Hello and welcome to my YES Greats snowboard review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Greats as an all-mountain-freestyle snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Greats a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other all-mountain-freestyle snowboards.
Overall Rating
Board: YES The Greats Uninc
Price: $629 (USD recommended retail)
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: 7/10 on YES’ flex scale
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 91.1/100
Compared to other Men’s All-mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 33 current model all-mountain freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Greats ranked 2nd out of 33
Overview of the Greats Specs
Check out the tables for the Greats specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | All-Mountain-Freestyle |
Price: | $629 - BUYING OPTIONS |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Turn Initiation: | Medium-Fast |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Centered |
Base: | Sintered |
Weight: | Normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
149 | 245 | 105-165 | 48-75 |
151 | 253 | 116-176 | 53-80 |
154 | 256 | 127-187 | 58-85 |
156 | 259 | 127-187 | 58-85 |
159 | 262 | 138-209 | 63-95 |
Who is the Greats Most Suited To?
The Greats is best suited to anyone who wants to ride freestyle all over the mountain and wants a board that's also good in the park, but at the same time wants to still be able to lay into carves on the groomers. This is one of the better twins for carving going around, IMO.
Not for the beginner, but it's also not an overly demanding board and is suitable, IMO, for intermediate to expert riders, if you're riding style suits the board.
Not the greatest in powder, but can handle shallow powder just fine.
The Greats in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Greats is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: YES Greats 2022, 154cm (256mm waist width)
Date: March 23, 2021
Conditions:
Sunny with cloudy patches.
Feels quite warm when the sun came out, but quite cold when it wasn't there or when the wind picked up. Wasn't super windy, but just enough to bring the chill when the sun was behind the clouds.
Temp -3°C (27°F) and -6°C (21°F) with wind chill factor.
24hr snow: 0
48hr snow: 4cm
7 day snow: 46cm
On groomer: Somewhere between medium and hard with some harder spots bordering on icy.
Off groomer: Quite crunchy/icy in patches, not too bad in others - more medium to hard.
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 580mm (22.8″)
Stance Setback: Centered
Width at Inserts: 274mm (10.79")*
* but more like 271mm if you rode at a 540mm (21.3") stance
Rider Height: 6'0"
Rider Weight: 175lbs
Rider Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Tactical ADV
Bindings Used: Burton Malavita M
Weight: 2860grams (6lb 5oz)
Weight per cm: 18.57grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.43grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 100 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021 *& 2022 models. If I could do grams per surface area, this would be a more accurate measure, but since not all brands publish surface area (and I don't have the tools or knowledge to work it out), I can't unfortunately.
The Greats is pretty close to average when you look at grams/cm, but it's a wider board, so is probably just on the lighter side in terms of grams/surface area.
Powder
I found a few pockets of powder. Nothing serious but there were some - and also I own the 2019 model of this board in the 156, so I've ridden it in powder (even though it's not my choice of board for powder days, you sometimes get those surprise days that are deeper than you expected!).
It's not a powder board, let's put it that way. It's the only real weakness of this board. It's got plenty of surface area for the length, but otherwise it doesn't have much else going for it for powder, apart from a little rocker in the nose and tail.
Carving & Turning
Carving: I just love carving on this board. It had to be the best, if not one of the best twin, mid-flex boards for carving out there. So much fun!
Turning: Really fun to turn on. Snappy and lively and effortless.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: I found it really quick turning at slow speeds, despite that extra width. Quicker turner than my Greats, I reckon, so it's partly the size. But my 156 Greats is pretty nimble too. For it's width, this board is good edge-to-edge.
Skidded Turns: Forgiving of skidded turns to an extent but not super forgiving
Speed
It's pretty good at speed - again for a mid-flexing twin, it feels better than you'd think. I was back and forth between giving this a 3.5 or 4 for speed, but ultimately I think it falls closer to 3.5. But can definitely handle a good amount of speed without getting shaky. I rode the PYL that day also - and that thing can handle some speed!
Uneven Terrain
Crud: It's not a crud destroyer, but it can smash through it to an extent. It kind of likes to go over top and kind of likes to smash through, it's in between in that respect.
I found it didn't get bucked around super easily but it did get bucked around a bit - but it was really easy to correct when you got thrown off your line.
Bumps: Felt good weaving between bumps. Nice and nimble. And it had enough flex and forgiveness to hug bumps pretty easily when going over them.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Any good all-mountain freestyle worth it's salt has to be a good jumper and the Greats doesn't disappoint.
Pop: Really easy to access the pop. Doesn't take much loading up to really get decent pop out of this board. The pop ceiling isn't super high - as in when you really load it up, the max pop is good, but not epic. But you can get to it's max pop or close with very little effort.
Approach: Really strikes a beautiful balance between being stable but also nimble - so for faster approaches you're not concerned about it getting squirrelly and it's no problem making any adjustments to your approach on your way down.
Landing: Solid as landings on this thing. That extra width really gives you a good landing platform, even in the shorter lengths. But it's also forgiving enough when your landing's a little off or you hit the knuckle or something. Just in that sweet spot of being able to stomp a landing, but if you're a bit off it doesn't punish you too much.
Side-hits: Have always loved this board for side hits and this occasion was no exception. Just has that nice ability to be easy on approach, has that easy pop and that great solid, yet forgiving landing platform. It's an artist for sidehits!
Small jumps/Big jumps: The sweet spot is medium, I would say, but it can handle small and large jumps almost just as well. And my 156 is more in that medium to large zone, but is still perfectly fine on smaller jumps.
Switch
If it's an artist for side-hits - and it is - it's just as much a switch artist. If your switch game is relatively tight, then this things is a joy to ride in your unnatural direction.
Again, it's not super forgiving (or super unforgiving to be fair) of skidded turns, so if you're switch game is pretty beginner, then it's not as easy, but if you've got switch relatively dialed, then it's just perfection!
Spins
So good! A spinning machine. Easy pop, easy to get the spin around and setting up and landing switch is a dream. Only thing stopping me giving it 5 is the same reason, I took 1/2 a point off for jumps - the pop ceiling isn't super high. So if you're looking to go super big, then there's that to consider. For me though, I didn't feel like I needed that high end max pop for the size of spins that I do (as in I don't go that big!)
Jibbing
It's not a jibbing master, but it's fine hitting the odd box or rail. Does a commendable job. I'm not a strong jibber, but I didn't/don't feel intimidated hitting boxes/rails on it. Also didn't ramp up my confidence on jibs, like some more jib oriented boards do.
Butters
For it's flex, it butter really quite easily. Without being so easy that you're going to overbend it if you're a stronger rider. Doesn't quite butter as easily as my control board (Lib Tech Terrain Wrecked) but wasn't far off.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
| FACTOR | Rating (/5) | Weighted |
|---|---|---|
| Jumps | 4.5 | 18/20 |
| Carving | 4 | 8/10 |
| Turns | 4 | 8/10 |
| Switch | 5 | 10/10 |
| Speed | 3.5 | 7/10 |
| Spins | 4.5 | 9/10 |
| Butters | 4 | 8/10 |
| Jibbing | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
| Crud etc | 4 | 4/5 |
| Trees | 4 | 4/5 |
| Pow | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
| TOTAL (after normalizing): | 91.1/100 |
The Greats is just about the perfect all-mountain-freestyle deck. It's been my favorite for a good few years now.
It's not a powder hound or anything, but otherwise, it can do pretty much everything and strikes a beautiful balance between being playful enough, but also aggressive enough. You can lay down a carve like no other twin I've ridden and if you like the mountain to be your park, then it's definitely worth checking out.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you’re interested in learning more about the Greats, are ready to buy or want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
If you want to see how the Greats compared to other all-mountain-freestyle boards or want to check out other options, check out the next link.
Hello and welcome to my YES Greats snowboard review.
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Greats is capable of.
)
Hello and welcome to my YES Greats snowboard review.
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Greats is capable of.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the great review!
My name is Jonathan — I’m 5’9”, 165 lbs, and ride US size 10 boots. I’m currently on a 154cm K2 Passport and I’m looking to add the YES Greats as an all-mountain freestyle board for something more nimble and playful for sit-hits, side features, and getting more into park and jumps while still riding the whole mountain.
I saw in the comments that you often suggest downsizing 2–3cm on this board. Based on the YES size chart, I’m right in the overlap for both the 151 and 154. Do you think the 151cm would be too short for me at my weight and boot size, or would it suit that playful all-mountain freestyle role better? On the other hand, I’m also wondering if the 154 might feel like too much board given what I’m looking for.
I’d really appreciate your thoughts on which size you think would be the better fit for my riding goals.
Thank you!
Jonathan
Hi Jonathan, thanks for your message.
Given what you’re looking for, I would be leaning 151 for you for this board. Definitely wide enough for your boots size, IMO and should be good for your weight, especially given you want it more playful than your K2 Passport.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thank you for your reply. Would 154 be too much board? Or I can use it for all mountain and carving. My friend is really trying to sell me the longer board better idea and is telling me 151 is definitely too short.
Hi Jonathan
Wouldn’t necessarily say that it’s too long. I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 157, but wouldn’t go to 156 for Greats or anything, because of how it rides longer than normal and is essentially a wide board, when you look at the under-foot width. So the longest I would go is 154.
So yeah, I wouldn’t necessarily say that the 154 is too big, but it won’t feel more playful than your 154 Passport. It is very likely to feel noticeably bigger than your 154 Passport, based on my experience with both boards. 151 for most boards would be too short for you, I agree, but for the Greats it’s not, IMO. And especially not, given you were wanting it to feel more playful than the Passport. But for all-mountain/carving, I wouldn’t say it’s too big, but I wouldn’t go any bigger for that particular board. And if you want it to feel more playful, I would say you need to go to 151.
Hi Nate
I Weight 58 kg and 173 cm tall and 42,5 boot size , will 151 be good for me ? Because i feel like 149 will be too short for my boot size and 151 would be Perfect considering im still quite young
Thanks
Hi Adam, thanks for your message.
I think you could probably ride the 149 with your specs, certainly in terms of length. The width is borderline. You’d probably get away with it right now, but it would depend on your binding angles, stance width, the profile of your boots and how deep you carve (aka, how big an angle you’re getting on your edge). But if you’re young and your feet are still growing and/or likely to put on weight in the near future, then the 151 is likely the better bet, as it will work right now and if your feet grow and/or you put on weight it will stay a good size for longer (or indefinitely, depending). If you’re keen to get on the 149 and want to know if you’ll be OK width-wise, let me know those details (binding angles, stance width, boot brand/model/year and how deep you carve) and I can give you my best estimate as to suitability width-wise.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Wondering if you could help me out with sizing a Greats uninc 2025. I’m 6′, 190lbs, size 9.5US boot.
Ride mostly to carve at the resort – would a 156 fit me?
Thanks for the great info!
Hi Jon, thanks for your message.
I replied over on your comment on the Mountain Twin review as well, if you wanted to check that out for more. But yeah, I think 156 would work well for you for the Greats. You are very similar specs to me and I really like the 156. I like the 154 too, but for carving and speed I prefer the 156 for sure – and given how it sounds like you ride, the 156 would be the better option for you, IMO. The 159 isn’t completely out of range, but I personally wouldn’t go that big for the Greats (6’0″, 180lbs, 10 boots (sometimes 9.5 depending on brand)). You might be OK with it, but I think 156 would be the safer bet.
Hello Nate,
I’d like to take advantage of the sales and buy a Greats.
I don’t know what to get between 149 and 151.
I’m 1,76m, 70kg but with small feet, 7 US (Vans Invado Pro)
I have a Deep thinker 154 and would like add something more freestyle to my quiver, but without sacrificing the grip.
What size would you recommend?
Thanks!
Hi Thomas, thanks for your message.
Given your boot size and the fact you already have the 154 Deep Thinker as your all-mountain/powder board, I would go 149 for you. I don’t think the 151 would be wrong but the 149 best fits what you want it for (more playful/freestyle) and is the better compliment to your quiver, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision and comes in time for the sale.
Hey Nate, hope you’re doing well!
Saw you rode the 2026 GREATS XTRM — how did it feel?
Currently riding the 2024 Greats Uninc 156cm, but it feels a bit less nimble than I’d like.
I’m 183cm, weigh 75kg, and my boot size is US 8.5–9. I’m thinking about sizing down for next season.
Mainly riding all-mountain casually.
Would love to hear any advice you might have!
Hi Leo
The Greats XTRM was sick. The only things that I’ve felt I want better with my Greats are for it to be lighter and poppier and the Greats XTRM is both of those things. In terms of nimbleness, it did feel, for me, a little more nimble than the Greats, which I think probably comes down to that lightness. They both feel about the same flex-wise, but the XTRM with that extra lightness I found it easier to maneuver.
And yeah, I think the 154 would work for you for the Greats XTRM. I would put your typical all-mountain length at around 158/159, but would likely err a touch smaller even with a regular width board. With the width of the Greats, I think sizing down to the 154 would work for you, given your boot size and the fact you describe your riding as casual and that you feel you’d like a bit more agility than your 156 Greats currently provides. While going to the 156 Greats XTRM, you’ll likely feel an improvement there anyway, the 154 is certainly within a good range for you and I don’t think you’ll find it too small or anything.
Note that I ride the 156 Greats regularly (was my control board this year as well, so even more lately) but I’ve ridden the 154 Greats and it didn’t feel small to me (6’0″, 180lbs, US9.5-10 boots)
Hope this helps with your decision
I am riding a twinpig. It’s a good stable board. Doesn’t have the pop or jump. Turning is a bit slow. I am looking to upgrade something a with speed and turns. I tried the DOA super, loved it but I think it’s too advance for me. I am looking at 3 different boards, yes great uninc , basic uninc, agent pro. I am 5’e3 at 145 lb. What would you recommend?
Hi Michael, thanks for your message.
I’d go Greats personally, based on what you’re describing, but the Agent Pro would be a close second. The Basic is definitely a faster turner than the Twinpig, in my experience, and I would say its the fastest turner of the 3 you mention, but I don’t find it great at speed.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 151 but depending on boot size, you may want to go down from there for the Greats. The Agent Pro would also depend on the boot size, but to a lesser extent. I’d be between the 151 and 148 for you. If you could let me know your boot size, I’d be happy to give you my 2 cents on the best sizes for each and whether one of the boards has a better size for you over the other (which can sometimes be a deciding factor between 2 boards).
Hope this helps
Nate! Any thoughts on whether I should grab the current 2025 Greats on sale, or wait for the new 2026 Greats or Greats XTRM? This would be a complimentary board to my PYL Uninc (which I love). Thank you!
Hi Justin, if you’re ok with spending the extra for the Greats XTRM, that’s what I’d do. There’s really no downsides to the Greats XTRM, in my experience, but there are upsides – the main ones being lighter and poppier. But regular Greats is still a sick board, so if you can justify the extra cash, still a really good choice. If you go regular Greats, I would grab the 2025 model on sale – so long as you don’t have to compromise on size. If you have to compromise on size for the 2025, then I’d wait for the 2026. If you’re happy spending the extra, then I would wait for the ’26 Greats XTRM.
Hope this helps with your decision
You’re the man, thank you. Went with the 2025 Greats for $420. Bonus, seems like this may be the last of the Uninc branding. Double bonus, Yes sent me the one with the black base. Wasn’t totally sold on this year’s graphic, but I actually really like the white simple top sheet in person.
You’re very welcome Justin. Stoked you got a good deal on it! Hope it treats you well.
Hi Nate,
First, thanks very much for the reviews, it really a big help for us to narrow down on which gears to buy.
Weight: 100 kgs
Height: 174
Boots size: 10 US /28 mondo size
Currently, i am riding a 2015 Burton Flight attendant 159 cm with a 2016 Flow NX2 bindings, boots are 2018 Burton Ions. All three are rated stiff and I love their response.
I am now on the hunt of a All Mountain board that can be playful but still can hold a carve on an icy slop. I’m looking at the Yes the greats uninc which describes the Playful and Aggressive combo. I’m thinking of getting a shorter board. Would the 154 be ok or can i get a smaller board or even 153.
Thanks very much in advance for your kind advise and more power to your website, im sure it helps thousand of riders.
Hi Nel, thanks for your message.
I think the Greats will work well for what you’re looking for in your second board.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 160/161, but with the Greats you can size down for sure. I would say the 156 is probably your best all-mountain size for this board. You may find the 154 a bit unstable at speed, but otherwise, it could work. I would say it’s more of a freestyle/park size for you, but as long as you don’t expect it to be super stable/fast, it’s within range, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks for your great reviews and wealth of knowledge! I am an intermediate rider, 5’10”, 145-150lbs, feet size women’s 10, mainly going down on groomers, occasionally between the trees, if the kids insist, not a park person. Love carving and speeds. Terrain will be japow at start of season and a bit more icy towards late season. I recently tried the GNU ladies choice 153.5cm that you reviewed as well, love how easy it is with the turns and found the carving very nice as well. Edge hold on ice was not bad, I was really tempted to buy it until I read this review. It seems like both GNU LC and Yes Greats have equal pros and cons for me, what will you suggest?
Hi Sharon, thanks for your message.
Not a bad choice you can make between them, IMO. If you go Greats, I would size down to the 149. It’s wider than it looks. While the waist is very similar to the LC 153.5 (245 vs 244), the Greats is around 10mm wider at the inserts and tip/tail, which is quite significant.
Size-wise for the LC, typically I would say go 151.5 for your specs/what you’re describing, but given you’ve ridden and felt the turns were easy on the 153.5, I think that’s a good bet. The biggest thing with going longer would be the ease of turns, but since you found them easy, then going longer will give you the advantage of extra stability at speed and better float in powder. Speaking of powder, the LC is a little better than the Greats in that department, IMO, so, given that it sounds like you get a reasonable amount of fresh snow in your season, that would have me leaning towards that. The Greats, IMO is likely to give you a little better grip in icy conditions, but there’s not a huge gap there.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
I really enjoy your reviews, and was hoping for a bit more advice.
I’m 5’7″ maybe 5’8″, 76kg (ex gear) and UK8 (currently in Burton Kendo/Photon). Boards I have a Jones Mountain twin 157 (2021) and a Frontier 159 (2023). The Twin seems really soft, even compared to the current year, not sure if that’s an age thing or if the model has been made stiffer over the years. It’s certainly easier to pop a jump than the Frontier though.
I’m tempted to replace the Twin with a true twin, and was leaning to the Jones Tweaker until reading about The Greats. Mainly on piste with ventures off to the side/ungroomed runs as we only get 2 weeks away a year. Looking to get a bit more into jumps (both kickers and flat-land) probably not really jibs. Given the traffic in resort usually managing averages of 20mph and top speeds of 40mph so not bombing about.
Mainly wondering on your thoughts for the more all mountain side, but also an expansion on the pop as they sound like they may be the same from how I read it?
Thanks in advance
Ed
Hi Ed, thanks for your message.
Yeah, I would say the Greats has similar pop to the Mountain Twin – though a touch easier to access, but overall I prefer the Greats for jumps. It’s also a little better in icy conditions and for carving, in my experience but not as well suited to powder. But you’d have your Frontier for deeper powder days.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks Nate, what about the greats vs tweaker?
Hi Ed,
Vs Greats, the Tweaker is, in my experience:
– not as good for carving, not as stable at speed or in crud
– A little easier to butter and a little better for boxes/rails
– good for jumps, but I still prefer the Greats. In terms of pop, I’d say same total pop, but the Tweaker probably a touch easier to access vs the Greats, but not much in it. Both easy to pop.
– not as good in icy conditions (and I found the MT better in icy conditions too).
– a little better suited to powder, but not by a whole lot
Hi Nate, Im 167cm tall, 63kg and using burton malavita M, a 27cm deeluxe snowboard boots. And I mostly ride in Canada. Currently I’m riding a November Desire 152cm board, more on a ground trick/ park side. However since that is my first board so I bought this mostly because of the style and look.
After a few seasons of riding, I would say Im an intermediate rider and I want to look for a new board focusing more on small to medium jump, carving and freestyle. Im looking at the YES great uninc size 149/151 or the Capita Kazu Pro size 151. Appreciate it if you can have some suggestion on board/ sizing. Wondering if the Yes great 151 will be too big for my size.
Also open to any other boards suggestion if you think that’s good 🙂 thanks !
Hi Jeremy, thanks for your message.
Both quite different boards. The Kazu is stiffer and more directional. It’s good for jumps for a freestyle board, particularly if you’re hitting jumps in the backcountry/sidecountry into powder, but the Greats is better for freestyle all round. If you’re looking for something that will be good in powder but can also ride freestyle well – for jumps more so and less so for jibbing, spins, etc – then the Kazu is a good bet, but if you want to optimize more for freestyle and are OK with less powder performance, then I would go with the Greats.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 151, but with the Greats I would size down for it, so the 149 would be a better bet, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
thanks for the feedback !love the review
You’re very welcome Jeremy. Hope you have a great rest of your season!
Nate! What’s up homie!
I’m stuck here between 151 or 154
I’m leaning more towards the park riding but I noticed you said to pick a bigger size board considering boot sizing
I’m 165lbs, size 11 boot.
I ride a super DOA but finally figured it’s not my riding style. Speed is fun and all but damn right back to the lift line in the blink of an eye hahaha
Hey Chris
Could also let me know your height? While weight and foot size are more important than height for sizing, IMO, I still like to take height into account, for the leverage factor.
But for a few different heights, I would say:
– 5’7″ to 5’10” – I’d go 151, given you’re leaning more park. 154 still wouldn’t be wrong and be fine as an all-mountain size, but because of your park focus, I’d go 151
– 5’11” and up, I’d be more leaning 154
Yeah, I agree, I like to bomb it, but always just bombing it and you can feel like you’re spending more time on the lift than anything else! Especially on a smaller hill. I’ve heard of people who won’t go to smaller hills because they get bored of it – but it sounds like they just bomb it down every time – though to be fair it’s only skiers I’ve heard complain about this. Most snowboarders I know know how to make a small hill fun.
Great review as usual, Nate. Thank you.
I’m 5’11”, 170 lbs. Would 154 or 156 cm be best?
Also, would this board pair well with Burton’s Photon Step On boots and Burton’s Escapade Step On bindings?
Thank you.
Hi JB, thanks for your message.
Could you also let me know your boot size, so I can give a better sizing opinion.
The Photon Step On and Step On Escapade are a good flex-match for the Greats, IMO.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your review. I’m an intermediate to advanced rider returning to the sport after minimal riding for the last decade or so, looking to get a new rig. I’m roughly 5’11, about 160lbs, usually wear size 12 Salomon boots. I’m not committed to a consistent stance—I play around with it depending on how I feel.
Back when I was riding more frequently, I mostly rode a 158W Option Makinen. Today, I ride 90% on the east coast in icy conditions. Trying to find something that can do it all, but a little more playful than what I used to ride. I like to carve groomers, play around in the trees, and have fun on side-hits. I love the park and would like to improve my park riding, but I will never spend more than 20% of my day in the park realistically. Also trying to improve my switch riding. I like to carve but I’m not a super hard charger—not trying to set land-speed records. I enjoy powder, but sadly don’t get to see much, so although ability in powder is a slight consideration for my net board, but only minimally so. (If I was planning a trip where I expected to see a lot of powder, I’d be willing to add another board to the quiver.)
Currently considering the Yes Greats in a 156 or 154, Gnu RCC3 158W, or a Yes Standard in a 156, and would love to get your perspective on the ideal match. Currently leaning towards Greats 156, but wonder if you think the Greats 154 or the Yes Standard 156 might be a better fit. My old Makinen was roughly 173cm wide at the inserts and never gave me trouble with toe or heel drag. But I’d be wary to go much narrower. The 158W RRC3 seems like it could be a little more board than I want, and the 156 Yes Standard seems like it may be the lower limit of width for me. Greats 154 may also be a hair narrow.
Thanks for the help!
Hi Avery, thanks for your message.
I was reading through your comment and hadn’t looked at what review it was on and was straight away thinking Greats for what your describing, then I got to the last paragraph and looked at the review. So yeah, the Greats would work really well for what you’re describing, IMO. The Standard does have powder over the Greats, but that difference only really comes into play when it’s deeper than around 5″ of fresh. Anything less and you won’t notice much difference in my opinion/experience. The Greats is a little better for carving and slightly better icy edge hold, in my experience and it sounds like you’ll see that more – also better for park and switch, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 157/158. With the Greats, even with size 12 boots, the 156 is more of a 157 equivalent, so I would say that’s your most pure size for the Greats. The RC C3 would also be a good match and the 158W is a good size for you, IMO. But if you wanted to go a little smaller for the extra forgiveness/maneuverability and improvement for park/freestyle etc, then it could feel a bit much. But as an all-mountain size, I think it works for you. For the Standard I would go 156. It’s not going to feel as big as the Greats in a 156, but I think you’d find the 159 too big for what you want to do. I wouldn’t go down to the 153 for the Standard for you though either. If you went Standard, I’d only go 156, if I was you.
The Greats in 154 could definitely work though, so you do have another option there. I think the 156 is probably the best all-mountain/all-round size for you, but the 154 is still going to be good. It’s not a board that I found felt small, like I typically would for a 154. It felt more like riding a 156/157 to me. I typically ride all-mountain boards in 156 to 159. I own the 156 Greats and love it. And while the 154 did feel a little more freestyle/maneuverable and a little less stable/carvy etc, vs the 156, it certainly didn’t feel small compared to what I would typically ride.
Width-wise for the 154, you’re looking at around 272/273mm with a 22″ (560mm) stance – and more like 271mm for a 21.3″ (540mm) stance and 274mm with a slightly wider – 22.8″ (580mm) – stance. Since you like to play with your stance, if you were to go with the narrower stance options at times, you’d be going below what you’re at now, as you mention, so I get your concern there. You’d likely be OK, but the 156 would be safer bet in terms of width. You could go down to a 21″ stance and still be over that 273mm mark.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much for the detailed and thoughtful response!
I ended up going with the 154, but I was really right on the fence between that and the 156. I decided the smaller board might be a bit more conducive to helping me learn to ride switch better. Also I ended up being able to get a better deal on the 154, haha. I figure this also leaves some room for me to one day add to the collection a bigger, true all-mountain board for powder and charging.
You’re very welcome Avery and thanks for the update. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hey Nate,
Thanks for helping out so many of us looking for advice.
I’m unsure on the best size for me and I’m interested in your thoughts. I’m an (early) intermediate rider with 4 seasons under my belt. I’ve ridden a couple boards but only ever owned a 156 LibTech C3 Dynamo. I feel comfortable on the board, but again, I haven’t ridden many others to compare.
I’m 5’8″, 170lbs, I’m leaning towards the 151 based on some other comments I read above, but wanted to get your thoughts.
Thanks again!
Hi Brian, thanks for you message.
I would be debating between the 151 and 154, depending on your foot size. If you ride with US9.5s or below, then I’d go 151. If you ride 10.5s or up, then I’d be looking at the 154. If 10s, I’d say it’s 50/50 but I’d probably err to the 151, given that you’re an early intermediate rider.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Looking to purchase the 2025 Greats. Trying to decide between the 149 vs 151. I am 5’6-7”, 155lbs, size 8.5. I will be using this board as my daily driver for carving, jumping, spins, smaller jumps, boxes, and improving switch riding. I am used to riding boards typically in the 149-151 range but which size would you recommend? Worried if 149 would be too small to tolerate faster speeds and if the 151 would feel too big for spins? Thanks for your input!
Hi Rob, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 154 but would size down from that generally with your boot size and for the Greats even more so. 151 is the biggest I would go with for you for the Greats, and it would be doable, but given what you’re used to and how you want to use the board, I think the 149 is your best bet. The 149 will feel approximately like a typical 151 anyway, in my experience, so it’s already at the higher end of your typical range. The 151 would feel more like a 153.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate! Love your reviews!
I’m 6’2”, 165lbs, US11
Would you recommend the 156 for me? I’m worried that I might be a bit on the light side for it… I prefer a softer more manoeuvrable board but 154 just seems ridiculously short!
Thanks!!
Theo
Hi Theo, thanks for your message.
For this board, think of the 154 as more like a 156/157 and the 156 as more of a 158/159. As that’s closer to the size feel of the “average” board. So, the 154 isn’t as small as the 154 would suggest. That said, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 159, so I think the 156 would be your best bet as a do-it-all size.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
I have a 2024 Yes Standard in 153. I love how it rides switch, its stability, and the edge tech for east coast ice. I’d like another Yes board and think the Greats would be a good one for me.
My specs – 5’6” 175lbs size 8 boot – centered duck 15/15 regardless of board. High Intermediate and don’t want anything catchy – I prefer not needing to be ‘on’ all the time. If you believe what you read, the Basic Uninc and Jackpot would be too catchy for my liking (and why I’m not considering either).
I feel like my size options for the Greats are 151 or 154. The effective edge of the Standard 153 is 113.8, and the Greats 151 is 116.4. Am I wrong to assume the Greats 151 will feel just as stable as my Standard 153, given the eff edge is not smaller and a hair bigger? Both Standard 153 and Greats 151 are rated similar in ‘flex on snow’ and rated up to 190lbs. That also makes me think they’ll ride similarly relative to stability. Being nimbler and more maneuverable and easier to heel turn without giving up any stability is a win in my book. If the 154 is a safer bet and not suffer much in ease of maneuverability, I get it and would take your expert opinion all day.
Thanks very much!
Hey Gerry, thanks for your message.
Yeah, I’d go 151 for sure. IMO 151 is the closest equivalent size to the 153 Standard. As you mention that effective edge is a big reason for that. For your specs, I would have said 151, even without the extra info of how you find the Standard, so yeah 151 all they way, IMO.
Hope this helps (if it didn’t come too late – have been pretty hectic with gear testing the last week)
Thanks very much for your insight. I really appreciate you!
You’re very welcome Gerry. Hope you have a great rest of your season.
Awesome review, Nate! Love how you interact with your community.
I’m a 33-year-old intermediate rider with 10 years of experience, currently on a 2019 Capita Ultrafear 153 with the Park V2 profile. I’m looking for something more all-mountain-oriented with better edge hold on firm snow while keeping freestyle flexibility for side hits and about 30% park use. Lately, I’ve been focused on improving my carving and want a board that carves well but isn’t too punishing when I just want to cruise. Powder float isn’t a priority, and this would be my only board.
I’m 5’10” (177cm), 158 lbs (72kg), with 9.5 (42.5) Northwave Decade boots, and I usually ride a 56-58cm stance. That said, my actual foot length is 25.5cm, which technically translates to a US 8 – but all my shoes and boots are 9/9.5, and I could never squeeze into an 8, which is kind of weird.
I’m torn between the Yes Greats 151 and 154. The 154 seems ideal for all-mountain riding, and its reference stance matches mine well, but the 27.3 width at the inserts REALLY worries me. My Ultrafear is around 26.3 at the inserts, and it feels perfect. While my 9.5 boots should be okay-ish on 27.3, if I go by my actual foot length (25.5cm), I’d have a massive 1.8cm of foot underhang on the 154 Greats.
So, I’m wondering if I should go with the 151, hoping that the 26.9 insert width won’t feel too sluggish thanks to the narrower waist (to be honest, even 26.9 worries me a bit :D), especially since I love carving but rarely bomb runs past 40-45 mph.
Alternatively, I’m considering the 156 Salomon Assassin if you think it would still carve well in hard snow while staying playful. I’m instinctively more drawn to the Greats for its uniqueness, but the 2025 Assassin is getting a lot of great feedback.
Would love to hear your thoughts – thanks a lot!
Hi Pietro, thanks for your message.
From what you’re describing, the Greats would suit you really well, IMO. We haven’t tested the 2025 Assassin, unfortunately, so can’t really say much there, except what we felt on the previous assassins and in terms of sizing.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 156, so for the Assassin, I think the 156 would be fine. Given your foot size, you could size that one down to 153, especially given you’re used to a 153. Though, I understand if you might want to go a little bigger, if you’re looking to go more all-mountain oriented now.
For the Greats, it’s a close one. The 154 would be sizing down a little bit from that 156, but given how much wider it is, I would be erring towards the 151. For my specs, I’m an all-mountain size of around 159/160 and I own the Greats in a 156 – and as an all-rounder size, it feels perfect for me. But I’ve also ridden the 154 and it didn’t feel super small or anything and often I do find 154s feel small for me. It was certainly what I would use if it was more of a freestyle predominant ride, but it certainly wasn’t a noodle or super unstable in that size, like some 154s can feel. For reference I am 6’0″ (183cm), 180lbs (82kg) with 9.5 boots and 27.3cm/27cm feet. In that sense, I’m sizing down around 3-4cm. Given your foot size, I would size down at least 4cm from that 156 on the Greats, so I think the 151 would be your best bet.
I don’t think you’ll find it sluggish in that length, even though the width is wider a. because the narrower waist does help and b. because going with the shorter length will help compensate for the wider width.
tldr; I would go 151 in the Greats and that size should work well for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks so much for your detailed comment – it was incredibly helpful!
I just ordered a Yes Greats 151 based on your recommendation and can’t wait to try it out. Really appreciate your advice!
You’re very welcome Pietro. Hope it treats you well. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hi
I am 185cm, 85 kg, size 11 boots (Ride Anthem)
which size would you recommend on this board?
It’s gonna be my day-to-day board for all sorts of things.
Thank you so much
Hi Ken, thanks for your message.
As your day to day board, assuming that includes some slower speed riding/sharper turns (e.g. trees) and some freestyle, then it’s a close call. If you don’t do any or don’t do much of that, then I would go 159.
If you don’t do a lot of high speed riding and don’t need it to perform in powder and you do do the things above, then I would be leaning 156.
If it’s a real mix of everything, it’s a really close call.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 160/161, which certainly suggests the 159. It’s sizing it down a little and even with 11s, I’d say it’s enough of a size down, if you’re doing some high speed riding and the likes. But there’s the option to size down more if you want more maneuverability and incorporate a lot of tricks. If you were in size 10 boots or below, then I’d be leaning stronger towards the 156 and if you were in 12s or up, I’d be leaning more strongly towards the 159 (which doesn’t help I know!).
I personally really like the 156 and wouldn’t go bigger than that myself (I haven’t ridden the 159, but I have ridden the 154 and really liked that as well and I own the 156. This is a board that feels bigger than the overall length suggests. I would say the 156 feels more like a 158/159. I’m 183cm, 82kg and ride 9.5 or 10 boots. Height/weight is fairly similar – it’s the foot size that makes the 159 more suitable than it would be for me, IMO. But again, depending on how you think you’ll ride it, the 156 is still an option.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks for the reply!
I do want to use it for some freestyle. (I am still learning tho.)
I am leaning 156 since I don’t do much deep powder. I would probably get a powder board if I need it.
Just one concern for 156, will that be very unstable at high speed? (my top speed is under 35-40mph, I don’t know if it is considered as high speed lol)
Hi Ken
Yeah, I would consider that as high speed. I’m 82kg, so pretty close to your weight – and I have found the Greats pretty stable in that 35-40mph range. It’s not as surefooted when you get closer to 50mph, but I feel nice and stable on it personally in that 35-40mph range.
Hi Nate,
I am trying to decide on what size to get. I am 5’9″ 185 lbs. size 8.5 boot. I currently ride a Jones Aviator 2.0 158 which I love for hard charging. I am looking for a more chill board to compliment my Aviator. It will be used for carving groomers, side hits, small to medium park jumps. I am leaning towards the 154 what do you think? Would the 156 be a better choice?
Hi, thanks for your message.
Yeah, I would go 154. Particularly with the 158 Aviator already in your quiver. You could almost get away with this board in a 151. It would be more playful and less suitable for carving, so I feel the 154 would be better, but the 156 will feel more like a 158/159 and while I think that’s a good size for you, given how you want to use this board and that you already have the A2.0, the 154 is the best bet, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, love your reviews hoping you can help me choose a size for Yes The Greats Uninc. Trying to decide between 154 and 156, but also open to other boards if you think something else might be a better fit. I am 5’ 9.5” tall, currently 190 lbs but optimistically hoping to get down closer to 180 or less in the future. Size 9.5 boot. I am currently riding a 2018 Rossignol Jibsaw Heavy Duty 157 and don’t hate it, but don’t love it either. Boots are Ride Trident and bindings are Nitro Phantoms. Looking for something a bit more playful without sacrificing too much in the way of stability / carving at speed. The majority of my riding is during an annual 2-week trip to the French/Swiss alps, with the rest being Ice Coast USA. I would say I’m on the lower end of advanced in terms of skill. I love to carve and ride switch. Just started to get into buttering and flat ground tricks the past few seasons. No big jumps but some small side hits and lots of little spins. Most of the time I ride with skiers, so don’t want to sacrifice TOO much in terms of speed / stability at speed so that I can keep up with them at the larger mountains in Europe. My typical cruising speed is around 25-35 mph, pretty rare to go above 45 mph. I would probably continue using my current boots and bindings if you think they would be a good fit with the board. But I was also considering trying Flow NX2 or NX2 Carbon bindings to reduce time strapping in at the top. So thoughts on those options with this board also appreciated. I have my annual euro trip coming up in a few weeks and this would probably be the only board I bring, but definitely open to building out a quiver whether or not I keep the old Rossi board.
Hi Brian, thanks for your message.
I would be leaning 156 for you. The 154 would certainly work as well, and if it was going to be a little more specialized in terms of freestyle etc, then I would likely be leaning towards it, but given you want to keep decent stability for speed/carving, I would be leaning 156. The Trident should be fine with the Greats. On the stiffer end of what I’d put on it but still in range. The Phantom should be fine too, but we haven’t tested them, so couldn’t say for sure. If you go Flow, I would go NX2, rather than the Carbon, just as the Carbon version might be getting a bit too stiff for the Greats. We haven’t tested the Carbon version, but felt the regular TM at around a 7/10 flex. It has a very stiff highback, but overall flex feel was more like a 7 to me.
Hope this helps
Hello, I have been following your website for several years and you do a great job.
5 years ago I bought a Never Summer West Bound board (157 cm) in a set with Union Atlas and Ride Lasso 10 shoes (28 cm), but I have to buy another shoes 28.5 cm, they are a bit too small in the toes. The shoes need to be replaced and I thought it was time for something new. I am 178 cm and 83 kg. I mainly ride on prepared routes, I like carve and fast speed (record 93 km/h) – I will also add that in the west bound my fingers caught on the snow and it made it difficult to carve. I would like the board to be good for carving and fast speeds, but also for me to have fun on it and learn switch riding, so it must handle well at low speeds and not kill me (so far I only ride on my right leg). I’ve read a lot of your reviews and descriptions and I conclude that Yes Greats will be right for me – I haven’t ridden on different boards – how would you compare it to West Bound? I would like something a little different.
Or maybe you have another suggestion? I was thinking about buying a Burton ION BOA for this (I like the BOA system) because my Ride Lasso (7) doesn’t seem very stiff to me, and these should be stiffer. I was thinking about keeping the Union Atlases for two boards, but I’m considering buying the entire Step One set? Does this make sense? Can I leave Atlas at West Bound and buy other bindings? I will be grateful for any suggestions on how to create a cool set that will give me a lot of fun and develop my skills. Thank you for help !
Hi Michal, thanks for your message (and apologies for the slow reply – way behind atm!)
The Greats is definitely a very different board to the West Bound and does strike a really good balance between carving and slow speed turns. It’s certainly decent at speeds for its flex, but just don’t expect it to be able to handle any speed without feeling a bit wobbly at times. They would make a good quiver, IMO. The Greats isn’t very good for powder and the Westbound is, so they would compliment each other well.
The Ion Boa would work with the Greats. They’re at the stiffer end of what I’d use with the Greats, but they’re still in range and if you want a stiffer boot and particularly one with a low profile, then the Ion Boa are a good match, IMO. In terms of Step On, I found the Ion Step Ons stiffer than the regular Ion Boa. To a point where they are bordering on being too stiff for that board. So a Step On setup with the Ion Boa may end up being too stiff, IMO. The Atlas would work well on the Greats though, I would say, so you could certainly use those and switch them around.
Hope this helps (if it didn’t come too late)
Thank you for your reply.
It’s not too late, I leave in two weeks 🙂
I have a few more questions.
1. Compared to West Bound, Greats is more or less stable at speeds?
2. Will Greats be a good choice for learning switch riding?
3. What size greats 178 cm and 83 kg (183 lb) weight, shoe 10/10.5 US?
4. Unfortunately, in my area there is a big problem with the availability of Burton ION for regular bindings, but they have other recommended Ride Deadbolt boots,
DC Judge, Burton Photon in every size and I think I will go and choose the most comfortable for me. From what I’ve read, they are a bit softer, but I think each of them will match the hardness of both boards?
I read your review about StepOn and maybe it will be my next set, but from what I understand it will be easier for me to learn switch riding (by feeling the board) on regular bindings?
Hi Michal
1. Very close in terms of stability at speed. I would say a touch less, but it’s a different feel. The Greats is a more stable feel overall, but it’s softer flexing than the West Bound, so when at higher speeds, that extra stiffness helps. But again, very close I would say.
2. Yes, it’s awesome for riding switch, IMO. And should be fine to learn switch on as well.
3. I would go 156 for your specs
4. IMO all those boot options would work with both boards, so going with the best fit of those is a good bet, IMO.
Yeah, I would learn switch on regular bindings over step on. I think it would be easier.
Hi Nate,
Thank you so much for all the info and useful review. I’m thinking of replacing my 152 Yes Basic with something a bit faster, but that would still allow me to do flat tricks – I’m not really into the park side of things. My boots are 26.5 mondo/8.5US and I’m 176cm and 67kg. Would you say that the 151 is a good size for me? Thanks
Hi Vito, thanks for your message.
I think the Greats would work well for what you’re describing, a good step up. Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 155, but would certainly size down for this board, with 8.5s. I think the 151 would be right on in this case. You’ll likely feel it bigger than your 152 Basic, so if you wanted to have a similar size feel, then I’d go 149, but given you want something better for speed (the Greats is better for speed size-for-size anyway, so you would get some improvement even in the 149, IMO, but more subtly so).
For reference:
Greats 151: 116.4cm effective edge | 253mm waist, 269mm width at inserts, 305mm tip/tail width
Basic 152: 114.8cm effective edge | 250mm waist, 257mm width at inserts, 292mm tip/tail width
Greats 149: 114.6cm effective edge | 245mm waist, 261mm width at inserts, 297mm tip/tail width
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
I am buying the Greats soon. However:
My weight(180lbs – 190lbs) says I should go for 156 but my feet(US12) say I should go for 159.
which size do you suggest?
Considering it will be my daily board and I am exploring freestyle (some small features and ground tricks)
Hi Thomas, thanks for your message.
Could also let me know your height. While weight and foot size are more important than height for sizing, IMO, I still like to take height into account, for the leverage factor.
I am around 6′ to 6’1. Thank you!
Hi Thomas. I would be leaning 159. Typically I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 160/161. If you had smaller feet, then I’d say go 156, but in this case you don’t need to size down too much. If you’re used to riding shorter boards, then you could still go 156. It’s wide enough for 12s, IMO, so if you want to go shorter, the option is there, but I’d say the 159 is probably the better all-rounder size for your specs.
Hello Nate!
Thank you for your review!
I am 187cm with 83kg. Wearing US 12 boots
Do you think 156 is suitable for me if I want to learn more about freestyles?
Is 159 too stiff for my weight to do tricks?
Hi Leo, thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 161 and with size 12 boots, I would say your best all-rounder size for the Greats is 159. However, if you were going to be using it predominantly for freestyle stuff, then you could definitely size it down to the 156. But it’s likely to become more of a dedicated freestyle board in that size for you, IMO. While your weight is very similar to mine your longer feet will enable you to apply more force to the edges than I would be able to – and your extra height will have some impact on that too (not as much as the foot size, but does make some difference, IMO). So you’ll probably be able to overpower it pretty easily when you’re looking to lay down a high speed carve. So it would be a board that would behave differently to how I would experience it in the 156. Not to say that it would become a noodle or anything like that. But enough difference that it wouldn’t be as good at speeds or as good for carving – and if you were planning to take it in powder, you’d be cursing it all day long! But as a dedicated freestyle board without any intention to drive it hard at high speeds or taking it in powder and it would definitely work iin that size for you. But I would call it a park board at that point, rather than an all-mountain-freestyle.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate!
I follow your review to buy snowboards since day 1 and it was always a success!
I’m 5’8″ and has small feet (US men size 7.5) and weights 132lbs, I’m looking at the 149 but it looks like the board is a little bit too wide at 26.1cm underfoot. Is it still good for me or I should look something else?
Thank you!
Hi Ryan, thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think it’s a little on the big side, because of that width. It’s not far off, but I would put your “typical all-mountain” length at around 150, but at this width, I would prefer to see you size down from this. Another, narrower board in a 149/150 would be a good size, IMO. But this particular board it may feel a bit big. Don’t get me wrong it wouldn’t be unrideable by any means, but not optimal either, IMO. If you can let me know the kind of board you’re looking for – how you want to be riding it, your rough ability level and any preferences you may have developed, let me know and I can look into an alternative option, if you’d like.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks for your reply.
I’m currently riding a Yes Typo 152 which I bought after saw your best intermediate snowboard review 2 years ago (thanks again! It’s an amazing board). After 2 years, I made some progress and feel the board is not enough for me.
I ride almost everything, I should say 40% carving 20% moguls, 20% ground tricks and 20% jumps. Don’t care too much rails and boxes but good to have it.
BTW I tried to step on it in the store and it seems my boot actually overhang a little bit (Nidecker Rift size 7) when my bare foot is about 0.8cm under hang on both toe and heel side.
