Hello and welcome to my YES Hybrid snowboard review.
In this review, I will take a look at the Hybrid as a mellow freeride snowboard.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Hybrid a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how it compares with other mellow freeride snowboards.
Note: The 2024 model was the last released model of the Hybrid.
Overall Rating
Board: YES Hybrid
Price: $599
Style: Mellow Freeride
Flex Rating: Medium-Stiff (7/10)
Flex Feel on Snow: Medium (6/10)
Rating Score: 89.3/100
Compared to other Men’s Mellow Freeride Boards.
Of the 30 current model mellow freeride snowboards that we tested:
❄️ The Hybrid ranked 4th out of 30
Overview of the Hybrid’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Hybrid's specs and available sizes.
Specs
Style: | Mellow Freeride |
Price: | $599 - BUYING OPTIONS |
Ability Level: |  |
Flex: |  |
Feel: |  |
Smooth/Snappy: |  |
Dampness: |  |
Playful/Aggressive: |  |
Edge-hold: |  |
Camber Profile: | Hybrid Camber YES' Camrock 1-4-1 |
Shape: | |
Setback Stance: | Setback 1.5" (40mm) |
Base: | Sintered (YES' "Sintered True" |
Weight: | A little heavier than normal |
Sizing
LENGTH (cm) | Waist Width (mm) | Rec Rider Weight (lb) | Rec Rider Weight (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
153 | 260 | 140-190 | 64-86 |
157 | 264 | 150-190 | 68-86 |
161 | 264 | 160-200 | 73-90 |
Who is the Hybrid Most Suited To?
The Hybrid is first and foremost a powder board - and that's where it excels the most.
But this is no one-trick-pony. It can carve and bomb groomers well too. Whilst it's not a good freestyle weapon, it can handle straight airs over jumps pretty well for its board type.
It's a short wide board, so it's best to size down for it.
Not a beginner board. You want to be at least solid intermediate to ride this board.
The Hybrid in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Hybrid is capable of.
Demo Info
Board: YES Hybrid 2022, 157cm (264mm waist width)
Date: March 3, 2022
Conditions
Cloudy with some patches of blue at times. Really high cloud so visibility was all good.
Temperature was -2°C (28°F) degrees. No wind.
24hr snow: 4cm (1.5")
48hr snow: 23cm (9")
7 day snow: 64cm (25")
On groomer: Some icier sections in places but for the most part medium firmness with some softer areas. Fair bit of crud with not all that much groomed but some well groomed areas as well.
Off groomer: Some left over freshies! Untracked in places even. Mostly tracked but some nice untouched spots to explore.
Set Up
Bindings angles: +15/-15 (Nate) and +12/-9 (Fraser)
Stance width: 23″ (585mm)
Stance Setback: Setback 40mm (1.5")
Width at Inserts: 283mm (11.14") at front insert and 278mm (10.95")
Testers: Nate and Fraser
Fraser Specs: Height: 6'1" | Weight: 180lbs | Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Tactical Lexicon ADV | Bindings Used: Fix Yale (M)
Nate Specs: Height: 6'0" | Weight: 180lbs | Boot Size: US9.5 Adidas Tactical ADV | Bindings Used: Burton Malavita (M)
Weight: 3020grams (6lbs 11oz)
Weight per cm: 19.24 grams/cm
Average Weight per cm: 18.59 grams/cm*
*based on a sample size of around 200 models that I’ve weighed in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 & 2023 models. So, the Hybrid is a little heavier than average. Part of that is down to how wide it is. It's really the equivalent of a regular width 161 or thereabouts at a guess, so it's around average weight for it's surface area. That said, I did find it a little heavier than normal riding it. Fraser felt that it felt normal in terms of weight. I would like to try this board in 153 - in which case, it would feel lighter.
Powder
We had some powder on the day, which is always nice. It wasn't an epic pow day or anything, but there was still enough to get a feel for how it would perform in powder. Between that feel and the specs of the board I am confident this board would be great in even deep powder.
It's tapered, directional and is stiff enough to not fold. And it's got a little rocker. The rocker is fairly subtle but it's there. Plus because of the width, there is heaps of surface area. It's even wider than the waist width would suggest.
Carving
When you get it on edge it can hold a really nice carve. Prefers long drawn out carves.
Turning
Ease of Turning/Slashing: Takes a little more muscle to turn than I remember it from the previous model I tested. But still quite easy to initiate turns and slash on.
Maneuverability at slow speeds: Again not as quick edge-to-edge as I remember it. It's not a slow turner or anything, but average/normal. Becomes more at home and more maneuverable in powder.
Skidded Turns: Nose feels a little catchy at times, but nothing crazy.
Speed
Nice and quick and really stable at higher speeds. Decent glide too. Was confident opening this board out and riding it fast.
Uneven Terrain
Crud: If it did get thrown off, it wouldn't be hard to correct but not super easy either. But I didn't feel it at a point where it was getting bucked around. Smashed through or just flew over everything I encountered.
Bumps: Averagely maneuverable. Less maneuverable than I remember it when I tested a previous model. It's not bad, but nothing that's super weavy or anything.
Let’s Break up this text with a Video
Jumps
Not bad at all for jumps for the type of board it is.
Pop: Not super easy to access, but not that hard either. When you do load it up a bit, it gives back some good pop. I wouldn't say epic or anything, but decent.
Approach: Stable and can definitely hold a line well once you pick it. Speed checking and corrections not super easy but not super hard either.
Landing: Solid on landings. Somewhat forgiving of errors but not super forgiving - don't want to land too tail heavy.
Side-hits: Not amazing but decent.
Small jumps/Big Jumps: Best for medium jumps, IMO. But it can certainly handle bigger jumps. Just that if you do land tail heavy there's more consequence from a bigger jump, so that's the only reason I'd say medium is it's sweet spot but can handle small and large jumps fine.
Switch
Node ideal being as directional as it is.
Spins
Not great. Being a little heavier and setting up/landing switch not great. But not what it's made for either.
Butters
It requires a little muscle to press but nothing too extreme. You can certainly press it. But the tail and nose do feel quite different. Again, not what it's predominantly designed for.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
POWDER | 4.5 | 27/30 |
TURNS/SLASHING | 3.5 | 10.5/15 |
CARVING | 4.0 | 8/10 |
TREES/BUMPS | 4.0 | 12/15 |
CRUD/CHUNDER | 4.0 | 8/10 |
SPEED | 4.0 | 8/10 |
JUMPS | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
SWITCH | 2.5 | 2.5/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 89.3/100 |
Overall, the Hybrid is pretty versatile, given how directional it is. Apart from the obvious (powder) it can also carve well and feels stable at speed and when you want to hit the odd jump or side hit it's not too bad there either.
But it's when you get it into powder that this thing excites. It just feels really at home in powder and should be able to handle the deepest of pow.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you want to learn more about the Hybrid, or if you are ready to buy, or if you just want to research prices and availability, check out the links below.
If you want to check out some other surfy freeride snowboard options, or if you want to compare how the Hybrid compares to other surfy freeride snowboards, then check out the next link.
Hi Nate, thanks for all you do. I’m looking to get a new board after spending the past dozens years on a Rossignol Krypto Magtek 163. I’m 6’1″, 206 lbs, size 10 Burton Ion Boot. I’m an intermediate/advanced rider-can go anywhere, but as it gets steeper and bumpier my form goes out the window and I’m skidding every turn. Never go in the park. Enjoy cruising groomers, love pow when I can get it, would like to be better in trees and steeper bumpier runs. Mostly ride at Breckenridge-10-14 days a year (live on east coast). Leaning toward a 157 Hybrid ( I know they stopped making them-but a few are still available). A little concerned about maneuverability, which some said can be an issue with this board. Coming off my old 163 Rossi-will this board be noticeably easier to maneuver? Or should I be looking elsewhere? (also want my new board to have good edge hold, given that if it’s icy, I still want to go out and feel safe. (I’m 60-so not into falling, decently athletic for my age) Thank you
Hi Frederick, thanks for your message.
Based on what you’re describing, think the Hybrid would be a good match, with the biggest question mark for it being maneuverability, as you say. But I don’t think you should have too many issues with it in terms of maneuverability, in the 157. If you were looking at the 161, then yeah, I’d be hesitant in terms of it lacking that maneuverability, but in the 157 I think you’ll be fine (and given the width of this board, the 157 is the size for it, that I would recommend for you).
Lots of other options that would work for you as well, and I’d be happy to list a few others that I think would be a good match, but the 157 Hybrid (and I’m guessing you can get it at a decent price) should be a good bet, IMO.
Hi Nate, please help me with the measurements. 182 lbs, 180 cm, boot 11. pow/carve 157 or 161.
off topic, I have a question that has always tormented me: when I choose a board, should I consider in my weight the extra of clothes, boots, protections, helmet, mask, backpack? sometimes I could even have an extra weight of 5 kg + with the addition of all these accessories.
thanks
Hi Anthony
I go from weight without gear and from what I hear from brands they base their weight recommendations on the same. It’s more about the force your body can apply to the board. The weight of those clothes etc aren’t applying force in the same way as your body. That said, if you do carry significant extra weight than what would be considered normal, you could add some of that – e.g. backpack with extra stuff in it. But I wouldn’t count weight from clothes, boots, helmet etc.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 159/160. With how wide this board is, I would be inclined to size down a little, even with size 11 boots, so I would be leaning 157. Because it sounds like you’d mainly be using the board for carving and powder, you could go to the 161, assuming you were wanting to be doing more high speed, long carves more so than slower speed/shorter/sharper carves and weren’t going to be spending your pow time in the trees, or not often. If you wanted to also incorporate trees/slower tighter riding, then I would probably stick with the 157. But if it’s more open terrain, fast, big carves and powder, then the 161 is probably a good bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
At 6’2 215lbs size 11 boots. 161 or 157?
Hi James, thanks for your message.
Probably the 161. I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163. This board is still wide for 11s, but the need to size down isn’t as much as it would be with smaller feet, so I think sizing down 2cm would be enough in this case. The 157 wouldn’t be wrong though, IMO, if you were wanting to really optimize maneuverability – i.e. using it as a dedicated tree board, that kind of thing. But as a more do-it-all or more powder focused board, I think the 161 would be your best bet.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi and thank you for such an awesome website.
Yours and others’ reviews are helping me to buy a new board after riding a Salomon Powder Snake for 12 years. I didn’t realise there are so many differences in boards.
I’ve narrowed it down to the Greats or the Hybrid (or even the Standard or Bataleon Thunderstorm. I’m 186cm, 85kg. US11.5. Solid intermediate. Ready for more and feeling a little limited by my 1 board quiver. Don’t really do park. Just cruise the groomers and hit the Japan pow before it gets all chopped up. I ride with students (being a PE teacher) of all levels. From beginners to taking video of the big kids hitting wild stuff that I go right around.
What size would be good for me? 159? Thanks
Hi Quinn, thanks for your message.
If you were going to be keeping your Powder Snake for powder days, then I think the Greats would be the best compliment to it – as in, being the most different. But given you don’t do park, something like the Standard or Thunderstorm would also be good bets. The Hybrid would work too, but being more powder oriented, I would go with one of the others, and be leaning Standard or Greats, to give yourself a bigger contrast between the boards in your quiver.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. With 11.5s you’ll want to go wide with most boards. The Greats and Standard can both pretty much be considered wide boards.
If you were to go Greats, the 159 would be a good bet, IMO. The 156 would be in range too, if you wanted to really optimize maneuverability and slower speed performance at the sacrifice of some stability at speed and float in powder.
For the Standard, I would go 159. The 156 is probably a bit small for you for the Standard as it’s got less effective edge than the Greats. The 162 would be a possibility but getting on the bigger side, especially for when you want to be riding slower with more beginner riders.
For the Thunderstorm, I would go 159W, but the 162W would also be a possibility, but given what you’re describing and that you’ll sometimes be riding slow – and assuming you’ll have the Powder Snake for powder, I would be leaning 159W.
If you were go with a 2 board quiver out of these 4 boards, then I’d likely go 156 Greats and 162W Thunderstorm or Hybrid.
For the Hybrid, if you were going to use it as a complimentary board for the Powder Snake, I’d say 157 is your best bet. If you were going to use it as your powder board, I’d probably go up to the 161.
Hope this helps
Thank you very much for your feedback. Actually, I didn’t write this but the Powder Snake now has a cracked core at the start of the rise of the nose so I’ve been riding it backward with the bindings switched for the last part of this season.
I am now also considering a 160w deep thinker or skeleton key 162. Looking for a 1 board to do a bit of everything except the park, that is also forgiving yet fun when cruising with beginners. Will you be testing the Gril Master? Is there a board that does all that well? Thanks for your thoughts always.
Hey Quinn
Thanks for the extra info. For a do it all board, I would go either Standard or Thunderstorm from the boards we looked at above. But if you’re not riding any park or any switch, then something like the Deep Thinker or Skeleton Key would work. Even if you needed to ride switch sometimes, then the Deep Thinker would be fine. The Skeleton Key not as switch friendly, but doable if you’re a capable switch rider and don’t need to do much in switch. The Gril Master could definitely work too. I got out the 2025 model this year and was a really fun board and nice and forgiving. It’s easy to ride at slower speeds and take sharper turns and should be good in powder. I found it was OK for riding switch, but not ideal with 15mm of taper and that directional camber profile. But certainly doable. I think the 160 in that one would be a good bet for you. I’d say a little more forgiving than the Deep Thinker, Greats – similar in that respect to the Standard and Thunderstorm. The Skeleton Key I’d also say is just as forgiving, but it feels heavier/damper, so not quite as easy to whip around.
Hi Nate,
I’m a 47 years old advanced Rider with Bootsize 12 (92KG; 193 cm; Stance angle: 18/-6) and I’m looking for a daily driver mainly used for carving (little more leaning to a turny / circle carv than high speed s-turns) on groomers in variable conditions (Europe/Alps). Good edge hold in icy conditions would be important also. My older Boards (Burton Custom 162W; Nitro Magnum 163) were okay (not great), but were lacking a bit on edge hold to me. I’m more of an all mountain rider. Rarely some smaller jumps or 180s or switch riding. No park. Like Powder for sure but that is max 10%… After reseaching on your website i m tending to: The Gnu Gremlin, The Yes Hybrid or the Yes Optimistic. Do you have a recommendation/sequence or better options for me? Which size?
Thank you!!!
Hi Martin
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning Hybrid, but all 3 would be good choices for what you’re describing and all 3 have really good edge hold in icy conditions, in my experience.
Size-wise, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 163, but even though you have size 12s, I would size down a bit for the Hybrid. But sizing to the 161 should be enough, given your boot size. The 157 would be doable at a stretch if you wanted it super maneuverable, but it would be at the sacrifice of stability at speed and float in powder. Same goes for the Optimistic.
The Gremlin 158 is wider at the waist and the nose (tail the same) vs the Hybrid, but narrower at the inserts. The 161 Gremlin (because the Hybrid 161 stays the same width as the 157) is a little wider at the inserts vs the 161 Hyrbid and quite a bit wider nose and wider at the tail. Overall it’s surface area is quite a bit more. Unfortunately it’s hard to say how it compares in terms of effective edge because GNU only publish contact length (which is a different measurement). But overall, I would say the 161 Gremlin is going to feel bigger than the 161 Hybrid and Optimistic. So, I’d be more inclined to lean towards the 158 on that one. But the 161 wouldn’t be wrong. I rode the Gremlin in the 152 (6’0″, 180lbs, size 10 boots) and it didn’t feel small to me. I wouldn’t go bigger than that on it for me. I rode the Hybrid in 157 and while I’m pretty sure I’d prefer the 153, the 157 didn’t feet overly big to me. I rode the 154 Optimistic and that size was just right for me.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hey Nate,
Would this be a good compliment for my Yes Typo? The Typo is my daily, resort/park on occasion board. Then the Hybrid would be for softer snow and powder days. I ride in Utah. I am 5’ 11”, 190 pounds size 11 Ride Fuse boots. I’m thinking the Hybrid in a 157. Would love to know your thoughts or opinions if you think they’re a better compliment to the Typo. Thanks!!
