Lib Tech T. Rice or Lib Tech TRS or…
Posted: 18 August 2010 08:40 AM
Hi,
I have a park board and thinking to buy a all mountain oriented board. I’m thinking of Mervin C2 BTX boards, especially TRS and T. Rice, may be Jamie Lynn 2011 models. I’m an intermediate rider, 163 lbs , 5’8 and wear 8.5 boots. Which board do you recommend among these two or other alternatives?
About the waist width of these boards; TRS is 25.3 for 154 and 157 and T. Rice is 253 for 153 and 258 for 157, are these waist widths big for my 8.5 boots?
And what do you think about Mervin’s TNT bases? I read in a forum that they’re not as good as sintered bases.
And also I want to ask about Capita Black Snowboard of Death 2011, what do you think about it?
Thanks.
Posted: 19 August 2010 02:29 PM
Hi Veritas,
To start with, comparing all of the Lib Tech boards you have listed. I’d be inclined to go for the Travis Rice. It’s the only board in the list that features the C2 banana tech (rocker between the feet and camber at the nose and tail). This tech just gives a bit more control shortening up carves and generating power at the end of a carve to pop you into your feet. With your stats, you’re a prime candidate for the 157. I rode the 157 last year and absolutely loved it. My feet are US9, I’m 5’9” and 74kg which I think is around 160lbs. Sure you could maybe do with 5mm less waist but I don’t think you’ll find it too wide.
Regarding the Capita Black Snowboard of Death. The 2011 uses a profile similar to Amptek and Camrock, early rise rocker at the nose and tail and camber between the bindings. The BSD has lots of Carbon and Kevlar in it, but the new rocker/camber profile will soften it up a little. I’d probably still go for the Travis Rice until you’re skill level has progressed to charging blacks and hitting bigger jumps, buying a stiff board can inhibit progression.
I’ve never heard a bad word about Lib bases. They do tend to dry-out quite quickly, but providing you keep on top of the waxing you shouldn’t experience any problems with speed or acceleration.
Rich
Posted: 19 August 2010 03:53 PM
Thanks for the comments Rich.
If I remember correctly, TRS and Jamie Lynn are also C2 BTX in 2011 line. What do you think about these two? 157 T.Rice has a 258 waist and frankly it concerns me since I’ve 8.5 boots? Will a 153 T.Rice be short for me?
(I have a question here; some shorter boards have a longer effective edge than other boards with a longer total length. Which one should we consider when coosing the size? Effective edge or total length?)
I’ve also read good comments about Rossignol One Magtek and JDub Magtek and Never Summer SL-R i your site. Could you compare them with the above Lib Tech boards? What do you think about them?
Rossignols shape are different from Lib Tech and Never Summers? Does it make a much difference?
Lastly could you line up these 6 boards according to your choice?
Thanks.
Posted: 21 August 2010 03:44 AM
Great question on the effective edge versus total length. I myself have always gone with total length but I could be wrong.
When looking at value you’ll probably get more out of Rossignol boards then Lib Techs. Not saying Lib is a bad company but their price points are quite high compared to other manufactures.
I was really impressed at the value that Rossignol had last season. Even looking at this season we can compare two boards for an example.
the-house.com listed the 2011 T. Rice at $540. They have the Rossi One MagTek at $450. For the extra $90 bucks you aren’t getting more features. Both are rockered, both have magnetraction, both have sintered bases… I’d be hard pressed to spend an extra $90 just cause it’s a Lib and is a pro model board.
Never Summer makes some solid looking boards too… but again they are pricey.
To me I always look for what gives the most bang for my buck and out off all the boards you mentioned above I’d have to say it’s the Rossi One MagTek.
My two cents…
Posted: 21 August 2010 12:43 PM
Effective edge and board length. Well it all depends on what type of terrain you are riding. There are a number of pure freestyle snowboards that use long effective edge relative to the running length so that the board can be sized down. Boards in this vein include the K2 WWW, Endeavor High 5 and Lib Tech McKink. Alot of the time these boards will use flat kicks in an attempt to put a bit more float into the board, but on the whole they don’t work so well in powder.
Then you’ve got long-ish powder specific boards that have relatively short effective edges and fairly long running length. Keeping the edge shorter means the board snaps out of turns more manaegably and doesn’t have to have an enormous sidecut radius. They can use a nice long eliptical nose so the board doesn’t submarine in deep snow.
Lastly you have big mountain boards which use long effective edges and long running lengths with big sidecut radii. These boards have loads of stability, great edge hold and tons of float. On the down side they’re about as manueverable as an oil tanker.
I think with Magnetraction, you don’t have to worry too much about the effective edge length, that’s quite a technical stat that boardercross riders and hardcore freeriders might be interested in, but it’s not that relevant for all mountain riders. Just worry about the overall length.
Search the Forum:
