# Does person height vs board length matter at all?



## trapper (Jan 15, 2013)

Conrad Hart said:


> And no, I can't post her weight here for fear that at some point she will read this forum and eviscerate me.


:eusa_clap: 

Quote of the day for sure.


----------



## BigmountainVMD (Oct 9, 2011)

I outweighed the "recommended" range for my board by 30 lbs or so. It really doesn't matter that much, but it will certainly be harder for her to turn. Adding 10 cm on to a board is huge and it will certainly take some getting used to.

Just for reference, I'm 220 and can ride a 157 in almost any conditions except waist deep powder.

The B-nice is a flexy rocker board, so it won't be as bad as if you threw her on a stiff camber board, but depending on her weight, she could be fine.


----------



## LuckyRVA (Jan 18, 2011)

It is generally accepted that a smaller board (but still within the rider's weight range) is easier for beginners to learn on. Unfortunetly, without your gf's specs it's hard to give advice.


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

It's really based on rider weight and riding style. For a beginner, go small/soft. She'll know when she's pushed the board to it's limit when she gets there. Then you can think about going longer/stiffer or whatever she's into at that point.


----------



## Fewdfreak (May 13, 2013)

I would say that it is more of a recommendation but does have some truth to it and a board that is legit too big for a rider does suck. Now a few cm's are not gonna matter all that much and I personally have rode boards on the "smaller" end of the recommended range and never had any issues and people will tell you with more length you get more stability and a shorter stick will get you more agility and control and for a beginner such as your wife this may be more beneficial at first. My stats if you would like to compare are 5'6" 120# and size 9 women's boot. I usually ride 144 but have a a 147 and 49. If she has a smaller foot you may want to make sure the width isn't too wide because that does also play into control. I rode a men's 153 rental when I was first starting out more than ten years ago when I was smaller and shorter and I remember it was horrible and huge and so heavy which is why I think I have a tendency to ride smaller boards. 

Your girl going from a 138 to a 151 would be scary I think-138 seems tiny to me. If you didn't already pull the trigger on the board (or are able to return it) I would look around and see if you can get a deal on a smaller board. If she thinks it is too big before she even rides you may want to keep looking.

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## tonicusa (Feb 27, 2008)

A persons height can matter in different ways to riders based upon their level of skill and the type of riding they do, pipe, powder etc. And often over time it will become a personal preference.

For someone learning or just starting out it's important to have a board that will readily respond to their body mechanics so that they have success in learning how to properly steer, stop, and turn the board. Length and flex have a lot to do with that. You want a board with enough flex that they can use their body weight to get it to turn and respond, and something short enough that it doesn't exhaust them or become cumbersome on pitch. Look for a board that is short but has a decent length effective edge so that they are able to stop and feel safe at speed.

Up to her forehead is too long for someone at her stage. There are plenty of shorter boards with long effective edges.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

Keep her on the 138 for now until she's more confident. 142 might even work (bridge the gap).

One thing I know about women/girls on snow, if they're freaked out about anything, it's very rare for them to get over it and every difficulty, every fall, every hard edge catch take down will now be your fault.


----------



## Ocho (Mar 13, 2011)

jdang307 said:


> One thing I know about women/girls on snow, if they're freaked out about anything, it's *very rare for them to get over it* and every difficulty, every fall, every hard edge catch take down will now be your fault.


We have greater tendency towards self-preservation. 

But your observation isn't exactly a blanket statement of truth. Some of us girls still push hard and continue on.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Hey Conrad,

Rider height does not matter _at all_. It should not be considered in your buying decision. The same is true of tip to tip board length (i.e. 148 cm) except in the case where you are comparing board sizes within a given model. 

The size that she will want is entirely dependent on the model she is considering. 

Kindly post up her weight and foot size (we won't tell).  Without both of those pieces of info there is really no way to size her correctly for any given model.

STOKED!


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

EatRideSleep said:


> We have greater tendency towards self-preservation.
> 
> But your observation isn't exactly a blanket statement of truth. Some of us girls still push hard and continue on.


Oh it was definitely a generalization. But she's already freaked out. Before trying it. I've got my spidey sense on this one.

My girl rode before I did so I didn't have to endure it. But I've seen enough buddies try to teach their girls ...

Going from 138 to 151 for a beginner ... that'll be tough.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Weight ranges are (like many things) only a rule of thumb based on averages... 
Take a sporty tall, a short chubby not so sporty, a small heavy-built marathon runner, and a lanky very tall girl, all 130lbs. Which ones will be rather able to handle the same board? Weight is only one of many variables.. do yourself a favor and get her a board she feels comfortable with


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

neni said:


> Weight ranges are (like many things) only a rule of thumb based on averages...
> Take a sporty tall, a short chubby not so sporty, a small heavy-built marathon runner, and a lanky very tall girl, all 130lbs.


Hi,

If the two (hypothetical) riders have the same foot size they will require exactly the same board size in any given model. Boards are designed based on weight and foot size. height is not considered at all in designing a snowboard.


----------



## Kevin137 (May 5, 2013)

Wiredsport said:


> Hi,
> 
> If the two (hypothetical) riders have the same foot size they will require exactly the same board size in any given model. Boards are designed based on weight and foot size. height is not considered at all in designing a snowboard.