Hi Kevin
I think the Hybrid would compliment the Typo well – and I’d use it exactly how you’ve mentioned – for fresh snow days. I think the 157 would be best bet too, based on your specs. But if you could also let me know the size of your Typo, to confirm that it would be the best size to compliment your existing board.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the reply. My Typo is a 159W.
Hey Kevin. Thanks for the extra info. Confirmed, I would go 157 for the Hybrid.
Hi Nate,
Loving your reviews (spent the last week browsing more of your pages than I care to admit).
I’m 5’11, 190-195lb, 9.5 Boot.
I’ve ridden Burton Custom camber 158 (good), Nitro x Volcom Beast 156 (loved), Soloman Assassin 158 (hated it), Burton Process Flying V (meh, just meh).
I ride mainly (50%) tree runs playing on natural kickers, 25/25 on groomers (again looking more for quick tree dips or kickers on the side) with a little straight lining and very little small park jump. Would like to go into a bit more buttering but not a huge priority. Intermediate/ advanced.
I was set to buy a Burton Custom, but after weeks of research I’m thinking Jones Flagship, Yes PYL (159), but just found this review for the Yes Hybrid (can pick up a 157 2023 for $400).
Was looking at DOA but discounted it as an option, and Lib E jack came up a lot.
Based on my style and preference, would you made a strong recommendation for the cheaper hybrid, the PYL, or the Flagship? Or even to stick to something less directional as it’s all I have ridden.
Would love your thoughts
Thanks
Hey Luke
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden a Beast, but based on specs it sounds like something with a good bit of camber in it is certainly your preference. The Beast is also quite stiff, on paper, though for your specs, going to the 156 would have mellowed it out a bit, so probably felt a little softer than flex rating for you – and based on my experience with other Nitro boards, they tend to be a touch softer than they’re rated anyway. But even with all that said, something with a decent amount, but not too much stiffness. The other thing with the Beast in 156, is that in that size, you likely found it nippier in the trees. Given you spend so much time in there I’m guessing that contributed to your enjoyment of it. All that said, the Beast is a freestyle focused board, so there isn’t a lot of board outside the contact points – i.e. probably lots of effective edge vs overall length, so you can ride it shorter.
Having established that, and the fact you want to get into a bit more buttering, I think the PYL, Flagship and Hybrid could work, but will be harder work to butter. A little harder than the likes of the Custom. But if that’s not a priority, they can work, particularly if you keep the size erring on the shorter side (given you like trees and will also make them a little easier to butter and for things like side-hits). They’re all going to give you quite a bit more powder float than something like the Custom or Beast, so assuming you want good powder performance, then that’s a big part of the reason you’d want to go directional. If you’re not riding switch and want that powder performance, then going directional is a good idea. But if you do want to ride switch sometimes and rarely see deep powder, then I wouldn’t go directional. They’re not as camber dominant as something like the Custom or Beast. They all have rocker in nose and tail (more so in nose), because this also helps in powder and their more powder oriented than the likes of the Custom/Beast.
Size-wise for those mentioned, I would look at the 158 Flagship, 159 PYL and 157 for the Hybrid. But note that the Hybrid is going to feel bigger than the other 2 because of how wide it is. It’s probably going to give you the best for powder, because of that extra surface area, however, you may not find it as nimble in trees as the other 2. So, because of sizing, I would be leaning one of the other two.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi Nate, good day.
Thank you so much for your review yes hybrids that really help me to make a decision for my first board. I’m a beginner approaching to intermediate. I’m now considering 3 boards Jones frontier, never summer snow trooper and yes hybrid for my first board to buy for playing at Niseko in coming winter. Finally, I may choose Yes hybrid because I need the one board that can play all conditions of snow, float in powdered, responsive to turn , easy chang from edge to edge, good in tree 🌲 run and carving no need for parking because I don’t like. So if I high 170 cm weight 70 kg and boots size 9 US , the board size 153 is ok for me? Please advise. One more question it seem this bord a bit wider more than other brand with same 153 size, any issue for controlling turn?
Hi Vee
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the Hybrid is the hardest of the 3 for your level, and I would be leaning towards the Snow Trooper or Frontier for what you’re describing. They’re still good in powder – particularly the Frontier, but just a bit easier to ride and progress on. The Hybrid is a short/wide, so it’s something you typically size down in length for. For you, I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at 155, but with size 9 boots on the Hybrid, you would want to size down a bit more than to 153, IMO, which unfortunately isn’t possible as 153 is the shortest size of the Hybrid. So, that’s another reason, I would be looking at one of the other 2. Size-wise for the other 2, I would be looking at:
Frontier: 152
Snowtrooper: 152
Given you want that powder float, I would be leaning Frontier.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate and other experts,
I’m Nils from the Netherlands and love powder but in the alps it’s not allways the case obviously. I have ridden a k2 joydriver 165, 2017 for the last 6 years (3 weeks a year) I loved it because it was great in the powder and great for carving on slopes as well. I’m not a park guy.
My weight is 190lbs, length: 6,1″ and have Burton Ion step on 10.5 with step on Medium.
I allready ordered an received the Yes Hybrid 157 (2022/2023) because I think it’s the tight size after reading a the reviews and tests… But, compared to my joydriver 165 it’s so short! I’m thinking about changing to the 161cm hybrid.
What do you think? most important: a good mix between powder/ trees/ groomers/ hardpack/ carving
thanks a lot!
Hi Nils
Thanks for your message.
I would put your “typical all-mountain length” at around 161. With a freeride board, like the Joy Driver, particularly if you’re not doing anything freestyle and aren’t riding slow much, then sizing up from that makes sense. So while I do feel the 165 is on the big side for you, it’s nothing too crazy. Though if you are riding a fair bit of trees, then I usually say to temper how much you size up for your freeride board. With a lot of trees, I would have likely recommended the 162 for the Joy Driver. All that said, given that you’re used to a 165, I can see why the 157 will seem short.
Based purely on specs, I would say 157 for you for the Hybrid. But given that you’re used to a 165, the 161 Hybrid is a possibility. Do note the following width differences though:
– 165 Joy Driver: 254mm waist (likely around 264mm at inserts, though I haven’t measured this one)
– 161 Hybrid: 264mm waist | 283mm at front insert, 278mm at back insert
– 157 Hybrid: 264mm waist | 283mm at front insert, 278mm at back insert
So whichever one you go for, you’d be looking at around 20mm more on the front insert and around 15mm wider on the back insert. The overall surface area of the 157 Hybrid would be close to that of the 165 Joydriver, though you would be loosing significant effective edge, but that’s the case when you go short wide. The 161 Hybrid will have more overall surface area than the 165 Joy Driver.
So, in short, I would say the 161 is doable for you, given what you’re used to riding, but it’s best not to think of it as being 4cm shorter, as it will feel bigger than that. I would say 161 Hybrid is more equivalent to like a 166 or 167 Joy Driver (if one existed).
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, some advice would be much appreciated. I’m 5’11 and 176 lbs – switched to snowboarding from skiing 2 years ago aged 49. I think I’m around a level 5, or 6 on a good day. On my last trip to the alps I hired a better board (I think it was a Rossignol JibSaw 158) and had my first proper few powder days and loved it! Don’t really have much interest in riding park. Looking to buy a board that will help me to confidently increase my speed on groomers but will be amazing on a powder day! I’ve been thinking about YES Hybird and Jones Mind Expander – any advice? Also – what length. My mate had an Orcha and loved the shorter/wider size – would the 153 YES be the way to go?? Cheers. Matt
Hey Matt
Thanks for your message. I think both boards would suit what you’re describing well. Size-wise, it would depend on your boot size, if you could let me know that, that would be great. Some other options of similar boards, if you wanted to check them out – top 10 mellow freeride boards but the Mind Expander and Hybrid are on that list and very good options for what you’re describing, IMO. The others that I should mention, that I rode ’24 models for that really impressed me this winter are the Never Summer Swift and the Burton Deep Thinker. Not all these options are volume shifted (short/wide).
But yeah, if you could let me know your boot size, as that plays an important part in finding the correct size, IMO.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate – massive thanks for the quick reply! I’m a UK size 9.5 so US 10.5. Cheers. Matt
Hey Matt
I think you could definitely size down to the 153 for the Hybrid if you wanted to. It’s pretty wide, so I would size down from your typical size and going 157 is pretty close to what I’d consider your typical size (around 159), so I think the 153 would be a good bet. The Mind Expander would certainly be doable in the 154 as well. But it’s narrower at the back insert, so that would be my biggest hesitation there with it being borderline too narrow for your boots. The 158 could work too. It’s quite wide at the nose, but not that wide at the tail. I rode the 158 in the old model (when it was all rocker) and that was fine. Though I did prefer the new version, in the 154, with that camber in it.
Awesome – thanks Nate – I’ll go for the 153 Hybird!
You’re very welcome Matt, hope it treats you well!
Hi Nate,
I have a hard time wrapping my head around the rider weight vs board waist size dilemma. I’ve read all your articles and still seems to struggle a bit with my personal situation. I’m 5’9’’, 270 lbs and size 9.5/10 boots (EUR 43). Being on the heavy side while having regular height/boots size, I struggle to find a board with a high enough rider weight that is not too wide.
I would describe myself as an even mix between aggressive all-mountain/mellow freerider. I ride hard snow groomer, bumps/trees and pow after a fresh snow dump (that comes rarely on the east coast, I must say).
I currently have a NS Proto CT that I bought in 2013 and was looking to add a board that would allow me to charge harder on groomer and float more easily on pow on the occasional snow trip. I was drawn to the Yes Hybrid since the specs seemed to match my needs, but was torn for the sizing as the board seems a bit wide for my boots size, even for the 157 (I wouldn’t go as far as 153 since I’m too heavy). I was also looking into other Yes boards: PYL 162/165, PYL UnInc 159/161 and Standard UnInc 159/162. I also checked out the Jones Flagship 164 and UMT 163, but was afraid of the Flagship’s flex and the UMT lack of pop.
According to your table, I should target a recommended board length of 164 while having a waist width around 255. Like I said earlier, I find it hard to find a board with a high enough max weight that is not too wide. What would you recommend?
Thanks!
Hi Philippe
Thanks for your message.
My instinct for you is PYL 165. It shouldn’t be too wide for your boots. I don’t think you’d have any issues applying pressure to the edges. I think the Flagship 164 would work well too, and I don’t think you’d have too many issues with the flex.
If you did go Hybrid, the 161 is probably your best bet. With volume shifted board (short/wide) how much you size down depends on how wide it is compared to your boots. I think 157 would be sizing down a little far on that one. That said, the 161 is maybe not quite enough of a size down, if they had a 159/160, I’d be more confident sizing it for you.
I haven’t ridden the PYL Uninc, but it’s supposed to be stiffer than the PYL, so there’s a chance it’s stiffer than the Flagship too.
The UMT doesn’t have epic pop, but I wouldn’t say it was devoid of it. It’s decent enough. But the 163 is bordering on being a little wide – even though it’s only 2mm wider at the waist versus the PYL 165, it’s likely to be around 8mm wider at the back insert and 4mm wider at front insert.
Standard Uninc is tricky to size for you, IMO. I feel the 162 is a little too wide, even sizing down to 162, but going to the 159 is going too short.
PYL 162 wouldn’t be wrong, but I would be leaning 165 in that board for your specs.
Long story short, I think I would be weighing up PYL 165 or Flagship 164. With the Caveat that I have yet to ride the PYL Uninc.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thanks a lot Nate for the answer. It is greatly appreciated. Looks like i’ll look up the PYL and wrap my head around it. I was throwing out the PYL UnInc since I do appreciate the artwork, but is more difficult to find that late in the season.
You’re very welcome Philippe. If you think about it at the time, let me know what you end up going with and how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get it out on snow.
Hi Nate,
Just finally bought the Flagship 164, even though I’m not a big fan of the board artwork (wasn’t a fan of this year PYL neither, which is why I was looking at other boards). I decided to prioritize the float pack insert that I could enjoy on my occasional west coast trip and wanted a board that would truly allow me to float on snow.
I will pair this board with the Union Atlas Pro. Really looking forward to riding this rig.
Thanks again for taking the time to help me with my board decision.
Philippe
Hi Philippe
Thanks for the update. I think the Atlas Pro are a great match. Hope the board treats you well. Happy riding!
Hi Nate,
Interested in your input as I wrestle between the Hybrid 157 and PYL 160w. 6’3, 170 lbs, and size 12 boot. I have a NS Proto type two, and am looking at adding a board that will let me charge a bit harder on piste without too much work and float more easily in powder. I’m drawn to the PYL but a bit worried about the width for my boot. Also, the Hybrid’s flex seems a bit closer to my Proto and former NS West, both of which I’ve enjoyed.
Thanks!
Hi John
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, unfortunately the PYL is on the narrow side for 12s, even though the 160W is a wide size. It’s narrow for a wide, so it would be pushing it.
But the Hybrid should allow you to charge a little harder than with your PT2, from my experience, and definitely better in powder. And given you’ve liked that level of flex, I think it’s a good bet. And definitely wide enough, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hey Nate
Thanks for the reviews. Convinced me to buy 153 hybrid. Looking forward to riding it in the powder especially.
What bindings do you think pair best with this board? Have been looking at the Rome and union bindings but am open to all suggestions. I’m about 5’10 170lbs and am looking to use this board especially on nice powder/tree days.
Just of note Rome black label caught my eye. Seems to be slightly softer than the cleaver which may pair well with the board but haven’t been able to see many reviews on this binding.
Thanks
Travis
Hi Travis
Thanks for your message.
I would go with something around 6/10 to 7/10 flex for the Hybrid and that would suit your specs and riding style with it too, IMO.
We haven’t tested the Black Label, but based on specs, they look to be around a 9/10 flex, which is what Rome also rates the Cleaver. I found the Cleaver to more of an 8/10 flex, so the Black Label might be closer to that too, but I would be leaning Katana from Rome. From Union, the Strata, Force, Falcor and Atlas would all be options. You could also check out:
>>Top 5 All-Mountain-Freeride Bindings
>>Top 5 All Mountain Bindings
Hope this helps
Hey Nate
Do you think the Atlas or Strata pair better with the Hybrid?
Hi Matt
They both match the Hybrid for flex, so both would definitely work. The Atlas is probably the better match, given the type of riding you’re likely to be doing on the Hybrid as they’re a little stiffer (Strata 6/10 by my feel, Atlas 7/10 by my feel) and will drive the board a little harder. As in for carving/speed – I felt the Atlas allowed for a little more stability at speed and allowed for deeper/longer carves. Subtly but still noticeable. So that’s another factor.
Also note that the both produce a different kind of feel. The Strata’s produce, in my experience, a little more of a springy/snappy response vs a more smooth, even response from the Atlas. So which of those you think sounds more like you is another factor to consider.
Hope this helps
Hiya
Great site and love the 121 q&a so thought I might give it a go.
I am 50 and been snowboarding since teenager in the Alps where conditions vary a lot. Never missed a season (10- 15 days). These days I like to charge (50mph+), carve, pow, trees, some switch, small jumps, play in the sides and rough. Will straight line a black, steeps and tracks, or go find some bumpy slush to bounce over, get low and throw the board around. I’m energetic for my age, but I don’t hit the park at all, broken my back twice in there now, so avoid the risk.
I’m 190lb, 5ft11, 11us boot. Old Union bindings and old ion boots.
My current board a NeverSummer SL from 2011 size 157. Camber-rocker-camber. Lost its pop, turns dead easy in the slow, skids a lot, and got to work it hard for a carve. Spot any ice, one option only, straight line it and hope it doesn’t last. If I am carving fast on steep hard pack, I can sometimes get judder on toe side, suggesting too much pressure, occasionally causing me to dig in and unable to release which is frustrating.
