Hello and welcome to my YES Basic snowboard review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Basic as a freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Basic a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other freestyle snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: YES Basic
Price: $429
Style: Freestyle
Flex Rating: Medium (5/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Soft (4/10)
Rating Score: 84.2/100
Compared to other Men’s Freestyle Boards
Out of the 36 men’s freestyle snowboards that I rated:
Overview of the Basic’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Basic’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Freestyle |
Price: | $429 |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Fast |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | Hybrid Camber 4-4-4 |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Centered |
Base: | Extruded |
Weight: | On the heavier side |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
143 | 245 | 90-140 | 41-64 |
146 | 247 | 100-150 | 45-68 |
149 | 248 | 110-160 | 50-73 |
152 | 250 | 120-170 | 54-77 |
155 | 251 | 140-190 | 64-86 |
156W | 259 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
158 | 253 | 160-210 | 73-95 |
159W | 261 | 160-210 | 73-95 |
161 | 254 | 180-220+ | 82-100+ |
163W | 263 | 180-220+ | 82-100+ |
Who is the Basic Most Suited To?
The Basic is a great board for anyone looking for a really good, buttery but otherwise stable feeling, freestyle board at a great price.
Also a great option for beginners - especially those who see park riding in their future - it's a board you can start out with as a beginner and keep it as your park board, basically for as long as you wanted.
Suitable as an all-mountain-freestyle board, just don't expect it to be a bomber or an aggressive carver or anything like that.
The Basic in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Basic is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: YES Basic 2020, 158cm (253mm waist width)
Date: March 20, 2019
Conditions: Perfect sunshine (as I'm sure you can see in the pic there!) and perfect visibility.
Crunchy/icy off groomer - and in some spots in the shade on groomer. But softened up a little as I rode the Basic - especially parts in the sun. But never got slow/sticky at any point.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 572mm (22.5″)
Stance Setback: Centered
Width at Inserts: 262mm (10.32")
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 185lbs
Rider Boot Size: US10 Vans Aura
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 3040g (6lbs, 11oz)
Weight per cm: 19.24g/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.45 grams/cm*
*based on a small sample size of 51 boards that I've weighed in 2019 and 2020 models. So the basic is heavier than normal, but it felt normal on snow to ride, maybe very slightly on the heavier side, but pretty much normal.
Powder
There wasn't any the day I rode it - but from riding previous models and based on the specs, it's not going to be a great powder option - fine in shallow stuff, but when it gets deeper, it will get sinky.
Carving & Turning
Carving: It's not the kind of board that drives aggressive carves at speed that well, but..
Turning: It's super agile at slow speeds - edge to edge is lightning.
S turns at slow to medium speeds are nice on this board too - really easy and smooth. Prefers to turn at medium and slow speeds and not so much at high speeds.
Speed
Previously I've rated this board a little less for speed. But getting on the 2020 model, it actually surprised me a little bit. Still not like a bomber at speed or anything, but better than I was expecting and better than I remember it being.
Not something you lay down carves on at high speeds - I found you're more holding on, but it held on better than I expected.
Uneven Terrain
For weaving through bumps it's really good - being as numble as it is. But it certainly does feel the chop and the bumps. Not super damp.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Overall a very competent jumping board, more suited to small jumps.
Pop: Not oodles of it, but what's there is super easy to access. It pops quickly and easily. Load it up and you don't get anything extra - so what's there is easy to extract.
Approach: The approach for trickier sidehits is great, and for small jumps - but not as suited to larger jumps where you need to get more speed.
Landing: Solid enough, but again, more suited to smaller jumps. Forgiving landings for those learning jumps.
Side-hits: Great for side hits - especially anything that's not that straight forward to line up. It's nice and nimble and has that super easy to extract pop - is great for spins and forgiving on landings.
Small jumps: This is where this board shines for jumps - I'd say 5/5 for small jumps.
Big jumps: Not as suited to big jumps.
Switch
It's a true twin with a centered reference stance. Enough said.
Spins
The Basic was easy to get around, and has decent pop. It's also great landing and taking off switch. For bigger tricks not that suited but for flat-land spins and spins off small jumps it's awesome.
Jibbing
Conditions weren't great for when I was hitting the jibs - conditions were a bit icy. But I still felt fairly confident hitting them on the Basic. It holds well in icy conditions and is really nimble, which made the approach even in those conditions good.