A little bit more info about my current setup:
Bindings: supermatic
Boots: Nidecker Rift 7
Board: Yes Typo 152
Stance: 52cm
Hi Ryan
Yeah, should pretty much always be some boot overhang. Preferably no foot underhang and I don’t like to go with anything that has more than 5mm of foot underhang without sizing down. Given you’re used to a 152 Typo, the 149 could be doable. I’d say you’d probably feel the 149 Greats similar size-wise vs the 152 Typo, but a little stiffer, and maybe a touch bigger overall, though that may not be a bad thing, if you’re looking for “more board”. For reference, some rough numbers, based on 52cm stance width:
YES Greats 149: waist 245mm, 259mm at inserts, 297mm tip/tail | effective edge 114.6cm (note I’ve estimated this width at inserts, based on what I’ve found the board to be in other sizes and given you’re riding with a 52cm stance width, which is narrower than the reference stance that YES have it at. With the Supermatics, you should be able to get something around that 52cm stance pretty easily.
YES Typo 152: waist 251mm , 256mm at inserts, 294mm tip/tail | effective edge 115cm
Actually, I think they’d likely feel similar size-wise, with the narrower waist (which does help to keep the feel a bit more agile than if it was that width at inserts without the narrow waist) of the Greats and its tighter side-cut, bringing back the extra width at inserts and tip/tail. Given you’re looking for more board, I’m more confident in the size of it than I was previously, I think it’s more doable, assuming you haven’t felt the Typo being too big at any point. I think the Greats would be a good bet for what you’re describing, so I’m warming more to it working in the 149, given the new info.
Some other options worth looking at:
– Rome Agent Pro 148 (or 151)
– Never Summer Easy Rider 148 (or 152)
Yes, I don’t feel the current board big, it’s very easy to make super tight turn on moguls, Ordering the greats 149 now! Appreciate the detailed analysis, thank you and Merry Christmas!
You’re very welcome Ryan. Merry Christmas to you too!
Hi Nate!
I’m curious about your opinion on something. My curated guy is ADAMENT that I need to get greats in 156, however what you have written, what the good ride has ridden and what the yes rep has said has pointed me to the 154. Showing this info to the curated guy he is still adamant that a 156 is better for me. This would be my only board.
Weight: 165 – 185
Height 5″ 9
Binding: Nidecker Supermatics Large
Boot: 10
What do you think?
Hi Johnny, thanks for your message.
Not saying that the 156 would be wrong, but I would be leaning 154 for the Greats for you. That’s taking a mid-point for your weight. If you were more consistently at that 185 mark, then there’d be a stronger case for the 156. I still don’t think the 154 would be wrong at 185lbs, but it would take on a more freestyle leaning feel, rather than do-it-all. I could see the curated guys point in leaning 156 if that was the case. But even then, I wouldn’t be as adamant as he sounds like he is. But if you could also let me know a bit more about how you would be riding it. Are you planning mostly on carving groomers and not much else, or would you be riding trees, park, side-hits, butters and other ground tricks etc.
Assuming a relatively varied style of riding – and I’m sure the curated guy must’ve asked you about that right? – and assuming your weight to be around 170-175 for the most part, when you’re riding it, I would say the 154 would be your best bet. If you are looking to mostly carve and ride it pretty fast and not do much else, then there is a case for going 156, for sure. I ride the 156 personally and really love it as a do-it-all size, but I’m 6’0″, 180lbs, so it’s a different case. And also when I rode the 154, it wasn’t something that I felt was too small. It just felt like it was better for riding freestyle stuff and not quite as good for carving and speed for me. But it still definitely didn’t feel like it would be park only or anything – it was still pretty decent at speed and still really fun to carve on.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate! Thank you for your reviews, this one helped me in deciding on buying the a Yes The Greats at the end of 2023 Season. When I did demo the board first, I had Burton step ons+Photons on them. I felt incredibly secure with that setup and got some of the best carves of my life on that combo.
I picked up 24 Strata’s last year to pair with the board and while I love them, I can’t help but feel like they’re not able to get me those same incredible carves like I was getting w/ the step ons where I felt one with the board. I’m looking for a pair of stiffer bindings to pair as I mostly use this board for carving and running the mountain and have a 22 Yes Basic that I’ll likely pair the strata’s too instead. May do the occasional park run if I get more into it but I’ll usually have the basic with me for that if needed as well. I run with non step on Burton Photons as my boot as well.
Been looking at these potential picks:
– 25 Union Falcor
– 24 Rome Katana
– 25 Nidecker Supermatic
Any recommendations between these or other options based on my criteria for this board?
Hey Kevin, thanks for your message.
I get what you’re saying for sure, and I really like the Greats with slightly stiffer bindings. I enjoy it with Malavitas (more similar for carving to the Strata) still but I like it even more with my Falcor’s. That would be the pick if I was you. That said, I haven’t had the Katana or Supermatic on the Greats specifically. But, while I think you’ll get more carving performance out of any one of those you listed, the Falcor has been such a good combo on the Greats for me, that’s the one I’d recommend above the other two. You won’t get quite that same locked in feeling you got with the Step Ons, but they should definitely help with carving performance, if my experience with them is anything to go by.
Hope this helps with your decision (and apologies this reply came late – things pretty hectic right now and I’m way behind!)
Hey bro. just what i was looking for! i’m thinking I will pick this up but i did see a comment on reddit that made me concerned by someone who has one. He said:
“The wide/narrow shape is a double edged sword tho because it naturally has a very small sidecut, esp heelside, so short quick turns is what it likes. But it will really hold you back on steeps and high speed. I’d want a larger sidecut on this board. Also, too soft for high speed on steeps. It rides over imperfect terrain, not through it. So either bomb and skid turns, or carve at a controlled speed.”
do you find this true? do you think this board would do ok around 50-55mph? Would a jones frontier or ride shadowban be better for speed? I’ve narrowed it down to these 3 boards
Hi Rick, thanks for your message.
The Greats does have a tight sidecut on it – and this does typically prefer shorter/quicker turns. But it’s not as much as you’d think. Also, it can handle decent speeds and is one of the better carvers for a twin. It’s certainly not a bomber though. If you want something that’s really good at high speeds and for long drawn out carves at high speeds, then it’s probably not going to be the board for you. It’s predominantly a freestyle oriented all-mountain board – so you could make it’s sidecut longer and make it stiffer, but then it wouldn’t be as good for other things it does. That’s why there are many different types of snowboards. In my experience the Frontier and Shadowban aren’t going to give you any better at speed and aren’t as good for carving, IMO.
In comparison to the Standard Uninc or PYL or PYL Uninc (just to name a few YES boards as an example) it’s not going to go as well at speed as them, but it depends on what you’re looking for. I’d say the Greats is pretty comfortable around 45-50mph, but that’s probably about it’s limit, in terms of feeling comfortable. But that would be the same for the Shadowban and Frontier, IMO.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate, just wanted to say thank you so much for all the reviews you do, they have been so helpful as i’m choosing a new board.
I have been riding a 162 Capita BSOD since 2003 and I now i’m getting older I would like a slightly shorter and more flexible board to do smaller jumps and side hits but still stiff enough to carve and go fast on groomers (i’m an ex-instructor). I’m considering a Greats 156 or 159 and I’m having trouble choosing which size I need. My issue is I’m 6′ and 165lbs but size 11.5US boots. My weight makes it look like I need the 156 but i’m concerned that on steep fast runs it will become unstable, would I be better off going for the 159? Thank you
Hi Giles, thanks for your message.
If it was a compliment to the BSOD, then I’d say go 156, as then you’d still have the BSOD for when you wanted to ride faster. But if it’s your only board, it’s a close call.
The 159 Greats should still feel like “less board” than the BSOD 162. It’s 3cm in total length shorter and 1cm less effective edge. It is wider though. While both have a 262mm waist width the Greats 159 is fairly significantly wider at the inserts and tip/tail. But it’s a softer flex and a tighter side-cut, so will still, IMO, feel more suited to the likes of your smaller jumps, side-hits and should still feel a bit more forgiving. Should definitely hold up for fast/steep stuff too – I would say not quite to the same degree as the BSOD 162, but you should still get plenty of stability there in the 159.
I’d say you’d likely still prefer the 156 for side-hits and the likes, but you’d be looking at a bigger drop in stability vs the BSOD 162.
Hope this gives you more to go off, and apologies for the slow response – in constant catch up mode at the moment!
Thanks Nate that’s really helpful! I think I’m leaning towards the 159 on your advice. You should start an ‘Agony Aunt’ column in a snowboard magazine!
You’re very welcome Giles.
I had to look up what Agony Aunt meant! But yeah, could definitely look into that.
Would you say this board is less damp than the standard standard uninc and shadowban? Thinking about getting this but I worry I’ll get bucked around
Hi Meddy
I would say it’s similar to the Shadowban, but a touch damper. Not as damp as the Standard Uninc. Somewhere in between I would say, but close to the Shadowban. I don’t find it’s super easy to get bucked around on, but it’s not ultra damp either.
Hope this helps
i want to replace one of these two boards in my quiver with the greats. which one would you replace with the greats?
Hi Meddy
It depends what you want out of the two remaining boards. If you need something that will be better in powder, then I’d keep the Shadowban. But if you want something that’s damper and better at speed, then the Standard Uninc would be the one to keep, assuming you didn’t need anything that’s really good in powder – or if you have another board lined up for that. Based on your comments in the Flagship and PYL reviews, I’m guessing you’re also looking for something more freesride. If you do also go with a freeride board that’s good in powder, then I would probably replace the Shadowban with the Greats.
Thanks for the reply Nate! I also picked up a deep thinker 157! I bought the greats in a 154. Very excited for this season. Appreciate your help!!
You’re very welcome Meddy. A great setup, IMO! Hope your quiver treats you well and that you have a great winter!
Hello Nate ! First of all, I would like to say that I have not seen a greater enthusiast and professional. I follow your site with great interest 🙂 THANKS YOU 🙂 I have been riding a board for about 5 years. I currently have a Barton Joystick 156 cm with malavita est (M) bindings. I would like something new that will allow me to progress. I am interested in a board that I will have fun on. Fun in the park. However, I would like it be stable at higher speeds and also sensitive and responsive at lower speeds.I ride on and off the trails. I’m always looking for adventure and fun.
I love playing with the board everywhere, and sometimes it’s good to accelerate.
When I see a good trail, off the trail or even powder I go straight to it. During the ride, natural jumps, riding between trees and snow moguls. I like a little bit of everything 😀 😀 Looking through your reviews, I noticed YES GREATS. What do you think? Would it be the right board for me? If so, what size board should I choose and what bindings do you recommend. My height: 177 cm. Weight: 75 kg. Shoe: 42 (26.5 cm foot)
THANKS 🙂
P.s. maybe you would suggest a different set? I’m not interested in a typical board for park use only, and also a typical one for aggressive riding. MORE UNIVERSAL 🙂
Hi Lukazz, thanks for your message (and apologies for the delay in response – still catching up trying to get reviews etc published!)
I think the Greats would suit what you’re describing really well. All except for the powder aspect. It’s fine in shallower powder (up to a few inches) but when it gets deeper, it’s not a great floater. If you don’t see a lot of powder or it’s never that deep, I think you’d be fine with that. Otherwise, I would look at something that’s a little better in powder.
If you do go Greats, I would go with the 154.
If you think you want more powder performance, let me know and I can look at some other options for you.
Hope this helps
Thanks a lot for your answer. Light powder snow is enough for me at the moment. What bindings would you recommend? Can you give me 2-3 models in different price ranges?
Hi Lukas
Union Strata or Burton Cartel for lower price range.
Union Falcor, Rome Katana for higher price range.
Burton Cartel X for something in between those prices.
Hey, thanks for the reply. How would you rate the above bindings in relation to Malavita. Significant difference? How would you ride yes greats with typical freestyle bindings? I’m asking because I noticed that you tested the board on Malavita
Hi Lukas
Personally I love my 2019 Falcor’s on the Greats. The Malavita are my testing bindings – so I keep them consistent for everything I test, so that I can get a clear reading on a board. But that said, they are a very good match to the Greats. But Falcor’s are my pick. The Strata would be my choice in the lower price range and if you want to go a little softer flexing. The Cartel and Strata are the softer options there. I’d say the Cartel are probably the most similar to the Malavita, but they are still different enough to notice.
I just bought a union strata 2025 and a union falcor 2024 and 25 😀 Union strata and falcor 2024 at the same good price. The question is which binding to keep and which to return? 😀 I noticed that this year’s strata has a lower flex from 6 to 5. What do you think? I would like to get more fun and responsiveness from the board at lower speeds. Do you think the strata will be a better choice than the falcor? Won’t the falcor be too stiff? If you choose the falcor, is the 2025 model significantly better than the 2024 model?
Hi Lukas
A little bit to unpack here!
Firstly, I don’t think the Strata has changed at all. They are just rating it differently, as far as I can tell. Which sometimes happens. It got a new toe strap for the 2025 model but other than that it appears to be the same as the 2024 model. We didn’t re-test it as there weren’t enough changes to warrant it and our time was better spent with other bindings, but there’s nothing in there that suggests it will be any softer in reality. That said, I wouldn’t go softer than the 6/10 flex of the Strata on the Greats anyway. The Strata is a really good match for the Greats, IMO – and is a great binding for slow speed response.
Given that you want more slow speed responsiveness, I would be erring Strata over the 2024 Falcor. This goes for Falcor models from the 2022 to 2024 models. The 2022 model got a new stronger highback and the result was a stiffer overall feel and it wasn’t as good as 2021 and prior models in terms of slow speed response and overall wasn’t, IMO, as good as it was (and certainly not as suitable for the Greats) as previous models. Still great binding, but not as good, IMO. However, the 2025 models have a feel that is way more similar to the 2021 and prior Falcor’s but even better, IMO.
My personal choice would be the 2025 Falcor. But the Strata will work really well. The Strata will still, IMO, be a little better for slow speed response, but the 2025 model Falcor is better in that area than it was for the 2022 to 2024 models.
Hi Nate.
I have a yes the greats 156 and I have always used Burton Imperial 29.5 cm (11.5) I bought it new
deeluxe boot 29 cm (11) . the new boot has a larger footprint despite being a smaller size. it is about 0.5 cm more. measuring it including the hull it is approximately 33 cm. in your opinion with the yes the greats it measures 27.5 in the inserts. I use 12/12 and malavita corners where I cannot perfectly center my foot. the tip comes out 2.8. cm . I have problems?
Hi Gud, thanks for your message.
Depending on how deep you like to carve (how high an angle you get on the edge), you could run into some toe drag problems. But you might be OK. However, if you can move the binding back at all, then I would try to have more overhang on the heel edge, than the toe edge (if you can’t center them) – as it’s less likely that you’ll be able to drag your heels.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, thanks for all the info here! I’m looking to get a more playful all around resort board than my 159 Jones Stratos. Mostly going to use it to have fun on side hits, flat ground butters and ripping marginal quality groomers. Keeping the Stratos for deeper snow and burlier hills just looking for more fun on average days. I’ve got plenty of riding experience, am about 6’, 190lbs and have size 10 boots. Do you think the Greats Uninc fits that bill and if so, 154 or 156? I’m thinking 156 based on stability at speed but if the 154 fits the bill it may be fun to have a shorter board than I’ve ever owned. FWIW I’ve got either older Burton Genesis or Jones Mercury bindings to bolt onto it. Also been looking at the Bataleon Beyond Medals but seems a bit close to the Stratos but interested in your opinion there as well. Appreciate any feedback! Thanks, Drew
Hi Drew, thanks for your message. And apologies for the late reply – been working to get the 24/25 reviews out and updating stuff (super late this year!).
The Greats would work really well for how you want to use it, IMO. It’s my go-to for the types of days you’re talking about.
Size-wise, I think the 156 is the more pure “all-round” size for you. But the 154 definitely doable – and doesn’t feel as small as a typical 154. I own the 156 and love it, but I’ve also ridden the 154 and while it’s subtly less stable/fast and subtly more playful, it certainly didn’t feel like it was a noodle or tiny or anything. I’m similar specs to you (6′, 180lbs, 9.5 boots) – so I don’t think you’d find it too different to how I found it. The 156 would be the safe bet (and still be playful) but if you wanted to go a little more playful, the 154 certainly isn’t a crazy idea or anything. I’d almost think of the 154 as a 156 and the 156 as a 158 – if converting sizing to a typical board.
Both those bindings would work on it. I would probably go Genesis, if you were to go 154 and Mercury on the 156. Though both would work on both.
Hope this helps (if it’s not too late)
Thanks a bunch Nate!!
You’re very welcome Drew. Thanks for visiting and hope you have a great season!
Hi Nate, great site, keep up the hard work! I had a browse though the Q&A here for the Yes Greats but still not 100% on sizing so would really appreciate any insight. I’m 180, ~74kg, boot size EU42 (US9). Normally ride 157/158 all mountain and many years experience, mainly aggressive piste slamming. Last year a local ski shop butchered my Capita Mercury ’57 and I decided to heed your all mountain list and try the Yes Standard in 153. Has its good points for sure (pop access, buttering, switch, solid through chop) but carving experience leaves me cold and base is like treacle after the Merc. I had a toss-up last year standard vs greats. I would want something even more playful as planning keeping the standard for pow, but also can have a separate noodle. Greats seems still really good option for me to diversify more to freestyle (mainly smaller jumps, side hits, off piste features) but still hammer pistes. Maybe better quiver of 1 for flying trips. Torn between 151 (they claim perfect for my weight and shoe size) and 154 that would perhaps be a little quicker? I see you tend to size up a little on your demo boards but also curious did you find the Greats less sluggish than the Standard speed wise?
Thanks,
Damo.
Hi Damo, thanks for your message.
I would go 154, if I was you. I put your all-mountain length at around 158, which is also right on what you typically ride. With 9s, you definitely want to size down the Greats, and while the 151 wouldn’t be wrong by any means (I’m similar specs to you but a slightly larger boot and 6kg heavier) and I really like the 156 but also get on well with the 154. But if I was to get the 154 (I own the 156) I would be using it a little differently – a little more playful and less speed, more ground tricks, rails, etc. For what you’re describing, I think the longer size would suit what you want better. I still do a strong mix of freestyle to carving on the 156 – like probably 50/50. It’s definitely not too big for side-hits and doesn’t make it too hard to butter/pop or anything, but it gives more stability and more speed.
One of the only things that YES boards do tend to lack in a little bit is base speed and I wouldn’t say the Greats is better than the Standard (I’m a pretty precise/fussy waxer so I can get a decent glide going on them), but the 154 Greats should feel noticeably faster than the 153 Standard. The 154 Greats is bigger than the 1cm difference to the 153 Standard would suggest. They have a 1cm difference in overall length, but the Greats (154) is a very significant 5.3cm (119.1cm EE) longer effective edge vs the 153 Standard (113.8cm EE) and also a 9.4cm longer contact length (113.7cm vs 104.3cm) as well as being a little wider – so overall a bigger board, so it will track faster.
I find I use my greats for everything except for powder days – if I could only have 2 boards, I’d probably go Greats and a powder board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks. Really appreciate you taking the time with a long and thoughtful response. I was looking at the Yes sizing but suspecting you’d say 154 for my use case. Helped me make my mind up. Preferred the 23/24 graphic but hey-ho, can’t win em all.
Damo.
You’re very welcome Damo. Yeah, can’t have everything sometimes!
Hi Nate,
First of all, love your work. I would appreciate your opinion on a Greats as a second board (potentially will be my main). Im 6ft/185lb/11US Boot and tossing up either the 156 or 159 Greats.
I am aiming to ride this board all mountain, but with a focus on going fast/carving groomers, etc (gotta try keep up with some fast friends). However I still want a board that is fun/butters/flexs/spins/etc (am i asking too much lol) and that I wont hate riding switch.
Currently I have a 2024 Twinpig 151, which i find fun to mess around on but im not in love with it. I actually feel like the board is pretty sketchy at speed, but this could be my fault for not having enough talent and/or being on a board that is probably too small for me.
Originally i wanted a board that was different to the Twinpig (ie Twinpig for park, something else for speed/all mountain), but now i am thinking the Greats is possibly just an all around better board than the Twinpig. So perhaps i could sell the Twinpig and solo it on the Greats or who knows, maybe replace the Twinpig with some type of bendy noodle board.
Would you recommend the Greats in my circumstances or something else? And if so, a 156 or 159?
Also, are you aware if there are any/many changes between the 2024 Greats and 2025 Greats, as I can only buy a 2025 version in my country (no 2024 stock remaining).
If its of any relevance the bindings im currently riding with are the Burton Genesis – maybe I need something stiffer..
Hi Johnny
Thanks for your message and apologies for my slow response. Very busy getting 24/25 reviews etc ready to publish, so I’m a bit (understatement) behind right now!
Firstly, the 2025 Greats, as far as I can tell is the same as the 2024 Greats.
IMO, the Greats would be a better all rounder. One of the downsides of short/wide boards, is that by going shorter you do loose effective edge – so while you may have the same surface area for powder, you loose a lot of stability at speed (even when other things about the board favors stability at speed) simply for now having enough edge in the snow.
I think if you were going to go for a noodly board, then you could pair the Greats with something stiffer, but for what you’re describing, I think the Greats would make a really good all-rounder, so long as you’re not looking to ride any deep powder. It’s not terrible in powder, but it’s not great either.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160. But this is a board you can size down, both because of its width and it’s effective edge. As an all-rounder I would be leaning 156 for you, but you could definitely ride the 159 too. If you were to get a noodle to pair it with, then I’d probably go 159 for it, but note that it will be more speed/carving focused and more difficult to butter/spin.
The Genesis would be a good match to the Greats, IMO – particularly if you go with a 156. If you were to go with the 159, then I would go a bit stiffer for the bindings, but the Genesis would match the 156 sell, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
You’re a legend Nate, thanks for the reply. Cant wait to see the 2025 reviews as they are published!
I think that confirms it, a 156 Greats it is.
Hope you guys in the northern hemisphere have a sick season ahead.
Thanks Johnny! Hope the Greats treats you well.
Hey Nate! Thank you for all the effort you put into this. It makes finding/researching my next setup so much easier! For the greats uninc, if I can only put 1 binding on it for all mountain freestyle riding, to rip the groomers and side hits, with occasional park lap jib focus
Hi Chris, thanks for your message.
Quite a few good binding options. I would personally go with something in the 6/10 to 7/10 flex range to match the board well and give you enough stiffness to be able to rip but not so stiff that you can’t flex them enough for the freestyle stuff. And because you’re hitting side hits and jibs, I would be looking for something with good board feel and shock absorption. So something like the Union Strata, Salomon Hologram or Rome Vice/Bataleon Blaster Asym would be good bets for a 6/10 flex option, or if you wanted to go a little stiffer, then the Union Falcor, Rome Katana, Burton Cartel X or Salomon Highlander.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks for the quick response! I have the Stratas right now, is there much of a difference between those and the Falcor to warrant purchasing new bindings
Pick your line uninc a good choice of board to add to this for a 2 board quiver?
Hey Chris
It would be a difference that you would notice, IMO, but whether or not it warrants getting new bindings probably depends on how much money you have to throw at snowboarding purchases. If you wanted to have one bindings for both PYL and Greats, the Falcor would be the better bet. But if you wanted a pair on each, then I’d put the Strata on the Greats and something stiffer on the PYL. And yeah, PYL and Greats would make a really good 2 board quiver, IMO.
Just looking at the Greats in isolation, I personally would just stick with the Strata and not spend the extra money. While the difference will be noticeable between those two bindings, the Strata is still a really good match for the Greats and is a combo I’d be very happy with.
Thank you Nate! You’ve given me lots to think about. I’m riding a 156 in the greats, it looks like a 159 in the PYL uninc would be a comprobale size for me in that. 190-200 lbs, 5’11, size 12.5 US boots… those 2025 falcors look pretty epic with the redesign
Hey Chris
I rode the 2025 Falcor in the winter – and they are sick! Always liked the Falcor’s and the 2025s are an improvement on already great bindings, IMO. And I agree that the 159 would be a good size for you in the PYL Uninc and comparable to the Greats in the 156, size-wise.
Hi nate, I’m also planning on having a 2 board quiver with PYL and Greats.
What boots would you recommend then? Is one pair of boots somewhere in the middle enough or is it better to have 2 pairs in different stiffness?
Thank you!
Hi Bobby, thanks for your message.
I think ideally, having 2 pairs with different stiffness is ideal. But it’s not necessary and especially with these 2 boards not being super far apart in terms of flex. And with boots, it’s kind of a pain to have break in 2 pairs, but its doable for sure, if you wanted to get that really specialized setup for your boards.
I tend to err a little stiffer with boots, so in this case, I think something around a 7/10 flex would be a good bet. I’d rather have slightly stiffer boots on the softer board than slightly softer boots on the stiffer board, but at that, you’d be a good match for the PYL and still a good match with the Greats. You could go 6.5/10 or 7.5/10 as well, but I’d try to go stiffer than 6 for the PYL and softer than 8 for the Greats.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
For anyone on the fence about this board….Don’t be! Top rated for a very good reason! I reached out a few seasons ago and ended up on the 151 which I unfortunately thrashed riding low tide east coast conditions at the end of the year. I parted with it but had to get another one, so I decided to go to more of an All mountain size for me and scooped one of the last 2024 154’s off of Backcountry for 358$ usd out the door!
I rode the 151 and will be riding the 154 with Union Strata which match the board perfectly imo. My question for you Nate is do you think you could still ride pow if you set the bindings back a little? Or would it just not ride correctly being a true twin and you would then be off center of the midbite/assym side cut slightly.
I also have a warpig that I ride indoors, in slush, and would most likely ride if it was around a foot of snow set back but I wonder if you have gotten any pow laps this past season on your Greats?
Thanks!
Rider stats: 5’7 170 10 boot
Hey Nick, thanks for your message.
That’s a great price. Nice one! I’ve had my Greats in powder and it does fine in around 6″ or less (without setting back), but anymore and gets a bit nose-divey. You could try setting it back. I think it would feel a bit off, especially being an asym twin. In powder it might be OK, but anything in between powder stashes might feel weird.
Hi Nick,
I’ve been riding my 2024 Greats all season this year, and it’s truly a great board. $358 is an awesome price and what a score!
I rode the board in a foot deep pow one day in March, and no it’s not good in it. I went into a trail in dense trees while my family was on the groomer run parallel to me, and as I tried to cross the trees to get back to them, I immediately sank in the foot-deep pow. I crawled back to the trail and picked up some significant speed, and tried again; this time i made it out of the trees, barely, and with all my weight on the back foot.
This board is a great groomer and park board, but I wouldn’t recommend it in anything more than 6″ deep as Nate said. Always have a good pow board for those days!
Hi Nate,
I am hoping to get your view on sizing the Yes Greats. Shock I know.
I am currently riding a Yes Standard 162 but want a board that is more freestyle orientated to advance my spins and butters. I rarely go into the park and want to play on side hits and generally play around on the slope. I do like to kick the speed though as well.
6’3″
195 -200lbs
US size 9
With my weight, I fall between the 156 and 159. I am guessing the 159 would be an ideal all-rounder but I am drawn to the 156. I plan to keep the standard for powder days, I’m just a little concerned about how unstable the 156 would be if I push it on groomers. To throw a curve ball I was also looking at the Rome Agent Pro. I think it is more of a park board rather than a mountain freestyle. Would it also be a good board for playing all mountain freestyle?
Thanks for taking the time,
Luke
Hey Luke, thanks for your message.
My instinct says go 156. The 159 would of course give you more stability for speed, so you would be sacrificing a little there, but for everything else, I think you’d really appreciate the 156. I ride the 156 and it feels like a really good all-rounder size for me. I’m a little shorter/lighter (6’0″, 180lbs) but a little longer boot (9.5 or 10 depending on brand). So you may not feel it as stable as speed as I do, but I can’t imagine that you’d find it super unstable either. I’m always torn between whether to give it 3.5/5 or 4/5 for speed, it’s right in the middle, so I think for you, you’d still get decent speed performance. And I think the 156 Greats with the 162 Standard would make a good combo.
I recently tested the 2025 Agent Pro, and I think this would work well as an all-mountain-freestyle board. Very similar in terms of stability at speed as the Greats, but I’d say the Greats just a touch more stable at speed. I rode the Agent in the 157. You could probably ride the 160 fine in that though – which would likely give you a bit more stability than the Greats 156. It’s noticeably narrower than the Greats and Standard.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision.
You the man! I’ll stick with the greats. Thanks for taking the time.
You’re very welcome Luke. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
Just following up. I ended up going with the 159 since that was what was left in the sale. I am glad I did because I think the 156 would have been a little short for me. I like the board and use it on days when I am feeling a bit more playful.
That said, I still prefer my 162 standard. Just personal preference. I find it more stable and still plenty playful ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Either way it is fun to mix up boards depending on the day.
Thanks,
Luke
Hey Luke, thanks for the update and appreciate your insights. Happy riding!
Hello from Spain! I’m a huge fan of your website and advices, it is amazing!
After reading most of your reviews i have chosen The Greats as my one-for-all board (as we dont see much pow here, mostly icy hard snow or too wet). I would see my riding as intermediate/advanced, love steep slopes and starting to butter and jump (nothing big yet, beginner on those). Did I make a right choice?
The thing is 159 is out of stock. I am 187 cm, 92 kg and 11.5 US, would you think 156 is doable for my stats? Union Strata are still a good combo? (Or any other binding would suit better)
Thanks a lot!!
Hi Alejandro
Thanks for your message. For what you’re describing I think the Greats should work really well.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 162. With 11.5s, I’d probably ideally only size down to the 159, rather than to the 156. Definitely doable in the 156 for you, but you’d likely find it more playful and a little softer flexing than I do. Wouldn’t be like a noodle or anything, but a little softer/more playful than it’s described in this review. Would make it easier for tight turns, riding at slower speeds and for butters, ollies, etc vs 159, but not as stable at speed or in crud/messy snow.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m going for the greats. Would the 156 still be considered mid-flex for my weight/height or am I stuck with the 159? My intention is to use this as a more all mountain freestyle board. Ground tricks, side hits, some park (10%), and slow to fast carves.
220 to 240 pounds
size 12 boot
5’11”
Thank you.
Hi Ed, thanks for your message.
It might still feel mid-flex in the 156 for you, but I think it would be bordering more on mid-soft. I think the 159 is probably your better bet. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163/164 and while you want to size down for this board and for the style of riding you’re describing, I think sizing down to 159 would be the right amount, particularly with size 12 boots and given you want to keep a medium flex and want to throw in faster carves too. I think you’d find the 156 a little too small.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you for the input.
You’re very welcome Ed. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
I have been snowboarding for about 14 years, a few days per season. So far I have only used rented boards, but I would like to go to the next level. I would like a board that can handle everything so that I can experiment , currently undecided between Yes and DOA, I am 175cm and 75kg, what sizes do you recommend? Thank you, and have a great day!
Hi Nick
Thanks for your message. I would personally go Greats, but the DOA is also a good option. Neither are great in powder, but other than that quite versatile. The Greats a little more versatile, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157. For the DOA, the 156 is likely the best option, IMO, but you could also go 158. For the Greats, it’s likely the 154, IMO. But if you could also let me know your boot size to confirm, that would be great.
Hi Nate,
You recently suggested a size 154 Yes Greats for me as an east coast daily driver. I have been looking at getting either the new Union Force or the Union Ultra for this board. Which would you recommend between these two?
Thank you as always.
Hi Paul, please refer to my previous response above.
Got it, thank you. I appreciate your help.
Hello Nate, how should I choose among the three boards Yes. Greats UnInc, basic uninc and NS proto ultra.
I’m currently riding the Lib tech Orca and would like to buy an additional two-way board as a supplement. I want to take care of both the track and the woods, and practice sliding on my back. I am 5’6 tall and weigh 121 lbs. What size ski should I choose?
Hi Rossi
Thanks for your message. The Proto Ultra is a stiffer board and you may not like it in the trees. I would be leaning Greats for you, but not sure if there’s a small enough size for you at 5’6″ and 120lbs. But depending on your boot size, the 149 could work. And also if you’re used to riding longer boards. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 147/148 but the Greats is wider than usual, so while it’s in range length-wise, the combination of length and width makes it bigger. But if you’re used to riding around 151-154 length boards, then the 149 could work for you. What size is your Orca? The Basic Uninc 149 is likely a better size and I think this board would also suit what you’re describing, so that’s likely the way I would go. But if you could let me know your boot size and what length board you’re used to riding and the size of your Orca, that would be great.
Hello Nate,
Would appreciate if you can help with your advice. I’m 194 cm, 100kg, size 11-11.5 (290-295mm) boots, intermediate. I want mainly a resort board for carving, a bit of speed, to learn switch, some jibbling and small jumps, butters; maybe a bit of powder sometimes. I want to buy either the Libtech T Rice Pro 161w or Yes Greats. If I choose Greats, you’d think that the 156 would be good size? as I found it at a discount and it’s about 130$ difference between the 159.
Thank you!
Hi Tudor
Thanks for your message. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 164/165. You can definitely size down for the greats, but I think sizing down to 156 would be too much, especially with 11-11.5 boots. The 159 would be the better bet, IMO. The 156 is doable, but you are likely to find it a lot more playful and will likely lack in terms of stability at speed and for carving for you. Would likely make it really easy for jibs, butters, spins etc, but would also not float very well in powder, I wouldn’t imagine. I get the price difference, but I think the 159 would be more suitable.
Hope this helps with your decision
I’m considering buying the greats board. I’m stuck between the 154 and 156 cm. I’m a tad under 5’ 7”-5’ 8” and in the upper end of the 154 cm but fluctuate between 185-200 lbs. I wear a 9 US men’s boot.
My current board is a 159 cm T. Rice pro by Lib tech due to being a heavier dude for my height. It’s been great but do feel the desire for something shorter. I ride groomers, in the trees, side hits, and some terrain park.
What size would you recommend?
I left a previous comment but left out some details.
Thanks
Hi Brandon
Thanks for your messages – and thanks for filling in those details.
As a more all-mountain board, I would be leaning 156 for you, but the 154 is doable and if you do want to optimize it more for trees, side-hits, boxes, then the 154 would be a good choice. If you were likely to be closer to the 200lb end in the snowboarding season, then I would say 156 is probably your better bet as an all-round board. But if you were closer to 185lbs, then I’d probably go 154, regardless. In between those, I think it depends on whether you want to strike a balance between speed/stability/powder float and agility/boxes/trees etc. If you wanted a balance, I think the 156, if you wanted it a little more towards the more agile/playful side, then the 154. So, I would say:
185lbs: 154
190-195lbs: depends
200lbs: 156
Oh yeah and Greats should work really well for what you’re describing. It’s well suited to everything you’re describing, IMO. In terms of powder, it’s not great. That’s it’s biggest weakness, in my experience. There are boards that are worse than it in powder, it’s not bottom of the pile. But there are plenty that are significantly better too.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi, my name’s Brandon. I currently have been riding a 159cm T. Rice pro on falcors. I fluctuate between 188lbs-200lbs + or – a couple lbs depending on if I’m working out. I’m looking at the greats because it seems like a really fun take it everywhere board minus maybe not being suitable for powder but have seen mixed reviews.
Im still working on getting comfortable with my switch riding, and I like getting into trees, side hits, carving, boxes, some small-medium jumps. I like to enjoy everything the mountain has to offer for the most part. I’m in between the 154cm and 156cm for the greats. One thing I wish I was able to do with the t.rice pro was have it a few cm shorter so it was a little more playful. I actually ended up bending a part of my toe edge and deformed the base along that part of the edge.
Would you recommend the greats and if yes, what size?
Hi Nate,
I’m 6’3, 188lbs, size 10.5/11 boots (Vans aura pro), currently riding on Never Summer Proto Synthesis 160x, with Malavita, what size of Yes Greats would you recommend?
Or compared to the Yes Jackpot, which one and size would you recommend? I wish to use this board for freestyle and all-mountain (maybe some trees).
Thanks
Hi Roger
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 162, but with the Greats you want to size down at least to 159, but you could even go down to the 156, if you wanted to really optimize it for freestyle and trees. I ride the 156 (and love it!) and it’s a really good do-it-all (apart from powder) size for me. If I was to get it more as a freestyle/trees optimized board, then I’d happily ride it in the 154. I tested the 154 and it certainly didn’t feel small to me. Note that I’m 6’0″, 180lbs and size 9.5 boots.
For what you’re describing I would go Greats, but the Jackpot would definitely work. Size-wise, I’d go 158 for you.
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate, if I want to add some carving for my riding, do you think 156 still works?
Hi Roger
It would still work, but it wouldn’t be as good for carving as the 159 would be for you, IMO. Certainly not higher speed carves. For lower to moderate speed carves, it should still be fine though.
Hi Nate,
I could use your expertise. I am an experienced snowboarder, about intermediate-advanced who typically only gets to ride about 6 times a year out in Tahoe.
I am 5’11”, 170-173 lbs. 10.5 Burton Ruler boots. I love to ride fast with my wife and father in law on Tahoe groomers and love going through the trees too. I’m 43 years old and have been riding since about 1992, but I took most of my twenties off from riding due to finances. I just started learning how to ride switch this year.
Currently I have a 162 T.Rice pro from a few years back out in NV. I am likely going to be getting a 153 orca next month to be my powder board.
I leave my equipment out west (I live in NH) and now want to get a more playful board and setup for riding here on the east coast as my wife and I started going on the weekends to the local hills here in NH.
I am pretty sure I want to get a Yes Greats as my one board for riding east coast. I think it should be ideal for the smaller mountains here, for the icy conditions, and for weaving through the crowds. I have started getting more playful in my riding so I thought the Greats would be perfect. Not big into jumps or rails, but I like side hits and riding switch (poorly at this point but getting there). Mostly looking to ride with my wife and just have a great time.
Should I go 154 or 151?
Thank you for your help. Sorry for the long message but wanted to explain the situation. Thanks again.
Hi Paul
Thanks for your message. I think the Greats would be a great choice as your East Coast/more playful option. The Greats is my go-to hard/icy conditions board. I like it for everything (except powder), so not just for icy days, but it’s the one I go to for icy days. I would go 154 for you. Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159, and while you want to size down because of the width, I would probably go down to 156 for you, if it was going to be your “do-it-all” board, but sizing down that extra bit, to make it more playful is a good idea, but I think going to 154 is probably the best bet. The 151 wouldn’t be wrong, if you wanted to go really agile/playful and weren’t worried about any stability at speed, but I would be leaning 154.
Note I ride it in the 156 (6’0″, 180lbs, size 9.5 boots).
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
Thank you very much. I appreciate your help. 154 it is.
You’re very welcome Paul. Hope it treats you well. Happy riding!
Nate is there a particular Union binding that you’d recommend for the Yes Greats? Thank you.
Hi Paul
Apologies for the slow response. Was already behind with a lot of gear to test, then had some family dramas. Hope my response isn’t too late.
I would likely go either Strata or Force but you could also look at the Ultra, Falcor or Atlas. The Ultra would be on the softer side for it, though if you’re riding it in the 154, the Ultra would work. I really like my 2019 Falcor’s on the 156 Greats, though the more recent Falcor’s are maybe a little too stiff, especially if you’re looking to keep things playful. So, I think Strata or Force would be best flex match, but the Ultra would work, since it’s on the 154. If you’re going to be experimenting with freestyle stuff on it, then I’d be leaning Strata (or Ultra), over Force, as they have better board feel and make it easier and more fun for things like ollies, spins and butters, IMO.
Hey Nate. 5’10, 165-169. 9.5 Athletic. 9.5 32 Lashed boots. Your advice is always top notch. Due to some of your advice, I’m currently riding a Jones Mountain Twin 154 and really like it. Lately, I have been trying to focus more on learning some ground tricks, ollies, modest jumping, butters, spins, etc. Even dabbling in learning rails. I was curious to see if you thought it was worth investing in a freestyle board that might be better suited to this type of riding and be different enough from my Mountain Twin to make the investment worthwhile. If so, what freestyle board would you recommend? I also enjoy carving and a high level of turning maneuverability/ ability as opposed to something that’s more suited to bombing hills. Thanks for any input you can provide.
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message. You could certainly do all that on the Mountain Twin, but yes, there are other boards better suited to those things and likely going to be easier to learn them. If it was just jumping and ollies, I’d say you could just stick with the Mountain Twin (and you still could) but it would make things easier/better for the likes of butters, other ground tricks and rails, etc. on a more freestyle specific board. I would start by looking at this list here. Where I think you’ll those would be better for learning/progressing with freestyle than something like the Greats, or other all-mountain-freestyle boards.
From that freestyle list, I would specifically be looking at the Proto Slinger, Head Space, Wraith, Agent, Relapse or Evil Twin, so you can get something that will be good for jumps, butters, spins and rails.
SIze-wise, I would put your typical all-mountain length at around 157, but for a freestyle specific board, I would size down from that. And I’d go a little smaller than your Mountain Twin – so something in the 151-153 range, woudl be a good bet, IMO. If you’d like my take on sizing specific boards, just let me know the boards you would be most interested in and I can give you my opinion.
Hope this helps
Awesome thank you Nate! Off of the freestyle list, I would be most interested in the Wraith and the Proto Slinger if you have specific size recommendations for those. As far as the boards from the all-mountain freestyle list, are you steering away from those because the more pure freestyle boards are easier to learn, because the all-mountain freestyle boards would be too similar to the Mountain Twin that I have, a combination of both reasons, or something else?
Hey Matt
Yeah, a bit of both. They will be more similar to the Mountain Twin and for the most part a little harder to learn freestyle on. Though the likes of the Tweaker and Whatever from the All-Mountain-Freestyle list should be easy to learn on and are less similar, but this list provides boards that are a bigger contrast to the MT.
Size-wise for those two, I would go 152 for the Wraith and 153 for the Proto Slinger.
Awesome thank you. Final question. I am running around in Union Strata bindings that I’m happy with. Would a pair of those go well with the freestyle boards?
Hi Matt
Typically I find that anything that’s more than 2 steps of flex away from the board flex don’t tend to work as well. If bindings are too stiff for a board, then it can make the board feel quite twitchy. I find when I get 8/10 flex bindings on a 5/10 flex board, for example, then it feels twitchy. But 7/10 flex don’t feel twitchy.
I felt both the Proto Slinger and Wraith at around a 3.5/10 flex and the Strata at a 6/10 flex. So, it’s borderline, but I think you should be OK.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for sharing. I’ve been riding for a season now and can switch in the green and blue trails, and sometimes explore the black trails. I’m looking for a board that will allow me to a more advanced level. Do you think I can handle this board? I’m 5’6-5’7, weigh 145 lbs, US 7 shoe size, do you think I should choose 149 or 152?
Thanks
Hi Kevin
Thanks for your message. I think it would likely be a board that will challenge you, but not so much that it’s too far out of reach. It’s hard to say for sure, without seeing your riding but if you think you’re at or close to a solid intermediate level, then you should be good with it. But just a note that how well you handle it will be more about your technique than the types of runs you’re making it down. If you’re getting down blacks but just side slipping down, then that’s different to actually properly riding them. But if you have solid technique on blues, then you should be OK with the Greats.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 152/153, however, with the Greats I would definitely size it down, so the 149 would be a good bet for you, IMO. The 151 is, IMO, too big for your specs.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate!
You’re very welcome Kevin. Hope you have a great rest of your season!
Hi Nate,
Great reviews and info in your responses. I’ve been riding a long time, but mostly steeps, trees, and bombing groomers. I’ve always ridden stiff freeride boards and never gotten into the more playful stuff. I’ve been thinking about picking up a more playful 2nd board this year for the non-powder and late season days that’s better on jumps, switch, and buttering. I probably won’t be hitting the park and didn’t want something super soft (especially at my size). The Greats was on my list due to the great reviews and I’ve never ridden an asym twin and it just seemed very different. They just went on sale and 159 was sold out everywhere except the Yes website, so I pulled the trigger.
I’m 6’5″ and currently about 210lb geared up, but sometimes 10-15lb lighter (size 12 low profile boot) and live in CO.
1. Should I have gone really crazy and sized down to the 156 instead if I’m not too concerned with carving? That just felt way too small, but I’m within the weight range and my old freeride board is slightly narrower and I made that work with even larger profile boots for years.
2. What binding would you recommend for someone my size, with more focus on playfulness vs hard-charging and carving? I have a pair of this year’s Falcors on my main board that I could throw on occasionally if I want something stiffer. I was leaning towards trying something with a little more flex like the Rome Katanas as my main binding for this board, but really don’t have any experience with mid-flex bindings. Given that I’m also heavier than most people, I assume most bindings are also going to flex a little more for me.
Thanks
Hi Brendan
Thanks for your message.
I think you went with the right size. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 164 and with your boot size I think sizing down 5cm is enough and it should feel pretty playful. While you could’ve ridden the 156, I think the 159 is the better bet in this case. If you were 210lbs but with a 10 or smaller boot, then I would have been more inclined to go towards the 156. Not because I think the 156 would be too narrow for you, but because with smaller feet you would want to size down more. But with 12s and your specs, I think the 159 is your best bet.
In terms of bindings, I think the Katana would be a good match. And yeah, certainly more weight means more force against the binding, so you are likely to feel it a little softer. But it’s not like you’d feel them like really soft bindings or anything. I felt hem at a 6.5/10 and I imagine you’d feel them at a 6/10 or 5,5/10 at softest. Height also plays a part, IMO, because you’re applying more leverage, but I still don’t think you’d feel them too soft for the Greats or for what you’re wanting to do with the setup.
That said I really like my Greats/Falcor combo. But i have the 2019 Falcors on my Greats – and those were a touch softer than the more recent Falcors. Again though, you’d like feel the new Falcor’s a little softer than me, so I think they would work. But yeah, like you say you’d have the option to put those on when you wanted to.