Last season my friend had a super pig 151. I gave it a try, and wow. I was loving it, loved the agility and it held an edge and carved so well compared to my board. Think I got got an extra 10mph and left only grooves. Realised I needed a new board, probably boots and bindings too but that will have to wait.
I’ve been dreaming since and want a short board like the superpig, as looking for agility and quick turns, but also damp for straight line speed, must hold edge in ice, carving with pop, pop for we jumps, occasional switch, but also forgiving for when I’ve had a beer and want to chill with some skid turns or head into the trees.
I read this review and thought, maybe this is the one. The latest specs on yes site suggest the 153 and 157 have the same board width (just different length), also that max rider weight is the same for both boards. Like the idea of the the 153, I know it won’t be so great in pow but should still be good right. I believe you will tell me 157, but Im dreaming that superpig 151 feeling. Also, how will the stiffness of superpig compare to this? Anyway, I’m here to listen, open to suggestions on alternative boards too, if you don’t this is right for me.
Cheers Austin
Hi Austin
Thanks for your message.
Just to clarify, I believe the 161 and 157 have the same width, with the 153 having a narrower width than the 157 (260mm waist, 279mm front foot, 274mm back foot, 310mm nose and 302mm tail vs 264mm waist, 283mm front foot, 277mm back foot, 316mm nose and 308mm tail on the 157).
But in any case I think the 153 could work for you. It’s pretty close between the 153 and 157 and if I had to say, I’d say the 157 was probably the better size for you, based purely on your specs. However, given you’ve been riding a regular width SL (if that’s correct?), the 157 Hybrid will likely feel considerably bigger – and the 153 would be a more similar feeling size-wise. Also, the 153 Hybrid isn’t as wide as the 151 Superpig, but given that the Hybrid is a little longer (both in overall length and in effective edge), I imagine the 153 Hybrid would be a close equivalent size-wise to the 151 Superpig. So, in short, I think the 153 is very doable for you.
I haven’t tested the Superpig, so I can’t say for sure, but my estimation is that the Hybrid will be softer flexing than the Superpig. It’s rated “aggressive” by Ride in terms of it’s flex (which isn’t super helpful!) – but from what I hear of it, I imagine it’s around 7/10 flex. The Hybrid is rated at 7/10 flex, but I felt it more at 6/10 – and that was the 157. The 151 Superpig might feel closer to 6/10, potentially, but I’m not sure, but in any case, I would predict that it’s a little stiffer than the Hybrid.
But I would say that both would feel stiffer than the SL. The SL kind of merged into the Snowtrooper – which is a board that feels 4/10 flex to me.
Some other options which could fit what you want include the Arbor Single 152 (a little softer though – at around 5/10 flex), GNU Gremlin 152 or YES Optimistic 154.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate. Sorry, I just realized I should have put my previous message in this section. I’m hoping you can help me with a board recommendation.
I am 55 years old. I’m 6’3”, 195 lbs, size 12 Photon boots and large Step On bindings. I have skied most of my life and then fell in love with snowboarding in 2017 at the age of 50. I like to ride bumps, trees and steep, fast groomers. No parks at my age lol and I don’t ride switch. I ride about 25 days a year in Summit County, Colorado (Keystone, Breckenridge, Vail).
My go to board is a 2015 Rossignol Templar Magtek, https://www.evo.com/outlet/snowboards/rossignol-templar-magtek-snowboard-2015, size 162 wide. I like it because it holds an edge like crazy with the magne traction. It’s great in the bumps and trees. I would like to get a new board, but haven’t found anything that I like as much.
I had a 2020 Salomon Assassin 163W. I liked it, but lost confidence with it when the edge came out from underneath me a few times on hard pack/ice. I fell a few times when I slid out heal side on ice, injured my wrist a few times, then sold the board. It was a crappy year for snow (unusual amount of ice) in Colorado, but I just lost confidence on the board.
I bought a 2021 Ride MTNpig on advice from a local shop. They sold me a 164W. The board is huge. It’s hard for me to ride it in the bumps because I feel like I’m ready to turn for the next bump but keep catching the tail on the last bump because the board is so big. After reading reviews, I now know that you’re supposed to size down for that board, so a 164W may be too big for me at 6’3” and 192. I rode it several days, then went back to my Rossi for the rest of the season. I may sell the MTNpig, or maybe keep it as a powder board??
At 55 years old, edge hold on hard pack and ice is very important to me and my body parts. I still like to go fast down steep groomers, hit the bumps and trees, but have the confidence that my board won’t slide out from under me too easily.
Thanks for your help!
Jeff
Hi Jeff
Thanks for your message.
I think the Mtnpig was/is too big. With size 12s, there is less of a need to size down for you, but at 164W – particularly as you like to ride bumps – it’s still too big, IMO. It’s also going noticeably stiffer than your Templar – and stiffer typically means harder to maneuver at slower speeds.
Because you like to ride bumps and trees I wouldn’t go overly stiff. Also, and I don’t want to make assumptions, but as we get older a stiffer board becomes more fatiguing as we might not be as strong as we once were. That said, since you still like to ride fast, I wouldn’t go too soft either.
Size-wise, I would stick to around that 160-162 range, to help give you a good mix of maneuverability and stability at speed.
Some options that have great icy edge-hold, in my experience, and fit what you’re describing (in terms of being good in bumps/trees but still stable at speed as well).
– YES Hybrid 161 – this is the best of these in powder
– Rossignol One 161W – this will be familiar. A little stiffer than the Templar. A little more stable at speed but a little more effort at slower speeds than the Templar.
– YES Standard or Standard Uninc 162 (or you could even go 159 with this board, if you wanted to favor maneuverability over stability at speed) – if you don’t really ride that much powder, then I’d go Standard Uninc. If you do see a bit of powder, then the regular Standard
– Lib Tech BRD 162W – you would have to get used to the rocker between your feet, as the Templar has camber between the feet (as does the Assassin and Mtnpig) – so there’s that, but if you can get past that it’s a good option. And the rocker is pretty subtle.
– YES Typo 163W – this is the most playful option. It’s the quickest edge-to-edge at slower speeds versus the rest on this list, but it’s also the least stable at speed.
– Lib Tech Ejack Knife 162W – on the stiffer side, but not oppressively stiff. Same goes for this as mentioned for the Lib Tech Brd
– YES Pick Your Line 160W – on the stiffer side as well, but if you size to 160W it should mellow it out a little, whilst still being stable enough at speed.
Hope this helps
Nate, wow that is awesome. Thanks so much for the advice. You have provided a lot of great options. I really appreciate you taking the time to do that.
Thanks!!!!
Jeff
You’re very welcome Jeff. Thanks for visiting and hope you find your perfect snowboard match!
Nate, I picked up the Yes Hybrid 161. I have been out a few days on it and I freakin love it. Thanks so much for the advice. Have a great season!
Jeff
Hey Jeff. That’s great to hear! Hope you have an awesome rest of your season too!
Hello Guys: I want buy the Yes Hybrid
Im 1m 77 – 78kg – Boot Size 10
Whats the better Choice for me
153 board or 157 ?
My freeride board (Niche Hawthorne) is 157! But the Yes is a Camrock Board and i think it have more Contact Surface.
One other Consideration is the Y?
How does it compare for an middle-advanced Boarder who practice moves from edge to edge on the slopes and does a little backcountry?
Thank you for this awsome Page !
I’ve been following your Site for years
Greetings from Switzerland!
Hi Ertan
Thanks for your message.
I would be leaning 153. The main reason is the width. The Hybrid is quite wide and with 10s on a board as wide as the Hybrid it’s a good idea to size down a bit, IMO. I would put your standard length at around 158cm, so I think you got it right for the Hawthorn, but that is a regular width board, so I would be inclined to size down for the Hybrid. The 157 is doable though, particularly if you want extra stability at speed and float in powder – at the price of less maneuverability.
The Y is a similar style of board in that it’s used for similar purposes. However, it’s quite a different feel and I personally preferred the Hybrid in almost every aspect. The new Optimistic (2023 model) however is a more enticing prospect, IMO. It’s like a cross between the old Optimistic and the old The Y (which isn’t getting a 2023 model). IMO, it’s become better than either the Optimistic of old or the Y, somehow. I would consider that before I consider the Y. If it was between the Hybrid and the Y, I’d personally pick the Hybrid.
Hope this helps
Thank you Nate! It helps me a lot! I think i get the Hybrid in 153! For deep powder i will take my niche hawthorne. I want a board for playing at the groomers and little bit backcountry!
Greetings!!
You’re very welcome Ertan. Thanks for using the site and hope the Hybrid treats you well!
Hi Nate
Love the site, incredibly valuable.
I am an intermediate approaching advanced rider in my 5th season. Usually ride in more icy conditions I have the 2019 Typo 156w. Was super keen on the hybrid as a POW freeride board , I find I struggle with the Typo on powder , even setback all the way. Otherwise have enjoyed the board.
I’ve been looking at the Hybrid , love the reviews and it ticks a lot of boxes.
My question is on board recommendations and if the Hybrid 153 or 157 would be better , I’m trending towards the 153 but would love your thoughts. I almost never ride switch , don’t do any park time , love free ride and POW and tree runs . I don’t really ride super fast preferring quick turns in and out of trees and powder.
I’m 6ft , boot size 12 US and 175pounds .I’m using Burton Step on bindings with burton Photon Boots.
Thanks again and keep up the amazing work
Hi Jonathan
Thanks for your message.
If you were the same height and weight specs, but with a size 10.5 or even 11 or less boot, then I would be more inclined to say 153. But with size 12 boots, the board isn’t really wide for your feet, so I’d be less inclined to size down that much. I would put you on roughly a 158/159 as your “standard length”, so I think the 157 for the Hybrid is the best match. It will give you more float in powder and should still be agile enough in trees. That said, the 153 isn’t completely wrong or anything – if you wanted to really maximize how quick it turns and sacrificing a little in terms of float in powder. Note that compared to the 156W Typo, the Hybrid 153 will still float better than it – it’s designed to ride powder better – and in terms of surface area, they’re probably relatively similar, with the 153 Hybrid still being a noticeable amount wider than the 156W Typo. So you’d still get that boost in powder performance, so it’s not wrong for you, I don’t think. But if you wanted more powder performance then the 157 – which I think is the more pure size for your specs. But it’s not likely to turn as quickly as the 156W Typo, so that’s something to keep in mind.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Really helpful thanks.
Any other boards you feel I should be looking at which might be similar for POW but comfortable in other conditions
Again keep up the great work the site is invaluable
Hi Jonathan
Something like the new Jones Mind Expander (2023 model). I say the new because it got a new camber profile – with some camber in it versus the older models which didn’t have any camber sections. The new model is a better all round board, IMO. The Capita Navigator, Burton Skeleton Key and GNU Hyper also well worth considering for what you’re describing.
All great suggestions, I note you left off the LibTech Orca, any reasons for that?
I really like the look of the new Jones Mind Explorer would be great if you could re-review that when you get a chance as the 2023 seems to be quite different from previous models . would be really interested in it’s hard snow ice hold. Living in Australia I spend lots of time on hard snow and ice so this would be a factor for me .
Thanks again
Hi Jonathan.
The main reasons I left out the Orca is that it’s stiffer than the others and that I found it less maneuverable at slower speeds for tight turns, which is something you mentioned you value. From your interest in the Hybrid, I figured it might be a little stiffer than what you wanted to go.
The Mind Expander is good in hard/icy conditions, IMO. It’s better than the old model – that camber really helps there. It’s up there with other Jones boards now. I would say 4/5 for hard/icy conditions, so not quite as good as the best, but still really decent and should be able to handle most hard conditions fine. I will be updating the review shortly. Should be done by mid-September – got a pretty tight schedule for the next 6 weeks but it’s on the list to be done. But yeah, in terms of edge hold in icy conditions, that wouldn’t be something that stopped me getting the new Mind Expander – just make sure it’s the 2023 model.
hi Nate, i m looking for a new powder board and i glance at the hybrid. you helped me with the my Standard size and i hope you will with this one.
im 5’10 for 179 lbs size 8 or 8,5 us. i was heading for the 153 and then rethink for the 157.
thank you for your help
Hi Stephane
Thanks for your message.
I would go 153, if I was you. With bigger feet, then I’d consider the 157, but with the width of it, I’d be leaning 153. I mean if you were going to be predominantly using it for open terrain deep powder, then I might look more at the 157. But if you ride any trees and/or will be using it on groomers at times, then I’d be leaning 153.
Hope this helps with your decision
thank you very much Nate and it s good point on the open terrain which i don’t go really go often and for few time i do it will be enough.
thank again for your help and your website which is gold!!
You’re very welcome Stephane. Thanks for visiting!
Hi Nate, I would like some help mounting the bindings on my yes hybrid. My height is 6″ and my weight is 200lbs with a size 11.5us. From knowing what the correct stance would be to what the front and rear angles could be. In addition to where to position the bindings, either rear or in the middle taking into account that the board already has a superior nose, where I am predominantly carving, groomers and irregular terrain that is somewhat hard.
Hi Nicolas
Thanks for your message.
Everyone has a different sweet spot, so I would experiment a little bit with it to see what works best for you. But given the board, your riding style, specs, etc, I think a good starting point would be:
Stance Width: 560 (22″) – 585mm (23″). If you’re on the 157, then 585mm (23″) is the reference stance width – reference stance is always a good place to start. If you’re on the 161 reference is 597mm (23.5″) but at 6’0″ myself, I would find that too wide. Depending on your bindings, you may or may not have the stance with adjustability to get it to roughly 580-585mm. If you have to move you bindings at least one set of hole at a time as is the case with some bindings – and you want to keep the same stance width, then you’d have to narrow it to 557mm (22″), if on the 161 and wanted to go narrower. Of course if you did want to increase the setback, then you could move just the front binding to narrow the stance by 20mm (down to 577mm). Of course depends on the bindings as to whether or not you have micro stance width adjustability or not.
Setback: I would start with the reference stance of the board (depending on what you wanted to do with stance width). It’s already setback 40mm from the effective edge and more than that on the overall length of the board (with the nose being longer than the tail, as you mentioned, the overall setback is longer than the setback on effective edge). If, for example, you’re on the 161 and you really like a stance around that 580mm mark (and you don’t have micro stance width adjustability with your bindings), then you could set yourself back a little more (by just moving the front binding towards the center).
Binding angles: For your style of riding and this style of board. I would start out with a forward stance of some description. Something like +21/+3 and see how you like it. And I would experiment from there, to see what’s most comfortable for you.
Hope this helps to get you started
Hey Nate!
Picked a 157 hybrid up last year and having only ridden it once… it’s fantastic!
Right now I’m on ancient second hand lamar bindings, I’m looking at a pair of Now Select pros for only about $120USD
Do you think they would be stiff and responsive enough to pair with the hybrid? I’m a beginner and noob to the buying thing, first board and not a lot of experience to compare with.
Hi Liam
Thanks for your message.
I think the Select Pros are a good match flex/response-wise with the Hybird. So no issue there, IMO. And that sounds like a great price.
Whelp… I had the same answer from both Avran and yourself…
I now have the 2019 mediums in the post 😅
Couldn’t pass up that clearance deal.
Keen to also have access to the soft bushings and highcups for when I’m taking my fiancée for her first rides and don’t need access the responsiveness for faster carving and trees.
Thanks!!
You’re very welcome Liam. Hope they treat you well.
Update:
Bindings arrived! I was definitely worried about the wrong things!
Have only just pulled them out of the box but can already tell they’re going to be an invaluable improvement over what was installed!
Turns out that the Lamar bindings I’d picked up second hand and rode last trip would have a flex rating notably lower than the Select!
Just twisting both bindings around in my hand I can see that the Nows will be massively more responsive!
Expecting fantastic things from my next ride!
