Hello and welcome to my YES Basic Uninc RDM review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Basic Uninc as an aggressive all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Basic Uninc a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other aggressive all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: YES Basic Uninc RDM 2023
Price: $579
Style: Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: Medium-stiff (7/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium bordering on medium-stiff (6.5/10)
Rating Score: 86.4/100
Compared to other Men’s Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 14 current model aggressive all-mtn freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Basic Uninc RDM ranked 8th out of 14
Overview of the Basic Uninc’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Basic Uninc’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Aggressive All-Mountain-Freestyle |
Price: | $579 - BUYING OPTIONS |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Smooth/Snappy: |  |
Dampness: |  |
Playful/Aggressive: |  |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Centered |
Base: | Sintered (YES's "Sintered True") |
Weight: | Felt Normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
149 | 248 | 110-160 | 50-72 |
152 | 250 | 120-170 | 54-77 |
156W | 259 | 150-200 | 68-90 |
158 | 253 | 160-210 | 72-95 |
159W | 261 | 160-210 | 72-95 |
161 | 254 | 180-220+ | 82-100+ |
* the 159W and 161 are new sizes for the 2024 model
Who is the Basic Uninc Most Suited To?
The Yes Basic UNinc RDM is ideally for anyone who is looking for that do it all one-board-quiver style board but in a more aggressive manor. It is for a riding style that prefers to spend the day ripping around the mountain carving up groomers, rather than cruising around slashing things.
It's only real weakness is riding powder and if you don't plan on doing that (or have a different board for that), then this is going to be a really enjoyable board for the right rider. You can essentially take it anywhere from jumps to carving and expect it to perform well at all of them.
I would not recommend this board to any beginner riders. It's a little too aggressive for them. But anyone who's a intermediate-expert rider can have a great time on it.
The Basic Uninc in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Basic Uninc is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: YES Basic Uninc 2023, 158cm (253mm waist width)
Date: February 23, 2022
Conditions
Sunny with cloudy periods. 100% visibility.
Temperature was pretty cold, ranging from -10°C (14°F) to -12°C (10°F) through the day. -13°C (9°F) with wind. Wind pretty much non existent though.
24 hour snow: 0cm (0")
48 hour snow: 0cm (0")
7 day snow: 8cm (3")
On groomer: Hard pack with icy patches for the most part. But mostly hard pack until we got lower down the mountain and then it was really icy.
Off groomer: Crunchy and icy for the most part. But still doable higher up the mountain.
Set Up
Bindings angles: +12/-9
Stance width: 22.4″ (570mm)
Stance Setback: Centered
Width at Inserts: 10.32" (262mm) at both inserts.
Rider Height: 6'1"
Rider Weight: 180lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Tactical Lexicon ADV
Bindings Used: Fix Yale: M
Weight: 6lbs 9oz (2980grams)
Weight per cm: 18.86 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.59 grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 200 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 & 2023 models. So the Basic Uninc is very much an average weight and felt like a normal weight on snow.
Powder
Unfortunately we had no powder to test in on the day but taking a look at the specs and getting a feel for the board, it's not going to be great in powder.
The Basic Uninc RDM doesn't have a lot going for it when it comes to riding powder because it's a true twin, centered stance board with a traditional camber profile. I'm sure it can handle smaller amounts of powder with no issues, like any board, but it isn't ideal for deeper snow.
Carving & Turning
Carving: Capable of laying out nice carves due to the traditional camber profile, I did however prefer it for shorter, deeper carves. I found the underbite technology really grabbed ahold, making that style of carve most enjoyable.
Turning: Turns felt smooth and predictable and never felt washy or catchy. It also felt pretty quick edge-to-edge. I enjoyed it most when turning at moderate-higher speeds, as this is when the camber and underbite really felt like they were working cohesively.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: The traditional camber profile will require you to always be on top of your edges at slower speeds. I wouldn't say it's incredibly quick from edge-to-edge at slow speeds but I wouldn't call slow either - overall felt pretty average.
Skidded Turns: Handled them decently most of the time but could be punishing at times.
Speed
Definitely capable of bombing hills whenever desired. The camber mixed with the stiffer flex really allows you to rip down the mountain with a stable damp feeling. On top of that, I found it held an edge extremely well and didn't get chattery at these higher speeds.
Uneven Terrain
Not the best for smashing through crud/chunder but not terrible either. It can definitely get bucked around at times but is still maneuverable enough to correct your line when necessary.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Overall performed quite nicely.
Pop: Only had a average amount of pop overall, but it was pretty easy to access.
Approach: Felt smooth and stable on approaches. Could be a bit quicker edge-to-edge for adjustments on smaller jumps that didn't require a ton of speed.
Landing: Absorbed landings nicely. Even when you landed a bit off center, it was forgiving and allowed you to ride away, even when not getting it quite right.
Side-hits: The overall capabilities of the board made side-hits really enjoyable, especially if they were bigger and required some speed.
Small jumps/Big jumps: Totally capable of being taken off any size jump but preferred it for bigger jumps.
Switch
Felt pretty identical riding switch, which wasn't much of a surprise as it has all the tools to succeed, like the centered stance and true twin shape. In transition from regular stance to switch, the board felt uncatchy and smooth, which for a camber board was a welcomed surprise.
Spins
Again the shape and stance made any spin feel smooth and effortless. You can set-up or land switch without too many issues or catchiness. My only critique would be a bit more pop for doing spins on smaller features, to help get that extra air for bigger spins.
Jibbing
Quite capable and enjoyable if you're an experienced jibber but not as much if your newer because it requires more effort for things like butters and presses due to the stiffness. And the traditional camber isn't the most forgiving when on a rail feature as it can be more catchy than a board with some rocker.
Butters
Performing butters/presses on the Yes Basic Uninc RDM takes a bit more effort than your average park board - you have to lean into them a bit more than normal to hold them into place.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | SCORE WEIGHTING | |
|---|---|---|
JUMPS | 4.0 | 16/20 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 16/20 |
CARVING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
SWITCH | 4.5 | 9/10 |
SPINS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
TREES/BUMPS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
BUTTERS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
POWDER | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 86.4/100 |
Overall, the Basic Uninc RDM is a board that will make you put in some extra work due to it's more aggressive nature but that work is quite rewarding, as you get a one-board-quiver style board that is seriously fun for things like big air or carving.
While it may not do any one thing extremely well, this board is really well rounded and capable of doing almost anything you ask of it.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Basic Uninc, 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 aggressive all-mountain-freestyle snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Basic Uninc compares to other aggressive all-mountain-freestyle snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
I’m currently hesitating between the Yes Basic Uninc (156W) vs Lib T.Rice Pro (157). Both are true twins all-arounders on the more aggressive side with great edge hold thanks to Magentraction and Underbite… which I what’s missing in my quiver right now.
I am an experienced snowboarder looking for a good true twin all-arounder that will mostly be ridden in resorts but I want something that can handle going hard and fast in most conditions rather than an easier to handle catch-free playful board. I already have a powder board and a smaller softer playful board for when I want to fool around or teach kids at slower speeds so powder and jibbing are not too important here.
I had the first T.Rice 157 a loooonng time ago, back when Banana Tech didn’t exist so it had a full camber and I think it wasn’t a true twin then but I did enjoy to go hard and fast on it, it felt heavyish and maybe because of the blunt tips, it felt longer than it actually was IMO.
I’m kind of leaning towards the Yes because I think the full camber might be more to my liking for the type of riding I will use it for, I tried a Gnu RC with C2 and didn’t really enjoy bombing it, it felt over-powered too soon when going hard but it was a 154.5 and probably softer than the T.Rice is.
Oh and with off-seasons sales, both are well priced but the Yes is almost 100$ CAD less.
What do you think?
Hey Jerome, thanks for your message.
I would personally go with the Basic Uninc for what you’re describing. I’d say it handles bombing a little better. The T Rice Pro is stiffer than the RC, in my experience and the 157 vs the 154.5 would make a difference too, so you’d definitely prefer it to the RC for bombing, IMO, but I’d still go Basic Uninc. And that’s not taking into account price – at $100 less I’d be sold.
Hope this helps with your decision
You’re confirming what I was thinking. Thanks, always helpful!
