Jones Mountain Twin - 2011

/images/brands/jones/logo/jones_logo.gif

It’s a common belief amoung park kids that freeriders choose to tackle the burliest lines and biggest drops because they can’t cut it in the park. Sure Jeremy Jones might not be throwing-down double corks but he can ride jumps, the fact that our head of testing spotted Jeremy and Xavier de le Rue spinning off the pro line kickers in the Verbier snowboard park the day before the Verbier Extreme competition proves it! Jeremy signed big mountain freestyle nut job Jonaven Moore to his brand this winter, working together they’ve created a twin board which cuts it in the park, in the pipe, on the groomers and in the backcountry whilst reducing the boards negative impact on the environment. Is The Mountain Twin a rival to knock the mighty Burton Custom off it’s thrown?

Manufacturer's Description:

The all-mountain, all-terrain fun board. Ideal for all-mountain freestyle‚slashing banks, boosting wind lips, rallying ditches, and bouncing down pillow lines.
When you feel like rallying the mountain like it’s your own personal skate park, strap into the twin profile, directional flex, Mountain Twin. CAMROCK frees up the tip and tail offering extra float in soft snow while camber under foot combined with Mellow Magne-Traction give the Mountain Twin the snap and hold of a traditional board. A progressive free-style shape with a freeride heart, the Mountain Twin is designed for the fall line creativity of Jones team rider like Jonaven Moore.

Jeremy Jones’ Thoughts:- When I want to trade off between doing laps on the jump line, searching for smooth steeps, and sniffing out left over pow stashes I grab my Mountain Twin. The rockered tip and tail stay evenly afloat riding regular or switch and the camber and Mellow Magne-Traction combination keeps me confident on edge. The go anywhere maneuverability of the Mountain Twin make it my easy all-day choice from first chair to the afternoon backcountry powder lap.

Recommended for park riding.

Recommended for halfpipe riding.

Recommended for freeride riding.

High cost $

Available in MidWide.

Rocker Construction.

Twin Shape.

Green or Eco Friendly Construction.

Year: 2011

Available Lengths (cm):
155, 158, 160mW, 164mW

Riding Style: All Mountain

Specifications:

Full FSC sourced Poplar and Beech wood core
Film topsheet, reduces board weight and use of plastics
High Grade nano carbon sintered base
Camrock rocker
Blunted Nose and Tail
Mellow Magnetraction

Jones Mountain Twin Snowboard 2022
Jones
$499.95
Jones Snowboards Ultra Mountain Twin Snowboard - 2024
Jones Snowboards
$454.96
(30% off)
Jones Ultra Mountain Twin Snowboard 2024 size 157 | Bamboo/Plastic
Jones
$552.46
(15% off)
Jones Mountain Twin

Snowboard Review:

It goes without saying that Jeremy Jones can design a freeride snowboard. Years spent developing Rossignol’s freeride offering with countless pro models means Jeremy knows his onions. I was intrigued to find out if Jeremy’s take on an all mountain freestyle board lived up to the hype and expectation surrounding Jeremy’s solo venture.

I took the Mountain Twin out in conditions that most boards and especially rockers tend to struggle in, heavy afternoon spring snow. The Mountain Twin uses Nidecker’s Camrock camber/rocker hybrid profile, an attempt to take the best of both worlds. Camber runs between the bindings and the nose and tail are rockered, in the case of the Mountain Twin, camber is probably being a bit generous, to the untrained eye it looks like the board uses standard reverse camber through the whole length, and on the snow you kind of get that feeling too, to say the MT is loose is an understatement, it’s one seriously slippery weasel, but it kind of works in most terrain. The spring corn was a bit of a laugh on the MT, which skipped over all the undulations so I ventured into the pipe and was pleasantly surprised. The blunted nose and tail mean the MT has an abnormally long effective edge which is definitely a plus when holding a solid edge makes the difference between airing out the top of the pipe, or cussing and blinding at the bottom of the vert. Out of the pipe the long effective edge is a mixed blessing, it grips well carving but made the MT feel a bit cumbersome on the smaller jumps, that said, transitions between edges was wickedly fast, like dancing the electric boogaloo, maybe faster. The Mountain Twin is so easy to turn that I reckon a beginner would get on with it.

The Mountain Twin is a board that does exactly what it says on the tin. It’s a joy to cruise around on, holds an edge like a vice and is capable in the pipe and off jumps. I would have loved the opportunity to take the MT out in some powder lined tree runs which with the loose feel of the Camrock would be a delight. Riders who are coming from a camber snowboard background looking for a hybrid camber/rocker profile might find the Mountain Twin sits a little far to the rocker side of the fence for their liking, on icy run-ins and refrozen corduroy the looseness of the MT can be a little unsettling for those used to the planted feel of a cambered board.