Will update again afterwards to help inform other readers….. there’s surprisingly little info around on either the Hybrid or the Selects???
(Everyone just buying a PYL and Drives 😅?)
Thanks for helping me get over the line on the purchase decision.
You’re very welcome Liam and I look forward to how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to get them on snow.
Hi Nate,
I’m a 5’7″-5’8″, 170-175lb advanced rider and like doing moguls and trees the best, but I like to bomb on groomers as well, so speed is definitely a big factor as well for me. I don’t ever ride switch or go in the park. I’m torn between the 153 Yes Hybrid and the 154 Burton Show Stopper as a one board quiver. It seems like the Show Stopper naturally turns better, but maybe the Hybrid can make up for that as it has more flex and is 1 cm shorter (the widths look just about identical). I mostly go on the west coast (trips planned in advance) but occasionally go on the east coast as well, so I have to be concerned about potentially icy days. I’m also not crazy about the channel system as I have had issues with it in the past (but it was an old board so maybe the technology improved). You gave both boards the same speed rating, but some other sites say the Hybrid handles speed a bit better. I am much more concerned about the way that they ride but I also think the Hybrid is much cooler looking. They both seem like great options but if you had to pick one, which one would you recommend?
Thanks,
Brandon
Hi Brandon
Thanks for your message.
I found the Show Stopper to be the slightly more nimble board and something that I preferred in trees and moguls. But that’s comparing Hybrid 157 to Show Stopper 154. If comparing the 153 Hybrid to Show Stopper 154, I think they would be very close. In terms of stability at speed, I really couldn’t choose one over the other. The Hybrid, IMO, is better for icy conditions.
In terms of width, they do both have the same waist width, but the Hybrid is overall wider:
Hybrid 153: WW = 260mm | Width at Inserts = 279mm at front insert and 273mm at back insert | tip width 310mm, tail width 302mm
Show Stopper 154: WW = 260mm | Width at Inserts = 271mm at front insert and 271mm at back insert | tip width 308.4mm, tail width 296.4mm
So the Hybrid is overall a reasonable amount wider, despite the same waist width.
What’s your boot size?
Hi thanks for the reply. Sorry I should have included that, I wear a size 9 K2 Thraxis.
Hey Brandon
Thanks for the extra info. I would be leaning Show Stopper, largely because the width is better for your boot size, IMO and there’s not much else to choose between them. But you can’t go wrong with either, IMO, but yeah I’d be leaning Show Stopper.
Great, thanks so much for the rec! Will let you know how I like it!
You’re very welcome Brandon. Look forward to hearing how you get on.
Hey Nate
I picked up the Yes Hybrid Unic last year and I absolutely love it. It really surprised me how well it carved on east coast groomers. I’m using a pair of old Burton Cartels bindings right now and want a new pair of bindings. I’m thinking Union Atlas or Union Falcor. What bindings do you think will complement the Hybrid better? Im also open to other brands if you have any other suggestions for bindings for the Hybrid.
Hi Matt
Thanks for your message – and awesome to hear your loving your Hybrid Uninc.
Both the Atlas and Falcor would work well with the Hybrid, IMO. Between the two, it would depend on the kind of feel you were looking for. I find the Atlas to have a smoother, more consistent/predictable kind of response versus the Falcor, which has a more explosive kind of feel to it’s response, if that makes sense. The Falcor has better board feel for things like ollies, butters, jibs etc, but that may or may not concern you in this case.
In general, I think something in that 6/10 to 7/10 range for flex is a good bet for the Hybrid but even 8/10 flex should work fine for it.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the response. On union’s website they have the Atlas at a 8/10
and the Falcore at 7/10
I know the Hybrid is not as stiff as most free ride boards so a I might be leaning toward the Falcors. I like the idea of the mini disc with board feel ,even though I rarely ever butter. I mostly ride resort bumps and trees.
It’s a hard choice though because the Atlas seems like more of a on piste all mountain binding. I wish I could demo both and then decide 😕
Hey Matt
Yeah, they rate the Atlas quite stiff, but I’ve never found it as stiff as that. And the Falcor got stiffer for the 2022 model – and there aren’t any changes for the Falcor for the 2023 model. I rode the Atlas again this past winter in the 2023 model and I can get it to a 7/10 stiffness, but not to an 8. The Falcor more like a 7.5/10 stiffness. That’s the feel I got, but of course Union rate them a little differently.
Atlas are marketed as their more all-mountain bindings, but I find the Falcor are fine for it. They’re better in the park than the Atlas, but they’re still good for all-mountain/freeriding. But both are really good all-round bindings, IMO, so there’s not really a bad choice. Which is why I’d say it comes down to which response feel you’d prefer.
Hi Nate, I was looking for the yes ghost or standard in 162 but unfortunately there is no more stock. For the same price they offer me the hybrid unic dcp 161, and I’ve watched several videos but I’m not very convinced, although several say it’s a tremendous job. My use is all mountain, I like the carving, speed and salaloms of other riders (not park) :D. Could I go for this table or should I wait and look for other things?
Hi Nicolas
The Hybrid could work for you. If you’re not really riding any switch or park. The Standard/Ghost are better for riding switch, better for park, better for sidehits etc, but the Hybrid is as good for speed/carving, IMO and better in powder. Not much in it, but I’d say the Ghost/Standard are a little quicker edge-to-edge, so for those slaloms probably a little better than the Hybrid. But the Hybrid could work for you. If you were still keen on something like the Ghost or Standard, you could wait to see if you could find 2023 models. The Ghost is no more but YES are bringing out the “Standard Uninc” which is really similar to what the Ghost was.
Hope this helps
in case I choose the hybrid unic, if my weight is 200lbs and my size is 11.5. Is 157 or 161 right for me?
Hi Nicloas
For your specs, I would be looking at the 161. I wouldn’t consider the 157 to be ultra small for you or anything, but I think the 161 is the better bet. If you had the same height/weight, but a smaller boot size – like 10.5 or less, then I’d be more inclined to lean towards the 157. But the combination of your specs points towards the 161, IMO.
Hi Nate, would appreciate your help – planning to buy my first board (boarded for 6 weeks in total already). I mostly do groomed runs. want to start doing more offpistes in the future. I don’t usually ride switch, and I don’t really care about the park – mostly exploring the resort and offpistes. Since I don’t choose my snowboarding week by the weather, it’s also important for me that the board performs well in all conditions (ice, powder, etc).
I’m 6’1, 174 lbs. Shoe size US 11.
On my last trip I tried the 159W Jones MT which was a little too unforgiving for me, and the Salomon Assassin which was great from the forgiveness perspective but felt less stable than the MT.
Do you think that the 157 Hybrid would be a good choice for me? Compared to the boards I tested and the Yes Typo/Standard.
Thanks!
Hi Eddie
Thanks for your message.
If you found the MT too unforgiving, then I think you’d find the Hyrbid too unforgiving as well. It’s nothing really unforgiving, but slightly more unforgiving than the MT, I would say. If you stepped the size down to 153, you might be OK, but not sure if you’d want to go that small.
The Standard is similar in terms of forgiveness, IMO, but I think it would be doable, if you went with the 156, which I think would actually be a good size for that particular board for you. I think that option would work.
The Typo is the most forgiving of them, but still quite a stable feel, though not sure I’d say it was any more stable than the Assassin. If you went Typo, then I’d probably go the 159W.
Also, what size was the Assassin you rode? Size does make a big difference, so that might be part of why it felt less stable.
Hope this helps
Thanks for the quick reply!
I rode the 158W Assassin, felt I could skid much easier than with the MT.
I think that my MT experience is very strange is general, the rental shop told me that it’s super unforgiving and stiff (which it was), and when trying to skid I would fall, but the online reviews are telling a different story about it – I saw one video saying that the MT demo for 2022 was super stiff, so maybe that was the case in the rental shop.
I think in this case my main question is – for resort riding in all conditions + a little offpiste, is the hybrid a better board than the typo (in case I can handle it)? Thanks!
Hi Eddie
Yeah, I would say that the Hybrid is the better board overall – but certainly a little more challenging to ride. Yeah, that is a strange experience with the MT vs what I experienced. I might expect that from the Ultra Mountain Twin more.
Also I’ve made a mistake and I’m 164 lbs and not 174 lol, wrong translation from kgs
Hi Eddie
That does make the 153 more doable – and I think in that size, it would certainly make it more easy going than if you were to go to 157. Would still be on the small size, given your a size 11 boot. With a size 10 or less, then I think 153 would be the right choice. But Given your weight, I think the 156W would have been better in the MT. And still Standard, I would go 156.
Hi Nate,
I’m looking at picking up a freeride/powder board as a 2nd board to my quiver (currently on a 157 Jones Mountain Twin which I love). I was thinking of the Hybrid as my first foray into a freestyle board and was wondering which size you’d recommend. I’d like it to float well in powder, but also be maneuverable enough for tree runs–and if it can also carve at speed once out of the trees that would be even better.
I’m 5’10, 170lbs, and wear a size 10.5 Thirty-Two boot. Would you recommend the 153 or the 157? Intermediate rider level. I know I’m probably in-between sizes, but see a great deal on a 157, so I was wondering if that would be too much board for me and would make tree-runs difficult.
Hi Terry
Thanks for your message.
I think the 153 would be your best bet. I think it’s still going to float well enough in powder for you, but certainly be more agile in trees. I think 157 is getting big, given you want that maneuverability in trees. I would put you on a “standard all-mtn” size of around 158 – but with the width of this board, you want to size down – and I think sizing to 153 would be a good bet. Sorry, I know you have a deal on a 157 and I’d like to tell you that’s the best option, but the 153 would be better suited for you and what you’re describing, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hello Nate,
I’m 6’2″, 220-225lbs (especially with all my gear on!) with a size 12 boot, lower advanced rider and was initially leaning toward a Hybrid in a 161. But, when I checked the sizing specs on YES’s site, they only have an upper weight limit of 200lbs on their largest 161 Hybrid offering.
Because of that, I got a 164W YES PYL instead. I’m definitely stoked about getting the PYL as it seems to check all my boxes, but I liked that the hybrid seems like a more mellow PYL with the same edge hold capability in ice coast conditions. I just got worried that the Hybrid would turn into a wet noodle with my body size muscling it around.
Do you think exceeding the weight limit per YES’s 161 specs is a valid concern to have?
The PYL is on the way, but my local shop still has a 161 Hybrid on the shelf which still has me still thinking about it. I’m sure the PYL will kick ass with my size, but your review has me worried in regards to the forgiveness and what not.
What do you think?
Hi Tom
Thanks for your message.
In terms of length, I would size you to around that 164 mark, so I think size-wise, you’re spot on with the PYL. But I wouldn’t worry too much about the Hybrid in the 161 being over its weight recommendations. I think that size is still doable for you. It will be quite a bit more forgiving than the PYL, as it’s already more forgiving, even looking at size-for-size, and then that smaller size will make it a little more mellow again. Note that the 164W PYL is still a little narrower at the inserts than the Hybrid 161 (at inserts Hybrid 161 is around 277mm at back insert and 283mm at front insert versus around 275mm back insert, 277mm front insert on the PYL) – though the 164W Hybrid is wider at tip and tail. But the 161 Hybrid is still in range size-wise for you. That said, I think 164W is the more optimal size.
The 2022 PYL is stiffer and less forgiving than it was in the past – and the 2023 model is going back to how it used to be – a little more mellow – with the 2023 lineup introducing a PYL Uninc model, which is stiffer, more like the 2022 PYL. So the difference in forgiveness/mellowness between the 2022 PYL and 2022 Hybrid is bigger than it is between the 2023 PYL and 2023 Hybrid.
So yeah, I think the 161 Hybrid is doable, but there would be quite a difference in flex and how aggressive/mellow they are.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Nate,
Thanks for your time and reply! Truly appreciated.
I did notice the width differences between the two at the inserts and tip and tail. Interesting to say the least.
Also interesting on the stiffness change from 2021 to 2022 on the PYL. Where do you find out all this info on next years models and such? It seemed like it was just assumed that the 2022 was just going to be the same as always? Did they ever announce it was going to be stiffer?
OK, so I think at this point, I may just try and stick with the PYL to see how it fares. I’m a fairly athletic guy with some strong legs. I think/hope my size will counteract and balance with the stiffer PYL well.
If not, Hybrid 2023 or PYL 2023, here I come! 🙂
Thanks again.
-Tom
You’re very welcome Tom.
We tested the 2023 model, so we know it’s softened up again. But we also have the 2023 Catalog, which shows a softer flex rating.
I think that’s a good way to go – if your athletic/strong then you might like that extra stiffness.
Hello Nate,
Thanks for answering my questions back in March, Nate!
Just wanted to give you an update because it’s an unusual one and ‘fun’ to share…
I ended up breaking my leg on my trip out to Breck in Colorado on my 2022 PYL! Happened a week after I was asking you about the Hybrid vs. PYL. I was in a tree trail that became far too dense with trees the further I went into it that I should’ve never been in.
The front of my board caught a tree which caused me to fall forward into it. The outside of my left leg right below the knee impacting the tree first, and hard. Broke my tibia ‘plateau’ instantly. I knew right away my leg broke and realized I had to get the hell out of the woods ASAP as I was by myself (idiot). Ended up sitting on my board like a sled and controlled my descent with my hands and right heel until I got to the main trail.
A tibial plateau fracture cannot be supported with an external cast and requires surgery. So, I now have 9 screws and a 3″ x 9″ T-shaped metal plate in my lower left leg!
Sounds horrible, I know. But, now at a bit more than 6 months out from the surgery with an excellent Orthopedic trauma surgeon in NY, I just got the all clear (I flew home from CO to NY with a broken leg). And, the screws and plate can come out after a year if I want.
Most people think I’m nuts for wanting to go snowboarding again, but it is what it is. I tell them that I NEED to go snowboarding again. Especially since my kids really started enjoying it. Can’t abandon the activity on them now!
All that said, I was REALLY enjoying the 2022 PYL up until that point. For karma’s sake, I’m going to sell it and pick up a Hybrid instead, or maybe the 2023 PYL for a bit less aggression. My first ever bone break will likely tone things down a bit for me 🙂
Cheers,
Tom
Hi Tom
Thanks for the story. Sorry that happened to you but also glad to hear that the recovery is going well. Takes more than that to stop us snowboarding!
But yeah, given that you might be riding a bit more mellow now, I think it’s a good idea to switch to one of those.
Hope your recovery continues well and you have a great season!
hey Nate your website is the most insightful snowboarding place in the internet!
I’m thinking about buying the Hybrid but worried about how wide it is based on your article: Snowboard Width Sizing
is the 26cm waist width of the Hybrid 153 too wide for me or fine? I ride with 8.5 ThirtyTwo Boots and i’m 168cm & 74-75kg.
Mainly looking for a fun carver with stability at speed and good in powder. Have heard great things about Yes in general and the Hybrid in particular!
Hi Pierce
Thanks for your message.
Yeah, unfortunately I think it’s a bit too big overall for your specs. It’s definitely too wide for your boots, but with a board like this you often ride it wider and shorter. Sizing down the length helps to gain back maneuverability lost with going too wide. In your case, I would put you on around a 155 as your “standard all-mountain” length, which would assume a good width. To get on a board this much too wide for your boots, you’d need to size down more than 2cm, IMO. If they had a 149/150, I think you’d be good then, but I think the 153 is too big.
Hope this helps with your decision
I am interested in Yes hybrid snowboard, I read a lot positive feedback when doing backcountry and on carving groomers with this board. I also find positive reviews about yes the y, and my question is what is real difference between that two boards.
I find size 157 in hybrid is right. I forget to said I prefer more fun board as I not stay more than 10 days on snow and want to have good fun time with my friends, especially in searching tracks in trees and backcountry.
Thanks a lot, all the best!!
Hi Jakov
Thanks for your message.