You’re very welcome Jerome. Hope it treats you well. If you think about it at the time (which I know is a ways away yet!), let me know what you end up going with and how you get on with it on snow.
Hi Nate, Thanks for the good reviews.
I’ve been using my first board Salamon sight. 5’8 75-85kg. I recently went to my local snowdome to try some demos.
Yes basic/yes basic uninc/battalion evil twin/burton process/Slash happy place.
Yes basic uninc was my favourite with the Yes basic and slash happy place next.
It held an edge remarkably well on the hard snowdome surface and gave me so much confidence. I loved the speed and precise feeling I got from the board.
My question is what other boards would you say are similar or would be recommended so I can shop around a bit? Is the Yes standard a similar ride as you have rated that very high.
I went back on my own board and I couldn’t ride it it was so bad in comparison haha. Its awful on ice and seemed to easily dig in and oversteer.
Not a highly skilled rider enjoy red runs with minimal tricks but starting to play around with jumps now.
Hi Jason, thanks for your message.
I would say that the Standard Uninc (full camber version of the Standard) would be more similar to the Basic Uninc, but the Standard could work for you as well. All 3 very good in hard/icy conditions in my experience. I would say the Standard is the most mellow of the 3, with the Standard Uninc being the most aggressive and the Basic Uninc in between. Given the experience you had on the Basic Uninc, it’s a pretty good bet. Size-wise, if you could also let me know your boot size, that would help to land a more accurate sizing opinion.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate!
Thanks for you amazing review! I’m pretty convinced about getting this board, however I’m not sure which size I should get.
I have Medium Union FLite Pro bindings and US 10 Nike Vapen boots. I’m 1,73 meters and I weight 82 kg. I’m thinking in getting the 156w, but I don’t know if it’s going to be super wide for me.
Thanks!
Hi Fernando, thanks for your message.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 158, so I would be weighing up either the 158 or the 156W. The Basic Uninc RDM isn’t super wide for a wide board, so while the 156W would feel on the wider side, it shouldn’t feel too wide – and at that length, I don’t think it would feel too big overall. So long as your boots aren’t super bulky, I think you’d also be fine on the 158. But if they are bulky and you’re riding with a pretty straight back binding angle (e.g. 0 – 6 degrees) and you like to carve pretty deep, then it could be pushing it for being too narrow. If that’s the case, then the 156W would be the safer bet. But if you ride with more angle or have low profile boots, etc, then the 158 would be fine, but the 156W still an option. You’d get a little more edge contact with the 158 and a touch more surface area on the 156W.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
I am an experienced, advanced rider looking for a new board. I am 6.2, 170 lbs (without all the gear), 44 eu size boots. I can get the 159w at a great price. Do you think this size would work for me or should I look for the 158 one. I rarely ride park and would often ride off-piste and uneven terrain. I am used to stiff, full camber boards, so the aggressive profile does not concern me here. Should I go for the 159w or should i look for another deck?
Thank you!
Misho
Hi Misho, thanks for your message.
If you’re used to stiff boards, you might even find this one on the more playful side in comparison. It’s not soft, but it’s not super stiff or anything either – just above medium. I think it would work for what you’re describing, depending on how much powder you get and how hard you want to work in powder when you do get it. It’s not great in powder, so if you did want to take advantage of powder when you get it, if it’s more than just a few inches, then there might be better options.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159/160. So I think the 158 or 159W are both good lengths for you. In terms of width you’ll probably want to go wide, so the 159W is your best bet, IMO. EU44 is sometimes a 28.5cm mondopoint and sometimes a 29cm mondopoint, depending on brand. If it’s a 29cm mondopoint, then definitely wide, IMO. If it’s a 28.5cm mondopoint, you may get away with it, but it would be pushing it and if you like to carve fairly deep, then I would still go wide. This board isn’t super wide in it’s wide sizes either, so the 159W shouldn’t feel too wide for your foot size.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
Firstly let me say I hope you are well and that I enjoy your website and all that you do to help the snowboard comminuty.