And it felt good on the jib too. Would be interesting to get it on a softer day and be able to compare it to looser, jib friendly boards - it might be the case that I would give it 3.5/5 instead of 4/5. But since I was confident jibbing even in those conditions, I think it warranted 4/5.
Butters
This board is really easy to butter. YES boards typically are - even some of the stiffer flexing ones, I've found. But the Basic is a step better - that softer overall flex obviously making it even easier to butter.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
JUMPS | 3.5 | 14/20 |
JIBBING | 4.0 | 16/20 |
SPINS | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SWITCH | 4.5 | 9/10 |
BUTTERING | 5.0 | 10/10 |
UNEVEN TERRAIN | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
POWDER | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
SPEED | 3.0 | 3/5 |
CARVING | 3.0 | 3/5 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.5 | 4.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 84.2/100 |
Overall, the Basic is a great option for park riding and riding the groomers like a park. It's something also goes well in trees - so long as the powder isn't too deep in there - with some great agility at slow speeds.
Also a great option for beginners who want a board that is still quality and that they can transition easily into freestyle riding on but that still won't break the bank.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Basic, or if you are ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
If you want to check out some other freestyle snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Basic compares to other freestyle snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
For a complete beginner 180cm, 80kg, mondo 27,5, which size would you recommend, 155 or 158 for cruising at ski resorts?
Thanks!
Hi Ivan
Thanks of your message. It’s a close call. The 155 will be the easier board to progress on, IMO, but the 158 wouldn’t be wrong. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159/160, so you’d still be subtly sizing down on the 158. But I would be leaning 155. If you have any inclination as to where your style might lead (more park, tricks etc or more speed, powder etc), then that could play a part in your decision. If you think you’d like to get into tricks etc at some point, then I’d be stronger on the 155. If you don’t think you will but think you’d like to ride at speed and ride in powder at some point, then there’d be an argument to go 158.
Hope this helps with your decision
HI Nate, thanks for the great site and information ( as always).
I recently purchased a Yes Basic 159W, Burton Genesis bindings and Rome Bodega BOA boots.
I’m 6’0, 185lbs and a size 12 boot ( I felt like I needed every bit of width as my boot used it up). I’m a Level 5 early intermediate (according to your charts)
Riding the Basic for a few days in Tahoe, I loved it, super flexible, buttery, spinny and nice turning, small hits, etc. I did find it was hard to carve (maybe I’m just not good enough) but it felt like I lost speed trying to rail or carve it. Also, I felt like I could bomb the mountain with ease b/c the speed really wasn’t there on this board. I waxed the base before my trip just to get everything I could out of it.
My thoughts are going to a Salomon Assassin Pro, Jones Mountain Twin or Yes the Greats. I want something that’s still playful but faster and can carve better. I also thought with a more aggressive, faster board, I can go shorter to get more playfulness from it while benefiting from the nimbleness of a shorter board but keeping my width reqmt’s in mind bc of my boot size.
Let me know your thoughts and thanks again!
Alex
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
Given you want to keep things playful, I would probably go either Mountain Twin or Greats. They’re not as playful as the Basic, but are more playful than the Assassin Pro. The Assassin Pro isn’t without playfulness, but it’s the most aggressive of those 3, so given what you’re describing, I would be leaning either MT or Greats.
Keep in mind that a longer board will always be faster and more stable at speed versus a shorter board, all else being equal – so whilst you can shorten down a board that’s better at speed to get more playfulness, you don’t want to go too short as going too short, you could cancel out the speed gains you were looking for. For the MT and Greats, I would look at:
– YES Greats 156
– MT 156W – though you could definitely go 159W for this as well and wouldn’t be too big by any means. The 159W is what I would suggest for your specs typically, but given that you want to go shorter, the 156W could work. Going to 156W you should still get better speed performance than the 159W Basic, but of course you will get even better speed performance if you went to 159W.
Hope this helps with your decision
Totally helps, thank you (as always) Nate. I really want to lean toward the Greats, but I just want to be sure it’s not too much board for me as a progressing low intermediate. Let me know if you think I should be able to handle it.
Finally, are you every planning to review the Ride lineup of boards? (Algo, Twinpig, etc?) – not sure if you’re able to get them to send you stuff but wish I had your reviews of those as I’m back and forth in deciding.