I would say that the Hybrid is a little more “fun” as in a little more easy going, than the Y, so given that, I think the Hybrid is probably your best bet. I preferred the Hybrid over the Y overall and found it more fun.
I found the Hybrid easier to turn – more agile in general, softer flexing and better for jumps and riding uneven terrain and powder.
Hope this helps with your decision
Nate, thank you for your fast reply and confirmation for my option.
You’re very welcome Jakov. Happy riding!
Hey Nate, your website has been a godsend for info about snowboards, thank you so much.
I am looking to buy one (first) board when I head to Japan. Will likely be an even split between groomed (I’d like to try harder carves and butter spins/rolls), Powder (nothing too insane, but I hate sinking and getting stuck) and low-mid level park/side hit/natural jumps (minimal rail/jib).
I thought the Yes Hybrid or Standard, Salomon Dancehaul, or Jones Mtn Twin (all with union atlas) sound pretty awesome, what would be your recc? May need decent edge hold for crap snow/ice in Aus/NZ too.
Any feedback here would be greatly appreciated, keep up the amazing work <3
Hi Lucas
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t ridden the Dancehaul, so I can’t say much about that. Given what you’re describing, I think I would be leaning Standard or Mountain Twin – sounds like you want to do a bit of everything and those boards do that. The Hybrid is certainly doable though, if you wanted to get powder performance and you’re not really riding switch. They all have good edge hold in icy conditions, in my experience – with the Hybrid and Standard being a little better than the MT, but the MT still good.
Make sure you get the size right too. It’s important. I would be happy to give sizing rec – would just need your height, weight and boot size.
Hope this helps
Thanks for your quick reply and reccs!
I’m starting to lean back towards the Standard again as a result (its a little hard to find in Japan and I do love the hybrid graphic though.) Do you think the Standard with the slam backs will stand up fairly well to Japow days? Is the Hybrid that bad for switch landing/approach/flatland playing around?
Sizing wise, I hover around 170 lb or below. I am 5 foot 10 in. I left my boots in Japan so unsure of exact size but approx. 9/9.5 (I bought them as a teen, 25 now). I would consider myself to be a mid-high intermediate rider (comfortable on pretty much any black runs, less comfy on bigger park features)
FYI I will probably try and buy leftover stock so sizing options can be limited. When I looked at sizing I selected:
Yes Hybrid – 153 cm (26 waist width)
Yes Standard – 156 cm (25.8 ww) (or 153 depending on availability) not too fussed, my guess is 6 is slightly better for carving/powder and 3 for butters/spins.
Jones MT – 156W cm (25.9 ww) (but 154/157 acceptable for same reasons above).
I like that the wider waist will provide extra float and prevent any booting out, but if you don’t think its necessary or would be a big detriment that would be a great tip (I’ve never intentionally ridden wide). What is your impression of the sizing options above?
Thanks so much again Nate!
Hi Lucas
The Standard with the Slam Backs is still not going to be up to more powder, freeride oriented boards, but it’s certainly above average for pow, IMO. 3.5/5. The Hybrid is something that you can ride switch on – it’s not the best, but it’s not the worst either. For flat land tricks – like for butters, it’s actually not super hard to butter or anything, it’s more buttery than you’d think, but there’s a bit of a different feeling when pressing the tail compared to the nose. And then for flat land spins and that kind of thing – again, it’s not ideal for setting up/taking off switch, but it’s doable.
Size-wise, I think 153 for the Hybrid is your best bet.
For the Standard – I think you’re spot on – both the 153 and 156 would work – with the 156 better for speed, carving and powder and the 153 better for butters, spins, more maneuverable at slower speeds. But I would be leaning more to 153 because of width.
For the MT – I personally wouldn’t go wide with 9/9.5s. You shouldn’t have any booting out issues on the 157 or 154, IMO. Certainly not on the 157 with 9/9.5s. I find if a board’s too wide for my feet, unless I size down quite a bit, that it takes more effort to initiate turns – and that there’s a bit of delay in response. Typically fine for big carves – when you get on edge, you don’t really know your on a wide – but for any short/sharp turning (e.g. trees, bumps etc) they tend not to perform that well. That said, the Standard is quite wide, but the narrower waist does help with that maneuverability. The 156W MT isn’t super wide at the waist, so it might be doable – but it is a little wider overall at inserts. But I would still be leaning 157 for the MT.
Thanks for your reviews!
I bought a 153 Hybrid based on your review and absolutely love it.
Edge hold is awesome especially for the east coast, very playful, forgiving, and easy to skid turns . This board can carve too! Plenty of pop for small jumps and this board presses easily.
I actually sold my Lib Tech Orca 150 to buy this and demo’d a NS Harpoon 152 and the Hybrid’s my fave.
Unfortunately, I have yet to test it out in fresh pow unlike my Orca which was awesome.
I’m 150 lbs, 5′ 10″, size 11 boots.
Hi Sanjay
Thanks for your message. Appreciate your insights. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you’ve had a chance to test it in powder.
Hi Nate,
Awesome site and reviews you got going on my man! Thank you!
I have a question. I have a yes greats 156 which I love. But I am looking for a board to grab when we go some longer tours and for the powder days.
Love a board that I can do everything with.
My specs: 170lbs (fluctuate between 167 and 175) 6ft. (183cm) and boot size US 10.5.
Can’t decide between the Hybrid 153 or 157.
What would your advise be?
Hi R.J.
Thanks for your message.
I’d say your “standard all-mountain size” is closer to 159, but with the width sizing down makes sense. The question then becomes, sizing down 2cm or 6cm.
To give reference, the Greats 156 is around 273mm at the inserts (depending on stance width) and the Hybrid 157 is 283mm at the front insert and 277mm at the back insert (based on a 585mm (23″) stance width). The 153 would be roughly 279mm at front insert and 273mm at back insert (given the same stance width). Also to note, the Greats 156 has a 120.8cm effective edge. The 157 Hybrid has a 119.5cm effective edge and the 153’s is 116.1cm.
It’s a tough choice. I liked the 157 and thought it would feel too big (6’0″, 185lbs at the time, size 10), but didn’t – I had a few pounds on you, but you’ve also got slightly larger feet. And if you’re going to be using it predominantly for powder, I think it works. If you want to get the best float in powder and best stability at speed, I think I’d be leaning 157. If you want it to be more maneuverable for trees etc, then you could certainly go 153 and it would still beat out the Greats, for sure, in terms of powder.
Hope this helps with your decision
Thank you for your really detailed answer! It helps a lot, but does not make it easier haha.
I Love the capabilities of the 157 in the powder, but also love the maneuverability of the 153…
Decisions, decisions! Wish they had a 155!
Sounds like the 157 might be the best addition next to my greats. But still concerned about the maneuverability.
Hi Nate,
I’ve decided it’s time to get my own board after using an old hand-me-down K2 Electra since I started boarding 3 years ago. I have been going about 10 times a year and right now I think I’m at an intermediate level. I tend to follow my more experienced friends down black runs often, but also tend to hit the ground somewhat often. I get off groomers and into the powder (trees and/or bowls) as much as I can, but I’m looking for a board that can handle both well. Not interested in park though.
Right now my eye is on the Yes Hybrid, though I’m also considering the Capita Navigator or Burton Show Stopper. The reason I’m hesitating on getting the Yes Hybrid is that the smallest size (153 cm) has a recommended weight of 140-190 lbs, and I’m a small dude. 140 is my current weight and the heaviest I’ve ever been, and there’s the possibility I lose a few pounds in the future. I’m also 5’6″ and have size 9.5 Nidecker Talons. Should I be worried about being too light for the Hybrid, or is it not a big deal? Do you think the other 2 boards I mentioned might suit me better?
As a follow up, I was also looking at the Flux XF (or Burton Cartel X) bindings for these boards. However I’m concerned that these bindings are both listed for Advanced ability levels. Would you think I’d be able to effectively use these bindings with these boards? If not, do you have any more-intermediate level freeride binding recommendations.
Thanks for the advice
Hi Brandon
Thanks for your message.
I think all 3 boards would be good options for what you’re describing, so I think it comes down to the best size. IMO the Hybrid 153 is too big. You could, maybe, get away with that length, but when you add the width into the equation versus 9.5 boots, it’s overall too big. So, just for sizing reasons (as you suspected), I would cross the Hybrid off the list.
For the Show Stopper, I like the 148 for you. I think a standard “all-mountain” size for you is around 151, assuming a relatively advanced level. The Show Stopper is a little wider than normal and whilst not ultra-wide for your boots or anything, it’s just on the wider side, so sizing down a little from the 151 makes sense. So, I think the 148 should work well. I really liked the 154 (I’m 6’0″, 175lbs, size 10 boot). So I don’t think the 148 is going to feel too small. Should be just right, IMO.
For the Navigator, I would be looking at the 151. It’s a good width for your boots, IMO, so I wouldn’t size down. I’ve ridden the Navigator in both 158 and 161 and both worked for me in those sizes. I think 151 would be just right.
Between the 2, I’d say the Navigator is the slightly more easy going ride. The Show Stopper is still intermediate doable, but just that little bit more of a challenging ride versus the Navigator. Size-wise, both those sizes should work well, but if I had to choose the best size, I’d say the Navigator in 151, but that’s splitting hairs, as both sizes work really well for you, IMO.
In terms of bindings, I think those should be fine. I would say both are solid intermediate level bindings, but most important is that they match the board. The Navigator being 6/10 flex and the Show Stopper 6.5/10 (both by my feel) those bindings should match well. The only thing to consider with those bindings is that they may feel a little stiffer to you, given your weight. Typically lighter weight people feel bindings stiffer than heavier weight people. So, that would be the only thing to consider – whether going to a 6/10 flex is better in terms of your weight. If you did, then something like the Burton Cartel or Union Force (or Strata) would be a good way to go.
Hope this helps with your decision
Picked up the Navigator with Union Stratas, thanks for helping me decide!
You’re very welcome Brandon. 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, Your article helped me a lot, and I really like the design of UnInc DCP this year. I have some questions about the length, I am 6’’, about 200 pounds. I like to ride on uneven slopes, hoping to find a fun freeride board. My main riding area is around Seattle. Would you like to recommend 157 or 153?
Hi Shawn
Thanks for your message.
Can you let me know your boot size. Really important for sizing, particularly with a wider board like this one.
Sure, my boot size is 9
Hi Shawn
I would be looking at the 157 for your specs. With bigger boots, you’d be able to go to 161, but with 9s, I would size down to the 157. I think the 153 would be too small for your specs.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Shawn,
Thanks for your review.
Really In trouble for the hybrid size, im 6ft x 180 lb
Wich size should I get?
153/157
Really. Thank you!!
Hi Gabriele
Thanks for your message.
Can you let me know your boot size please. Boot size very important for sizing. Also if you can let me know how you like to ride. e.g. fast? trees? powder? any freestyle? more aggressive or more playful? And rough ability level.
Hey Nate,
Many thanks for the great review and site – think the Hybrid 161 is the board for me this year, but I was wondering is there much difference between the regular Hybrid and the Uninc? Heard that the Uninc is slightly stiffer in the tail but really interested in your opinion, as I probably won’t get to test before I buy.
Thanks in advance…
Hi GG
Thanks for your message.
I haven’t had the chance to ride the Uninc, so I’m not sure from personal experience. But based on specs, it looks like the only difference is the glass in the tail. Haven’t heard of “XPIC 202” so I’m not sure if it’s stiffer than Triaxal or not. Triaxal is stiffer than biaxal, of course, but not sure about this XPIC 202 or how much difference it would make. But my guess would be that it stiffens up the tail a little bit.
Many thanks for the comments and the swift reply. Will go with the Uninc – just ordered one!
Cheers,
GG
You’re very welcome GG. Hope the Hybird Uninc 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. Happy riding!
Hey Nate,
Finally had the chance to take out the Uninc and it’s a blast – so much fun to ride, really stable at speed (although you do get some nose chatter, but it doesn’t resonate under the bindings), stable on landings and great for carving on groomers – had some great euro carves so far. Definitely has the x-factor, and is a fantastic all rounder for piste and pow.
Thanks again for the great review – was absolutely spot on.
Cheers,
GG
Hey GG
Thanks for the update. Much appreciated. And awesome that you’ve loving it! Makes me want to get on the Hybrid again. Might see if I can get on the Uninc, if they do a 22/23 model of it. Happy riding!
Hi Nate, great reviews and tips, thanks a lot! Reading quite a lot of (your) reviews, I think the Hybrid fits best to me. I need a strong edge for icy conditions when going to Europe but generally like more cruising and riding aside of the slopes (skidded turns, uneven terrain and crud) and back-country with as much as possible powder and trees, especially in Japan. No park and no big jumps. Reading the comments about maneuverability is the only point that makes me think… 1) really the right board, 2) can this be compensated with the right length?
I am 46 (OK athletic but not very strong and a bit restricted in the hip), 6’2” tall, 195 lbs. Boot size is 10.5-11. Riding since 30 yrs, 15-20 days a season. I am something in the middle between 157 and 161 for the Hybrid, would go for a 159 if existing.
What do you think about the length? Can you recommend a matching binding for the Hybrid and my profile?
Do you see an alternative to the Hybrid that I should check?
Many thanks in advance for some advice, really appreciated!
Cheers, Nico
Hi Nico
Thanks for your message.
The Hybrid sounds like it fits the way you ride well.
Size-wise, I’d be leaning 157 for you. From what you’re describing and given you’re concerned about maneuverability, I think that’s the best size. And I’d be surprised if you found it difficult to maneuver in that length. I’m 6’0″, was 185lbs when I rode this board and with size 10 boots and I didn’t find it lacked maneuverability. WIth 10.5-11 boots and a bit more size, it should feel easier to maneuver than I did, and I didn’t find it an issue.
Only downside I can see for you going 157 over the 161 is powder float. But for this board, I don’t think the powder performance should still be really good in that size for you.
Hope this helps with your decision
Many thanks, Nate! Just ordered, looking forward to test it!
Cheers, Nico
You’re very welcome Nico. 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!
Yo Nate!
I’m also trying to decide between the PYL and Hybrid. I hope I can demo both this year.
I’m 5’11” 175 11.5 Addias Lexicon Adv. I was thinking 160W PYL or a 157 Hybrid.
I saw in your current review of the PYL that it seems stiffer and not as nimble as previous years. This is concerning to me because my riding style is more bumps and trees that could be at times a slower technical riding as opposed to just bombing down the mountain.At the same time I still want a board that can lay down a nice carve and float in pow.
I may be leaning towards the Hybrid but I have a few questions.
1. Which board is better on hard pack and east coast “ice” conditions?
2. Will a 157 Hybrid be easier to turn then a 160W PYL especially at low speeds.
3. When I go out West I love big bowls and black to double black steeps . I’m pretty sure the PYL is built for this but can a short fatty Hybrid work for big mountain riding?
4. Would the 153 Hybrid be an option or would I lose stability and gain toe drag on a board that short?
Thanks again for your time and knowledge!
Hi Matthew
Thanks for your message.
I think those sizes make sense for your specs. To answer your questions, based on my experience with the boards:
1. They’re both good in icy conditions in my experience. If I had to pick, I’d say PYL, but they’re so close in this respect, that I wouldn’t let it affect your decision
2. IMO yeah, the 157 Hybrid will be easier to maneuver at slower speeds versus 160W PYL. Talking 2022 model. If we were talking earlier models, I would say it would be really close.
3. I think the Hybrid could definitely work in those situations. Particularly with the 157 and your height/weight specs. I think it’s still long enough. Because of your 11.5 boots, you don’t have to go too short with it, so being able to go 157, I think it could handle it fine. The PYL is better for bombing and really opening it out for big mountain riding, but the Hybrid isn’t going to suck in those situations either.
