boards on the website. Just use the search function or the “See Full Review” links on this page.
Hope this helps and isn’t too late for your decision
Have you had the opportunity to ride any of the Stranda boards? Specifically the Descender and the Biru. Would love to see a review of these.
Hi Steve
Haven’t had the chance to test any Stranda boards unfortunately. So many brands out there!
Hi Nate,
I have been reading through these comments and really appreciate the thoughtful responses you provide. I am looking to buy a new board. I’ve been riding a Never Summer SL since 2007, length 158. I love it but I want a board with newer technology (and the NS is very well-used). I’m looking for something that rides great in powder, trees, and steep terrain. I usually ride with a bunch of skiers in Colorado (so I get pulled into steep mogul runs a lot) and do an annual trip to Silverton Mountain. I’m looking for something that better handles the steep terrain at Silverton, floats well in powder but is still agile. I do not go anywhere near the parks (just turned 40) and rarely ride switch. I’m 5’8” and 155 pounds, an expert rider. I’m a bit partial to Never Summer, but both the PYL and Jones Flagship (I also have the Jones Solution Splitboard for hut trips) look like good options based on your article. It’s been a while since I bought a new resort board so was curious about your thoughts given your expertise.
Thanks!
Eric
Hey Eric
Thanks for your message.
I think both the Flagship and PYL would work well for what you’re describing. If you wanted to go Never Summer and wanted really good agility, then the Never Summer Swift would be a great option. I found that thing to turn on a dime. It’s not quite as good in terms of stability at speed as the likes of the PYL and Flagship, but it’s more agile and as good in powder. Any one of those 3 options should work well for what you’re describing though, IMO.
Hope this helps
Nate, thanks so much for your reply! I have one follow-up question as to the size of the Never Summer Swift. With it being a mid-wide shape, do I go a bit shorter? I usually ride a 158, but I am wondering if I should do the 153. (I’m 5’8” and 155 pounds, US 10 feet in size.) Thanks!
Hi Eric
That’s a close one. The 153 is going to be around 264mm at the back insert and 270mm at the front insert. 158 is 266mm back insert and 272mm front insert. This is wider than normal and on the wider side for 10s, but it’s not hugely wide, at the back insert. At the front insert, it’s wide for your boot size, but again not super wide. Based on your specs, I would say your “typical all-mountain length” is around 155, in which case, I would go 153 for sure, given that it is a bit wider. However, given that you’re used to riding 158, going to 153 when it’s only a little bit wide is quite a big size-down.
If you feel like your 158 is a little bigger than you’d prefer, then I would go 153 (which is likely to feel more like, roughly, a 155 in a regular width), but if you feel 158 is a good size for you, then the 158 would probably be the better bet. Note however, given your height/weight specs, that you’d likely find the 158 a little bigger than I did and a little bigger than your current 158 (depending on what board you have, of course) and will likely feel a little stiffer than I found it.
That said, note that I typically ride 156-159 and I was wondering if this would feel a bit big for me, but I didn’t find that at all and found it super agile, even though it’s a touch bigger than I’d typically ride. So, if you typically ride a similar size to me (and don’t feel like anything has been too big) then there’s a good chance that you won’t find the 158 too big in this. Whether this translates 100% accurately, given our different specs (I’m 6’0″, 180lbs, size 10 boot) I’m not sure, but hopefully this gives you more to go off.
Hi Nate,
I’m cross-shopping the Burton Hometown Hero and the Kazu Kokubo Pro for 2024. I consider myself an intermediate-advanced rider, and ride a mix of conditions. I’m looking for a one board quiver, and given these two boards are similar, which would you recommend? Don’t really hit park.
Hi Davinci
Thanks for your message.
I would personally go Kazu. But the Hometown Hero is also a good option. It’s a little softer/more mellow than the Kazu, but not by a whole lot. But if I had to say, the Hometown Hero is a slightly easier ride, if that makes any difference. I’ve linked to their reviews if you want to make a closer comparison.
Hope this helps
I have the Kazu and really like it, but have had it for 3-4 years. Looking for my next pow board and don’t know if I should go for another Kazu or something different.
What do you consider the best pow board used in a quiver for primarily cat boarding in deeper snow and trees – steep, but not ultra steep. Also, fun in those really good powder days at the resort. Thank you for any help.
Hey Matthew.
My favorite pow tree board right now is the Never Summer Swift. The Burton Pow Wrench would be right up there as well. The old Capita Powder Displacement Snowcraft too, but they haven’t made a 2024 model of that. I’m guessing the Capita SB Powder Glider is right up there as well, but haven’t had a chance to ride it yet, but that would be worth taking a look at. The Powder Racers probably too. We don’t test a lot of powder specialist boards, so we certainly haven’t had a massive selection of them. There’s certainly more out there from other brands too, I think Jones has a couple that we haven’t tried – the Jones Storm Chaser or Storm Wolf would be worth looking into too.
Nate, thanks for the response. The Swift keeps coming up in my research. I will make sure to link to it through SP. Again, thanks.
You’re very welcome Matthew. Hope you have a great season!
hello, which do you think is the fastest among them? do you know anything about Jones Freecarver 9000s, I heard that it would be fast and stable at the same time?
Hi Anamaria
Unfortunately, we haven’t had a chance to test the Freecarvers, so can’t say anything about them from experience.
ok, but from the top 10 presented by you, which would be the fastest but also stable at the same time?
Hi anamaria
The overall best at speed are in the score breakdowns. Those scores factor in both speed and stability at speed. I would say the Ravine Select and the Capita BSOD would have been the fastest. With and both stable at speed. The BSOD slightly faster overall, with the Ravine Select more stable at speed.
Hi Nate,
I think I already know the answer here but am curious what you would think.
Currently I ride a burton custom camber, which is too soft for me and looses grip and stability above a certain speed. Before that I rode a Hammer PSM snowboard which is stiffer and suited better for my riding style – it was more than 10 years ago, but still.
I usually ride around 15 days per year in Europe. I have the most fun in powder, but since the trips are usually organized before the season, it depends on the conditions.
If the powder is not available, I like to ride aggressively on the groomers.
So I´m currently looking at the PYL and the Flagship. I think the PYL might be better for the groomers and the flaghsip for the powder.
This would be my only board, not one for the quiver.
I think I would have the most fun on the PYL given my style. Does that board stay confident above 60-70 km/h?
I have the opportunity to test one of the 2 boards at the beginning of the season but not both.
I´m 171 cm, weigh 67 kg, my feet are EU size 42.
So, PYL, Flaghsip or somehting else?
Thanks!
Hi András
Thanks for your message.
Both would be suitable, but I would be leaning PYL for what you’re describing. You would get a little better powder float on the Flagship, but the PYL is still really good in powder, IMO, and I think you’ll appreciate it more on the groomers and at speed. That said, I think the Flagship would work well and there’s not much in it, but I’d be leaning PYL. And yeah, the PYL has always been able to handle those speeds fine, when I’ve been on it.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thank you! I’ll go for a test ride on the PYL. I expect it will be fire!
You’re very welcome András. It’s always been fire anytime I’ve ridden it. Hope you find it the same.
Hey Nate
This site is amazing man. You’re a godsend to all of us!
I’m 6’1″. 220 lbs, size 11.5 boot. I used to ride a 162 Flight Attendant and a Burton Fish (can’t remember the size). I”m due to replace both boards. I’d say I’m an advanced rider but I’m getting up there in age (and injuries) so my waning health brings me back into the realm of intermediate/advanced sometimes.
I’d say I’m a freerider so I just purchased a YES PYL 164w based on your review. I chose a 162 previously as going a tiny bit short gives me extra control over the board. I assume that the 164w will be fine though. I’m pretty sure this will be perfect for my daily resort board.
I do occasionally go CAT skiing (why I had the Fish). I’d like a new proper powder board for this – something a bit longer to help stay on top. With my measurements I was consider the Capita Navigator at 167 however I just noticed that the Jones Flagship has a 5.0 rating in powder and comes in longer sizes also. I want to have a typical mellow freeride experience while maintaining the feeling of control and responsiveness in the board. What would you recommend for the second board? Or is there a third option?
Thanks in advance!
Nick
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
For the PYL, I think you should be good on the 164W. That size is just right for the PYL for your specs and how you describe your riding, IMO.
The Navigator 167 would certainly work as your powder board, if you’re looking to keep things mellow. The Flagship is, IMO, a little better in powder, but it’s not as mellow, so you’d have a more aggressive ride with it. If you’re only ever in powder with it, I think you’d be good. But if you’re looking to keep things more mellow when not necessarily in pow, then the Navigator might be the better option. You could also look at the Lib Tech BRD (comes in a 167W). Which is in between the Flagship and Navigator in terms of how mellow it is.
One other option that came up in my search was the Slash Vertical 167. It’s not a board I’ve ridden, so can’t say for sure how it rides, but on paper, it looks like something that could work.
Hope this helps
Just a follow up bud. I’ve been using Burton Step-ons for a while now…mainly bc i’m lazy lol. They’ve served me just fine before and I’ve used them on my old Fish. Do you think I should get a separate pair of boots and bindings for the Flagship in POW? Flux XVs? It’s not cost prohibitive…I’d only get them if it would make a significant difference in my use and experience on the board.
Hi Nick
I think the Step-Ons would match the Flagship fine, in my experience with them (depending on the Step On boots you have). So probably no need to get separate boots/bindings. The only thing would be that I can forsee Step Ons being a little annoying when trying to get them in if you have “step on” in any deeper powder at any point (e.g. hiking to a spot and then trying to step on in heavy pow. But if you’ve not had that issue in them before, they’re probably all good. If it’s the Ruler Step On, then they’re a little soft to be ideal for the Flagship, but would still work. If it’s Photon or Ion, I think you’re all good.
Hi Nate,
This is such a amazing website! After my last trip I totally regained the snowboard vibe again, so I have been reading quite a lot on here.
I have been riding for about 15 years. I am lean build and tall (6.7) with big feet. I weigh 95 kg/ 210 lbs. I currently have ThirtyTwo Prospect boots in size 14 and Burton Misson bindings.
I am in the market for something new, because my current board Libtech Skunkape 167W seems to have had its best time. I still like it a lot, but I find it a bit sluggish at times. I mostly ride groomers in Austria/ France and the occasional POW-opportunity. I like playful riding and tree runs, but also like to charge hard. I was leaning into Flagship , BSOD of PYL or E-jack knife. What size or which board do you recommend?
Hi Kajee
Thanks for your message.
All those boards would suit what you’re describing, IMO, but I would be leaning PYL or Flagship as I found them the best in trees, of the 4 you mentioned, but still can charge hard and good in powder. Given sizing (see below), the Flagship has a better size for you, IMO, so I’d be leaning that over the PYL.
Size-wise, I’d be looking at:
PYL: 164W (though this would be pushing it width-wise probably, even though it’s wide)
Flagship: 165W (169W wouldn’t be wrong either, if you wanted to go longer)
BSOD: 165W
E-jack: 162W – though I think this is a bit short for you and could also be borderline too narrow still, so size probably rules this one out, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
As it turns out, I think my profile is somewhere between aggressive all mountain freestyle, aggressive all mountain and freeride. But then maybe the Jones Twin Mountain Ultra is a a better choice than the Flagship? The Mega Merc also looks good, but way too small. Also I cannot find the 165W BSOD on stock any where.
I did see a Yes Typo 163W being offered for 374 euro.
Hi Kajee
You might find the Typo 163W a bit too soft for what you want. And also it’s not overly wide for a wide board, and with 14s, I wouldn’t be so sure of it.
But I think the Ultra Mountain Twin 165W would work well.
Hi Nate, thanks for putting out all this information.
I’m relatively new to free riding and I’m currently riding a GNU Beast 2016 which I’m loving it (for powder conditions mostly). I bought this board used and I’ve gave her quite some punishment so I’m starting to think of going for an upgrade. Do you have any suggestions for a similar board? Thanks in advance.
Matias
Hi Matias
Thanks for your message.
I’d say the most similar to the Beast now would be the GNU Banked Country. Not exactly the same or anything, but pretty similar.
Hope this helps
Nate,
I hope you’re shredding well out on the slopes and in the pow. Thanks for all the inputs and advice. Now, I need your advice.
I’m a relatively new snowboarder, but am a really fast leaner. I’m fearless and tend to get myself into trouble because I love to challenge myself so much. I’m already trying to go into heavier powder and trees. I currently ride a 2018-2019 Rossignol Angus. The Angus was the only board that was available at the resort I was at the time. Luckily it was an all mountain board and it worked for what I was getting into at the time, standard European green and blue groomers and some reds and a black. I also picked up an old CAPiTA Charlie Slasher off a local that I used to teach myself board repairs on. It had some pretty bad core shots (the metal edge teeth were exposed from one of the core shots) that I was able to repair. Then I ran down a black run after the repair. It worked just fine and I didn’t die.
All that aside, I’m an odd shaped dude. I’m a whopping 5’8”, above average muscularity, i weight approximately 190 lbs, though I’m trying to get down between 185 and 190, and finally, have boats for feet (size 12 – currently in a size 13 snowboarding boot – that’s all they had, but fit). I’ve been looking at both the Flagship 159 wide or a PYL 160 wide because of my big feet, heavy weight for my height and the fact that I want to start getting a little crazier both on the slopes (carving and hanging with my kids) and getting into some higher speed fun (European Reds/American Blues and some blacks), pow, and trees. I’m not looking at getting crazy riding switch or getting too big into park stuff right now. I enjoy venturing off the beaten path a little more than anything else. I’m sure my Angus will suite me just fine if I run across park snowboarding. I’m also military, stationed somewhere I can’t easily get a new board, and was just recently informed of an opportunity to get a hold of a new board that I might not get again any time soon nor before the next season.
As a result, I would really appreciate your thoughts and suggestions. Flagship or PYL and length of board given my body description?
Hi Louie
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, in terms of sizing, I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 158. For freeride boards like this you can err a little on the longer side (because more of the length is outside the contact points vs something like an all-mountain board). As a newer snowboarder I would typically size down a little bit, but given how fast it sounds like you’ve progressed and given you’re above average strength by the sounds of it, I don’t think it’s necessary in this case. Long story short, I think 159W Flagship and 160W PYL would be good lengths.
The PYL 160W isn’t that wide for a wide board though and given that you’re in 13s, I would be concerned that you’d have issues with boot drag on it. So I would be leaning Flagship 159W for you.
Both boards would be suitable for what you’re describing for sure and in this case sizing is a good tie breaker with the Flagship 159W being wider and, IMO, a better width for your boots.
Not a board that I would typically recommend for a newer snowboard, mainly because of it’s stiffer flex, but given that you’re used to an Angus, which is a pretty stiff board too, and because it sounds like you’ve progressed quickly and are stronger than average, I think it will be fine for you. And definitely the kind of board that would suit the kind of riding you’re describing, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
You’re right, I’m kind of a newer snowboarder, but have been riding skate boards my entire life which helped me progress faster than normal. Plus I’m fearless. Maybe it’s me, but the Angus definitely doesn’t feel as stiff as it is said to be. I read somewhere that going a little longer 2-4cm for free riding is a strong suggestion. Thoughts on that? Again, many thanks for your insight. Really appreciate your knowledge.
Hi Louie
Yeah absolutely sizing up a little for freeriding is often a good idea (as I mention in this). I like to temper that a little bit if your freeriding involves trees though, as going too long can hinder tree performance. I think going 159W is already sizing up a little from what I would consider your “all-mountain” length, so I wouldn’t personally size up any more than that at this point.
Thanks a ton.
You’re very welcome Louie. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
You’ve got to get on the Family Tree line from Burton. I noticed you put a premium on versatility, and that is exactly what those decks do. They both have exceptional powder day effort (their primary focus), and excel as groomer carvers.
Hopefully you get a chance to hit a demo tent, as they will change your mind
Hi Pete
Thanks for your message. Have gotten on plenty of family tree boards, and will get on more this winter. Looking forward to checking out some of the new ones they’re bringing for their 23-24 line.
Hey Nate, loving the content and learning a lot from the website.
I’ve never been a park guy and I mostly like to cruise and carve. I was going to go with the YES PYL Uninc but I’m kind of torn now between that and the Standard Uninc. I’m pretty much primarily on groomers, so do you have a recommendation for me?
Hi Jay
Thanks for your message.
I think it depends on how much you like to bomb when you ride or not. One advantage of the PYL Uninc over the Standard Uninc, is for powder, but if you’re not really in deep powder, then the only other thing would be stability at speed. And that’s only talking relatively as the Standard Uninc is pretty stable at speed itself. But if you really needed something that was going to be super stable when riding really fast, then the PYL Uninc, I would say, has that over it. Note that I haven’t ridden the Uninc version of the PYL but from what I understand it’s stiffer and more aggressive than the PYL, so it’s going to be stiffer, more aggressive than the PYL.
Probably depends on how stiff you like you’re ride too – the PYL Uninc is going to be around 8/10 flex – so really quite stiff – vs around 6.5/10 flex that I felt the Standard Uninc at. Standard Uninc still a really good carver too. Though for high speed, big carves, the PYL Uninc is likely to be better. Given you use the word cruise, I think I’d be leaning Standard Uninc – it’s a little more mellow a ride. Now mellow isn’t a word I would use to describe it, but relatively speaking vs the PYL Uninc.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Mike,
Really great list, but i still need your help :))
I am torn between ravine select and yes optimistic. Most of the time i go on groomers for some high speed and fast carving and maybe a little bit of powder if there is some fresh powder next to the track… which would suit me better for that? Thanks a lot!!
Hey Linas
Thanks for your message.
Note that this is all with respect to 2023 models. The Optimistic changed quite a bit for the 2023 model.
Both good in powder, so that’s not a separator between them, IMO.