Thanks again man.
Hi Alex
If you go with the 156 Greats, I don’t think you’ll have issues with it as a low intermediate.
I have tested a few Ride boards, but has been harder to source them recently. I did get on the 2022 Twinpig though (review coming soon). It’s no more playful than the Greats, IMO. Maybe even less playful. Felt stiffer to me than what it’s rated. It was quite heavy too. It was all round a decent board, but nothing that really excited me. Haven’t tested the Algorhythm yet, unfortunately (have been trying to get on it since it came out!).
Good luck with those Ride boards…..we all need your great reviews on them so hopefully you can get a hold soon.
Thanks again, and happy riding!
Thanks Alex. I hope so too.
Hello, I started learning snowboard this year. I am 6feet 2inches tall, 170 lbs , vans us12. Generally glide, the speed should not be too fast, stable, which one to choose or your recommendation.
1, yes basic 159w
2, nitro prime 159w
3, Capita outer space living
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
The Outerspace Living is a little beyond beginner, so it would depend on how far you’ve progressed so far. It’s really a low intermediate and up board – if you’re more beginner, then it might be a bit of a stretch. The Basic and Prime would both work well, if you’re a beginner, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 160 – but as a beginner it’s a good idea to size down a bit. So you could certainly ride the 156W for the Basic and prime, if you wanted an easier start. The 159W is doable though, just a bit of a steeper learning curve.
Hope this helps
Thank you very much!
You’re very welcome John. Happy riding!
Hey Nate
Great review. Im hoping to get some advice on the board and sizes. I would say im intermediate rider that does mainly groomers but like the sound of an all mountain board.
Im leaning towards the Yes Basic 161 as can pick one up pretty cheap.
What size would you recommend?
Boot size 11 (but use Burton Rulers which i believe have smaller footprint)
weight – 190lbs
height – 6′ 2″
Thanks buddy!
Hi Andy
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise for the Basic, I would go 159W for your specs and what you’re describing. Even with low profile 11s, I think the regular width Basic’s will be too narrow – and the wide versions aren’t actually super wide. The 159W is around 270mm at the inserts, which is a really good width, IMO for 11s. I would put you roughly on a 161 as your “standard all-mountain size” but as an intermediate rider, it doesn’t hurt to be a little under that. And I think the 163W is pushing being a little too big for you. I think the 159W should work well. Note that this is what I would consider a freestyle board – or all-mountain-freestyle at a push, rather than an all-mountain board, but no reason you can’t use it for groomers if you think it suits your riding style.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate, this helps a lot. I reserved a 161 basic as that’s all i can find in stock anywhere.
Do you think a Typo would be a better board? Although they seem even harder to get hold of.
Hi Andy
For all-mountain I think the Typo is a better board. But the Basic can work well if you want to keep things more playful (the Typo is also fairly playful, they’re not worlds apart or anything). In terms of 161 with the Basic, the biggest concern is width, as mentioned in my previous reply. Because you have low profile boots, if you were to ride it at least with a good bit of angle on your bindings, and weren’t planning on doing any big eurocarves, you’ll probably be fine, but it’s borderline at that width for 11s, IMO.
Nate, I need your wisdom, please. Yes, I wrote you before because I was looking for a board learning tricks and butters and a board for icey conditions. But now I’m thinking about combining these two into one. I own a Salomon Dancehaul 147 which is perfect for good conditions and also some pow. But on ice it’s not so fun. Also my Asymulator 154 is a little bit slippery on hard days and I have no chance buttering it because, and here comes my big problem: I’m small, too small IMO for standard lenght boards accoring to my weight (mostly 154cm) and also my legs arn’t that long (I need lenght 30 in jeans). I’m not able to move my weight enough over the tips to press the board. I have to lean really hard with all my muscles to get a simple press done. But with such maximum body tension it’s not possible to do smooth looking tricks…
Long story short I’m looking for a board, thats a little bit volume shifted/can be driven a little bit shorter, is buttery and has a really good edge hold on these hard/icey days. Not sure if this is even possible, because a shorter effective edge relates to not so good edge hold… (I will sell my Asymulator after finding the new one).