4. With your boots (really low profile) I’d be very surprised if you got any boot drag on the 153. However, I think the 157 is the better size for you overall. Your height/weight with a size 9/10 boot and I’d be more inclined to say 153, but for your foot size, it’s not going to be that wide for you, so you don’t need to size down as much – and from what you’re describing, I think the 153 wouldn’t be as good as you wanted it in terms of bigger mountain/bombing stuff. You’d probably really like it in trees. But I think you’ll still like the 157 in trees and overall it’s the better size taking into account everything you want to do.
Hope this helps with your decision
Yes thanks for your answer. I can’t wait to demo these boards this winter!
You’re very welcome Matthew. Bring on winter! And if you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on after you get a chance demo them.
Appreciate the well written reviews! Glad I found your site.
Maybe you’d have a second to provide some advice for me and get me off the fence..
My dilemma is similar to others here, Hybrid or PYL, except I’m 6ft, 225lb.
I’m putting together my new set-up this year. Coming off a 2008 Arbor Wasteland 163 and pretty stiff Flow rear entries from around the same era. The Wasteland that year was a flat deck, no rocker or camber. E.e. 1237mm, waist 264mm, 9.3/8.4/9.3 sidecut.
New 2022 equipment so far includes Union Atlas and Burton Photon Boa.
I’ve never been an exceptional technical rider, but quite competent. Probable about a 7 on your scale, minus the switch riding and only really ever had the odd BS 3 in my bag-o-tricks.
But I’m getting older and out of riding shape. Still try to bomb trees, glades, and anywhere else I might find a stash of pow. Top to bottom on my 2000ft vert local if I’m feeling energetic. Future cat-ski trips not out of the question.
I can’t always get many days in a season because I work away, but I’m hoping to get up more often, (only one day last season..) and I want the right weapon for charging variety of lines and trees, but also for fun and maybe a bit of forgiveness if I tire out quicker than I used to. Still got a few good years left though!
Any thoughts are welcome. Or other board recommendations too, but I think I’m fairly set on trying this tapered underbite style edge tech. I seem to be gravitating toward the descriptions and reviews of the Hybrid, but don’t really see riders my weight and skill combo riding this thing. Worried maybe the flex would be a little soft? I don’t get to compare boards really ever so… not even sure what the flex rating would be on my Arbor.
Anyway there’s the background. You think PYL or Hybrid, and I’m guessing 161 Hy and 164W PYL?
Thanks
Hi Scott
Thanks for your message.
Sizing-wise, I agree that 161 and 164W are prob going to be the way to go. But if you could just let me know your boot size, to confirm.
I rode the 2022 Wasteland last season and felt it at 7.5/10. However, I don’t know how that would compare to the 2008 model. And also having had the board that long, it will now feel softer than it would have been at the start of it’s life. So, assuming (and it’s a big assumption) that the 2008 model is similar in flex to the 2022 model, I’d say that what you feel it at now would be no more than a 6.5/10 (as a big guess!) – in which case the PYL will feel a little stiffer, and the Hybrid will feel a little softer. But again, that’s based on big guesses, given the timespan of your Wasteland. In any case, I would still imagine that you’ll find the PYL a little stiffer than it, and likely the Hybrid a little softer than it.
In terms of forgiveness, the Hybrid will feel more forgiving – and in the 161 versus the 164W PYL, that difference in forgiveness will be a little bit of a wider gap.
In terms of trees, I think the 161 Hybrid will be a little easier to maneuver in there than the 164W PYL, partly because of the size difference and partly because it’s more forgiving. In terms of powder, it’s close. The Hybrid does have a larger setback and a little more taper and greater difference between nose length and tail length. The PYL has very subtly more rocker in the nose and the 164W overall has a slightly longer nose than the 161 Hybrid. Size-for-size, I think the Hybrid would perform slightly better in powder, but 161 Hybrid versus 164W PYL, given the slightly larger amount of surface area on the PYL 164W, I think maybe the 164W subtly better than the Hybrid 161, in terms of powder.
Going Hybrid 161 would mean dropping quite a bit of effective edge compared to what you’re used to with your Wasteland, so that’s something to consider as well. The 164W PYL is very similar in terms of effective edge.
Hope that gives you more to go off – and if you could let me know your boot size too – that would help to confirm sizing.
Thanks for the reply!
Boots are US 11.
I guess I’m worried most about float in pow and flex for my weight, but maybe the flex is not such a big deal as long as the board is still stable at speed, and it could still eat up some chunder every one in a while?
Hi Scott
Yeah with 11s, the 161 Hybrid and 164W PYL certainly your best sizes, IMO.
If you’re really worried about flex being too soft, then the PYL will be your best bet – and will certainly give you more stability at speed.
Hi Nate,
I am looking to get the hybrid or really any all-mountain board with focus on freeride/powder. however i have a super tricky body in terms of height and weight. I’m 205cm(6’7) and only weigh about 75kgs(165lbs) and have a US boot size of 11. what size board should i get? because i see a lot of contradicting information and i assume that with my height and weight it might be different than “normal build” people.
Hi Giel
Thanks for your message.
Whilst I do like to take height into account, weight and boot size (and riding style and ability level) are the most important factors for sizing, IMO. The biggest complication that can come into play with being tall and light is if a boards stance width maximum is too narrow for your stance width, which is often a little wider for taller riders. But in the case of the Hybrid that shouldn’t be an issue as the 153 and 157 both go out to a max stance of 24.6″ (624mm) and I wouldn’t think your stance would be that wide.
If you had a smaller boot size – like 10s or less, then I’d be leaning 153 for you, but with 11s, I think the 157 is probably the better bet. You would want to size down more if you had smaller feet. But with 11s and 75kg, I’d say 157 for sure, in this case.
Hope this helps
Hey Nate,
Thanks for the reply!
I was thinking to get the 161 but from what you tell me the 157 might fit me better then?
Also I’ve been looking at the Capita Mercury as well and am deciding between the yes hybrid and the Mercury. I’m aware that they are different boards and after reading reviews of both on numerous sites including obviously yours i still can’t decide. What is you opinion there? Thanks in advance!
Hi Giel
Yeah, 161 is too big for your weight/boot size, IMO, for this board. The 157 would be the best size for you, IMO.
Between the Hybrid and the Mercury, it depends on how you’ll want to be riding them. If you want to get the most out of powder and aren’t that concerned with riding switch that much, then I would go Hybrid. If powder is less of a concern and you value being able to ride switch well, more so than powder, then I’d go Mercury. That’s not to say that the Mercury sucks in powder or that it’s the best board out there for riding switch, but it’s better at switch and not as good in powder as the Hybrid. And you can ride the Hybrid switch, but it’s just less suited to it than the Mercury. Both are great boards, IMO, so I think those are the main factors to consider in this case. The Mercury, to me, feels marginally stiffer (6.5/10 versus 6/10 on the Hybrid), if that’s a factor at all for you.
Hey Nate!
Wow! okay i thought i really needed that 161(my stepdad claims this as I’m quite tall and have a lot of leverage) well you basically told me what i expected, i should go for the hybrid.
Laying down carves, bombing, doing some jumps that are on and off the groomer(not park) and POW when it’s there is my aim so i guess I’ll buy the Hybrid in 157, could you please if time permits explain why you’d go for the 157 over 161 in my case? thanks anyway!
Hi Giel
Yeah from that description, I agree Hybird over Mercury.
Choosing snowboard length from height is pretty old school. It’s how it used to be done and it’s a much easier way to do it – particularly for people doing rentals – you can just look at someone and decide from that – and it’s always more sensitive asking for someone’s weight. But the snowboard doesn’t really care how tall you are. What the snowboard feels mostly is your weight. Leverage is important but that mostly comes from foot size. If you’re feet are longer – or more to the point if your feet are right on the edges of the board or very close to, you can apply more pressure to the edges than if they were a long way inside the edges of the board. Leverage also comes from how much force you can apply to those edges – whether because of more weight or from a lot of strength or a combination. IMO height doesn’t make a lot of difference, if any, to leverage in the case of riding a snowboard. That said, I do like to take height into account to some extent, but it’s not as important as weight and boot size, IMO.
For your specs, you could certainly go closer to 160 on a narrower board. But when a board is wider, like the Hybrid, you typically size down for it. With 11s, you would be on a wide board most of the time, but there are some boards where you could get on the regular. And the Hybrid is wider than a typical wide. For 11s, the 157 Hybrid is on the wider side. So sizing down makes sense – as is the case with most people on the Hybrid. If you had size 12 boots and/or were heavier, then 161 would work, but for your specs, I think 157 is the better size for this particular board. Hope that makes sense.
Hey Nate,
I’ve been looking for this board but it’s been hard to locate it in Germany in 157 unless I’m going for the 2020(?) model, what is the difference between 20,21&22?
What board would you recommend as alternative if i can’t find it at all?
Hi Giel
As far as I can tell the Hybird hasn’t changed, so the 2020, 2021 and 2022 all look to be the same board (apart from the Graphics). The 2020 model didn’t have the 153 size – that’s the only real change – they added a size. I rode the 2020 model. I typically don’t retest a board, unless it’s had obvious changes. So, yeah, if you can get the 2020 model, go for it. And you should be able to get it cheaper in the past season model too. Note that the 2020 model was the first model of the Hybrid, so any model you’re looking at won’t be any older than that.
Hello.
I’m looking for a new board and this hybrid caught my eyes. I’m 6’2 about 198 pounds and size 11 boot. Got some adidas with reduced footprint. My previous board was a capita outerspace living and i’ m looking for something better in powder.
I like to mess around on my board, ollie, nollie , jump from sidehits and natural features and i really like to butter. I used to skateboard when i was younger so i got a skater mindset on my snowboard. I’ve been riding twins for ever now but i’m looking for something better for pow.
So i really liked this board until the part you said spins should be a multiple of 360. That is really bad for me since i like 180s. A back 180 is better the any spin )
Keep in mind i’m not talking about anything big. 41 this year.
I have been looking at the jones stratos since it has smaller setback and not such a big difference between the nose and the tail. But with the stratos i’m afraid it will not butter that good.
Can you please make some light in my dilemma on hybrid vs stratos? Or if you have a better suggestion for a board that fits my riding.
Thank you
Hi M.C
Thanks for your message.
Between the Hybrid and Stratos, for what you want to do, I would go Hybrid for sure. Stratos not an easy board to butter at all. And to be honest I found it harder to ride switch. It’s actually got more taper than the Hybrid. There’s a smaller difference between tip and tail length’s (Stratos 70mm difference between tip and tail and Hybrid 135mm difference), but that’s all happening out side the contact points, so whilst it makes a difference when you’re not in pow, it doesn’t make as big a difference as the taper, when riding switch on groomers (IMO). And, like you say, the Stratos has the smaller setback, which does make a noticeable difference when riding switch, but I just felt overall that the Stratos was more difficult switch. Not by that much though – neither are well suited to riding switch.
The Hybrid isn’t the best for setting up or landing switch, which is why I don’t find it the best in terms of 180s (and I agree not much better than a backside 180!). But that’s not to say you can’t do it. It’s just not the best for it, simply because of how it feels setting up and landing switch.
If you can get past that, I think the Hybrid otherwise sounds like it would suit you well.
Some other options that won’t be as good for powder but better for riding switch and still buttery (and still a little better for powder than the OSL):
– Slash Brainstorm
– Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker
– YES Standard
If you really want to get more of a powder performance boost and are willing to have switch a little more difficult, then the Hybrid is your better bet, IMO. But if you want to get more of a balance between powder and switch, then one of those 3 would work really well for what you’re describing, IMO.
Hope this helps
First thing i want to thank you for this really in depth answer. It made me realize i`m making kind of a big leap from riding twins to freeride boards , without visiting the all mountain segment.
The yes standard seems a winner from the three boards you mentioned. Slash is a brand i never encountered and i`m not familiar with it. Lib tech is solid, had some park boards from Mervin, but i like the camrock profiles these days.
Also i `have been looking, with this new mindset, at more AM boards ,and the ride algorithm stood up , mostly because of the 19 mm setback. I“m rethinking my stance angles from +-15 to a more forward stance. I don`t think a +15-3 stance works on a twin.
Any thoughts on that ?
Hi M.C
I haven’t ridden the Algorythm yet (it keeps alluding me!), but on paper, it could definitely work for what you’re describing. I think you can ride a more forward stance on a twin, but usually because you’re riding a fair amount of switch if you have a twin, you typically wouldn’t. But you can. Certainly something like the Standard you could ride with a more forward stance.
Hi. Thank you for the fast reply.
I’m more and more interested in the Standard. Especially since you said you didnt need the slam back inserts. I have mini disc bindings so will not be able to use them. I’m thinking the 159 is the right size for me. I saw that you tested the 156. Will i have enough float with the 159, or should i go for the 162? The 162 seems a bit too wide even for me
Hi M.C
Yeah, I found it decent in powder even without using the slam back inserts. But that said, it would be even better if you were able to use them. But you can still setback with mini disc bindings – you just can’t setback as much as you could with the slam back inserts. But you could still go to the back of the regular inserts, if you wanted to setback a bit for powder days.
Debate is definitely between the 159 and 162 in terms of sizing. I think probably 159 with 11s. If you had 12s or bigger boots, then I’d probably more inclined to go 162. But Even the 159 is a little wide for 11s, IMO. So sizing down to that probably makes the most sense. Typically I’d say closer to 162 for your specs, but with this board it’s a good idea to size down, depending on boot size. I’d typically ride 158/159 for an all-mountain board, but prefer the Standard in the 156 because of it’s width. I ride 10s, so with 11s, maybe not the same need to size down as much, but 162 might be a little big overall, with width and length combined, so I would be leaning 159.
Can you also let me know the size of your OSL? Just want to make sure you’ll be getting enough of a boost in terms of powder float, given that was one of the reason’s for wanting the new board.
hi. The Capita OSL is 159 wide
Thanks M.C
I think the Standard 159 would give you marginally better float in powder versus the 159W OSL. The Standard is very slightly wider overall and will give you marginally more surface area and has a little more volume in the nose. I think it will be better in powder, but it’s not going to be head and shoulders above.
Hi.
Me again.
I just saw the capita mercury has some wide boards now.
The mercury seems to me more pow oriented but i see you gave it the same score for pow as the standard.
Isn’t the mercury better for what i am looking mow that they have a wide option ?
Thank you
Hi M.C
Yeah I’d say the Mercury is marginally more pow oriented than the Standard, if you’re going to use either in their reference stance (i.e. Standard centered versus Mercury 1/2 inch setback. The Standard does float better than what you’d expect. But yeah, the Mercury in the 160W is an option that could definitely work. Note that the Mercury 160W is marginally narrower overall than the 159 Standard, but pretty close. So, I would go 160W for your specs, rather than the 158W, which I think is a little too small. 160W Merc very similar overall surface area to the OSL 159W. It’s a good width for 11s too, IMO and I think that length/width combo should work well for you. And you’ll get a little better powder performance, IMO. And certainly more stability at speed. You loose a little in terms of butterability, but still good for riding/landing switch and jumps, IMO.
Hey.
I bought a Yes Standard and i’m loving it. It’s exactly what i was looking for. I wanted to thank you for your well thought input.
You helped me a lot narrowing down the board selection.
Thank you
You’re very welcome M.C.
Thanks for the update and awesome to hear you’re loving your new board! Happy riding!
Hey what sort of difference would I notice between this and the pyl?
I’m looking for a board to go with my proto synthesis.
Would this board be good for heliboarding?
Hi Brian
Thanks for your message.
The PYL is a little stiffer and is better on a carve and for stability at speed – Hybrid isn’t bad at those things by any means, but the PYL a little better. If I had choose one for powder, I’d say the Hybrid is the slightly better board in powder. Both are good compliments to the Proto Synthesis and work in a quiver with it, IMO. Heliboarding is something I haven’t had a chance to do it (definitely on the bucket list, when I can justify the cost!), but I would say both would work, but if I was to choose between the two for a heliboarding mission, I would go PYL.