Additional Info:-

Having found a thread on the net, it appears some people have been a little confuse by this review. Reviews are supposed to help consumers make a decision, not confuse them further so I’ll try my best to explain how I felt this board rode. Firstly, I mentioned that in the slush some rockered snowboards can struggle, sure if the piste is smooth then rockers work fine, you benefit from not having the start of your effective edge catching when you dig in a carve, granted on these occasions rocker is better in slush. Late afternoon, when the spring slush is super heavy and usually in big mogul like lumps, I find that unless the board has sufficient reinforcement in the tail and nose, you just get bullied about; cambered boards dont tend to get too affected by this because the camber works against the bumps. The Mountain Twin has enough reinforcement and guts to feel strong and forcefull in these conditions, it doesn’t get bumped around too much. The second point of confusion was that I said the board felt almost too loose on ice. Although the Mountain twin uses camber between the bindings, it’s really shallow (if you pick one up in the shop, you won’t notice it until you lie it down on a flat surface), so when you ride it on hard icy snow it feels as if the board is almost pivoting from the center point like on a banana deck. For those who are used to having these pressure points fore and aft of the bindings it can feel a bit un-nerving. Our head of testing Tom, rode the Nidecker Legacy in March which uses the same Camrock profile, his observations were exactly the same.

So the Mountain Twin has enough guts to cut through heavy slush mounds, but could do with a little bit more camber between the feet to feel planted on hard mid-winter snow.

Posted by Rich Ewbank in • Jones

User Snowboard Reviews

Want some advice, or have a question about the Jones Mountain Twin snowboard, or whether it is right for you? DON'T POST HERE! Head over to our snowboard forums and our community will be happy to help.

Seriously - READ THE ABOVE..., the snowboard forum the best way to get your question seen by all of our community and an answer, rather than just those who happen to view this page.

However, if you have ridden this snowboard and want to share your feedback, then please add your experience below. It helps to add as much detail as possible, e.g board length you used, bindings, rider stats etc.

Post a review of this snowboard:

Remember my personal information?
Notify me of follow-ups to this snowboard review?

Submit the word you see below:

What colour is powder?

Adare on July 26, 2010 at 11:44 PM

Great write-up.  I have been riding a few of the YES boards from 2010, and I felt the exact same way about the Camrock high-centering in icy conditions.  I LOVED the fun flex of the YES (what will now be the 2011 Typo), I was hoping that with Jones use of Mag that the boards would be a bit more grippy in hard pack/ice conditions.  My two questions are:

1.  did you find the Jones MTN-T to hold an edge more so than the YES boards you tested (given its MAG edge)?

2.  is the flex the same as the YES (since they both come out of NDK’s factory)?

Many thanks, keep up the great work.

-A.

Rich Ewbank on July 27, 2010 at 04:00 PM

Hi Adare,

Thanks for the kind feedback on the site, nice to know we’re heading in the right direction. To answer your questions about the Jones Mountain twin:-

1) The Mountain Twin uses a slightly less agressive take on Magnetraction call Mellow-Mag. I’ve got Magnetraction on my Rossi Jdub and I’ve ridden it on all types of Libs and GNUs but it really doesn’t feel as agressive as those boards. I think Jeremy was keen to use the benefits of mag without the board feeling too grippy (if you get my gist). So yeah the Mountain twin does have slightly more edge grip than than the Yes boards, but you don’t really notice it until you need it. Put it this way, if it wasn’t there I’d probably have taken a few more stacks.

2) The flex is a little firmer than the Typo but not significantly. Flex depends on the core profile and glass reinforcement more than the manufacturer. The torsional flex is noticeably stiffer but length wise it’s not much stiffer. I’d probably say the flex was more like last year’s Yes 156.5 which for next year is called ‘The Dudes of History’... perhaps a touch softer.

Rich

Hope that helps.

Rich

Patrick on August 12, 2010 at 08:57 AM

Good overall review, curious though how you think a camrock board should be viewed when trying to chose a size. I know that lib tech encourages a slight down size in boards with banana tech due to the longer than normal contact length in their boards. However I have friends who ski with skis that have similar construction to camrock, camber underfoot and rocker tip and tail, they tend to size up and argue that those types of skis usually have shorter contact lengths and therefore sizing up is the way to go. I realize a ski and snowboard have weight applied to them differently by the rider. So what is your school of thought on the sizing? Also do you know if all the sizes have the same flex rating or is it like the rossignol jones boards that varied in flex from size to size? I am torn between the 155 and 158 board sizes, I live and ride in southwestern Montana and ride all mountain. I weigh 160lbs and wear a size 9.5 boot, what do you suggest or recommend? I have been riding a 156 skate banana the past two seasons and like the size for doing everything, I am just looking for a twin with a stiffer flex and more guts. I would appreciate your advice and opinion.