My first idea, the Yes Dicey, isn’t a a good pick I think, because I should use it at normal lenght (154) according to the weight range. Looking a little bit further I found the Basic and the Typo. My first question here is: Why they have different weight ranges for the same lenght?! They are identical except the small setback of the typo and this one is a little bit stiffer. So why can the stiffer board handle less weight at the same lenght than the softer one?
And more important: Are these boards a good idea? If so, which one should I choose? Or are there better picks out there?
I’m 172cm, 71kg, Mondo 26,5. Carves in my normal stance are really good IMO, can get the elbow to the ground, in my switch stance they are getting better every day. I would guess I have been on the board for 40 days so far. Started to try jumps a few days ago (but without spins at the moment, figuring out my movements) but I’m totaly new to tricks/butters.
Thank you for your time! 🙂
Hi David
Thanks for your message.
I don’t think you need to go volume shifted to ride a shorter board. Particularly something like the Dicey – you should ride the 152 in that IMO anyway – in fact even shorter if they had it – it’s quite a wide board, particularly for your foot size, so sizing down makes sense. I wouldn’t worry too much about the weight recs. The board will feel a bit softer because your over the weight recs but that doesn’t sound like it will be a bad thing for what you are wanting. Similarly with the Basic, given what you want it for, you can go to the 152 – and even that is, for your boot size, a little bit “volume shifted” anyway. If you wanted it even softer and super easy to butter – then you could even go 149. However, given that you don’t want it purely for park/freestyle, I think I would go 152.
Those weight recs for the Basic and Typo being different – I wouldn’t worry too much about that. I like to take weight recs into account, but they’re only a small consideration – and they often don’t make that much sense.
But I think, given that you’re looking for something easy to butter, that the Basic is the way to go. I found it really easy to butter – more so than the Typo and Dicey (but those were almost as easy to butter). For me the Asymulator was pretty easy too – but the Dicey and Typo a little easier. Given your experience though, I think going even easier with the Basic makes sense. And, in my experience it’s pretty good in icy conditions.
Hi Nate, I am 5’9, weigh 180lbs, and use size 9.5 boots. I was wondering what size you would recommend for me? I want size that would lean slightly more towards a freestyle riding style. I spend about 60% of my time at the park and 40% riding the rest of the mountain.
Hi Israel
Thanks for your message.
Given your style of riding I would be leaning 155, but you could also ride 158. I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 158/159 – but given you have that much freestyle in your riding, I would be leaning towards the shorter 155. Particularly if you’re freestyle riding is more butters, jibs, smaller jumps/spins etc. If your more about going big, then 158 becomes more attractive.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello!
Thank you for your review, love it!
I’m an early intermediate rider (around 28 days of riding under my belt). 175cm, 85kg and size 7UK/8US boots.
Looking for my first board. I’m debating between Basic, Standard or Typo. Looking for an all mountain board with no intention for park or jumps and just want to progress, improve my riding and, if possible, to be forgiving. I only ride blues, groomers, looking to lap them and also be stable on icy conditions.
Looking forward to your board and sizing suggestions.
Thanks
Hi Cezar
Thanks for your message.
Given that your early intermediate and how you describe your riding, I think the Typo would be a really good option. With 28 days under your belt and with no interest in the park, I don’t think you need to go Basic. The Standard is probably a bit of a stretch though. The Typo, IMO, sounds like it will be just right.
Size-wise for the Typo, I would look at the 155. You could certainly ride something at 158 too, but because of your boot size, I would size down a little bit.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Massively helpful, thank you for your help and advice.
Will aim for the Typo and keep an eye out for some discounts or a second hand one. Already saw someone selling a 2016 Typo in good shape.
I was looking at pairing with some 2021/2022 Union Flite Pro bindings. Would you say those are a good start for me?
Appreciate your help.
Thanks
Cezar
Hi Cezar
I think the Flite Pro would work – but ideally something a little stiffer, if you were being really fussy. But definitely in range for the Typo.
Hi Nate,
Would Union Force be a better suited option instead of the Flite Pros? Ideally for a Yes Basic or Typo (which is hard to find at this time in the UK).
Thanks,
Cezar
Hi Cezar
I think the Force would work on the Typo – it’s kind of on the stiffer end for the Typo, but it would work for sure. And on the stiffer side for the Basic. The Contact Pro would be my first choice for the Basic from Union – and for the Basic, the Flite Pro is a good option too (the Typo is a little stiffer than the Basic). For the Typo, I would probably go Force (or Strata) over Flite Pro, but I’d be leaning Contact Pro, if that was an option for you.
Hi Nate,
As a small update, thank you for your help and suggestions.
Ended up buying a Yes Typo 158 and Union Contract Pro. Next time I get to test these are at the end of March and am looking forward to it. Will keep you posted how it goes.
Appreciate what you’re doing.
Cezar
Hi Cezar
Thanks for the update. Look forward to hearing how you get on at the end of March.
Hi Nate,
I’ve finished my trip and considering I’ve had new pair of boots, board and bindings, I’ve been fortunate enough for everything to work really well. Amazing actually.
The Typo with Contact Pro are an amazing pair and can’t thank you enough for recommending them to me. Extremely chuffed with my setup and I have a lot of room to improve and grow with them.
Only downside is that one of the standard screw holes on the board was not threaded properly and had to shift one set back but that didn’t affect my riding but will contact YES for some help.
Thank you
Hi Cezar
Thanks for the update. Much appreciated. Sorry to hear about the threading issue, hopefully you can get it sorted. Awesome to hear that the setup is treating you well as a whole though.
Hi Nate,
I’m a true beginner looking to purchase a board for east coast ice/snow groomers, no parks. Some basic info I am 5’11, size 12 and 300lb, I know learning will be tough.
I’m committed to learning and I have already purchased stiff bindings and stiff boots. I am looking at boards and narrowed it down to a yes board. Either a basic, typo or standard or your awesome recommendations.
Hi H
Thanks for your messages.
I think I would be leaning Standard. It’s the most advanced board of the 3, but given you have stiff boots and bindings, it will be the better flex match to them – also, size-wise, I think it’s the only one that has a suitable size for your specs, IMO. I think the 167 Standard would work well. The 163W Typo and Basic would be too small. With already quite a mellow flex, being that much small for your specs, they would feel even softer – and probably too soft, IMO. Even 167 is on the smaller side for your specs and so that should mellow out the Standard a bit, making it more beginner friendly. Still going to be a steeper learning curve than the likes of the Typo and Basic, but I think it will be fine and the best option for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
Yeah it’s very helpful, I was advised to go smaller than that as it would be harder to learn on a larger deck as a true beginner, I purchased a 159 but I guess that would be way too small, I can always return it.
Hi H
Did you pick up the Standard in 159 or Typo or Basic in 159W? Either way, yeah, I think too small. Definitely a good idea to go smaller as a beginner, but as an advanced rider, I would put you closer to 170. If you wanted to really dial down the size, then 162 Standard could work. Or 163W Typo. I think it’s going to feel quite soft for your weight, but if you want something super mellow and easy to ride to start off, it’s doable. Between Basic and Typo, if you were to go 163W, I’d go Typo, because it’s a little stiffer than the Basic.
I originally bought a 159 standard. It’s still sitting in the shipping box, yes I was thinking for as a true beginner also simultaneously just focus on losing the lbs, good inverse relationship for length and weight.
Hi H
Absolutely. If you were going to lose weight as you progressed, then the board might stay the right size, for sure.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking to pick up my first board, true beginner (1-2 tough tries on the slopes on ill fitting rentals), I’m 5’11, size 12, 300lb, east coast ice/snow groomers
,
Being on the heavier side I am aware its harder for me, so I’ve been told so many different things now by so many different people I am unsure of what board to pick. I’ve basic already picked up stiff bindings/boots and am looking for a board to compliment this whole thing. I think I’ve narrowed it down to a YES board (your reviews are very helpful)
Yes Basic, typo or standard or any recommendations you have as well would help.
Hey Nate!
I’m a beginner rider looking at the basic for my first board, but stuck trying to find the right size for me at 6’2″, 200 lbs, and with size 11 boots. I’ve had recommendations from shops for the 159W, 161, and 163W, so I’m not sure what to choose, especially since I know so little. What do you think?
Greg
Actually, I just went and got fitted and found out I’m a size 10 boot, not 11
Hi Greg
Thanks for your messages.
With your specs, given size 10 boots, and as a beginner, I would look at the 158 or 161. I wouldn’t go wide if you’re going to be in 10s. I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 162/163, which assumes an advanced level. As a rule of thumb it’s a good idea to go 3-5cm shorter, if you’re a true beginner. So that would make the 158 the best bet – this will be the easiest to learn on. However, if you have some riding experience already and feel like you want to go longer, then 161 isn’t way off. Definitely no to the 163W though, IMO. And even the 159W, given that you’re not going to be in 10s. I’d be leaning 158 though, if you want the fastest progression – would mean you’d have to upgrade sooner than if you went 161, but would give you the easiest progression, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you for all the good information and work you put in. I’m planning for a new board this coming season. I’ve been on a GNU RC C2X 158 for the past two seasons. Want to go with more of a classic camber board. Can’t decide between Yes Jackpot 156, Yes Basic RDM Unic in 156W I guess. The Basic is 25.9 wide, I think the 158 might too narrow at 25.3. I ride size 11 thirty two TM2 boots. 200lb. about 5’10”. Pretty much all east coast resorts. Need good edge hold.
Would like to get lower in my carves and I’ve come to like wider boards for rails and boxes. However, I’ve noticed that the following wider boards I’ve ridden seem to skip out on heel side edge on hard turns and speed checks at times. GNU RC C2X 158 W at 26.8 wide and 158 Salomon Craft at 25.1 wide. Really leaning to the Basic because of the core martials but don’t want to get too wide and experience that skipping out again. Could be technique, don’t know just something I’ve noticed. So, do you think I’d be good with the Basic 156W? Thank you.
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
For reference, to get an idea of those boards in terms of width at inserts:
GNU Riders Choice 158W: 276mm at inserts
Salomon Craft 157W: 270mm
YES Basic Uninc RDM 156W: 268mm
YES Jackpot 156: 271mm
Just to show that the width at inserts of the Basic Uninc 156W and Jackpot (assuming 156) aren’t too dissimilar to the Craft. The width (at inserts) on the RC is a little wider. That width, in the case of the RC may have been contributing to the wash out, but it’s unlikely that it was the width alone. It (and the Craft too) could have had something to do with the camber profile and flex too – or even edge sharpness. The flex of the RC and the Craft, by my feel are around 5/10. The Jackpot is similar in terms of flex, maybe a little stiffer, but it’s full camber – full camber boards tend to be far less likely to wash out. Also the Jackpot versus the Craft, IMO, has better edge hold in hard/icy conditions.
Around that 270mm width at the inserts is a really good match for 11s, IMO, so I don’t think you’ve got any issues width-wise on either the Basic Uninc RDM or the Jackpot.
I haven’t ridden the YES Basic Uninc RDM, so I can’t say anything based on personal experience, but looking at the specs, it looks like it might be a little stiffer than the other options – which can help for sure, if you’re looking to carve deeper. That said, the Basic Uninc RDM is rated by YES at 7/10, which the Jackpot also is, but I felt the Jackpot a good bit softer than 7/10. That doesn’t necessarily mean the Basic Uninc RDM would be softer than the 7/10 rating as it’s not always going to be the case, but there’s a good chance it feels a bit softer than that, particularly if you were riding the 156W with your specs. It looks to be all camber too – so you’ve got that part covered.
In terms of length, I would say the 156W for the Basic Uninc RDM is a little short for your specs. I agree that the 158 would be too narrow. If there was a 158W or 159W I would be more leaning towards that. You might be fine on the 156W, but biggest concern is that going too short can also affect how hard you can carve, so if that’s like one of the key thing that you’re looking to improve that would be my only real concern with the Basic Uninc RDM for you.
For the Jackpot, I would be leaning to the 158. I think that would be the best size for that board for your specs and how you’re describing your riding.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Yes sir it does thank you so much!
You’re very welcome John. If you think of it at the time, let me know what you end up going with and how you get on.
Hi Nate, I ended up with a DOA 157w, After a few sessions I realize I have a keeper. So fun! Have a great season!
Hi John
Thanks for letting me know how you got on. And awesome to hear you found a good match. Love to see it! Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
I’m riding the yes basic 155 as my first board and now i want to step it up. Looking for a board for the whole mountain freestyle not for the park(basic as parkboard). Thinking about the capita mercury(155, 157) or jones MT(154, 157)? is this a solid choice for carving harder and freestyle all over the mountain? 78kg and 180 cm
Thanks,
Guido
Hi Guido
Yeah, something like the Mercury or MT would certainly fit that bill. And the kind of boards I would be looking at if you also want it to be decent in pow. If you don’t need it for pow, I would be more inclined to look at:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
OR
>>Top 5 Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Note that the Mercury is “a bit more board” than the MT. If you’re looking for something slightly more aggressive, then the Mercury takes a little more to ride but gives a little more back in terms of bombing/carving, but probably not as suitable for riding the mountain freestyle. The MT isn’t what I would call a super playful board but it’s a little more easy going than the Mercury.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Again hoping to pick your brain. I recently picked up the yes typo 159w for my all mountain deck per your recommendation and I love it. Now I’m looking for a dedicated park board to round out my three board quiver and aid with park progression. My specs are 190-195lbs, 6’1, and size 10.5 boot (2020 Salomon focus boa). I’m looking at the basic in a 155, the niche wraith 155 (there’s very little feedback on this board besides that it’s similar to the old knew with a different profile), the 155 Salomon Huck knife, and the 154 slash happy place (I rode this and had a blast but feel like I need the 155w). The board will be rode with either Salomon Holograms or union contact pro bindings.
Thanks,
Other Nate
Hey Other Nate!
The 155 Basic would be potentially too narrow, based on our previous conversations. I mean if you weren’t going to really be carving on it, then it might be doable. Only thing with having the Basic in the Quiver, is whether it would feel too much the same as the Typo. They’re certainly not exactly the same, but relatively similar. Whilst going for 155 (or 156W) will make it more different, it’s still going to be a similar feel. There are of course benefits to that too – you get a board that you’re really in tune with – but something that’s a little shorter, a little softer and centered. So there’s that argument for it. But if you want more of a difference in your quiver, some of the other options would be better.
The Huck Knife is a relatively aggressive option. A good for the park, but I would almost say that it’s something that you’d want if you’re already quite advanced at park riding. If that’s the case, then I think this is a very good option. If you’re still more of a park beginner or intermediate, then that’s something to consider there. The Salomon Villain would be an easier board to progress on in the park, IMO, if you wanted to go Salomon.
I haven’t ridden the Wraith, but I definitely enjoyed the Knew when I tested it. I will hopefully be getting on the Wraith in a week or so.
The Happy Place (as you’ve experienced) is a really fun freestyle board – and definitely something that’s easy to ride/progress on in the park, IMO. I agree that the 155W is probably the best size for you. The fact that you’ve ridden and enjoyed it already is something to consider too.
I would say that if you’re looking for something more aggressive and you’re already quite advanced in the park, then I would go Huck Knife. If you want something more playful, then the Happy Place. The Villain and Wraith (I suspect) somewhere in between.
Hope this helps
Not sure if you’re planning on putting a review up on the wraith but I would love to hear your feedback. I’m very much down to the wraith or the happy place.
Honestly the terrible graphic on this year’s happy place is the only thing holding me back as I already know I like that board. I did find a 2019 in a 156, is there any reason why this size wouldn’t work for me? Do you think it would be too narrow? Do you think I would lose or gain anything going that size vs the 155w?
Hey Nate
Assuming I get on the Wraith this week, I will likely publish a review for it. But it wouldn’t be until later in the year (still publishing reviews of 2020 boards that I was testing a year ago!). But I would be able to give you more insight onto it, then.
Size-wise with the Happy Place, I think 156 would work fine in terms of length for you. In terms of width, it’s pushing it, like with the Basic 55 as discussed before. I think you get away with it, so long as you’re not going to be using it to do any heavy carves. If not, then I think it would be fine. Vs the 155W you loose that leeway in terms of width if you were going to be doing some harder carves on it and also you get a slightly smaller landing platform for jumps, but that’s not a big deal. Advantages of going 156 vs 155W is that it should be easier to maneuver.
Hello! I’m an intermediate ride (about 30days of riding under my belt). I’m debating between Typo and Basic. I like the all mountain element more than park and want to learn more about carving, side features, and bombing down hill. I am however worried Typo being too stiff for me. (I’m 5’5 130lb. Not the strongest guy). Can you give me some suggestions? Thanks.
Hi G
Thanks for your message.
Please refer to my answer to your comment on the YES Typo review.