I have a Yes Greats and love it. I was looking at getting more of a charging aggresive snowboard and there is a good deal on the Basic Uninc and the Capita Mercury at the moment. I was curious as to your thoughts regarding a better compliment to the Greats for more aggressive resort riding. I am also looking at the Standard Uninc. To be honest, I am open to suggestions and not dead set on any one board at this stage.
I am comfortable with sizing the board but wanted an opinion on the ride of the board and which you think might be a better choice. Unfortunately I do not have any local stores for me to get a hands on look or demo.
Appreciate any words of wisdom you can offer.
Barry
Hi Barry
Thanks for your message.
I would probably go between the Standard Uninc. The Basic Uninc is more aggressive, but won’t be as noticeable a difference to the Greats as the Standard Uninc, IMO. While the Mercury is a little more aggressive than average, it’s also not overly aggressive. If you were wanting something that was also better at powder at the same time, then the Mercury could work – or you could go even more aggressive to the Mega Merc. But of those 3, if hard charging is the main goal, then I’d be leaning Standard Uninc.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
What bindings you would recommend for this board? I owe union forces and union falcors. Will they work or should I buy something new?
Thanks!
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message. Both would work, but I would put the Falcors on the Basic Uninc RDM. There are other good options for it, but I think the Falcors should work really well, so no need to get new bindings, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi,
what size board would you recommend for this model (basinc uninc)? I would have a use for shred in resort (park, jump, carve and little pow).My size is 164cm and my weigh is 62 kg. I hesitate between 152 and 149…
thank you
Hi Jeremy
Thanks for your message.
For your specs and how you’re describing your riding, I would go 149 for this board for you. But if you could also let me know your boot size, just to confirm, that would be great.
thank you.
my boot size is 6,5/7 us.
Hey Jeremy
Taking into account your boot size, I would say definitely 149 for you, for this board.
Hey Nate !
Thanks for all your reviews. What would be your size advice given my measurements (1m78, 72 kgs and size 9 / 9,5 boots)?
Also would you consider the yes basic uninc as a good compliment of the jones flagship in a 2 board quiver ? I’ve never ridden my Jones board so far but can wait to do so !
I am hesitating between the yes basic uninc and the jones mountain twin
Hi Julien
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157. So I think the best bet would be the 158. However, given it’s part of a 2 board quiver with the Flagship, I would be erring a little smaller with the second board in your quiver. So, ideally, I would be looking at something 2-3cm under that 157 mark. But there isn’t that option in the Basic Uninc unfortunately. You’d have to go down to 152 (I would go wide, so not considering the 156W, which would probably feel at least as big, if not bigger than the 158), which I think would be getting too small. The 158 is still doable, but not ideal, IMO, given the quiver. Otherwise I think it would be a good compliment to the Flagship. Quite different boards. Depends on what you would be doing with the other board as well though.
The Mountain Twin compliments the Flagship well too, if you’re looking for something that’s more mellow, better for freestyle etc than the Flagship. They work together in a quiver, IMO.
If you could let me know a bit more about what you’d be mostly using the second board for that would be great. Also if you could let me know what size your Flagship is.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your answer. Totally agree with you on the size, I wish I could get this one in 155
My jones flagship is size 158, would be my first choice for powder days and riding fast on groomers. This will in my opinion be a good balance between agressive all mountain and freeride perspectives and more versatile than the 161
To compliment the flagship I am looking for a board more freestyle oriented, more buttery that can still handle some speed and carves, be ridden switch and a good overall jump performance.
I rarely go to the park but still like very much to do some flat tricks on groomers, side hits and spins
Its underbite technology also seem to get this board at ease in icy conditions which is a good point, along with its agressive all mountain freestyle temper you mentioned in your review
Hey Julien
You could look at the YES Standard Uninc (I’d go 153 as it’s a wider board) or the YES Greats (not quite as aggressive, but would still work well for what you’re describing, IMO) in the 154, or even the 151 could work in the Greats, but if you wanted to keep it a bit more aggressive, then the 154 might be your best bet. Some other options to consider include the Burton Freethinker 154 or Burton Blossom 155. The GNU RC C3 154.5 (not sure if you wanted to stick to camber between the feet or open to the other way around – but the C3 camber is predominantly camber).