Rich Ewbank on August 12, 2010 at 04:23 PM

Hi Patrick,

To anser your question:

Firstly, I reckon at 160lbs (73Kg) your best option for board length for riding everything is going to be the 158, the width will be perfect for your 9.5 size feet.

Secondly to answer your queries about your buddies and their skis. If i thinking right, the ski is a Rossignol, i think Atomic make one too. These skis are quite powder focused and have reverse sidecut in quite a large proportion of those nose. This means the effective edge for carving is relatively short in comparison to the length of the ski. With amptek / camrock profile on snowboards, you don’t really get that problem. You also have the benefit of the profile creating 4 main pressure points along the edge, at the start and end of the effective adge and at your feet… add this to the increased grip from Mellow mag and you’re talking about more than enough edge hold for the boards length. In my experience standard Camrock provides much better edge hold than standard reverse camber.

Hope tha helps

Rich

Patrick on August 23, 2010 at 06:16 AM

Hi Again,

I have a follow up question. I am now torn between the 2011 Jones Mountain Twin, 2011 Lib Tech Travis Rice, and 2011 Never Summer SL. I realize that theses are all going to be great all mountain freestyle decks but trying to decide which one is very hard. I have been riding a 156 skate Banana the past couple of seasons after coming off of a Gnu Riders Choice with Magnatraction but no BTX. I definitely like the Skate Banana, but was able to find its speed limit more often than I had hoped. Meaning that at a certain speeds (and on certain slope angles) things got sketchy feeling. So I would really like to bring back some of the stability at high speeds I remember from my cambered boards but still be able to keep the fun and forgiving aspects of rocker. I never managed to catch an edge on my Banana like I did on the Riders Choice or other cambered boards that I have owned. So after a long winded intro which board of those I mentioned earlier for 2011 would you say combines the two worlds the best. Meaning which is the most stable at speed, best pop, best float, and still somewhat forgiving. I live in Southwestern Montana and ride all over the the state and at Jackson Hole, WY. I realize that what I am asking is for an opinion from you, and also that I am asking for qualities in a board that are seldom all found in the one deck. I should mention that I do ride kickers but have zero interest in halfpipe, rails, boxes, etc. I am not a park kind of guy unless the snow is bad on area. In which case I am normally on my splitboard in the backcountry anyway. I would love to demo the boards but that is probably not likely to happen until the end of this season.

Thanks for the help, Patrick

Rich Ewbank on August 23, 2010 at 06:32 PM

Hi Patrick,

Sounds like you are torn between three snowboards that are going to do the job your asking of the board equally well. I’m a big fan of all of the boards you have mentioned. if you’re swayed by price the Mountain Twin is going to win as the other two boards are quite permium. For balls out charging I think the Never Summer SL is a great option, it’s quite a powerfull board that works well with aggresive riding, and the damping is second to none, the board feels solid at speed and doesn’t get too jittery when the speed gets serious. For freestyle and kicker riding it’s all about the Travis Rice, snappy, responsive and forgiving. In carves I think Camrock is better or long carves and RC & C2 camber/rocker profile gives way more punch and feedback from short steep gradient carves. Just to add another couple of options, we’re also rating the Rossignol One Magtek and Apo BC 159 Powder Rocker for all mountain charging.

Rich

B on September 01, 2010 at 06:11 AM

Rich, What size mountain twin did you ride? I’m considering this board for all mountain freestyle at Vail and winter park here in Colorado, but I’m not seeing the size I need? I’m 6’1” 196 lbs with a size 9 boots… - The 158 seems small and I don’t need the wide????? Thoughts?

Rich Ewbank on September 01, 2010 at 02:58 PM

At 26.3cm wide the 164W Mountain Twin isn’t exactly wide, I’ say mid wide, but it’s still a little on the wide side for a size 9 US boot, and you’re right 158 is too small. If you’ll consider similar boards that aren’t as wide, you could look at the Rossignol One MagTek 163 which uses a similar camber/rocker profile and uses a slightly more defined Magnetraction sidecut, these boards are crazy value for money. You could also look at the YES Optimistic, DCP’s ride at Yes. A slightly more directional ride using Camrock and like the Jones boards, built in the Nidecker factory, this board is also available in a 163 like the Rossi One. If you’re riding in Vail, you’ll probably need the right width under your feet as I’m told it can get quite firm under foot.

Rich

Brett on September 02, 2010 at 06:37 AM

I see the WW on the 160w is 26cm….decisions, decisions.

What size did you ride?

Rich Ewbank on September 02, 2010 at 06:59 PM

I rode the 158. I think the flex was a good match for my height and weight and for riding all types of terrain. But then again I am 30lbs lighter and 3-4 inches shorter than yourself. From the look at the Jones Website you sit slap bang in the middle of the recommended rider weight range… could definitely be a winner.

Page 1 of 4.  1 2 3 >  Last ›