The YES Basic is a really easy riding, easy going board that has a nice stable feel (up to certain speeds). It's super easy to turn and is nice and predictable.
This makes it a great option for those new to snowboarding and even better for someone who's new to freestyle snowboarding.
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: $449
Style: Freestyle
Flex Rating: Medium (5/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium-Soft (3.5/10)
Rating Score: 83.7/100
Compared to other Men’s Freestyle Boards
Of the 28 current model freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Basic ranked 17th= out of 28
Overview of the Basic’ Specs
Check out the tables for the Basic’s specs and available sizes.
STYLE:
freestyle
PRICE:
$449 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
feel:
DAMPNESS:
SMOOTH /SNAPPY:
Playful /aggressive:
Edge-hold:
camber profile:
HYBRID CAMBER
HYBRID Camber - Yes's "Camrock 3-4-3"
SHAPE:
setback stance:
CENTERED
BASE:
EXTRUDED
weight:
Felt a little lighter than normal
Camber Height:
6mm
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 |
153W | 257 | 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 best suited to someone who is looking for their first board to learn on or already have some snowboarding skills, but are new to freestyle.
It's the kind of board that will give you confidence to be able to try things.
Would work for a more advanced rider as their park/jib board or to use as something they take out when riding with new riders and they can just play around and butter etc with it.
Not for bombing or high angle carves and not for powder and not for big jumps. But for more leisurely riding and playful freestyle riding, it performs really well and is really fun. And a really great option for beginner snowboarders or beginner freestylers.
TEST/REVIEW DetailS FOR THE BASIC
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Basic is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: Yes Basic 2025, 161cm (254mm waist width)
Date: February 20, 2024
Powder
In the powder patches I encountered, the Basic felt OK, but it wouldn't fare so well in deeper powder.
There is a healthy amount of rocker in the nose and tail, which will help it in powder. But as a centered true twin, there's not much else going for it powder-wise.
Carving
The Basic definitely isn't a hard carving board. But it's also not the worst. At slower speeds, it's decent enough. But it's pretty easy to wash out at moderately fast speeds, when carving.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: Super easy to initiate turns and slash turns.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Really agile at slow speeds. Even in the 161, which is bigger than I'd typically ride, it was still really agile. But naturally not as agile as smaller models of the Basic I've tested.
Catchiness: Basically no catchiness at all.
Speed
This board prefers to keep things at a more leisurely pace and tends to get a bit jittery at higher speeds.
Uneven Terrain
Crud/Chunder: It's really easy for this board to get bounced around in crud, even in the 161, and you feel plenty of chatter too. The saving grace is that it's easy to make adjustments on - but that won't save you if you're trying to go through crud at speed.
Trees/Bumps: Nice and agile for weaving between objects and has a nice easy flex that molds the board when going over bumps at moderate to slow speeds. Would be a bit divey with powder in the trees though. Watch out for those tree wells!
Jumps
It's nothing exciting, but as an easy and predictable ride, it would be fine for someone learning jumps. For those who like to get air a lot, they might something with a little more energy.
Pop: As you'd expect with a softer flexing board like this, the pop is really easy to extract. But the total pop is lacking.
Approach: Really easy to make adjustments and speed checks. But not great for faster approaches.
Landing: It's a bit wobbly from higher landings and if you don't get your speed in check pretty quickly afterwards, it can get the speed wobbles. But with it's even nose and tail and softer flex, it's pretty forgiving of landing errors, when you're not dropping from too high.
Side-hits: It's really well suited to side-hits, particularly smaller ones. It does well when having to make adjustments approaching a not-so-easy to get to side-hit and you don't have to work to get it to pop.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Small jumps for sure. For jumps, it would work really well for small jumps for someone learning jumps. It doesn't give you a lot of pop, but you probably don't want that when you're learning. It's predictable and easy to adjust and speed check.
Switch
Being a true twin, it's naturally a natural at riding switch. Transitions are really easy too, being as catch-less as it is. Of course it has the same shortfalls riding switch - as in, once you get to a certain speed or try to carve too hard, it will still get wobbly and washy.
Spins
Really easy to spin, even in the 161. Catch-less setups and landings and good for taking off and landing switch.