Hope this helps
Bataleon Astro Asym or Rome Katana for the 23/24 Greats Uninc? Thanks
Hi Eric
Thanks for your message. I would be leaning Katana for the Greats. That said, we haven’t tested the Astro Asymwrap (just the Fullwrap) but assuming the Asym wrap is more 7/10 to 7.5/109 flex, then I would be leaning more Katana. Astro Asym still doable, but I’d say the Katana would be the better match for the Greats.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
I am getting a 23/24 Greats soon , but want to hear your advice about size. I am 182cm height, 85kg weight, Burton US 9.5 boot, currently rides a Burton paramount 155 and love the size regarding to maneuverability, also the fast base. For Yes greats, I am in the middle of weight range of the 156 and upper end of the 154, which one should I get? I used to be a park riding lover and managed to do medium jumps, 180s, 360s and some box & rail, but tuning to age of 45, my knees are not quite good to support practicing those tricks a lot any more, so my riding style right now is more of carving , lots of switch, some flat tricks to do the connections, but also wish to do some freestyle & air when I feel good on my knees. BTW, my powder board is 156 Korua Dart plus, and also got a never summer proto slinger 156 for park riding backup.
Thanks in advance.
Hey Tony
Thanks for your message. As an all rounder I would say that the 156 would be your best bet. But the 154 is in range. If you were going to be using it mostly for freestyle I would recommend the 154. For a bit of everything, I’d typically say go 156 for your specs. However, the 154 will feel closer in size to the 155 Paramount, IMO, with the Greats being a wider board, so with that in mind, you may prefer the 154. The 156 will feel more significantly bigger than the 155 Paramount than the 1cm would suggest. And Greats in the 156 is likely to feel significantly bigger than the 156 Proto Slinger. I’d say the Korua Dart 156 would likely be a similar size comparison – but that’s just based off specs, as we haven’t ridden that board, so hard to say for sure.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply, Nate! your information is very helpful, I like the feeling of my paramount 155 a lot under my feet, before that I was riding a Burton process 157 and did’t like the way it spins, little bit too long and slow to my taste. since I don’t hit big jumps, so that high speed stability is not my first priority. after reading you comment carefully, I am leaning towards 154 now.
one more thing off topic, do you think that Proto slinger 156 is right to me or I need something like 153 or even 154X.
Have a good day!
Hi Tony
I think the 156 Proto Slinger is appropriate. I’m similar specs to you and I use the 156 Proto Slinger for Park. The 153 or 154X wouldn’t be wrong either, but at that size, you’d want it to be more of a small jump/rail specialist, IMO.
Hi Nate,
I think I am in desperate need for you help/advise.
I am 180cm, 90kg, US 10 and currently ride a Huck Knife from 2019. I am an intermediate rider that comfortably rides blacks and in the park with 5-7m jumps and boxes.
Even though I am more or less happy with the Huck Knife I am looking towards a second/replacement board for more resort riding with less park focus. I ride mainly in the European alps (Austria) and I would say that I would ride groomers & side hits 75-80%, 15% park and 5-10% powder (if there is any).
What I would be looking in a new board would be something that can do it all, mainly resort riding, groomers, side hits and so on. A board that is really fun all around the mountain but also a board that can send it if needed and holds an edge well when I like to lay down some carves on more icy stuff. Now that I ride more and more with skiing friends, I need to keep up speed-wise
.
Currently I was looking towards the YES Standard and the YES Greats. I also had a look at the Capita Aeronaut however I am not quite sure if that is a bit to aggressive for my type of riding.
Any thoughts on this? Thanks in advance!
Hi Freddy
Thanks for your message – and apologies for the slow response – have been doing a lot of gear testing lately.
I would go Greats for everything but powder. That’s where the Standard comes in as the better all round, because it gives you better powder performance. The Greats, in my experience, is a little better for carving and side hits. But the Standard is still good for those things, just not quite as good. But you get that powder performance in its place, which makes it more all-round option for what you need it for.
We haven’t tested the Aeronaut yet, so can’t really say, if that would also work or not.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for taking the time to give such a detailed answer -that really helps.
Which sizes would you recommend on the greats an the standard?
Thanks,
Freddy
Hi Freddy
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. But with 10s for these boards, which are wider than normal, I would size down from that. Whether you size down to the 156 or 159 is the question.
If you were looking to optimize the speed, big carves and powder float more so than agility, side-hits and shorter/sharper turns/carves, then I would look more towards the 159s. I would be inclined to go 159 in the Standard than I would in the Greats, because there’s less effective edge (i.e. more of that length is outside the contact points vs the Greats).
If you were the other way around and wanted to optimize more for sharper turns, side-hits, etc, then I’d go 156, particularly for the Greats.
Hi Nate,
Stumbled across your site while looking what board to upgrade to and gotta say, I’m a huge fan!
Based on your reviews, I am looking at the Yes Greats, Yes Standard and Bataleon Thunderstorm. I’m looking for something to be stable at higher speeds while also being nimble for some fun (don’t do any park currently, but would potentially like to get into it a bit). Pow is pretty much out of the question where I live.
I’m 187cm at 90kg with size 12. What would be your view on these boards and sizing?
Thanks!
Hi Patrik
Thanks for your message. Given you’re not needing any powder performance, I would be leaning towards the Greats. The Standard will work, but I feel you get more out of the Greats for carving and would be better if you were also going to get into the park later. The Thunderstorm would also work, but it’s more directional and if you were to go Bataleon, I’d be leaning more towards something like the Goliath+, if you’re not going to get the powder benefits of the Thundertstorm. That said, even without powder, it’s still a really fun board. So yeah, I don’t think you could make a bad call between the 3, but I would be leaning Greats.
Size-wise, I’d go 159 for the Greats or Standard and 162W for the Thunderstorm – though you could also go 159W for the Thunderstorm if you wanted to size down a little on it – but you’d sacrifice a little bit of that stability at speed (while gaining some nimbleness and something that would be easier for starting out in the park).
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I will also check out the Goliath+, but I think you have helped me settle on the Greats.
Thanks and keep up the great work!
You’re very welcome Patrik. Hope you have a great season! If you think of it at the time, keep me updated on what you go with and how you get on, once you get it out on snow.
Hello Nate
I m still undecided between the greats 154; 156 cm and the T Rice Pro 157; 5.10; 190 lbs and 10,5 us Ride Insano/ Burton Driver X ( i like stiff boots)
I m an intermediate to advanced rider. I want to learn switch and carve mainly and teach a 3 year old boy to snowboard. I also have a Mind expander 158 for powder days.
What should i get?
Thank you!
Hi Christian
Thanks for your message.
Personally I would go Greats for what you’re describing. The 156 would be the best size for you, IMO, but if you wanted to make it more mellow and easy to ride, the 154 wouldn’t be out of range, IMO. Just expect it to be a little less stable at speed and little less capable on big high speed carves if you went 154 vs 156. The 156 would be the best “all-round” size for you, IMO. But the 154 would likely be easier when teaching your 3 year old.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I reached out a couple of years ago and was back and forth between this and the Standard with you as my do it all board. I ended up going with the standard as I wanted something that could handle some steeps and speed a little better when I am bombing the big mountain. I am 6’3 195 with 11 boot and I ended up with the 159 and use Katana’s with it. I love it and it is the perfect all mountain size for me. I like my boards on the smaller side, but it handles everything so well and I feel confident anywhere I take it – especially the bigger resorts.
My closest mountain however is on the smaller side (Big Bear, CA) and when I am there I mostly lap the park and carve around with the occasional bomb, and it still is plenty proficient there, but it doesn’t quite feel nimble enough for that. I am trying to progress my backside boards and spins, and want to have a two board quiver with one for bear and one for the bigger mountains (I also got a deal last year on a ride Algo 157 that I love for a little harder charging freestyle, but it feels strange to me on harder days flatbasing so I am going to let it go.)
I am going to go with the greats, but I was wondering about how much I could size down with it. I want to progress further in the Jib and butters, but I also still like hitting medium to large kickers and I was wondering if the 154 could still stomp landings and handle some speed, or if the 156 will still be nimble enough for the butters and jib. I want something that feels more nimble than the 159 standard but won’t give out on me.
Let me know what you think and I really appreciate all the help again! Always send peeps your way when I get the chance.
Justin
Hey Justin
Thanks for your message and good to hear from you again. Glad you’re enjoying the Standard – and thanks for the referrals!
I think you’ll find the 156 Greats will work best. For your specs, it should be nimble and playful enough in that side to progress with jibs and butters, but still be able to handle a bit of speed and give you enough for landing those medium to large kickers. I feel the 154 would be that little bit too small for you and would likely not be as stable as you’d want it. I ride the 156 Greats and I’m confident buttering and jibbing with it, and those are the two weakest areas of my snowboarding, and I’m 6’0″, 180lbs with a 9.5 boot. I typically enjoy boards that are a bit smaller than they should be for me and I have no problem with the 156. If I was looking to use the Greats how you’re describing it, I would personally probably go for the 154, but given you’ve got a bit of size on me, I think the 156 would be just right.
Hope this helps with your decision
Exactly what I needed to hear! I appreciate the help and I will send an update when I get on one. Happy Shredding!
You’re very welcome Justin. Look forward to hearing how you get on. Happy shredding!
Hi Nate,
Reading your glaring review on the Yes Greats makes me want to pick one up as an almost one-board quiver. However, my boot size is only Men’s size 7 (25cm mondo), and my weight and height are 130lb and 5’4″. Do you think even the smallest 149cm could be too wide for me to maneuver, especially at slow speed? I intend to use this board for most of the situations – carving up the mountain, hanging slowly with family, and the occasional boxes and jumps in the park. Thank you.
He Leo
Thanks for your message. It could be still a little wide. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 148 for your height/weight, so I think the length is fine. But you’re looking at around 26cm at the inserts on this one, even though the waist is 24.5cm. Which is getting quite wide for 25cm mondo feet, so the combination of length and width makes it bigger than ideal, IMO. This is assuming you’d ride it at around the reference stance width that yes recommends (540mm (21.3″). If you rode it narrower than that, then it would be a little narrower, but you wouldn’t get much narrower. However, if you typically ride boards longer – i.e. if you typically ride like 152s or something, then you might be OK with the 149 Greats. But if you typically ride around that 148-150 length, then this will feel bigger than what you’re used to in the 149, IMO. The biggest thing with this will be when your riding slowly with your family.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the advice. It’s a bummer since I really want to try the Greats. My stance is around 19-19.5″. In your opinion, would that make the width narrow enough to ride?
My other boards that I currently ride are Jones Flag ship 151 and Mountain Twin 149. However, I’ve sometimes felt that the MT 149 is a bit small and wish I had gone with a 151. Both the Flagship and MT, however as you know, are fairly narrow boards so edge-to-edge are lightning quick for me.
Thank you for the help.
Hey Leo
Actually with a 19″ stance width, you’d be looking at going around 3.5-4mm narrower at inserts. With a 19.5″ stance probably around 2.5-3mm narrower. 4mm doesn’t sound like much, but can make a difference when it comes to width.
So with a 19″ stance, you’d be looking at around 256mm at the inserts. For reference, I would say:
– MT 149 with a 19″ stance width likely to be roughly 251mm front insert and 252mm back insert, so certainly narrower – but not as much difference from that to 256mm as it would be to 256mm.
– MT 151 would likely be around 255mm/256mm at inserts (with 19″ stance width), so pretty much the same in terms of insert width. And that narrower waist width on the 149 Greats does make a difference too. The tip/tail of the 149 Greats are still quite a bit wider, but overall probably very similar width-wise. And the 151 MT has more effective edge, so I think overall, if you think the 151 MT would be fine for you, then the 149 Greats probably will be too, with that kind of stance width. Also note that Jones and Yes have surface area measurements, which is really cool (wish more brands would do that). The Greats 149 has a surface area measurement of 38.6dm2 and the 151 MT a 39.19dm2, so a little more surface area in the 151 MT. The 149 MT has a surface area of 38.15dm2.
– Flagship 151 would likely be around 255mm at the front insert and 250mm at the back insert (with around a 19″ stance width). And a surface area of 38.43dm2, according to Jones. So less overall surface area than the Greats 149, but more than the MT 149.
Long story short, you would be going wider and you would be looking at something with increased surface area, but that stance does make it more doable, IMO. Hope this gives you more to go off anyway.
Hi Nate,
As always, thanks for the detailed analysis and your advice has always been very helpful in my gear selection. It sounds like I’ll likely be fine with the Greats’ width at my 19″ stance width, so I’ll go ahead with the purchase. If the Greats rides as expected, I will probably just replace the MT with it and keep my quiver to the Greats and Flagship.
Sorry for one more question, but right now I ride my MT with Union Force Pro 2022. I also ride powder days with my Flagship and Atlas Pro. With the Greats, do you think I should pick up a set of Strata if my main usage is closer to the freestyle end of All-Mountain (side hits, riding switch, and small amount of park), rather than the hard carving end? If I want to hard carve and freeride, I would use the Flagship anyway.
Thank you.
Hey Leo
Yeah, I think the Strata would work really well with the Greats, particularly for that use purpose. The Union Force Pro would work too, but given what you’re looking to do with the Greats, the Strata would be the better match, IMO.
Hi Nate,
Thanks for helping me choose the bindings (Union Strata) earlier. I ordered a set already.
I currently wear a pair of K2 Orton right now with my jones flagship. However, I feel these boots are a bit difficult to ride slowly with family and they were not easy to turn and play around at slow speeds. I’m thinking about getting a pair of softer boots and I’ve narrowed down to vans aura pro and Nidecker rift. Which one would you recommend for my planned style of riding with the Greats paired with Strara, for all-mountain freestyle and going slowly with family?
Thank you again.
Hey Leo
I think both would work well for the style you’re looking to do with the Greats and both would be an improvement on the Orton (which are boots I really like but aren’t as well suited to what you’re looking to with the Greats and not as good for riding slower.
Between the Rift and Aura Pro, there’s really not much in it. The ones that fit your feet the best would be the ones I would go with, but if you don’t have the opportunity to try on, some fit things that I noticed with each:
– Rift: In terms of width were medium bordering on mid-wide. I would say the Orton are medium. Felt great from the time I put them on. In the time I rode them, they didn’t feel like they were packing out too much, so I think the 10 would be right for me, with some possibility that I’d get into a 9.5.
– Aura Pro: Medium width. Right on medium, IMO. Overall, they were tight to begin with in the 10, which is my typical size, but felt better and better as I rode them, so would break in just right, IMO. So I would say true to size. I don’t think I’d get into the 9.5, but the 10.5 would be a little too big.
Hi Nate,
Thank you for the advice. I’m a true size 7 with width between D and E (9.4cm measured width on the right foot for a size 7 foot; left foot is only 9.0cm). I would not be able to try on the Rift since no retailer in my area carries this brand, but to be safe I should probably order the Rift since I am halfway between D and E width for the right foot.
Another option I had just thought of is to get a Vans Verse which I tried on last year but didn’t actually purchase. The boots fit me back then but I was able to get the K2 Orton with a much bigger discount so I went with the Orton in the end. I remember it has two tongue stiffeners that I could remove to soften the boots. This may actually allow me to carry only one pair of boots to use with both the Flagship and Greats. In your opnion, would removing both tongue stiffeners soften the boots enough to ride slowly with the family on the Greats?
Hi Leo
Even without the tongue stiffeners, the Verse will be a similar flex, in my experience, to the Ortons. The tongue stiffeners make a difference but not enough to make them that soft, IMO. However, if the Vans fit you well, then the Vans Aura Pro may well fit you quite well. Or you could look at the Invado Pro.
Hi Nate,
Following your advice, I ended up picking up the Rift to pair with the Greats + Strata bindings. I tried to break in the boots at home for three days and rode this set up for two days this past weekend. Please see my impressions below.
Greats + Strata – I was amazed after 5 minutes. It was a carving dream and I could not imagine that I could hold a carve for so long on a mid-flexing board. It’s still not up to the level of deep carve of my Flagship but it never felt like it was going to fold, unlike some other boards I’ve tried. Buttering was also super easy and I could get a higher ollie than my Mountain Twin; switching riding felt slightly more natural too than the MT (perhaps because of the asymmetry?).
The edge-to-edge felt just as fast as my MT despite the much larger width so I felt pretty relieved. Slow-speed turns were very easy as well. I taught a class of 2 on the second day and was able to easily show heel-side and toe-side turns at very slow speeds.
Rift – In contrast to the Greats, I was underwhelmed after the first day. At home, the heel-hold felt fine, but on the slope, the BOA loosened more often than I desired. At the end of the first day, my heels were lifting so much that I was getting foot cramps trying to control my turns. I’m sized correctly (24.7cm mondo and have a size 7 boot).
Then the next day, I thought of something. On the previous day I cranked the BOA until they felt like they couldn’t be cranked anymore (basically the resistance was pretty strong at that point). However, my shin still didn’t feel like they were being supported well. So I thought I should try to continue cranking – and lo-n-behold I was right. Even though the BOA resistance felt strong already, I could continue to crank, until my shins felt well supported. So I understood that’s what I had to do, and the second day went much better!
The Rift’s comfort was great like your review said. I never had any pressure points or pains at all!
Thanks again Nate for all the help you’ve given me – I think I’m pretty much set for my quiver-of-two setup for the next few years!
Hey Leo
Thanks for your update and detailed insights. Great to hear and appreciate you getting back to me with your experience.
Hi Nate, been going through all comments but still itch to ask for some advices!
I have been getting all mountain/freeride boards and been riding mostly carve/skids in regular within resorts. Getting my AASI Level 1 as well. Beginner-intermediate rider with most issues in heel edge carving but overall comfortable with blue/easy blacks.
Got interested in adding an all-mountain freestyle board for some ground tricks and small park features for more fun. Choices are down to two: Yes Greats vs Never Summer Easy Rider, both 2024 (being 1st and 3rd in your ranking)
I am 83-85kg, 183cm tall, US 10 Nitro Teams TLS, wears vest/supplies while riding (not sure if that adds to total on-board weight though lol). I current have two boards I ride often and loved
– Lib Tech Rasman 159
– Yea PYL 2024 160w
Both gave me great carving experience (easy to get on edge). Both has similar waist width around 260mm.
Also had three bindings, though not feeling much difference:
– Burton Malavita 2023
– Burton Cartel X 2023
– Flux DS or XF can’t remember
I rode my friend’s NS Easy Rider 157 (he weigh 100kg and about 180cm tall), found it to be flexible but his stance was narrow so wasn’t a blasting experience. I like it for the quality and also the pro offer discount! Though I am unsure if sizing (157 vs. 158x)
My coach (Level 3), prob heavier than me with similar height, been riding Yes Greats till 2022 and been recommending Greats as no-brainer to me, yet he rides 159 and think I should be fine with 159. I am concerned that 159 being too wide for me if I want a playful experience while maintaining carving stability. Thus I am debating 156 vs 159.
Definitely want to hear from you if any recs!
Hi Richie
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160. But for your all-mountain-freestyle board, particularly given you have other boards in your quiver, I would size down from that. In the case of the Greats, I would size down to the 156, with it also being wider than average. I think the 159 is something you would be able to ride fine, but given the use purpose you want for this board and given you already have longer boards, I would go to the 156. You have similar specs to me and I really like the 156.
If you were to go Easy Rider, I would go 157. You could go 158X but in this case I think, again, because it’s going to be your all-mountain-freestyle board, I would go smaller than that. The 157 is probably going to feel a little smaller than the 156 Greats, because it’s narrower. It does have a little more effective edge, but I think the Greats likely will feel a little bigger than it in the 156, but not by a huge amount.
Given your experience on the Easy Rider, I think I would be leaning Greats. While being in your more natural stance width would have made the experience better, for sure, not sure if it would make enough difference to make you love it. Both are great choices for what you’re looking for, IMO, but based on that experience, I would be leaning Greats.
Hope this helps with your decision
Great! I pulled the trigger on Greats 156. Thank you for the detailed reply!
Would Cartel X be a nice binding combo for it? I always got confused on which one is softer, Cartel X vs. Malavita.
So if I really wanna use the NS pro offer (& love the quality of NS boards), do you have any rec for a NS board for my quiver? On the other hand, If I get a NS board, I may just sell the Superpig online as I do not find it easy to ride with compared to PYL for carving, unless I go to Japan more often….
Any recs?
Hey Richie
Awesome you’ve found a new board. Always exciting!
Overall I find the Cartel X stiffer. The Malavita has a stiffer highback, but overall flex on the Cartel X stiffer, so it must have a stiffer base plate. The Malavita’s work well on the Greats, but I would be leaning Cartel X. I really like the Union Falcor on the Greats. Just a little stiffer flex but still good board feel. But the Malavita are a good match, so you could go either, but I’d be leaning Cartel X.
For a NS board, it would depend how you wanted to round out your quiver. If you wanted a more easy going powder board that was good for weaving through trees, fun on the groomers, but not something that’s insanely stable at speed or anything – can handle a bit of speed but not a bomber – but an easy turner and great in powder, then I’d look at the Never Summer Swift. If you wanted to round it out with a more freestyle/park specialized board (a bit softer/more playful and more park specialized, as opposed to all-mountain-freestyle like the Greats), then I’d go Proto Slinger.
I was reading some reviews for NS Swift, seems like a good all-in-one board for days with mountain top powders connecting with trees and then some carving on groomed surface as close to basecamp.
What size would you recommend for my specs on 2024 version? 158 or 163
Hi Richie
You have very similar specs to me and I loved the 158. It’s so nimble. For a wider 158, it’s super nimble. Given you’d be riding trees with it, I would be looking at the 158.
Hey Nate – Love what you do here and appreciate all the work.
Looking to upgrade and leaning to Greats and Standard Uninc. How do you compare the two?
I’m 5’9 170 lbs w 10.5 boot. Pretty experienced rider that likes to carve and be playful but get aggressive at times. Will do some side hits here and there as well.
Any suggestions?
Hi Pat
Thanks for your message.
The main differences I would say are:
– The Greats is a little more playful and softer flexing than the Standard Uninc. Not much in it flex-wise, but the Greats overall more playful. Some of that is likely down to the rocker subtle rocker sections before the tip/tail vs the full camber of the Standard Uninc.
– That full camber also gives the Standard Uninc more of a semi-locked in feel vs a more stable feel. Best way to describe this is looking at the graph in the specs section (on a scale of loose to locked in).
– The Greats is snappier than the Standard Uninc
– The Standard Uninc is damper than the Greats.
– The Standard Uninc a little better for speed, but Greats still really decent there
– Both really good for jumps but Greats better for spins and switch riding and easier to hit boxes/rails with too. A little easier to butter as well
– I find the Greats easier to do quick edge-to-edge turns on – likely down partly to a softer torsional flex and those rocker sections. And I prefer it in trees, particularly if there’s no powder in the trees. Overall easier to ride at slower speeds and more agile.
– I would say the Standard Uninc is a little better in powder.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Looking for some advice with sizing and choices. I’m 5’6, 120lbs, US9 boot
I’m torn between the YES standard, YES standard uninc as well as the Greats uninc being my most likely choice. Biggest concern is in regards to sizing. I know I am definitely more suited towards 149 in terms of weight but I worry my boots will be too big for the width. If it comes down to it should I be going for the 149 or 151 for the boots?
I am an intermediate-advance rider and I ride mostly resorts. Carving, switch, butter and some side hits. Looking to start doing some park as well.
Which board and size do you recommend for me?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Eric
Thanks for your message.
I would go Greats for what you’re describing and I would go 149 for sure. I think anything else would be too big for you. And width-wise, I think it will actually be the perfect width for your boots. While it sounds like it’s quite narrow with it’s 245mm waist width, it’s wider at the inserts than you’d expect. Assuming a roughly 21.3″ (540mm) stance width (which is the reference stance on the 149), you’d be looking at around 260mm at the inserts based on my measurements of the 154. Which is plenty wide enough for 9s, IMO. On Yes’s website they show 261mm at the front and back insert (one of the few that show width at inserts, which is great to see), so that’s pretty much the same.
If you ride with a narrower stance than that, it will be a little narrower than that. However, you’ve got room there to go narrower with 9s. And even if you went to like a 19.7″ (500mm) stance width, you’d still be looking at around 257/258mm at the inserts, which is still wide enough for 9s, IMO. The only thing would be if you had really bulky boots, really liked to lay deep carves (like eurocarves) and rode with a really flat back binding angle (like 0-3 degrees, kind of thing), then it might be pushing it but otherwise you should be fine. And with an asym board like the Greats, it’s recommended to ride a duck stance anyway. So long story short, I reckon you’ll be good width-wise.
Hope this helps with your decision
Are there any changes for the 2024 model beyond the graphics?
Hi Tycho
As far as I know, the 2024 model is identical to the 2023 model, apart from the graphics.
Hello, Nate! I am looking for resort ride board. More carving and a little bit less flat freestyle. My specs are: 185cm height, 80kg weight, 9.5 US boot (275mm). What size would you recommend – 154 or 156?
Thanks for useful content!
Hey Max
Thanks for your message. I would go 156 for sure, if you’re looking for more carving. I’m similar specs to you and while I still enjoyed the 154 when I rode it, I own the 156 and really like it and think it would be better for what you’re describing.
Hey, Nate
Thank you for the answer. The one thing is confusing me is wide width, 25.9 for my 9.5 US is not very much? I heard it pretty nimble because of asym sidecut and underbite, is that so? Is there a big difference in turn initiation between 154 and 156?
Hey Max
Yes it’s wide for your boots, IMO. But I ride with 9.5s on it and the 156 is still pretty nimble. Likely something to do with the mid-bite and sidecut, like you say. But the 156 is sizing down for you, IMO, which is taking into account that extra width (as well as the effective edge). I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 160/161.
I could notice the difference in turn initiation, with the 154 being a little easier, but I’m tuned in to notice these differences, and it’s not a huge difference. I don’t find turn initiation difficult on the 156 at all.
Hi Nate, I’m 5’10, 160lbs, US8 boot. Not sure if I should get the greats in 151 or 154. Mostly riding at resorts carving, butters, switch and side hits. Cheers!
Hi Danny
I think both could work, but for how you’re describing how you want to use it, I think the 151 would be your best bet for this board. It’s shorter than I’d recommend for you for most boards, but the extra effective edge and the width of this board vs your boot size, I think the 151 would be your best bet. This would particularly be the case if you were to have another, longer board in your quiver. If you were wanting this board to do a fair bit of powder and/or bombing, then the 154 could work. But for what you describe, I would be leaning 151, for sure.
Hi Nate,
I am 175cm 165lbs with us size 10 shoes. I ride blossom 155cm/orca 150cm. Which size should I choose for the greats?
I want this to be the do it all board when I don’t have anything specific in mind — meaning that it needs to get me down the double black runs on non-powder days.
Hi Boyi
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tight call between the 154 and 156. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157/158, but this is the kind of board you size down because of effective edge vs overall length. But also because it’s quite wide. So my instinct is 154. I ride the 156 and trust it everywhere (it’s not great in powder but for everything else) – but I’m 183cm, 180lbs, so I’ve got a bit of size on you. I still enjoyed the 154 when I rode it too, but for what you’re describing, if you were my specs, then I’d say 156 – but given the size difference, I’d be leaning 154 for you. The 156 wouldn’t be wrong but I’d be leaning 154.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks! About the downsizing you mentioned — Would you say that riding greats 151 feels close to blossom 155?
Hi Boyi
In some ways, yes. At a guestimate, I would say the Blossom 155 and around a 152/153 Greats would be similar sizing-wise. But with the Blossom being stiffer than the Greats, I would be more inclined to ride the Greats at 154 for you and what you’re describing. The 151 wouldn’t be wrong for you by any means, but I would consider it more of a freestyle focused size for you. So, if you were going to be predominantly focused on freestyle when you rode the Greats, then 151 would be a good size. I would ride the 154, if I was going to use it predominantly for freestyle but as an all round size I prefer the 156. As an all-round size, I’d still be leaning 154 for you.
Really appreciate your inputs! I can’t seem to find 154 anywhere. I’m starting with the 151 for now — if I like the board as much as you do, I’ll pick up a 154 for sure!
You’re very welcome Boyi. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on with the 151, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
I am an intermediate snowboarded and I am considering to get a Yes the GREATS UNINC board but I am struggling on the sizing.
My condition :
Height : 168cm
Weight : 68kg
Shoe size : MEN US8.5
According to the SPEC, size 151 should suit me the best but IMO I love the appearance of size 154 more. I found my condition will fit both boards, just wondering if choosing 151/154 will affect a lot based on my current condition.
Thanks !
Hi Jeremy
Thanks for your message.
I think the 151 is your best bet. I would put your “standard all-mountain length” at around 153, but this is the kind of board you want to size down for – both because of its width and the ratio of effective edge to overall length. In your case, I would be strongly erring towards the 151.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks a lot ! That made my life so much easier !
You’re very welcome Jeremy. Hope you enjoy the board. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
I think im leaning towards the greats at this point… im worried the standard uninc might be too advanced for me
I’ve been riding a 154 terrain wrecker , Im 168 lbs, 5’7″, i wear rome libertine boots size 9.5, my current stance is 20 inches, riding duck 15 and -15. I’m mostly into carving hard, jumps, sidehits, althought im slowly buidling my freestyle skills ( took a long time off).
So the question: 154 or 156? You said you thought my all mtn length was 156, but I see you rode the 154. thanks again
Hi Sal
I would go 154 for this board for you, for sure. Whilst I think your “typical all-mountain size” is more like 156, with this board, being wider and with more effective length per overall length vs the average board, I would size down for sure. I would actually be more thinking 151 or 154 than 154 or 156 for you for this board. That said, if you want to get the most out of it in terms of carving (and I really like this board for carving – one of the better carving twins I’ve ridden), then 154 would work well. The most recent model I tested was in a 154, but I own the 156 – and I really like that size for all-round riding. For your specs, though I wouldn’t go as long as 156 for this board. Even in the 154 it will likely feel noticeably bigger than your current 154 TW. I have the 157 TW and that feels smaller than my 156 Greats.
Interesting..
so it sounds like the TW 154 was a bit small for me … it does start to feel unstable when i push the limits of my speed mon steeper slopes.
the 151 would be if i spent most of my time in the park ? i’d like to mast as many park features as possible but i have the most fun carving / all mtn freetyle (side hits, butters, etc).
thanks as always
Hi Sal
Yeah, 151 would be if you were going to be using it mostly in park and weren’t as worried about stability at speed. I think 154 is the way to go for you.
Nate,
I have my eye on this board for an all mountain freestyle board to fill out my quiver. I currently ride a burton flight attendant 159cm for freeriding and hard charging and want something a little more playful that will turn tight in the trees, sidehits, dabbling in the jump line, butters, but still stable enough to handle the occasional black or other steep runs. I’m 6’2” around 165lbs and wear size 10 boots. Looking at the 154cm or 156cm. My weight fits best on the 154cm but that seems short for my height. Did you have a suggestion?
Hi Kody
Thanks for your message.
If it was going to be your one board for everything, I’d go 156 for you, for sure. As part of your quiver, can definitely make an argument to go 154. It will give you that better maneuverability in trees and be easier for sidehits and buttering. You would of course sacrifice some stability at speed, so you wouldn’t get the best out of it from that perspective. But it’s not likely to feel super wobbly at your weight, I wouldn’t imagine.
I think the 156 is the more pure size for your specs, but I’d be leaning 154 to be a better compliment to your quiver. But going 156 certainly wouldn’t be wrong if you wanted to keep a bit more stability.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello,
Thank you for all these detailed reviews!
I have a Proto Slinger (153) for park, an Orca (150) for powder/freeride and an Outsiders (154) as my all mountain/do it all snowboard.
I love riding switch on the Proto but due to the flex, I find it struggles with speed a bit. I also live in Ontario so I don’t enjoy the board as much on hard snow/icy conditions which is normally the case for night boarding sessions which I do a lot. The Outsiders is definitely more stable at speed but I find it doesn’t butter so well (still not good at this so not completely the board’s fault). I also find I have to work hard to get it to pop which could be attributed to not having proper technique yet.
Was looking at upgrading the Outsiders with a board that is as stable at higher speeds but is also more easy to butter and has added grip tech for East Coast conditions. I would be using it for groomers and park (jumps/jibs). Doing some research I’m looking at the Yes Greats, Standard and Standard Uninc. Do you think either of these three would be a worth an upgrade over the Outsiders? I’m leaning towards the Greats but not sure if it’ll have the stability at speed that I would like. Also what size would you recommend for either board? I was thinking 154 for the Greats but not sure between 153/156 for the Standards. I’m 5″10, can weigh between 155-165 lbs and size 9 boots.
Thanks!
Hi Mark
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats would be the best option. Though the Standard Uninc would also work well. The Greats is at least as stable at speed as the Outsiders, IMO, but better in icy conditions. It’s easier to butter too, in my experience. I would say the Standard Uninc is a touch easier to butter as well, but not as easy as the Greats. I wouldn’t say either have oodles of pop but they are easier to extract the pop from than the Outsiders, in my experience.
Yeah I think 154 for Greats. Even the 151 would be a possibility because of the width of that board, but as an all-mountain option, I would go 154 for you. For the Standard Uninc, I would go 153, again because of the extra width. The biggest advantage of the Standard over the Standard Uninc is that it’s better in powder, but since you have the Orca already, I would be leaning Greats/Standard Uninc. And because you want easier buttering, I would be leaning Greats.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the response and you definitely did!
You’re very welcome Mark. Happy riding!
Hello,
So Ive been getting back into snowboarding after a long break and I’m trying to find the perfect board. I was really into the greats this year when researching but ended up getting the Beyond Medals Whatever by Bataleon. Slight regret as I’m not in love with 3bt, feels a little washy and loose. I find when setting up for a spin it can feel a little weird since I want to initiate it from an edge and it feels a bit harder to access. Maybe I just need more time on it. I also have a Dancehaul, which I’ve tried once so far and find it fun and a bit poppier or at least easier to pop than the Whatever. Only downside is its worse at riding switch which I’m trying to get better at so I can feel more comfortable landing switch when spinning.
Id like to improve in the freestyle category, jumps, spinning, butters, etc. Would The Greats be an upgrade over the boards I currently have?
I’m 5’9 145lbs with size 9.5 boot. Would I get 151 or 149?
any information greatly appreciated.
Hi Cole
Thanks for your message.
3BT is a different feeling for sure and it’s not for everyone. Some really love it, some less so. I enjoy riding 3BT personally but it is a different feeling and there is that looser feeling and it does take a little more to engage to the edge. It doesn’t come when you’re expecting it until you get used to it – it’s a little further in as you lean, if that makes sense.
The Greats is something that will feel more typical – there’s no 3D spooning or anything in the base. And it’s great for riding switch. I really like it for butters, jumps and spins, so I think it’s got those things covered for you. If you were to go Greats, I’d be leaning towards the 149, if you’re going to be using it predominantly for freestyle riding. The 151 would also work well for you, IMO – and as a more all rounder, like if was you’re only board and you were doing a bit of everything on it, then I’d prob go 151.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you so much! You put a lot of detail in your responses, really appreciate you taking the time.
How would the Mega Mercury fit into what I’m looking for? I could essentially sell the Dancehaul if the Merc rides powder well.
Ideally I think I’d just have one board, but if a greats and Dancehaul would be a better combo I’ll go that route.
Hi Cole
The Mega Merc is a pretty well rounded board, except that it doesn’t like riding slow that much – and going to be harder to butter than something like the Greats. For freestyle stuff it’s good if you’re really experienced – and preferably quite strong/athletic too, as it’s quite stiff. It’s decent in powder. I wouldn’t say it’s as good as the Dancehaul (haven’t ridden Dancehaul but based on specs) but better than the Greats. For speed, powder and carving, it’s got you covered. But if you like to slow it down and slash around, get a bit more playful, it’s a challenging board to do that with. If you plan on riding it quite aggressively all the time – as in put in a pretty aggressive amount of effort, then I think it could work as your one-board-quiver, but if you want to get a little more playful and want to do slower, more casual riding at times, then I think having the Greats/Dancehaul combo would be a better bet.
Hi Nate,
I’m a big fan of YES Snowboards. I have a 2018 YES Typo (155) that has served me well the past several seasons. I’m looking to potentially “upgrade,” and have been eyeing the Standard, Basic Uninc, and Greats. I’m looking for a one-board quiver, serving primarily all-mountain riding on hard-icy snow here on the east coast, although I do occasionally make it out to Colorado, etc.
Which board of these 3 do you think would likely be more catered to the above? And given that recommendation, which size do you think? I’m 5’9″, 160-70lbs, size 8.5 boot, with Burton Genesis Step-On bindings. Thanks so much.
Hi DC
Thanks for your message.
If you do tend to see some powder when you’re out in Colorado, then the Standard might be your best bet, as it’s the best of the 3 in powder, IMO. If you don’t really ever see deep powder, then I would go Greats. It can handle shallow powder fine and it’s what I’d go with on groomers, particularly icy ones, of the 3.
For the Standard I would go 153. It’s a wider board, so you’ll want to ride it shorter than the Typo. I would put your “typical all-mountain length at around 157/158. You could go 156 if you wanted better stability at speed and float in powder but you would lose quite a bit of agility versus your 155 Typo. I’d be leaning 153 for your specs.
For the Greats, it’s a board you can size down even more, so I’d even consider the 151 in your case. The 154 would work as well though – but it would likely feel noticeably bigger than your Typo. More like a 158 Typo size-wise.
The Basic Uninc certainly wouldn’t be a bad choice either – but I don’t think there’s really a great size. The 158 is doable. The 156W too wide and the 152 too small overall, IMO. If there was a 155 or 156, it would be a more appealing option for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision.
Awesome reply Nate! Hit all the points I was weighing. I regrettably don’t see too many true powder days. I live in VA with a smaller resort nearby where we hardly get any significant natural snow, and make 1 sometimes 2 trips per season to a major resort historically Vermont or Colorado. That said, most of my time is cruising and carving on groomers, some hard or icy, with the occasional powder day if it happens to snow when we’re at resort. Considering those things, sounds like the Greats would probably be my best bet, with the 151 fitting my specs best, OR I could go with Standard at 153 as choice 2.
Hi DC
Yeah I think that’s good reasoning – Greats at 151 and Standard in 153 as a second choice. And yeah, if you’re predominantly in smaller resorts, then erring a little smaller is typically a good idea as well, if you’re not often going to be able to open out and go super fast a whole lot. I find on smaller hills I like to make the most of each run and if I just bomb down it’s over too quickly!
Hi Nate,
I come from 1 season with yes the greats and underworld where I found myself very well, this season I changed bindings and bought burton genesis. I still have to try the set up , what do you think of the genesis compared to underworld ? does it pair well with the yes the greats? I also have now select pro (which I haven’t tried yet) which I use on a directional board, but for freestyle use I prefer the Burton comfort, what do you think about genesis / the greats?
thank you .
Hi Sayes
Thanks for your message.
At first I was confused as I’ve never heard of underworld bindings, but with a bit of research I realized they are what we would call the Malavita’s in North America. Looks like Underworld must be the name for them in Europe?
The Genesis and Malavita/Underworld aren’t too different overall, but I would say the Genesis are a little more comfortable. The Malavita has a stiffer highback compared to the Genesis with the Genesis having a stiffer baseplate vs Malavita/Underworld. But overall flex feels quite similar. Greats/Genesis is a good pairing, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, I’m 5’10 158lbs US8 boots, would the 149 or 151 Yes Greats be more suitable for my sizing. Cheers!
Hi Danny
I would go 151. 149 is getting a bit small for your specs, IMO. 151 is already sizing down – but it’s a good amount of size down, IMO, given your boot size vs the width of this board and that it’s a board you size down for anyway. But I think 149 would be a bit too small, unless you were going to be using it as a dedicated park board for creative freestyle riding – like butters, jibs, spins, small jump tricks, that kind of thing.
Hope this helps
Hi again Nate!
The specs of this board seems awkward to me, shorter sidecut radius, larger width at inserts..
My question is, isn’t it the kind of board that everyone should experience “foot underhang” and has to put more effort to turn that board?
Even if one sizes down, width at inserts still seem to be much, its really like a wide board.
For my specs (US10.5 82kgs 187cm), probably you would recommend 156 but what about 154?
which one would be your first choice, considering that I am right in the middle between playfulness and speed stability
Hi Ismail
Yeah I would be leaning 156 for you – as an all-round board. If you were going to be riding mostly freestyle or if you were wanting to optimize playfulness and maneuverability, then you could go to 154 but I would go 156 in your case.
The width at inserts is very much like a lot of wide boards, but it doesn’t feel like a wide board when riding. At least not to me. I think the narrower waist still helps to make it feel more maneuverable. That and the tighter sidecut I think also helps with that maneuverability.
Dear Nate,
I went for Yes Greats 156
187cm 83kgs US10.5 with Union Flite Pro Bindings
First of all thanks to you for such a content rich website, it made me buy an awesome snowboard which the brand even not known in my country!
I am not a pro to evaluate and compare the board with others, anyways here are my first comments after first day of riding ;
+ I did not fall at all, even not just a single time after whole day riding! Normally I fall down 5-6 times a day but with that board, not at all even if I tried stupid things
+ The board is superfast and stable. (Maybe its because my previous sintered board was not waxed after 15 days of riding)
+ The board is so easy to turn. It’s like there is a turn table right in the mid bottom, allowing me freely to move the tail. (Felt so much difference with 156 Greats, but maybe its because my previous board was 159W Capita OSL)
+ I had hated one narrow ski run with less slope in the resort, I was anxious about people passing by me and could not pass anyone because the run is quite narrow. Now with that board, I am the one passing people in that runway!
+ The day I rode was quite uneven ground and not icy. I had no issues at all even if I was riding fast on bumpy snow and no problem even though I pass over on icy parts.
+ I don’t jump pop ollie therefore I can not comment on this, but with that board its time now!
My next move will be to change bindings with Union Strata’s
Hi Ismail
Thanks for your update and insights. Much appreciated. And awesome to hear you’re getting on well with your new board!
Hey Nate,
I’m really between the YES Standard and the YES Greats UNIC. I’m 6’ 170-175lbs, 10.5 boot. I live and ride mostly in CO, sometimes Utah & California.
I’m looking at the Standard in 156cm and Greats UNIC in 156cm. I mostly like to hit groomers and charge pretty hard, and some side hits. Not crazy concerned about carving across the entire mountain, but enjoy getting some carves in here and there. Tree runs are also one of my favorites. Not much a park guy, but from time to time will hit rails or jumps in there.
I’ll be riding with Union Starta bindings. Which board would you recommend in this instance?
Hi Scott
If you don’t ride a lot of powder or when you do get powder it’s not that deep, then I would go Greats for what you’re describing. If you do see some deeper powder and want a bit more powder performance, then I’d I would lean more to the Standard.
Both boards match well with the Strata, IMO. The one thing to mention though is that, if you go Standard, that the Strata won’t work on it’s “slam back inserts” (two extra holes that are 4cm behind the main insert packs) because of the mini-disc. Not an issue if you don’t think you’d use the slam back inserts and not an issue if you go Greats, as it doesn’t have those slam back inserts.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello and thanks for the review.
5.9 195 lbs and size 10.
Should i get the 154 or the 156?
Want to improve my switch riding, carving maybe butters.
Cheers!
Hi Andreeei
Both are possibilities for you for sure. Given that you already have the Orca in your quiver and this will be used as your more freestyle oriented board (I’m assuming from your comment on the Twinpig review), then I would be leaning 154. If it was going to be your one-board-quiver board and you were treating it more all-mountain, then I’d say 156.
Hy Nate,
I bought the 154. I still have 2 more days of I want to change my mind and get a 156. I m 195 lbs without gear and size 10.5. ( the higher spec sheet for 154 is 200 lbs on their website). Any toe drag?
Should I keep it? Will it be unstable at high speeds?
(50 kmph)?
Looking forward to your advice
Hi Andrei
As per my previous response, I would be leaning 154, assuming its going to be a more freestyle dominant board for your quiver and give you have the orca already. As an all round board though, I’d go 156. With the new info re wanting to ride it fast, the 156 will give you more stability at speed of course, and the 154 may feel a little unstable at 50mph. Previously you had said size 10 boots. However, with 10.5s you still shouldn’t have drag issues in most scenarios on the 154, imo.
Hi Nate,
I have been searching for an all mtn board and I think the yes. Greats fit the bill for me.
Alternatives were Jones all mountain or lib tech terrain wrecker
Intermediate rider, no intention of park, maybe stumble on powder but probably will get a powder specific board later, and I ride a lot with beginners but will venture off to jump side hits and carve. Wanted to start buttering too.
My question is what size should I get? I don’t see a lot of texts for women riders unfortunately. I am female, 5’4, 180lb with gear. Thanks in advance!
Hi Sophia
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats suits what you’re describing. The Mountain Twin and TW would also work and are better for powder than the Greats, but if you were going to get a powder specialist, then the Greats would fit well in a quiver with that.
In terms of sizing, could you please let me know your boot size as well.
Hi Nate, thanks for the reply! I completely forgot the boot size, my bad. I wear a size 8 men’s boot and using medium cartels. My beginner board I find is too soft and too slow at 148 (ride baretta 2016).
Could I also ask the recommended sizing for the all mountain and terrain wrecker? I might delve into researching those two more, especially if I don’t see myself hitting powder more than I think. Thanks again!
Hi Sophia
Thanks for your replies. I deleted the ones just because they didn’t have any extra info that this one didn’t have.
I would put your “standard all-mountain” length at around 153, but I would size down for the Greats, because it is wide. It doesn’t look that wide just looking at the waist width, but the width at inserts is wider than you’d think. So it’s between the 149 and 151, but I’d be leaning 149. 151 is doable if you really want to go bigger, but the 149 is still wide for your boots, IMO. So taking off that 4cm of length balances out that extra width. It will still feel noticeably bigger than the Baretta 148. The 2016 148 Baretta has a 244mm waist and the 149 Greats has a 245mm waist, so on that they don’t look much different in terms of width. But at the inserts I would predict the Baretta to be around 253mm at the inserts and the Greats 149 is more like 261mm at the inserts. And the tip and tail are 7mm wider too, which is significant. The 151 wouldn’t be wrong though, if you did want to go a little bigger again. The Greats will also feel significantly stiffer than the Baretta. The Baretta is rated at 3/10 flex, with the Greats rated at 7/10 flex. I felt the Greats more like 6/10, but still significantly stiffer.
For the Mountain Twin, I’d go 151. Again, still on the wider side for your boots. But 151 is sizing down a little from that 153 point, so I think it would be a good bet.