The Ravine Select is going to give you more stability at speed and better for big high speed carves. In terms of shorter/sharper carves, the Optimistic is a little better – a little better at slower speeds, IMO. I think those things are the biggest deciding factors between the two boards – whether you want to maximize stability at speed and big high speed carves (then Ravine Select) or whether you want something that’s still good at speed, but not as good but better for riding a little slower, more mellow, when you want to (Optimistic).
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi thanks for the great reviews. I’m an advanced rider 20+ years and looking for something to better handle choppy snow and feel more locked in and stable. I was thinking it was the Yes PYL 165 and then upon further looking at specs it looks real darn close (at least in measurements) to my current daily driver the Lib Darker Series 161 and so I’m wondering if this is a mistake. I’ve been interested in both the Flagship and PYL as a new all around charger when its not a pow only day. I have an older Hovercraft for that.
My current issue with the Darker Series is its a fast board and just wants to go, doesn’t maneuver great at slow speeds, and I’m heavy and it gets going. This is fine I generally ride faster, it just seems that I’m overpowering the board at my current weight or it’s worn out I don’t know. I feel that it’s not as stable as I’d like through any crud or uneven snow and leaves me lacking confidence to ride at speed, which is what it wants/needs. When I first got the board I didn’t get this feeling. I was generally around 190lbs then as well. About 230 now.
Would you suggest the PYL or Flagship or even something else for an all around freeride relatively hard charging board for a heavier rider?
6’2” and 230ish lbs (pretty strong/muscular not a fatty) and riding Idaho (used to be Tahoe) resorts.
Thanks for any help!
Hi Tim
Thanks for your message.
I think part of it is probably the size. For your size, particularly being strong/muscular, and the type of riding your doing, 161 is too small. It would have been a good size when you first got it, but now it’s a little small, which will be at least half of the problem with it not feeling stable enough.
I found both the PYL and Flagship good when dealing with crud – and they’re both the kind of board that are good at speed, but they’re not completely unforgiving at slow speeds – you can still ride them slow without them feeling like tanks. So, I think they are a good match for what you’re describing. There are other options of course, but those 2 I think would both work, so don’t want to complicate the decision further.
But size-wise, I would say go 165 for the PYL and 164 or even 167 for the Flagship. Though going 167 will take away some of that slow speed performance. So I’d be leaning 164 but 167 certainly not out of range. But if you could also let me know your boot size so I can confirm those sizes are appropriate.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks. Yep, boots are size 10 Ride Insano’s.
I was also looking through your aggressive all-mountain category. Would that be a better board type for groomer days up to light powder? Open to other suggestions for sure, just had the PYL & Flagship on my radar.
As far as I can tell we don’t get super deep dumps here like is common in Tahoe, so still trying to figure it out.
Thanks!
Hi Tim
Thanks – with 10s, those sizes should work well.
Yeah, you could definitely look at something aggressive all-mountain, if you’re only getting light powder. Something like the Burton Custom X, Capita Mega Merc or Arbor Wasteland would certainly suit for riding fast but not be as manageable at slower speeds as the PYL or Flagship, IMO. If you wanted to temper it a little and have something a little more manageable at slower speeds, then something like the Aviator 2.0, Jones Ultra Mountain Twin or GNU 4×4 would be good bets. I haven’t looked at sizing for any of those to see if they all have appropriate sizing, but if there’s anything there that grabs you, I would be happy to give my opinion on specific sizing.
What’s your opinion of the K2 Alchemist? I’ve had a lot of people say that it’s a Ferrari on the slopes and will only be enjoyable to the most advanced. I was going to pair it with the Burton Genesis Bindings and the K2 Thraxis boots. I love to bomb the mountain as much as the next guy but I also like to ride slow and hang with my wife or jump/out of the trees
Hi Jimbo
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t had a chance to ride the Alchemist yet, so I couldn’t say from experience, but I’ve heard the same – that it’s a pretty demanding ride. Probably not going to be one that’s a lot of fun riding slowly – but again, can’t say from experience. If you did go Alchemist, ideally I’d go with stiffer bindings. The Thraxis would be a good match, but I’d try to go a little stiffer with the bindings for a board that’s supposed to as stiff as the Alchemist.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the awesome reviews and advice in your comments!
I’m in analysis paralysis and need help. I’m set on a c3 profile board and want to have magne traction and am debating between lib tech ejack, lib tech TRS and gnu rcc3.
I’ve been riding the same camber board for 25 years. Just got burton step-on bindings and boots last year. I’m 5’9″, 180 lbs. I’m on the east coast so mostly groomed and often icy resort runs, occasional powder on snowy days…. I mostly carve and like a bit of speed but last year started riding switch occasionally, doing some spins and little jumps here and there and I’d like to explore these aspects a bit more. Keeps it fun while I snowboard with the kids and can’t go fast. Maybe do some small jumps in the snow park but the knees are not what they used to be…. So looking for a board that carves well but is also a bit playful.
Please let me know what you’d recommend between the 3 boards….or maybe something else entirely although I’m keen on that magne traction to fight the ice.
Thanks in advance!
Hi Tony
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning GNU RCC3 or TRS as they’re better than the Ejack for riding switch and little jumps and are more playful, IMO but are still decent for speed and carving. However, if you see more powder than I’m assuming the Ejack Knife is much better in powder than the other two, but you’re not going to notice that difference too much unless you’re in fairly deep powder. The other 2 will handle shallow powder fine.
I would probably lean TRS just because it should be a little better in powder than the RC C3. The RC C3 better for riding switch, IMO, but not much in it versus the TRS. The TRS is kind of in between the RC C3 and the Ejack Knife in a lot of ways – though is a little softer than the RC C3 – it’s closer to the RC C3, but just has that little bit of a setback stance to make it not fully twin.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate. That does help a lot! Cheers!
You’re very welcome Tony. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the detailed reviews, I’m currently riding a neversummer west from 17/18 at 159. I’m 5’10” at 175 lbs with no snow gear and a size 10.5 boot. I love my west but I’m looking to add a board that is more powder focused and a bit stiffer. I’m currently looking at the Rome stalefish, Rome Ravine and the capita Kazu Kokubo Pro. I ride a bit of everything don’t really hit the park much anymore. But still hit natural kickers if I see them along the way. What are your thoughts on these boards to pair with the west? What sizes do you think would work best? I mainly ride in Idaho and the northwest if that helps. Thanks for your time and keep up the good work.
Ernesto Vidales
Hi Ernesto
Thanks for your message.
Note that we haven’t tested the Stalefish, so can’t comment from experience on that one.
The Ravine and Ravine Select are a little different, so just want to clarify on that, depending on which you go for. The main difference is that the Ravine is quite a bit softer flexing than the Ravine Select. Ravine more like a 6/10 flex and the Ravine Select more like 8.5/10. So, there’s quite a big difference there. The Ravine probably going to feel a little stiffer than your West (and certainly more powder oriented) but the flex difference will be subtle. With the Ravine Select, it will be very noticeable. The Kazu is what I felt as a 7/10 flex, so that should be quite noticeable too.
Both the Ravine Select and Kazu would pair well with the West. Both quite different boards. The Ravine Select would be a more pronounced contrast, certainly in terms of flex, but the Kazu is definitely different enough to be a good compliment to it as part of a quiver.
Size-wise, I’d be looking at the 160 Kazu. You could also ride the 157, but if this is going to be your more powder oriented board in your quiver, then going a bit bigger will give you better float in powder. Also, the 157 is borderline in terms of width with 10.5s.
For the Ravine Select, I’d look at the 158.
The Stalefish is a volume shifted board (short/wide), so you want to ride it in a shorter size. So probably the 152 for that one. Though 157 would be doable if you wanted even more powder float. You just might find it feels a bit big in terms of maneuverability.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate that does help, sorry I should have clarified I was talking about the ravine select. I would like something I can charge faster with in the powder and still have fun hitting natural features and just having a good time going in and out of trees if they’re around. I love the west but it’s more of my mellow board I can just be lazy with and Cruz around the mountain.
Hi Ernesto.
All good, thanks for the clarification. Between the Ravine Select and Kazu, the Ravine Select is going to be the stiffer, more aggressive option that’s going to give you a little more in terms of speed and deep high speed carves, but the Kazu, IMO a little better for hitting natural features and in trees.
Hey Nate,
first of all, thank you very much for this site, which is always my starting point when buying new gear.
I’m stuck in a bit of an analysis-paralysis, and i hope you can help me. I’m looking for a new freeride board and bindings.
I have been snowboarding vor 20 years. I ride in powder whenever i can, i love powder-tree-runs, and on slopes i love going fast as hell and to carve. I do small jumps, but i don’t ride park. I think most of the boards here would meet the criteria of beeing powder-friendly and good for carving – but i am looking for something which is not a tank when going through trees but still stable when going fast. Also, realisticaly, a lot of times there is no powder and i’m stuck on more or less bad slopes and i’m planning on not hating myself too much when this is the case.
I’m currently riding a Burton Flight Attendant in 159w. It’s an awesome board for going fast and straight powder-lines, but for anything else i found it to be too heavy and tank-like.
The boards on my shortlist are the Capita BSOD, the Capita Kazu Kokubo Pro, the Capita Mega Merc and the Yes PYL Uninc.
I’m planning to combine them with either the Rome Cleaver, the Flux xf or the Burton Cartel X.
Which combination of board-bindings would you recommend? If you have any recommendations outside of my shortlist, i’d also be courious to hear them.
Thank you in advance and greetings from germany,
Marius
Hi Marius
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing, I would go either PYL or Kazu. They are better when it comes to quick turns in trees. The BSOD and Mega Merc can feel a little tank-like when being ridden slower. More so than the Flight Attendant, in my experience, so given what you’re describing, probably not what you’re after. The PYL and Kazu however, I found to be very good in trees and surprisingly good when riding slower for more technical tight trees, given how well they manage speed as well.
In terms of bindings, all of those options are good matches, IMO. The Cartel X and XF are what I felt at a 7/10 flex. The Cleaver I felt at more of an 8/10 flex. So, if you wanted them a little burlier, then the Cleaver is a good option. But the Cartel X and XF match well to both the PYL and Kazu, IMO, if you wanted to stick with a little more forgiving in terms of flex. Between the Cartel X and the XF, the Cartel X offers better shock absorption (which isn’t very good in the XF – it’s only downside, IMO) with the XF offering better response. In terms of turns/carving, the XF is my favorite binding. You can lay big carves in it and it can handle speed, but it’s also responsive at slower speeds. As mentioned shock absorption is it’s biggest downside, but awesome for turning/carving.
Hope this helps with your decision
And one more thing to clarify, when I say PYL, I mean the 2023 version. The 2022 version was a bit stiffer and not as good in trees, IMO.
Hey Nate,
thanks a lot for your quick and helpful response!
I was actually considering the PYL Uninc, which is probably more like the 2022 Version of the normal PYL. Do you have any experience with that board? And compared to the PYL and PYL Uninc, were would you sort in the Kazu in terms of stiffness?
Capita doesn’t offer a wide version of the Kazu. Do you think the 160 works with size 12 boots?
One more question: would you consider the Rome Katana as stiff as the xf/Cartel x or is it a bit softer?
Thank you in advance and sorry for the thousand questions, choosing new gear without being able to test it is really a pain in the a**.
Hey Marius
I didn’t get a chance to test the PYL Uninc, but on paper, it certainly seems like it’s more like the 2022 PYL – not exactly but close. A summary of differences below – some may be just the marketing alterations:
“Differences between PYL Uninc and PYL ’22: PYL 22 had triax + ash veneer with the uninc just triax | the PYL Uninc core is poplar/paulownia/chakra vs “weightless” on 22 model | 1-4-1 camrock on Uninc vs 1-4-2 on 22 model | | PH Sintered True on Uninc vs Sintered True on PYL 22″
Kazu to me is a very similar flex to the ’23 PYL. The Uninc a bit stiffer than both of those.
Unfortunately I think the 160 Kazu would be risky in terms of width with 12’s. You’d be looking at a back foot insert width of around 264mm, which would be risky for boot drag, IMO, with 12s, even with a lot of angle on the binding and low profile boots.
I felt the Katana at 7/10 in terms of flex, which is also how I felt the XF and Cartel X, so I’d say they’re the same or very similar.
Hey Nate,
i can’t reply to your last comment. I just wanted to say thanks a lot for your help and have a great season!
You’re very welcome Marius – hope you have a great season too!
Hey Nate,
sorry, i need to ask one more question as i realised i was wrong about my boot size. My boots are size 11, not 12. My bindings have a 12° angle. So based on your chart, the Kazu 160 could work – but i’d be a close call. I also need new boots, so i could go for low profile boots (i have the K2 Maysis at the moment). I’m afraid i don’t really have the chance of testing the board here… and Capita themself wrote that it works just fine even with size 12 boots (which i doubt).
What do you think?
Hi Marius
Yeah, would definitely be risky with a 12! With an 11, at those angles and a low profile boot, it’s doable though. I don’t think I’d be that comfortable with the Maysis though, as in my experience testing/measuring the Maysis it’s pretty bulky, but with a low profile boot and those angles, I think you’d probably get away with it.
Hi Nate!
I’ve been riding for 14 years and have only ever ridden Burton. I’ve ridden most of burtons line up from the Deuce to the custom X. My current daily driver is the deep thinker and I absolutely love it. I live in Salt Lake City and my home mountains are Brighton and Snowbird, so a lot of steeps, deep and sometimes some park (pretty much all jumps and barely any jibbing). I snagged a demo E Jack Knife about a month ago but obviously haven’t ridden it yet.
I’m looking to try something different and break away from burton a bit. I wouldn’t mind pulling the trigger on the YES PLY, Jones Flagship or Stratos. I’m 5’11 205lbs with size 11-11.5 boot. Do you think the 3 that I listed would be a good call, or would you recommend something else?
Thanks for your time!!
Hi Jake
Thanks for your message.
All 3 are good boards and for what you’re describing would work well, IMO (being better suited to the steep and deep more so than the park, but doable in the park, if you’re only really doing jumps). My preference would be for either PYL or Flagship over the Stratos. All will feel different to the Deep Thinker, but the E Jack Knife is what you’ll likely feel the most different, IMO.
Hi Nate,
love all the reviews, I’m gearing up this year and was curious if you’ll be reviewing the PYL Uninc and how you think it’ll perform.
I’m aiming to stay in the trees as much as possible but also live in the northeast so I’m expecting ice most of the season, the PYL struck my fancy, but so did the hybrid from surfy reviews. Any advice for someone coming from a 2011 flow quantum?
Much love
Hi Martin
Thanks for your message.
We didn’t test the PYL Uninc, so I couldn’t say for sure, but looking at specs, it’s probably quite similar to the ’22 PYL. The ’23 PYL is a little softer/more maneuverable than the ’22 model. Given that you like to ride trees, I would go ’23 PYL over the PYL Uninc. If you want to see our review on the ’22 PYL go to the bottom of the PYL review and there is a tab with “past seasons reviews for the PYL” click on the tab to open it. I don’t know much about the Flow Quantum but with some quick research it looks like it’s a park board – but a relatively stiff/aggressive one, by what I read. But either way, the PYL will feel very different. But yeah, I personally think the PYL will be better for you in trees than the PYL Uninc, so that’s the way I’d go.
Hope this helps
Thank you for the thoughtful advice, and yeah I’ve been on the quantum forever but my style definitely has left me wanting for a new board.
I’m 165lb and wearing 9.5 vans verse range editions (just came in, they’re sweet) I know typically for free riding you want to upsize a little bit on length, do you think the 159 would work well for keeping me floating while also not being too big for trees?
Also, I’m thinking of demoing a few boards before my final decision just to make sure whatever I choose feels right for me, if I were to buy my board through a demo program is there any other way I can support you and your website?
Hi Martin
Yeah, you can certainly size up a bit for a freeride board. Typically they have less effective edge versus overall length of the board, due to having quite a lot of nose outside the contact point (for better float in powder). So 159 would probably work for you, but if you could also let me know your height. Weight and boot size are definitely more important for sizing, but I still like to take height into account – it can act as leverage, so I do think it plays a part, even if weight is more important. And yeah, like you’ve alluded to, there are trade offs for going longer or shorter – with longer being better for the likes of float in powder and stability at speed and shorter helps with maneuverability among other things.
You can support the site here with half the proceeds going to POW.
Awesome, my height is about 6′
My quantum is a 155 I also have an _old_ Prior splitboard which measures closer to 158 and feels pretty good.
Hi Martin
Thanks for the extra info. Yeah, I think the 159 would work well for you. The 156 wouldn’t be wrong either, keeping in mind the trade offs we discussed. But I’d be leaning 159.
Aloha Nate!
Burton came out with the Cartographer Camber this season. Do you have any thoughts on it?
Thanks for providing great and legit views!
Hi Dano
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Cartographer, so can’t say from personal experience. But it looks to be kind of like a softer flexing, more mellow Flight Attendant, with less taper, a heavier core and slightly lower quality base. It’s not exactly that, but that’s probably the best way to describe it, looking at the specs. But yeah, having not ridden it, it’s hard to say for sure how it rides.
Hi Nate!
I am 5’11”,240 lbs and use a size 11 boot ( k2 maysis). I use Union atlas 18/19 bindings.
I’ve ridden for over 20 years and I’m based on the east coast so a lot of ice.
I just picked up a 2015 lib tech 162 hot knife to help with the ice and I love it. Wasn’t sure I would like the lib tech so I bought something used.Working on my switch and the board rewards you for pushing. It’s not an entry level boards.
It’s not great in the powder however .
We don’t get much out here but I want a second board for dump sessions.
I was considering a Yes pyl , lib tech e jack , lib tech dynamo, or gnu back country.
I was also looking at the volume shift options but I don’t know if going to be doing a lot of tree riding.