It does have a tendency to over spin but if you don't quite get a full rotation, it's super easy to finish your spin on the ground and your unlikely to nail yourself if you under-rotate.
Jibbing
I felt confident jibbing on this board. I'm not a strong jibber, but felt I could trust this board and try things that I might not on other boards. Particularly for those like me that aren't necessarily super confident on rails, the Basic helps with it's easy adjustability, easy pop and catch-free feel.
Butters
Really easy to butter this board, even in the 161. And could still over-flex it in this size. So, really easy, but initiate presses, but also quite easy to over-flex.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Jumps | 3.5 | 14/20 |
| Jibbing | 4 | 16/20 |
| Spins | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
| Switch | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Butters | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Uneven Terrain | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Pow | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
| Speed | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
| Carving | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
| Turns | 4.5 | 4.5/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 83.7/100 |
The Basic provides a nice stable feel at slow to moderate speeds and is easy to turn, quick to turn and gives up its pop with ease. It excels in powderless trees, on small jumps and side-hits and easy rails/boxes in the park. And for a board of its flex, it's really good for hard/icy conditions.
It's not at home with high angle carves at more than slow speeds and gets wobbly when riding faster. It prefers to live at more leisurely speeds, taking life easy.
It's a confidence inspiring board that is a great option for beginners or those just starting out with freestyle. Particularly for those who see plenty of hard/icy conditions.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
To learn more about the Basic, or if you're ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
To check out some other freestyle snowboard options, or to see how the Basic compares to others, check out our top rated freestyle snowboards by clicking the button below.
Hi Nate,
I am planning to get Yes Basic. I am hesitating on choosing size of the board. I am 178cm (5ft8), 75-80 kg depends on bulking or cutting season. I was considering 156W or 158, I mostly spend my time on groomers for practise.
Hope this message will find you well. Can you give me advices? Thanks
Hi Kay, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 157/158, so probably the 158, but depending on your boot size, you might need to go wide. Or it might even be the case, if you the board is actually wide for your feet, that you might be better off sizing down to the 155. If you can let me know your boot size, I can give you my opinion on the best size.
Hope this helps
Rode a 149 Typo this season at your suggestion, enjoyed it. Did well but still don’t feel confident on blacks without good coverage, worried to catch an edge (but never did) or lose an edge (a couple of times).
Would a Basic 152 be a step backwards for me? 5’6″ 130lbs. Age 50+, Size 8.5, frontside groomers on the Ice Coast.
Would like to feel more confident going faster like on skis (50 on skis OK, but only 30 on snowboard). Just keep riding what I have? sometimes I feel like I want to have just a bit more edge underneath me.
—–
Next question: Daughter went from a 115 kid board to a Yes Basic 133 this season (97 lbs., 5’1″, size 6)
She rips, think she outgrew the board. What’s the next step for her?
Hey Tim, thanks for your message. And apologies for the delay in response. I’m up the mountain testing gear almost everyday at the moment.
While the 152 Basic would give you a bit more length (which would help with stability at speed and getting more speed in general), you’d be going softer flexing (which isn’t going to help with stability at speed), so at a guestimate I’d say it’d be a bit of a wash, particularly with the Typo also being a little more camber dominant (which can also help with stability and edge hold). So, while it may not be a step backwards in terms of speed/stability at speed, it’s probably not going to be an improvement or at least not much of one.
One option would be to go up to the 152 Typo. Another would be to look at the 149 Greats. It wouldn’t be going up in total length, but you would be getting more effective edge (114.6cm vs the 113cm on the 149 Typo) and you’d be going up in stiffness. The reason I’d go 149 on the Greats is because of it’s width – while it’s waist is a little narrower than the 149 Typo’s waist, it’s noticeably wider at the inserts and tip/tail. Would certainly be better for speed vs the 149 Typo, IMO – and I’d say better for speed vs the 152 Typo, though not by a huge amount. Definitely a great board for icy conditions, it’s been my go to when things get icy for a few years now.
Or if you’re not doing any freestyle/switch riding, then something like the Never Summer Nokhu or Burton Gril Master might be good bets. Not as good in icy conditions as the Greats, but decent.
I see you have a comment on the YES Rival review re your daughter’s board, so I’ll reply there for that one.
Hope this helps (if it didn’t come too late!)
Hi Nate,
Thanks for the review.