For the Terrain Wrecker, I’d go 152.
Hi Nate.
I’ve had 7 weeks of snowboarding in total but haven’t been since 2014… Was really confident riding switch and loved being in the park on small/medium jumps and the odd box/rail. My only question is around the flex. I really enjoy cruising along doing butters and side hits. Is this board too stiff for that? My last board was a burton whammy bar which was pretty soft at 3/10 I think.
I’m 179/180cm and weigh 79kg, US 10 boots. Was looking at 156cm but could maybe drop to 154cm for bit more playfullness. 154 has the nicer graphics too lol.
Any other boards you think would suit better?
Thanks
Hi Clegg
Thanks for your message.
You’ll definitely notice it feeling stiffer than the whammy bar, but I find it pretty easy to butters and sidehits. It’s not like easiest board out there for buttering, but given it’s overall flex it’s easier than you think. The tip and tail feel softer than the overall flex of the board.
I think the 156 would work for you, but given your style, I think the 154 would be your best bet. I had no problem riding the 154 (183cm, 83kg, US 10 boots) – so it’s still not going to be a noodle or really unstable at that length for you or anything.
If you did want to maximize your board for park, butters etc and wanted something softer, also check out this list.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
what you think, which of them better, Yes Base Uninc or Yes Greats ?
Hi Erzhando
It depends on what you’re looking to do on them. They are similarly minded boards, but the Basic Uninc a little more aggressive. It’s full camber and a touch stiffer. Not by a lot but just a bit. It’s also a narrower board, so sizing is a little different. I personally prefer the Greats. I really like the asym feel and just all round feel of the Greats but really liked the Basic Uninc RDM as well. Some differences to consider:
– I prefer the Greats a little more for jumps, carving, slashing, riding switch, spins jibbing, butters and in uneven terrain
– I prefer the Basic Uninc RDM at speed
– For powder both are about the same and neither great, IMO
Hope this helps
Nate thanks for the complete explanation
I think the Basic designe is so cool (i love anime) , so i will take Basic Uninc. Nate what about size ? 156W will be good choice? Im 180cm/82kg/ boots 9″ (42)
sorry for my english 😉
Hi Erzhando
I would go with the 158. You don’t need to go wide if that’s your boot size. And 158 is a really good length for your height/weight. So 158 for sure, IMO.
Hi Nate, thank you for your reviews and comments.
I am looking into a YES Greats in 156.
Am 5.5″ (170cm), 220 lbs (100kg) so basically I am short and fat..
Shoe Size US 10-10.5 (43-43.5) depending on the boot.
Am an advanced rider for over 30 years. Looking for all-mountain freestyle where I can carve a bit but also work on my switch and buttering which I didnt do much the last couple years.
For all-mountain shredding when I really wanna go fast I have a Burton Custom X in 162.
Now I want something that is much more playful and fun also at lower speeds.
No park, no big jumps anymore, just some smaller jumps.
Most freestyle oriented boards don’t work for my due to my weight. I would have to get a board that is way too long for freestyle oriented riding.
The YES 156 should work for my weight but am just a bit concernd about the width due to my shoe size.
Do you think this board would work? Or any other board you think I should consider?
If the YES 156 works, which binding do you recommend when I want the board more on the playful side? Had good experience with Burton bindings in the past so am inclined towards it. Malavita? Genesis?
Thank you so much!
Hi Guido
Thanks for your message.
I think the 156 would work well for what you want it for, particularly given you want it to be for predominantly freestyle riding and you have a bigger board for faster, more aggressive riding.
No problems width-wise on this board with 10-10.5s, IMO. It’s quite wide at the inserts compared to the waist width, due to the mid-bite, so you should have plenty of room for your boots there. I ride the 156 with 10s and this is the widest board I own and have never been close to boot drag. I think this board and size would work really well for what you want it for.
In terms of bindings, both the Genesis and Malavita would work well. The Cartel X also match to the board, but given the style of riding you want to use it for, I’d be leaning Malavita or Genesis. And I’d probably go Malavita, just because it’s a little stiffer than the Genesis, but still playful enough – and a good flex match for the board. But the Genesis wouldn’t be wrong by any means for it.
Hope this helps
Thank you so much for your response Nate.
I ordered the Greats in 156.
Will get the Malavitas with it.
Now the snow can come!
Cheers from Switzerland
Nice one Guido. Hope the setup treats you well and that you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate.
Wanted to ask if you think the 159 would be too large for me.
I’m 6ft, 205 lbs, US10.5 Boots (Vans Infuse)
According to your skill levels, I’m about a 5.5 boarding onto 6.
Currently have a Capita Outerspace Living 160, but unfortunately cracked it last season hitting a tree. So looking to get something to take my riding (and switch riding) to the next level.
Only reason I’m asking about the 159 is that I can find a last season’s model for a bit cheaper than a 2023.
Ride mostly SoCal/Mammoth. Thank you.
Hi Frank
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tight call between the 159 and 156. Typically for your specs, I’d say to be looking at something around that 161/162 range. But that would be with a width that would be just right for your boot size. So, I think you could certainly ride the 159 but whether it’s going to be optimal for your riding style is the question. Note that it’s likely going to feel noticeably bigger than the 160 OSL. It’s quite a bit wider and has more effective edge vs overall length. IMO the 156 Greats is a closer equivalent size to the 160 OSL. So, if you felt you could use a little more size than your 160 OSL, then I think the 159 could work. If you’re looking for more stability at speed, then you should certainly get it going with the longer 159. If you like to ride fairly casually and prefer quick edge-to-edge at slower speeds, and want to do tricks, butters, etc, then I think the 156 would be the better option.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thanks for the great reviews! It’s helped me narrow down my choices.
I’m 5’9 160lbs with size 10 shoe; I’m looking for a do-it-all board to replace my current one. I currently own an old Nidecker 149 which is way too small for me, so the new board will be the only one I have.
I will be boarding pretty much exclusively on the mid east coast so I definitely need something that can handle ice. I’m not extremely experienced snowboarding but I’ve been advancing quickly and I am planning to go ~50 times this season, so I don’t have a problem getting a board that I’ll be able to grow into in skill.
I lean more towards all-mountain than park, and I want something that is going to be good for ollies, side hits, and overall making the most of groomers, but I still want something that can lay out decent carves and hit the park when I’m feeling it.
My options that I’ve come down to are
Yes Greats
Yes Basic
Salomon Assassin
Ride Shadowban
I appreciate any opinions on what would be best. Thanks!
Hi Griffin
Thanks for your message.
The Greats would be my pick, based on what you’re describing. The Greats and Basic are the best in icy conditions, IMO, but the Greats is a much better carver and better at speed IMO, and overall a bit more dynamic – and something that you won’t risk growing out of, which you could with the Basic.
I haven’t ridden the Shadowban, so can’t say too much there, but my past experience with Ride boards is that they OK but not amazing in icy conditions.
The Assassin would be my 2nd choice after the Greats – not as good in icy conditions, but still decent. And is a good mix of being not too hard to ride but also something that you shouldn’t grow out of.
For the Greats, I would go with the 154. If you went Assassin I would go 156. The Greats is a board that can be ridden a little shorter, due to being wider and having a higher ratio of effective edge to overall length than the average board.
Hope this helps with your decision
I have a 2022 yes the greats 151 , I’m 5 foot 7 , weigh 140 pounds and wear size 8.5 boots . I love the 151 and have no issues with it . I was curious about what the differences would be for me with the much narrow 149 yes the greats ? Easier for jumps or carving ? Or would it be worse for me ?
Hi Devon
Thanks for your message.
The 149, vs the 151, would feel a little easier to butter, easier to maneuver, especially at slower speeds – being shorter and also narrower, would allow you to get from edge to edge quicker. For carving you’d have less effective edge, so your carves would feel shorter – it would feel better on shorter/sharper carves in comparison, rather than longer drawn out ones. The width wouldn’t make a lot of difference, except when it came to initiating the carve, which would require less effort on the 149, but once engaged in the carve you’re on the edge of the board, so you don’t feel that width at that point.
The trade-off of the 149 would be that you’d reduce how easily it floated in powder and reduce stability at speed.
In terms of jumps, it’s 6 of one half dozen the other. The 149 would make it easier to extract the pop and being a little lighter would make it easier to get full value for your air time and be easier to spin with. But in terms of landings, you’d lose a bit of stability on landings from the reduced surface area. Overall the 149 would probably be enjoyed more for smaller jumps and smaller sidehits, but for bigger jumps, where you need more stability on approach and for landings, it would be a little worse.
Overall I would have recommended the 149 for your specs, but the 151 isn’t like way too big or anything and if you’re loving it, then there’s likely no reason to change. I would say your “standard all-mountain size” is around 152, which makes the 151 closer, but given the width on the 151, which isn’t huge for your boots or anything, but it’s a little on the big size for your boots, I would have erred to the 149, but the 151 isn’t wrong for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
That’s for the detailed reply ! I just bought the last 149 available in Canada . Is the yes the greats your favourite all mountain freestyle snowboard?
Hi Devon
Nice one!
Yeah, it’s my favorite all-mountain-freestyle board and has been for a good few years now. I own one and it’s never let me down.
Hello Nate, I’m so thankful for your review content on your site.
I have two questions I hope you can help me with:
1) I own the greats uninc 2020 and I think it’s not that all mountain mostly due to a flex I would say it’s 4,5-5, which translates to washing out heel carves and less pop. Still a great board but mostly for freestyle.
In your previous year’s review of the greats, you scored it as a 5.5 flex, while this year is 6. I asked the YES team and they said they have indeed upgraded the epoxy to a stronger formula. What is the main difference in the flex this year and do you feel any improvement compared to last year?
2)I have a pair of Stratas and Atlas which I think match the greats depending on the mood of the day. I was thinking if the new Union Ultra 2023 may fit this year’s Greats Uninc. What is your binding opinion if I want to get this year’s Greats and use it 60% for park and 40% for AM? Many thanks in advance.
Hi Javier
Thanks for your message.
I’d say the Greats is only very subtly stiffer than it used to be, so if you really wanted to go noticeably stiffer, then you could go more again, but if you wanted subtly stiffer it could work. The new Ultra are what I would consider a 5/10 flex binding. It would work with the Greats, but I’d err a little stiffer. The Ultra is softer than the Strata, IMO, so I’d say the Strata is a better match.
Note that Union had an Ultra binding for years (up to a 2020 model) but it was a very different binding and significantly stiffer. Wish they hadn’t chosen the same name for a binding that’s so different. Can make things confusing. If you go to our Ultra review and scroll to the bottom, you can see how different the old ones were in the “PAST REVIEWS” section.
Many thanks Nate.
I think I would get this year’s greats with my Stratas.
Have a pow filled season!
You’re very welcome Javi. Hope your season also contains an abundance of pow!
Hi Nate,
Update on the 2023 Greats:
Me: 177 cm, 77kg, 9,5US Salomon HIFI. 57.2cm centered, +12 -12. Union Strata 2023 M. FL=+1. Rotated highback. Yes Greats 154 2020. Intermediate advance rider.
This year’s has a stiffer flex than my yes greats 54 2020. It is damper at high speed, absorbing more vibrations It feels the base has a better glide. The flex is more balanced between the toe and heel where it used to wash out on the heel, the torsional flex is stiffer as well. Better pop and is more responsive. A little harder to press but more rewarding pop when released.
Overall the board feels slightly more all-mountain but still, it is driven between the feet where the midbite is located. you can carve this board but with a reverse camber technique leaning toe to heel and not like the pre-2019 model where weight transfer between nose and tail was very rewarding.
Very good edge hold. I have sold my 2020 as I lean towards a more all-mountain setup nowadays. It is a slight improvement in the flex and the stance (this yearä’s has almost 2 cm wider ref stance). I wish YES. would blend the stability and edge hold of this design with the agility, pop, and carving sensation of the pre-2019 model.
Enjoy your holidays
Hi Javi
Thanks for your input and insights. Much appreciated. Happy holidays to you too
Hi Nate!
I am considering buying Yes Greats 156 2022 model this season, for my freestyle progression. I am 6 foot, 185 lbs intermediate rider well versed into carving and powder riding, who just started getting into park.
My other board is Yes Hybrid, and I am looking for one bindings to rock them with both boards.
Available options in my local shop are Burton Cartel X, Union Atlas Asadachi, Union Contact Pro and Bent Metal Transfer.
What bindings you would recommend to me?
I had Cartels previous year, on my Burton Process Flying V, and liked them a lot – so I am inclined towards Cartel X.
Do you think Cartel X would be too stiff for the freestyle riding?
If that is of importance, my boots are Burton Ion.
Thank you for your time.
Hi Michael
Thanks for your message.
The Contact Pro will be too soft, IMO, for the Greats and Hybrid. The Bent Metal Transfer probably is too, though I haven’t ridden those in a long time. The Cartel X and Atlas would both work well, but I would be leaning Cartel X, because they have better board feel than the Atlas, so will work better for your freestyle stuff, IMO.
Hope this helps
Nate,
Tnx for help!
And it helps a lot!!! Since my personal experience when it comes to gear is limited to Burton’s channel system, I was in a difficult dilemma on this bindings question.
P.S. yesterday in my local shop came along one pair of Union Strata.
So, I have little bonus question – Cartel X or Strata’s? 🙂
Hi Michael
The Strata are a very good match for the Greats, IMO, so it’s a close call between them. The Cartel X would work very well as well. But I would be leaning Strata, as I feel it’s the more pure flex match (a touch softer than the Cartel X – they’re 6/10 vs 7/10 on the Cartel X, by my feel). And just a touch better for freestyle progression, IMO. Both would work, but I’d be just leaning Strata, in this case, for this particular board.
Hi Nate,
Thank you so much for your help, I appreciate it a lot!
So, this season it is going to be Yes Greats and Union Strata for me.
Best wishes from Serbia!
You’re very welcome Michael. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hey Nate, first off I’d like to say this website is fantastic.
I’m looking into a new board and I can’t decide between a the Greats and the new Standard Uninc. I currently ride a Process Flying V 155 and it was my first board, but now I’d say I’m a 7 on your riding scale (but not in the park) and want something that I can perform with best at my level.
I ride mostly in extremely steep terrain, but speed isn’t my focus but rather control. I ride a fair amount of powder as well and want something that can do okay there too. I dabble in the park and would like to progress there but it isn’t my main concern.
Basically I feel like the Greats would give me a bit more control in my turns but not do as well in powder, while also working well as a park board. Whereas the Standard Uninc would perform a bit better in powder and for speed, but maybe a little more difficult to make tighter turns? Not sure there. Obviously not as much as a park board but I would still have my Process if you think that would work as a park board?
I am an instructor and my main concern is just having a board that will help me with my AASI certifications so maybe that’s good to know.
I’m 6′ and about 170lbs, progressing quickly, and would love some insight into what you think!
Sorry for all the jumbled ideas, hopefully this conveys where I’m at!
Hi Kyle
Thanks for your message.
I would say the Greats is a little easier on heel side tighter turns. I find that asymmetry does make a difference there. But otherwise there’s not too much difference. Neither are awesome in powder, but yeah, I would say the Standard Uninc a little better, courtesy of those slam back inserts allowing you to setback a little further for those powder days. The Process Flying V can certainly work as a park board, IMO. So, if you found the Standard Uninc too much in the park, then you could always use your Process Flying V. I found the Standard Uninc to be great for jumps in the park. A little trickier for jibs, but certainly doable.
I think I’d be leaning Standard Uninc in this case, as it gives you a little more in powder. But it’s a close call and both boards would work. Just note that in really deep powder, still not going to be amazing or anything.
Happy to give my opinion on the best sizes, but will just need your boot size.
Hope this helps
HI Nate,
I have the Yes Greats 156, and am in need of bindings. I’m a quickly improving, Intermediate rider that likes to charge a bit, carve, ride switch and hit the park a bit too. Probably the definition of an All Mountain Rider, with ~ 10 days/year on the snow. Given the Asym Yes Greats board, my riding style and skill, what bindings would you recommend for me?
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
For how you describe your riding, and to match the board, I would be looking at something with a 6/10 to 7/10 flex. I would also look for something with good board feel and shock absorption, given that you’re riding a bit of park on it. Check out the following and pay attention to the score breakdowns, there should be a few good options in there that will suit you well.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Note that some in the first list will be a little softer, so pay attention to the flex as well.
Hope this helps
I think I’m landing on Union Strata’s…. for a bit more shock absorption and versatility, but still stiff enough?? What do you think?
Hi Alex
I think they’re a good bet and stiff enough for the Greats, IMO. Bonus with the 2023 model is that the price has gone down quite a bit (which is almost unheard of in this industry!). The hardware has been downgraded from Magnesium to Aluminum, but if that doesn’t bother you, then they are a real bargain now, IMO.
Already ordered them…$250!
Thanks again, Nate. You’re the best.
Actually, US $200 w/free shipping on Moosejaw, if anyone else is interested!
Hi Nate,
I just read through pages and pages of your responses and I can’t believe how helpful and prompt you are, thank you and good on you!
Just another sizing question. I can’t decide between Greats 154 and Greats 156. I’m 6 ft, 185 lbs, riding Burton Ion US 10 (but previously 32 TM Two US 9, Burton Sabbath US 9.5) and currently trying out Union Atlas Medium bindings.
I like to carve, pick tree lines, hunt down drops, charge at speed on groomers but without missing any of the side hits – often basically carving from one hit to the next with lots of fakies to speed check. I pop odd 180s or ollies of rollers. Speed and precision are very important and fundamental to my riding but I also love drops and air time, and spending time in the trees, or butter and pop flat tricks every chance I get on the groomers.
In the past (when I was lighter more in the 170 lbs range) some of my favorite boards have been:
K2 Zeppelin Camber 158 (Burton Sabbath, Burton CO2)
K2 Slayblade Flatline 158 (Burton Sabbath, Burton CO2 or 32 TM-TWO Burton X-Base)
Rome Agent Camber 156 (was too playful eventually for the bigger lines) (and 32 TM TWO, Burton C02)
Yes Tadashi Fuse Ghost Camber 156 (my favorite board of all time for stomping landings and general charging) (32 TM TWO, Burton C02)
I’m concerned that the 156 might be a little wide for me and not quick enough edge to edge, but 154 on the other hand, not enough board at speed and off-piste, and during landings.
I’m smack-bang in the middle for weight range recommendation for 156, and in the top 1/3 of the range for 154. But will the 156 be sluggish edge to edge and not give me enough pop? Or, on the other hand, will 154 just not be enough board at speed and landings?
What standard size would you put me at, and what about on the greats?
(I also just bought a Gnu Banked Country 159 for a charging/carving machine as well for those icy mornings, concrete conditions, and big days of freeriding with the crew).
Any advice from you would be much appreciated!
Thanks,
Dimi
Hi Dimi
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning 156. I don’t think the 154 would be wrong for your specs, depending on your style of riding, but I think how you describe your riding, the 156 is the most suitable. There are some arguments to go 154, but I’d be leaning 156. I would put your standard length at around 160. The Yes you want to size down for, for sure – and the 154 and 156 are what I would be debating for you. Ultimately because you still want to have that stability at speed, that’s the tie breaker for me between those 2 lengths. I ride the 156 Greats and am very similar specs to you (6″, 180lbs, US10 boots) and I find it just right – for doing all the things you’re describing. I still really enjoyed riding the 154 – and if it was going to be the board I used as my freestyle dominant board and wanted it a little more playful and easier to spin and butter etc, I would be happy to go for the 154. But as my do everything (apart from powder) board, I love it in the 156. And my do everything is relatively freestyle heavy anyway (and I have a softer freestyle board for when I want to be particularly playful).
The argument for the 154 is that you’ve already got the bigger board in your quiver with the 159 Banked Country – and going smaller would offer a bigger difference. But honestly between the Banked Country 159 and 156 Greats, there’s already a really big difference.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks, Mike. You’ve rationalised it perfectly. The fact that you’re happy with the 156 definitely gets me over the line. I’ve also thought about 154 to get that huge contrast when stepping down from the GNU, but I think 156 will be more versatile. With how my riding and weight have been, I couldn’t see myself riding a TDF or Rome in size 156 nowadays, so I think Greats in 156 should be the right step down.). There is a new model in the YES lineup as well, 2023 Standard Uninc Camber (comes in 156 and 159 among other sizes) – have you come across it yet? It would be great to see a review on one!
Nate* sorry!!
Hi Dimi
All good 🙂
Yeah, I got to ride the Standard Uninc this winter. A sick board for sure – really liked it. Much like the old YES Ghost – the 2018-2021 models, more so than the earlier models. The TDF was a precursor to the Ghost. If yours is called TDF then it’s likely 2017 or earlier. I think it was for the 2018 model that the width changed to be wider, like the YES Standard. And essentially became a traditional camber version of the the YES Standard. Which is also basically what the YES Standard Uninc is – though I did find it was marginally stiffer than the Standard – but more like 6.5/10 rather than 6/10 on the regular Standard – it’s not hugely stiff or anything. But yeah really liked it. I rode it in the 156 and really liked that size. I think I’d find the 159 too big, because of the width of it. If it was the TDF 2016, then I would ride it in the 158, rather than 156, but the new Ghosts and the Standard Uninc, I think 156 is best for me.
HI Nate, thanks for the great reviews. I know you’re a fan of The Greats, as many others are also. I’ve got a deal on a 156, but I’m not sure on the width and sizing. It’s not a volume shifted board, so should I size down? I do like the idea of a 156 as it will be more nimble for me.
I’m 6’0″, 183lbs and wear a size 11.5 shoe. I’m getting new boots this season and will opt for a low profile boot in hopefully a size 11, so I figure that will bring my needs down a bit in terms of width. I currently ride a 26.1cm width board and my foot touches edges just about perfectly barefoot at the inserts. I ride +12/-12 and am an early intermediate rider.
My question is: Should I go for the 156 Greats or do the 159 (which is only 3 cm wider at the waist)?
Thanks for your help and your great site!
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
Whilst technically it’s not considered a volume shifted board, it is wider than usual – and at the inserts it’s wider than you’d think based on waist width. With an 11.5 boot, I think your more pure size would be 159 for this board, but with smaller feet, the 156 would be just right. But even with the 159 being the more “pure size”, the 156 is certainly doable – and given you’re an early intermediate, I would be leaning towards sizing down, so I think the 156 would work well. The other thing to take into account is that there is quite a lot of effective edge when compared to overall length, so even with bigger feet, the 156 will feel a little longer than a typical 156.
Width-wise, I don’t think you’d have any issues with 11.5 boots – particularly with those binding angles. With 11s, definitely no issues, IMO. The width at inserts of the 156 is around 27.4cm (assuming roughly a 22″ stance), which is likely more than your 26.1cm waist width board, depending on the board.
Hope this helps
Thank you , Nate… I really appreciate you taking the time to answer comments and questions . It means a lot .
My current board is a Yes Basic 159W, so about 270mm at the inserts. So the Greats 156 is 4 cm wider . I’m pretty comfortable from a boot size standpoint , just don’t want to ride smaller than I should . I’m a Level 5 , and get about 10 days/year in, though I’ve progressed quickly thus far.
Here are my literal options :
– Ride Algorythym 160W
– Capita OSL 157W
– Yes Greats 156
– Yes Greats 159
I like a quick turning board , but a stable board (for small jumps and side hits) with decent pop (ollies, etc) that will allow me to ride freestyle all over the mountain and some park , some carving, some trees , some pow but I’m in Tahoe so it’s not buckets of pow.
I can get a good deal on any of these boards , but really want to make the right call.
I appreciate your thoughts .
Hi Mike
Apologies for the slow reply. Have had some personal things to sort out.
From those options, for what you’re describing, I would be leaning Greats 156. I haven’t ridden the Algorhythm, but in that size, it’s bordering on too big, given that you want something quick turning, trees and freestyle. If you were predominantly charging and carving, then it could work, but borderline too big IMO for what you’re describing. The OSL in 157W would work too, but I’d be leaning Greats, as it’s a board I prefer – just has a bit more x-factor.
Even versus the 159W Basic, the 156 will feel more stable than it – I would say – haven’t ridden the 159W Basic versus the 156, but have ridden the 158 Basic and the 156 Greats is considerably more stable at speed than that was.
I hope everything is sorted out for you, and please don’t ever apologize for answering (slowly or otherwise), as it’s a real service that you provide all of us with your amazing reviews and your consistent feedback.
Anyway, I’m glad to read your thoughts again, as I just received my Yes Greats 156 today! Less then US $400, all in, so I’m pretty stoked.
I looked at width at inserts, radius, overall edge, etc. This board just stands out in every respect for me…now the hard part: waiting until next season to ride it! I have Union Strata’s but very open to another recommendation if you prefer another for this board.
I WILL update you and let you know about the board and my experience, so hopefully it helps others (and reduces the amount of questions for you).
Take care and thank you again Nate.
Thanks Mike – and yes all resolved. Glad you were able to get a good deal on the Greats.
IMO the Strata’s are a very good match for the Greats.
Look forward to hearing how you get on!
Hi Nate, thanks for so much great info on this site! I have another sizing question for you: I’m 5’9”, 175 lb (without gear) intermediate, 15/-15, Strata bindings (L), Adidas 3MC ADV boots (size 11). I’m definitely more toward the all-mountain side than freestyle – no park in my future, but I do want to get better at buttering. I got the 156, which was all I could find anyway. It feels like a perfect fit for my feet (haven’t taken it on snow yet). [Side note: Don’t ask me why, but I was given a Huck Knife Pro 155W for a recent rental when they didn’t have The Greats and I asked for something comparable. I struggled mightily with turns on what should have been easy groomers, and when I returned home and looked it up, I was disappointed to learn I’d been given a park-specific board with a min rider weight of 176 lb. I felt I couldn’t hold an edge, and wondered if that’s because I’m a hair below the minimum weight, or if it was just because park boards aren’t good at that anyway, or maybe both (I’ve never ridden a freestyle board before).] Anyway, now doubts are creeping in about being too close to the low end of the Greats 156 weight range, as opposed to smack in the middle of the 154 range. I expect to be 165-170 lb by next season, so my question is, given my size 11 boots and L bindings, is the 154 vs 156 performance difference at 165-170 lbs enough that I should consider sizing down to the 154 to be more in the middle of the range? Thanks!
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
I think you’re good on the 156. For your height and weight, I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 158/159. It’s a good idea to size down with the Greats, so I certainly wouldn’t go 159 for that board. And whilst the 154 would certainly work for you, I think the 156 is more optimal for what you want and your specs.
If you had smaller feet, then I’d more inclined to go 154, but with 11s, the 156 isn’t overly wide for 11s (which is often one of the reasons to size down for this board), so I don’t think you need to size down more than that. Also, if you were more freestyle oriented, then I would be more likely to lean 154, but given the style your describing, I think the 156 is the best bet. The 154 wouldn’t be wrong, but the 156 is what I would be erring towards.
Hope this helps
Definitely helps! I feel a lot better about my decision and appreciate your take.
You’re very welcome Jason. Thanks for visiting the site and hope your new board treats you well!
Hi Nate,
Thank you very much for all the detail you put into your reviews and comments. It’s definitely helped me narrow down the decision for my next board. I’m an intermediate-advanced rider and looking to get an all mountain freestyle board to replace the 2018 Gnu Carbon Credit I currently use as my daily driver. I also ride a Jones Mind Expander for powder days and an older Custom X for any super aggressive riding (which I’m not huge into). I’m looking keep the quiver to 2 main boards for most of my riding, the new one and the Jones.
I typically spend most of my time in the trees and on ungroomed trails, but want to have a board that can still perform well on the groomers. I like finding all of the side hits and spend some time in the park too. I’m right around 190cm tall and fluctuate around 90kg. My boot size is an 11/11.5.
The 3 boards I have been looking at are the Greats, Salomon Assassin Pro and the Gnu RC. I think I would like the camrock profile a little more than the hybrid rocker, but I haven’t ridden a board with it yet. The Custom X is a fun ride, but I want something more playful and forgiving.
Of those 3, which do you think is the right complement for the Jones? If I was to get the Greats, it looks like I should choose the 159, but they’re out of stock everywhere. The 156 should still work, but not sure if that would be too small. Are there any other boards you would recommend?
Thank you!
Hi Drew
Thanks for your message.
If you’re looking to go hybrid camber then the Greats and Assassin Pro are good options for what you’re describing, IMO. The GNU RC would work too, but if you’re looking for that more stable feel of the hybrid cambers, then the Greats and Assassin Pro. Both will be more forgiving than the Custom X – both in terms of flex and having that rocker towards the tip and tail. The Assassin Pro is a little stiffer and a little more aggressive feeling – but it’s still more playful than the Custom X.
For the Greats, the 159 would be your best bet, IMO. I think you get away with the 156 if you were going to be using it predominantly as your freestyle/park board, but as your daily driver, I would go 159. If you did go 156, expect it to feel softer, more playful, more maneuverable, easier to butter but less stable at speed and not as good for carving as I found it.
For the Assassin Pro, it’s a tough call. If you wanted to err more playful, then the 158W is a definite possibility – it’s still going to be hold up to speed and carving better than the Greats in the 156, IMO – and being the stiffer option to start with, I would def consider that size. The 162 is probably not quite wide enough (unless you’re in low profile 11s and +15/-15 binding angles or similar – but it’s a really close call and would restrict your boot choice) but otherwise could work. The 163W is an option too, but for what you’re describing, with a lot of trees, it’s getting on the too big side, IMO. I would be leaning 158W.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate, that definitely helps solidify my choice! I was able to find a 159 Greats and it should arrive in the next week or so. Can’t wait to try it out!
You’re very welcome Drew. If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
ciao Nate,
first of all thank a lot your awesome review! It give me a precision view of what i need.
I’ve been snowboarding for a few years … there’s not something I don’t like doing.
“Yes great board” respects what i want, I am worry about only to the “freeride aspect”…
In order to increase powder specs (or stable speed), make sense buy a more big size of board?
My number
boots Adidas Acerra 3ST ADV US 11 (long feet :D)
Height 1.80
Weight 165 to 170 libs
I think to buy 156 size… but not sure if is better to buy 159 in order to increase a little powder specs (or stable at high speed). Which do you think is the right size?
I am just an intermediate for now, but I think that on the future i will buy a specific board for freeride/deepsnow.
best regards from Rome
Fabri
Hi Fabri
Thanks for your message.
I think if you’re going to go for a more freeride, powder board in the future, I would optimize the size of this board for what it’s good at. So I would go 156 in your case. It’s true that the 159 will give you more in terms of powder and speed, but it does come at the sacrifice of other things, such as manueverabillity, butterability, etc. I think the best size for you for this board would be the 156 and that’s what I would go with and then look at another more specific freeride/powder board later. If you got the 159 now, then when you get your second board, it won’t be the optimal size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, firstly thanks for all the great reviews and advice. Awesome site!
Hoping you could give me advice on size for the Yes Greats, please. Looking for a softer more playful alternative to my Yes PYL to use on resort trips with family. Love the PYL off pist but find a bit dull when slowing down so want another board for those kind of days, but still want it to be a really strong carver. Looking to carve the mountain, get better at jumps, working on my switch and just riding more playful than I do on my PYL where I tend to be quite aggressive. I’m 185 cm, 85 kg and size 11 vans verse, Jones Mercury bindings. Thinking 156 or maybe even 154 (my boots to big?). Want it to be playful so was thinking the 159 might be too big since I won’t use it to bomb or go steep, got the PYL for that. Am I right? Also carving is more important to me than jumping, if that could be a deciding factor?
Thanks!
Hi Johan
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats will work well for what you’re describing and a great compliment to the PYL. Since it’s part of your quiver and the purposes you want, I would also go smaller than the 159. But I would be looking at the 156. The 154 would be wide enough, IMO – it’s wider than the waist width makes it look. But given that you value carving over jumps etc, then I would err to the 156. I ride the 156 and love it for carving, but it’s still playful enough to have fun with butters, park, jumps, sidehits etc (I’m 6’0″ (183cm), 180lbs (81kg) and size 10 boots). If you were going full park/playful and not too worried about any carving or speed, then the 154 would certainly work, but I would go 156 – it’s going to be playful enough for you for all those things, but will be the better carver.
Hope this helps with your decision
Great Nate, that completely answers my questions. Thank you!
Before I started researching the Greats I had my mind set on a Jones Mountain Twin (I really want a Jones board..) but then figured it’s not that far off from my PYL and also doesn’t seem to be as good on carves as the Greats so felt it wasn’t really filling the hole I wanted it to. Am I right?
Also do you have any other board suggestions you think I should consider and compare against the Greats?
Thanks Nate!
Hi Johan
I’d say that’s fairly accurate, certainly in terms of that I find the Greats the better carver over the Mountain Twin – it’s not worlds different, but it does carve better, IMO. And the MT is closer to the PYL than what the Greats is, IMO in a lot of ways – apart from that carving feel – but I wouldn’t say it would be close to the PYL – it’s in between in a lot of ways. It’s better for powder than the Greats, but not quite PYL – but it’s a very similar to the Greats in terms of flex. And the shape of the Mountain Twin, whilst certainly being different enough to the Greats, is also quite different to the PYL. It’s got a little bit of a setback at reference stance – though you can ride it centered on effective edge as well – and the nose is a little longer than the tail (by 1cm). The Greats is true twin and asym. The PYL is quite a bit more directional. And it’s noticeably stiffer than the 2 of them as well. So, overall, I’d say the MT is different enough from both, but if I had to choose one that it was closer to, it’s slightly closer to the Greats.
You could also consider the Salomon Assassin, GNU RC C3, Lib Tech TRS Capita Asymulator – though not as good a carvers. Or you could look at the Never Summer Proto Synthesis (note that you’d be switching to a hybrid rocker (rocker between the feet) – as would be the case with the RC C3 and TRS. The Niche Crux is another worth looking at. It’s a little more aggressive, but a really good carver, IMO – especially for a softer flexing (5.5/10 flex by me feel), twin board.
Ok, thanks Nate. Think I’m decided on the Greats now. On the others boards there’s always one aspect or characteristic I’m not so keen on. The Greats ticks all the boxes.
Cheers!
You’re very welcome Johan. If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Hi, Nate
I’m an intermediate rider who rides Lib tech Golden Orca and Capita Super DoA
I’m trying to pre order 2023 Yes Greats. I’m 5’ 10 with 168 to 172 lb and I’m hesitating with size between 151 and 154.
I love side hits and it’s the most important thing for me to choose the board size. I also like sliding turns and some of carving turns.
For me, my golden orca (153cm) is much easier to ride than my super doa (154cm)
Can you please advise me which size I should go with?
Hi Mason
Thanks for your message.
If you could let me know your boot size, that would be great. Important for sizing, IMO.
My boot size is 9. Thanks.
Thanks Mason
I don’t think either would be a wrong choice, but I would be leaning 151. I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 157/158, assuming an advanced level. The Greats is a board you should ride shorter, particularly with 9s, and whilst sizing down to 154 would be enough, if you were going to be using it as your only board and were predominantly using it for speed, carving etc, then I’d lean 154. But given that your most important thing is side hits, I would err a little shorter.
Also to note, the 154 will likely feel a little bigger than your current boards. It doesn’t have the effective edge of the Super DOA 154, but it’s considerably wider – and whilst the waist is narrower than on the Golden Orca, it’s a little wider tip and tail – and probably similar at the inserts, but overall, it’s probably got a little more surface area than the 153 Golden Orca. Hard to say if it has more effective edge or not than the 153 Golden Orca, as Lib Tech publish contact length and not effective edge. But I’d say it would feel a little bigger overall. If that’s what you want, then 154 would certainly work.
Hope this helps with your decision
I should go with size 151. Thanks a lot for your advice. It really helped me choosing size.
You’re very welcome Mason. Happy riding!
Hi, super great reports. Thanks for this.
I am interested in the Yes Greats or Basic. I have about the same height and weight as you.
184 cm and 79kg.Shoes US10.5. I snowboard for many years but mostly only ski slope or some deep snow, which is almost never available. Pipe and jumps are not mine. My current board is an older Ride Manic 161cm, super easy to ride, very forgiving but nothing more. Carving does not go at all, which I love to do. The years before I had a Salomon, which I found very aggressive and in no way forgiving, but which could be carved well.However, I also fell down more often because it was not at all forgiving. I’m therefore a bit averse to aggressive boards, but it may be that this is no longer the case, as boards have evolved in the last 15 years…. My question now, which of the two boards in what size would you recommend me based on your experience. The German support of “Yes” recommends me the Greats 159cm and the Standard at least 159W. Both sizes sound very big according to your reports. You also had both Greats in 154cm and 156cm for comparison.Which one would you choose today?
Many thanks and greetings
Roland
Sorry, the standard without “W” in 159cm.
Hi Roland
Thanks for your messages.
Given you like to carve and everything else you’re describing, I would go Greats. The Basic is a very forgiving easy to ride board, and whilst it’s OK for carves, the Greats is better – and it’s still not anything super aggressive, so you shouldn’t have problems with it in terms of being too aggressive.
Size-wise, if it was the Basic then I’d be looking at the 158 or even potentially the 159W. But for the Greats, I would size down a little bit. For a couple of reasons – for one it’s on the slightly wide side for your boots. With 10.5s, it’s not super wide, but it’s still on the wider end of your range. This board also has quite a lot of effective edge versus overall length, which is another reason to err a little shorter. I would go 156 for you. I rode both the 154 and 156, like you say. The 154 didn’t feel small – which a typical 154 would for me – but for what you’re describing it’s not the size I would get. If you were doing more park/freestyle, then I think you could ride the 154 – but given your style, I would go 156, for sure.
I would put your “standard all-mountain” size at around 159/160, but for this board you want to size down, IMO. Given that YES has weight recommendations of 77-113kg, it seems strange that they would suggest the 159. You’re within the weight range, but just barely and with the width of it, I would only suggest someone at 79kg to ride the 159 if they had like size 12 boots and were 6’4″ or something. Even then, could still consider the 156 (IMO)
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey there, awesome website and great information!
Wanted to know if you can provide me a tip, I have definitely decided to get this board, it seems that it will do well on Ice Coast where I live, I’m just torn between deciding which size to get 154 or 156. (154 they currently have in stock at a local store, 156 I would have to get online and wait.
I’m around 160lbs 6ft in height, and my boot size is 11.
Im confused because it seems my weight matches better for the 154, but based on your comments on boot size and height maybe I’m better off with 156.
what do you think?
Hi Nazar
Thanks for your message.
You could definitely either size, so I get the dilemma. I would put you on roughly around a 157/158 for your “standard all-mountain” size, but this is the kind of board you size down for, even if it isn’t overly wide for your boots. It just depends no how much you wanted to size down – sizing down to the 154 or 156 would both be reasonable in your case, IMO.
I think it would depend on how your mostly going to use it. If you plan on using it for freestyle and/or trees a fair bit, then I would be leaning 154. If you were more looking to carve/bomb most of the time, then the 156 is probably more suitable. Another to think about it is – if you want it more on the playful side, then the 154 would work better – if you want it a little more aggressive, then 156 would allow to ride it faster – and do bigger high speed carves.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I am considering getting this board and just wondering which size is better for me.
I am 5″10 and around 150-155 lb with 8.5 size boots. Love freestyle, ground tricks, and some aggressive carving when I want to bomb the slope. Not many powder days in the nearest resort so I think greats is just perfect for my condition. Anyway, which size would you recommend for the 2022 greats, 151 or 154?
Thanks!
Hi Jason
Thanks for your message.
Whilst I think 154 would be doable, I would be leaning 151. 154 wouldn’t be sizing down much from what I would consider your “standard all-mountain” size of around 155/156 – and with the width of this board coupled with the large amount of effective edge versus overall length, I think the 151 would be the most suitable for your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your reply. I am thinking about 151, too, according to the Yes. size chart. I am glad to hear that 151 is more suitable for my style.
But one thing I am concerning is whether the 151 are able to handle the aggressive carving well. As you said, I would normally ride 154-156. I believe the 154 would handle speed better. But if 151 also has a solid ability to deal with high-speed riding with my given spec, I think I will go for the 151 then. What do you think about it?
Thanks!
Hi Jason
The 154 would give you more stability at speed for sure. All else being equal, the longer board will always be more stable at speed, but I think the 151 would still be decent at speed for you. I would say you’d feel the 151 as good at speed as I felt the 154 – which was solid. Never going to be a bomber, but a solid 3.5/5 for speed, by my feel.
Gotcha, thanks!
Thanks for a fantastic site!
I’m currently something like 5,5 on your rider level scale and riding a Process Flying V.
I mostly enjoy fooling around, practicing my switch riding and mainly want to get better att butters and smaller jumps and tricks along the sides of the groomed slopes.
Now and then I’m in conditions with hard packed or icy slopes or a mix of bumpy loose patches with hard/icy patches between. At those times the Flying V lacks edge grip and is generally a bit too loose I think, even if my main interest is in the flat-ish, simpler, freestyle domain.
So, enter The Greats. Will it be too much of a board given my humble level and ambitions?
I’m 187cm, 98kg, 11,5US – would 156 or 159 be best for me?
My bindings are some Burton “Custom” reflex, which I suppose are in the soft/medium span, which I think matches my Burton Ruler boots. Would the Greats do better with a stiffer setup?
A lot of questions, thanks for your patience
Hi Joakim
Thanks for your message.
The Greats is certainly a step up from the Process Flying V – but it’s not ultra aggressive or anything like that. A lot more stable than the Process Flying V though – so if you still wanted a little bit of looseness but not quite as much as the Process Flying V, then there would be better options. The Greats isn’t what I’d call “locked-in” or anything – it’s what I consider stable – which is right in between locked-in and loose. But for a level 5.5, I don’t think it would be too much board. If you did think you wanted to stick with something a little on the loose side, but more stable than the Process Flying V and with better grip in hard/icy conditions, I can certainly recommend some good options.
But if you did want to go Greats, I think it could certainly work. Size-wise, I would be looking at the 159 for your specs.
Ideally I would go a little stiffer in the boots/bindings for the greats. I think you get away with the Ruler’s (5/10 flex by my feel), but the Custom’s (4/10 flex by my feel), might be a bit soft. Also if you’ve had your boots a long time, then they’ll be a bit softer than when they started. But if your boots are still in good condition, I would keep riding them, but when you do change boots, you could up the flex a bit. Given your style or riding, I wouldn’t go much stiffer though – up to a 6/10 or at most 7/10 flex for boots and bindings.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks for the reply, it certainly helps!
Regarding Greats or another board I’d appreciate suggestions on other boards too. If I could always choose the conditions I’d say I wanted to stay on the loose side. But now and then I’m simply “stuck” with less than ideal conditions and then I still want to make the most of it and need some more edge grip and stability.
Availability of boards in suitable sizes seems to be a problem at the moment too, quite a few options I’ve looked at are simply unavailable.
I wouldn’t mind having 2-3 boards in total though, if that makes a difference for your advice.
Thanks!
Available for me is also GNU Riders Choice in both 158W and 162W. That seems to be very close to Greats (based on e.g. your review) but have a bit more loose feel and more flex.
Given my previous question how do you think RC would compare to Greats in my case? And what size would you recommend between 158W and 162W?
Thanks again! 🙂
Hi Joakim
The Rider’s Choice was actually one that came to mind. I wanted to establish the feel you were looking for first. The RC is something that’s still on the looser side (not as loose as the Process Flying V but still on the looser side of stable) but something that grips icy conditions better. Since you’d prefer to stay on the looser side if you can, then I’d go RC over Greats, and you still get good grip in icy conditions.
Size-wise, you could certainly ride 162W for your specs – it’s probably the more “pure” size for your specs, so that’s definitely an option. However, given how you like to ride, I think the 158W would work well. Note that for your specs, I’d put you on roughly a 163W as your “standard all-mountain size”. But you can size down if you’re going to be riding a little more casual or more freestyle.
Thanks for all the feedback and support!
I’m going for a Riders Choice 158W and a pair of Union Strata to go with it.
Thanks for the great site and content, it’s really helpful.
You’re very welcome Joakim. I think those bindings are a really good match too. If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get your new setup out on snow. Happy riding!
Man your reviews are great. Really putting me in a hard place though!
154 Yes Greats vs 156 Yes Standard(maybe 153?)
I’m 5’11”, 170lbs, size 9.5-10 US.
I have been riding for about 10 years. If I am in the park I focus on mid-size jumps and love pipe. I live in the mid-west (tons of ice and not much pow). Have been riding the same 153 jibstick for years now and am looking for a board to head out west and be able to a little bit of everything with then come back and be able to use here.
Any reason why I should go one over the other? It seems like the Greats is the same/better at almost everything but pow and still capable with a little more effort.
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think that’s fairly accurate that the Greats is better at most things (IMO) except for powder. But the Standard isn’t bad at anything – no real weaknesses, just doesn’t quite carve as well as the Greats (IMO) and not as good for more freestyle things either. The Standard would help you when you do get good powder – especially if you’re willing to take the time to put those bindings back into the slam back inserts on powder days. But the Greats can handle shallow powder fine.
Size-wise, I would go 154 Greats and 156 Standard. Both are boards you size down for a bit, but the Greats is bother wider than normal and has a lot of effective edge relative to overall length, so it’s something you can size down more so than the Standard. Even though your used to a 153, going 156 is still sizing down a bit for your specs, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
First of all I wanna say thank you for this amazing site and all the work you put in reviews – it’s great stuff!
I am considering to buy the Greats 159cm and I was wondering if you have an opinion on it’s fit for me:
Height: 197cm (~6.46ft)
Weight: ~183 lbs
Bootsize: 12 – 12.5 US
In general, I don’t mind riding rather short boards and prefer a playful / relaxed ride over racing.
Thank you so much in advance.
Cheers,
Constantin
Hi Constantin
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats in the 159 would work for you. I would say your closer to 162 for your standard all-mountain size, but this is the kind of board you can definitely size down for. Given your boot size, you don’t need to size down for width (but it should be easy wide enough), but it’s one you can size down for anyway, because of higher effective edge versus overall length. That plus the fact that you prefer playful, makes the 159 a good size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
thanks for your reply, definitely helped! I just ordered the board + a pair of 2021 union strata bindings. Really looking forward!
Have a good day!
You’re very welcome Constantin. Happy riding!
Nate
Nate
I just started snowboarding this season. I bought a Salomon sight X to help me learn. I quickly outgrew that board, i definitely felt that I had to work harder if I wanted to dig in and hold an edge. I out grew that board the 6th time being up and I was lucky to buy a old Capita DOA 2013/2014. That board really put everything I was trying to do like carving and bombing down the hill so effortlessly. I thought I would step it up and demo a golden orca and that was not the case. Board to stiff and I couldn’t be lazy with my technique. By all means I have alot to learn but riding that orca made me realize that having a stiff board can make you a better snowboarder by making you use proper technique. That board was just too stiff. Would the YES greats be too stiff as well?
This board sounds amazing and I can grow into. I’m wondering is this board maybe a little bit much for me? By your rating a DOA is a 5 flex/stiff and the YES greats is a 6. Is it that big of a difference in stiifness 5 & 6?
I’m using K2 boundary boots and union strata bindings
5,8
195LBS
8 size foot
Thank you all your reviews it has helped me a lot in what I’m looking.
Hi Stephen
Thanks for your message (I got your other messages too, but were just repeats of this one, so I deleted them to keep things tidier).
I actually feel the DOA at more like a 6/10 flex. Capita rates it 5.5/10. I would say the Greats is stiffer through the middle of the board than the DOA, but it’s softer tip and tail.
But yeah, I think the Greats would suit what you’re describing well. Particularly as it sounds like you’re progressing super fast. It’s certainly not as stiff as the Golden Orca (haven’t ridden the Golden Orca, but regular Orca is rated 7/10, same as golden Orca. I felt the Orca at 7.5/10).
So yeah, if you’re having no issues riding the DOA, I don’t think the Greats will be too much board for you. Note however, that this is based on newer models of the DOA. I never rode the 13-14 version (earliest version I rode was the 16-17 model.
Size-wise, I’d be leaning 156 or 154 for you for the Greats. For your specs, I think something around 159 as your “standard all-mountain” length, but the Greats is a board you ride a little shorter anyway (because of quite a lot of effective edge versus overall length) and with 8s (it’s quite a wide board), sizing down also makes sense. As a first season rider, I would be leaning 154, but 156 is doable. If you could also let me know the size of your Sight and your DOA, that would be helpful for calibrating the right size as well.
Hope this helps
Nate
Thank you for replying and all this is super helpful. My sight X is a 159 and my DOA is 156. I found it difficult to initiate turns on my sight X at fast speed or maybe it just took a lot more effort. So I switched it up to the DOA and it felt amazing. I just automatically assumed it had to be the length that made the difference for me turning. Again thank you for all your work and this site has been so helpful.
I apologize for the double post before.
Hi Stephen
Thanks for the extra info. The DOA is also a board I’d ride a little shorter, but not as short as the Greats. So, I think if you liked the DOA in 156, that I’d go 154 for Greats. 156 doable, but with 8s and given how you liked the DOA in 156, I’d be leaning 154.
Is there big difference in between the greats 2020 & 2022 versions?
Hi Stephen
The Greats, as far as I can tell hasn’t really changed since the 2019 model, so 2020 and 2022 models essentially the same, as far as I know (apart from the graphic)
Thank so much and I found a 2020 model but was too late. Guess I’m just gonna have to buy the new one. Please keep up the great work on here.
You’re very welcome Stephen.
Hey Nate,
I’m currently deciding between the Yes Greats 149 and the Endeavor Pioneer 152, and I’d love your opinion.
I’ve been riding the same board for the last 10 years and would like to finally purchase a new board. I would consider myself intermediate.
I will be focusing on carving, butters, spins, and mostly ground tricks type of freestyle.
I am 5’6 and weigh ~145lbs.
I am also planning on getting Burton Step On bindings.
Suggestions on other boards are also welcome!
Thanks!
Hi Homan
Thanks for your message.
Both of these boards are suited to what you’re describing, IMO. The Pioneer being the softer, slightly more playful option of the 2.
I would say the Greats is better for carving and at speed. Both fairly similar for buttering – even though the Greats is stiffer overall, it’s still quite buttery in the nose and tail. For spins both really good. The Pioneer maybe just a touch easier to spin, but very little in it.
Size-wise, I think 149 Greats and 152 Pioneer are just right. But if you could also let me know your boot size, that would be great.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the reply Nate 🙂
My boot size is Men’s 8.
Hi Homan
Thanks for the extra info. Yeah, I’d 152 Pioneer and 149 Greats for sure.
When they say they added the 149 for more riders to ride, does that include women? Like Lib Tech did with the Orca. I have an Orca and absolutely love it.
I have a Yes Basic but it’s a few years old and cracked near the bindings after landing a small jump. I love the Basic but am looking for an upgrade.
I have been looking at the board for a while and it just looks like a heap of fun but it always seemed too wide.
My stats are
1,8m tall
65kgs
8.5 US women size
My Basic is a 155 and the Orca is a 147.
My riding style is rad mom 😉 I follow the kids around and look for features to jump off of next to the piste. I venture into the park and like the jumps. Not into jibbing or rails. I like bombing down the groomers and carving. Powder days I abandon the kids and let the Orca loose.
Hey Blake
Thanks for your message.
The 149 is still going to be really wide for your boots – but 149 is sizing down quite a bit for your specs, so I think it could work.
For reference for the width, the Greats 149 will be around 260mm at the inserts (but that’s assuming a 540mm (21.25″) stance width – if you rode it at a narrower width, then it would a little narrower). Comparing to your Orca:
– Orca 147 – 257mm waist, 266mm front insert, 265mm back insert (assuming a 530mm (20.9″ stance width), 303mm tip width, 293mm tail width
– Greats 149 – 245mm waist, 260mm inserts (at a 540mm (21.25″) stance width), 297mm at tip and tail.
So still narrower than your Orca, but more length and more effective edge. So I’d say it’s equivalent size-wise to the Orca, or maybe marginally bigger, but smaller than your 155 Basic (which IMO is a bit big for you, when taking width and length into account). So yeah I think it’s definitely doable.
The other option might be the 152 Rival, if you wanted a more traditional shape, in terms of width and length. It’s not the equivalent of the Greats, it’s the equivalent of the Jackpot, but still something that gives you more performance than the Basic and would suit how you describe your riding. But in saying that, I think the Greats would work for sure.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi there,
Thanks for your reply. I tried the Greats and while it’s super fun I did have a bit of a hard time manipulating it. I think I need something with a bit of a softer flex.
The Basic is definitely a bit too big for me. I bought it before I lost the baby weight…
I never really thought of a “park” board before but the Rival looks awesome. I did find a ladies choice on a great sale – 50% off it also looks like a fun board as well. I am however torn between the 153.5 and 151.5. They both have the same weight limits. Perhaps I am just overthinking everything.
They also have the Union Legacy bindings on sale 🙂
Hi Blake
If they have the Legacy on sale, I’d go them over the Strata, as per our previous conversation.
The Ladies Choice could certainly work too. I would be leaning 151.5 for Ladies Choice, especially given you already have the Orca for powder days. If you’re going to be with the kids and given the style you describe when you’re riding with the kids, I think the 151.5 would work best.
Thanks for your help. I just ordered everything. Now do to the snow dance and hope for good snow.
Hey Blake. Awesome! New snowboard gear is exciting. I’ll sacrifice some pineapples to double the efforts of your snow dance!
Hi Nate, I am 5’9 US men, weigh 180lbs, and use size 9 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.
It’s between the 154 and 156. I think if you were more all-mountain, less park, then I’d be leaning 156, but given that your 60/40 park/mountain, I would be leaning 154.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
first of all, amazing website you’ve got going here! It helped me a lot in gathering information for my next snowboard.
I’m 6’0”, about 170lbs and am currently riding the K2 Raygun 157w. It was my first snowboard and i was really happy progressing my snowboarding with it. By now i would say I’m an advanced rider all mountain and on the stronger side of intermediate when it comes to freestyle.
When I’m riding I would say I’m carving groomers for about 65% of the time and I’m looking for sidehits, trying out some butters and am generally messing around at the mountain for 35% of the time (unless there’s powder, then I’m chasing lines all day).
I’m looking for a board that’s agressive and stable enough to bomb the mountain and lay down proper carves, but that can also be ridden slow and be played around with. I especially wanna work on improving my butters and learn some spins beyond the 180 (and maybe even inverts) using sidehits and natural kickers. I’m fairly confident riding switch when the slopes are still in a good shape, but that’s also something i want to improve in the future.
I’m rarely in a resort with a proper park, but if there is one i favor the small and medium jump lines with the occasional jib.
The main boards I’m considering at the moment are the Gnu Rider’s Choice, Gnu RCC3 and – after looking through your all mountain top 10 – the Yes Greats (which is my favorite pick at the moment).
I’m very happy with the way my Raygun performs in powder, so I’ll probably keep it in my quiver for those days. Therefore I’m not that worried about powder performance of my next board.
The past few days I’ve been trying out the Gnu Müllair and I loved the edgehold and the carves you could put down on it (despite the very hard snow conditions). Despite it being the first camber-dominant board i’ve ridden, I had no issues catching edges whatsoever. The pop and the stability at high speeds were amazing, riding Switch worked quite alright, but I definitly felt the directional profile. I was underwhelmed by its performance in powder and I could barely butter with it, because of its stiffness. Therefore it’s not quite the addition to my quiver I am looking for.
Now back the Yes Greats: Size-wise I was considering either the 156 or the one 159 to help with stability at speed and carving.
Do you think the Yes Greats would be a good choice for my intentions or do you have any other recommendations?
I hope you can give me some insights for my search and I’m looking forward for your input!
Cheers, Thomas
Hi Thomas
Thanks for your message.
Given you want something more stable for carving and speed, but still with butter performance, I think the Greats would be a really good fit. The RC C3 too. I would go RC C3 over the Rider’s Choice for what you’re describing. RC C3 has the same camber profile as the Mullair, but it’s, of course, softer flexing and twin (not the only differences of course, but to point out some of the main ones).
In terms of sizing, it’s going to depend on your boot size. If you could let me know that, I would be happy to recommend a size for the Greats.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
I‘ve got the Nitro Anthem TLS boots in US Size 11 (44 in EU) and K2 Cinch TC bindings in large.
Would you favor the Greats or the RC C3 for what I‘m describing?
Best wishes from Germany and thanks for your help!
Hi Thomas
Yeah, I would be leaning Greats or RC C3 for what you’re describing.
Size-wise:
– Greats: I would be leaning 156. 159 is doable, but it’s getting on the big side, when taking into account length, width and the fact that it has a lot of effective edge, compared to overall length. The 159 would be more stable at speed, but it’s not going to be as easy to butter or other types of freestyle or ride in trees. Compared to how I feel the board, it would likely feel less playful and a little stiffer.
– RC C3: 158W
Okay, thanks for the sizing tips!
So in the end now I’m struggeling with which one of those two boards to get. I’m pretty sure I would enjoy riding either of them.
I found quite a sweet deal for the 20/21 Version of the Greats for about 375€, while the GNU would be about 580€ (gotta go with the 21/22 version as there are no wide versions available in the previous year).
Which one would you get, if you had to choose?
Hi Thomas
Definitely a hard choice as both boards are sick! And I’d say you’d definitely enjoy either one. I’m really partial to the Greats, so I’d be leaning that way – and with that price difference, makes it more enticing. But I’m also really fussy on sizing. So, for me, if I had the choice between the 159 Greats (which I find too big for me and the way I like to ride) and the 157.5 RC C3 (which is my preferred size for that board), I’d go 157.5 RC C3 every time, even at the greater cost. If that makes sense. If I had the option of the 156 Greats and the 157.5 RC C3, then the decision is really hard, but I’d opt for the 156 Greats – and with that price difference, I wouldn’t hesitate.
Great review !
how does it perform in Trees? Thanks
Hi Aaron
It’s pretty good in trees. It’s pretty nimble – depending on how you size it, but that could be said for a lot of boards. I find the 156 pretty nimble – it’s not like the ultimate in edge to edge speed, but still pretty good. It also absorbs bumps pretty well when going over stuff when you don’t want to get air.
Hope this helps
I’m 6′ 185 lb, 10.5 boot, Union Strata L bindings. Between the 154 and 156. I’m leaning 154 as I’m looking for a more nimble/playful. Foresee any issues with my size and the 154?
Hi Blayne
Thanks for your message.
I don’t foresee any issues with going 154 for this board. It’s short for your specs, but even in the 154 it’s wide for 10.5s, so some sizing down certainly recommended. I think 156 would be the more pure size for your specs, but if you’re looking to go more nimble, and happy to sacrifice a little in terms of speed for it, then 154 is certainly an option and within your range. I recently rode the 154 (6’0″, 175lbs, 10s) and it didn’t feel crazy small or anything.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks so much for the reviews
I have the greats 2019 model (save the humans). Is there any change in the 2022 model? The asym side cut look the same and the Flex is rated the same. Could you Tell me? Thanks
Hi Nas
As far as I can tell the 2022 model is the same as the 2019 model (apart from the graphic). I own the 2019 model as well. And I tested the 2022 model last winter – allbeit in a 154 and I own the 156. Nothing appears to have changed specs-wise and it felt like pretty much the same board. The only change that I felt was from the size – otherwise, yeah, as far as I could tell very much the same board. Only thing new is that it got a 149 size, which it hasn’t had before.
Hope this helps
Thank you very much for the reply
You’re very welcome NAS. Happy riding!
Hi Nate !
Thanks for your greats reviews, I’ve learned a lot reading them !
Sorry to annoy you again with board size question, but I’m really stuck in my buying decision since I’ve got a really weird body !
Weight => 139 pounds (63-64 kg)
Height => 5’10” (177 cm)
Feet => … 11.5 US (45 fr)
I’ve got really long feet with really light weight, it become really hard for me to choose board since they expect someone more heavy for this feet size.
I’m intermediate rider, I like more to ride mountain and do butter than going to snow park. I like powder too !
I already bought my boots (Vans infuse 11.5, thanks to your review again !) and Union Strata (Thanks agaaain for your review).
I really don’t know which board size I should buy, if I follow the Yes spec, I should go for 151 but with 11.5 I thinks I should go for 154 maybe ? Do you think it would fit my spec (63kg ?) and it would not be too heavy to do butter ?
I’ve already bought Niche Crux 156 days ago, but some guy at shop told me that 254 waist width was too short for my feet size so I send it back. So now I’m looking for another board that would be wider.. Hard to find good boards with that kind of spec I’ve got.
Hope you will be able to help me in this difficult time ahah
Have a good day !
Hi Flo
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think the 151 is the better length for you in the Greats. I think the 154 will be too big, given your weight. And going to be quite hard to butter, IMO. The 151 would likely be noticeably easier to butter for you.
In terms of width on the 151, it’s borderline, but doable if certain things are in place. If you have roughly a 580mm stance width on it, then you’re looking at around 271mm at the inserts. This is still bordering on narrow for 11.5s, but with Infuse (quite low profile) boots and +15/-15 binding angles (or similar), then I think you should be fine on the 151 width-wise. Asym boards like this are recommended to have a mirror duck stance anyway, so I’d recommend similar angles to that anyway. It just depends on your stance width. E.g. if you went to 540mm stance width or thereabouts, then you’re probably looking at more like 268/269mm which is probably pushing it.
I agree that the Crux 156 would be too narrow. Even though it’s a similar waist to the 151 Greats, it’s not as wide at the inserts. I measured the 156 at 265mm at the inserts. Also, I think the 156 is a bit too long for you as well – and I think you would have struggled a bit to butter that. The 151 Greats a better option, IMO – will just depend if it’s wide enough, which is going to depend mostly on stance width, IMO.
Another option that could work is the 151 Twin Pig. I haven’t ridden it yet, but the specs look like they’ll work. I’ve got a Twin Pig coming to test right now, but I won’t get it out for another month or so, I would say.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Your reviews have helped me pick out my first ever snowboard! I’ve been going for 3 years now and I’m so keen to get my own gear rather than rent.
Could I please ask your advice?
I’ve seen the Burton Cartel X on a really good deal ($200 AUD) and wanted to ask how you think they’d go with the Greats?
I’ve also found the Malavita for $240 AUD and Union Strata for $300. Just trying to get good value haha
Thanks so much for your work!
Hey Jake
Thanks for your message.
For the Greats, I’d be looking at anything around 6/10 to 7/10 flex, so I think the Cartel X would work well (7/10 flex, by my feel). I’ve ridden the Greats with the Malavita as well and they work well. But my favorite setup on the Greats is my Union Falcor 2019s (7/10 flex). The Strata also a good match. So you can’t really make a wrong choice with any of those 3, but if you want to go Cartel X (Re:Flex of course – make sure it’s not the EST model as that’s only compatible with channel boards), I think that would be a good match, particularly given my experience with similar flexing bindings on the Greats.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks so much for your detailed reply! You’ve helped a lot. At the time of writing the sale for the Cartel X is over and the Strata was the cheapest. I was pretty happy with how well reviewed they were and grabbed them!
I’ll be purchasing a board soon and thought the Typo, Standard or Greats would be a good board for an Intermediate 5.5 (using your guide).
I’m looking for an all mountain board and I’m venturing off the groomers into untouched snow and tree runs, but also want to hit rollers, sidehits and jumps. I’ve just been popping off natural features on my runs and am aiming to learn how to butter and 180 front side next season.
I’m in Australia so powder isn’t really a common thing unfortunately, so I don’t think powder performance will matter too much.
Do you think a The Greats (156), Standard (156/159) or Typo (159W) will be okay for what I’m looking for?
I’m 5’9”, 205 lbs and wear size 11-11.5US shoes (yet to buy boots).
Thanks so much for your help!
Hi Jake
The Strata are great bindings, IMO, so can’t go wrong there – and they’ll match to any one of those boards.
If you had more powder, then I’d say go Standard, but given powder isn’t a big thing, I’d be leaning Greats. The Standard and Typo would definitely work for you as well for what you’re describing, but my instinct says Greats in this case. Personally, taking into account not too much powder, I’d go Greats over Standard. The Typo is a good all round board and a little more playful. Definitely not a wrong choice either, particularly if you think more playful is appealing. The Typo is the easiest to butter and the most maneuverable at slow speeds (read: best in the trees). And would be the easiest to spin with to begin with as your learning. But the Greats will give you more when you’re riding at speed and better for carving – but still good at those freestyle elements – and once you’ve gotten those spins down better for spins overall, IMO – and jumps overall. And it’s certainly not something that’s hard to butter. It’s more buttery than you’d expect for how well it carves. Also note that the Typo is the easiest to ride, but neither the Greats nor Standard are hard to ride or anything.
Size-wise, 159W for the Typo would be just right, IMO, if you went with that board. I mention the Typo for sizing first, only because it’s the easiest choice!
For the Greats, it’s a tough call, but I’d be leaning 156. Typically for your height/weight specs, I’d say go around 160, give or take. For the Greats, if you had size 10 boots or less, I’d quite confidently say go 156. With larger feet, the 159 becomes a possibility in your case. But I’d be leaning 156 for couple of reasons a. because of how you describe how you want to ride. The shorter size will be easier/better for trees, sidehits, butters, 180s etc – and it sounds like you’re going to be spending a fair bit of time on things like that. b. the 159 is wide, even for 11s (if that’s what you end up in). Not ultra wide for 11’s, but it’s still getting pretty big. The Greats is something you can size down on, even without taking width into account, as it has a lot of effective edge versus overall length. And the 156 is still wide enough for 11.5s, if that’s what you end up in.
If it was the Standard, I’d be leaning 159. It’s marginally narrower than the Greats, which is one reason, but that’s not the main reason. Main reason being that the effective edge on the Standard is quite a bit shorter, so you can afford to ride it longer. If you had 10s or less in boots, then the 156 would become a possibility, but in your case, I’d go 159, if you were to go Standard.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
you had reasons yes specs are wrong, stance goes to 54 or 58 cm.
At this point in the demo I think I tried the yes the greats 156 board at 54 cm stance with bindings now select pro which I liked.
I am happy with the stance at 56 I had never tried 54, I am 187 cm tall and weigh 82 kg it seems strange to me to swing with a tight step at 54 but I must say that after the demo you have to think again I like to play all over the mountain side shots 180,360 butters …
You have seen that laps is 54 or 58 what are your impressions?
also i have
a Malavita bindings like it
do you see coupled to the table? the
now select pro tried it seemed to me more responsive.
I’m waiting for your info … great super professional Nate.
Hi Peter
I like the Greats at both 54 and 58. I will typically go with 56 or close to (I’m 183cm tall), but I’m happy to adjust to 54 or 58 – don’t like going much narrower or wider than that though.
I mostly ride it on the 58 stance now. I just like that extra stability for landing jumps and riding at speed. But the 54 stance does give a bit more maneuverability.
I like the Malavita on the Greats, but I typically ride it with my Union Falcors – I like the extra response I get from them. I haven’t ridden the Select Pros, but not surprised they are a little more responsive. The Malavita definitely works with the Greats though, IMO.
Hi Nate,
I’m considering buying this great board. I’m an intermediate rider that is looking to get mostly an all mountain board, but interested in learning to do some freestyle. I’m a resort rider and ride grooms and want a board that can carve decently and maintain stability on bombing. What size should I get?
Height: 5’11”
Weight: 155lb
Shoe size: 8.5 US men
Hi Jake
Thanks for your message.
I’d say, for this board, it’s between the 151 and 154. Typically for your specs, I’d say 156, but this is a wider board – and for 8.5s it’s quite wide, so sizing down for that reason makes sense. Also this is a board with a lot of effective edge versus overall length, so you can size down anyway regardless of width. So 156 too big in this board for your specs, IMO.
It’s whether to go as short as the 151 or just down to the 154?
Neither would be wrong, but the following might help with your decision:
– The 151 will feel more playful, be easier to butter and easier in general for learning freestyle stuff, in addition to being easier to maneuver at slower speeds (trees etc)
– The 154 will feel faster and have better stability at speed – and better for big higher speed carves – and better float in powder.
So I think it’s between which of those you’d prefer to maximize. Not saying the 151 will be terrible at speed or that the 154 will be impossible to maneuver at slow speed or anything like that, but one will be better at the other than the other, if that makes sense!
Hope this helps with your decision
Will the 154 be too wide for my 8.5 foot size? Will it still be buttery if I go for the 154 opposed to the 151? Will it be a lot harder to control the 154? Thank you for the help!
Hi Jake
It will still be buttery in 154, IMO, but it will be less buttery and requite more muscle to butter it. The 151 will be more effortlessly buttery for your specs, IMO. The 154 will take more effort to maneuver than the 151 for sure. Wouldn’t say it would be too hard to control, but will require more effort.
The 154 will be wider than what I would consider a “good range” for width at the inserts. It’s around 271mm at the inserts (assuming a 54cm stance width). I prefer to be in a range of 260mm-265mm at the inserts personally with 10s, and even slightly narrower is typically good for me too. But sizing down length really helps when a board is on the wider side. I own the 156 Greats (around 273mm at the inserts) and I love it. It’s wider than I’d typically go for but also shorter (I’m 6’0″, 175lbs, size 10 boot). I typically really don’t like boards that wide but sizing down really helps. Also, the actual waist width does have some effect as well, IMO, on how wide the board feels, so the width at inserts is a lot, but having a narrower waist does still help.
I felt fine riding the 154 too. Didn’t feel too small for me or anything. I’d still stick with the 156, but was fine with the 154.
The 151 is also still wide for your boots (roughly 268mm at the inserts), but going down in size from what you’d typically ride in length, I think that size wouldn’t feel overly wide.
I think I’d be leaning 151, if you’re looking for more effortless buttering and maneuverability.
Hello born,
I have to buy the yes the greats 156 by mounting Burton underworld bindings (like yours) you know well that with burton bidings I cannot maneuver the stance horizontally.
Stance is important to me.
Are you sure your stance on yes the greats 2002 is 58cm. Because from the demo where I tried the board and from the web yes reference it would be 56 cm.
Thanks
Hi Peter
Thanks for your message.
YES reference stance width is often off from where they have the reference stance on the board and what they have the reference stance published as on their website or in their catalog.
My 2019 YES Greats 156 is listed in their catalog as having a 56cm (or 55.88cm to be exact) reference stance, but the measurement on my board is 54cm (or 53.9cm to be more exact). If you want to go wider with the Re:flex disc, and at the same time keep the stance centered, then you’ve got to go out to 58cm (or 57.9cm to be exact). If you wanted a 56cm stance, you’d have to move just the back binding one set of holes from the reference stance – but then you’d be riding it with a small setback stance. I find I can get a 56cm stance fine with my Union Falcors (mini-disc) but you can run that disc horizontally, so you’ve got more micro stance options.
I didn’t test the 2022 YES Greats (tested the 154 model this time), so I can’t say for sure if it’s got the same discrepancy between published specs and actual reference stance on the board. You’d think they would have fixed it by now. But on the 2022 154 that I rode reference was at 54cm (and is also published as 55.9cm for that size). I rode it at 58cm. So based on that the discrepancy still exists. That was a demo model, so maybe it was just an error on that board. But my 2019 156 is a production model.
The other thing confusing with the 2022 154 that I tested is that they had actually setup the reference stance markers on different holes on the front insert pack and the back insert pack. I assume that was an error, for sure! They make great boards, but when it comes to publishing reference stance specs, they leave a lot to be desired!
That’s not to say that the 156 2022 production model would be the same. The consistency isn’t there to assume anything! Your best bet would be to contact a shop or YES and ask them to measure it and make sure you’re going to get that 56cm stance option, if it’s really important to you.
Hope this helps
Hi,
I’m really interested to buy this board after reading your review. I’m 1.7m tall and weight around 57kg (125lbs), which size would you say suit me most, 149 or 151? Many thanks.
Hi Jay
Thanks for your message.
I’d say most likely 149. But if you could let me know your boot size as well (also important for sizing), that would really help.
My apology for forgetting about the boot size, mine is us 9.5.
Hi Jay
Thanks for the extra info. Yeah, I’d still say 149 for you for this board. Even with the waist at 245mm, I don’t think it’s going to be too narrow for 9.5s. It’s wider at the inserts than you’d expect – around 260mm at the inserts for the 149 (depending on stance width, but based on roughly a 540mm (21.25″) stance width). I think 149 is a really good length for your height/weight and that width is pretty much spot on for your boots – so I think it’s a really good size for you.
Really appreciate the advice. Thank you so much.
You’re very welcome Jay. Hope you have an awesome season! If you think of it at the time let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hey nate, looking for a new daily resort driver. I’m 180lbs, 6’, and 11.5 boots. I currently ride a 155w NS prototype2 daily and a 158 Jones mind expander on pow days. I love my prototype2 but I’m looking for something a little less twitchy/squirrley when racing friends down to the lodge but also something that’s still forgiving and can turn quick like the prototype2. I think going camber between feet and go a little bit longer will help stability. Looking for something that I can point down the hill but also something I can turn easily while going slow. I was looking at the 2022 greats in 156 and 159 or the pyl in 160w. Leaning towards the greats in 159 but wondering if 123.5 affective edge will be a slow turner? Would you recommend any over the other? I spend most of my time on the mountain but I do like to hit small to medium jumps and boxes when I pass by the park and love hitting side hits on groomers. I would like to work on my switch, I can get down the hill but not nearly as fast as regular . I’m in the central Sierras so I’m usually riding Mammoth/Tahoe type of snow (hard in the cold mornings and softer but tracked out in the afternoon). Also since I already have the mind expander I do not care how the new board performs in powder.
Other options I was considering were capita Asymulator and yes optimistic.
Thanks for the help and all the content that you have researched for us!
Hi Cambo
Thanks for your message.
I think I’d be leaning Greats, for what you’re describing. Firstly, because you still want to be able to ride switch – the PYL you can do it on, but it’s not ideal. And secondly because the PYL isn’t as easy to ride slow. It’s not something that’s horrible riding slow, but my instinct from what you’re describing is that you’re looking for something a little more forgiving than the PYL (or the Optimistic). And given that you don’t need it to be good in powder, that’s another reason. The Asymulator also gives you that great switch riding ability and that forgiveness, but not, IMO, going to give you the bump you’re looking for in terms of speed.
The Greats is something I’m always caught between giving it 3.5 or 4 for speed – and I’m not going down that rabbit hole of giving things 3.75! But, I would say that it’s, even size for size, just a little better at speed than the PT2. And if you compare the 156 Greats to the 155X PT2, you get another little boost in that stability, with the extra effective edge. Going up to the 159 Greats and comparing to the 155X PT2, you’re looking at a bigger difference of course.
I ride the Greats in 156 and love it in that size (very similar specs to you 6’0″ 175lbs). Biggest difference is that I ride 10s. I’d never go to the 159 for the Greats, but the combo of the length and width is too big for me. I rode the 2022 Greats in the 154 and I liked it in that size too. But I really like my 156, particularly when it comes to speed/carving, over the 154 – but still pretty forgiving. With 11.5s, that opens up the option of the 159, as it’s not too wide for your boots. And if you really wanted to gain that speed advantage over the 155X you’d get the most noticeable difference there. But would sacrifice in terms of quick turns at slow speeds. It wouldn’t become a tank or anything, but there is a trade off there.
So, I think between the 2 sizes the decision probably comes down to whether you a. want to get a decent bump in terms of speed, whilst maintaining a similar level of quick turns/forgiveness, or b. want to get a bigger bump in speed, with a less agile at slow speed, less forgiving ride (but still not going to be ultra-unforgiving or tank-like, I wouldn’t think).
Hope this helps
Thanks for the advice, I really appreciate it!! I think I’m gonna go with the 159 and use it as my all mountain bored that I can hopefully still play around on. I want both sizes but I feel like there might be a lot of overlap with my prototype2 in the similar size. Thanks again for everything! Yeee!
Board*^ lol
lol! You’re very welcome Cambo. Hope if treats you well. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow
Hi Nate,
Firstly, thanks so much for such a brilliant website! There’s so much information on everything and I’ve found it all so helpful.
I wondered if you could help with sizing for me – I’m 178cm tall, weigh 63kg and boot size 10, so I’m torn between the 151 and the 154. I’m enjoying getting into the park equipment (currently just boxes and jumps, but will hopefully soon be on pipes/rails etc) but I also want to feel stable when travelling at speed. From your ability rating list, I’d say I’m on a 5.
Also, is there much difference between the 19-20, 20-21 and 21-22 boards? I can’t seem to find any previous reviews on them, and can’t see a difference in their descriptions, but thought I’d best ask you!
Thanks in advance!
Hi Laurence
Thanks for your message.
The 18-19, 19-20, 20-21 and 21-22 are all essentially the same as far as I can tell. You can find my past reviews at the bottom of this review in a tab (sorry if it’s not obvious – it’s just above the social share icons – you’ve got to click on it to expand it). The 18-19 changed a lot from the 17-18 model.
Size-wise for the Greats, I would go 151 for your specs. It’s a particularly wide board – wider than you’d think just looking at the waist width, so going down rather than up in size is a good idea. For you, I’d say something around a 153 would be your “standard all-mountain” size, but for this board, particularly being wide – and also having a high ratio of effective edge versus overall length, you want to go down from there. I think the 154 is probably too big.
Riding the 154 with a 580mm stance width (22.8″), the width at inserts was 274mm – which is quite wide for 10s. Narrower of course with a narrower stance width but only be a couple of mm.
So yeah, long story short, I think the 151 would be the best size for you, and I think it would be a really good size for you.
Hope this helps
Ah sorry, I’ll have a proper read of them now, thanks for pointing them out.
Thanks so much for the detailed response, really helpful!
You’re very welcome Laurence. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hey Nate
I’m from Japan.
I’m torn between YES Greats 20-21 and 21-22 due to price and design, is there any major difference between them? Also I am 173 cm tall and weigh 71 kg. My foot size is US 8. Please tell me which size is more suitable for me.Thank you.
Sorry for my English.
Hi Akira
Thanks for your message. And your English is perfectly fine.
As far as I can tell the 20-21 Greats and 21-22 Greats are exactly the same, so if you prefer the design and can get the 20-21 cheaper, then that’s a great option – assuming it’s in your best size. I wouldn’t compromise on size, but if you can find the right size in the 20-21 model, you’ll be getting the same board as the 2022 version as far as I can tell.
And onto sizing – I think the 151 is your best bet. I would say your “standard length” is around 155 for your weight/height, but with size 8 boots and the Greats being quite wide, I would size down to at least the 151. The 149 is a possibility as well. If you were going to be riding predominantly freestyle/park/more playful, then I’d consider the 149. If you’re looking for a board to do a bit of everything, then I’d say 151 is best.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate! I’ve decided to pull the trigger on the Yes Greats, based off your reviews for edge hold over uneven terrain, icy groomers, carving and mid-sized jumps/side hits.
If you could choose the perfect pair of bindings to match the Greats, which would you choose?
Burton MalaVita
Union Strata
Burton Genesis
Help!?
Hi Jayson
Thanks for your message.
I would go Strata for the Greats. The Malavita would be a close second though and definitely matches well with the board, but my first choice would be Strata. Genesis would work too, but if I had the choice I’d go Strata or Malavita, with the Strata slightly in front of the Malavita.
Hope this helps
Why not the Genesis, exactly? I found an epic deal! :-/
Hi Jason
Wasn’t saying no to the Genesis. All 3 options you gave would all work on the Greats, IMO. But in order of what I would think would work best out of those 3, it would be Strata, then Malavita, then Genesis. Mostly because I’ve found I’ve enjoyed slightly stiffer/harder driving bindings on the Greats and the Genesis is the softest of the 3 options, by my feel. But the Genesis do work well with a wider range of boards than a lot of bindings, so even at a 5/10 flex (by my feel), they’re certainly not wrong for the Greats – and if you’ve got a good deal on them, it wouldn’t be a bad choice to put them on the Greats or anything, I would just personally go Strata or Malavita first.
Thank you so much, bro! You’re a legend.
All good man. Thanks for visiting!
hi, i’m a french guy.
I am interested in this board but I am a boot size of 8.
I wanted to know if the board will be ok for me. I measure 1.80m for 65kg.
Size 151 is not too small for me?
(sorry for my english :))
thank u very much
Hi William
Thanks for your message.
Typically I’d say something around 154 for your height/weight specs, but for the Greats you’ll want to size down from that, particularly with size 8 boots. I would be debating between the 149 and 151. 151 is still going to be wide for 8s, but that little bit of sizing down will help. I think I would be leaning towards the 151 if it’s going to be your one and only deck and you want to be able to ride it fast, have decent powder float and do big carves on it. If you’re do a lot of park riding and freestyle stuff is the thing you do the most, then I would probably go 149 for this board.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, i purchased a Yes Basic in 2018 as my first board as per your recommendation and am looking to progress further
Height 181cm Weight 68kgs.
Intermediate rider looking for an all-mountain/freestyle board, not into park/jibbing.
My Yes Basic is a 152cm and i am feeling the instability at higher speeds.
Should i go with 154 for the yes greats or 151?
Hi Anson
Thanks for your message. I think the Greats would suit what you’re describing well.
Size-wise it really depends on boot size in this case. If you could let me know your boot size, that would really help determine. Even in the 151 the Greats will be more stable at speed than the Basic, so you’ll definitely get a step up there. But it might be that the 154 is the better size anyway – but it really depends on boot size.
Hope this helps
Size 9 US. Im afraid that going 154 will make me lose maneuvrability as i’ve read the greats is a fairly wide board.
Hi Anson
With 9s, I would be leaning 151. The Greats is wide for 9s – particularly in the 154. Even in the 151 it’s on the wider side for 9s and going to be wider than the 152 Greats. But sizing down to the 151 because of that width will really help with that maneuverability – and like I said before, the Greats in the 151 will be better at speed than the 152 Basic for sure – so you still get that stability at speed improvement, without sacrificing on maneuverability, at least not too much. For reference, the 152 Basic (250mm waist) is around 259mm at the inserts versus the 151 Greats (253mm waist), which will be around 267mm at the inserts.
So yeah, long story short, I would go 151 in your case, for the Greats.
Hi Nate thanks for the awesome review. I’m 6’0” tall and 160-165 lbs. Wearing Burton Swath US 9. I’m a intermediate level ride trying to get into some freestyles. Should I go for 151 or 153? Thanks!
Hi Peter
Thanks for your message.
I think it depends on how much you’ll use this board for freestyle stuff. If you’re going to have it as your predominantly freestyle/park board and you have another board for freestyle stuff, the I’d look at the 151. If it’s going to be your do-it-all board, then I would go 154 with your specs.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Thank you for all the awesome gear advice on your site! I am considering buying the Yes Greats, but I am a bit concerned whether it would work with my large feet.
I am looking for something that rides well all over the mountain, carves really well and is quick edge-to-edge. I ride switch a lot and enjoy buttering. Sometimes I do some basic jibbing and jumps in the park, but that is no priority. Powder is no priority either, there are too few powder days here.
Feet size: 46EU / 13US
Inner boot size: 30.5 cm
Outer boot size: 32.5 cm (low profile Salomon boots)
Length: 1.88 m / 6’2 feet
Weight: 79 kg / 175 lbs
If I can get away with my feet size, I would prefer the 156 over the 159 because I think the 156 might be more playful.
Really curious to hear what you think!
Hi Joost
Thanks for your message.
Assuming you ride it with +15/-15 angles (which is highly recommended on an asym board like this), then I think it’s possibly doable, given how low profile your boots are. Some numbers.
On the 156: At a 15 degree angle you’re looking at extending the width at inserts to around 27.9cm (27.3cm straight across the board). With 32.5cm boots, that leaves you with 4.6cm of total overhang. If you can get a little more of that overhang on the heel side (let’s say 2.4cm heel, 2.2cm toe), then I think you would probably get away with it. If you’re doing eurocarves in soft snow, then it might still be pushing it, but otherwise, I think you get away with it.
On the 159: Total overhang would likely decrease to around 4.3cm.
Both of these numbers are based on a 555mm stance width (22″). If you ride it with a wider stance than that, then you’ll reduce the overhang. If your stance is narrower, that overhang will increase.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thank you very much for the elaborate reply – it helped a great deal!
I decided to opt for the 159 after all 🙂
Many thanks!
Joost
You’re very welcome Joost. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Will do!
Thank you greatly! (pun intended)
Hi Nate,
I’m considering the 2021 YES GREATS board. But I’m not sure which size to choose. Should I go with 151, 154 or 156? I’m 186 cm, 75 Kg and wearing Ride The 92 boots size US 11.
Based on your skill levels I’m between Intermediate and advanced. I can tackle any terrain but not good at freestyle riding. So I want to progress more into freestyle riding. But also still be able to bomb the mountain, sometimes take the pow.
Based on weight 151 should be ok for me. But will it be enough width for my boots size? Also will it be enough in the powder?
156 probably is ok, but will it be maneuverable at low speed?
Or maybe 154 is the best for me?
Thanks in advance.
Regards 🙂
Hi Egidijus
Thanks for your message.
I think you could ride the 154 or 156, with some aspects being better on each. The 151 is too short for you, IMO – and it’s pushing it being too narrow for 11s too. But I think it’s too short anyway, so I would cross that one off anyway.
Between the 154 and the 156:
– The 154 will give you more maneuverability at slower speeds, be easier to press and generally better for freestyle riding in general, except maybe for really big air
– The 156 will give you more stability at speed and more float in powder
For what you’re describing, given that you’re looking to up your freestyle game, I would be leaning 154. But 156 wouldn’t be a wrong choice either.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate,
Thanks for your help.
I’m leaning towards 154 🙂 Maybe the only concern will it be ok for my boot size US 11? At the back my angle is -6, so I’m worried about overhang. Or it should be ok, given that it is a wider board. What do you think ? 🙂
Regards !!!
Hi Egidijus
I think you’ll likely be fine width-wise. The 154 is around 270mm at the inserts straight across the board. Personally I never run into any boot drag issues for anything around 260mm+ and even slightly narrower than that. That’s with 10s. With 11s, the equivalent would be 270mm+ at the inserts. That’s typically with a 15 degree angle at the back, but 6 degrees does give you a bit more leeway. A couple more millimeters. So I’d say you’ll be fine width-wise.
Also to note, that asym boards are typically recommended to be ridden with a mirror duck stance (e.g. +15/-15). Not sure the exact reasons why but that’s what they recommend. That said, I have ridden them with different angles and it hasn’t felt weird or anything.
Hey Nate, thanks for all the reviews!
I currently have a Burton process flying V 159 with 11″ Burton swaths (I’m 5’10” 195lbs). I’m not happy with the board but it could be because of my skill level (beginner to intermediate). My biggest gripe with it is that I feel it is really lacking in edge hold, especially on harder packed snow. When I try carving there seems to be a tiny sweet spot where it won’t get a good carve or it wants to immediately turn hard. I also find it difficult to track straight going into a jump unless I’m on some sort of edge. For buttering if I want a deep press it wants to slide out.
Based on my limited research, I’m thinking about the yes greats. I would love to demo it but know near the resorts I go to carries it. So before I just buy it I’d figured I’d ask someone with more experience if its right for my needs.
I’m looking for something to ride in harder packed snow that will give me confidence in holding an edge. I want to be able to euro carve and carve at higher speeds. I’m looking for something that’s not super catchy that allows me to butter and ride switch. I like to ride park (small and medium) and definitely want something to make lining up for jumps easier and with a flat base. Currently I’ve only hit boxes but eventually do want to hit rails as well. My powder experience is limited and not a priority. I’m basically looking for a board to ride the mountain, do side hits and just give me more confidence in going on the direction I point it.
Is this a good board for me or do you recommend something else? Would the 156 be better for me due to my boot size and weight?
Thanks again!!
Hi ivwshane
Thanks for your message.
Yeah the Process Flying V I have never found great in harder conditions. The Greats is really good in hard/icy conditions, IMO. And should have no problem pointing it straight.
It will certainly feel stiffer than the Process Flying V and it’s wider. But if you’re looking into getting into Eurocarving, it’s certainly better equipped for that than the Process Flying V, IMO. It’s not as easily buttery, but it’s still pretty buttery and if you’re looking for more resistance in a butter, then it will give that a little bit.
My biggest question would be the beginner to intermediate that you mentioned. I think you’d want to be solid intermediate for this board. But it sounds like from what you’re describing, that you’re past beginner. But you’ll be the best judge of that. I think if you’re a good intermediate rider, then this board will suit what you’re describing. Not bad for jibs, but also not like really well suited to jibs either.
Size-wise, I would go 156 for your specs and what you’re describing. Oh yeah and I’m assuming by 11″ Burton you mean US size 11. But if not, let me know.
Hope this helps
Thanks.
Yeah I’m using Burton 11 US and step on bindings.
To me I feel like I’m still a beginner but really I’m just comparing myself to what I want to be able to do that I’m currently not able to do. For instance, I can barely ride switch but could make it down an easy blue run. Riding normal I can get down easy black diamonds but I’m not bombing down any run (my fastest speed is about 50mph). I can pop and ollie on flat ground but not with confidence at high speed. I can do some carving but not euro carving. I can go off of small and small/medium jumps but I can only do straight airs. I’ve done a couple of 180’s but only when going slow.
To me that makes me a beginner intermediate rider but you could probably better tell me where I fit in.
I guess I just feel like my biggest issue is edge hold and not feeling confident/locked in what trying any sort of trick. It could be that I just suck and need to work on the basics more or maybe a different type of board would help. Any advice is welcome!
Hi ivwshane
50mph ain’t that slow! I would say you’re probably at an intermediate level. But if you wanted something that helped you to really progress your tricks, then I would look at something like:
>>My Top 10 Men’s Freestyle Snowboards
But I get you’re also trying to up your all-round game, so:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Are also appropriate, but some in that first list aren’t bad for carving either.
I think if you’re looking for something with better edge-hold and a little more stable, then moving away from the process Flying V isn’t a bad idea.
From that first list, I would be looking at:
– Endeavor Pioneer
– Niche Wraith
– YES Dicey
– Never Summer Proto Slinger
Some of the others on that list are either too loose for what you’re describing or not good enough edge-hold. I would look at those if you want to prioritize tricks/freestyle.
From the second list, I think anything there works, but the likes of the Proto Synthesis and YES Greats, the biggest question mark is if they’re slightly beyond your ability. I think you would be fine on them from what you’re describing, but if you’re not sure, then I would look at the others there. These would be best if you want to work on your all round game, getting more confident at speed and for bigger carves.
I just read your snowboarding skill level article (I really need to explore your site more), and based off of what you have written, I’m definitely at level 5 intermediate.
I decided to buy the yes greats so hopefully my skill level will be compatible with it.
Hey ivwshane
Sounds good. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow. Happy riding!
Alright I’m back with one days experience on the board!!
Where: alpine meadows northern ca
Weather: bluebird no wind
Snow conditions: hard packed with a couple of inches of dusting and softer slush towards the end of the day.
Bindings: Burton step on large
Boots: Burton swath 11US
Board: yes greats 156
What I liked about it: edge control in hard/icy conditions! Omg! I was able to charge down the mountain with confidence! On one black Diamond run I could hear boards and skis just scraping against hard packed snow and ice. When I dropped in on the run I had absolutely no problems maintaining an edge and getting down the run with no issues. On my Burton process Flying V I would have been scraping and siding down the run.
This board also gave me much better carve control and I see some lay down euro carves in my future:D Heel side carves were a little too easy and I will have to adjust my technique to take advantage of the asymmetric shape of the board.
When people say the board is stable, it is, flat basing was as easy as point and go. However because I had issues with the process my trust in the new board was limited, I suspect as I get more used to the board and trust it, my level of riding will increase.
The yes greats did feel a little playful however, unlike the process, it was easy to tame with a little applied edge and it got right back in line going where I wanted it to go. On the process, it could be a struggle to tame the playfulness and it always required me to do way more speed scrubs and setup turns.
Butters on the greats is very easy and I was able to get deeper presses than I could on the process, not because the process isn’t as flexible but because when I tried deeper presses the board wanted to slip out. That being said, on the greats, if I pressed too far it too would slip out but it was way easier to not only find that point but it was easier to recover.
I feel like ollies on both boards were comparable (but that may be because of my lack of trust in the greats at this moment in time) however the greats was super solid on the landing.
The greats definitely had less chatter when I was charging down the mountain and it only added to the overall feeling of stability.
I did try to do some 180’s on it and while this is a trick I’m currently learning, it is definitely easier on the greats. I don’t know if it’s because I’m riding a 156 vs a 159 or if having a more stable platform to take off of helped me to focus my energy on spinning but either way, it is easier although I still suck.
I rode switch with it a couple of times and I’ll just say I need more practice and no board is going magically make me better at it, it felt just as weird on the greats as it did on the process.
I did ride some untouched snow but I don’t know if it’s considered powder as it wasn’t super deep and it was a little crusty but the board handled it perfectly and I had zero issues with keeping the nose up as well as the speed.
In terms of speed, it could be because of the factory wax but it definitely felt faster than the process. There are several flat spots on the trails at alpine and I didn’t get stuck once.
Unfortunately I didn’t get to try any park features so I’ll have to save that for another time (I plan on going to North Star which has a better park anyway).
So what are the negatives?
The biggest negative is that the top sheet is super slippery so I found it hard to control when one footing it on/off the lift and I completely slipped out one time like a noob. Luckily this is an easy fix with a stomp pad. On my process the top sheet was textured and it didn’t require a stomp pad.
I’m also a little concerned with the build quality as there is a slight gap where the mid bite is. I don’t think it’s an issue right now but I’ll keep an eye on it.
Other than that I love the board and now I feel like I know what I need to work on to improve.
Thanks again for your help!!
Hi ivwshane
Thanks for the feedback and details. Much appreciated!
End of season follow up:
I really love this board! It has given me the confidence to try new tricks so far the only thing that’s held me back is my own mental blocks.
I can bomb down mountains with this thing no problem, on edge or flat base (which I have now learned to trust this board). In fact I hit a new top speed of 64mph (according to the squawalpine app).
The edge hold on this is ridiculous when going down icy trails, nothing but confidence when I do turns, no slipping.
I’m still working on my butter technique but I don’t slip out as easily as I was on the process Flying V.
This thing is stable, whether it’s one footing off the lift, flat basing down the mountain or on cat trails, and most definitely on landing. I now try to hit anything I can find in terms of popping/ollying and the landing is the least of my worries with the setup line being right behind it in terms of having any concerns, point it and it goes there.
I do feel like I could use some more pop out of this though but it’s a skill I’ll be working on more next season, so hopefully I’ll be able to get more out of it.
My concerns about the durability still hold as this board shows more wear than I expected. The top sheet has already chipped due to my boots (not rocks or other ski equipment). The sintered base, while fast, is very wax thirsty. I have to wax it basically every other trip but it hasn’t gotten me stuck yet and I love passing people on the cat trails.
Thanks for all your help and your reviews, I try and send as many people here as I can.
Hi ivwshane
Thanks for the update. Glad it’s treating you well – and hopefully those durability issues don’t get worse. I’ve had mine for a couple of season’s now (all be it that I don’t ride it that many days as I’m always testing new gear) and it’s held up fine for me so far. Hope you get many more awesome days out of it!
Hi Nate,
Thanks for this review it is exactly what i needed to feel confident in my decision to pull the trigger on this one. Hoping you could help me with sizing:
Im 5’10, 65kg, Size 9 boot
I’m a mid level intermediate rider looking for a quiver of one to push my carving and freestyle riding to that next level. I spend most of my time on groomers searching out every side hit i can find, in glades, and every once in a while in the park mostly hitting jumps. 151 seems to be the most logical size for me, but i’m really interested in a stable ride, esp at speed – probably the only reason im considering a 154.
Do you think stretching to a 154 would be worth the compromise? or do you think the 151 will still offer enough stability for me? Any help is much appreciated.
also considered the protosynthesis 152, yes standard 153 and jones MT 154..but i’m pretty set on the greats.
Hi CJ
Thanks for your message.
I think you’ll find the 154 too big with your specs, and the 151 should feel stable enough at speed for you, IMO. I think the small amount of stability you sacrifice going smaller would definitely be less impactful than the loss of maneuverability, pressability, ease of pop etc, that you would lose from going up to 154. 154 is, IMO on the long end for you, but not super long or anything, but when you add in the width of it and take into account the size 9 boot, I think it’s overall too big.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for all of the work you put into making these reviews! You’re the best!
I’m stuck making a decision between the Greats or the Standard. I’m more of the expert side in skill level. I do a lot of hiking bowls, backcountry, and trees. However, I do enjoy barreling down groomers at very high speeds, carving and jumps. I’m around 6ft/205 lbs and have a 11.5-12 boot size. I’m trying to figure out which board would be more inline with my profile. Thanks for your help!
Hi Leon
Thanks for your message.
For what you’re describing, I would certainly be leaning more to Standard, just because it’s more in line with the style that you’re describing. Though I would probably actually be leaning more to the Pick Your Line for what you’re describing, from YES, unless you’re also riding park as well.
Size-wise, for the Greats, I think 159 would work best and 162 for the Standard. But if you have any personal preferences on sizing that comes into it as well. The 159 Standard wouldn’t be undoable either, particularly if you wanted more maneuverability in the trees. For the PYL if you wanted to consider that as well, I’d say probably 164W. It’s something you can ride a little longer. 160W would be doable if you had a preference for shorter, but it’s almost borderline too narrow, even though it’s a wide board.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the tip! I have decided to go with the PYL 164W. Do you foresee any issues maneuvering glades with that length? Also, what are your suggestions in regards to the best boot/bindings combination for the PYL that would be optimal for my profile? Thanks again!
Hi Leon
With your specs, I think it will work fine in the trees, though I wouldn’t say it would be optimal. If you do a lot of glades and wanted to optimize more for in there, with some sacrifice to bombing, powder, more big mountain stuff, then the 160W would give you a board that’s more leaning to tree performance (and still be fine for those other things but just not as good as the 164W). With 11.5s, I think you would get away with the width of the 160W, particularly if you have low profile boots, but with 12s, it might be pushing it. With low profile 12s, maybe, but it’s borderline.
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the reviews, been a huge help in finding my next board.
I’ve decided to go for the greats, and am ready to buy, the only thing i can’t seem to decide is sizing, which is proving more complicated than I thought.
I currently weigh in at 152 lbs, height is 6″1 and boot size is 11.5 (US).
I originally though the 156 because of my boot size but weight wise it looks like the 154 might be more suitable. What do you reckon?
Thanks and keep up the good work!
Rob
Hi Rob
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I think I would be leaning towards the 154 for you, for this board. You could certainly ride a little longer in other boards but for the type of board, assuming you’re looking to ride an all-mountain-freestyle style, I think 154 makes the most sense. Should still be wide enough for 11.5s in the 154. Only just, but assuming you will be riding +15/-15 binding angles or similar (which is recommended on an asym board anyway) I think you should be OK. The Greats has “mid-bite” which is great for edge hold in hard conditions but also makes the width at the inserts wider than you would think from just looking at the waist width. If you’ve got really bulky boots, then it might be pushing it, but otherwise, I think you should be fine width-wise on the 154.
I don’t think 156 would be wrong for you, but I would be leaning 154.
Hope this helps
Hey sir,
First of all, huge thanks to these awesome lists you’re making. Makes it so much easier for me to pick a board which fits my needs.
I’m an intermediate+ boarder, looking to get more into ground tricks, jumps and features. For the past 6 years or so, I’ve been boarding on a 159 cm Lib Tech Attack Banana (2014), which I really like for speed, powder days and improving my carving. But due to the board size, compared to my weight and size, it’s pretty stiff and I can’t really butter it, nor do I have much manoeverability et cetera.
This board really got my attention, as it’s got all I’m looking for. I want a more flexible board, allowing me to butter, make tighter corners, really work on my switch and generally speaking, a board that will give me all the tools I need to start improving on all the freestyle aspects of snowboarding.
My questions are:
– As your article states, this is probably the board I’m looking for. Would you agree?
– Does this board work well with Burton Cartel EST (2014) bindings?
– Is it true that I should pick a size 151, weighing around 70-72 kg and being 177 cm tall?
Again, huge thanks for all your awesome efforts!
Greetings from the Netherlands,
Ruben
Hi Ruben
Thanks for your message.
I would say the Greats could definitely work for you. If you’re looking for something freestyle optimal, then you could check out >>My Top 10 Men’s Freestyle Snowboards – the Greats is something that’s more of a do-it-all board, but with a freestyle flavor, if that makes sense. So it’s geared towards being able to carve and bomb a bit, as well as freestyle stuff. If you wanted to maximize your freestyle progression specifically, then something from that Freestyle list is likely more suitable. But if you still want that all-mountain board, but more on the freestyle end of the spectrum, then this is a good choice.
Won’t work with EST bindings unfortunately. EST bindings only work on a board with the Channel mounting system. But are you sure your bindings are EST? EST bindings wouldn’t work on the Attack Banana either. If you’ve been mounting them on your Attack Banana, then they must be Cartel Re:Flex, in which case they will work well with the Greats, IMO.
Size-wise, it would be between the 151 and 154, IMO. But would depend on your boot size. I would say most likely 154, but if you can let me know your boot size, that would be really helpful.
Also, are planning on keeping the 159 Attack Banana and having this as your second board, predominantly for riding freestyle? Or are you looking to get a new board to use for everything and replace the Attack Banana?
Hey Nate,
Thank you for the informative and quick response.
I stated that wrong indeed, I’ve got the Cartel Re:Flex bindings. My apologies, but glad you figured that out already ;).
I’m using Burton Imperial boots, size 43,5 (EUR) / 10,5 (US).
I am looking for a board that perfectly suits the idea of using the mountain as park, but I want it to be a nice (enough) board for carving too, because I just really like doing/practicing that. I am someone who won’t be found in a park, nor bombing off a mountain (bombing maybe in future). No big jumps either. Also, this new board will most likely be my primary board. I’ll keep the Attack Banana as a secondary board, predominantly for powder / snowy days.
I did check out the freestyle list. Seems like some of those boards, especially the YES jackpot, suits my wishes as well. As you state in your article, the YES jackpot is a good all-mountain freestyle board as well. The Proto Slinger also has my attention, as you stated that it’s particularly well suited for using the mountain as a park. But seems like I’ll give in a bit on carving with that one compared to the YES greats / jackpot, which I don’t prefer.
Hope this makes it all more clear!
Thank you and looking forward to your response,
Ruben
Hi Ruben
Thanks for the extra info.
I would be leaning 154 for the Greats for 10.5s with your specs. But the 151 is certainly doable if you wanted something a little more playful feeling and a little more agile. For the Jackpot, which I think would work really well for what you’re describing too, the 154 is also what I would be looking at for you.
Proto Slinger is a good carver for how soft it is. Just when you get it going too fast it gets a bit more wobbly than the likes of the Jackpot and Greats. The Greats is the best carver of the 3, IMO. But the Proto Slinger is certainly the most buttery and playful. It’s got a good bow of camber in it, so you can get really good pop and spring out of it, but it’s quite soft flexing. I own both the Greats and the Proto Slinger – 2 of my favorite boards. The Proto Slinger is what I take out if I’m going to mostly ride the park or playfully ride the mountain like a park – or if I’m out with my wife and just want to have a cruisy playful day. The Greats for everything else (unless it’s a pow day) – riding the mountain freestyle, but also bombing and carving it up in between.
I think the Jackpot is in a lot of ways in between the 2. It does have more camber than the Greats, but is a little softer. But still stiffer than the Proto Slinger.
Hey Nate,
Seems that I’m in for a close call – both the Jackpot and the Greats seem to fit my desires really well. I’m skipping out on the Proto Slinger, just because that extra bit of carving / speed is important to me.
If I have to choose right now, I’d pick up the Greats 154, as I feel that I will gain a bit more on carving than I will lose on playfulness, compared to the Jackpot. I don’t think I could go wrong here, either.
Unfortunately, the next time I’ll be boarding is december next year, due to covid-19.. I’ll probably pick up the Greats soon, but I might just wait for the 2022 boards, as time is with me.. Either way, I’ll let you know once I’ve made a choice and shred a few rounds :).
I’ve learned a lot about boards the past days, thanks for that. You’ve been of great help!
Greetings,
Ruben
You’re very welcome Ruben. Thanks for visiting the site and if you do think of it at the time, definitely be interested to hear what you go with and how you get on.
Hi Nate,
I’ve been looking at getting a new snowboard recently and am torn between a newer version of my current board and the Yes Greats. I currently ride a 154 Happy Place and have loved it, however every now and then I like to charge around the mountain at speed and to throw in the odd eurocarve. I love how buttery and fun the Happy Place can be on side hits and jibs, but it suffers just a little at high speeds and I struggle to lay out carves on it. Would a Yes Greats be a good replacement for the Happy place or would I be sacrificing certain elements that are better on the Happy place than they are on the Yes Greats, if so, what would they be?
Thanks for any help dude and thanks for the rad reviews!!
Hi Andy
Thanks for your message – and you’ve explained the pros and cons of the Happy Place very well!
The Greats isn’t as buttery and not as good on jibs as the Happy Place. But it’s still certainly a board you can hit jibs with and still relatively buttery – but it is a step down in both facts versus the Happy Place. It’s not as playful overall – but it’s not ultra aggressive either.
For carving and speed, the Greats is a good step up from the Happy Place, IMO, and for jumps, they’re probably equally as good for smaller jumps, but the Greats better if you’re looking to go big.
So you will be sacrificing a little in terms of butters, jibs and playfulness, but you certainly make up for it in terms of speed/carving. And I’d say you gain more in speed/carving than what you loose in jibs/butters, but you certainly loose some in that aspect. So I think it depends on which you value getting more performance on.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
I’m shopping for a new board and I’m eyeing the Capita Outerspace living (157W) as a replacement for my oh way-too-narrow for my size 12 boots 2013 Capita Indoor Survival FK. After reading your write-ups (thanks for doing a great job!) I added the Yes Greats to the mix.
I like riding all mountain, carving, bombing down the slopes, trees and all that. Occasional powder days happen when I get out West (I live on the Ice Coast). Parks are usually just little rails and small jabs. If I could butter all the way down from the top – I would, but I guess the narrow indoor survival is not the best choice.
I’m 5’11” at around 190lbs, size 2 and as mentioned I’ve been riding the indoor survival 156 since ‘13. I love it, but as I realized that my toes dig in way more often than I’d like (base width is only 25cm) – I’m looking at a replacement.
Any opinion? Whether it’s on the board or size. My previous board was a super stiff old 159 burton and I hated it.
Since the width on the Greats is a lot different, would the 156 still work or is the 159 better.
If you have other suggestions – please don’t be shy.
I do love the Capita boards.
Once again, thank you for the reviews.
Lex
Sorry, had someone else’s comment highlighted and it copied it below mine.
Hey Lex.
All good, I’ve deleted that off the end now.
I definitely agree that you need something wider. In terms of width, I think the Greats 156 would be wide enough for you. The 156 Greats measures around 273mm at the inserts and the 157W Outerspace Living is likely around 273mm at the inserts too (the Greats a bigger difference between waist and inserts). So either one should give you a good bit more leeway than the 156 Indoor Survival. The 2021 156 Indoor Survival is around 260mm at the inserts, and I think the 13 model was a little narrower.
Length-wise, you certainly could go a little longer – 159W for Outerspace, 159 for Greats, but you don’t necessarily have to. If you’re comfortable with that 156 length, as it sounds like you are, then no reason you shouldn’t stick with that. The longer length would give you a little extra float in powder and some more stability at speed – but at the cost of a bit of agility and less suitable for freestyle. But my instinct says stick with 156/157 – with powder you’ll get more out of the 156 Greats or 157W Outerspace vs the 156 Indoor Survival anyway, because of the extra width and more rocker involved in the profile. And based on how you much preferred a mid-flex 156 to a stiffer 159, I think it’s probably the best way to go.
Between the Greats and Outerspace Living, there really isn’t a bad choice, IMO. I slightly prefer the Greats overall, but the OL is a little better in powder, and since you ride powder occasionally it’s got that going for it. Since you like Capita it’s got that going for it too. The Capita Asymulator would also be an option if you wanted to go Capita. Lose a little in terms of powder but otherwise a great option. And anything from the following:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
You’ll see the Greats and Asymulator there – and the Outerspace living was only 1 off (was 6th) making the list too.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate!
Thank you for awesome reviews!
I’m kinda rad dad, so riding mostly groomers with my kids, looking for sidehits, doing buttering stuff or laying down carves if there aren’t any. Totally not a bomber, but like to hit some trees on occasion. I’ve got 151 greats from 2019 and after a season my old ’14 ride capos seem to match it not really well.
So here is the question: are union stratas a perfect match or contact pros fit my needs just fine? There’s a sweet deal on the latter so I’m about to pull the trigger.
Thank you in advance!
My weight is about 150 lbs if that matters.
Hi Tommy
Thanks for your message.
And apologies for the slow response – have been on vacation so a little behind in replying.
Weight definitely comes into it a little for bindings. A heavier rider will exert more force on bindings so will find bindings not as stiff as a lighter rider would. But that said, I think matching flex to the board is the main thing – not necessarily exactly but as a rule of thumb getting close to a flex match makes sense.
So between the Strata and the Contact Pros, I would put the Strata on the Greats. They are a great flex match and should go really well together. The Capos are really quite stiff and, IMO, lack a bit in board feel. So, IMO, not a great flex match to the Greats and at 150lbs you probably feel them even stiffer than I would. Also, going that stiff in bindings isn’t a good match to the style of riding that you’re describing. Stiffer bindings tend to mean less maneuverability at slow speeds. Stiffer bindings are better for bombing and laying aggressive carves.
The Contact Pros would certainly work and for your specs and style of riding I would put them on the Greats before the Capos, so if you did end up buying them, or still considering buying them, I think they will work better for you than the Capos, but I think the Strata would be the best match.
Hope this helps
Thanks, Nate! Really appreciate your reply.
You’re very welcome Tommy
What would you say the differences were between the Greats and GNU Rider’s Choice? Saw they were ranked 1 & 2 for freestyle all mountain. I know they are both asym and seem to similar other features.
I am 5’8″ about 160 lbs with size 10 boots deciding between the two. Most of my riding realistically is groomers and some trees with side hits but like the occasional park lap. I’ve enjoyed looser boards knowing I don’t have the urge to bomb for speed. Curious if that description speaks to either boards strengths.
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message.
Looking at your last sentence, I would be leaning towards the Rider’s Choice. The Greats isn’t super locked or super aggressive or anything, but the Rider’s Choice is certainly a slightly looser feeling ride. On a scale from loose to locked-in, with “stable” being in the middle, the Greats is what I would call “Stable” and the Rider’s Choice “semi-loose” (aka in between loose and stable).
And that’s one of the main differences between the two, IMO.
From a technical standpoint, they have a few differences:
1. Rider’s Choice has a hybrid rocker profile (the rocker is between the feet) vs the hybrid camber on the Greats (the rocker is outside the inserts). This is predominantly, if not solely, what gives the Rider’s Choice that slightly looser feel.
2. The Greats is a wider overall platform. A little wider at the waist, but considerably wider at the inserts and tip/tail.
3. Sidecuts are quite different too
There are other technical differences, but those are some of the main ones.
Size-wise, because you have 10s and because of the width of the Greats, it’s something I would ride slightly shorter than the Rider’s Choice. For me I like the RC in 157.5 and the Greats in 156. For you, I would go 154.5 for RC and either 154 or even 151 for Greats. Especially given that you don’t really bomb and like to hit trees, I think the 151 would be worth considering in the Greats. But overall from what you’re describing, I would go with the RC and I think the 154.5 would be a great size for you, in that board, given your specs and how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps with your decision
Excellent feedback. Appreciate the response.
You’re very welcome Joe. Thanks for visiting!
Hi Nate,
I’m thinking about getting Yes Greats, on the other hand I saw you tested Never Summer Proto Slinger.
I like riding all mountain, I like carving, smaller jumps and bombing, sometimes even a bit powder. I don’t spend too much time in the park, but I would like to learn more ground tricks (buttering and etc). I also like riding switch.
At the moment I’m thinking that Yes Greats would be better for occasional bombing and pow, but Proto Slinger seems also promising, but not sure how well it is suited for all mountain riding.
I am 5’9″ 160lbs, current boot size is US 11.5 (Burton Ruler 2010), but mondopoint is 280mm (which is actually US10), I have to buy new boots anyway and I’m hoping to size down boots, thinking about getting Yes Greats 154.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Pets
Hi Pets
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning towards Greats, for what you’re describing, mainly because it’s a little better than the Proto Slinger in terms of carving and bombing. The Proto Slinger isn’t far off, but it’s a softer board and not as stable at speed. It’s great for carving for it’s flex and it’s not bad at speed for it’s flex, but still just a bit down from the Greats. The Greats is a little better for powder too – though it’s not amazing for powder either.
The Proto Slinger is easier to butter, but the Greats is pretty good there still. And I’d maybe go Proto Slinger for small jumps, but the Greats is still really good for small jumps – and is a little better for larger jumps vs the Proto Slinger. The Proto Slinger is a sick board for sure – but I would describe it more as a predominantly park/freestyle board, that does well on the rest of the mountain. Whereas the Greats is more of an all rounder and more all-mountain suitable, IMO.
The Proto Synthesis would be the closer equivalent to the Greats from Never Summer, IMO. The Proto Synthesis will take over from the Proto Type Two for the 2021 models. It’s a more similar flex to the Greats. Still a different board, but more in the same category, whereas the Proto Slinger is more park/freestyle oriented. The Proto Synthesis is no longer an asym, like the Proto Type Two was though, FYI.
Size-wise for the Greats, I agree that the 154 would be the best size for your specs. Regardless of the boots you get in. It should still be wide enough for 11.5s, but not too wide for 10s or 10.5s, if you get into smaller boots. For your foot size, and your height/weight, the 154 would be your best bet, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
thanks for the response.
I have another question? If you compare it to NS PT2, which one is easier for buttering and which one has better pop? IMO PT2 has better graphics and better shape in general, although it is not that important.
Some say that PT2 lacks pop or it is not easily accessible, also regarding buttering you have put more effort to overcome the camber zone.
What are your thoughts regarding PT2 and pop and buttering?
Hi Pets
PT2 (and Proto Synthesis) are as good for buttering vs the Greats, IMO. Still quite buttery. But not quite as buttery as the Proto Slinger/Funslinger. In my head I always think that having that camber section where it is on a hybrid rocker board, would be detrimental to buttering, but in reality it’s often not the case. Certainly with the PT2 it’s still really good for buttering.
In terms of pop, the PT2 isn’t as poppy as the Proto Slinger, but it’s not un poppy. I’d say it’s almost as poppy, but it does take more effort to access that pop, it’s not as easy to extract. Vs the Greats, I would say the Greats is somewhere in between, in terms of pop – but closer to the PT2 than the Proto Slinger, if that makes sense. It’s very close in terms of pop to the PT2.
Hi Nate,
How do you score the Mid-bite edge hold with other edge hold technoligies?
If I say Full Magne (LibTech TRS, GNU RC) is 5/5, what about Under-bite (PYL, Basic) and Mid-bite (Greats, Standard), also the Never Summer Vario (Funslinger, PT2)? Cause you have tested most of the boards, I think your guide will be very useful when we choose boards for good edge hold capability.
You are the best!
Tim
Hi Tim
Great question. I would say mid-bite and under-bite provide about the same as each other in terms of edge hold and I feel they are both pretty close to magnetraction but maybe not quite to that level. But it also depends on the level of magnetraction. Some magnetraction is more mellow than others. Some magnetration isn’t as good in icy conditions as mid-bite/underbite, IMO. But in terms of the TRS & RC, I’d say they’re just that little bit better.
I would say 4.5/5 for mid-bite/under-bite and 4/5 for Never Summer, vs 5/5 for magnetraction (depending on how mellow or aggressive that magnetraction is).
Hi Nate,
I have another technical question hope to listen your opinion, it is still about the edge hold, but from different assumptions.
1. the mid-bite. We all know it was introduced firstly to Jackpot in Yes and later Greats and Standard. However, when you set back 4.5″ on the Standard, the mid-bite will become mid-front-bite, it will be more closer to your front boot because you set your bindings back. I read reviews it will affect the edge hold and lose some edge hold capability on the Standard. I am not sure if you felt the issue when testing?
2. the underbite, the same issue will happen on the Basic if setback, but it will work fully functional in the Y and Optimistic because those two boards are already directional when setback is zero (i.e., the bite is still exactly under the foot).
3. Same issue will apply to NS Vario when setback. Is that right?
4. Magne, also has similar issue if the board is designed as twin like riders choice, TRS, Terrain Wrecker, but work fully functional in Rossi XV and LibTech EJK, Orca if the boards are designed in directional (the Magne shifted with the directional design). But I think the shift on Magne will has less effect than Yes midbite, because the way Magne works is to create more contact points, while mid-bite more replies on the body weight. So when your body weight is shifted, the mid-bite will lose the contact point.
Hi Tim
Great questions and very well thought out.
I typically test boards at their designed setback and as close to reference stance as possible, so I can’t say from experience how these things would be affected, but I would say you’re right that it would have some effect. Just not sure to what extent. I could only theorize, like you.
I’ve only ridden the Standard center stance, and haven’t tried it in the slam back stance, unfortunately. And same goes for Basic, TRS etc. And yeah, those already with a setback stance in mind, the edge tech would be optimized for that stance.
In terms of Magnetraction having less of an effect when riding setback on a board that’s designed with a centered stance, I couldn’t say for sure, like I said, but I think your theory could make sense. Since there are more “bumps” on the sidecut, the edge hold is relying less on having your weight over a certain part of the edge.
But like I say, I can’t say from personal experience what effect it would have or to what extent those effects would be.
Hi Nate,
I’m 174cm, weighing about 83kg and have US9.5 boot. Im looking for an all mountain freestyle board. Currently I am considering the YES Greats for an all mountain deck. I live in Australia so our snow down here is usually hard to icy… I am a little unsure about the sizing should I got a 154cm or 156? for an all mountain freestyle deck I usually ride a 155cm -158cm board. Also Im an intermediate who who like to progress and start using the mountain natural features as my terrain park!!
Cheers
Hi Tung
For the Greats I would go 154. The main reason for this is that it’s quite a wide board and sizing down makes sense for this board, IMO. If you typically ride 155-158 for all-mountain freestyle, I would be looking at the 154 for the Greats.
IMO the Greats is a great (excuse the pun) option for exactly what you’re describing – great in icy conditions and great for using the whole mountain as a park.
Hope this helps
hey Nate!
I’m relatively new to boarding and only been my second time this past February and I want to try to make this a regular. I’ve just fallen in love with it and been exploring getting a board of my own. I’ve been reading through your reviews and lists – and they’ve all been extremely helpful! – and I’ve landed on this board.
While being new, I aspire to be able to learn to be able to do a bit of everything. I was able to confidently S-turn, and I hope to learn to carve properly. Powder is not so much of a concern at this stage, and would actually like to learn how to ride switch, and do some buttering and jumps.
Again, what I am struggling with is the size. I’m just about 5’9″, 170lbs, Size 9 and I actually picked up a 154cm. Though, I do wonder if the 151 would have worked for me. So, I decided to drop a comment and see if you’d be able to help sort me out a bit. Really appreciate your time reading this!
Thanks.
Hi AL
Thanks for your message.
Size-wise for you for this board, I think 154 is about right. That said, as a beginner, and given the width of the board for size 9s, the 151 would be an easier learning curve. It’s not something that I would typically recommend for a beginner, so just know that it’s probably going to be a relatively steep learning curve either way. At a more advanced level, I think the 154 works for your specs, but if you’re sold on this board, then the 151 might just help to make it an easier learning experience.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate, thanks for the response! That’s really helpful and I’ll keep that in mind. I might try to switch for the 151 if I can find it and start from there.
Keep up the great work! Love the site.
You’re very welcome Al. Happy Riding!
Hey Nate,
I’ve been pouring through your reviews – think they are great by the way! Extremely helpful for me who can’t cycle through demoing various boards.
The Greats is looking pretty perfect for me, but like a lot if the comments below I’m torn on size, between 154 and 156. I took a look at a lot of the reviews and for one reason or another my stats slightly differ from all the ones I read. I am hoping you can help me out?
Height: 6ft
Weight, no gear: 168lbs (can fluctuate between 165 and 170)
Boot size: US 9.5
Riding style: All mountain freestyle. I like to do everything, tree runs, carving, jumping, and bombing. I don’t spend too much time in the park, but like to know the boards ready when I am. Love the occasional pow and want to learn butters better.
Hi Gordon
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats would work really well for what you’re describing. Only thing to consider would be for powder. It’s average in powder – it’s not terrible but it’s not great either. If you’re not going in particularly deep powder, then it’s not that much of an issue, but if you were going to be regularly going in deeper powder, then that would be something to consider.
Size-wise, I would say to go 154 for this board. Usually I would recommend something longer than that, but with the Greats being a wider board, and with it having quite a bit of effective edge vs overall length, then sizing down makes sense. 156 would be sizing down a little as it is, but I think the 154 is the slightly better option. I ride the 156 and find that it’s just right for me at 6’0″, 185lbs, US10 boots. You could ride the 156 too, but I would be leaning towards 154. But some things to consider – the 156 will be better, IMO, for stability at speed and for float in powder. The 154 will be better, IMO, for buttering, trees and jumping (though if you’re doing really large jumps, then the 156 will have some advantages there).
If you were to go 154, the only thing I would suggest, is probably going wider with your stance vs the reference stance. The reference stance is quite narrow on the Greats already and at 6 foot on a 154, the reference stance would probably be a little narrow anyway. Of course it depends on your preference for stance width, but that’s something I would consider. Also the reference stance stats on YES’s website and catalog always seem to be off so be careful with that too. The reference on my 156 Greats is 540mm (or 538mm to be exact) but I prefer riding it at 578mm (moving the back and front binding one spot wider each). I don’t mind it on that 540mm stance, but I prefer to go a little wider, which you might too at your height. Just something else to consider.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
In the review you say the ref stance is 54 cm but in the yes web site says is 58,42 cm for the 156cm board, Is this right? I have the 151cm and it says on the web the ref stance is 53,3cm. I will check tomorrow.
Thanks for the information
Hi Nas
Thanks for your message.
YES’s reference stances are always a little off for some reason. Not sure why. Where the reference stance is marked on my 2019 YES Greats, it measures 54cm (or more precisely 53.8cm). I like to ride it a little wider and go with a 58cm (57.8cm) stance). Most YES boards that I’ve measured seem to differ to their specs. Not sure if this changed for the 2020 model though. But the specs for the 2019 model showed 55.88cm despite that not being the case (at least not on the demo model I demoed – or on the production model that I bought). Not sure why they often differ. Will be interested to see what your one is. If it matches the website/catalog.
Hi Nate
I already measure my ref stance in my the greats 2019 and you are right. I got 51,4 cm and not the 53.3 cm advertised on the web.
Than you very much for your reviews
Bye
Hi NAS
Thanks for that. Good to know. Yeah, not sure why their stance width specs never measure up!
Hi,
Just bought the Yes Greats 156, as my one board quiver.
And I am geeking out over sizing… Is the 156 right for me, or should I swap it for a 154?
My stats:
Height: 6ft. – 183cm
Weight, no gear: 170lbs (can fluctuate between 165 and 175)
Boot size: Adidas Superstar US11 – Euro 44 2/3
Riding style: All mountain freestyle. I like to do everything, easy cruizing, carving, jumping, bombing, switch a lot. But not much a park rat. Love the occasional pow.
Thank you!
Hi Denz
Thanks for your message.
I think you made the right call with the 156. For your specs that’s what I would go with. If you had US10 or less boots (or if you were predominantly using it for freestyle), then it would be a tighter call, and potentially lean more towards 154. But with 11s, I think the 156 is the better match for your specs/how you describe your riding.
Hope this helps
Thank you for your answer!
In normal shoes I am somewhere floating between 9.5 and 10.5. But my snowboard boots always seem to be bigger.
The guys in the shop where also debating between the 154 and the 156.
Never rode a Yes board, so I might not even know if a 154 would have been the better call.
Have you measured your foot before? If so, what’s your foot length?
Hi Nate,
Thank you for your help.
My foot length is 27,5cm.
When I fit my boots and bindings over my board I am exactly where it needs to be: 1.3cm overhang on both sides.
When I fit my feet barefooted I exactly fit on the top sheet of the board.
Hi Denz
Sounds about right. Fitting the top sheet of the board with your feet means you’re a little inside the edges (I always measure compared edge-to-edge on the base of the board) but if they’re exact on the top sheet, then it’s not too far inside the edges, so all good I would say. I ride the 156 with 27cm feet and it’s fine for me (I have a bit more weight (185lbs), otherwise I might consider the 154). I think you’re good on the 156.
Hey Nate,
I’m looking to buy a new board, I’ve been riding an endeavour guerilla 153cm for the last few years. Really like it for freestyle riding, flat land tricks, natural features, trees but always found it a bit softer when it comes to laying down carves and speed. My typical day is on the mountain (east coast), jumps, natural hits, spins, carving. Maybe a couple of laps in the park, jumps only.
Looking to get something that’s more capable of carving and riding switch hard, but still offering the playfulness of a freestyle board. Asymmetry sounds like it will help my heel side as well.
I’ve narrowed it down to the N.S proto 2 and the Yes Greats.
Height – 5’-9”
Weight – 160lbs
Boot – 9 (burton fiend)
Bindings – Rome 390 boss (may get something lighter and stiffer, any rec.?)
Sounds like the 154cm in both would work? Which do you think might suit me better and the size? Thanks!
Hi Paul
Thanks for your message.
Certainly in terms of carving, freestyle oriented boards the Greats and PT2 are 2 of the best, IMO.
Length-wise, I think 154 is a good length for you for these boards, so I agree there. For the width, the Greats is a wider board, so it’s getting pretty wide for 9s. There would be a case to size down to 151 in that case, but then length-wise it’s getting on the shorter side. For that reason, I would be leaning towards the PT2. But if you’re OK with it being a bit wider – or if you’re OK with the idea of going down to a 151, the Greats certainly fits what you’re describing very well too.
In terms of binding recs – I would look at the following:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All Freestyle Bindings
Going with something around 5/10, 6/10 flex is a good idea, IMO, to match those boards.
Hope this helps
Thanks, I appreciate the feedback.
Have you had experience with the capita asymulator? Looks like a comparable board in the category.
Hi Paul
Yeah the Asymulator is certainly part of that category, IMO. And a good one at that. I actually did a direct comparison review between the Greats and Asymulator (which I don’t usually do, but thought I’d do something different). You can check it out at the link below:
>>Greats vs Asymulator Review
And below you can also see that it made my top 5 all-mountain-freestyle list:
>>My Top All-Mountain-Freestyle Snowboards
Hi Nate,
Happy New Year and thank you for all that you do for the community. I’m upgrading all my gear this season and will get this board but not sure what size board I should go with due to the boots I have.
I’m 6’0 @ 205lbs and wear a size 11 Adidas Acerra 3ST ADV boots. The boots have a reduced footprint so smaller by 1/2-1″ I believe. If the boots were a true 11 I would go with the 159, but will the reduced footprint will this board require me to go down to a 156 due to the board being wider?
Also, I’m deciding between Union Strata’s vs Falcor’s. I’m assuming the Strata’s are a better match in flex with this board?
Thank you!
Hi Jeremy
Thanks for your message – and apologies for the slow response (I was already behind after Christmas, then had some family issues to deal with – getting back on track now (hopefully!).
The great thing about reduced footprint boots, is that they allow you to go narrower if you want to – but you certainly don’t have to. It’s the size of your feet rather than boots that ultimately applies pressure to the edges of the snowboard. The only restriction on the boots size is if the boot is too long and causes boot drag, but it can’t be too low profile. So since, you have size 11 feet, then that’s the size to go off for the width of the board.
So, I would say the 159 is the best size for you. You could fit on the 156 in your boots for sure, but I think the length of the 159 is a better bet for you height/weight.
Yeah, I would say Strata are a better flex match with the board, but both work. I would go stiffer than the board before I went softer personally – so whilst the Strata is probably the best match, the Falcor are certainly doable if you want a more powerful binding on it. Given that you have the stiffer Acerra boots, it might go well. I often ride my Greats with Falcors and I like the match-up.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Great review. I’m choosing between the greats 151 and 154. I’m 5’8 190lbs and have us 8.5 boots. Looking for a size to ride all mountain and also improving my freestyle riding. What’s your suggestion please? Thank you
Hi Jimmy
Thanks for your message.
I think the 154 would be your best bet. It’s on the wider side for your boots, but even at 154 it’s still sizing down from what I would consider your “standard length” which compensates for that wider platform – and I think going to 154 is sizing down enough to make it easier for improving freestyle too. The 151 would make it even more freestyle oriented, but I think it’s getting too short for your specs and would sacrifice too much in terms of all-mountain performance.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate, I know you’ve answered a lot of questions on this deck, but I’d like your opinion.
Im 5’8,185, 9.5 boot. Live on the east coast, hard snow, can be ice.
I’ve been on a 2019 Gnu Headspace 52, for the past 2 seasons. I ride a lot more resort these days, but still prefer freestyle decks. I like to pop in the woods, hit every side hit in sight, butter, and take maybe one or two park laps. The Headspace has actually blown me away how stable, and how well it carves. I really enjoy the Gnu, but it’s really catchy while buttering. Do you think the Greats would be an improvement? I was a little concerned about the stiffer flex in the Greats. I was also looking at the 151 sizing for the Greats. I also have Union Stratas and Contact Pros, which do you think would suit the Greats better? I like my contacts more on the Gnu. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Hi Mic
Thanks for your message – and apologies for the slow response. A bit behind and trying to catch up after vacation.
I haven’t ridden the Headspace, but based on specs and my experience with other similar GNU boards, I would say:
– The Greats is a little stiffer, but not massively so. And it butters better than you would think for it’s stiffness. I would say that the Greats is around a 5 or maybe 5.5/10 flex and I imagine the Headspace would be closer to 4/10 flex.
– The Greats isn’t a catchy board and I would say less catchy than the Headspace, so I think in that sense there would certainly be an improvement
I would usually say 154 for the Greats for your specs. But since you’re used to the Headspace in a 152, I think the 151 would work for you – and given that you’re predominantly freestyle focused, even when not in the park, then I think it would work. And would feel more playful/less stiff vs going with the likes of the 154.
Personally I would go Strata on the Greats to be a better flex match for it and that will help to drive the board more. I would go Contact Pros on the Headspace probably, depending on how I felt it, but if it does feel roughly like 4/10 in terms of flex, then I would put the Contact Pros on that. But yeah if you were keeping both boards and bindings, I would put the Strata on the Greats an the Contacts on the Headspace. If you’re replacing the Headspace, then I would try both on the Greats to see which you liked best, but personally I would go Strata on the Greats.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Awesome Nate. Thanks so much for this. I just pulled the trigger on the 151. Hypothetically, the stiffer Stratas would help me flex the Greats out more, correct? I am most likely going to replace the Headspace with the Greats. I’ll try both bindings, but I think you’re absolutely correct, in thinking the Stratas are going to be a better match up.
Hi Mic
Awesome that you have your new deck on the way! Yeah stiffer bindings help to drive a board harder (which is more necessary for a stiffer board vs a softer one) – and to put more energy into flexing it for sure and I think the Strata will work best. But certainly no harm trying both.
So about a month on the Greats. My first day out, I thought I might have made a mistake. It took me a bit to get used to the width. But honestly, I don’t think I’ve had this much fun snowboarding in years. I truly think it’s helped progress my riding, even after all these years. Combined with the Stratas, this thing just charges. I think it’s softer than claimed, which I’m fine with. Full charging, buttering, side hits, park runs, this thing does everything. Thanks for the help. Love this thing.
Hi Mic
Thanks for the update. Always awesome to hear feedback on boards and great to hear you’re having a blast on the Greats, after getting used to the new ride!
Yeah definitely not as stiff as YES rates it (7/10) – more like 5.5/10 for me, bordering on 5/10.
Hi Nate,
First of all compliments about your website! It has already helped me a lot in my search for a new snowboard.
I’m looking for a playful and forgiving snowboard to work on my butters and small jumps. I ride 3 weeks a year in Austria. My priorities are on the slope and especially butters and small jumps I like.
But I also want to have stability at higher speeds.
My stats:
183 LBS
5’9” Tall
Size 11 Burton Concord BOA
I’d consider myself an intermediate rider (All-mountain)
How’s buttering with the Greats compared to the Lib tech Skate Banana?
I’m hesitating between the two considering playfulness, forgiveness and stability a higher speeds. Which snowboard do you recommend and in which size?
Thanks!
Greetings from the Netherlands
Hi Maximilian
Thanks for your message.
The Skate Banana is certainly the more playful option – and easier to butter. But the Greats is a lot more stable at speed. I would say Skate Banana 4.5/5 for buttering, pushing 5/5 but only around 2.5/5 for stability at speed. The Greats, I would say 4/5 for buttering and 3.5/5 for stability at speed. So I think the Greats would be the better balance between the two, from what you’re describing. But if buttering and playfullness is more important to you, then the Skate Banana is a little better there – you would just sacrifice in terms of stability at speed.
Size-wise, I would say 156 for the Greats and 156W for the Skate Banana. If you wanted to go more playful and sacrifice a little in terms of stability at speed, you could 154 for the Greats. I would say it would still be more stable at speed vs the 156 Skate Banana, but not as much so as the 156, but you would get something a little more playful/buttery than getting it in the 156.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you for your clear explanation Nate!
I went to the store yesterday to see the two of them.
They advise me to take a look at the Bataleon Evil Twin as well.
What do you think about this board? Is it a good compromise between the two? Or don’t you recommend this one at all?
I like the camber for more stability at speed. The TBT makes it playful, forgiving and very suitable for butters. The only thing I doubt about is that I have no experience with TBT/Bataleon.
How do you feel about this board compared to the other two?? Is it a happy compromise between the two? Or don’t you recommend this one at all?
Hi Maximilian
I don’t currently test Bataleon boards, so I couldn’t really say. Not sure what the TBT feels like or Bataleon boards in general, unfortunately. On paper, it could be an option. The camber would certainly help with stability at speed, but it looks like it’s quite a soft board, which doesn’t help with stability at speed. And not sure how the TBT affects things there. So, could definitely work, but might not as well – having no experience with Bataleon it’s hard to say.
Thanks, Nate! I have chosen the Greats 154 with Union Force bindings
Hi Maximilian
Thanks for the update. Awesome that you have your new board/bindings. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it on snow
Hey Nate,
Great reviews & the website is fantastic! I am wondering if you could help dial me in, as I seem to be smack in the center of a 156 & 159. Thanks for your reply and keep up the good work!
6’ Tall
205 lbs (could lose a few)
Size 11 Photon boot
I’m looking for more of an all mtn freestyle deck that can rip around the resort, dip into the trees & can butter some rollers. I definitely don’t spend too much time in the park anymore, beside some spring days…but am still bouncing off everything in sight. My last few twins were a 155 & 156. Overall I’m worried about jumping to the 159, especially with the super long EE. BUT it does seems to cater to my current riding style. I also have a Custom 156 Flying V…..which maybe makes the case for a longer twin this go around.
Thoughts?
Hi Jack
Thanks for your message.
I think if you had size 10 boots, I’d be leaning towards 156, but with 11s, I am leaning towards the 159. You would certainly be fine width wise with 11s on the 156 – and the 159 is going to be on the wider end of the range for 11s. But for your height and weight I think the 159 is more suited. If it was going to be your only board, given you’re used to 155, 156, then that might sway me a little more towards the 156 for you, but assuming you’re looking to keep your Custom Flying V 156, then I think having the 159 in your quiver would work. That said, the Greats is quite a different board to the Custom Flying V anyway, so even going 156 you certainly wouldn’t have 2 overly similar boards, but going in 159 gives you that bit more of a difference.
I don’t think the 156 would be a bad choice at all, and I totally get your dilemma on this one, but I would be just slightly leaning towards 159 for the reasons above.
Just for your info in terms of width, I would say the 162 is around 275mm at the inserts. Personally I tend to try to stick to under 265mm at the inserts (with size 10s), unless I’m sizing down in terms of length. For 11s, that same equivalent would be 275mm at the inserts. So I don’t think it’s overly wide for you – but it’s on the wider end of an ideal range for 11s (IMO). To note – the 156 Custom Flying V (assuming it’s not super old) is around 262mm at the inserts, so you’d certainly be going considerably wider.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, great review! Question for you, based on reading the recent comments and your responses, I’m thinking the 2020 Greats 154cm is my best bet for overall sizing (5’9″ 170lbs. size 8.5-9US) but with the new wider widths, especially where the bindings are, do you think the 154cm would be manageable for turning with my boot size? Thanks.
Hi Steve
Thanks for your message.
The 154 is still going to be on the wide side for your boots, but going 154 would be sizing down a little, so that would, at least somewhat compensate for that extra width. Because you are going shorter that helps make it more manageable, even though it’s still wide for 8.5-9s. If it was a pre-2019 Greats (before it got wider) I would have said 156 for your specs, so I think 154 is a good option. Also to note – I ride the 156 and even though the width is wider than I usually enjoy, it’s something that I really enjoy turning on (I’m 6’0″, 185lbs, US10 boots, foot measures 27.3cm). 156 is sizing down for me, but I think having that waist that isn’t that wide (still a little wider than normal but not that wide) helps, even though it’s quite wide at the inserts. Note though that, the 154 is about 3mm narrower and a size 9 foot, all else being equal is roughly 10mm shorter than a size 10 foot.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
Thanks for a great review!
My stats: 177cm, 74Kg, 9,5US, intermediate/advance, 60% Park (mostly jumps, no rail/boxes Im old), 30% resort, 10% pow.
I own Greats 2017 156 and Greats 2018 154. I love both boards but I notice is a big difference within them.
Riding 156 with Union Atlas I can carve like a champ leaving hair wide tracks behind and feeling the spring in each turn. The 154 will skid turns if I am that aggressive and it does not have the spring while carving. So I use the 154 with Union Forces for park and it is the best I have had (and old UNINCs) in terms of jump approach, track and stability, the 154 is definitely softer for presses and very fun for our small slopes.
The only lack I found in both models is edge hold in hard snow and a wider platform which seems to be sovled with the post 2019 models.
So now my question: 151 or 154 in the post 2019 model? How are the new models compare with the old models in terms of size feeling?
You say the effective edge is longer in the greats than average board but as I said, I noticed it a lot just by sizing down 2 cm in the old model.
Will the new 151 feel like the old 154 in terms of size?
Will I be able to carve hard in the new 154 like with the old 156, I am assuming effective edge will be shorter but I will expect a harder torsional flex to hold that edge, am I right?
In general, which size of the new models will allow me to shred the park, jumping up to medium size, good buttering but still hold an edge like the old 156?
Thank you in advance sir!
Hi Javi
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the new (2019 & 2020) Greats 154 is in someways similar to the 156 from 2017/2018 and in other ways similar to the 154 – so I would say it’s going to feel somewhere in between. The new 154 has a similar effective edge to the old 154. But it’s also considerably wider overall (even vs the old 156) – giving it the feel of certainly being bigger than 154.
Despite having the same effective edge as the old 154, the new 154 is going to, IMO, carve a little better a. because there is now less rocker – so it feels more camber dominant. It’s now 2-4-2 (rocker-camber-rocker) where it used to be 4-4-4. And b. that extra edge hold helps it to carve in hard conditions better.
The new 154 isn’t going to feel exactly like the old 156 for carving – it’s a different board – but it will feel more like 156 in terms of size vs the old 154. So I couldn’t say for sure whether it will be the same to carve, but hopefully that gives you more to go off. I definitely appreciated that more solid landing platform going from 2018 to 2019 model, and the extra edge hold too. It’s a better board overall, IMO. Size-wise for you, I think the 154 would work well – it’s probably in some ways going to feel somewhere in between your 2017 156 and 2018 154, I would say.
The 151, you’ll be dropping effective edge vs both your current 154 and 156, and I think it’s probably going a little too small for your specs, so I would be looking at the 154, if you go with a 2019 or 2020 model.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate for this valuable feedback.
I will go for the 154, I believe in your 2-4-2 explanation. I appreciate the mix of experience and logical/scientific facts in your reviews.
Have a great season.
You’re very welcome Javi. Hope you have a great season too!
Hi Nate,
Thanks for all the reviews. Getting this board for next season. Not sure whether to get the 151 or 154. I’m 5’9”, 178lbs, 10.5 US boots, and ride 12,-12. Feel like I can ride either size.
Hi Ricky
Thanks for your message.
I would say go 154. That would be the better size for you, IMO. If you were wanting it for just riding park or something like that, then I think you could get away with the 151, but for all-mountain-freestyle, I would go 154 for your specs.
The 154 is around 270mm at the inserts, which is on the wider end of the range for 10.5s, but certainly not overly wide – and since 154 is already sizing down from what I would usually recommend for you, that’s already taking into account the slightly wider insert width. I think going 151 would be downsizing too much. I prefer the 156 in this board. I’m 6’0″ 185 lbs and US10 boot. So for you I wouldn’t go as short as 151.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Thank Nate for your reply. I’ll be using this for all-mountain freestyle riding and I normally ride 156. so yes I was leaning towards the 154 as well but I also like to do flat tricks occasionally and some park riding so thought the 151 could be a better choice for those situations but 154 is probably better like you suggested. Thanks again!
You’re very welcome Ricky. Hope you have a great season, when winter rolls around!
Gender: Male
Weight: I hover around 170lbs (77kg) or so, give or take 10 pounds
Height: 5ft 9.5inches (166.37cm)
Boot size: between 12 and 13 depending on brand
Preferred riding style: All-mountain-Freestyle (Utah)
So, I recently moved back to the Rockies after a few years of living in the deep south US (wouldn’t recommend. Too hot, no snow or mountains) and I plan on getting back into snowboarding this winter. It’s been about 5 years since I last boarded and I’m definitely in need of a new board. I still have my old board, but its a 2006 Forum Youngblood 148 which even 5 years ago, if I’m being honest, was a bit on the small size for me. I’ve had it a long long time.
I’d consider myself an intermediate rider on the freeride aspect and basically a beginner on the freestyle side. I can carve and connect turns pretty well and bomb down a hill easy enough, but I want to get into freestyle. The last couple seasons that I was boarding, I was dabbling in the park every few runs and trying out the smaller jumps landing them every now and then. So I’m looking for an All-Mountain board with a Freestyle lean. After reading through a few of your reviews, I’ve become interested in a few but not sure which would fit me better. (YES Greats, YES Standard, and Never Summer West)
I do like speed and carving which all 3 seem to do well, but my real interest is in learning to enjoy the jumps and rails, maybe halfpipe if I’m brave enough to try it, while still being able to send it on the rest of the mountain when my backside needs a break from screwing up landings. I’m not a huge fan of deep powder so it’s not super important, but that may be just because my old board was too small for me and it seemed like a tiring chore to keep the nose above the snow in the deep. I would like to be able to enjoy those fresh powder days though without my nose constantly trying to dig in and slow or stop me. Switch riding was still awkward for me, but I tried to force myself to become comfortable with it so a twin tip or directional twin would be ideal. One of my biggest concerns is finding the happy medium between board width and the proper length considering my somewhat big size of feet.
Any advice would be great! Thanks!
Hi Ryan
Thanks for your message.
I think you’ve narrowed down 3 good options for what you’re describing. And I would say, if you do want to get a bit more out of those powder days that the Standard and the West are going to do it a little better, but the Greats a little better for the more freestyle aspects. The Greats will still be an improvement in powder vs your 148 Forum Youngblood, though, so that’s something to keep in mind.
Size-wise for those, I would go:
YES Greats: 156
YES Standard: 156
Never Summer West X: 157W
The one concern would be width-wise. In terms of width at inserts, they are the following:
YES Greats 156: 273mm
YES Standard 156: 270mm
Never Summer West 157W: 269mm (estimated)
With size 10s I have gone as narrow as 255mm at the inserts without issue, but with 12s, I’d usually say at least 275mm at inserts to be safe – and that’s with +15/-15 angles and low profile boots. So that’s my biggest concern there. That said, if you didn’t have issues on your 148 Youngblood in terms of boot drag, then you should be fine (unless your feet have grown since then?). It also depends about how aggressive/low you get on carves. Like if you’re euro carving or that kind of thing.
Something like the Nitro Team Gullwing could be an option, and is a little wider. Estimated width at inserts on the 157W is around 274mm (so actually not that much wider than the Greats).
But yeah in terms of length something between 156 to 158 would be a good bet, IMO, for your specs and how you describe your riding/how you want to ride. If you’re really worried about width though, then going up to 159 in the Greats or Standard would give you more leeway there – or the 159W for the Team Gullwing.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
Wondering if I can fit on this board, heard lots of great things about it.
Height: 6ft 5
Weight: 220lbs
Boot size: 11.5 US
Thanks!
Hi Sam
Thanks for your message.
I think you could ride this board – in the 159. But for your specs, it probably won’t ride the same way that I experienced the 156. It’s going to be overly wide for 11.5s (very good width for 11.5s, but not so wide, that sizing down is necessary) – so I would normally put you on something longer – maybe around 163-165 for an all-mountain-freestyle deck like this. So, at 159, it’s likely to feel a little softer flexing – hard to say for sure, but feel more medium-soft, than medium for you, on the 159. So I think it would be a great freestyle/park option for you, but would be less all-mountain oriented and likely feel more playful for you.
So, an option, if you’re looking for that kind of board – but you’d likely need to lower the speed, carving and powder scores listed here to get a better representation of what the board would feel like for you.
Hope this makes sense/gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Epic reviews. Wondering if you could help me with sizes also.
I’m 180-185lbs, 11.5us burton rulers, 6′ tall.
I’m a pretty good free-rider and love carving, I suck in the park as I don’t get to practice much but I enjoy boosting jumps (like up to ~40ft) and just doing some basic board slides etc.
If I’m with mates I basically just carve around looking for side hits. If I’m with the misses or in Japan it’s just riding pow, trees and some back country.
I have a pow board for when it’s really deep already so it’s not a huge concern.
I ride about 60/40 in Japan and Australia.
The size guide says 180lbs is the lowest end for the 59, but a 56 is a small board compared to anything I have ridden before.
Also, last years 59 had an elephant on it and I don’t think I’m an elephant sized person but an all mountain freestyle board for me I feel is about a 58.
Cheers,
Jarod
Hi Jarod
Thanks for your message.
I ride the 156 (6’0″, 185lbs, US10 boots) and it’s the perfect size for me. But it’s also sizing down slightly what I would usually ride for an all-mtn-freestyle. Not by heaps, because I like to ride a little shorter for my size, but usually I’d go 157, 158 for all-mtn-free – and 155, 156 for a predominantly park board. But a big reason that I prefer the 156 is that it’s a wider board. And it has good effective for overall length too, which is another reason. I would be perfectly comfortable riding the 154 too, but I would ride that more freestyle focused.
Since you have bigger boots, it’s a tougher call. If you had 10s, 10.5s, then I’d say go 156 for sure. But with 11.5s it’s a tougher call between the 156 and 159. I’d say you’d be fine width-wise on the 156 – especially with Burton boots and with a duck stance (which is recommended on this board, being asym) but it wouldn’t be a wider board for you – it would be a good width for you. In which case, you may not want to size down.
The 159 does have a 123.5cm effective edge, which is long vs the average 159. So, it will still ride a little bigger than that, even if it’s not overly wide for you. Would like to give you a more definitive answer, but it is a tough call. If you’re looking for it to be more freestyle focused, then 156 would be the way to go – and will be great for those side-hits – but if you want a bit more stability at speed, then 159 might be more appealing.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate
What an amazing job you do! So helpful and insightful.
I’m looking at getting a Greats, but the 2020 model which is available here in AUS. Apparently there’s no change in specs from the 2019 model, except for the graphics. The size options are 151, 54, 56 and 59.
I have been riding a 2013 Greats in a 154 and recently purchased a Gnu Mullair 159. The Greats has been my daily driver for a long time and I have really enjoyed riding it. I decided to get the Mullair as it was time to replace the Greats and I went with the 159 due to my specs. It’s a fantastic board with amazing edge hold and stability at speed (especially compared to my 2013 Greats) but in my view is overkill for the snow conditions we have down under and majority of riding I do. Which is mainly cruising around, carving, bombing, with some side hits and butters. Whilst I can do most of these on the Mullair (with the exception of buttering) I seem to have more fun on the Greats, even though the edge hold feels almost nonexistent compared to the Mullair! So I’m going to keep it for trips to Japan, the US and the (very) occasional pow days we get at my local.
Which leaves me still wanting a replacement for my old Greats. Hence the interest in the 2020 Greats.
What size would you recommend for me? I’m about 5’8″, 89KG (196lbs) riding size 10US Vans and NOW Pilots size medium. Normally I would go for the 159 but understand I can size down on this board. So 156 or 154? One of my local shops told me I could ride a 151 but I’m skeptical.
Also, are you able to provide the reference widths for the 154, 56 and 59? I like a wide stance, 23″ off the top of my head. Angles are +15/-15. I believe the reference stances on these boards are narrower than usual. Correct? Would my preferred stance width be too much ‘off-spec’ that it would adversely affect the boards’ characteristics?
Thanks!
Hi Chop
Thanks for your message.
For the 2020 Greats (which like you say is the same as 2019 bar the graphics), you can certainly size down a bit because of it’s width. I would also usually say around 159 for you, for an all-mountain board, but for this board I wouldn’t go that long. But 151 too short, IMO. So, I agree that the debate is between 154 and 156. I would be leaning towards 156 for you.
The 2020 Greats has better edge hold than the 2013 edition. The inclusion of that mid-bite really adds edge-hold, IMO. So even on the 154 you would likely get more in that sense – and you’d be riding an overall bigger board, than your 2013 Greats. So, I think it’s an option, but overall, I think the 156 would suit you better.
In terms of reference stances, it’s a little confusing. On YES’s website they are as follows:
154: 558.8mm (22″)
156: 584.2mm (23″)
159: 584.2mm (23″)
Which aren’t narrow at all – fairly normal. But on my actual 159 (2019 model) – the reference point is at 540mm (21.3″). But I ride it at 580mm (22.8″). i.e. one set wider than reference. So, it’s a little confusing. But mine rides great at that stance, so if you were to go for the 156, there’d be no issues there, IMO. In the catalog, the 2020 model is showing 22″ for the 154 and 156 and 23″ for the 159, so it’s really hard to say if they’ve changed that for the 2020 model – or if their figures are out again!
For all the things that YES do well – clarity over their stance widths is not one of them!
Hope this helps
Hi Nate. Thanks very much for your reply, and yes it was helpful! Particularly the reference stance info.
I rode a demo model of the 157 but didn’t LOVE it. Think I might try a Riders Choice in 154.5 and 157.5. Or persevere with my Mullair.
Thanks again!
You’re very welcome Chop. Yeah give the Rider’s Choice a go. Also a great board – and being Hybrid Rocker, rather than Hybrid Camber might suit you better if you prefer that kind of feel. Definitely worth a try.
Thanks Nate for your input and hope you are having a great vacation. I think I may go with the Greats. I have been looking at Asym Boards and top of my list were Space Case, Greats, and Proto T2. One last question (I promise), what size would work best for the Proto? I know they aren’t as wide as the Greats, so would the 157 work?
Hi Jacob
Yeah I’d say 157 for the PT2. You could certainly still ride the 154 – and would be a more enticing option, if you were going to use it just as a park/freestyle option. But as a one board quiver, I’d go 157 for you.
Hey Nate!
I was wondering would you recommend Yes Greats or GNU Space Case? I am looking to ride the whole mountain. I like to carve and cruise around or bomb down mountains (depending on my mood). I am trying to progress in jumps, buttering , and a little bit of jibbing. For Yes Greats I am looking to get either the 154 or 156 and for GNU Space Case I am looking at 156.
Height: 5’9″
Weight: 185 lbs
Boot Size: US 8.5 – 9
Thanks in advance!
Hi Jacob
Thanks for your message.
To add to my previous answer, the Greats would be, IMO, the better option out of those 2, in terms of riding the whole mountain. Still not going to be great in powder, but doable. But yeah, as an all-rounder a better option than the Space Case, IMO. I would go 154 for you for the Greats. I’d normally say to go longer than that with your specs, but the Greats is quite a wide board and something I would downsize for with your boot size. For more options also see the links I provided in my previous reply.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate for the reply. So would you say that 156 won’t work for me at all? Based on the sizing chart, it seems like 156 would be the board for me at my weight. What would be the pros and con of getting either the 154 and 156, if you don’t mind me asking?
Hi Jacob.
Apologies for the slow reply – on vacation with limited internet.
The main reason I would say 154 as opposed to 156 is that the 156 is getting very wide for your boots. Even the 154 is on the wide side for your boo size – but sizing down a little to 154 counteracts the wideness a bit, so I think 154 is the best balance. The weight recommendations on my review here are actually a little outdated – thanks for getting me to check – I will update them now. The 154 should actaully be 150-190 and the 156 160-200. But they really are just rough guidelines in any case – and often change, even when there’s no change to the snowboard.
Hope his helps
Hi Nate, I am having dilemma on what size to pick. I am 180cm and gliding from 90-105kg. Currently on 95. My boot size is 9.5. Currently I am riding TRS 159, but my past boards were 159 as well. What size of greats you would recommend, I was thinking about 156?
Thank you
Hi Vladimir
I agree that 156 would be the best size for you. You could also ride the 159, and that’s probably more in line with your height/weight specs, but because it’s a wider board and you wear 9.5 boots, sizing down to the 156 would be a good call. The 159 not a bad call either, but it would be getting on the wide side for your boots, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hey man, Love your site an reviews.
Haven’t seen anyone here with size 14 boot as for advice yet (burton concord BOA)
am really liking the all mountain specs and park which is where i will be spending 60-70% of my time. im 88kgs and 6’2 in height. will the 159 with a 262 waist work for me?
Looks good for icy conditions which is ideal for Australia where i am from.
i roe a 160 neversummer blue rental rnx in NZ recently and i liked it a lot for buttering and park.
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
With Burton 14s, I would say you’re in a similar situation to Harry in the comment above. The width at inserts of the Greats 159, I would predict based on other sizes, to be around 276mm, 277mm. With 14s, that’s going to still leave a fair amount of overhang. If you ride with binding angles like +15/-15 or similar, then that gives you a better chance. Also, if you’re mostly riding park and aren’t doing any really aggressive carving (like Eurocarving), then you might get away with it. But there is certainly risk there with that level of overhang.
You could also look into risers for your bindings. I have no knowledge about them – except to know that they exist – but that might help you to have more confidence with the width of this board especially for big carves.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, I’ve just a lot of reading through all the other posts to see if my question has already been answered, and no.
I’m 6’2″ 195lbs US13 feet (32 TM3s). 23.5″ stance, 18/-12
In your opinion, will I get away with the 159 with these boots? Will I still be able to lay over a decent euro-carve, or do you think it’s likely to boot out?
Thanks bro
Hi Harry
NO way of knowing for sure, but hopefully this will help you assess it. The 159 Greats (I would estimate, based on measuring a different sized Greats) has an estimated width at inserts of 276 – maybe a little wider with the wider stance. But not by heaps I wouldn’t say – maybe 277mm, at a guess. With 34cm boots (as you mentioned in your previous post), you’re looking at total overhang of 6.3cm (or 3.2cm for heel and toe). That number would decrease at the -12 angle. But that’s still quite a lot of overhang, if you’re going to be doing Eurocarves, IMO. I would say you’re not guaranteed to get boot drag, but it would be risky, IMO.
I haven’t used them, and not sure where you get them from, but you can get risers for your bindings, which essentially ride your boots higher off the board – which allows you greater angle to work with. You could look into something like that.
Hope this gives you more to go off
Hey Nate,
Going to try and pick up the 2019 Greats. I’m 5’11 3/4″, 200lbs, size 10 boot(Ride 92 Boas). I’ve been riding a 2017/2018 NS Funlsinger 156. I’m on the east coast, spend some time in the park. Been working on more spins and butters, which is why I got the NS. I find the size works for me, just sometimes will wash out when I push it on carves. Think the 2019 Greats 154 would hold an edge for me if I really layed into a carve? And could I make bigger turns if I wanted? I know you’d probably normally at least recommend the 156 for me, but I think if I can get away with some good turns on the 154, it might be more fun overall. Planning to sell the NS. I have a Rossi One LF to use if I get lucky enough to go west and hit powder.
Hi Paul
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, I would definitely say 156 usually for this board, which would be sizing down as it is for your specs. For an all-mountain board, assuming an advanced level, I would say closer to 161, 162. But because the Greats is wide for 10s and because there is a lot of effective edge vs overall length, sizing down to 156 is definitely doable for this board. It’s the size I like (6’0″, 185lbs, size 10) for this board for doing a bit of everything.
In saying that, it is a board I could ride in a 154, if I was going to be predominantly using it for freestyle. But it wouldn’t hold up as well for big carves or riding at speed vs the 154. So, if I was to get the 154 I would be using it more specialized towards freestyle riding (whether in the park or over the rest of the mountain).
So, given that you want to use it for a bit of everything (bar powder), I would still say 156.
That said, I think the Greats 154 would still be an improvement vs the 156 Funslinger in terms of carves and edge-hold and at speed. Just not as much vs the 156. The 154 Greats still has as much effective edge as the 156 Funslinger – and it’s a stiffer board, which will certainly help to hold those carves. And the mid-bite tech gives it a bit more grip in hard/icy conditions, IMO.
Also, I can see where you’re coming from in wanting to go 154 to have a bigger difference vs your Rossi One. If you were going to be using the 154 specifically for freestyle/park days, then I would be more positive towards that as an option. But just because you’re wanting to use it as your daily driver, and because you’re looking for an improvement carving-wise, I think the 156 would be the better option.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate,
I’m considering the 2019 yes greats board as well but since it’s kind of late in the game, Ican only find 151 rather than my usual 154/155. I was wondering if it’s a good idea to size down on this board or should I keep looking for a 154. Im around 5’9, 163 lbs, boot size 9.5 and intermediate.
Thanks a lot
Hi Phil
Thanks for your message.
This is the kind of board I like to size down for, depending on boot size. Two reasons – 1. it’s a little wider than the average “regular width” board and 2. There’s a lot of effective edge compared to the overall length. I really like this board in the 156, but I’d say I could still definitely get away with the 154. For this type of board I usually go for something 157, 158, depending. For reference I’m 6’0 and 185lbs with size 10 boots and I typically ride a little smaller, especially this kind of board which I like to ride a lot of freestyle on. For more all-mountain I prefer more like 159 and freeride boards, I prefer to go 159 to 161.
The 151 will have the kind of effective edge than a lot of boards have in around a 154, 155 (depending on the board of course but on average) and it’s as wide or wider than most 154/155 boards. If you’re going to be riding it +15/-15 (which is usually recommended for an asym board like this), then the width on the 151 is still going to be on the wide side for 9.5s – so that makes sizing down to the 151, especially when you take the effective edge into account, doable for sure.
I think you could also ride the 154, but it would be a bigger feeling – both in terms of width and effective edge – 154 than the 154 you are likely used to, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Appreciate your detailed response. I’m leaning towards mostly all mountain but throw in a bit of freestyle. I actually found both sizes in stock. Which do you recommend for that profile? How would the 154 feel compared to an average 156 length board?
This is going to be my only board for a while so I’m looking for it to be more all around. Which length do you like for my specs?
Hi Phil
Hard to say with accuracy exactly how long the 154 will feel in comparison to an average 156, since there is so much variety out there. But I would say it would feel at least like a 156, maybe 157 vs an “average” board.
The 154 vs the 151, will float more in powder, be more stable at speed and be better for long arcing carves. The 151 better for trees, maneuverability at slower speeds and for freestyle type stuff.
Weighing it up, since you mention that you would be riding it mostly all-mountain, with freestyle thrown in, I would be leaning towards 154. If you were taking a more freestyle approach, then 151 would likely be better. I really like it in the 156 and for other all-mtn-freestyle it’s only a little smaller than I normally ride for this style of board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate,
I’m 6ft 195lbs without gear and 9.5 boots. I’m looking at the 2019 as my main board to pair with my Nitro Pow for powder days. I’d mainly be using the Greats to bomb groomers, go off piste when I can for natural hits, and I’m just beginning to hit medium sized kickers in the park and would like to keep progressing on those. I stay away from rails.
Do you think it’d be best to get the 156 or the 159?
Thanks for all your help, your reviews have helped me find my last two daily drivers.
Hi Sean
Thanks for your message.
I think the 156 would be a good size for you for this board. I wouldn’t normally say to go that short for your specs, but with this board, I think it’s a good call (because of the wider platform and a lot of effective edge for the overall length). The really like the 156 (6’0″, 185lbs, size 10 boots) and I think that would be a good size for you too. The 159 would be getting on the really wide size for 9.5s, IMO – and wouldn’t be sized down enough to compensate for it, IMO. So yeah, I think you’d really like the 156.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello there,
Thanks for the review and I would like to get some advice if you dont mind.
Im 5’10 tall, 78kg with size 11 boots, currently riding with Adidas superstar with great reduced foot print.
My current board is 158 in length and has 255 waist width, I would say the boot out isnt a huge problem, its still acceptable at around 1.4cm each side, but I am looking for a short, fat board that is easily manuverable and wider (maybe 265minimum) cause I find myself enjoy carving a lot. I also ride all mountain and play jumps, and jibs a lot.
Do you think the greats 156 would be a board that suits me? Since this board seems to be wider than most boards in the market.
Another board Im considering is the Ride Twinpig, since it has huge waist width and I think I can downsize to 154 with Twinpig.
Thank you!
Best,
Matt
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message and apologies for the slow response – have been out testing a lot of gear the past few days.
If you’re looking to go a little wider, then something like the Greats is a good option – and fits the other things that you’re describing. I wouldn’t say that the Greats is a “short/wide” as such – but it is a little wider, and you can downsize a little for sure – so in a sense it’s a sort of short/wide. Certainly wide enough for 11s – and I think the 156 would be a good length for you.
The Twin Pig, is certainly a short/wide, and something you would size down a fair bit. I’d almost look at 151 for you in that board – though the 154 would also work – and if you’re looking to use it more for all-mountain-freestyle then it’s probably the better size. But if it was going to be more predominantly freestyle the 151 would work too. I haven’t ridden the Twin Pig, but based on specs, I would say that you would get less out of it for carving and speed than something like the Greats – it has a lot less effective edge and is softer flexing, for one thing. Looking at it, I would say that it’s more freestyle oriented. The Greats is more of an all-rounder (with it’s biggest weakness being powder).
Hope this helps with your decision
I Thank you for any answer, you do a wonderful world here!
hello nate, do you think Burton ion boa would fit with yes greats or should something with softer flex?
Hi Hendrikus
Thanks for your message.
Slightly softer flexing boots would be ideal, but not way off in terms of flex, and they could work with the Greats, flex-wise if you prefer a slightly stiffer boot, with a slightly softer board. Ideally, I think a 5/10 flex or 6/10 flex would be best, but the Ion (which I would rate 7.5/10) could work if you like a stiffer flexing boot. However, one reason as well as the flex, that I wouldn’t go Ion on the Greats, is that the Ions don’t have an articulating cuff. For anything freestyle – and the Greats is something that’s good for all-mountain/freestyle riding – I prefer to have an articulating cuff on the boots.
If you wanted to stay Burton – then the SLX (7/10 flex) if you want something a little stiffer, or the Swath or Swath Boa (5/10 flex) or Ruler/Ruler Boa if you wanted to go a little cheaper (also 5/10 flex – by my feel). If you were wanting to stick with something Boa, check out some of the options at the link below (some of which will be Boa/articulated cuff) – or if you wanted Burton and Boa and an articulating cuff then Swath Boa/Ruler Boa.
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
Hope this helps
Hi Nate,
Love your reviews as they seem honest and are also detailed.
Im thinking about getting the YES Greats Snowboard because of your review. I came for the assassin review but didnt find it in you top picks in all mountain freestyle.
I ride all jumps i can find offpiste and on piste and like to go to the park (but im not very experienced in park rail and stuff). I do jumps, lots of 180’s and trying rails. I want to take my snowboarding to the next level with a board that suits more advanced snowboarding.
I also like to go offpiste is a larger size like the 1.54 the best option or should i stay with the 1.51.
Im between 52 to 58 KG, length of 1.70 Meters, with a 42.5 EU shoe size.
Thanks in advance greetings from the Netherlands 🙂
Hi Guust
Thanks for your message.
The Assassin was only 1 off from making my all-mountain-freestyle list, so I think that’s still an option to consider. But yeah the Greats is pretty awesome and sounds like it would suit what you’re describing – as would the Assassin.
Size-wise, I think the 151 is the best size for your specs. Even going off-piste. If you were strictly riding park, I would say to go smaller than that (if there was a smaller available size). But if you’re used to something a little longer, that should be taken into account as well, but even then, I think 151 would likely be the best size for this board, for you. For the Assassin, I would say go 150 – and I’d say it’s just wide enough for your boots (depending on what size boots you end up in). The Greats wouldn’t be an issue width-wise with your shoe size, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi, i am 6″ size 10 US boots and 158lbs. 154 or 156? looking for a fun small mountain board
Hi Greg
Thanks for your message.
For your specs, and the fact that you want a fun small mountain board, I would go for the 154. It’s still going to be on the wider side for 10s – that and taking into account your other specs, the 154 would be a great size for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate, thanks so much for the review and for taking the time to answer questions. I really like the greats boards when I’ve demo’d them and want to get 2019 version. I’m 185lbs size 10 US (9 uk). I’m thinking of going 154, which I know is too small for me but I do a lot of indoor riding here in UK and need something I can throw around really easy in a short park.
My question is, as much as i favour my kickers, I do a lot of rail riding too and still want to progress this. Have you ever found the asym to be catchy on rails? I know you’ve already said it’s not the ‘best’ jib board, but do you think the fact I’m going small for my size might equalize this a bit more? I do still want to progress my rail ridding as well as everything else (and ridding quick indoor park laps, you can’t avoid them!).
Should I look at a different board?
Thanks for your help.
James
Hi James
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden indoors (have never lived close to anywhere indoors), so I couldn’t say for sure how it would go indoors. But jib-wise, it’s doable, just not ideal. It’s a little stiffer than I would usually prefer on jibs and more camber than I personally prefer. But I’m not a super strong jibber either. I didn’t notice the Asym affecting anything jib-wise though.
Usually I would say go 156 (depending on your height, but based on weight and boot size), but if you’re going smaller to help you out indoors, then the 154 is going to feel softer flexing, which would, IMO, help on the jibs.
If you wanted to check out some other options, some of the boards in the list below are better for jibbing, IMO, but the Greats is certainly doable for jibs and I would imagine a little easier if you go 154.
Hope this helps
Great thanks Nate,
I took a punt on the 154 and I think it was the right thing to do. It holds up fine in a carve and just means I can really chuck it around in quick laps around the park. You’re right, it’s not a jib stick, but certainly holds its own on rails and feel more confident gapping to rails / boxes than I ever did on a noodle. Kickers is where it excels most and havent lost much stability for going smaller I don’t think. Also supper easy to ride switch. Overall I would say sizing down slightly was ideal for my needs and I’m going to really enjoy riding this everywhere.
Thanks dude. Stay rad!
Hi James
Thanks for the update. That’s what I like to hear! Awesome that going 154 has worked out for you and that you’re loving the board!
Hello Nate,
First of all thanks for the great review! I would like to ask your opinion sizing.
I am 5’8″and 160 lbs with size 10 DC Judge Boa(2019) boots which are med to med/stiff flex in my understanding.
I rode for more than 10 years so I can say I am kind of intermediate/advanced.
I am in between buying 154 or 151 sized Greats. I have been using my Burton Custom 156(2011) which feels stable at high speeds but a bit too stiff / large to manuever(for freestyle riding/switch riding etc.) therefore I am inclined to get 151 for faster turns and more fun feeling but I am worried if it would be too unstable at high speed. What would be your opinion on this matter?
Also I need bindings and I was thinking of Burton Cartel or Union Atlas for this board. Do you think these bindings would go well ? I am inclined towards bindings on the stiffer side for better control and compability with my Custom.
Thank you very much!
Homer Topcu
Hi Homer
Thanks for your message.
It’s a tough call between the 154 and 151 for you. On the one hand, this is the kind of board I would usually size down for a little anyway, and then with it being wider, you can size down again. So, that could certainly end up on 151. But in terms of stability at speed, the 154 would certainly be better. Going to 154 would mean dropping the effective edge (which among other things has an effect on stability at speed) a little bit compared to the 2011 156 Custom (120cm on the Custom vs 119cm on the Greats 154), but not by heaps. The 151 Greats would drop it to 116cm, which is more significant. However, to get the fast turn/fun feeling, dropping effective edge will certainly help there. The 151 would certainly be better for freestyle and maneuverability at slower speeds, but you drop a bit in terms of float in powder and stability at speed vs the 154 (and vs your current board) – but it’s not, IMO, going to be super wobbly or anything either.
I would be leaning towards the 151 for you, if you are going to be keeping the Custom. If it’s going to be your only board, then I would be leaning towards 154.
Keeping in mind also, that the 151 has a reference stance width of 21″ and the 154 22″, in case that has any influence as well.
Bindings-wise, I would go Cartel over Atlas, and the main reason for that is board feel. The Cartel’s have better board feel than the Atlas, IMO, and if you’re going to be riding freestyle, then I think you’ll appreciate that. If you were to go Union though, I would go Strata over Atlas. A little softer flexing but not by heaps and better board feel. Or if you wanted to still go for something a little stiffer, then I would go Falcor over Atlas – again largely because of board feel. Check out the following for more:
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Dear Nate,
Thank you very much! I will get 151 and cartels in the end
All best!
You’re very welcome Homer.
If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get them out on snow. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate,
Awesome review! I am looking at the greats, but the only size in the UK is 156, unless I go for the YES Greats Chi in a 159 – I currently have a Basic 159.
I’m 6 ft, 190lbs and size 9/10 (UK) boot. Which size would you recommend?
Thanks
Chris
Hi Christian
Thanks for your message.
I think you could ride the 156, though I think the 159 would be the slightly better option. The Greats is something you can ride a little smaller for sure, so that 156 size becomes an option. Usually I would say something around 161, 162 for an all-mountain board, assuming a relatively advanced level of riding. But for the Greats (and most all-mountain-freestyle boards) I find it a good idea to take off a little bit of length – and given that the Greats is also wider, you can take off a little more, depending on boot size.
If you are going to be using it mostly for freestyle type riding (whether in the park or on the rest of the mountain), then the 156 becomes a more appealing option. But if you’re using it more as an all-mountain option, then 159 would be better. Also if your boot size ends up being UK9, then that would also lean things slightly more towards the 156. But a UK10, I would be leaning more towards 159 for your specs. You would still be able to get on the 156 width-wise with UK10s though, but there would be less need to size down from the 159, with longer feet.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate,
Happy New Year! Itching for a new board and strongly considering the Greats. I am 5’11, 220lb, sz 11. Live
on the Ice/East Coast. I ride the Rossi One 159 (have 166 powder fish for twice a year powder days) but my switch riding/overall freestyle skills have taken off the last couple years and thinking of a new board that can take me to next level. I like to make the mountain my park, but not a huge park person. Greats a good board for that? What size would you recommend for one quiver (minus deep pow) 156 or 159? Widths have me a bit confused/concerned. Appreciate your help!
Hi Josh
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats fits what you’re describing very well.
Size-wise, I think the 159 would be the better length for your specs and as your daily driver.
In terms of width, it’s on the wider side for 11s, but this is the kind of board that’s usually a little wider, and going a little shorter with it works well, IMO. Usually for an all-mountain board, I would put you on something around 163, assuming a relatively advanced level. So 159 is a great length for you for this board, IMO, given the extra width. For reference, I really like the 156 for this board (6’0″, 185lbs, size 10 boots), where I would usually go for something more like 159, 160 for an all-mountain ride.
For reference vs the Rossignol One 159, the width at the inserts on the Greats 159 is likely to be around 276mm (based on measuring the 156) vs 265mm at the inserts on the Rossignol One 159. The 156 Greats is 273mm at the inserts.
You could ride the 156 (I ride the 159 Rossi One and 156 Greats) – but I think the 159 will be better overall for your specs, as your daily driver.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks Nate. Appreciate your help. I ended up going with last year’s Smokin Awesym 162 (got a great deal from a buddy). Has the asym sidecut, a slightly softer flex than the Rossi, and some magnetraction for my icy snow. Fingers crossed it works out.
Thanks again! Have a great season!
Hi Josh
You’re very welcome. I haven’t ridden the Awesym but based on specs it sounds like it fits the bill and given that it’s not as wide as the Greats, the 162 is probably a good size too. If you think of it, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to ride it. Hope you have a great season too!
Hey Nate,
Just want to drop in and let you know that the Awesym is insanely good. It definitely fits into the All Mountain Freestyle bucket. As compared to the Rossi One (my only real comparison, rode last 3 seasons), its lighter, but also more damp and feels more solid. I am not sure what materials/construction are being used, but you can just feel how solid it is, but then it’s lighter as well. It has a slightly softer flex than the Rossi, but somehow rides faster and is damper. It’s really unreal. The only thing, I would say is that it is definitely more intermediate-advanced…it is faster, so have to be more aware, and then also it is full camber vs the Rossi Camrock, so can’t be so loose…I caught an edge a few times on switch, vs the Rossi, I could get away with some sloppy skids. Carving is also amazing with asym sidecut…the heel edge feels way more balanced, just easier to get that edge in without falling back or skidding out. I would guess the only negative probably is powder with the camber profile, and big big jumps, maybe not stiff enough, but overall it has that freestyle feel, but then it is also is more all mountain than the Rossi too, so I can only say, you gotta try it if you have a chance.
Hi Josh
Thanks for the update. Awesome to hear the Awesym was awesome for you! Can definitely feel your excitement for it. Makes me want to test it for sure! Will try to get my hand on it this winter/spring.
Hi,
I am seriously considering this board as an upgrade from my Basic 155. I love the Basic as it is super fun on the pistes, playful hitting jumps and just fun on natural terrain features. I am not bothered with jibbing or other park features. I only go into the park to hit the jumps and enjoy the boardercross. I like going off piste too but the powder here is never really very deep. We get small dumps of 5 – 10cm’s and very rarely 20cm and above. I can manage it on the Basic but end up with a tired leg. I don’t think we get enough powder here to have a powder specific board.
I ride in the southern alps so deep power is very rare and the pistes can get quite icy. The Basic deals with the hard/icy snow really well and my biggest problem with it is that it starts to get very chattery when I hit a bit of speed hence the reason why I am thinking of the Greats 154.
My stats –
Girl
180cm
69kgs
Boot size 7 UK
My question is would you think this is a good board for me? I have tried other girl specific boards but they always leave me underwhelmed. I really like the Yes boards and thought about the Hel but it’s too aggressive to be fun.
Hi Kara
Thanks for your message.
I think the Greats would be a good step up from the Basic, and 154 would be a good length for you for this board. Though the 151 would also work for this board. My biggest concern size-wise, is that it’s quite wide for UK7s. And that would make the 151 more appealing (dropping a bit of length with a wider board can help). Even the 151 is wider than the 155 Basic.
If you could get hold of the 2018 model, it’s a narrower width (the 2019 changed quite a bit), and would be great in the 154.
The only thing with going down to the 151 is that you’ll loose some of the stability at speed advantages of the Greats over the Basic. I think it would still be a little better, but not as much as the 154 would be.
So yeah, I think it’s a good option, but my biggest concern is the width for UK7s.
Hope this helps
Thanks so much for your reply.
That is my worry with the Greats. My boots if I remember correctly are around 29cm’s toe to heel on the outer boot. There is slight overhang with the boots on the Basic, but at the waist the Greats 2019 is 5mm wider
I have been hesitant about the Greats 2017 and 18 models as they aren’t as good on the hardpack and ice…
Perhaps it is time to look at something else but the Greats just looks like so much fun and pretty good anywhere on the mountain.
Hi Kara
Yeah the Greats is awesome – and the 2019 is better in hard/icy conditions, for sure. But yeah, the width would be my only hesitation for you.
Hi Nate,
Another sizing question here. I’m 5’8″ and 205 with size 10 boots. I am considering a 159 Greats (it’s also the only size I can find right now). Would this be appropriate? My only concern is that the board is wider this year and not sure if I should be sizing down to the 156.
Hi Newb
Thanks for your message.
I think the 159 would be doable for you, but I think the 156 would be the better option. Going strictly on the weight recommendations, 159 would sound best, but considering all the factors, I would be leaning towards 156.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate, thanks for all the insight. Looking to grab this deck but unsure about size. I’m size 9.5US, 5’8, 166lbs. Rode a 156 Gnu Space case C-R-C with Asym last year.. Need the stability, pop that R-C-R is said to provide. Will mainly be used for jumps in the park (M,L) and freestyle all mountain. Would you put me in a 54 or 56? Appreciate your feedback.
Hi AL
Thanks for your message.
For the Greats I would go with the 154 for your specs. With it’s width and the amount of effective edge compared to overall length, it’s something you can ride a little shorter. I like the 156 (6’0, 185lbs, US10 boots). So for you I would recommend the 154.
Hope this helps with your decision
Man, this board is dope! I’ve listened to you advice and bought the 156. Holds on ice perfectly, its very good edge-to-edge (I have a solid competition in my quiver in that area: Slash Straight and Burton Branch Manager), amazing pop, and relative stability. Thanks!
I’ve also bought a Basic Decade but brought back to the shop without trying it. I simly don’t want to put down this one 🙂
And I was lucky, my board is only ~2700g.
Hi Vick
Awesome that you’re loving your Greats – it is an awesome deck!
And sweet that it’s even lighter than the one I tested. It might be that the production model is lighter (though also, wood cores can vary in weight too).
Happy riding and hope you have an awesome season with your new ride!
Hi! Thanks for the review. I’m looking for a Greats 2019 but not sure about the size. Will YES Greats Uninc 151 snowboard suit me? My height is 174 centimeters, my weight is 63 kilograms. My boots are Ride Trident US 8. I am afraid that the width of the snowboard and the size of 151 will be big for me.
Hi Alex
Thanks for your message.
I think 151 would be a great length for you, for this board, assuming a relatively advanced level of riding.
My biggest concern would be the width. It’s quite wide for 8s, IMO. Which isn’t an issue if you can size down a little, IMO, but with 151 already being a good length, the width would be the biggest question for me. Still doesn’t mean it’s not doable, but maybe borderline too big overall. What length are you used to riding? That plays into it as well.
Thanks for answering.
I confused the sizes of boots US and UK. In fact, the length of my foot is 27 centimeters, the size of EU 42 is indicated on the boot. Unfortunately in my country it is difficult to find a good consultant in the store, so the snowboards I had, had a size not quite suitable for me. Therefore, you are one of those whom I turned to in order to be more confident in the selection of the Greats Uninc snowboard size.
On the site yesnowboard.com for the size of 151 Weight Range is 63-81 kilograms. I think that if I choose 154, then the snowboard will no longer be responsive to me.
Hi Alex
Yeah definitely not 154, IMO. My debate was whether even the 151 would be too big. But now that it looks like you’re in a US9, I think the 151 would be a good size for you, for this board.
Thank you for helping to decide on the size. Now I think which bindings to choose – Flux XF or Flux XV. I prefer hard bindings. Since Greats is wider than ordinary snowboard, the edge-to-edge will be a bit slower than ordinary snowboard. I think that for this snowboard you need to choose bindings harder to improve edge-to-edge. I like carving, but I want to start learning simple tricks. That’s why I have a question – does the Flux XV completely exclude for me the ability to do simple tricks or will I just need to put a little more effort and precision in my movements?
Hi Alex
Personally I wouldn’t go as stiff as the XV for the Greats but if you like your bindings stiff they could work. They’ve got decent board feel, so not undoable for tricks but also not ideal. The XF still definitely better for tricks and overall a more suitable binding for the greats, IMO, and still relatively stiff (7/10). For more details, check out:
>>Flux XV review
>>Flux XF review
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you Nate.
Today, I measured my weight by putting on all my clothes and body protection, in which I usually ride, and I received a result of 72 kilograms (159 lbs). To this weight, you can still add the weight of both bindings of 1,5-2 kilograms. Now I think that 151 will not be stable for me at speed. 151 is good for me if I only did freestyle, but I want All mountain and carving and a little freestyle, so now I tend to choose 154. 154 will give me more stability at speed and still freestyle will be possible. I don’t have enough weight for 154 size, but I think 154 will feel like a slightly tougher snowboard. I fear the 154 will be a little less responsive to me.
My Stance Width is 49 centimeters. Flux bindings uses disc 4×4, so at a snowboard size 154 – Min Stance Width there will be 52 centimeters – for me this is a bit uncomfortable. To get a Stance Width 50 centimeters, I will need to turn the Discs and move the bindings to the center of the snowboard.
What do you think about this Nate?
Hi Alex
Weight guidelines are usually calculated without gear, so I wouldn’t take gear weight too much into account. That said, adding 9KG for gear is certainly more than usual, so you can make some allowance for the extra weight that it sounds like you ride with compared to the average rider. But typical weight, like the weight of pants, jacket, gloves helmet, etc I wouldn’t consider – and certainly not the weight of the bindings.
That’s not to say that you couldn’t go 154, but I wouldn’t take that total weight with gear into account. Maybe add on to your 63KG, the weight of the body protection that you ride with. So basing it on like 67/68kg, I still think the 151 would be the best option for you, especially given the width, but the 154 becomes more doable.
Looks like you could get as narrow as 49.9cm on the Greats 154, so you wouldn’t be able to get 49cm and you’d be on the narrowest stance at 49.9cm, but with the 151 you could get closer to 49cm and still not be at the narrowest – so the stance would be better for you, by the sounds of it, no the 151 as well.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
hi, i am 15 and am considering buying my own. I am 6’1 and a half and I weigh 150 lb. I also wear a size 12 shoe so don’t know how that converts to a boot. what size board should I get if the great is suitable
Hi Theodore
Thanks for your message.
I think the 156 is your best bet. It should be wide enough for 12s (likely you would be around a 12 in snowboard boots, but you could be 1/2 a size up or down from there, depending on brand). The 159 is too long for your weight, IMO. And the 154 too narrow for 12s and probably too short for your specs too.
Assuming you are at least intermediate level, and like the style of riding this board is designed for, then I think it’s an appropriate board. If you’re not sure what it’s best for, check out the “Who is the Greats Most Suited To” section in the review for a quick overview.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Greatings from the Netherlands! I’m looking for the greats too but don’t know if the 156 or the 159 is the best choise. Hope you can help.
I’m 181 cm and 87 kg. Boot size us 10. I like too ride fast with a jump here and there. I ride switch a lot (50-50) with some powder here and there. Currently I ride the lib tech trs 159.
Also which binding is better for this board? The union flacor, or the burton genesis? (My boots are the burton Slx)
Thx for you’re time!
Greetings,
Gert
Hi Gert
Thanks for your message.
For this particular board and with your specs, I would be leaning towards 156. You could ride the 159 too, but it’s getting pretty wide for your boots. The 156 is already quite wide for 10s, but going to the 156 brings back maneuverability lost in going wider. I really liked the 156 (183cm, 84kg, US10 boots).
The advantage of going 159 is that it would float better in powder and be more stable at speed. But won’t be as agile, won’t be as good for jumps or other freestyle type stuff.
Also, since you ride the 159 TRS, which I think is a good size for you for that board, I think the 159 Greats would feel big in comparison. It’s got more effective edge per length and is wider. But if you feel like you’re looking for something bigger than the TRS 159, then that would make the 159 Greats more appealing.
In terms of bindings, I would rate the Greats as around a 5/10 flex (though YES rates it 7/10), and the SLX more like 7/10. The Falcor’s are 7/10 and the Genesis 5/10 – by my feel. So, I think both the Genesis and the Falcor would work, in terms of a flex match. It depends what you’re looking for. The Falcor is noticeably more responsive than the Genesis. The Genesis is overall a little more comfortable, has a little more shock absorption and just a touch more ankle support – and overall is more forgiving.
Since you like speed, I think the Falcor would likely be the better option, overall. Or something in between in terms of response, like the Union
Strata or Burton Cartel.
For both Burton and Union bindings I would recommend Medium, with Burton boots.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thx Nate! This helps a lot.
You’re very welcome Gert. Hope you have an awesome season!
Hi Nate,
Looking to purchase the greats 2019. Not sure if I should go for 154 or 151. I’m 5`11, US 9 and 150 lbs. Planning on doing everything on this board: jumps, parks, woods, all mountain.
Where I usually ride I don’t get lucky for powder days so that isn’t so important. I just ride and try to find every kicker possible on my way down.
Thanks for taking the time. All the best.
Hi John
I think the Greats would suit what you’re describing very well.
Size-wise, it’s a tough call. I think the 151 would be a better width for you – still on the wider side, but going down to 151 is dropping length from what I would usually recommend for you, so that balances out, IMO. The 154 would certainly give more float in powder, but since you don’t get a lot of that, and since this isn’t the kind of board that shines in that area anyway (IMO) I don’t think that’s an issue. The only thing that makes me hesitate on saying 100% 151, is stability at speed, which is certainly going to be better on the 154. If you’re not a speed demon, then that’s not as much of an issue, but if you are that would be my only real concern with the 151. I think you would enjoy the 151 for everything else.
The only other thing with the 151 is that it has quite a narrow reference stance for 5’11, but you can certainly widen your stance. But if you were wanting to ride closer to reference stance, then the reference stance on the 154, might be more comfortable for you.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate, I am nearing the end of my painstaking snowboard search and I have finally narrowed it down to the Proto Type Two or The Greats and I am just so stuck. Is there anything you’d say one accells at over the other? They both definitely match my riding style fine. I come from traditional camber and my biggest fear is the rocker in the middle of the Never Summer will throw me off. What would you say the benefits of the cam rock cam versus the rocker cam rocker are? And is it hard to adapt to the rocker in the middle after riding traditional camber for a very long time?
Thanks,
Joe
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message.
Between those two, there certainly isn’t a bad choice, IMO.
Between the cam rock cam versus the rocker cam rocker, I would say that having that rocker in the middle typically leads to a slightly looser feeling ride, but the extent of that depends on how much rocker there is in there and how much camber. The Proto Type Two has more camber than rocker, so that looser feeling is more subtle than on some cam rock cam boards. I would still say there is a slightly looser feel than with typical rock cam rock boards (including the Greats) but only subtly so.
I’ve personally never had any issues riding cam rock cam, but I ride a lot of different boards, so I might adapt more quickly. I would say that going to rock cam rock (i.e. the Greats) would be less of an adjustment from traditional camber than it would be to go to cam rock cam (PT2).
Apart from feel, performance-wise, they are pretty close. Not much in it. I would say that I prefer the new Greats (2019 model, which has changed a bit from the 2018 model) for jumps and jibs – just because of that wider landing platform that it now has. Also, just a little better in powder, again because of more surface area. Otherwise, they are very similar in terms of performance.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi there, nice review, helped a lot making up my mind about this board. But really unsure about the sizing. I’m about 185-190lbs, and wear rather small, US9.5 boots. For my weight I think the 156 would be better, but for my feet (and my eyes) the 154 seems more appealing. I’m afraid that if I choose the 154 I will lose on snap/stability, and with the 156 I’m concerned about edge-to-edge ease, which is quite important for me I think. What do you suggest?
Thanks
Hi Vick
I found the 156 fine edge-to-edge considering it’s width. I didn’t have any issues with it, and I usually don’t like anything too wide. My boots are a little bigger, but not by much. My specs are 6’0″, 185lbs, US10 boot.
I would be leaning towards the 156 for you, I think it will be the better length and I think the width should be OK. The width of the 154 would be better, but I think the length in this particular case, outweighs the width.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate! Thanks for your wonderful review and for your for your help with previous purchases. I’m planning to get a 2019 The Greats. I’m 5’11” and wear size 12” boots, so the 159cm looks great on paper, but my concern is that it is supposed to be for weights 180lbs + and am only 170lbs and losing some. Would you advise I go for the 156 that has a 25.9 width instead of 26.2? Thank you!
Hi RJ
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, I wouldn’t worry too much about those weight recommendations. They are pretty rough, IMO.
But in saying that, I think the 156 would be the better length for you, for this particular board. With 12s you could certainly ride the 159 too, but I would still be leaning towards 156.
Width-wise, I wouldn’t usually recommend a board with a 259mm waist, however, this board is wider at the inserts than the waist width would suggest. It measures 272mm at the waist, which, with +15/-15 angles (and angles like this is recommended for this board being an asym). So, I think it would be fine. It will be on the narrower side, but should be OK. If you have low profile boots I would be even more confident of that. What brand/model boots do you own?
The 159 would work too, if you were really worried about width, but I think the 156 would suit your specs better for this board.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks so much for the detailed response. My boots are 2018 Burton Concords, which I wouldn’t categorize as low profile. I measured them and they are actually closer to 13 inches… bindings are 2018 Burton Custom Re:Flex
Hi RJ
Burton boots are typically pretty low profile. For 12s 13″ is pretty standard though. Around middle of the road for outersole profile is around 3cm greater than the mondo-print of the boot. The Mondo for 12s should be 30.0. From the Burton boots I’ve measured in the past, they are typically around 2.5 to 2.6cm over Mondo, so I would expect them to be around 32.6cm (roughly 12.8″). But also Burton boots do tend to have a reasonable bevel on them, which also helps.
In my opinion, you should be fine width-wise on the 156 Greats with Burton 12s.
Hi Nate! Thanks for all the advice. Got the board and it is actually wider around the inserts than my 2018 Jones Mtn. Twin 158cm Wide.
Can’t wait to ride this!
Thank you
You’re very welcome RJ.
Yeah not too surprised about that. I got 272mm at the inserts for the 156 Greats – and though I haven’t measured the 158W Mountain Twin, I would predict it to be roughly 270mm at the inserts (based on measuring the 157 Mountain Twin).
If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to ride it. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
Great review of the board. Like everyone else I’m looking for a recommendation for sizing.
I’m 6’2” and around 190-200 lbs with a US 11 boot.
Will the 156 be enough for my specs? Will mainly use the board for groomers, side-hits and smaller jumps. Also working on my butters.
For powder days and faster carving I have a Nitro Magnum 162.
Hi Chris
Thanks for your message.
Width-wise you’d be fine on the 156. Generally I would say that it would be too short for your specs. But since you already have a 162 Magnum, the 156 might be a good compliment to your quiver. If it was going to be your only board, then I’d definitely say go 159, but as part of your quiver the 156 might work well.
Just note that it’s going to feel more playful and be more suited to more freestyle oriented things (jibs, spins etc) than it will be for carving and speed. But yeah, I think it would be a good size for working on butters and the like. Just note that you’ll take a little hit in terms of speed & carving going down to that size.
Hope this helps with your decision.
Thanks for taking the time to answer in such an elaborate way!
I ordered the 159, I got a feeling the 156 might be a bit short for me.
Only thing missing now is the snow in Sweden.
Stoked!
You’re very welcome. Bring on the snow! When it comes, hope you have an awesome season!
Hey,
I have similar specs. How did the 159 work out?
Thanks!
thank you for the answer, helped me again to make the right choice, you are the best!
You’re very welcome Rico. Hope you have an awesome season!
hello nate ,do you think burton ion boa matches yes yes greats?
Hi Rico
I wouldn’t personally match the Ion with the Greats.
The flex would be OK, though I would probably go a little softer flexing than the Ion, but wouldn’t be too far off. Even though YES rate the Greats 7/10 for flex. I definitely get more of a 5/10 feel off it. And the Ions to me are 7/10 flex. Whilst that flex match could still work, the main reason I wouldn’t pair the Ion Boas with the greats, is that the Ions don’t have an articulating cuff. If you’re not riding any freestyle, then I don’t find that’s an issue, but for freestyle riding I definitely prefer to have an articulating cuff on my boots. And to me the Greats is something that you want to be riding freestyle on, even if it’s over the whole mountain and not just the park.
Hope this helps with your decision
hello nate ,what binding and boots you recommend with yes greats ?
Hi Rico
For the Greats, for bindings and boots, I would go with something around a 5/10 or 6/10 flex. Maybe 7/10 at most but no less than 5/10. Check out the following for some options.
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>My Top Freestyle (medium flex) Snowboard Boots
>>My Top All Mountain (medium-stiff flex) Snowboard Boots
These should give you some good options, let me know if you need help narrowing them down.
hrllo nate , for buttering is good ? yes greats
Hi Rico
Yeah I found the Greats really nice/easy to butter with.
thanks nate, you do a great job here!
You’re very welcome Rico. Hope you have a great season this winter!
Nate,
Great review and comments. Like most comments, I’m looking to get your size opinion. I’m 210lbs with a 10.5 US boot. 5’10” with a 0-0 stance (I’m pigeon-towed, so that’s basically duck for me 🙂 ). I’ll likely ride the US Northeast (VT/NH) the whole season with one trip out west. I’m getting a bit old (43), but still butter, hit wide boxes, and launch kickers, and love creative side hits. My old deck is a 154 rocker, and I’ve definitely outgrown it because it gets recklessly chattery at 30mph, so this will be my quiver of one board until I get a pow board next season. So, will the 156 hold my turns at 40-50 mph on first drop groomers, or do I reluctantly add 3cm for the slight chance of those pow sessions and a more stable steed at speed? Inquiring minds want to know. Thanks in advance!
Hi Mike
Thanks for your message.
That’s the first I’ve head of anyone with a 0-0 stance. Love hearing about all the different stances and if it works for you, then that’s awesome.
Width-wise you shouldn’t have any trouble on the 156 with 10.5s, even with 0-0 angles, so that’s definitely an option.
Length-wise, it’s a tough call, because the 156 isn’t out of your range and going to 159 will be a bigger adjustment from the 154 you’re used to. But for your specs, if you want to get that stability at those kinds of speeds, then I think you’re better off going with the 159cm, overall. Won’t be as good for your side-hits, and jibs, but still definitely work for that. And should be fine to butter. This board butters nice and easy.
I felt the 156 was pretty stable at speed for me (185lbs), without being an out and out bomber. I’ve never clocked how fast I ride, so I don’t know if it’s getting up to that 50MPH mark or not (you’ve given me the idea now though that I should measure my speed when demoing this year). But with the extra weight, I think you might find the 156 a little too wobbly at those kinds of speeds, at a guess.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision.
Thanks, Nate! Finally decided to go with the 159 with the Now + Yes collab bindings in a Large. Can’t wait to get out there this season! Have a good one.
Hey Mike. Awesome to hear you’ve decided on your new gear. If you think about it at the time, let me know what you think of your new setup, once you’ve had a chance to ride it. Bring on the winter!
Hey Nate!
Thnaks for the review, I own the 156 19 and have been using it most of the season here in nz. Love the board in most aspects though personally i am preferring my yes optimistic for my all mountain at the moment and has taken over the greats as my daily driver. Like you mention i feel the stance is a bit narrow. I notice it when laying a carve the back foot feels like is washing out a bit. i have tried putting the bindings on the next set of holes but that makes the stance a bit wide.
My question is if i get a pair of unions and adjust the stance width to something comfortable do you think that will help with it washing out? Or does the greats just need modern camber?
Hope that made sense haha
Thanks for the great reviews
Hi Tim
Thanks for your message.
Going wider with your stance will certainly help with stability, but it’s still not going to be at that Optimistic level in terms of carving/speed, partly because the Optimistic is all camber and the Greats has those rocker sections and partly because the Optimistic is a considerably stiffer ride. Certainly for bombing carving and for float in powder, the Optimistic is going to give you more. But the Greats, for me, is a great board for finding side hits, buttering, spins, hitting the park but at the same time being something you can still lay down a carve on, when you want to – but still not going to be at the level for that as something like the Optimistic or the PYL. So yeah, in short, widening the stance should help a little, but isn’t going to drastically transform the board.
Hope this helps
yo, dude i noticed you tested the 156. what’s your height/weight?
Hey
I’m 6’0″, 185lbs and wear US10 boots.
For this style of board and this width of board, I really like the 156 and typically ride this style of board (all-mountain-freestyle) in around 157, 158. If I was going for an all mountain board, usually more like 159, 160 and for a freeride board anything from 159 to 162. But 156 for this works well for me as I like to size down a little for boards that are a little wider. Which is why I go for 156 as opposed to 158 for this board.
Hope this answers your question
Hey Nate great reviews and big fan here. I have yet another sizing question. I am around 190lbs but have pretty small boot size at US8. So I was wondering how much should I take into consideration the boot size vs weight as I am afraid 156-159 could be a bit wide and slow edge to edge for those feet while 154 could be too small for the weight. Thanks in advance.
Hi Andrej
Thanks for your message.
I would be inclined to go for the 154 for your boot size. The 156 is going to be pretty wide for you. Even the 154 is going to be wide for your boots. However, reducing that length, will add back some of the maneuverability/edge-to-edge speed lost in the width. Like you say, ideally for your weight you’d want to go longer, but I think the 154 would be the best balance between boot size and weight. The other thing to think about is your height. Whilst not as important as weight and boot size, I still like to take it into account, particularly for stance width.
Thank you Nate, I am 182cm but I prefer pretty narrow stance at around 50 – 52cm so the 154 should be still better. I would assume these kind of sizing questions are tiring, but it is great to have a possibility to get some third party opinion before putting 500 euros for something you cannot try beforehand. So again thank you.
Hi Andrej
Yeah I wouldn’t normally say 154 for your height/weight. It’s sizing down quite a bit. But for your boot size, it’s striking a balance on a wider board like this. Just note that you are going to be working with a shorter board than normal. There’s perhaps not an ideal size for you for this board, but if this is the board that your set on, then I think the 154 is striking the best balance between all the factors. The other reason why 154 is doable for you for this board, IMO, is that it has quite a long effective edge compared to the overall length. A lot of 158s and 159s don’t even have the effective edge of the 154 in this board. So that’s in it’s favor, in terms of working for you.
I also ride a 12, -12 stance
Hi Rasheed
Thanks for your message.
I think the 159 Greats would certainly work for in terms of width with 11.5s (note that there isn’t a 158 in the 2019 model but there is a 159). The 156 I rode had a width at the inserts of 273mm – the 159 would be roughly 276mm at the inserts which would be plenty for size 11s. Probably actually a little wider than the 164X Never Summer West at the inserts based on other Never Summer boards that I’ve measured at the inserts. And with a +12/-12 stance, width will be fine.
The only debate is the length. Usually I’d say something around 164 for your specs. But for this type of board you can certainly go shorter than that (effective edge relative to length is quite long on these boards – and also, for an all-mountain-freestyle type board like this, sizing down is something I like to do). So, with that in mind, I think the 159 could work for you. It’s not going to be a length as a bomber board or a board for powder for you. But if you plan on using it for carving groomers, park, side-hits – that kind of thing, then I think that size would work for you. If you’re looking to keep the 164X West for certain conditions – then I think the 159 Greats would be a good compliment for your quiver. But if was going to be your one and only board for everything then it might be on the small side for you.
Hope this helps/makes sense
Thanks! I’ll go with the 159 then. I plan on keeping the West for Deep powder days or days I feel like going fast. I want to be able to ride it as a direction board that it is instead of switch. Also want to have add a camber board to complement the hybrid rocker. Thanks again! Your site has taught me everything I know about snowboard gear.
You’re very welcome Rasheed! If you think of it at the time, let me know how you like the Greats, once you’ve had a chance to ride it
Best snowboard I’ve ever ridden. I actually ride it in all conditions and it works greats. I tried transitioning to the west on few occasions and I ended up going back to the greats. Big fan of the Asymmetrical side cuts. I matched the board with the Union Strata bindings and Adidas tactical ADVs boots.
Hi Rasheed
Thanks for the update – and glad you’re getting on so well with the Greats! Sounds like an awesome setup with the Strata and Tactical ADVs too.
Hey Nate, considering the YES Greats as well. I’m 6’0, weight 220lbs and wear size 11.5. Really excited to try out the asymmetric twin as the never summer west that I own doesn’t quite feel the same while riding switch. I own a 164 x on the never summer. Will the 158 work for the 2019 model?
Hey Nate,
I am 5′ 9 and 185lbs. I have been riding a 152 Capita UltraFear and And older Skate Banana (both rocker or flat camber). I can still ride these boards in somewhat deep powder, but looking for more of a groomer/park board/all mountain board for my quiver.
Would you suggest the 156? I am thinking a 154 would be too close to what I already have
Hi Danny
Thanks for your message.
I think the 156 would be your best bet for this board. Since you already have some freestyle/park related boards in shorter lengths, it would be a better addition to your quiver, IMO. And I think the 156 would be the best fit for your specs for this board too.
Also note, that the 2019 model is a bit different (will update the review for that soon) – there’s still a 156 but it’s a little wider. If you’re looking at a 2018 model, then 156 would be your best bet. For the 2019 model, potentially the 154 would be better for the 2019 model, depending on boot size.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate! I Have a size 10 boot. If I am going to go with the new 2019 model, should I stick with the 154 or up to 156?
I am still in the air on whether to get the 2018 version or 2019
Thanks Nate,
I am a size US mens 10. You think I should stick to the 154 2019 model or 156 for the 2018? Not sure if the 2019 would still be too wide or if its worth the upgrades that they have made
Hi Danny
Both the 2018 & 2019 models are great boards, IMO. I did like the 2019 slightly more personally, so I think the upgrades were certainly noticeable. But we’re talking going from an already nice board.
I rode the 2019 156 and it was ideal for me (6’0″ 185lbs size 10 boots). I found the width was fine – I usually hate wide boards, but there’s something about YES’s mid-bite no the Greats (and Standard and Ghost) that doesn’t make it feel like a wide board. For you, you’re the same weight and same sized boots, so I think the 2019 would work for you in the 156, but you could also ride the 154.
Hi
I’m looking for a greats 2019 but not sure about the size. I’m 1.85m somewhere between 80-85 kg. US11 Ion’s. Should I get the 156 or 159? I’m currently on a Jones UMT 157. Great board but I would like to have more playfullness for progressing on butters and park riding. But without to much compromise for carving. I guess 156 for more playfullness and 159 for more stability but will it be a hugh difference? Will the turn initiation on a 159 be a lot slower, or will the 156 work less for carving?
thx
Hi Fred
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning towards the 156. You could ride either, but since you’re looking to up your park riding/butters and something more playful, I think the 156 would be the better option. And in terms of carving, I think that size would be fine too. The Greats has a long effective edge compared to overall length, so you would actually be gaining effective edge on the Greats 156 (1207mm effective edge) compared to the 157 UMT (1170mm). So, in terms of carving, you would still be fine on the 156, IMO.
Only thing is there will be a considerable drop in powder performance.
Hope this helps
Thx for your reply.
But now I’m confused again. After I wrote the message I did some more research and was pretty sure I would go for the 159… I’m a bit torn between ‘will it be not big enough so I overpower it’ and ‘will it be to big so it turns to slow’. In other reviews I read that the added waist width made the bord a slower turner. So with that in mind I would take the 156. But weight wise I’m perfect in the middle for a 159. And let’s face it, I’m 35, the weight will probably go up in the upcomming years. I have Falcor bindings and Ion boots, I prefer direct contact and fast response. I’m looking forward for your complete review so I can try to analize it further.
Will there be a drop in pow performance? I would think that the wider nose and waist will float better? Anyway, that is not the most important, I can always buy a more freeride/pow oriented board for those conditions.
thx!
Hi Fred
I didn’t notice too much in terms of slower turning on the 2019 Greats compared to the 2018 model – but maybe ever so slightly in the beginning of the turn. But yeah, the 156 will certainly turn quicker than the 159. Definitely the 159 would be better in powder than the 156 (as I mentioned in my last response).
For reference, I am 183cm, 84kg, US10 boots and I didn’t feel like I overpowered the 156. For the type of riding that I like to do with the Greats, the 156 is the size I would go for personally. But it’s not a board I would use for powder – on powder days, I would use a different board. Not that you can’t ride it in powder, just that it’s not ideal for it.
Hi
I ended up buying the 156, tested it in Tignes last weekend. Great board! Need some more time on it but first impression is very possitive. Paired it with the Union Strata.
Bought a yes optimistic 154 as well for my falcors. But that is a lot more board to handle.
Hi Fred
Thanks for the report back. Good to hear the Greats is going well for you. Yeah the Optimistic is a lot of board, for sure, but awesome once you get a handle on it.
Nate – the help you offer everyone is amazing, and I really like your reviews. My current ride (I only have one board – don’t get out often enough to justify a quiver) is 15 years old so i’m treating myself this summer to an early xmas present. My dilemma is my size…i’m 6’6″ 235 lbs and have size 12 (reduced footprint Adidas Tactical) boots. Historically, I ride more freeride, but I want to spend some time expanding my skill set this season. And i’ve gong back and forth between some very different boards: Arbor Iguchi Pro Camber, BSOD, Capita Warpspeed, Lib tech Goldmember, etc. I’m really impressed with a lot of reviews I’m reading about the Yes Greats, and i think it might be really fun to ride an Asym Twin. BUT……i may be limited by their size. Do you think, with the wider profile of the 2019 Greats, that a 159 would be enough board for someone my size?
Hi Eric
Thanks for your message.
Width-wise you would be absolutely fine on the 159 Greats. But the length is pretty small for your specs, unfortunately. Maybe if you had it as part of a quiver, then it would be an option – to use as your short freestyle board – and had something longer for your more freeride oriented stuff, then it would work. But I feel like something that size would really lack in terms of stability for you and wouldn’t be that great on a carve for your specs. I think you’d probably have fun playing around on it and learning some freestyle stuff on it, but I wouldn’t get it as your one and only.
For something similar – not the same but in the same category (asym all-mountain-freestyle) – you could look at the Never Summer Proto Type 2 or the GNU Rider’s Choice. They come in bigger sizes. One of the biggest differences with them is that their rocker between the feet and camber to tip and tail, whereas the Greats is camber between the feet and rocker to tip and tail. And there are some other differences, but similar boards. The Proto Type 2 has a 164X (could also go 161X if you really wanted to go shorter, but I think the 164X would be the better option), which I think would be a good size for you – and the Rider’s Choice has a 166W (again if you really wanted to go shorter, then there’s also a 162W).
But yeah, unfortunately, I would be skeptical about getting the Greats 159 as your one-board quiver. Just that bit too small for you, IMO.
Hope this helps
That helps tremendously. Thank you for taking the time!
You’re very welcome Eric
Have you ridden the 2019 at all yet? I have the 159 at 185lbs and it’s super wide this year, I’m wondering if I need to take another board to japan for the pow or if this thing will do good enough. It seems like it’s got a fair bit of surface area even though no setback or taper.
Hi Jarod
Thanks for your message,
Yeah, I’ve ridden the 2019 model (in the 156) but haven’t had the chance yet to update this review. 2019 model has the mid-bite now, and the waist is a bit wider – so yeah, definitely a bit more surface area there for the 2019 model. Still not a pow machine, IMO, but a little better. Like you say, still centered and still a true twin shape. I’m also 185lbs and like that particular board in a 156, so the 159 would certainly give better float.
Wow, man, you left me speechless with all the details and first person perspective explanation. I think I’m really leaning to the BSOD now after all. as I don’t need another twinish board and the narrow stance made me sound uncomfortable already. I may compare them in person, but all the specs you have laid out here is hard core man. Really appreciated with all the feedbacks you have given. I’ll let you know by 2019 season how I feel with the new deck. Keep up with the good work and review more boards from your perspective, rather some other commercial channels. Cheers!!!
You’re very welcome Jalen.
Look forward to hearing which one you choose and how you get on once you’ve had a chance to ride it.
Hi Nate,
Great job on the review, which is one of the better ones I have seen all cross the internet for this Great board!!! Even though it was fun reading it through plus all the comments and your responses, but I wish you could make the video a bit longer to tell how Great this board is, even with comparison maybe?
I have a dumb question, how do you tell which is the toe side and the heel side for an Asym Twin board like this? Is it color coded?
and I am 181cm, 178lbs, I had a 156 at first, but then after thinking, I returned and got with a 158 instead, only due to my other boards are around 157ish (157 Never Summer Warlock, 156 Jones Hovercraft). Like you said a 158 Greats ride bigger than a normal 158.
I am sure you have tried a bunch of the 2019 boards, what board(s) would you recommend for the 2019 season if I want an all-mountain board in the intermediate-advanced riding level, which is better in carving and powder, to add to my quiver?
Much appreciated with your time and keep up with the Great stuff!!!
Hi Jalen
Thanks for the Great message!
To determine the heel edge, depends on the board – some asym boards have “heel edge” written on the board – so that makes it easy. I think the best way with the Greats is by looking at the tip and tail. You’ll notice that there’s one side of the tip and tail that sticks out more, that’s longer and pointier than the other side. That’s the toe side. See image below:
Hope that makes sense.
If you’re looking for something more all-mountain, that’s got more focus on powder/carving but still want it to be quite versatile, then I would check out the following:
>>My Top 10 All Mountain Snowboards
From the 2019 models I rode, I would also add the Nitro Team Gullwing in there, and if you’re thinking of something a little more aggressive but still good in powder, then something like the Capita Mercury or Jones Explorer would be worth looking at.
If you want something that’s more specialized for powder, speed & carving, then check out:
>> My Top 5 Freeride Snowboards
I rode 2019 models of all of these, except the Rossi XV, but that board hasn’t changed as far as I know. I would also add the GNU Mullair & Lib Tech E-Jack Knife to this lot (which I rode 2019 models of). Or the Capita Black Snowboard of Death which is kind of in between all-mountain and freeride.
Hope this gives you some Great options!
Thanks Nate,
Mannn… I was reading your YES Standard review and comments, how can you handle all those questions all about sizes!!!! I would lose my hair if that many people ask me such similar questions. But anyway, good job on trying your best to answer them in different perspectives. I would def looking into the new Standard and the Capita boards in this upcoming season, Actually I was almost got the Mullair this past season, also took a serious though into the Lib Tech TRS HP as it sound like a serious Carver but less productive in powder. instead I took the Jones Hovercraft to be my powder board for those 40cm Powder days in Whistler lol.
Hate to put myself onto this same boat as many others lol. I’m 181cm, 80kg, with size 10.5 in Vans boots. I’m thinking getting a stiffer boot (looking at the Burton ION kind right now), to go with the boards, as my Vans is a quite soft in comparison. DO you have any size recommendations for the above board we have mentioned. which can make a quiver more complete with their focused purposes? I don’t do pipes and no Jibbing neither.
I currently own:
Never Summer Warlock 157
Jones Hovercraft 156
YES Greats 158
Cheers Man!!!
Hi Jalen
I get a lot of questions about sizing, particularly for the Standard, but I get how confusing board choice and sizing can be, especially when you haven’t bought a board before, so I’m always happy to try to help people out with those kinds of questions.
Since you already have the Warlcok (soft flexing and what I would call a freestyle board) in a 157 and Greats (mid flexing and what I would call an all-mountain-freestyle board) in a 158 and Hovercraft (powder) in a 156. Then something that’s more medium-stiff, that’s all-mountain or freeride, and something in a 159-160 would be a good compliment to your quiver I think.
So something like:
~ Capita BSOD 159
~ Capita Mercury 159
~ Jones Explorer 159
~ Niche Story 159
~ Burton Flight Attendant 159
~ YES Pick Your Line 159
~ GNU Mullair 159
~ Lib Tech E Jack Knife 159
~ Never Summer Chairman 160
Anything like I think would be a good addition to compliment your quiver and would go well with the Burton Ions too. And the widths should be good without needing to go wide as well, with 10.5s, especially if you go with the Burton boots (or Adidas or Vans or Ride). If you really wanted something significantly longer than what you’ve got, you could go the next size up, but I think those sizes would be best for your specs, and since you’re already increasing the stiffness, I think that’s a good little step up in size.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate, its exactly what I’m looking for to add. That all mountain/free ride can carve as well.
What do you think the pros and cons between the Capita BSOD and the Mercury, Its so hard for me to pick one by not able to ride them in person, as I know the BSOD is gonna be a little better on powder, but the Mercury is so tempting with its close to TWINish ride by the setback differences compare to the BSOD. and its gonna be mostly for the Cypress and Whistler kinda mountain that I will be riding it for, I also thinking to take it with me onto the trip with my Hovercraft for those super Pow days.
Thanks for your time,
Hi Jalen
I would say the biggest differences between the BSOD and Mercury are (based on 2019 models which I rode on the same day, both in the same size (159):
1. The BSOD is a little stiffer. Even though Capita rate the BSOD 6.5/10 and the Mercury 7/10, I felt the BSOD just that little bit stiffer – but both fairly similar in that cateogory. I’d say the other way around though – Mercury 6.5/10 or maybe 7/10 and BSOD 7/10 or maybe 7.5/10.
2. The BSOD just has that little bit more in powder. I had a good bit of powder on the day that I rode both these boards (2019 models) and both were really fun in powder, but the BSOD just ahead in that category.
3. The BSOD was confidence inspiring at speed. I felt really confident bombing it at speed. The Mercury is also good in this area, but the BSOD just had it, IMO. I rated both 4/5 for speed for the 2018 models, but I’m probably going to up the BSOD to 4.5/5.
4. Both really fun to carve and couldn’t separate them there.
5. The Mercury felt better riding switch. For my 2018 review I gave it 3/5 for switch but I’ll likely up that to 3.5/5. You can ride the BSOD switch, but the Mercury felt a bit better there.
6. Jumps/Spins: Both felt good on straight airs and good for big air. Both with decent pop. Mercury a little better for spins than the BSOD. But neither great for spins.
7. The BSOD is a little wider at the inserts (268mm vs 266mm on the Mercury) despite the Mercury’s waist being wider (259mm on the Mercury and 256mm on the BSOD). And that was even with the Mercury with a wider stance (595mm vs the 555mm I rode the BSOD on). SO the BSOD is quite wide at the inserts compared to the waist (kind of like the mid-bite boards from YES) and the Mercury quite narrow at the inserts compared to the waist.
8. I like both in the trees – both felt agile in powder – but the BSOD would just get the nod in terms of tree performance for me.
9. Not that either would be great choices for jibbing, I would favor the Mercury over the BSOD in that respect.
10. Both boards were identical in weight (both 2700grams). I’m not claiming to have the most accurate weighing system, but yeah both the same. And both really light, something Capita always is. That puts both these boards at 16.98 grams/cm – the average of the 24 different boards I weighed was 18.21grams/cm. The heaviest was 20.63 grams/cm and the lightest was 16.21 grams/cm (another Capita board).
That’s probably more detail than you were looking for! But those are the most notable difference I noticed between them.
Hey,
I am 5’8, 168lbs and size 8 boot. Was trying to decide between 152cm and 154cm. Which do you think would be better?
Thanks,
Mike
Hi Mike
Thanks for the message.
I think both could work for you, but the 154 would be the best size, IMO.
Both would work width wise. The 152 would arguably be a better with for size 8s, but since there isn’t a huge difference in width, I think the length is the most important thing.
If you really wanted something smaller/more playful and were looking to use it mostly for freestyle, then the 152 is an option. The main subtle differences, IMO, would be.
~ The 154 would be better on a carve, more stable at speed, more stable on landings and provide better float in powder
~ The 152 would be a little more nimble, more playful, butter a little easier and be a little better for spins
All on a subtle but noticeable level, based on my experience testing two identical boards that are 2cm different.
But yeah, overall I’d say 154 is your best bet.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
After having ridden the 2019 greats, would you say it is stiffer or more aggressive than the 2018 model? I am asking because the new core has been described as “more responsive”, and the camber profile is now 2-4-2.
Do you personally prefer how the 2019 model rides over the 2018?
Cheers.
Hi Joel
Thanks for your message (and sorry for the delayed reply, have been on vacation)
Yeah, I preferred the 2019 Greats over the 2018 – and that’s saying something, because I loved the 2018. The camber profile is now 2-4-2 instead of the 4-4-4 it was, and that’s probably part of it, but it’s also now got mid-bite (like the Standard and Ghost) which also makes a difference.
In terms of flex YES rates it 7/10 (glad they are rating out of 10 now, they’re ratings before were a bit strange – to me at least) but it definitely didn’t feel that stiff to me. The tip and tail are actually quite flexy (making it super easy to butter). Stiffer between the feet, but overall I would still say 5/10. It didn’t feel any stiffer to me overall than the 2018.
Hope this answers your questions
Thanks Nate, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my message.
I also found Yes’s flex/5 scale a bit weird.
Just one more question about the 2019 model – Did you notice the increased waist width of the board while you were riding? The 156 had its waist width increased from 251 to 259, which seems like a considerable jump.
I am worried that the 156 may be too wide for my size 10 boots, and I’ll have to downsize to a 154, but then I fear I’ll be sacrificing some stability at speed.
Thanks again 🙂
Hi Joel
I admit I was skeptical about YES putting mid-bite on the Greats. I liked it on the 2018 Standard but I didn’t think it would suit this board. But turning felt very lively and I really didn’t feel like I was riding a 259mm waist board. And more than that, it’s also 273mm at the inserts (which is even more than you would expect from a 259mm waist, because of that mid-bite). But somehow it doesn’t feel sluggish at all. Not sure how it’s done, but usually a board that wide at the inserts would feel slow and heavy to me, but not with this.
I’m 6’0″, 185lbs and also size 10s. So for me riding 156 is a little bit of a down-size for me – so that would certainly help with increasing the agility of the board for me. If you’re a lighter rider, then it may feel heavier to you, but to me I didn’t notice it being any less nimble than the 2018 model. Again, I’m not sure how they achieve that, but that’s the feeling I got from it.
I did hear from another (lighter) rider that they felt that the initial turn initiation felt slower to them but then it was super lively through the rest of the turn. But they also rode the 156 and are a lighter build to me. I didn’t notice this when I rode this. That’s why I feel this (like the Standard and the Ghost) are boards that ride best, when you size down a little from what you’re used to – not heaps of length, not like 5cm, but a little, like 2-3cm shorter.
Thanks Nate. Much appreciated.
You’re very welcome
Hi Nate,
I have kind of a weird question for you. I recently bought a Greats 152 and noticed that the camber in the middle of the board is pretty flat. According to the specs, it should be 4mm but when measured on a flat surface, it’s pushing 1mm at most. Do you think this will affect the board’s performance much and should I be pushing a warranty claim on the board? I received the board a couple days ago and have yet to take it to the mountain, but I can’t return it because I’ve already mounted the bindings.
Thanks.
Hi Joe
Thanks for your message.
That is weird. At first I wondered if it might be just how the board sits, because of the rocker sections, but then I measured the YES Emoticon (my Girlfriends board – the only YES board I have with me at the moment) and the camber in that measures 2mm from the ground (from the center of the board, unweighted) – and it’s supposed to have 2mm of camber, so that seems right. But if you’re only measuring 1mm, when the Greats is supposed to be 4mm, then something doesn’t seem right.
Did you measure this unweighted? It will likely flatten out when you’re on the board – that would be normal. I measured it on the Emoticon without bindings on it, but I can’t imagine that would flatten it out more than like a 1/4 of a millimeter, if that – certainly not by 3mm.
If the camber has been flattened out like that somehow, then it should be a warrantable defect, IMO, but that’s only a guess. I would make sure to take a pic of the board with a ruler against it to show what it is. It might be that they have an explanation for it, but it’s worth bringing up with them for sure.
Would definitely make a difference to it’s performance if the camber has been flattened out somehow.
I should hopefully have a 2019 Greats to demo in the next couple of weeks, so I’ll measure the camber on that when I get it, to see what it is.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for your input. It was measured with both the bindings off and on, and it made very little difference. I will certainly take pics as proof. It’s interesting because the board has a bit more camber on the toe edge compared to the heel edge (~0.5mm). I am currently in talks with Nidecker’s customer service and waiting to hear back from their warranty guy.
As for the 2019 Greats, as much as i was excited for the midbite, it looks like they adopted a similar concept as the 2018 Standard where the midbite comes at the cost of a much wider platform. That made me lean towards the 2018 model. I’m really hoping i can get this 2018 Greats issue sorted out with Nidecker/Yes so i can get on the slopes at the end of this month.
Thanks again for your input and if you can get back to me with the 2019 camber measurements, i would appreciate it.
You’re very welcome Joe. Interesting to see what they say. Will let you know the 2019 Greats camber measurements once I get hold of it
Hi Joe
Got the 2019 Greats in Yesterday. Didn’t get a chance to measure it yesterday but did just now. It measures exactly 4mm, when lying flat on a desk completely unweighted (no bindings or anything).
The image isn’t the clearest, but from the naked eye, it measured exactly 4mm from top of table to the underside of the metal edge.
So, assuming you have the Greats lying flat (so that the hole board at least to the contact points are touching the ground or table), and it’s unweighted, and your measuring from the center of the board, then for it to read 1mm appears that your camber has been flattened at some point.
Note that when I had the board lying width ways across the desk and the contact points weren’t in contact with the desk, it only read 2mm, so make sure you have a big enough surface that you can sit the board on.
Hope this helps
P.S: The 2019 model is sick to ride! I was a little skeptical about the mid-bite on the Greats (even though I really liked it on the Standard, but didn’t think it suited the Greats) but it’s still an awesome board to ride.
Hey Nate,
I appreciate the follow up. It looks like my issue was just a one-off. I’ve sent the board back and ordered another one. If this one exhibits the same characteristics, i’ll send it over to the warranty department at Yes.
That’s pretty awesome to hear about the 2019 model. I took a gamble on the 2018 model after hearing about the midbite because i expected the board to get wider like the Standard did for 2018, and looking at the catalog, it looks like the 2019 model gets considerably wider. I’m working with a size 9 boot, so i’d prefer the narrower model instead of the mid-wides, although that seems to be the trend over at Yes. I’m bummed out about not getting the midbite but also super excited to try out this 2018 model this month. Thanks again Nate!
You’re very welcome Joe. Yeah hopefully that was just a one-off and you can get a replacement that doesn’t have that issue.
Hope you enjoy it as much as I did (had a great time on the 2018 model as well) when you get a chance to get it on the hill
Hi Nate,
Do the binding angles haveto be +15-15? I usually ride +18-9 (slight duck) and I’m wondering if this will work with the Asym board. Thanks.
Hi Dan
I wouldn’t say it will like super weird or anything but a mirror duck like +15/-15 is optimal for an asym, but not 100% mandatory. I’ve ridden without a non-mirror duck on asym boards and they still rode fine to me. Not optimal but still works for sure. And I think if you’re not in something like a +18/0 or something like that, then it’s doable.
Hey, I’m looking for an all mountain board and having doubts between those two:
*Yes Great 2018
*Yes Standart 2018
My riding’s style is to go in pists(in and out)but always looking for adventures.
I love to play with the board all around and even go fast sometimes.
When I see a good offpist/powder I go for it immediately, and occasionly go to the park, but just for small-medium jumps(sometimes natural jumps so, and between trees).
I know that the yes standart is more all mountain versatile, but I see thay its wider this year and I’m a small person.
My height is 1.65 cm, my weight is 61-62 kg(135 lbs) and my shoe size is 8, so it wont be a narrow stance in the 149 size for me?
In addition I got a good price on the Yes great 152 size in the shop next to my home so I’m not sure what to do?
(By the way, I know that the yes great is awesome and performes really good, my only fear is the powder/deep stuff abilities, so if my weight is 135 pounds and this size range is 125-165 so I’m beneath the avarage plus this board have rocker tip/tail means that it will be not that bad in powder?)
Hi Aviad
Thanks for your message.
The biggest weakness of the Greats is powder. You can still ride it in there, but not as good as something like the Standard. I actually think the Standard 149cm is a good size for you. That’s about the length I would put you on for an all-mountain board and it’s not too wide by the time you get down to the 149. It’s probably still going to be a little wider overall than the 151 Mountain Twin, but not by much – narrower at the waist, but a little wider tip/tail and likely to be a little wider at the inserts, but not by much I wouldn’t say. And that little bit of extra width will help with float in powder.
The Standard 149 is also going to be a little narrower overall than the 152 Greats.
The Greats is one of those boards that has a lot of effective edge when compared to overall length – so the 152 is going to ride a bit longer than your average 152. So with that in mind, I think it’s getting a bit long for your specs. That would, like you say, help it to float better in powder for you, and being a little bit wider than the 149 Standard will help there too. But I would say overall, the Standard 149 would be just as good in powder, even though it’s the smaller size, compared with the 152 Greats, but would be a better size overall for your specs.
Hope this helps
Tnx its very helpfull!, but they dont have the 149 size of the yes standart, and I just wanted to know if in ur mind the 152 yes great will be as good as I want in my riding style, or should I wait and look for another board?
Hi Aviad
I don’t think the Greats would be a horrible choice for you – but I think in the 152 it would be getting a bit long – that would help it to be better in powder, but my biggest concern is that you would find it too long, when not in powder. You could maybe go up to 152 for some boards, but this board in particular rides long for a 152, so that’s why I think it could be a bit long for you.
Ideally, I would say something around 149, 150, but you could go a little longer depending on the type of board, but for the Greats, something in a smaller size than 152 (if it existed) would be better – but then you’d still have something that wouldn’t necessarily be the best in powder.
So, whilst I think you could work with it, I don’t think it’s ideal for you.
Hi,
I’m cirious about your impression regarding the weight of the board. I found it suprisingly heavier then for example the Basic (156 vs. 155cm) when in my hands. Did you notice that? Why is that?
Hi MarBoc
I can’t say I noticed that – but I didn’t have the Basic at the same time as the Greats, so I had no direct comparison. Not sure why that would be – the Greats does have more going on in terms of tech, so that might have something to do with it – it has a poplar and bamboo core, as opposed to the Basic which has a full poplar core – but I would have thought bamboo would be light. Maybe the extra stiffness of the Greats makes it heavier? Not sure? But the Greats certainly didn’t feel heavy on snow – I found it quite a snappy, lively, poppy board – and I guess that’s where it counts.
I was really surprised when I took it in my hands as I was sure it would be significatly lighter due to bamboo and other tech stuff.
Can it be that sintered base makes the difference? I would think it’s more “dense” then extruded one as the pellets are pressed not melted. There’s also triax on the top vs. biax in the Basic. But I don’t think it’s noticable in terms of weight.
Hi MarBoc
Yeah, maybe it is the sintered base – as you say they are more dense than an extruded base. I’m very curious now to get the two boards together and feel the weight of them.
I’m considering buying this board cause of all the great reviews and hype it’s getting (plus I think it looks great)
Do you think a boot size of 11.5 would be too big for this board? I’m thinking of getting reduced footprint boots along with it. The waist width of my current board is 24.7 and I get a little bit of heel drag when doing aggressive carves
Hi Nestor
Thanks for your message.
You might get away with it on the 158, with low profile boots. I think you’d be ok then.
I’m not sure why they don’t do wide sizes for this board. Maybe they will next season?
But you’d want to make sure that 158cm is a good length for you too, even if you did want to take a punt on the width – I think that’s the only width that would work in the Greats sizes. If you’re not sure of your best length for this board, I’d be happy to give my 2 cents if you let me know your height, weight and ability.
Hope this helps
Hello Nate, I am Luis from Spain, I am 1.78cm tall, weight 75kg, foot size 43 European and I am 46 years old. Intermediate and somewhat advanced level. In the mountains I like to look for lateral jumps throughout the resort, in the snowpark I do small and medium jumps, in the boxes I have a limited repertoire but I would like to level up both in boxes and jumps. On flatter tracks I like to do tricks and butters and if there is more slope I like to learn to carve and play with speed. I like to do dodo with a freestyle approach. At the resorts where I usually go, in the morning the track is usually hard or frozen. Late in the season there is a lot of spring snow, I almost never find powder. Would this board be right for me? In what size? Would another table be more suitable than this one for me? The Union Strata are good for this table? O other bindings better? Thank you so much! Your work is amazing!
Hi Luis, thanks for your message.
I think the Greats would be a great choice for what you’re describing. It will handle everything you want and is one of the best, if not the best, board I’ve ridden in icy conditions, so it’s got you covered there, IMO.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 157/158, but you’ll want to size down from that with the Greats because of it’s extra width. I think you could ride the 156, if you wanted to optimize it a little more for speed/carving, but if you want it more optimized for side-hits, ground tricks and park stuff, then I would go 154. You’ll still be able to ride the 154 fast and carve with it, just want give you quite the same stability at speed as the 156 would. And similarly, the 156 would still be fine for your freestyle stuff, just not as good as the 154. So, it depends on which you want it to be slightly more optimized for.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you very much Nate! I really appreciate your advice.
Looking forward to next season and trying out the board. I’ll tell you.
I bought the Union Strata bindings, found a good deal and didn’t pass it up.
Have I done well? Do they make a good combination or should I put them on sale and buy others that match the board better?
Thanks Nate.
Hey Luis
Thanks for the update. The Strata are a great match to the Greats, IMO, so you’ve done well there, IMO.