I mostly like bombing groomers.
What boards and sizes would you recommend to compliment the hot knife on powder days ?
Hi Ranran
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, the Hot Knife not great in powder, but a super fun board otherwise. I was a little gutted when they took this out of their lineup, though now that the TRS has C3 camber, it takes some of what the old Hot Knife had.
With regards to adding your powder board, I’d be leaning PYL, just because I think it’s the better option in powder. If going with a GNU/Lib Tech, I would be leaning either E Jack or GNU Banked Country – they’re at least as good as Dynamo in powder, but will be better for bombing groomers, IMO.
Size-wise, I’d be looking at:
– PYL: 164W
– Ejack: 162W
– Banked Country: 160W – though if you’re not having issues with the width on the 162 Hot Knife, you should be OK on the 162
– Dynamo: 162W
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
I almost pulled the trigger on the PYL but ultimately decided to try something totally new for me and bought a 2020 Orca( 159).
I still plan on ultimately adding the PYL but I wanted to see what all the hype on the Orca was about.
I plan on bringing out the Orca only when I have at least 6 inches of fresh snow so it will be treated as a true powder board.
What do you think of my 2 board quiver for the Ice coast?
Hi Ranran
I think the Orca compliments the Hot Knife really well – a very different board and very much oriented towards powder. For powder days, it will certainly out perform the Hot Knife, so I think you’ve got 2 boards that work well in different situations with very little overlap, so a good 2 board quiver, IMO. If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on with the Orca, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Hi Nate!
Seasons over unfortunately but I managed to get some time on the Orca.
The board was surprisingly very good all-around.
Very damp.
I happened to find myself on icy groomers with mostly man made snow a lot and it bombed great with little chatter . I also thought the board was rather forgiving due to its hybrid rocker/camber shape. I used it to film my son a lot this year.
However, board really comes alive with even just a few inches of snow! I can see why it gets a lot of 1-board quiver talk!
Personally , I still prefer the C3 camber of my hot knife on most days . But, I would grab the orca if I sensed snow!
Hi Ranran
Thanks for the update. Always awesome to get feedback from other riders!
Hi Nate,
Thank you for your advice before for suggesting the Yes standard a year or 2 ago! Its been amazing! Perfect switch generally ok riding trees.
I am trying to get something that has a bigger nose because I always crash to the front as the head sinks with the Standard…I am 135 pounds is the PYL 156 good for me?
Regards,
Herrick
Hi Herrick
Thanks for your message.
156 probably too big, IMO, unfortunately. Going back and looking at previous messages to get your height and boot size, I would say around 151 would be your “standard all-mountain size” assuming a good width and a relatively advanced level. For a freeride board you can go a little longer, but 5cm is quite a lot and add to that the width being on the big side for your boots, overall, it feels too big, IMO.
Some other freeride options that have that directional hybrid rocker profile (assuming that’s what you’re looking at), but in a better size for you (IMO):
– Burton Flight Attendant 152
– Burton Skeleton Key 150 (for a more mellow, softer flexing option) – though you may be thinking a little longer. I’m guessing you have the 149 Standard, but correct me, if you have the 151.
– Capita Kazu Kokubo Pro 151
– Capita The Navigator 151 – on the smaller size if you’re looking to add length compared to your standard, given that it’s not that wide
– Jones Flagship 151 – or even 154 if you wanted to really add size
– Jones Hovercraft 152
– Salomon Super 8 151
Most of these are on or around your “all-mountain” size, but they’re also wide for your boots for the most part, so they’re still bigger for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you for you reply! I guess I won’t consider Burton because I had bad experience with the channel system with the process flying V. Or have they improved it so that it doesnt slide anymore?
Yes I am still using the standard 149 and using the setback inserts for powder today in Japan overall i think it is ok if the powder is light feels like flying but struggle a little bit when it gets heavier rideable but not as enjoyable. so I am wondering if its because my board is too short?
Have you heard of the brand moss?
Regards,
Herrick
Hi Herrick
I haven’t experienced that with the Channel, but I don’t know if they’ve changed it since your Flying V (what year was it?).
Length certainly adds float in powder – but other factors help too – the Standard is decent in powder, but it’s not as good as any of the boards mentioned in my previous reply in powder. So adding length would certainly help – and if you’re going to add a board to your quiver and keep the Standard, then I think adding a little length is a good way to go. I think the 149 is a great size for you in the Standard for all-round riding and you could ride it longer if powder was going to be the only thing you were doing, but ideally, I think I’d stick with the 149 for the Standard, but go longer in your second board. Around that 151/152, like the options I’ve listed in my previous reply.
I haven’t heard of Moss, sorry. So don’t know anything about them
Hi Nate!
Ignoring all other attributes…of the boards you’ve tested over the last couple of seasons what are your top 3 for flat out straight line bombing? I’m taking advanced rider, possibly with a screw (or two) loose!
Hi Brian
I would say:
– Burton Straight Chuter (which is like a freeride Custom X – so add Custom X to the list, except that I haven’t retested it within the last couple of seasons)
– Niche Maelstrom
– Capita BSOD
But honorable mentions to GNU Banked Country, Burton Deep Thinker, Capita Mega Merc and Arbor Wasteland Camber, YES Pick Your Line, Jones Stratos and I haven’t ridden the Ride Commissioner but if it’s anything like it’s predecessor the Timeless, it’s likely right up there.
Nate,
Could you compare the difference between the PYL and West Bound for handling tracked out Pow and Chunder Fields? How much better is the West Bound (if at all).
Thanks,
SG
Hi SG
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the West Bound is easier to correct if you get bucked around a little in it. The PYL is a little more “smashy” – i.e. smashes through a little better – and doesn’t get bucked around as easy, but a little harder to correct when you do get thrown off. I’d say their fairly even in terms of flat basing and just floating above it all. I rated the West Bound a little higher mostly because inevitably you get bucked around a little, so those corrections are often inevitable, unless you really commit to just bombing it over.
Hope that helps/makes sense.
Great thanks for the response. Great reviews.
SG
You’re very welcome SG. Thanks for visiting.
Hi Nate, My neighbour turned me onto your site and I’m loving the content. I’m riding a 2016 NS Ripsaw w/ Flux Bindings and am looking to add to the Quiver with a complimentary board to different conditions. I think the Ripsaw rides pretty well in the resort in powder (you may open up my eyes from there!). I’ve had lots of good heavy powder sessions in the Revelstoke North Bowl with it, although after reading your site I do need to see if there is a set-back on it.
The genesis of the NS board was primary riding in Revelstoke but now I find myself splitting 50 / 50 between Cypress / Whistler and Revelstoke, other interior mountains (Red etc.), plus hopefully again into the US. The Ripsaw has been great but isn’t exactly fun in choppy, icy conditions as happens in West Van / Whistler.
I’m 5’11, 195 – 205. Ride a mix of all the terrain the resorts have, but no parks and limited big air. Really looking for something that compliments the
The PYL seems like a great alternative. What else do you recommend? Also would appreciate your thoughts on where the Ripsaw would profile and if there are other alternatives for powder, or other non-icy conditions you’d point towards.
Thanks for your help!
Hi Steven
Thanks for your message.
I think the powder rating is tough, because any board is fun in powder really! OK, there are some that just drop their nose at the slightest lean onto your front foot that can be frustrating, but the Ripsaw is something that I would consider average. The newer Ripsaw is directional Twin, but in 2016 it was a true twin, so newer Ripsaw probably just a little better. I think one of the biggest things, is how effortless the board rides pow. Like how much do you have to really lean on your back foot on the board, versus just being able to relax and have the board float without having to really put in an effort to put your weight over your back foot.
If you’re looking for something that’s a step up in powder and for hard/icy conditions, then the PYL certainly fits that mold, IMO. And more forgiving in choppy conditions.
Going something like Flagship would also give you something more forgiving in choppy conditions, marginally better in icy conditions and another step up in terms of powder. Pretty effortless float in powder from the Flagship.
If you wanted to go even more forgiving (and softer flexing), you could also check out >>Top 10 Surfy (mellow) Freeride Snowboards – which also has some more powder specialist boards in there. But if you want to keep that stiffer flex, but still gain a bit more forgiveness in uneven terrain, and gain some powder performance improvements, then the PYL and Flagship are worth looking at for sure.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate. That is super helpful. I guess taking a step back, what do you recommend between having a set-up for diverse variety of regions? Ultimately I’ll probably do 50/50 riding between coast and interior. Having something that is a serious upgrade on uneven terrain / ice seems like a no-brainer and the PYL would seem to be a great fit with your recommendation.
For the interior would i best served just alternating the PYL and old Ripsaw to see feel and preference or take it from there? The Endeavour Scout looks interesting on the surfy list (the jumps and switch options are low priority to me). It might be something that I need to test out a few different feel types from this list as well to see what would be good to round out the quiver.
For the PYL – what do you recommend on sizing in general. I’m a size 10 shoe and 5’ll?
Thanks for your help!
Hi Steve
Yeah, if you went PYL, you could certainly alternate in the interior and see what you’re preference is.
If you have the chance to test stuff out, then that’s definitely ideal. Particularly would give you a chance to see if you like something a little softer flexing for less ideal conditions – and then you would have that quiver of something softer flexing to with the stiffer ripsaw. The PYL is a similar flex to the Ripsaw – so you don’t get that difference there. You do get a lot of other differences – including better icy conditions, better powder and better in uneven terrain, IMO – but flex is about the same, from my experience. But some people like to have different flex for different conditions like that and others just don’t like softer flexing boards full stop (and others don’t like stiffer flexing full stop), so certainly advantageous if you can try some options out.
Size-wise for the PYL, I would go 162. I think that’s spot on for the PYL for your height/weight/boot size.
Hi Nate,
You do fantastic work, you’re previous All Mountain board reviews got me set up with a Slash Brainstorm (157), Flux DS bindings, and Adidas response ADV. It has been a fantastic set up that has gotten me from intermediate to an advanced rider. Now I’m looking for a more aggressive all mountain/freeride board (still planning to keep the current set up for easy fun riding). I’m mainly looking to bust hard aggressive carves on groomers and also hit the pow and trees. Not much of a park or big jump rider, maybe a few side hits, and dont ride switch often enough for it to matter. I was intrigued with the West Bound, sad to see it discontinued (tho I can still get my hands on one size 160). I see NS has come out with a triple camber board (Proto fr), what’s your thought on something like that? Would it be worth pursuing (I haven’t been able to find many reviews)? Or would it be best to stick with something known like the YES PYL? I’d be interested to hear your feedback or any other suggestions you have.
Specs: I’m 6ft, 170-175lbs, and an 11 boot. I’m thinking I’d be a 160 for most boards.
Thanks again for your great reviews
Cheers,
Anthony
Hi Anthony
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, in terms of length, I agree that something around 159/160 for a freeride board for your specs is a good way to go. If your riding didn’t involve trees, you could potentially even go a little longer, but given you ride trees, I think around that size is a good balance between stability at speed, whilst maintaining maneuverability in the trees.
In terms of width, you’re on the cuff between regular and wide for most boards – for most I would say wide with 11s, but it does come down to the specific board in that 10-11 range.
For the West Bound 160, I think it’s just a little too narrow, particularly if you’re looking to hit hard aggressive carves.
I haven’t yet ridden the Proto FR, but definitely hoping too this winter. But it’s probably also too narrow in the 160. You might get away with it, but with 11s and wanting aggressive carves, I think it’s risky.
The PYL is a great option – and size-wise, the 160W is pretty much ideal for 11s, IMO. It’s not super-wide for a wide board, but wider than a regular width board – and, IMO, perfect for that 10.5 to 11.5 boot size.
Definitely other options too, that would suit what you’re describing. But from the boards you’ve mentioned, I’d be leaning PYL, mostly because I think the size fits the best (and it’s an awesome deck!).
Hope this helps
Thanks for your input Nate. I’m a fan of NS but as you mentioned, they just dont seem to have the width needed and the wide boards dont seem ideal either.
I’m definitely intrigued by the PYL. I do have pretty low profile boots in the Adidas response Adv’s so the 260 width may be okay. I’ll definitely look more in to the PYL, but I’d be interested to see if you have any other suggestions?
Once again, thanks Nate, you’re reviews and knowledge are great
Anthony
Hi Anthony
I think the Jones Stratos 159 is worth looking at. It’s quite wide for a regular width board. Particularly if you’re riding it at it’s 600mm (23.6″) reference stance. 270mm at the back insert.
Burton Flight Attendant 159W as well. It’s a really good width for 11s, IMO and suits what you’re describing.
Capita BSOD 159. It’s borderline width-wise – 268mm at the back insert. So probably not quite wide enough, but otherwise would be a good option, IMO.
GNU Essential Service 2021/Mullair 159W. If you could find a 2021 Essential Service or 2020 Mullair (same board, different names), I think that would work really well. But the 2022 Essential Service is a very different board (kind of confusing, but yeah, for what you want, I’d be looking at the 2021).
Lib Tech Ejack Knife 159W: It’s 264mm at the waist, but only around 271mm at the rear insert (Lib Tech and GNU boards tend to not have as big a difference between waist and width at inserts).
I’d look at those and the PYL 160W.
Thanks for all your input Nate. I stayed up wayyyyy too late looking in to these and think I have it down to two, but really one. The Essential Service (i can get the 2021 in 159W) and the PYL (160W). It seems the Essential would be a better all around aggressive carver, but slightly worse in powder and likely to get more upset with churned up groomers late in the day. I think the PYL could be a perfect combo of hard carve-ability on groomers, float/maneuverability in pow, and more forgiving on late day groomers, giving it the edge for an all day daily driver. I will have to pair them with new bindings, perhaps the Flux XF or Union Falcor’s
I was also intrigued with the Lib Tech BRD (went down many rabbit holes while researching), but was worried with the flex, that it wouldn’t be all that much different than my Brainstorm in terms of hard carving. Whereas I think the PYL will compliment what I currently have more (if I want to have a lazy day, rip it with the Brainstorm).
You’re very welcome Anthony.
I think that’s good reasoning – and I think the PYL would be a great compliment to your Brainstorm.
If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it (whichever you ultimately choose) out on snow
Hi,
Im looking for a new freeride board for New Zealand conditions which are generally volcanic or bowly runs with natural halfpipes, hard snow, lumpy groomers, ice, slush and small powder days, My present board is an older High Society freeride empire 164 which has been great here and in europe, good in powder and lumpy snow and good to turn with. I weight about 95 kg, US 12 boot. My oresent binding angle is a positive +15 and rear +3 but have had more positve in the past. I cant do duck!
I ride mainly groomers, natural half pipes and bowls. Not switch unless absolutely necessary, dont ride park at all, do occasiona drops from banks.
Am considering a Korua Cafe Racer 164 or Otto 161 which have been recommended to me.
Also like the Yes PYL but think only available here in 160 which might be too small.
Other possibilties Never Summer westbound fusion ( though unsure if this is same as westbound), some lib techs, gnus, jones flagship or stratus.
I a more sedate rider, only bomb occasionally, and prefer turning which is a mix of skidded and carves but id like to improve my carving. intermediate plus rider 25 years experience but a few seasons with only a couple days.
What would u suggest?
Cheers
Adrian
Hi Adrian
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden anything Korua, so I can’t help you there, but I think the PYL would definitely work for your conditions and how you describe your riding, but with your specs and a size 12 boot, I would be going 164W. I think you’d find the 160W too short, particularly coming from a 164.
I haven’t heard of a Westbound “fusion” but my guess is that wherever you saw it it’s just been named that way because the board has Never Summer’s Fusion Rocker camber profile. Unless there’s limited edition model in New Zealand, then I imagine it’s just they way they’ve named it because of the camber profile. I think the Westbound could definitely work for you, given the camber profile will feel somewhat familiar coming from the High Society Empire (not a board I’ve ridden but from what I could find it looks like it has rocker between the feet and camber under the bindings, which is similar to the Westbound).
Can’t go wrong with the Flagship, IMO, just note that it’s got more taper than the Empire. Something like the PYL or Westbound have a more subtle taper. The Stratos would certainly work too – I personally prefer the Flagship, but the Stratos does fit with what you’re describing. If you don’t mind a heavier feeling board, the Stratos could work. It’s got a little more taper than the others too.
Lib Tech/GNU options would give that rocker between the feet, if you were looking to keep that feel and are really good in hard snow conditions, so I think something there could work for you too. The GNU Essential Service/Mullair is not getting a 2022 model, but would be suitable if you could find an older model. The 2022 Essential Service from GNU is a different board – more of an all-mountain board than a freeride board (kept the name, but changed quite a lot and I wouldn’t consider it a freeride board anymore). The E-Jack Knife would certainly work.
GNU are bringing out a new board, the Banked Country, but it’s quite a beast and if you’re not really looking to bomb it much, then it might be a little more board than you’re looking for. I would be looking at the E-Jack Knife mostly, or you could also look at the BRD.
Hope this helps
Hello Sir – appreciate all the great reviews. I can get either Jones Flagship (2020) or Rossi XV (2021) on good offer currently and I’d like to pick one, so hoping you can tip the scales for me? My riding is all mountain, minimal freestyle (natural jumps), and no park. Not a bomber, but do enjoy some decent speed. I like the trees and would appreciate a board that’s not a tank at slower speeds (I enjoy cruising the groomers and only get powder sporadically). I place a high value on dampness as I’m old and often ride chopped up snow! Given these details, which would you suggest please?
Hi del
I would be looking at the Flagship, based on what you’re describing. If it was the 2019 or earlier Flagship, then it would have been a closer call between the 2, but the 2020 Flagship got better for riding slow and in the trees. Between those 2, I would say the Flagship better at slower speeds and for riding trees. But certainly still stable at speed, but not quite as much of a bomber as the XV.
If I had to choose dampness, I would say the XV is probably a little damper, but both are damp boards, so I wouldn’t be concerned about the dampness on the Flagship and based on everything else you’re describing, the Flagship is the better fit for you, IMO.
If you need any sizing opinions, I would be happy to give my 2 cents on that – I would just need your height, weight and boot size.
Hope this helps
Thank you sir!
You’re very welcome del
Hi Nate,
great information – thanks a lot!
When I read the description of Del in the last message that sounded just like me, so I think I will go for the Flagship.
Some more info: I am 55 years old, have been snowboarding for 30 years,
but usually just 1 week / year. Mostly off-piste, sometime woods, simple natural jumps.
Please some advice:
– better to take Carbon Flagship instead of “normal” Flagship?
– Flagship 2020 is ok or better to go for 2021?
– what size would you recommend: 187 cm, 92 kg, shoe size 11
– what bindings would you recommend?
Thanks so much, regards Andreas
Hi Andreas
I haven’t ridden the Carbon Flagship (now called Ultra Flasghip) but it looks like it’s very stiff. Personally I wouldn’t want to go as stiff as it’s rated if your in the woods sometimes – and generally speaking I wouldn’t go that stiff, unless I really just wanted to bomb and was doing a lot of big mountain bombing. Otherwise, I would go Flagship over Ultra Flagship, personally.
The 2021 model is very similar to the 2020 model. Only change I can tell is that they added “float pack inserts” so you can set back further. The 2020 model is quite different from the 2019 model, but if you’re looking between the 2020 and 2021, they are practically the same as far as I can tell.
Size-wise, I would say 162W would be just right for your specs.
In terms of bindings I would look at something at least 7/10 flex. Check out the following lists for some good options:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Really helpful answers – thanks a lot!
…. for the binding, I just order now your No1 recommendation, the “Union Falcor”!
For the flagship my last hesitation is between 162W and 164, esp. since I never had a wide board:
162W … certainly better for turning esp. in woods
Would 164 be more beautiful / more flow for surfing in deep snow?
Maybe also nicer for carving?
Thanks! Andreas
Hi Andreas
I think if you can get on the 164, I would, but the main reason that I went 162W is that you have size 11 boots. The 164 is borderline width-wise for 11s. If you’ve always ridden regular width boards and never had any issues with boot drag, then you’re probably going to be OK. But here are some things to consider:
– The Flagship 164 is roughly 267mm at the back insert and 272mm at the front insert. The front insert shouldn’t be an issue at all width-wise, especially given that you’re likely to have an angle of at least 15 degrees on your front binding. But the back insert is pushing it, particularly if you ride with quite a straight angle on your back foot. I usually try to go 270mm at inserts for 11s. That said, I do find that you can go narrower depending on a few things:
1. as discussed – binding angles. The more angle the more leeway and less likely to get boot drag.
2. Profile of your boots. Lower profile boots allow you to get on a narrower board (what boots are you riding?)
3. How deep you like to push your carves. The further up on edge you get on a carve the more likely it is that you’ll get boot drag. If you carve less aggressively there’s a smaller chance of boot drag.
And of course, you’re experience with boards will also determine this. If you’ve never had any issues on regular width boards, then you’re probably fine.
Also, whilst shorter boards are easier to maneuver, particularly in trees, if a board is too wide for your feet then it can be harder to maneuver – so whilst the shorter 162W has that shorter aspect, the wider will make it more difficult to go edge to edge IF you’re feet are too small for it. With 11s I would say they aren’t too small for it, so I think you would be fine. But if you can fit on the 164 width-wise, it won’t be any harder to maneuver in tight spots, IMO.
For surfing in deep snow, the extra width actually helps. Overall in terms of surface area the 162W probably has more surface area than the 164, so might actually float a little easier in deep snow. That said, the Flagship is very good in powder and both sizes will work well in that respect.
Great, really appreciate your advice!
Probably I found the solution: actually my shoes are 10 1/2, not 11, so the lovely 164 should be the right one.
Shoes are Vega Boa, some 6 years old, so if you have here also a top 5 list I might follow you also until the last mile (the boots)…
Thanks again Andreas
Hi Andreas
Yeah with 10.5s you should be fine width-wise on the 164, IMO.
For boots, I do have a top 5. I would say going with something between 7/10 flex to 9/10 flex. And try to get something low profile, to be even more sure that you’ll have no drag issues. I would check out the following list for options:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium to medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top 5 Freeride Boots
Hello Nate,
Thanks for your detailed reviews!
Possibly I will ask a little annoying question for you, but nevertheless..
My height: 175 cm., weight: 64 kg., boot: 10.5 us. Boots: Deeluxe Deemon TF 2020, bindings: Union Strata 2019.
I am trying to decide between Rossignol XV 159 and 163. Mostly I want to use the board in a big mountain which often ends with trees, so I expect that it will be stable at high speed and manoeuvrable enough. Unfortunately, I do not have good rentals to test different models, so I have tried only Jones Flagship 158 from the same board family, and it was feeling a little too clumsy. Not sure, but I thought that it is because of unusual board size (usually I ride up to 155) or not very suitable bindings for freeride (I am going to replace them with Union Atlas after a couple of seasons).
I was ready to buy 159 size, but lots of comments about Rossi XV saying that it is better to get a bigger size. I am afraid that 163 will be too big and disobedient for my weight. So, I am looking forward for your help. 🙂
Hi Ignat
Thanks for your message.
It’s true that you can go bigger with the Rossignol XV and for a lot of freeride boards it’s often recommended to go bigger. However, going to 159 is already big for your specs, IMO. For a standard “all-mountain” size for your specs, I would be looking at around 153. So I definitely wouldn’t go as long as 163 (that thing will turn like a boat for you, I would imagine – which will be especially cumbersome in the trees). That would be way too big, IMO. Even 159 is probably too big, IMO, particularly if you found the 158 Flagship too big. If they had an XV 155 or 156, I think that would be a more ideal size.
A stiffer binding on a board like the Flagship or XV is certainly a good idea, but that won’t have as big an impact, IMO, as getting the wrong size will, given that the Strata isn’t way off in terms of being a flex match with something like the Flagship.
So yeah, if you’re to go XV definitely 159 and not 163, IMO.
Hope this helps
How would you choose between the Jones Flagship and YES PYL?
Mostly East Coast, so hard and sometimes icy, plus a trip west or Europe, 5-10″ 190 lbs. I like to go fast, never in the park.
Hi Jos
Thanks for your message.
It’s a very hard choice! Both are awesome boards and well suited to what you’re describing, IMO. Some things that might help (note that this is referring to 2020 Flagship and forward – the 2019 and previous Flagships were quite different):
– I found the PYL to be a little better on a carve and at speed, but they’re both pretty close there
– The Flagship a little better in powder, IMO.
– The PYL marginally better in icy conditions, IMO. The Flagship certainly not bad there though
If you’re still undecided, sizing can sometimes be a good tie breaker. What’s your boot size?
Hey Nate, I still can’t decide on a board. I currently ride a Burton Custom which I love. Just doesn’t have good edge hold in harder snow. I think I’ve narrowed it down between the Yes PYL and GNU ES. I think I would like the C3 profile since I love my custom. I am now also looking at the LIb Dynamo. I like the thought of a softer free ride board but am not sure how it will hold up at speed. How does carving on these C3 boards compare to the Yes PYL? I want something that I can ride fast and hard but not be forced to ride that way all the time. I do not ride park at all. I mostly end up riding groomers since powder is pretty non existent on the NE. I will make at least one trip a year out west. I am 5’8” 160 lbs 9.5 boot. Thanks for your help.
Hi Frank
Thanks for your message.
Not all C3 boards carve the same, but typically they’re pretty good for carving. Between the ES and PYL, I would say ES (pre 2022 model, which is quite different to the 2021 and earlier models), I would say that the ES is the better carver. Not a lot in it, as the PYL is still a good carver. But the PYL, IMO, is a better carver than the Dynamo – so it depends on other factors than just the camber profile. The Dynamo is decent at speed, but it’s not as stable at speed as the ES or PYL.
Both the ES and PYL you can ride them more casual. Both boards ride better slow than a lot of boards of a similar flex, IMO. But the Dynamo is easier to ride slow/casual still.
For the Dynamo, I’d say 156. For the PYL, it would be between the 156 and 159. I think around 156 is a good “all-mountain” length for you, but you can go a little longer with something like the PYL, so you could certainly ride the 159 too. Same deal with the ES – either 155 or 159. If you wanted to optimize speed and float in powder, then going 159 in either would be a good way to go. But if you wanted to go with something a little more maneuverable, better in trees and easier to ride slow, then the 155/156 would work well with those boards (and still be fine at speed and in powder, but just not to the same extent as the longer options. Also to note, that the 159s will feel a little stiffer than the 155/156 versions – so going with the shorter sizes would also give you a more mellow flex feel versus going with the longer options.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate. Thanks for sharing all this – this is super helpful info! Was hoping you could help me decide on a new board amongst the ones I’m considering. I’m 6’6″, 210 lbs, wear a 13 boot (Burton Ruler), and have been riding a 2012 164w Custom X for nearly 10 years now. I will say this past season was probably the first where I really feel like I was fully able to harness the full capabilities of the Custom X considering how stiff it is and that it’s a board that really likes to go fast and performs better at speed. I typically ride all mountain, don’t do park and don’t ride switch. I’m in the trees probably 20% of the time and the rest on runs.
The boards that I’m considering are (in order of preference at the moment): Jones Flagship 169W, Yes PYL 164W and Westbound 168W. Considering my height, I don’t think 168/169 would be too big but I wanted to get your take on those sizes in those boards in particular, and also how those boards would differ from the 2012 Custom X 164W. I also saw some of your responses that the PYL has a smaller effective edge and seems to be narrower than the other boards. Any additional advice you can give would be much apprecaited!
Hi Steven
Thanks for your messages.
In terms of those boards, I would say that the West Bound represents the biggest change to the Custom X, so would be the one that would take more getting used to. It’s a little more playful and a little softer flexing than the other 2 and also it has a hybrid rocker profile (rocker between the feet) as opposed to hybrid camber on the other 2. The other 2 would feel more similar to the Custom X’s full camber. That said, all 3 boards are quite different from the Custom X. They’re all a little more forgiving and a little softer flexing, IMO.
Size-wise, if you were to go PYL 164W you would be looking at a lot less effective edge versus the Custom X 164W, though the same would be the case if you were to go 165W in the Flagship. Width-wise, the PYL isn’t super wide for a wide board, but if you never had any issues on the Custom X 164W width-wise, then it shouldn’t be an issue. The following for reference, hopefully it’s helpful:
– 2012 Burton Custom X 164W: 128cm effective edge | estimated 272-273mm width at inserts
– 2021 YES PYL 164W: 123cm effective edge | around 273mm width at back insert and 276mm at front insert
– 2021 Jones Flagship 169W: 126.6cm effective edge | around 284mm width at back insert and 289mm at front insert
– 2021 Jones Flagship 165W: 123.4cm effective edge | around 278mm width at back insert and 283mm at front insert
– 2021 Never Summer West Bound 168X: 129cm effective edge | around 280mm width at back insert and 281mm at front insert
– 2021 Never Summer West Bound 165X: 126cm effective edge | around 277mm width at back insert and 278mm at front insert
So yeah I would be debating between the 169W and 165W for the Flagship and the 168X and 165X for the Westbound. I think both sizes would work. Given that you’re not doing any park, I think that helps with going longer, but it can be nice in trees to go a little shorter, so both sizes are in your range, IMO. For the PYL, the 164W is the only size that would be suitable. It’s certainly doable for your specs, IMO, but there is a 5cm reduction in effective edge compared to your Custom X (similar reduction also if you were to consider the 165W Flagship), so it’s whether or not that’s too much. You’d probably really like it in the trees, it’s just whether or not you’ll miss that effective edge when really opening out and bombing.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate! Your reviews are awesome and extremely helpful. Wanted your thoughts on a new board. I’m 6’6”, 210 lbs and ride size 13 boot (Burton Ruler). Been riding a 2012 Custom X 164W and it feels like this season was the first season where I feel like I really harnessed the full capability of the board but am looking for a newer board with new tech etc. I mostly ride all mountain so groomers, bowls and trees and am probably a 7/10 skill level. I ride a mix of Mammoth (which can get hard packed – my custom was slipping all over the place this past weekend despite fresh edge sharpening) and Colorado/Utah.
I’m considering the PYL (164W), Flagship (169W) and Westbound (168W) and wanted your thoughts on how those boards compare to my Custom X and also if the 169 flag and 168 west might be too big for me? Think I’m leaning currently in order: flagship, PYL (saw you mention they ride smaller than listed size), and West but was hoping for a little more color to help with my decision!
Hi Nate. I ride 154 2019 yes greats. I am looking into moving on to faster board that carves well and do some POW. what would you recommend between a Jones Flagship and Jones Stratos? I would like a board that will complement my yes greats and something I can ride for a long time. I am 180lb and 5’9”. I go west 7 days and east 7 days. I would like to know your recommendation of the board and the size. I don’t ever go to park. If you can share your reasoning that would be fantastic!
Hi Sung
I would go Flagship if I had the choice between the Flagship and Stratos. I found the Flagship was as good or better in almost every category and it just feels (and is) a good bit lighter. The only thing I think is better on the Stratos is stability at speed, but there’s not a big difference there. Both as good for carving, the Flagship a little better for regular turns, better in uneven terrain and better in powder. The Stratos is a good option if your budget is tighter, but if budget isn’t an issue I would go Flagship every time.
Size-wise, for you I would go 161.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, would love your input! I am 6’1, 200 lbs. Currently on a 163 2018 XV Magtek which I love. However, I find that the size makes it tough to make turns in the trees and on steep terrain so I’m looking for a complement to it. I demo’d the Jones Flagship last week which I thought was solid but didn’t blow my mind. One of my buddies has been championing the Never Summer Swift, and I’ve been eyeballing their “West” Board. I’m not a buttering/park/jumps guy. Mostly like going fast, carving and playing in the trees. I’m in Northern California so while we sometimes get powder its a lot of Sierra Cement, which is why I love the Magna grip on the Magtek. Any insight on reccs would be amazing. Thanks!!
Hi Daniel
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the swift, so I couldn’t say there from experience, but on paper, and based on other similar Never Summer decks, I think it could be suitable, if you liked that much taper. It’s got 20mm of taper, so quite a bit. Sometimes that can make the back end wash out when laying down a big carve, but it is typically great in powder and trees. So as a compliment to the XV, I think it could work. If you’re looking to replace the XV, that’s the only thing to consider, is whether you want that much taper or not.
The West Bound has much more subtle taper. It’s still a very directional deck, but with a good bit less taper.
Some other options for boards that I found really good in trees, but still carved and bombed well – and good edge-hold/grip in hard/icy conditions – and with magnetraction or similar:
– GNU Essential Service
– YES PYL
And if you take out that magnetraction or similar, then the Kazu is also a good option.
Size-wise, from those I would say, given that you want to go a little smaller:
– Westbound 160
– GNU Essential Service 161
– PYL 162 or 160W
– Kazu 160
But if you could also let me know your boot size, to confirm that sizing.
Hope this helps
Dude this is amazing. Really appreciate the insight and thorough response!
My boot size is 10. Thanks! Why the longer size in the PYL? More rocker in the front?
Awesome, thanks! I am a size 10 Boot. What would you say main differences are b/w the NS and PYL? Guessing reason for the longer PYL is because it is further set back than the Westbound?
Thanks so much!
Hi Daniel
Reason why longer in the PYL is that it has less effective edge versus overall length. Essentially meaning there’s more length outside the contact points than there is on something like the Westbound. So it feels shorter than the overall length suggests versus something like the Westbound. You only really feel that extra length when in powder. The only question mark in terms of width would be the Essential Service 161 which is a narrower board. The others should be all good for 10s in regular width. The PYL would be doable in 160W for 10s, as it’s not that wide for a wide board, but I think I would be leaning 162.
The main differences between the West Bound and PYL:
– The PYL I found a little more stable at speed
– The West Bound I found a little better in uneven terrain
– The PYL marginally better for jumps
– The PYL a little better edge hold in hard/icy conditions, but the WB not bad there either.
Otherwise performance-wise quite similar. With a different feel, but overall performance-wise. The WB has a slightly looser feel but very subtly – it’s a marginally softer flexing too. And it feels a little damper.
Hey Nate! Could you help me with the sizing, please? I am going to purchase Burton FA. My specs: 84kg, 185cm, boot 10 US. I use Nitro El Mejor boot, it is 31 cm length (external sole), which is not low profile I suppose. I like fast ride, carving, a little jumps, don’t ride park and jubbing at all. Sometimes I ride off piste, and trees, but not really often on powder. Piste/off piste is 70/30.
What would you suggest me 162 or 159W? I am afraid that 162 will be too narrow for me?
Hi Max
Thanks for your message.
Really good question. I think you’d probably be alright on the 162 width-wise. 31cm isn’t low profile for a 10, but it’s not super bulky or anything either. It’s in the middle. If you ride with a really straight back binding angle though, you might be pushing it width-wise. If you ride with some kind of angle there, then I think you’re probably fine on the 162 width-wise. And I think that’s a good length for you too.
The 159W isn’t necessarily too wide for you though. It’s not overly wide for a wide board, so it’s doable as well. And if you do ride with a straight back binding angle and are worried about the width, then the 159W would definitely work. I would go 159W if you did go wide though (as opposed to 162W).
Hope this helps
Good day, Nate! Thanks for the reply, it is really helpful! My binding angles are -9 back +21 front. What do you think about back angle? It is ok to 162 Burton FA width?
Hi Max
No guarantees, but I think you should be alright on the 162. I would be comfortable with that setup on the 162. But if you’re going to be euro carving or something like that, then you might want to go 159W. Otherwise, I’d say 162 should be fine width-wise.
Hey Nate, I have read and learned a lot from your page. It’s an awesome resource you put together. Thank you for all your hard work.
I have been considering the PYL for my next board. I am 6’5” 230lbs with a size 13 foot. I have been riding for about 20 years, but many of those seasons I only saw a couple days. If I am totally honest with myself I am a solid level 6 rider working to get to level 7 (minus switch riding and park aspects). I spend as much time as possible in the tree’s unless they are completely iced up and hard. Then I will bomb some groomers. I almost never go in the park.
Do you think the 164W YES PYL is a good option? I don’t mind a long board. I am on a 166 Burton Royale right now and learned on a 174 Burton Supermodel, so this would actually be my shortest board ever. My only concern might be the PYL being wide enough for my boots? Thanks in advance.
Hi Bryce
Thanks for your message.
I think the PYL 164W would certainly work for what you’re describing, and the length should work well for what you’re describing, IMO. The biggest concern, like you mention would be the width.
You’re probably looking at around 6.2cm of total overhang (assuming a straight binding angle you can take off a couple of mm if you ride with a bit of angle on your back foot) on the back foot, assuming an overall boot length of around 33.5cm (which is relatively low profile for a 13). Which is going to be around 3cm of overhang per edge depending on binding angles – and more if you’ve got bulkier boots. That’s more than ideal for sure. I try to keep to a max of 2.5cm over the edge, and on the toe edge, even try to be less than that, particularly if you like to really lean into your carves.
Apart from going for a wider board, you could try looking into binding risers, which raise your boots higher off the board, giving you more angle, thus reducing chances of boot drag. I don’t have any experience with these, so I can’t say how they feel or where to get them or anything like that. But if you wanted to fit on a narrower board that is one option.
If you did want to look at other boards, let me know and I can put together some similar-ish options that are wider.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I’ve been snowboarding about 10 years now and am looking to get my first free ride board. I do most of my skiing on the east, in the trees, and also do a trip out to the west every other year or so. I’m 5’9″ and 135-140 lbs, and am rocking size 9 Ride Lasso boots. I’m curious as to what sizes for my board I should be targeting? I know that free ride boards should be a little bit longer, but I’m not sure how long is too long. I currently ride a 155 Rome Factory Rocker.
Hi Brian
Thanks for your message.
IMO 155 is already on the long side for your specs, so I wouldn’t be looking to go longer than that, particularly if you’re riding trees a fair bit. I would say anything from 153-155 would be your best bet.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I figured you haven’t replied to enough people, so I’ll add to it! 🙂
I’m an experienced female rider, been snowboarding for 25+ years now. I’m looking for a new in-bounds board and I haven’t looked at them in 6+ years, sadly. I’m currently riding a 2014 Burton Feelgood Flying V in 155 as my daily driver. I love this board, it does everything I ask pretty well, but Burton no longer offers this board in 155, and I’m a bit heavier of a lady at 210lbs.
I have a Burton Flight Attendant split in 158 that I love for hard charging, powder, and plowing through chunder, but I have found that I can’t maneuver this tractor trailer through trees. So, I purchased a Jones Dreamcatcher split in 154, and that is now what I use for tree runs, and really I find myself grabbing this board most times, but it doesn’t have the stability I want at speed. I much prefer the stability of the FA on the downhill, but the Jones uphills SO. MUCH. BETTER. than the Burton, it’s like night and day.
Anyway, hopefully that gives you an idea of my preferences. In-bounds I find myself taking tree runs or bump runs to stay away from the Texans. I’ve been looking at the 2020+ Jones Flagship and I’m wondering if you may have some input. Should I stick with the 155 womens? Is this board going to feel much too stiff in comparison or perhaps due to my weight it will be just right? Is there another board that should be on my radar?
Thanks!
Hi Trish
Thanks for your message.
Can you let me know your boot size and your height. Weight definitely more important for board size (as well as boot size, ability and style of riding) but I still like to take height into account.
I think if you’re looking for something more stable at speed than the Dream Catcher but more maneuverable than the 158 FA, the 155 Women’s Flagship could be the ticket, but boot size is the main thing I want to check.
Awesome list Nate! I’m shocked you’ve replied to so many comments. Seriously well done.
I’m 5′-6″, 175 lb with Size 9 Boots. I’ve had an Atomic Firestarter 162cm board since 2006 but I haven’t ridden much since becoming a dad in 2014. Thinking about getting going again and upgrading to a modern board. I’ve loved the Firestarter for it’s stiffness and carving ability. I’m not much for the park. What would you recommend?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Dmitriy
Thanks for your message.
Based on what you’re describing, I would probably look at the Niche Maelstrom or the Rossignol XV or if you wanted to go even stiffer, something like the Jones Ultra Mind Expander (or Ultra Flagship – though that’s a pretty pricey option!), Burton Straight Chuter, Ride Commissioner or Never Summer East.
I haven’t ridden the Firestarter, or Atomic boards at all, so I couldn’t say for sure what might compare, but if you’re looking for stiff and freeride, those are what I’d look at.
Size-wise, I would probably come down a little from 162, unless you feel like that’s your size and don’t want to change. Personal preference certainly comes into it. But based on specs and how you like to ride, I would say 158-159. However, given that you’re used to riding a 162, I think you could up that to more like 159-161.
Hope this helps
Nate, I am 6-6, 230 lbs., size 14 boot, advanced intermediate looking for groomers and powder. Do you have a recommendation for a wide board that fits my needs?
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
With 14s and for your specs, I would look at the 166DF (DF standing for drag free) Never Summer Westbound. I think that would fit your specs and what you’re describing really well.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Was reading through other comments thinking I could figure out what I needed to know from others questions but since you seem happy to help so figured I would comment. I’ve rented boards in the past but looking to buy for the first time so I want to get something I can ride for hopefully the next 10 years. Last year in Crested Butte I rented a Burton Flight Attendant which rode great and I was considering purchasing but the Gnu Mullair from your descriptions also fits the profile of what I am looking for and is on sale at most online stores right now. I typically like riding fast and carving groomers and then occasionally riding through trees and some powder. Love riding back bowls and getting somewhat off the beaten path when I can.
My only hesitation is that you mentioned it is a narrow board. I am 5′ 11″ and 185 lbs with a 11 or 11.5 boot size depending on the brand. I am probably going to try out the Adidas boots from your reviews so the boot will not be as big. Would the Mullair work for me or should I try a different board and just spend the extra money so I can make sure I get something I will ride for years? I have seen they make 159 and 161 in W option so thinking that may work. If you have a recommendation on bindings and which Adidas boot would pair well I would appreciate that as well. This website is great and I appreciate the time you put in to it! Let me know if there’s more I can do to support the site as well! I assume purchasing from the links you post helps!
-Michael H.
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
The Mullair would definitely work for what you’re describing. Note that it is a different feeling board, because it’s hybrid rocker versus the hybrid camber on the Flight Attendant. With it being C3, it’s predominantly camber, so you don’t notice the rocker between the feet that much, but just to note that. It has all the qualities you’re looking for, for how you describe your riding, IMO.
Size-wise, I think the 161W would work really well for you. It’s not overly wide either. Often with 11s, it can be tricky because wides are sometimes too wide and regular too narrow. In this case with the wide versions still not being super wide, I think it’s a really good fit. The 159W is a possibility too, if you want something a little more agile, whilst sacrificing a little in terms of stability at speed and float in powder – so between the sizes I think it depends whether you want to optimize speed and float or optimize riding in the trees. Each size will still be fine for the other, but that’s the debate between those sizes.
In terms of Adidas boots, I would personally pair the Mullair with the Acerra. I think that would be a really good match and match what you’re describing as well. The Tactical ADV and Response would work too, but I would be leaning Acerra.
And yeah, purchasing through the links is the best way to support the site, for sure, as it doesn’t cost you any extra.
Hope this helps
Have you ridden the Lib Tech BRD yet its supposed to be a great freeride board
Hi Matthew
Haven’t yet, but have had a few people asking about it, so definitely going to try to get my hands the 2022 this demo season. I don’t typically get boards until beginning of Feb at earliest, so it’s unlikely to be before then.
Hey, Nate. This info is so great, thank you. I haven’t been snowboarding since 2004. I hurt myself pretty badly in the army but have worked hard to get my body back in shape enough to get back on the mountain. I bought a 2020 Burton Deep Thinker (163 W), Maltavita EST bindings and Photon Boa boots. The boots were WAY too small but I hadn’t realized that the run small. I’m not tied to Burton, it’s just what I knew. I used to have a 160 Burton Floater and Nidecker Boots and Bindings. I’m 6’1 and 225, pretty solidly built. I’m looking for boots since the Photons didn’t fit. Would prefer to not spend more than $300, won’t be able to be on the mountain that often, and basically want comfort as the most important factor. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!!!
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
I would check out the following for some boot options:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top 5 Freeride Boots
The first list is basically boots with a 6/10 or 7/10 flex and the second list 8/10 or stiffer. I would say the Photon are around a 7/10 flex, so if you were good with that flex, that’s a good place to start. For the setup you have I would personally go 7/10 or 8/10 in terms of flex, but softer boots do tend to be more comfortable and less expensive.
Price-wise, some good under $300 options:
– Salomon Dialogue (the non BOA versions are under $300)
– DC The Laced
– Vans Invado Pro
– Thirty Two Lashed
– Ride Anchor
– K2 Boundary
For sizing/fit, of course best if you can try on in person, but if that’s not possible, this might help:
Sizing Snowboard Boots: The Different Brands
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I am amazed on how you take your time and reply to every single comment. You’ve helped so many people and I think that’s just great!
I read through a ton of your posts and comments and I feel a bit overwhelmed by all the information since I haven’t kept up with what’s going on in the world of snowboards for a bunch of years now.
Maybe you can help me with my decision.
I’m looking for a new board and bindings and I haven’t kept up with all the brands or whatsoever. My last board was an All-Mountain from Salomon which I bought as a bundle about 10 years ago and rode it until it basically fell apart.
Now I’m not quite sure which direction I should go and if I’m better off going with a Freeride board or choose an All-Mountain again.
My rider level is advanced and I’m only riding in the Alps so some decent mountains. I’m just shy of 6’ with 155-160lbs and have a size 10 shoe. Size wise for the board I am thinking between 159 and 161.
My preferences when it comes to riding are the following: I love some good powder whenever possible and I like riding groomers with good speed and carving. Off-piste, trees and uneven terrain are great as well. I’m hitting smaller jumps whenever I see some, but no park at all and not a lot of switch either.
Since I’ve had my old board for about 10 years I don’t care about having the latest board just because it’s new and I’m more looking for the most bag for my buck and a board that will last and take whatever I throw at it.
What kind of board type do you think would suite me best? And are there any specific boards maybe also bindings you would recommend for my mentioned preferences?
Cheers,
Pascal
Hi Pascal
Thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing, I would be looking at a freeride board. I think that’s a pretty good size-range to look at too. But I would also consider boards at 158. But yeah definitely a freeride board, IMO, given what you’re describing.
I think anything from this list would do the job for sure, but if you’re really looking to maximize in terms of speed/carving/powder, then I would check out the score breakdowns and see which would be the best there. Or if you’re looking for a balance with being nimble in trees and uneven terrain, then check out the “turn” scores and uneven terrain too. I think any of the first 4 on this list should tick all those boxes.
In terms of bindings, I like to go at least the flex of the board. E.g. if the board is a 7/10 flex, then I would prefer to go with a 7/10 flex binding or an 8/10 flex binding. Flex-match or slightly over. So I would check out the following:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for answering all these questions. Just picked up a 2021 Burton Skeleton Key. I’m 5’8′ and about 140lbs. I kept debating between the 150 or 154. I finally settled on the 150 as I am close to the lower end of the weight range. As well as I was reading a review and the rider was 180lbs and tried the 154 and 158 and he liked the 154 better.
Thoughts?
Hi Kango
Thanks for your message.
I think the 150 is the way to go for you. The 154 isn’t way out of your range, but it’s a little big for your specs, IMO. However, if you could also let me know your boot size, then I could give a more informed opinion. But just based on height/weight, I think the 150 was the right choice.
Thanks Nate,
My boot size is a 8.5 Photon and went with medium Burton Genesis bindings.
Cheers
Hi Kango
Yeah, I think 150 for sure with your specs. I think you’re right on there. And the Medium Genesis with 8.5 Photon’s and the 150 SK should work well.
Hi Nate,
You’re a good man. You’ve helped so many people with some fantastic advice. I’ve spent a copious amount of time on your site over the last few days.
From all I’ve read, I’ve narrowed down my purchase to the Yes PYL or the Standard.
I’m 5’11, 190, sz 11, rider level 6. I primarily ride in Ontario on hills, not mountains in less than ideal snow, but hope to get an annual trip to Quebec or Vermont.
I’m too old for jumps etc., just looking to carve and cruise with some speed and have a ton of fun.
Could you help me select one of those two boards or recommend another?
Thanks again for all you do, happy holidays and happy riding this year,
Greg
Hi Greg
For what you’re describing, both would work for sure, but I’d probably be leaning PYL, if you’re not looking to do any jumps or ride switch or anything like that. Even in that case, the Standard is still an option, if you wanted a slightly more easy going/slightly softer ride. The PYL isn’t like ultra aggressive or anything but it’s a little stiffer/a little more board than the Standard, but a little better for carving and at speed than the Standard.
Size-wise, I think the 160W would be right on for your specs. For the Standard, it would be a weigh up between the 156 and 159. It’s a wider board, with the 156 being slightly wider at the inserts than the 160W in the PYL. The 159 Standard being a good bit wider. Even with 11s, it’s on the wider side, which is why I would consider sizing down to the 156, if you were to go Standard, but then you are loosing effective edge. That’s potentially another reason to err PYL, as I think the sizing works better for you.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate – Thanks for putting together these great reviews – very helpful!
I’ve been riding Burton Customs since the late 90’s (the “sunset” series) and love them. My most recent was a 156 Flying V – I enjoy the playfulness and float in pow, but found a noticeable difference in stability at high speeds compared to cambers.
I’m considering a Custom X Flying V this year for a little more stiffness with hybrid rocker benefits – I’m a powder snob and still prefer the Flying V overall. Would you recommend the Jones Flagship or Burton Custom X for a board that (priority 1) is great in deep pow and (priority 2) is stable on hard pack or high speeds?
Appreciate any recommendations you have!
Hi Nik
Thanks for your message.
Wasn’t sure if you meant Flagship versus Custom X camber or Flying V, so I’ll compare to both.
The Flagship better than both Custom Xs in deep pow for sure. The Custom X Flying V better than the Camber version in powder though. For powder, I score them the following:
– Flagship: 5/5
– Custom X Flying V: 3.5/5
– Custom X: 2.5/5
In terms of stability at high speeds, I would go Custom X (camber), then Flagship, then Custom X Flying. My scores there are:
– Custom X: 5/5
– Flagship: 4/5
– Custom X Flying V: 3.5/5
In terms of edge-hold in hard/icy conditions, I would say Flagship, then Custom X, then Custom X Flying V. But not a lot in it between the Flaghip and Custom X (camber).
So based on that and what you’re describing, I think the Flagship would be your best bet. However, if you were wanting to stick with your Customs, the Custom X Flying V does offer more stability at speed than the Custom Flying V. Going Flagship would give you something a little more different in your quiver though.
Hope this helps with your decision
Very helpful! I’m hesitant to switch from my tried-and-true Burtons (to which I’ve been very brand loyal 🙂 but it does sound like the Jones Flagship might be right up my alley. Thanks for taking time to write this up, Nate!
You’re very welcome Nik. Would be very curious to hear which way you go and what you think. If you think of it at the time, let me know which direction you go, and how you get on when you get it out on snow.
Hey Nate,
I’m an expert level snowboarder. I’ve been riding for the last 21 years, which includes competition slopestyle, but I’ve taken more of an interest in aggressive tree and mogul riding in the last decade. Imagine trying to navigate down moguls or a tree run as fast as possible, gapping some bumps if the opportunity arises. Do you have any recommendations for a snowboard that is VERY quick turning, responsive, and has crisp feedback to it?
Part of me thinks a softer board with some type of rocker would be optimal for surfing down moguls and trees, but I don’t want to lose the aggressiveness that comes with stiffer boards. Any thoughts?
Thanks!
Hi Dominic
Thanks for your message.
Not sure how stiff you ride in terms of slopestyle competition, but I imagine fairly stiff to be stomping some of those landings? In which case, something like a 7/10 flex might feel like going a little softer, but without loosing too much of that aggressiveness? But I could be wrong as to how stiff you’d ride for slopestyle competition.
The best boards I’ve found for trees/moguls from this list, in this kind of flex range, are the YES PYL, GNU Mullair & Capita Kazu. Not far off were the Jones Flagship (2020 and newer models), Never Summer Chairman, Never Summer Westbound, E-Jack Knife and Burton FA. So, I think one of PYL, Mullair & Kazu would be a good bet, depending on sizing.
Note though that this is coming from an advanced, but not expert and far from pro rider. These were my feel on these. Typically I prefer a slightly softer board for really quick edge to edge in trees, but those were up there with the softer boards I’ve preferred. It should also be noted that when I’m going through the trees, I’m likely going significantly slower than you are, by the sounds of it, and softer boards tend to be more maneuverable at slower speeds, but less crisp/precise at faster speeds and less aggressive. So, for me, going slower through the trees, I prefer something softer, largely due to the speed I’m cruising through at. For you, I think something a little stiffer would likely be a good bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, can you give me an advice! I wan’t to bye new board. The last one was Rossi XV magtek 2016, looking for same conditions, but I need some new emotions from the board! After your reviews my choice is on YES PYL, how do you compare it too XV, what is cons and pros! And I need a bit size advice, I am 188 cm, 94 kg, size of boots 10,5-11 on different brands! Which size will fit me best?
Hi Kantik
Thanks for your message.
Appropriate that you mention personality – as that’s one thing about the PYL vs the XV – it’s got more x-factor – just feels a little livelier.
Otherwise, it’s a little softer feeling than the XV and not quite as good for powder. It’s kind of on the all-mountain end of the freeride scale as opposed to the more fully fledged freeride feel of the XV. PYL better in trees/tight terrain, IMO and better for when you want to get a bit more casual on it and in uneven terrain and if you want to hit some jumps or natural hits on it.
Size-wise for the PYL, I would be weighing up between the 160W and 164W for you. It’s not super wide for a wide board, so I think it would work well in the wide sizes for 11s. If you’re looking for a more agile ride and a little more forgiving – i.e want to ride trees a lot etc, then I’d lean 160W, but if you prioritize hard carves/stability at speed/float in powder, then 164W would be the better choice.
Would depend on the size of XV you ride too, and whether you want to keep a similar size feel or feel like you wanted to go shorter or longer than ride on the XV.
Hope this helps
Thank’s for answer Nate, you really doing a great job for all of us!
My XV is 167 but not wide, I have Adidas boots 10,5. with reduced foot print, and have no problems with the toe drag with this complete, but sometimes I am thinking the wide one would be better for me! Actually I don’t want the board to be shorter in feelings. Not much powder days in my riding now, but I need speed and stability, will be PYL the proper choice? What do you think about board size once again?
Hi Kantik
Given the extra info I would say go 165 for the PYL.
With a 10.5 Adidas boot you should have no problem with the width on it. If you still really wanted to go wide, then 164W.
Note that you would still be dropping a little in length on the PYL 165 (or 164W) versus the 167 XV, both in overall length (of course :-)) but also in terms of effective edge (123cm on the PYL versus 127cm on the XV).
Do be you think, I will feel the reduce of the effective length? Is it big reduce on your opinion? I am inclined to 164w size right now, because it can be a problem if the boots will be without reduced print size. But I never rode a wide board, and have some doubts about it.
Hi Kantik
If you’re concerned about going wide, then I would go 165. If you haven’t ridden wide before and haven’t run into any drag issues, then I doubt the 165 PYL will be too narrow for you. Certainly with 10.5 Adidas boots, you shouldn’t have any issues. I’m guessing your thinking if you get new boots at some point that aren’t low profile you could run into problems. Personally I would go with the narrower board, if you’re not sure about wide boards and just make a note to look at Low Profile boots next time you need boots. There are a few brands that are lower profile, so you don’t just have to look at Adidas.
In terms of the effective edge, it’s enough of a difference that it will certainly be noticeable. How much that affects you is hard to say for sure, but I would say you would feel it. Not to say that you’ll necessarily not like the feel of that length/effective edge, but it’s certainly enough to be noticeable.
Hi Nate!
Thanks for your work, it really helps
!
I was thinking to buy the Jones Flagship and need some sizing advise.
I’m 170 cm, 61 kg and 42 boot size.
What’s your suggestion?
Hi Alessandro
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, I wouldn’t go longer than the 154. For an all-mountain board, I would be looking at around 150 for you, but you can go a little longer in a freeride board. You could also ride the 151, but I would be leaning towards the 154. Width-wise, you shouldn’t have any problems with the 154 – and even the 151 you’d probably get away with. The Flagship is wider at eh inserts than it looks at the waist. But if you were really worried about the 151 width-wise, that would be another reason to go 154.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate! I’m looking to add another board to the quiver that has great carving, speed, and turns. Right now I have the button custom Flying V and it’s just not doing it for me at high speeds. Im really liking the sound of the PYL, Flight Attendant, and GNU Mullair. The only issue is I wear a size 11 boot and I’m only 5’10 145lbs. It seems the only wide boards are Longer. What board and what size would you recommend for me, either out of the ones I mentioned or any other on this list? Thank!
Hi Taylor
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, definitely in freeride boards, the wides are typically only on the longer options – a lot of more freestyle focused boards more often have wides in lower sizes. Even as short as 153W. Length-wise, I would say something around 153-156 for you for a freeride board, given that you’re looking for speed/carving. It would also depend on what you’re used to riding (what size is your custom flying V?), but I’d say that’s a good range to look at.
Even though the Mullair 155 would be a good length for you, IMO, it’s going to be too narrow for 11s. The width at the back insert on the 155 will be roughly 254mm, which I wouldn’t personally be comfortable riding on 11s. The 156 FA and 156 PYL give a little more – 257mm at the back insert for both, but I still wouldn’t be comfortable at that with 11s.
There are definitely other options though – some boards don’t come in wides at smaller sizes, but they are naturally wider and could accommodate 11s. Some options:
– YES Hybrid – not quite as hard charging as the PYL, but close and still good for carving/speed – the 157 is really quite wide (277mm back insert, 283mm front insert) and with the combination of length and width, might feel a bit big. But they are now also doing a 153 for the 2021 model. Which is 273mm at the back insert, which is a really good width for you, IMO. The 153 is probably at the lower end of your range, given you want a hard charger, but definitely doable.
– Burton Skeleton Key – the same camber profile as the Flight Attendant, but a little softer (and obviously other things different). Again like PYL vs Hybrid, it’s not quite as hard charging, but still pretty hard charging. The 154 should be good width-wise, with a 266mm width at the back insert. Will depend a little on binding angles and the exact boots you have (some are more low profile than others). If you can give me those details that would help.
– YES the Y. Not a board I particularly liked personally, but the size would work – the 154 has a 271mm width at back insert.
– YES Optimistic – more beefed up version of the Y. The 154 has the same specs. Again, not my favorite YES board, but the specs work.
– Jones Stratos 156 – it will be roughly 268mm at the back insert, which is definitely doable.
– Salomon Super 8 154 – back insert roughly 268mm
Hopefully that gives you some options to look at. But yeah, if you could let me know the brand, model (and year if you know it) of your boots, your binding angles and the size of your Custom Flying V and we can narrow down from there.
Hey Nate!
Thanks for the extremely detailed reply. Right now I’m on 158 2019 board, however, it was my first board and I didn’t know what I was looking for and what width I needed. It is a bit narrow but not too bad. I’m looking to do it the right way this time so I don’t want to pick a length based off of that one, but more so pick a length that really makes since for my size and what I’m looking to do. My boots are 2019 Burton Motos. My binding are Burton cartels from the same year. Thanks again!
Hi Taylor
Thanks for your message.
With Burton Moto’s you get a pretty low profile boot, so that definitely helps width-wise, so I would be pretty comfortable with you on anything from around a 268mm width at inserts, depending on your back binding angle. For reference, the width at inserts on the Custom 158 is likely to be around 263mm (I haven’t measured that particular size, but based on measuring a different size). So only really the Skeleton Key from below would be pushing it – but you’d still be getting a little more width vs your current board.
And yeah, I think you can go a little shorter than that for your specs, so I’d go for something in that 153-156 range. I think the Hybrid works at the lower end of that range for you, in the 153, given that it’s a little wider than the other options there. Personally I would be going for something between the Hybrid 153, Stratos 156, if you want a bit more length, or the Super 8 154. The Y and Optimistic are certainly options specs-wise, and are stiffer – particularly the Optimistic – if you were wanting something stiffer, but just not options I would personally go for – and I’d be a little bit weary of going Optimistic, given it’s stiffness and your weight. It could feel too stiff, I suspect. And the Stratos is a little stiffer than the Hybrid and Super 8, if you were looking for something stiffer. Flex-wise, I would say:
Stratos: 7/10
Super 8: 6.5/10
Hybrid: 6/10
Your Cartels would match any of those boards well, IMO, particularly the Hybrid, but the boots are too soft for the setup ideally. Given your boots are quite new, I totally get that you probably don’t want to upgrade them yet, but when the time comes that you do want to/can upgrade them, I would go for something a little stiffer – like 6/10 – 8/10 flex, depending on the board you go for, particularly given you’re looking to up your carving/speed game.
In terms of matching your gear, the
Hey Nate! It’s insane how much goes into this so thanks so much for the responses. Based off the reviews, I was pretty set on the mullair, PYL, or flight attendant, but glad I waited for you response. The reviews I’m seeing one the hybrid dont look to great when it comes to speed and carving. Is that accurate? If so, I’m liking the look of the stratos and super 8. What boots would you recommend going with for those boards? Thanks again man.
Hi Taylor
I personally found the Hybrid really good for carving and speed. Not quite to the level of something like the Mullair, PYL or Flight Attendant, but not that far off either. Everyone rides differently, so it’s hard to say why others found that, but I thought it was really good in those areas. Perhaps sizing was an issue with them, not sure. If you want more on my personal experience with it you can check it out below:
>>YES Hybrid Review
But if you’re worried about that on the Hybrid, the Super 8 and Stratos would certainly work too.
Depending on how stiff you wanted to go with your boots, you could look at one of the following:
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top 5 Freeride Boots
But I would be leaning to the first list there for you, because of your weight – something with a 6/10 or 7/10 flex.
Oh, and let me add, I was able to find last years model Super 8 in a 151 and a 157 for significantly cheaper. Is it worth spending the extra cash for the 154? That savings could really help me with the new boots 😂
Hi Taylor
I would personally get the size right and go 154. The 151 is going to be a bit small – and even if you got away with it in terms of length, you would be pushing it in terms of being too narrow. The 157 is getting on the too big side of things. For your weight, you would feel the 157 quite a bit stiffer than I think is going to be quite an effort to ride. I think the 154 is the sweet spot for you, for that board, personally. If you did go with one of those, I would sooner go 151 than 157 for you, but preferably the 154.
Thanks so much for all the help! After reading your review and a few more about the Yes Hybrid, it seems the first review I read about it not being a good carver is bogus. So I decided to go with the hybrid 154, paired with my Burton cartels, and picked up a pair of Adidas Tactical Lexicon Adv’s. I cannot wait to get back on the mountain. Thanks again!
You’re very welcome Taylor. Enjoy the setup and happy riding!
Hi
I am Snowboarding since 30 years. Intermediate-advanced. Actually 3 boards. I’m looking to buy only one all around board. Following my 10 years old in the trees (he goes so fast!). In quebec, hard moghul in trees is usual. And we always look for snow storm (powder!). And then i like to carve in the groom.
No jumps, no park, no jibs, no backside.
The board MUST negociate well the deep moghul between trees.
5’6’’, 150 pounds, feet 8
Does the jones flagstaff with the 3D shape could be great? Maybe to stiff…
Burton attendant?
Other? Thanks!
Hi Anthony
Thanks for your message.
I think the new Flagship could work for that – but only 2020 model and 2021 model I would consider. Was a lot less maneuverable in tight spaces in the 2019 and previous models. The Flight Attendant would also be suitable for what you’re describing.
I would also look at the YES PYL and GNU Mullair, if you’re looking for something around that 7/10 flex range, but is still maneuverable in tight spots. Another consideration in a similar flex range would be the Capita Kazu Kokubo.
If you wanted something a little softer, which I find can help when riding at slower speeds in tight spots – like mogully trees! – then something like the GNU Hyperkyarve or Lib Tech Dynamo could work well.
Sizing is going to be important too. If you go too long or too wide, that will really affect your ability to maneuver in tight spaces. So, there are some other options that would be good, but I’ve left out because I think they would be too wide (like the YES Hybrid, Burton Skeleton Key).
Since you’ve been riding so long, you probably have a size preference, so definitely go with what you feel comfortable with, but I would say something around 153, 154 in terms of length would be a good way to go. So for those options, I would be looking at:
Flagship: 154 (or even 151 if you wanted it even more nimble)
FA: 152
Hyperkyarve: 154
Dynamo: 153
PYL: 156 is shortest size, but might be too long
Mullair: 155 is shortest size
Kazu: 151
Would also be some options in all-mountain boards, but if you want to keep things more directional, which is probably a good idea given how you describe your riding, then I think these would be the best bets.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m amazed at your generosity replying to everyone on here. I’ll keep it short. I am 51, 5’10”, 190-200lbs, size US11 Vans boots and for the past 12 years I’ve been riding a Burton Supermodel 163 with Drake F60 bindings (probably should be in a museum at this point but they are made of steel and I love them) and I’ve been riding for 25+ years.
I live in interior BC with champagne powder and am happy on any run but spend most of my time these days dodging in and out of the trees following my 8 year old.
There are sales on just now and I can find:
Libtech EJack Knife 162
Never Summer West Bound 160, 163 and 158W
Gnu Mullair 161
I like to be able to do floaty powder in the trees, groomers, icy moghuls and steep trees but most of the time I am just cruising with my kids. I have a very dated but very aggressive riding posture.
Any advice is welcome.
Thanks,
Nick
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message.
Since you’re spending a bit of time in the trees, I would be leaning towards either Mullair or West Bound. I found both to be a little more agile in trees vs the Ejack Knife. The Ejack Knife certainly wasn’t bad in there, at all, but found the other 2 a little better.
Size-wise, the Mullair is quite narrow, and I would say too narrow for 11s. It’s 252mm at the waist, but only around 259mm at the inserts. I haven’t measured a Supermodel at the inserts, but I suspect the Supermodel would be closer to 264mm at the inserts. So yeah, I think the Mullair would be risking it in terms of being too narrow.
So, that would narrow it down to the West Bound for me, if you don’t have the option of the 161W Mullair.
The West Bound is wider overall, and I would say that the 160, for example would be around 266mm at the inserts, so you’re looking at something that’s going to be similar or slightly wider at the inserts vs your Supermodel. Assuming you’ve had no drag issues on the Supermodel, I think that would be a good width for you. As would the 163. In this case I don’t think you need to go wide, but if you have had drag issues with your Supermodel, then I would consider going wide.
Length-wise, assuming you don’t go wide, I would be leaning towards the 160 for you. If you did decide to go wide, then the 158X would work too, IMO. You’d be going shorter than ideal, IMO, but that extra width would counteract that, certainly in terms of powder anyway. But, assuming you haven’t had any issues with your Supermodel in terms of width, I would be leaning towards the West Bound in the 160.
Hope this helps with your decision
I’ve just moved back to the mainland after living in Hawaii for 16 years. With that said I would like to get a new board and curious about n what kind of board I used to have as far as what terrain etc it was good for. I bought it used back then and was the only board I used to ride. I’m a bit older now lol and anyways I like to mainly just go fast, carve a little switch and a small line jump but mostly carving/speed but can handle crappy icey snow. My old board is a Burton Asym 164. I was looking at the Flight Attendant. I’ve always loved Burton. I’m 6-3 190lbs
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
I think the Flight Attendant is a great option if you’re mostly looking at carving/speed. Assuming a relatively advanced level of riding.
Size-wise, I’d say 162 or 162W, depending on boot size. If you let me know your boot size, I can give you my opinion on whether you should go wide or not, if you’d like it.
It’s not bad in hard/icy conditions but there are better options for those types of conditions, if that was a really important aspect and you were wanting to maximize performance in that area. But if you’re set on Burton, then the Flight Attendant is a really good option, and so long as you keep the edges sharp, you should be good in those harder/icier conditions.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for your ranking. I am considering to upgrade my boards. My local store now has big sal event for Rossignol. Just wondering I’m an I pick Jibsaw and XV as a combination that Jibsaw for jump buttering and groomer, and XV for carving and powder? I look at those two because I can have great edge hold on those boards plus the price is really attractive. Any other recommendations you have?
What size should I go for those two boards? I read the comments here saying that XV should go really a big size? I saw it will start from 159 should I go with a 163? For the Jibsaw should I go 155?
I’m 5’11” and 175lbs and wearing boots 8.5. Plus I think I’m an intermediate to advance rider.
Hi Tim
The XV and Jibsaw are both really good in hard/icy conditions, in my experience, so they’ve got you covered there. And I would say they compliment each other really well as part of a quiver.
Size-wise, anything freeride you can typically ride a little longer. Part of the reason is that there is usually a longer nose, so in a lot of cases a lot of that length is outside the contact points – and the other part is that a lot of people ride these kinds of boards solely for powder or charging hard. That said, for your specs, I would say 159 is the better size, if you want it to still be relatively versatile. 163 would be doable if you think you would be predominantly using it in powder and big open terrain, and not really going into trees with it, or anything that would require some tight turns.
For the Jibsaw, I think 155 is a good bet for you, regardless of which size you got the XV in.
For reference, the Jibsaw 155 and XV 159 have the same effective edge (117cm). So you can see that a lot of the length on the 159 XV is outside the effective edge (mostly in the nose).
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi Nate,
I’ve been considering getting the Yes Standard for a while, but after reading your review of the PYL I’m second guessing myself haha. I would say that 90% of my time on the mountain is spent carving/speeding. I want something that can handle the occasional pow days, but it definitely has to be better on hard-packed/icy snow (I’m on the Canadian East Coast).
What I have been struggling with is that, although carving is my priority, I still want to have the option to practice my switch riding and do some small jumps whenever I feel like it. Which board would you say better fits my riding style? (I’m open to something other than YES also) On a somewhat related note, it is mentioned on the YES website that riders with 10-10.5 boot size should strongly consider wide boards, what’s your take on this?
Measurements / gear consideration:
Height: 6″1′
Weight: 190 lbs
Boots: Photons, 10.5
Bindings: Cartel
Hi Dominique
Thanks for your message.
I think, given that you give the figure 90% for speed/carving, that the PYL is probably your best bet – if you consider yourself an advanced rider – or at least bordering on advanced. The PYL is certainly not as good for switch as the Standard and not quite as good for jumps, but you can still certainly ride switch on it, and it’s not bad for jumps. I think because that’s only 10% of your time by the sounds of it, that the PYL is good enough in those areas and enough better in the other areas to make it the best option.
I think around that size 10 mark is the point where you start to consider wide boards – so in that sense I somewhat agree. Personally I don’t like wide boards and I ride 10s. But some people want that extra leeway in their 10s to be able to euro-carve. The picture becomes more muddy as you get up to 10.5s. Boot size is certainly important, in terms of the minimum width you can go. You don’t boot drag. In terms of boots, in theory you can go as wide as you like. But in terms of maximum width, it comes more down to your foot length. If a board is too wide for your foot, it becomes harder to put pressure on the edges and to initiate turns. For me, my longest foot is 27.3cm. I ride 10s, which have a mondo of 28cm. If you are riding 10.5s and your feet are 28.5cm, then I think wide is probably a good idea, because you shouldn’t have any issues with leverage. But if you have, like a lot of people, feet that are smaller than the mondo of the boot, then it’s less obvious. Probably with 28cm feet, you’re probably good, but if you’re riding 10.5s with 27.5cm feet for example, then there needs to be a balance of how wide you go, in terms of being wide enough for your boots but not too wide for your feet. Sorry that all got very long – but I hope it makes sense.
Long story short – Burton boots are relatively low profile, so I think you get away with a regular width board in those. However, if you like to euro carve, then I would consider going wide. If after all that you feel like you want to go wide, I would go 160W for the PYL. Otherwise, probably the 162. If you feel you like shorter boards, then the 159 is certainly within range for your specs, IMO. Note also that the 160W isn’t excessively wide. It’s narrow for a wide board, if that makes sense – so it’s a good middle ground that could work well for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
PYL it is then!
On a related note, what’s the best way to support you if we are buying from Canada? I don’t see any affiliate link when I click on the “Canada” tab for the PYL.
Thanks again for all your diligent work!
Hi Dominique
You’re very welcome. I don’t currently work with any Canadian retailers that stock YES boards, unfortunately, but I appreciate the gesture. Happy riding, and I hope you get on well with the PYL. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to ride it.
Hello Nate, I’m in a similar position – I have the choice between a 2020 160w PYL or a 162w Jones Flagship, both heavily discounted. 90% on piste, 10% off. Think I know the answer… but which would you go with? I’m 186lbs without gear and 6ft.
Thanks so much for any steer you can give, simon
Oh… and us11.5 boots
Sorry – should also have added that whilst i want something I can point, I also need something forgiving enough on crowded, late season Euro slopes. From what I can see, both could cope but wondering whether 160w for the PYL is long enough. I’ll stop now!!
Hi Simon
Thanks for your messages.
It’s a tough call as both would certainly be a good match for what you’re looking to do. I would be leaning towards the PYL personally, largely because it’s something that I think goes better on groomers and since you mention 90% on piste. And because it’s one of my favorite boards to ride.
In terms of width, the PYL 160W isn’t that wide for a wide board. My estimate would be 267mm at the back insert and 270mm at the front insert. The Flagship 162W on the other hand (assuming you rode it at the 600mm reference stance) I would say would be 275mm at the back insert and 280mm front insert. So, a good bit wider. The 160W PYL would be pushing it being too narrow. It would be on the very narrow end for 11.5s and I think you probably only get away with it, depending on the make/model of your boot and your typical binding angles. If you could let me know that, that would be great. But also, if you’ve ridden regular boards and gotten away with it in the past, then that’s a good indicator that it’ll be wide enough. Still wider than a regular width board.
Length-wise, I think something between 160-162 is probably a good bet for your specs. Especially if you’re going to have to tackle crowded slopes at times, then going 160W on the PYL would be fine, IMO. The only question really is the width.
So yeah, I would go 160W PYL, if the width looks like it will be OK for you. Otherwise the 162W Flagship, which is still a really good option.
Hope this helps
Hello Nate,
Can’t see a way of replying to your post of yesterday so am replying to an earlier question of mine!
Thank you for your really helpful pointers. I’m really grateful.
I’m wearing Burton imperials US11.5 which I think shrink down to us10.5. My angles are -9, +12
I’m currently riding a Jones Mtn twin 161w. Ideally I wouldn’t go much wider than that.
I did ride a Flagship 165w but that felt WAAAY too big / wide. Presumably the 162w would be a bit slimmer?
Last question, I promise!
Hi Simon
For coparison, I would say the Mountain Twin 161W is roughly 272mm at the front insert and 273mm at the back insert. So you’re looking at going a little wider with the 162W Flagship. A little narrower if you went 160W PYL. The Flagship 162W would certainly be a little narrower than the 165W – narrower by roughly 3mm at the inserts. And certainly would feel smaller overall vs the 165W.
I would say Burton Imperial 11.5 more like an 11, than a 10.5, but still quite low profile and with those angles, I would say you should be fine width-wise on the 160W PYL. Can’t guarantee anything of course, but I think you’d probably be fine, and it sounds to me like you’re more inclined to go narrower than where you are than to go wider.
My instinct is saying 160W PYL
Hey Nate – I’ve been reading a lot of your reviews lately and really appreciate it. It’s time to buy my first board. I’m 5’9 156-158lbs and consider myself an advanced intermediate – intermediate technical skills but athletic/aggressive. I only ride 3-5X each year so really don’t get an opportunity to improve much but I enjoy going fast, carving hard, and hitting some powder when it’s available. I grew up skiing so going fast and laying on edge is my style. On steeper groomers I tend towards the sides where it’s thicker and even a bit choppy but still like hard quick turns. Love me some wide open bowls too.
I’ve only ever rented general all mountain boards so don’t have much to compare against but initially though I wanted an aggressive all mountain board so was considering the Assassin Pro, Burton Custom X, and Jones Ultra Mountain Twin. Once I started reading some of your freeride reviews though it seems like that might be better in line with what I’m looking for. I don’t do the park and don’t ride switch but I do get into the trees and bumps some so need a bit of maneuverability. I also ride gentle groomers with my wife sometimes and since my skill level is only moderate I’d like a little bit of forgiveness. I guess I’m asking for a lot of versatility but I still think there is something in these freeride boards for me – too many options actually. GNU Mullair, Burton Flight Attendant, and Yes PYL seemed to catch my eye the most but I’d love your opinion and recommendation on length.
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message.
For what you’re describing, I think you’re on the right track with those options. And I think some slightly more forgiving/less stiff freeride options are probably the way to go vs those aggressive all-mountain options. And I think the Mullair, FA & PYL would be good options, among these. I would also consider the Skeleton Key (if you wanted something a little softer again) or the Westbound, which is more forgiving again vs the PYL/FA/Mullair.
One more left-field option I would throw out there, is the Capita Kazu Kokubo (only reason I mention it is that I just rode the 2021 model the other day and had a blast on it). It’s great in the trees and also something that’s directional but slightly on the more forgiving side. Something else to consider, anyway.
Size-wise, I would say something around 156 is your best bet, give or take. For the boards mentioned, I would say:
PYL: 156
Westbound: 155
FA: 156
Mullair: 155
Skeleton Key: 154
Kazu: 154
But if you could also let me know your boot size, as that could change those sizes above potentially.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the quick reply! I currently wear a sz11 Salomon Dialogue boot -sole is about 13 inches long. I picked these up at least 5 years ago and the only thing I know about them is that they are super comfortable, although maybe 1/2 size too big now that they have packed down inside.
I think I’ll leave the Skeleton Key off my list. While I don’t intentionally ride switch, I do end up going the other direction from time to time in gullies through the trees and such so I think it’s too directional for me.
I really can’t find a lot to differentiate the PYL, FA, and Mullair. I think I’m leaning towards the FA or Mullair though. The FA sounds slightly more forgiving but you also note that the Mullair is agile and maneuverable at low speed and excels at carving – I’d say those are my 2 primary use cases. And it’s not as if the Mullair sucks in powder. What’s the “unever terrain” category trying to get at though?
Reading your full review of the Mullair though, this slightly concerns me – “Definitely not for the beginner, or even intermediate rider – you want to be a fairly advanced rider to ride this one”.
Hi Joel
Thanks for the extra info.
With 11s, all of these are pushing it in terms of being too narrow. Particularly the Mullair 155, which is quite a narrow board. But even the FA 156 and PYL 156 are quite narrow. Unfortunately for a lot of these boards, they don’t come in wide sizes until they get up to like 159, 160. If you think you’ll be OK on the narrower board and aren’t concerned about boot drag, their still options, but I would be hesitant, in terms of width on them.
I’m now liking the YES Hybrid for you. It comes in a 157 and is a wider board that will be plenty wide enough for your boots, IMO – and shorter than the wider options of the other 3.
That or, if you didn’t want to go quite as wide as that, something like the Capita Black Snowboard of Death 156 – which is a little wider, but not overly wide.
Between the FA & Mullair, I’d say they are both similarly forgiving. The Mullair is a little stiffer, but the FA has more of a camber dominant feel overall. Those too things kind of cancel out a little to make them similarly forgiving. In terms of ability, I would say the same for both in terms of not really being intermediate suitable boards. But if you’re a solid intermediate rider skill-wise – and that combined with being more aggressive and athletic, I think they would be within reach. My biggest concern with them for you would be sizing. The Black Snowboard of Death a similar sort of level I would say, with the Hybrid being a little easier ride.
But if you are worried about them being a little too advanced, and wanted to look at something a little more forgiving, then again, the Hybrid is an option, but if you didn’t want to go that wide, there’s something like the GNU Hyperkyarve (157) or Lib Tech Dynamo (156) – which are good freeride boards that are less aggressive and easier to ride, but still directional – and are just a little wider than the FA, Mullair & PYL, as well as being more forgiving. They’re closer in width to the FA, Mullair and PYL than they are to the Hybrid, but would give you a little more leeway width-wise. Both really good in trees, IMO too.
Hope this helps
PS: The uneven terrain category covers both bumpy terrain and crud. Like bumps you would find going through trees. This is usually a combination of how well it goes over those bumps and how easy it is to maneuver through them. And it also considers how the board rides in crud (i.e. messy groomers after they’ve been tracked all day).
Okay – As much as I like how the PYL and FA sound in terms of speed and carving ability, if they are too narrow and maybe a bit too stiff/aggressive for me, then I need to be honest with myself and look elsewhere. Looking at your review of the YES Hybrid I think that’s a good option. Maybe I’ll progress past it eventually but considering I’m coming from nothing but rental and a couple general all-mountain demo boards I still think the Hybrid will be a significant improvement. Thanks for all of your advice!
Binding suggestion to pair with the Hybrid?
Hi Joel.
In terms of bindings for the Hybrid, I would go with something around 6/10 or 7/10 flex ideally. Some good options below.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Because of the extra width of the board, I would strongly consider Union, as they tend to have longer base plates, which will give you more leverage to the edges. The Falcor, Atlas or Strata would all be good matches to the Hybrid. But anything from the above, in that 6-7 flex range would work well, IMO.
Hey Nate, would appreciate your opinion on getting a new deck… I am an advanced all mountain rider that gets 40 to 50 days a year in Colorado. I am 5-9 165 lbs with an 8.5 boot . I mostly ride bumps and trees and am looking for a one quiver board towards that end (powder fast groomers and air secondary) …. was looking at yes pyl or is something a little softer ( yes globe not so basic) better in bumps…… looking for lightning quick turn
Hi Tony
Thanks for your message.
Typically I would say a little softer for bumps, because I personally prefer a softer board in that situation. I find that softer flex usually means quicker turns at slower speeds and when board’s get too stiff they don’t handle as well when riding slower. But I found the PYL surprisingly agile at slower speeds. So I think it’s definitely an option, particularly if you’re also looking to get something that’s also stable at speed when you look to open it out on fast groomers – and still good in powder.
Something like the YES Typo I would say is a little quicker turning (i.e. super quick turning) and other softer boards that really pivot quickly in tight spaces, but won’t give you as much at speed or in powder as something like the PYL. The GNU Mullair and Never Summer Westbound are others that are pretty good at slow speeds for their flex and can handle speed and powder well.
I haven’t ridden the Globe NSB, so I couldn’t say for sure, but YES actually rates the flex on it as stiffer than the PYL. But yeah, I’m not sure how it rides, as I haven’t ridden it yet.
The Skeleton Key also an option if you wanted to go softer. But keep in mind it’s also a little wider, so might be quite wide for 8.5s, you might want to size down a bit on it.
Size-wise, I would possibly look to go a touch shorter than usual to get things turning even quicker for bumps and trees, but not too short that you sacrifice too much stability at speed and powder float.
For those boards mentioned, in terms of sizing, I would look at:
– YES PYL 156
– GNU Mullair 155
– Never Summer Westbound 155
– Burton Skeleton Key 154
If you just wanted lightning quick and weren’t worried about how it was going to perform in powder or at speed, then I could look at some other options, but I think those would work really well for what you’re describing.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m 68 kg (150 lbs) and 183 cm (6 foot) and wear 9-9.5 boots. I’ve been snowboarding since i was 9 ( 21 now ) so I’m at the point where i feel comfortable on mostly every track. Two years ago I broke my foot pretty badly and I’ve taken a prolonged break from snowboarding ever since, but now I want to get back into it.But to have a brand new start I want a new set and don’t really know for what should i look, as my aptitudes have gone down a bit in the mean time but i want something that I can use even after I get my full range back.
Knowing that park and big jumps aren’t really my things and that i want a freerider that is versatile ( powder also carving groomers some off piste and all that at a high speed ) I thought about these:
-Capita Super DOA 154
-Endeavor Archetype 154
-Niche Maelstrom 154
-Yes PYL 156
-Nitro Squash 153
as for bindings -Now Drive( Skate-Tech sounds appealing )
and for boots -Burton DriverX
I mainly snowboard all around Europe so I encounter everything from icy zones to extreme moguls to mushy snow.
That being said I would really appreciate any kind of advice. If you have any other options for board, bindings and boots that you think could work for me that would mean the world.
Thank you,
Andrei
Hi Andrei
Thanks for your message.
Because you want something that’s good in powder and aren’t really focused on freestyle riding, then I would cross the SuperDOA off. It’s less freeride more freestyle (what I call aggressive all-mountain-freestyle) – I think you’ll find it lacking in powder vs the other options there.
The Nitro Squash I haven’t ridden, but the only thing is that it looks like it’s mostly camber, which might take away from powder performance a little. That said, it is tapered and directional, which will certainly help in powder, so it could be good there. Otherwise, can’t say much about that option.
The other 3 are certainly good options, IMO, though. Something in that 154-157 range is a good bet for you, IMO, so sizings there I think are good.
The Archetype is a little wider but as that’s on the shorter end of your range, IMO, that could work.
The Maelstrom is something you could possibly go up to 157 on, though the 154 works too. It’s a little narrower than the Archtype, but it’s certainly not too narrow for 9-9.5 boots, in the 154.
The 156 for the PYL is a good all-round size for your specs/what you’re describing, IMO.
In terms of bindings, if you’re looking at NOW, the Drive (and potentially even O-Drive if you wanted to go stiffer) would work. Some other good options:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 Freeride Bindings
And yeah, if you’re wanting stiff in boots, then the Driver X is a good option too. Some other options:
>>My Top 5 Freeride Boots
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
Wow. This is an awesome set of comments. I’d love a recommendation, too!
I’m 6’4″ and 190 lbs. I currently ride a very stiff Rossignol Nomad 2 Wide 168cm from 1999. It’s camber profile. After a long break, I’ve been riding it 30+days per year over the last three seasons and have become an advanced rider. I love the thing, but it’s time to upgrade and don’t mind introducing new tech that may be different from my current board.
Most of my riding is on the US east coast, so it’s hard and often icy. I want something that can grip ice, but can also handle powder in case I get lucky or make a trip out west. I enjoy riding really fast, but would also like bit of maneuverability for trees, moguls or exploring. I’m not interested in tricks or parks, other than as a spectator.
From my poking around, I’ve come up with the Rossignol XV 174W (is that overkill?) or the Niche Maelstrom 166. I’d love your opinion or pros/cons on these. And if you have an alternate suggestion, I’d love that, too.
Thanks so much!
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
Both boards certainly fit your criteria, IMO – being good in hard/icy conditions, but also being good for powder and at speed.
Size-wise, I think the 174X for the XV is probably overkill. I would stick to 168W with your specs, assuming you need a wide board, which I’m guessing you do? Particularly for trees, I think you’ll probably find the 174X too big.
The 166 for the Maelstrom is appropriate. Width wise, I would say it’s OK, depending on boot size.
Hope this helps with your decision
How does the Rossignol XV compare to the Yes PYL and Burton Flight Attendant?
Hi Jon
A few of the main differences, I would say:
– The XV I found a little stiffer than the PYL & Flight Attendant
– The XV a little better grip in hard/icy conditions. Though in saying that the PYL is very good there too, and the Flight Attendant not bad
– The flex is softer in the tail vs the nose, which gives it a different kind of feel (see my other reply for more on that)
– Not as good for jumps, IMO
Which do you prefer more? I am looking for an aggressive freeride board so was leaning towards the XV but curious what you think. My buddy has the FA and I like how it rides but don’t think it handles icy conditions well. The PYL seems great but more of an all mountain freeride style board, that is less aggressive and less freeride oriented compared to XV, but can manage a little park. I am looking for freeride aspects, such as speed, stability, powder, and carving, don’t really do park. Thanks.
Hi Jon
I prefer the PYL, but I like to have just that little bit of forgiveness, even in my more aggressive freeride board. So, given what you’re describing, I think the XV would be a great option – it is great in icy conditions and has all the attributes you’re looking for. For what you’re describing, I would be leaning towards the XV. Or something like the Niche Maelstrom or the 2019 or previous Jones Flagship.
Do you have a review of the Rossignol XV? I can’t seem to find a review of it on the site so curious if you have one or your thoughts on it, especially compared to the One LF. Thanks.