Hi Nate,
I am considering the greats, standard uninc and gnu rc c3 as we speak. These boards have a strong appeal to me and the jones tweaker poped up in my selection as well. So far I haven’t found a deal on these options as good as we currently get in France on the basic uninc and I forgot to mention that the price tag is also something I consider in my decision
I didn’t make up my mind on the board shape as I am not sure to notice the differences they bring underfoot
In your opinion going 152 on the basic uninc would be too small for my specs ? Should I stick with 158 on this one ?
Also do you think 2023 union stratas would pair well on the flagship and the boards mentioned above ? By the way my decision to go for strata was based on your review, very helpful to get some quality tester advice, thank you
Hi Julien
I think the 152 would be doable, but you’d lose quite a bit of the stability at speed going that small. It wouldn’t work as well for carves either. It would become more playful and likely feel softer flexing than I found it, if you were to go for it in that size. It’s the kind of size that could work for you as a dedicated freestyle board, but I think it’s too small given you want it to still be able to ride fast and carve with it.
The Strata would definitely work on both boards. Ideally I’d go with something a little stiffer, particularly for the Flagship. For the Flagship I’d typically recommend something in that 7/10 to 9/10 flex range. To work with both boards, and be a good option for your weight too, I’d be looking at something around 7/10 flex, ideally, but the Strata isn’t too far off that, so it would work for sure, and is very good value. Some good options in that 7/10 range here if you wanted to check out other potential options.
Do you think this board would work as a park snowboard for someone who rides 90%park 10% groomers
Hi Leon
I think it depends on your level in the park and how big you’re going. For the average park rider, it wouldn’t be my first choice. But if you’re a high level park rider hitting big jumps and doing big tricks, then it could work for sure. It’s not something that I would use as my park board, but I’m not a super strong jibber (would prefer a more playful board than this for boxes/rails etc) and don’t do anything too extreme (like spins on medium jumps and typically straight air on larger jumps for me). If I was getting a predominantly park board, I’d personally go with something softer/more playful. But for bigger tricks and an experienced park rider, this could work.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate, I see you’ve been testing the Basic and Basic Uninc RDM out in 158cm sizing with US10 boots.
My boots are the Salomon Dialogue Dual Boa in US10.
Do you think the 156W would be suitable as well or would the 158cm be better? What would you recommend? I know, with the underbite tech, that the waist width decreases at the points on the inserts so I’m not sure if this will mean more overhang?
Hi Andrew
The Basic/Basic Uninc aren’t super wide at the inserts vs the waist. They’re about average. Average difference is around 10mm (1cm). With the Basic Uninc it’s 9mm wider at the inserts vs the waist, by my measurement. In the 158 I measured it to be 262mm. IMO that should be wide enough for Dialogue 10s in most scenarios. However, if you tend to ride with a flat back binding angle (e.g. 0-6 degrees) and you like to carve deep, then there is some risk of boot drag there. The 156W isn’t super wide for a wide board, so I think it would be doable too (and even preferred if you think you’ll be carving deep with a flat back binding angle – I only refer to the back binding angle as it’s pretty rare to have a front binding angle less than 9 degrees). The 156W should be around 268mm at the inserts, which is on the wider side for 10s, but it’s nothing mega wide for 10s or anything – and given that you’d be sizing down 2cm in length vs the 158, it would be suitable. I would still go 158 optimally, unless you think you could risk boot drag (i.e. depending on binding angles and how aggressive you like to carve), in which case the 156W would be the better bet, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi, thanks for the review, I own a burton custom camber154 for all mountain free style, but the skied turn and butter is so hard on this. I think I just not have enough power to ride the custom. I am 5″7 145 pounds. Will this basic uninc be better on those if I go for a 152. Thank you
Hi Charlie
Thanks for your message. Like most YES boards, the Basic Uninc RDM is a little easier to butter than you’d expect. The tip and tail press more easily compared to its overall flex. So, you should find it easier to butter vs the Custom, particularly if you go 152. In terms of skidded turns, it might be a little easier but not a lot of difference there. If you want something easier to skid, then either something with some rocker in the profile, something with upturned edges or something with a softer torsional flex, will make it easier to skid turns. It’s not bad for skidded turns for a flat based, traditional camber board, but you’re not likely to find it significantly better for skidded turns vs the Custom Camber, IMO.
Hope this helps
Thank you a lot for the review and the reply. I wonder how would you compare custom(camber) to the basic uninc, their specs look a lot similar, so I wonder what is the biggest different and weather its worthy to get a uninc since I already have the custom, would it be better for me to go for other yes snowboard? Thank you !!
Hi Charlie
Specs-wise, there are some differences – e.g. the Custom is a directional twin with 12.5mm setback vs true twin for the Basic uninc and some differences in effective edge, contact length and sidecuts etc too. But I’d still say they are more similar than different. I would say that Custom is a little better for carving and has more pop for jumps with the Basic Uninc being easier to butter and better for riding switch. Probably the main differences.
If you wanted something a little more playful from the YES line, you could look at the Standard or Greats, if you’re still looking for an all-mountain freestyle board.
Thank you for the review.
I have a free thinker 2023 as you gave the highest socre to it. Now I’m thinking about yes basic beacuse it’s on sale now. lol. I don’t have any yes board yet. Would you like to compare those two boards. I like using them for park and carving. and I do a lot of jumps.
Hi JJ
Thanks for your message. Main differences, IMO, are (I’m guessing you mena the Basic Uninc RDM, given your on this review, rather than the regular Basic):
– Freethinker lighter and snappier
– Freethinker overall better for jumps, particularly in terms of pop
– Preferred the Free Thinker for carving and turning in general
– The Basic Uninc RDM is easier to butter
I’m definitely not one to judge, with the Quiver I have, but just to note that both boards are suited to really similar things – they’re not the same feel, they definitely have distinct personalities, but use purpose is the same, IMO, so not typically something I’d have in a quiver together. But if you want two similar types of boards with different feels, I’m definitely not one to talk with the amount of overlap I have in my own quiver!
Hope this helps
Thank you very much for the in-depth review. What would be your advice on choosing between size 149 or 152 given my measurements (5′ 6″, 130 lbs. and size 8 boots)?
Hi Ryan
For your specs, I would go 149. I think that should be a really good size for you. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” right on 149 – so I think it will be spot on. Whilst the 152 wouldn’t be massively long for you or anything, it would be on the long side and that coupled with the extra width, given your boot size, would be too big overall, IMO. 149 should be just right, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Wondering why you thought this board wouldn’t be great in icy conditions considering it has the Yes midbite.
Hi Danny
Thanks for your message.
Wouldn’t say that it wasn’t great in icy conditions. Still better than most in icy conditions, just not necessarily top tier. That rating was given based on how Fraser, who did most of the testing on this board, thought it performed in icy conditions. The Basic Uninc RDM has underbite, rather than mid-bite. However, I’ve found underbite to be really good in icy conditions in the past and this is somewhat subjective. I found it as good as the other underbite YES boards I’ve tested (i.e. the Basic and Typo).
Hope this helps
Thank you for the review.
When you talk about powder performance, you did not mention the slamback insert. It looks like you can get a significant setback out of that. Have you had the chance to test it?
Hi Ethan
Thanks for your message.
Forgot to mention it in the powder section, thanks for pointing that out. But it was taken into account for the score. You can certainly set this back more than most twins, but without that extra setback, I would’ve said 2/5, as there isn’t really anything else, other than that setback, that’s helping it in powder. Haven’t had the Basic Uninc RDM in powder, so no haven’t tested how much better it would be in powder when in the slam backs. But have setback twin boards in powder – and whilst it certainly makes a difference, it’s not something that drastically turns the board into a powder king or anything.
Hope this helps
HI, thank you for running this informative website for the snowboarding community!
I am 5’7, 155lbs, boot size 9m.. Is the 152cm is too small for me?
Hi Jay Kim
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “standard all-mountain” length at around 154/155, so you’re not too far off the 152. It would be sizing down a little bit but not much, so I think it could work. The 156W and 158 are too big, IMO, so I think the 152 is the best size for you for this board and a size that could definitely work. Likely to feel a little softer/more playful than it would if you were to ride it in a 154/155 (if it had one) – a little less stable at speeds and less float in powder – but easier to maneuver and butter etc.
Hope this helps with your decision