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: $599 (USD recommended retail)
Style: All-Mountain-Freestyle
Flex Rating: 7/10 on YES’ flex scale
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 92.1/100
Compared to other Men’s All-mountain-Freestyle Boards
Of the 33 current model all-mountain freestyle snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Greats ranked 1st 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: | $599 - 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 | 120-160 | 54-73 |
151 | 253 | 140-190 | 64-86 |
154 | 256 | 150-200 | 68-91 |
156 | 259 | 160-220 | 73-100 |
159 | 262 | 170-250 | 77-113 |
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.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
JUMPS | 4.5 | 18/20 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SWITCH | 5.0 | 10/10 |
SPEED | 3.5 | 7/10 |
SPINS | 4.5 | 9/10 |
BUTTERS | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JIBBING | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 4/5 |
POWDER | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 92.1/100 |
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, 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,
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!
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!