Hope this helps
I reached out to Nate at the end of the 2019/20 season, and he included the Yes Hybrid, along with the Gnu Hyperkyarve, and Never Summer Westbound as good fits for an early(ish) intermediate rider. Now that I have a full season with the Hybrid under my belt, I thought I would provide some thoughts for other intermediate level riders that might be considering this board.
MY SPECS – I’m 41 years old, have only been riding for three seasons, and probably fall somewhere in the middle of that vague universe called “intermediate” level. I can ride some double-black terrain (when the snow is soft), but I still skid plenty of turns and occasionally look like a moron on rutted up cat tracks, too. Weight 190-200 lbs (86 to 90 kg); Height 5’10” (177 cm); and Size 10 US Boot (28.2cm Mondo). I ride the 157 Hybrid with Burton Step-On bindings, and Burton Swath Boots.
SKILL LEVEL/FORGIVENESS – Almost anybody of any skill level could ride the Hybrid. For the intermediate, it really comes down to how well this board fits your specs, because if it is too wide for your specs, it will just require more than optimal effort to ride it all day, especially in less than ideal conditions. It does not have nearly as much rocker in the nose/tail with the 1-4-1 CamRock profile as many of Yes’s all-mountain boards (such as the Basic with 4-4-4, or the Typo & Greats with 2-4-2), but don’t let the specs fool you because the profile is plenty forgiving enough for almost anybody. In fact, because it doesn’t have that squirrelly feeling of some hybrid rocker boards, I think it is actually an easier camber profile than many rocker boards. The flex is basically perfect for intermediate riders ready to get further up the mountain and off the blue runs, but is still flexible enough for early intermediate riders still working on torsional twist to leverage the board.
AGILITY – The most common complaint about this board I found in my pre-purchase research is that turn initiation is slow. On the other hand, as you can tell form the comments on this site, there are just as many contrasting reviews (just like Nate’s review above) – so it was hard to decide whether this issue was real. Well, in my experience, agility for this board comes down to two factors – specs/sizing and snow conditions. This board is wide, and it rides that way for my size 10 boots in hard snow and messy end-of-day resort snow. In fresh snow, the board has a different personality that rolls effortlessly from edge to edge, and it is agile enough for me to take into the trees – but I’m not taking it anywhere near a tree run of day-old tracked out snow. Besides being so wide, it also does not have that quick pivot transition that hybrid rocker would, so you do give up some transition speed for the stability of this camber profile. That said, if the board fits your specs, none of this is an issue, and I think the agility will be fine for you.
SIZING – I purchased the original 2019/20 model prior to the 2020/21 season to save some cash – which meant I had to go with the 157 instead of the 153 because the 153 wasn’t available the first year. Although the 157 is wide, it is not comparatively as short as most short-wide style boards would be for my specs. Part of me would like to size down to the 153 to make it a better one board quiver, but the 157 floats and rides steeper terrain so well in good snow I’m hesitant to risk giving that up. (I think I may just buy an all-mountain board for those messy groomer days, and start myself a quiver.) For folks riding a size Large binding, I think the turn initiation on the 157 will be plenty fast, and I doubt they will have any limitations. (My medium bindings just swim inside the edges of the 157.) Intermediate riders with size 10-11 that are looking for a daily driver, should probably go with the size 153, and intermediate riders with boot sizes under 9.5, should probably look elsewhere. As big as the 157 rides, I would be hesitant to step up to the 161 as an intermediate, unless I had a boot size of larger than 11. Yes seems to be conservative on their weight recommendations, and I think riders up to 210 lbs would be fine on the 157, so I wouldn’t step up to that 161 just because you are a couple of pounds over Yes’s recommended weight of 190.
LIKES – I really love Yes’s hybrid-camber CamRock profile. It rides very stable, tracks well when one-footing and flat-basing, and makes for a rewarding yet forgiving ride. The tapered underbite sidecut is really unique, and creates an interesting turn profile. It doesn’t feel as back-foot washy as you would expect for a tapered board because of the way the tapered underbite progressively tightens the side cut radius. Keep in mind that I’m an extremely mediocre, middle-aged, glorified beginner; but even I can play around with shifting my weight to get different radius turns from the sidecut on this board. Once you get on edge, you can manipulate that sidecut to get the turn radius you want. I really like the flex of the board, too, and it has plenty of guts as far as I am concerned. I rode my first true double-black run at Jackson Hole on the Hybrid, and it performed so well I rode seventeen more double-black runs that same week. I really prefer a flex that hugs to the terrain when I get in steep stuff, so the Hybrid is perfect for me. I love this board anytime the snow is soft – on steeps and bowls at the top of the mountain, or slashing slush and carving groomers at the bottom…it’s great as long as the snow is soft. Don’t take the soft snow comments as a complaint about edge hold, though, because this board has edge hold for days. I have ridden pure east coast ice on it and it holds an edge, but it does take a lot of work to turn in icy conditions. In deep powder, the Hybrid has a unique ride because it planes out on top, and the back foot doesn’t have to sink as much. I have no issues riding powder with a centered stance because the nose floats it out so well. It’s not really a surf-style ride, but it’s a very floaty ride and I really like it.
COMPLAINTS – I basically only have two issues with the board. The first I have already mentioned ad nauseam – it is a bit of a chore to turn in hard snow. It will wear you out it in hard snow trying to turn through messy moguled-up runs, and it’s a downright pain in the ass for long, narrow, rutted-up cat tracks if you can’t flat-base it. The second complaint is that the reference stance is relatively wide at 23″ for both the 153 and 157 models, and it only has 2×5 inserts. If you ride a 23” stance, then ignore this comment because you are golden. I am much more comfortable in a 21.5-22” stance, and with Burton Step-On bindings, I don’t have any additional adjustment outside of what is available on the inserts. I have been riding the minimum reference stance of 21.5” – i.e. the inner most inserts. This works to give me the stance width I want, but it does make the nose ride a bit longer on the sidecut, which seems to exacerbate the turn initiation issue in shitty snow. It also means that I have to ride a 23” stance if I want to move my stance all the way back for powder (which is why I don’t usually move my stance back for powder). It would be nice to have another set of inserts for adjustability instead of the 2×5 pattern.
All in all, this is a very forgiving, yet very capable board, that I like very much.
Hi there! Excellent website, I enjoy your articles and I really appreciate your review methodology!
I am looking for a surfy/powder friendly board that can run groomers as well – my primary base is Tahoe so a lot days I go are “just” great days but I’ll run up there for a powder day 2-3 times a season.
Here’s the hitch: I’m 5’9″ and ~160-165 lbs but with big feet: I wear US size 12 Burton Swath. So I need a wide waist. My primary board was an Arbor Formula Rocker (159 M/W – waist 261) but it wasn’t stiff enough so I changed to a Salomon Assassin (158 W – waist 263) and it is great – I love the all around feel, the medium flex, the speed is all great – and that it works in pretty much every all mountain condition and works even in the park. BTW, my bindings are at 15/-6 – I don’t recall toe catch with the Arbor but I lived in fear of it; something I don’t worry about with the Assassin with the 2 extra mm!
So, yeah, I’d like to complement this with a surfy board that has the width to accommodate my barkers. Would you recommend the Yes Hybrid at which – 153 or 157? Or another board altogether?
Hi Charles
Thanks for your message.
Firstly, I think the Hybrid would be a great compliment in your quiver to the Assassin.
It’s a tough call which size is best. The 153 is my instinct, but some things to consider. If you had a smaller boot size, I would go 153 for sure. Not because the 153 isn’t wide enough for your boots, because it it, but because sizing down would make more sense with smaller boots. But even with 12s, sizing to the 153 is an option with your height/weight specs.
In terms of the width, you’re looking at something that is overall wider than the Assassin 158W, even in the 153. The back insert of the 153 Hybrid will be similar (roughly 274mm on the Hybrid 153 versus 273mm on the Assassin 158W). But the width at the front insert on the Hybrid 153 will be wider (279mm on 153 Hybrid versus 273mm on the 158W Assassin). Overall surface area will be less on the 153 Hybrid versus the 158W Assassin though. But it will still be a little better in terms of float in powder than the Assassin, given the wide long tail versus the shorter narrower tail and the setback stance. Basically you’re going to have more nose in front of you even on the 153 Hybrid versus the 158W Assassin (and less tail behind you). The 157 Hybrid will give you a good bit more overall surface area than the 158W Assassin.
In terms of groomers, I think it’s going to depend on the feel you want from it. The 157 Hybrid basically has the same effective edge as the 158W Assassin, so in terms of length, it’s going to feel a similar length – but it will be wider. So, if you’re looking for something that you can ride in the trees, even on non-powder days and be quite maneuverable in general on the groomers, then I would be leaning 153. The 153 would be a better park ally, IMO, if you think it’s something you’d do the occasional park lap on. If you want to be able to bomb more and will be doing more long arcing carves, then the 157 will be the better bet.
Also in terms of those powder days, it’s going to partly depend on where you’re likely to spend most of your time on those days. If you spend more time in the trees on a pow day, then the 153 becomes the clearer option. But if you’re predominantly in open terrain – bowls etc, then I think you’ll appreciate the 157 more.
Lots to consider I know but hope this helps with your decision
PS: This is irrelevant but just wanted to point it out FYI. The Formula Rocker (and all other Arbor boards I’ve measured) tend to be wider at the inserts than the waist width would suggest. So I would predict that your 159MW Formula Rocker was probably actually a couple of mms wider than the 159W Assassin. The Mid-Wide label on it is deceiving and not an accurate description, IMO.
Hi Nate,
This year I bought a Jones Frontier 159 with your recommendations as my all mountain charger and have been really happy with it. And I am already looking at my next year’s more pow/freeride focused board 🙂
I am 5’6, 175 lbs on a good day, probably 180 on a winter day after lunch with 8,5 size boots.
I am looking at Yes Hybrid and I have the similar question as previous guys. Should I go 153 for better maneuverability or with 157 for a better float in pow and more carving angles on groomers? MY weight is ok for 157 but maybe my feet are a bit too narrow?
Also what are the differences between the hybrid and the Y? 157 on Y suits my weight better despite higher surface area compared to Hybrid.
I am also looking at the GNU Gremlin, How do you compare all these 3 boards for a pow/freeride/charger fatty? Do you have any other suggestions?
Should I even consider a mid-wide volume shifted freeride board next to my frontier?
I am an intermediate/advanced guy with +10 years of riding, almost eurocarving on resorts, pow/tree riding, hitting side jumps, no park/jibbing.
Thanks again for your precious input.
Hi Korer
I would go 153 for the Hybird for your specs. With 8.5 boots I think you’re going to have maneuverability issues on the 157. Whilst not as good as the 157 would be for powder, the 153 will still do well there, for sure. I prefer the Hybird over the Y personally but if you did want to go Y I would say 154, even though the weight recommendations suggest the 157 for your specs. I think again the width/length combined make the 157 too big, IMO. Doable, but I would be leaning 154 if you went Y. The Y is noticeably stiffer than the Hybird, IMO, and makes you work quite a bit harder. For more on the differences check out my The Y review.
I haven’t ridden the Gremlin yet. Hoping I can get it next week, but having got on it yet.
Hope this helps
Thanks Nate as usual. I think I will be waiting for your Gremlin review still.
Hey Nate,
Great info on the site, much appreciated. Wanted to get your input on my next board. I have a 2018 NS proto type 2 154, 2021 Jones Mtn Twin 157. Love these boards, but would like to get something directional and focused on freeriding resorts. Spend most of my time riding with the wife and kids these days – groomers, off piste, powder where I can find it, and between the trees (my fav). No need for jibbing, buttering, or riding switch.
Want: Bombing on occasion but mostly groomers, off piste, and between the trees. I suppose once in a while some of the steep and technical stuff at the top when I am not riding with my wife and kids. Leaning towards the damp side.
Bindings: burton step-ons and burton genesis
Boot size: 9 in my Rulers and 9.5 in burton ion step-ons
Riding mostly in MN but go out west 2 times a year.
I have been eying the Yes PYL, Yes Hybrid, Jones Hovercraft, or Jones Flagship. I am leaning towards the Hovercraft or Hybrid as I would like to try a shorter, wider board. I was thinking of putting the step-ons on the Hybrid 153 and leveraging their high responsiveness for faster edge to edge on a wider board.
Looking to get your opinion since you have ridden all 4 boards. Which would you recommend based on what I am looking for? Or is there another I am not looking at that fits better?
Regards,
Wes
Hi Wes
Thanks for your message.
I think the Hybrid would be a nice compliment to that quiver. It gives you a point of difference for sure – and is a good tree option, IMO, particularly in the 153 (though if you can let me know your height and weight as well – just to get an idea of how sizing will work) but still something you can ride at a bit of speed too – and good in powder of course.
The other 3 tick those boxes as well, particularly the Hovercraft. The PYL and Flagship would definitely work for what you’re describing too – and are certainly different enough to compliment your quiver, but not quite as different.
But yeah, if you could let me know your height and weight that would be great, just to work out which might work best size-wise.
Yo what’s up man
Size 11.5 boot
180 lbs
5.11
I’m looking at the 157 hybrid. I like getting low and aggressive with my carving (on the border of euro carves) and I bomb
…. mostly freeride guy….. will I get toe or heel drag on the 157 ?
Hi Brandon
No guarantees, but I’d say you’d probably be OK. But can you let me know the brand/model of your boots and your binding angles too?
This board is marketed as a do it all quiver board but it’s terrible on groomers. It’s a volume shifted powder board (shorter and fatter than usual) so the area from the front binding inserts all the way up to the nose is super wide. Not like a little wide like holy cow when you actually get it in the mail. It was concerning but I need a powder board regardless so decided to ride it as a do it all quiver. Haven’t had any pow yet but I’ve ridden it 5 times on groomers and the turn initiation on this board is sooooo slow. Just brutal. I’m not being dramatic when I say that it’s so bad I don’t even want to ride gnar trails until my next board comes in. It’s not bad if you ride literally wide open, perfectly groomed, flatter trails but I ride steep rutted nasty terrain at Whiteface and need a board with maneuverabilitythat can weave threw bumps and this thing is brutal. I’m an advanced rider, 35yo now and have been riding since I was 10 years old so I’m making it work but man it’s a chore if you plan on using this for all day resort riding along as a pow board. It just kills your fun because the turn iniation is so slow. Which sucks because again it’s marketed as an all moutain board. Pretty misleading. Suspect of these other user reviews tbh. I will say however this board is savage just powering over bumps. The dampness on this is very impressive. It’s a crazy heavy board so its very very damp even for a 225 lber(riding a 161) when I’m bombing ending of the day east coast groomers. Not my style but thats how I’m riding now because that’s how it performs best. Feels stiffer than medium too if anyone is wondering. Feels 7/10.
Hi Chris
Thanks for your input. Really appreciate it.
Funny that you found this board to be this way. I found it surprisingly nimble for how wide it is. I typically find wider boards to have really slow turn initiation like you found with this, but the Hybrid was one that I didn’t get that from. I do think that 157 might have been the better size for you, despite the weight recommendations from YES. Because of how wide it is, I would have sized down from 161 for your specs. Even with 11 boots (referring to your comments from another post), this board is wide, so going to 157 would have been the better way to go. I rode the 157 and found it pretty good edge-to-edge for how wide it was. At the time they didn’t have a 153, but I would likely ride this board in the 153, if I was to buy it.
I do agree that it shouldn’t be considered a do it all quiver board necessarily – it’s certainly freeride oriented, but I certainly had a better experience on groomer than what you describe. And I had some pretty cruddy, hard conditions too. But yeah, personally I think for this board 161 is too long, even at 225lbs, so I think that’s part of the problem.
Anyway, again, I appreciate the insight and I’m sure others will too.
How does the hybrid compare to the yes Standard? I love the way the hybrid sounds around the entire mountain and in between trees cutting fresh lines, but want to make sure its good enough to take through the park 1 or 2 times each time I’m at the resort. I don’t spend much time in the park, although I do make a couple passes through each time I make a trip to the mountain. Mainly I hit the larger jumps if I’m in the park.
Hi Bryce
Thanks for your message.
In terms of large jumps, I think you would be all good – felt it jumped well and you can really stomp landings on this thing. The only thing is if you’re going to be hitting 180s/540s etc, then landing and taking off switch not that great. That’s where the Standard would be better. Certainly it’s better for powder and similar in terms of speed to the Standard.
So yeah, it’s good enough for the park, but straight air better – certainly for 360s it’s fine, but just that setup and landing switch not ideal – doable but not ideal.
Hope this helps with your decision
Hi Nate, thanks for a great review.
I want a board to charge aggressively on hard packed groomers ( pointing & carving holding stable edge.
I also need good/excellent pow float to take it to the Alps.
Before the Hybrid came I was thinking about the PYL..
Im 177cm long, 74 Kg with US 9,5- 10.
Which board & what size do you recommend?
I lean towards the Hybrid 157, its effective edge and contact length seems to match what I need to feel stable providing enough edge hold and surface. I just wonder if the 153 will still be stable enough, (I prioritize stability rather than playfulness for this board)
PS: I may add that I own a Yes greats 2020 154 and I like how wide it is.
Hi Javier
Thanks for your message.
I think the Hybrid would certainly match your needs, but the PYL might match them slightly more, just because it’s a little better for charging, IMO. But the Hybrid would certainly work for what you’re describing.
In terms of sizing, I think 157 and potentially even a little longer works for your for length for a freeride board. And going a little longer, since you already have the 154 Greats is a good idea too, particularly because you’re looking for bombing, carving and float in powder. My only concern would be how wide it is, in combination with the length. Given that I think you could go a little longer than 157 for a freeride board if you wanted to, means that 157 could be sizing down a little in overall length, making up for that extra width. I also understand you like the width of the Greats, but the Hybrid 157 is a good bit wider than the 154 Greats. For reference:
Greats 154 – waist 256mm – width at both inserts 269mm
Hybrid 157 – waist 264mm – width at back insert 277mm, width at front insert 283mm
So it’s significantly wider. So that would be my only concern. I still think it’s doable and an option, but that should be taken into account.
If you were to go PYL, you could size up to the 160W if you wanted that extra width and wanted to maintain around that 1190mm effective edge (similar to the Hybrid 157 and Greats 154). A board like the PYL is something that you can size up for. I would put you at around a 157 for an “all-mountain” length. You can certainly go a little longer for your freeride length, particularly if you’re prioritizing stability and carving, bombing and powder, and particularly when you have a smaller board in your quiver already. Typically I would say go 159 in the PYL, rather than 160W, but since you like some extra width, I think the 160W is certainly doable. And it’s not overly wide for a wide board either. It’s around 267mm at the back insert and 270mm at the front insert – so quite similar in width to the Greats 154. And similar effective edge – you’ve just got more nose to work with for that extra powder float.
I would say equivalent sizes of the PYL and Hybrid probably would be 157 versus 160W.
Hope this gives you more to go off for your decision
Hi
Many thanks Nate for your quick feedback.
I truly appreciate your elaborated answer giving objective arguments based on geometries.
I’m also concerned about the width since I enjoy both long and short radius fast turns with quick edge to edge transitions…
I will let you know if I finally purchase it.
Have a nice season
You’re very welcome Javier. Hope you have a great season too!
Update 2021-12-05
80Kg, 177cm, foot 27,5cm (9,5 Salomon HIFI), advanced rider. 57,5cm stance +18 -12. Union Atlas M.
I purchased the 153 based on your concerns about width. I have ridden it only one day and this board is awesome so far.
Stable but agile, medium fast turn initiation. Excellent grip on ice patches. Playfull where you want it (nose butters, tail presses) but firm on edge to carve like a champion. the 153 is more than enough for my specs. Feels very light and I didnt need any adaptation (I have several camrock twin yes boards). I even jumped some small jumps and it tracs fantastic both on approach and landings. I noticed chattering at hich speed on smashed groomers and the pop is just OK. A really fun ride which puts and smile while it launches from carve to carme with many freestyle aspects. It was even OK at switch. It does not feel very directional when you ride it. I still need to test it in powder where I hope it will shine even more. Very happy with this board so far. PS: I asked DCP directly through Insta and he has similar specs and also rides the 153 most of the time if it is not really really deep, then he will jump on to the 157 I hope it helps some people with the sizing doubts.
Hi Javier
Thanks so much for your input. Really helpful for others and always great to hear others feedback and experiences. Would be great to hear how you find it in powder, once you get some to test it in.
Hi Nate,
really like your reviews, because of you ill probably buy the Hybrid as it really looks to fit my needs, but im not sure which size to get. I already own an all mountain board (ride algorythm) and want to add something more freeride focused. Im looking to do a lot of trees, sidehits, carving and powpow. Im 180lbs and have size 9.5 boots. Im choosing between the 153 and the 157. On one hand im not sure if the 157 will be nimble enough for the trees with my specs, on the other hand the 153 might not have the same float (pow)/ carving ability/or might be too soft with my specs. And i also dont want the new board to be too similar to my algorythm (dont know if i even have to worry about that).
All that taken into consideration, which size do you think would fit my needs more? Would love to hear your opinion.
Hi Hans
Thanks for your message.
I’m yet to ride the Algorythm but based on my experience other similar Ride boards and the specs of the Algorythm, I would say they aren’t going to feel too similar, even in the same size. I imagine you have the Algorythm in either the 157 or 161? If you could let me know which one, that would also help.
Definitely a tough call between those 2 sizes for your specs – and you’ve hit some great points in terms of what the compromises between the size entails.
I have similar specs (185lbs and size 10 boots) when I rode this board and I found the 157 more agile than I was expecting for how wide it is. I typically don’t find wide boards very agile unless I size down quite a bit (to more like 153-155), but in this case I was pleasantly surprised. Still the 153 would of course be more agile and I am curious to try that size, if I can get my hands on it.
It probably comes down to whether the 153 would have a great negative effect on float/carving vs the effect on agility of going 157. And that will also depend on which one you’re more willing to compromise on.
In terms of flex, the 153 will feel softer than what the 157 will feel for you, for sure. Not massively so, but certainly noticeably so. I found the 157 to be around 6/10 for my flex. I imagine I would find, based on testing other boards at different size/a rough guess, the 153 to be more like 5/10 or maybe 5.5/10. So for you, it’s probably going to be similar. I often find Ride boards to feel a little stiffer or about on their flex rating and YES boards to be a little softer than their flex rating. The Hybrid is rated 7/10 but I felt it more at a 6/10. The Algorythm is rated “medium”. Other Ride boards that are rated medium I’ve tended to feel on the higher end of medium – so more like 6/10, but tough to say without having ridden it. So flex-wise, I feel like you will likely feel them to be similar in that regard. But if you’re looking for a slightly softer feel than the Algoryhm then I might be leaning 153, but if you want something a little more powerful, then lean 157.
With all that said, I think it’s going to come down to what you typically ride in an all-mountain size. i.e. what your Algorythm is. If you ride the algorythm in a 161, then I would be leaning towards the 157 Hybrid and if you ride the 157 algorythm, then I would be leaning 153. But it also depends on how whether you’re more concerned about agility or float/speed. You will have to sacrifice to some extent on one or the other depending on the size.
The Hybrid is likely to be a similar surface area on the 153 as the 157 Algorythm and the 157 Hybrid similar to the 161 algorythm. But given the more directional/tapered nature of the Hybrid, it will float better than the algorythm size-for-size (or more accurately surface area-for-surface area if that makes sense). So that’s one reason I think it depends on the size you’re riding the algorythm in – if you’re after more float than the Algorythm – which I’m guessing you’re after, then you’ll want to size accordingly.
I think both sizes would work but one will certainly be more tree dominant and the other more powder/carving/speed dominant, but both won’t be terrible at the other, if that makes sense. Probably hasn’t made your decision that much easier – but it really is a tight call with this one. Anyway, hopefully that gives you a little more to go off for your decision
Wow thanks for the fast and elaborate reply! I own the 161 Algorythm, and after hearing your answer im pretty sure im going with the 157 hybrid. Ive only owned all mountain or freestyle decks ever since i started snowboarding, so to get some more of that freeride feel i think the 157 will fit me better. Thanks for the help nate appreciate it!
You’re very welcome Hans. And yeah I agree, I think the 157 would be a good way to go, given you ride the 161 Algorythm.
Hi Nate,
Am thinking about the Hybrid for a fun carver and pow/tree board, but I have US8.5 feet. Would the 157 be too wide for me? (eg on hardpack) I can pick one up on sale at the moment. Or best to wait for the 153 to come out? (or another board)
Am also considering the PYL, but I need something that works at slow speeds as well as fast and suspect its too stiff
P.S I’m 180 lbs
Cheers
Hi Baz
Thanks for the message.
For your specs and what you’re describing. I think the 153 would be the better option in the Hybrid. And I think the Hybrid in that size would suit what you’re describing well, but I feel it will lack the maneuverability you are probably looking for for riding in the trees, if you were to get it in the 157.
The PYL is better at slow speeds than you would think. It always surprises me. It’s not going to be as maneuverable at slow speeds as the Jackpot 154 (looking back at our previous messages), but better than you would think for its flex. I think if you were to size to the 156, it would be a good balance of float in powder and good maneuverability in trees – and in the 156 would feel a little softer than if you were to get it in the 159. So, I think that’s certainly an option – and would be a good compliment to the Jackpot. The Hybrid 153 would also be a good compliment to the Jackpot and would definitely work also. Just depends on if you want to wait for it, or try to find a past season PYL 156. But I think they would both work, in those particular sizes for what you’re describing.
Hope this helps
Hi Nate
Thanks for replying to my post so quickly. Wow, it looks like I nailed it, just goes to show how detailed your reviews and support information is.
The widths at the inserts are great detail. That Hybrid front insert is really wide.
Whilst there may be some logic to sticking with Never Summer, I am thinking that the extra width of the Hybrid won’t hold me back and the underbite will give the Hybrid the better hold of the two on hard/icy steeps?
Do you personally recommend one or the other for my specs?
Thanks again
Hi Dave
I don’t think there’s a bad choice between them. The Hybrid is that little bit better in hard/icy conditions. The West Bound isn’t bad there though, but the Hybrid just a little better. Another reason to potentially lean to Hybrid is that you do get something that’s a different brand and you get that different brand feel. Though that said, the West Bound is a quite different board to the Funslinger, of course.
Thanks for the advice Nate. Ordered the Hybrid 157
You’re very welcome Dave. Awesome that you have the board coming. Hope it treats you well, when you get a chance to take it out. If you think of it at the time, let me know how you get on, once you get it out on snow
Hi Nate,
Thanks for your reviews, they make great reading and have helped me narrow down the board to buy.
Stats: 183lbs, 5’10, 11 boot. Level 5-6 using your system. I ride 12-15 days a year with 3 years experience.
I feel I am level 5-6 as I am confident, competent with turns on blues and reds but slide out when trying to control speed on steeper reds. Not felt confident in my speed control to ride blacks yet.
I have a NS Funslinger in 154x and Jones MT 2018 154. The Jones I bought too small and I use the Funslinger mostly. I now want a Freeride/All mountain board as I try to finish my turns without skidding and progress to off piste, trees etc.
I am looking to have something competent in resort powder (if I’m lucky), gives me more confidence to ride faster and suits my progression to make good turns on steeper terrain. No park.
I don’t want a 160+ length board and your review has made me think that the Yes Hybrid 157 or NS West Bound 158x could be suitable considering my experience and stats.
I have considered the NS Proto tt but I feel that it would make sense to get something directional.
Please would you give me your opinion and feel free to make any siggestions
Hi Dave
Thanks for your message.
I agree that your Mountain Twin is too short for your specs for what you’re looking to do. The 154X Funslinger is a good length for that board though, if you’re using it mostly for freestyle riding. But yeah, definitely going with a more freeride oriented board in a longer size to complement the Funslinger is a good idea.
I also agree that going with something directional is a good idea as a compliment to the Funslinger. The Hybrid or Westbound are great options for what you’re describing and I think you’re on the right track with something like that, for sure. Size-wise, again (I’m very agreeable today!) I think you’re right on in terms of sizing for those 2 boards.
The Hybrid is a little wider overall. They’re both the same at the waist, but the Hybrid is a little wider tip/tail and at the inserts. Width at inserts of the two boards:
Hybrid 157: 277mm at back insert, 283mm front insert
West Bound 158X: 273mm at back insert, 274mm at front insert
So depending on how wide you wanted to go.
But yeah, both would work really well for your specs and what you’re looking to achieve on them, IMO. And would both be a good compliment to your Funslinger, IMO.
Hope this helps with your decision
Dave, I hope you don’t mind me throwing my two cents in here along with Nate (Nate gives some great advice by the way). I just couldn’t help notice the similarities with your situation, and the purchase decision I was making last year at this time. My specs are very close to yours – same height, I’m approximately 5 to 10 lbs heavier, but wear a size 10 US boot. Our skill levels sound pretty comparable – I do ride some double black terrain when the snow is soft, but I wasn’t doing that until this past season.
Last year I was between the Yes Hybrid, the NS Westbound, and the Gnu Hyperkyarve. I ended up going with the Yes Hybrid 157, and I love it for most things. In soft snow, it is fantastic. It has a very unique ride. Nate hits it pretty well with his “stable” characterization, because it doesn’t ride as back-foot surfy in powder as most freeride boards. It has more of a float on top ride, than a sink the back foot ride. My two downsides for the Hybrid are the reference stance and the turn initiation on hard snow. The reference stance is 23”. I prefer closer to 22”, and have been riding the innermost inserts on the Hybrid, which puts me at 21.5” stance. If you ride a little wider, then this won’t be an issue, but for me the front of the board rides just a little long with my front binding mounted that far back. It doesn’t bother me at all unless I’m in harder messy snow. Obviously, if you ride a 23” or wider stance then you are golden, and honestly it’s just a bit of an occasional annoyance but not that big of a deal for me. The 2nd issue is that for my specs and style, the Hybrid seems to initiate turns a little slow in hard snow. In powder, it has a very smooth transition that rolls well from edge to edge. It’s plenty capable of powder runs through the trees. Yet on hard, tracked-up snow, it can be a little slow getting from edge to edge. It’s a board that just rides pretty wide. Since you have size 11 boots, you will be fine. I don’t think that will be an issue at all. My medium bindings just swim inside the edges of this board, and it just takes a little more effort to leverage the board, so it makes my transitions slow. Part of me wishes I would have went with the 153, but I would be scared to give up how great the 157 rides powder. Also, at the time I was board shopping, I was actually wearing a size 11 boot because that’s what the rental shops had always put me in, but when I purchased Burton step-on boots I ended up dialing it all the way back to a Size 10. Based on what I thought were my specs, the 157 would have been perfect. One other thing I will mention on the Hybrid, it has a very interesting side cut with great edge hold. As my riding progressed this year, I could tell a big difference in how the side cut wants to turn based on how you weight the turn. When you center weight it and pressure the board, it does hurry the middle section of the turn along the side cut, which makes for easy speed control. But you can also get much longer arcs out of the turn by shifting your weight slightly. It’s a really forgiving board, yet very capable, and I have been able to greatly progress my riding over the last season while riding the Hybrid. Based on what you said, I think it would be a good fit for you.
One side note on the NS Westbound, when I was still shopping, I spoke with a NS rep about my sizing for that board. Keep in mind that I still thought I was a size 11 boot at the time. She highly recommended the 157 for my specs, unless I planned to ride a very low stance angle. She said you really had to be turning the board over hard on a deep carve to get toe drag on a 157 with a size 11 boot, and even then you could crank up the stance angle and get away with it. She said I would probably enjoy the added playfulness and quicker response on the 157 compared to the 158x.
Anyway, just thought I would mention since your situation sounded very familiar. Hope this helps.