Hi Jon
Thanks for your message.
I never created a review for the XV. Haven’t ridden it in a while, but I would say the main differences vs the One LF are:
– It’s noticeably stiffer – rated 9/10, but I’d say more like 8/10 – just as with the One LF, rated 7/10, but more like 6/10 (IMO).
– It has more camber. The camber on the One LF extends only to around the middle of the inserts – whereas the camber on the XV extends beyond the inserts – with smaller rocker zones
– Is quite a bit more directional overall. The nose is a good bit longer than the tail, the nose is wider than the tail. The flex is directional. The nose and tail on the One are the same width and the nose is only slightly longer.
– The XV is a little different in it’s flex too, in that it has a stiffer nose compared to the tail. It’s stiff through the nose and waist, and then a little softer towards the tail. This is the opposite of a lot of boards with directional flex. Like the One which is stiffer in the tail and between the feet with a softer nose.
All of that makes it a more aggressive ride and a ride that requires a more advanced rider. But it gives you better carving, better float in powder and more stability at speed. It’s not as good as the One for riding switch or more freestyle elements.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hi Nate!
Took a bit, but I read through all of your comments. Thanks a lot for all of your insights man! They were helpful!
Little about me: I’m 25 y.o., 5’11” and 180 lbs with a size 11 Burton Moto boot. I also ride 15 in front and -12 in back (pertains to my question below regarding sizing).
I’ve been snowboarding for 13 years—all, remarkably and admittedly unintelligently—on my first board: an Option Jordan Mendenhall 149 cm (yes, 149 cm). Was a gift from my mom when I was 12 y.o., ran with it, have shredded double blacks at Jackson Hole, Snowbird, Park City, Vail, etc. using it and have loved its playfulness, agility, lightness, etc., so I’ve always postponed upgrading until now.
I’m in the market for an agile freeride board. I really enjoy carving while trying to keep my carves as tight and violent as possible. I don’t like to bomb a trail per sé, but I do appreciate stability at speed because I don’t like the chatter in my knees. Lastly, I do enjoy being able to make quick jump cuts on mogul-dominated trails, and I venture into the trees from time to time. Not a big park or trick guy.
Last week at Snowbird and Park City, I demoed the Burton FA (159W) and the T. Rice Lib Tech Pro HP (157). The FA felt a bit stiff for me and I didn’t feel as much control transitioning to toe-side as I normally do (albeit my stance was set back pretty far to account for the decent amount of powder and I’m used to a 149)… The T. Rice Pro HP didn’t handle the powder as well as I would have hoped, nor the moguls.
Do you have any suggestions for a board for me, and also a good size? Not married to any particular brand but intrigued by lib tech, yes, burton and jones…
Regarding sizing, I know my old board is significantly too small, but I am not sure if the FA felt a little too clunky because I got a 159W instead of just a 159? T’was definitely sturdy, but it didn’t seem as quick on my edge to edge transitions. I’ve heard good things about the ejack, but I’m also intrigued by the Yes boards; however, I’d like to demo before committing to a purchase and I can’t find anywhere that offers demoes for Yes boards unfortunately! Big shame.
Apologies for the essay and very much looking forward to your opinion. Thanks a ton, Nate!!
Hi Jared
Thanks for your message.
Since you’re so used to a shorter board (I had a mate who also rode his board he got as a 12 year old, into his 20s, so you’re not alone there!) then going a little shorter for your specs probably isn’t a bad idea, particularly given that you like tight, quick carves, moguls and trees. Certainly going longer than 149 is a good idea! But I would probably size down a little still, given those factors. When it comes to the FA, the 156 might have been the better option. Width wise too, going from what was a much narrower board to one that was both 10cm longer and a good bit wider, and likely a good bit stiffer, is a big (understatement) transition. With 11s, for most boards, I would recommend wide, but if you’ve gotten away with a 149 for this long, you might get away with regular width – and given you have those binding angles and low profile boots, that helps to get you on a regular width too. Most boards around that length are likely to be wider than your 149 at least.
Generally speaking size-wise, I would say around 159-161 for your specs. But given all the factors, I would probably size more to 156, 157.
I’ve never found the T Rice Pro a particularly quick board edge to edge for whatever reason, but a lot of Lib Tech/GNU boards are quick edge-to-edge so still definitely an option there. The T Rice Pro is more an exception, IMO, in terms of that factor for Lib boards. And it’s not a great powder board – it’s what I would term an aggressive all-mountain-freestyle board, rather than a Freeride board.
In terms of Lib Tech/GNU, if you wanted to go softer flexing but still wanted to go Freeride, you could look at the likes of the GNU Hyper Kyarve, GNU Antigravity or the Lib Tech Dynamo. The Ejack Knife is a really nice board and not ultra stiff either – but it’s as stiff as the Flight Attendant.
For Burton, again if you wanted to go a little softer, you could look at the likes of the Skeleton Key.
If you were OK going wider again, but going a little shorter from the 159W FA you tried, the YES Hybrid (157) could be a very good option for you too. The PYL a little stiffer, but a killer deck – if you were OK keeping that flex stiffer, but wanted to go shorter, then you could look at the 156, if you think you would be comfortable width-wise on it.
From Jones, the Frontier could be a good option. A little softer than the Flagship, if you didn’t want to go as stiff. It’s kind of in between all-mountain and freeride for me. So not a distinctly freeride board, but on the freeride end of the all-mountain spectrum. But the Flagship also works, if you’re wanting to keep things stiffer.
A lot more options from other brands too, but I could go on forever!
Hopefully this helps you to narrow down some options – let me know if you want to bounce any more ideas off me, or if you’ve narrowed down further but still can’t decide. Should give you a good list to demo, in any case.
Hey Nate, really appreciate the reviews!
I was hoping on a recommendation for a new board.
I would classify myself as a past advanced rider, but haven’t ridden as much lately and recently when I have I’ve been riding a lot with my wife who sticks to blues so I’m jumping into the trees a ton. Looking for a board that is great for the trees, does well in powder and can hold its own on hard or uneven snow when I get the chance to hit some more difficult double blacks and back country. Not hitting any jumps/rails/pipe. Currently riding a 155 Gnu Danny Kass fill in the blank series from 2006. I was leaning towards the YES hybrid, but am only 5’6’’ and 145 lbs With size 8.5 boots and am nervous the 157 is too big for me. My other thoughts are the YES PYL and Never Summer West Bound. Also playing with the Burton Flight Attendant, which I can currently get a good deal on (also getting a deal on Burton Cartel bindings to go with the new board). Any advice would be greatly appreciated for best board and best sizing. Thanks!
Hi JL
Thanks for your message.
Yeah I would say Hybrid is a great option, expect of the size. Too long/wide for you, IMO. Generally size-wise, I would say something around 152 for your specs. But since you’re used to riding a 155, you could go a little longer – and often in freeride boards you can go a little longer too. That said, if you’re in the trees a lot, then going longer isn’t necessarily the best idea.
The PYL 156 is going a little smaller overall vs the 157 Hybrid, but it’s still on the big side, especially when you take into account the extra stiffness vs the Hybrid and vs the Danny Kass. Same could be said for the FA and West Bound, though I think the FA in 152 and West Bound in 153 would work, for sure. Getting that bit more stiffness vs the Danny Kass, but a little shorter too.
You could also look at the Skeleton Key vs the FA, which is a little softer, but also a little wider. The 150 may be a little short and the 154 maybe a little wide for that length for you. Sorry thinking out loud a little here!
Overall, I think the FA in the 152 or the West Bound in 153 would be your best bets and would work well for what you’re describing. The Cartels definitely work on the FA. I think for that size and for your weight, they would be a really good combo. I would personally go with slightly stiffer bindings on the FA, but I think at your weight and in that size, the Cartels would work well.
Hope this helps with your decision
Greetings,
I’m 6′ 2″, 220 lbs, and size 14 Burton MOTO Boa boots, although I’m probably a 13 in other boots. I’m intermediate, although not particularly skilled, and am looking to advance my riding. I mainly ride groomers, trees, and some resort powder: no interest in park. My bindings are set to +15/+5: I have a pair of XL Flow Fuses and Flow Alphas. I currently ride a 2012/’13 Burton Bullet 160 (V-rocker; waist 260 cm). I want something a little wider, longer and stiffer so I can feel stable while going faster and to improve my carving. Extra points for a directional board with some camber AND rocker (just to have some variation from my current board).
Hi Robbie
Thanks for your message.
Yeah definitely agree that something stiffer and with some more camber in there is a good idea to get where you’re wanting to go. Just looking at the specs of the Bullet, it looks like a very soft board and with that V rocker, it’s not something for riding fast for sure. However, I wouldn’t necessarily go too stiff if you still identify at that intermediate level. But going to at least a medium flex is a good idea.
Size-wise, I agree that going longer and wider is a good idea for you. I would say something around 162-164 would be a good length for you and add the stiffness and camber in and that will really help to give you a more stable ride.
– The Nitro Team Gullwing is a candidate, IMO. It’s quite wide in the 162W (270mm at the waist and around 280mm at the inserts)
– The YES Standard 162 is 268mm at the waist and roughly 280mm at the inserts as well)
These are both around a 6/10 flex.
If you wanted to go a little stiffer you could also look at the “Drag Free” sizes for Never Summer’s West Bound and Heritage boards. Looking at more like 7/10 in terms of flex, but are that bit wider again compared to most wide boards. The 160DF West Bound has a 284mm waist, and I would estimate around 294mm at the inserts, based on measuring a different size of the West Bound. That would certainly give you plenty width-wise.
The 164DF Heritage has a 285mm waist. I haven’t ridden or measured this board, so not sure what it is at the inserts, but based on other similar Never Summer boards, it’s likely to be around 293-295mm at the waist.
All these options have a mixture of camber and rocker. The least directional is the Standard, then the Gullwing, then the Heritage and the West Bound is the most directional option there. The West Bound is relatively easy going for it’s flex, so it’s within reach. The same is probably true of the Heritage. So even though they are on the stiffer side, they are doable for solid intermediate rider’s I would say.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Live your site. Hoping you could provide one more recommendation.
I’m an old school boarder (25+ years). All I know is Charging hard on directional camber. I’m 5’9”, 180 lbs, and I ride a 162 2003 Burton custom (the one with the awesome hologram!). It’s old, long, super directional, all camber, and it continue to rip on-piste, and through chunky off-piste (although admittedly isn’t the best in the deep). Regardless it’s basically the only board I’ve ridden since I bought it.
I ride all over the place. West coast, east coast, Alps. Generally hard charging, fast edge to edge, free ride, all over the mountain – groomers, chop, off-piste, trees, bowls, etc. pretty much always directional. NEVER any park, jibs, or other silliness… Sadly I’m too old for that.
I was thinking Burton FA, or GNU Mullair, because they are so well reviewed and from such well established brands.
I also considered the Jones Flagship, but reviews say the 2020 is softer, less directional free ride than it used to be.
The Yes PYL sounds awesome, but I’ve never heard of Yes before.
Given my old school profile, what would you recommend? Also, what size? Seems the trend these days is to go shorter. I assume technology has allowed that to happen (?).
Many thanks,
Hi Dan
Thanks for your message – and apologies for the slow response. A bit behind and trying to catch up after vacation.
Given that you’re used to camber, I think the Burton FA would work really well. Gives you predominantly camber, but with rocker in the nose for better float in powder than what you’re used to. I haven’t ridden a 2003 Custom, so I don’t know how it would compare in terms of flex, but in terms of camber, you’re still getting camber back to the tail, with just that rocker before the nose.
The Mullair is pretty close to camber, but with some subtle rocker between the feet. Whilst it’s very subtle, it is there and might take some getting used to. But otherwise, it’s also a good choice.
The Flagship is a little softer, but not by that much. It’s changed shape, but it’s not less directional. It’s actually more directional – it’s got more taper and there is a bigger difference in nose length vs tail length. But it has changed personality. It’s become better for trees and generally riding in tighter spaces but not as good for straight line bombing (IMO) as the previous models. It might be that getting used to the extra taper is the hardest thing. The FA has almost as much taper (10mm tapered vs the 12.5mm taper on the Flagship) but, IMO, you feel that taper a good bit less than you do on the Flagship.
YES is relatively new, but have been around 11 years now. Personally I love a lot of their boards – and the PYL is no exception. Now, I started out riding hybrid profiles, so I haven’t come into these boards used to riding only traditional camber, so taking that into account, I think the Burton FA would be the easiest transition for you to make. Not that the PYL is anything crazy – it’s still camber dominant, but it does have some subtle rocker in the tail – and then more so in the nose.
So yeah, I think the FA is your safest bet. But any of those boards would be great for what you’re describing – they would just need more adjustment to get used to them vs the FA.
Size-wise, for your specs, I would say something around 159 would be a good bet. You could go 160-162 as well if you wanted, given that you’re used to riding longer. And also with a lot of freeride boards that have a good bit of nose rocker, sometimes the effective edge is less than it would be on an all camber board, so that allows you to ride a little longer if you want to.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
Thanks so much for the quick response. Gave me the confirmation I wanted for the FA.
All the best!
You’re very welcome Dan. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate,
Appreciate all the comments and feedback you offer.
Hoping you can help me out. I’m looking for a board that is strong in powder, carves hard on groomers and cuts through the ice / chunder effectively. Edge hold, stability, and control under top speed is important. I’ve been riding for 19 years, split my time between big mountain / CAT boarding and not so big hills that can get decently icy (Ontario).
5’9, 195lb, size 9.5 boot (Burton Ion’s). Generally ride a 156. Been on Burton traditionally, but looking elsewhere. Perhaps the Ultra Mind Expander or PYL, one of the Korua options or another suggestion?
Thanks,
Matt
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden any Korua boards, so I can’t comment there. But in terms of the Ultra Mind Expander – that is a beast of a board, IMO. Really stiff. It’s one of those boards that feels stiffer than it’s rating (some feel softer than they’re rating and some feel about on their rating). Jones rates it an 8/10 for flex but I would say more like a 9/10. One of the stiffer boards I’ve ridden. And it’s got some good camber. Nice on a carve – and definitely prefers to carve vs any other kind of turn. I wouldn’t say it’s like one of the nicest boards I’ve carved on, but it’s pretty good. In terms of speed though it’s super stable and damp. I didn’t get it in any powder unfortunately, but based on the Mind Expander (non-ultra version), it’s shape and the fact that there’s still a fair bit of rocker in the nose, I would say it would be very good in powder – but probably not as good as the regular Mind Expander, but certainly better than the regular mind expander for carves and speed. And edge hold. The edge hold is really good on the UME. But be warned it’s very stiff (or at least the one I rode was), so if you like things really stiff, then that’s a good thing, but if you prefer a bit of forgiveness in the flex, I would go PYL. I preferred PYL on a carve, but I like to have at least some flex in the board – the UME was a little dead-stiff for me. Size-wise, it’s the kind of board I would ride slightly shorter, but not heaps shorter. So, if you generally ride a 156, I would say go 154. Though do keep in mind, you’ll likely be dropping effective edge vs what you’re used to.
I haven’t published my review on the UME yet, so I just wanted to give you some info there. For more on the PYL check out my PYL Full Review here
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate
Love your review, it’s very helpful.
Wondering if you can give your opinion on something. I’m a one board guy that mostly rides off peiste (when there are conditions…), fast down groomers and rarely switch.
I mostly snowboard in Europe and can’t know the conditions, some weeks it’s deep snow and sometimes icy.
I am and experienced snowboarder (23 years).
I’m 1.8 m and 80kg with boot size 12(us).
I’m riding now on FA 159 2019 regular not wide….
At the shop I buy my gear they said it’s ok but everywhere else I see that I need the wide board – they didn’t have the wide …..
Do you think I should change for a wide board? Where would I feel the difference?
I thought about changing to either the Jones Flagship the Yes PYL or to stay with FA.
Which one of these boards and size would you suggest considering?
Cheers
Hi Ilan
Yeah I would say going wide is a safer bet. I’ve heard one or two people say they’re OK riding regular width boards with 12s, but they’re the exceptions. I’ve heard some with 11s or even 10.5s that have boot drag issues on regular width. It partly depends on your style of riding and partly on the boots you have. Lower profile boots give more leeway, but with 12s, I would go wide if I was you. Unless you know you’ve ridden regular width before without drag issues and/or if you’re kind of rider that doesn’t tend to get that high on their edges on carves. But being an experienced rider, I would say that you’ll want to go wide with 12s for sure.
Going too narrow, the biggest issues is potential boot drag. Going too wide has the issue of slower edge to edge transitions – the board feeling heavy and turning like a boat, because the rider can’t get much leverage on the edge of the board. However, this is only an issue if your feet are too small for the board. Going wide when your feet are close to the edges doesn’t generate this issue, so it’s only a downside if the board is too wide for your feet. And most wide boards, except the exceptionally wide are going to be an issue if you have size 12s, I wouldn’t imagine.
Between the FA, PYL and Flagship, they’re all really suited to what you’re describing, and you’re definitely in the right place on this list. I would say the Flagship and PYL are the best options for off piste, particularly if you’re riding through trees a bit. But the FA is still really good off piste just not quite as good, but a little better for charging and carving up the groomers than the Flagship, IMO. The PYL matches it though. Maybe ever so slightly not as good at speed/carving as the FA, but very close, IMO.
Size-wise, I would say 160W for PYL, 159W for FA, and 159W for Flagship. The PYL 160W and FA 159W aren’t actually all that wide anyway. Borderline for 12s really, so they would be, IMO, on the narrow end of your range, if you’re looking for something that’s just wide enough. For more leeway width-wise the Flagship is your better bet. But yeah FA 159 too narrow, IMO. Quite a risky option for boot drag for 12s.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
Thank you very much for the answer it helped alot. I’ll probably change to the PYL or FA….
Cheers