Head Question—What’s the difference between i.CT and KERS?

Posted: 17 January 2011 07:01 PM

Or it’s straightforward that the i.CT does not have a Kinetic Energy Recovery System, and the i.CT is more of flexing fibers for stability?

...Or maybe it’s the same thing?

Thanks!

Posted: 17 January 2011 07:08 PM

Welcome to the forums Gtastic.

Intelligence stiffens torsionally - whereas KERS stiffens longitudinally. It’s that way in the skis at least - assume it’s the same with boards.

They could have added it to the iCT but the temptation to use the f1 popularised KERS was just too great I imagine.

Posted: 17 January 2011 07:25 PM

Ah! Great!

Thanks for the fast reply.

I noticed one of their boards was named iCT KERS,
so it sounds like it would offer both, or they had renamed their technology.

Posted: 19 January 2011 02:24 AM

hmmm?!?  i have a 2008 I.CT intelligence 153 board but have never used it, still having a great time with 2008 Head Transit I 155.

is the new board worth the upgrade?

Posted: 26 August 2011 09:48 PM

So would you say that the i.CT KERS is gearing the board more towards freeriding or is the KERS technology still mainly for Freestyle/Park?

Posted: 26 August 2011 10:20 PM

Personally I think I.CT & Kers gear an all-mountain snowboard more towards freeride performance and a freestyle snowboard towards all-mountain performance. I liked riding the Evil Flamba with Kers in the pipe and off jumps but not really on the jibs… anything where there’s a long transition to pump, particulaly on an edge you feel the benefits of it. Evil Flamba in the Pipe is sooo good, maximum boostage!

Posted: 26 August 2011 11:23 PM

Interesting. Haven’t considered the i.CT by Head to be a good board for freeriders mainly about carving it up.

Posted: 23 October 2011 10:34 PM

Who KERS…=)

Can´t buy this boards in Sweden any way. Look´s great though.

Posted: 06 January 2012 08:22 PM

I’m actually riding an I.CT Kers and I love it. Good for a fast riding style, very staple and great in powder.