I‘m really interested in buying the YES Basic. I‘m not so sure about the size.
I‘m 195cm tall and my weight is 85kg and boot size 11.
What would you recommend?
Thank you!
Hi Nino, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 162/163, and with 11s I would go wide for the Basic, so the 163W is probably your best bet. If you’re more of a beginner or if you would be using it predominantly for freestyle/park, you could go 159W, but otherwise, I’d be leaning more towards the 163W.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello
I was kind of curious what size you’d recommend for me. The weight charts can be a struggle to understand because the ranges are so wide. A little bit about me; I come from a background of longboarding, big power slides + tech slides. I wish to get into park and according to your skill chart I fall under intermediate 1.
My specs are –
Height 5’8”
Weight 130-145 lbs (varies on bulk/cut)
Boots – 8.5M
Was thinking of a 149 but I honestly don’t know.
Hi Blake, thanks for your message.
Yes, I agree weight ranges alone aren’t super helpful.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 150-153, depending on if you’re at the low or high end of your weight range. So you could go 149 or 152. I would be leaning 149 though, since you’re looking to get into park and also because of width. While the 149 and 152 of this board aren’t too wide for your foot size or anything, they are on the wider end of a good range for your foot size, in which case I would be erring smaller rather than bigger. That plus the fact that it sounds like you’ll be in the park a fair bit, points me to the 149. The 152 wouldn’t be wrong but I would be leaning 149.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi, Nate! Thanks for being a great source of snoaboarding knowledge!
With end of season discounts, I am looking at buying a set of bindings for my 155 Basic and K2 Maysis boots. 177cm, 75kg, 5 days of riding 🙂 Just groomers, no park.
What would be your recommendation? I’ve read all the comments but still can’t decide. Looking at Bataleon Fly, Ride C4, Now Brigade, K2 Indy (but the heel strap seems from the ‘80s) and Union STR. A comfy ankle strap is a must, since I can easily decelop pressure points.
Thanks a lot!
Hi Adrian
Thanks for your message.
We haven’t tested the Indy, but when I tested the Formula (when it had a similar ankle strap to the current Indy) I didn’t like it. So, whilst I don’t know how the Indy would go, based no specific experience, that’s something I’d take into account. The Ride C4 would be a good match, IMO. I haven’t found the Ride C bindings line up to be anything special, but decent and solid, so would work for sure, I would say.
The NOW Brigade could work well too. A good flex-match and I found the ankle strap and overall comfort on them to be decent.
The Union STR would be a solid bet too, IMO. Again nothing special, but solid all-round binding for the price and the flex match works too.
We haven’t tested the Bataleon Fly, or any of their Heelwrap options (we’ve only tried their Fullwrap and Asymwrap models). But on paper, they look like they would be a good match.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!
I’m following your website for a while now. Loving all the reviews and advises you post. Keep up the good work👍 After 10 years of snowboarding on rentals I’m now looking to buy my own board. As an intermediate 6’4” and 75kg (44.5/US11) I mostly cruise down the blue, red occasionally black slopes, with a small jump now and then, nothing too fancy. Came across a good deal for the Yes. Basic board (159W). Is it worth it? Or too much of a beginner board? Other options I’ve been looking at….Capita DOA/Jones Mntn Twin. Are these better options?
Thnx in advance!
Steven
Hi Steven
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think for what you’re describing, you’ll be able to push the Basic to its limits too easily. If you were going to be using it as your freestyle deck in your quiver or just wanted something that was playful and you weren’t really interested in putting in any real carves at anything but slower speeds and had no interest in any real speed, then I think it would work fine, but otherwise, I think going with one of the other options would work better for you.
Between the DOA and Mountain Twin, it depends, but my instinct is the Mountain Twin for you, based on what you’ve said about your riding. If you were doing a lot of jumping/side-hits, wanting to ride switch quite a bit and otherwise mostly carving, then the DOA could work well. It’s not an overly aggressive board, but it is a board that I’ve found you want to focus on and it does best when you’re riding it more aggressively than casually. If you want a board that feels consistent across conditions, can ride powder decently but is also good in icy conditions and has a bit more of a cruisey feel and something that you can ride a little more aggressively when you want to, but something that you can also ride casually, then the Mountain Twin is a good bet. It’s basically something that does a bit of everything well and kind of sits right in the middle of everything and very good for just cruising groomers.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160/161. And for most boards I would go wide with 11s, but for some you wouldn’t have to. And if you want to keep things a little more playful/agile, rather than leaning more stable at speed, then you could also size down from that a little. I think the 159W in the Basic would work size-wise, but I feel like you might be wanting for more after a while.
Specifically for the DOA and MT, I would be looking at the following sizes:
MT: 160 – this is one board you wouldn’t have to go to a wide size with, if you went to the 160. It should be wide enough for 11s, IMO. The only way it wouldn’t really is if you’ve got bulky boots, a straight (like 0-6 degrees) back binding angle and you liked to lay your carves deep. Otherwise, this should be a good width for your boots. You could even potentially get away with the 157, if you wanted to go smaller and more mellow. If your carving isn’t super aggressive and you have like a 23.6″ (600mm) stance width or similar (which I’m guessing at 6’4″, you’re probably looking at a wider stance width than what I would typically use), then I think you could get on it, if you wanted to err shorter. If not, I think the 160 would be a good bet.
DOA: 159W
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you again for helping me on picking the right board for my wife in the other thread (Yes Womens Basic vs Arbor Poparazzi). As you recommended, we kept the Basic for her and she’ll be riding it this coming weekend (now just need to pick the binding too pending your suggestion between Rosa, Legacy, or maybe Ultra?)
Your suggestion got me to think that I may want to pick up a Yes Basic myself too to play around on the groomers and side hits when I go with my family (wife, and 7- and 4-year-old sons). Right now, my stash is Jones Mountain Twin, Jones Flagship, and K2 Excavator. I don’t really have a soft board, and I’ve been just using the Mountain Twin to go with families, but sometimes I think it’s a little stiff for very slow slashing (my wife is really slow, and so is my 4-year-old son who’s just learned how to pizza turn on his skis). Do you think a Yes Basic is a good choice for myself?
My stats are 5’4″, 130lbs, boot size 7. I’m at Level 7 according to your skill-level chart, and I’m a Level 1 instructor as well. Do you think size 146 will fit me well, or should I go up to a 149? I’m probably not ever going to go over 30mph on this board since I’m only using it when I go with family.
Hey Leo
I think the Basic would work well for what you’re describing – slow speed slashing about, hitting side-hits – something easy and fun to ride slow on.
Size-wise, I’d go 146. You’d be fine with a 149, but given the purpose you’re getting it for, I would go 146.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you again for the advice. I will take the 146 then and have a good time playing with it with my family!
Leo
You’re very welcome Leo. Hope you get some good fun out of it! If you think of it at the time, let me know what you think, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hey Nate,
I’m about 5’8 170lbs, US 7 boot. Used rentals a handful of times but wanted to get my own gear to avoid paying for them. I’m a beginner and was looking for something I could keep for the long run. Will be riding at resorts off groomers, do some ground tricks here and there.
Deciding between the Yes Basic or K2 Raygun Pop. I could get the Raygun Pop for about 50$ less than the Basic. Also a bit unsure for sizing as well. If the Basic, between 152 or 155. But the Raygun Pop, between the 153 or 156.
As for bindings I was looking at last season deals on the K2 Line Up and Formula. I’m assuming either would be fine?
Cheers mate
Hi Christian
Thanks for your message.
The YES Basic is a great option for what you’re describing, IMO. The Raygun Pop could work too though, but I’d be leaning Basic.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” based on your weight/height, at around 156/157. However, because of your boot size, I would size down from that. And for your level I would size down as well. You might get away with the 155 Basic, but I would be leaning 152. For the Raygun Pop I think the 153 would be your best bet. The Raygun pop is a little narrower, but still on the wider side for 7s, so I would still size down from the 156 – also the Raygun Pop has more effective edge vs overall length than something like the Basic, so I’d err smaller rather than longer. If you really wanted to go longer than 152/153, then I’d go 155 Basic, as I think the 156 Raygun pop is going to feel too big. But I would go either 152 Basic or 153 Raygun Pop.
In terms of bindings, I would go K2 Line Up. They are a better binding than the Formula, in my experience and a better flex match to the Basic and Raygun Pop, IMO.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision.
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.