I agree, but they will given the different types of people all react differently due to the way the same weight moves over a board...  As a shorter stockier person will have a lower centre of gravity, however, that is something that could never truly be tested and advised on as you are only 1 weight and height... Haha


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Wiredsport said:


> Hi,
> 
> If the two (hypothetical) riders


4 hypothetical riders...


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

neni said:


> 4 hypothetical riders...


Hah! I has misunderstood your meaning. The same is true however. Riders of the same weight and same shoe size will be best fit by the same board in any given model. 

I wrote this over 20 years ago (gag) and it is equally relevant today:

*Where your nose is, does not determine what size of snowboard you should ride!

...or your chin, ears, shoulders or any other body part for that matter. These are the silliest rules for sizing boards that could possibly be imagined, and yet they persist. We hear new ones everyday, "my friend told me that a board should come to in between my chin and my nose." Why, are you planning to nibble on it? Buying based on these generalities is good way to end up with a completely inappropriate board. Why do such rules exist? It is due to the fact that finding the right board takes a bit of research and knowledge. The easy way, however incorrect, is much quicker. A snowboard reacts to only two factors, how much pressure is being applied to it (rider weight), and where that pressure is coming from (foot size and position). Boards are designed around riders of a certain weight range. The total weight range for a given board will be around 50 pounds (although manufacturers tend to exaggerate this range to make their products sellable to a wider variety of customers). Two men who stand six feet tall and whose noses are at identical heights, may be separated by 100 pounds of weight. This would change the boards that they should ride by two entire categories of stiffness and running length. You will also want to make sure that the board is appropriate for your foot size. Up to 1 centimeter of barefoot overhang for both the toe and heel sides (yes, overhang) off the edge of your board is ideal (when measured at the stance width and angle that you will ride). We will discuss this more below when we address width in detail.*


----------



## trapper (Jan 15, 2013)

Wiredsport said:


> Hah! I has misunderstood your meaning. The same is true however. Riders of the same weight and same shoe size will be best fit by the same board in any given model.
> 
> I wrote this over 20 years ago (gag) and it is equally relevant today:
> 
> ...


But wouldn't height have at least some factor to play all else being equal? Particularly a comfortable stance width, I would think, would be determined somewhat by a person's height. That would impact where they place their bindings and how they would leverage the edges of the board, wouldn't it? 

Also, I think neni's point is also such that a person's physical makeup can impact how well they might be able to handle a particular board. I'm sure that a taller, more athletic person would have an easier time handling and turning a board than a shorter, non-athletic couch potato of the same weight and footsize would, no?

I understand your point on foot size and weight being the primary determinants, but don't these other factors play in at least somewhat? Just curious about this. Thanks.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Hi Trapper,

Height and rider preference (strangely, stance width varies much more by rider preference than by rider height) will affect the chosen stance width but that is more than covered by the insert options on any given model. 

As for being in shape etc, it will certainly help in terms of overall riding but will not change ideal size in any given model.


----------



## trapper (Jan 15, 2013)

Wiredsport said:


> Hi Trapper,
> 
> Height and rider preference (strangely, stance width varies much more by rider preference than by rider height) will affect the chosen stance width but that is more than covered by the insert options on any given model.
> 
> As for being in shape etc, it will certainly help in terms of overall riding but will not change ideal size in any given model.


Interesting. I guess that makes sense as I am 6'5" and only go 23 inches on my board while I know people shorter than that that go wider. But I was always under the impression that I should widen my stance because of my height; guess not.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

trapper said:


> Interesting. I guess that makes sense as I am 6'5" and only go 23 inches on my board while I know people shorter than that that go wider. But I was always under the impression that I should widen my stance because of my height; guess not.


Stance width is based on preference (and to a certain degree fashion) and it does not travel with rider height. Shoulder and hip width is a good indicator of _comfortable_ stance width...but again, preference is king there.


----------



## EastCoastChris (Feb 24, 2013)

I'm heavy in general. At 150 lbs my ribs stick out. I *look* about right at 160. I fucking destroy BMI charts.

I can ride anything from a 138 to a 152 depending on the kind of riding I am doing.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

Wiredsport said:


> Stance width is based on preference (and to a certain degree fashion) and it does not travel with rider height. Shoulder and hip width is a good indicator of _comfortable_ stance width...but again, preference is king there.


I'm short 5'6" and 21" is most comfortable but I lose all ollie power. Shorten it up and my knee hurts but I can ollie again.


----------



## Triple8Sol (Nov 24, 2008)

Height used to be the determining factor for board sizing. Years ago it changed to weight. I agree with the change, but many people seem to forget to factor in height anymore or dismiss it completely. I'm no physics major, so I've always imagined how differently a board would flex both torsionally and longitudinally, not to mention stability at speed. Not sure if you'd call it leverage or whatever but imagine a size 157 board ridden by two people that weigh 160lb. but one is 6'2" and the other is 5'6." The board is not going to handle the same under these two very different height/weight proportions.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

I was always under the impression that the height-based sizing metric was a hold-over from the ski world: ie merely something simple to use and understand, but without any factual basis.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Triple8Sol said:


> Height used to be the determining factor for board sizing. Years ago it changed to weight. I agree with the change, but many people seem to forget to factor in height anymore or dismiss it completely. I'm no physics major, so I've always imagined how differently a board would flex both torsionally and longitudinally, not to mention stability at speed. Not sure if you'd call it leverage or whatever but imagine a size 157 board ridden by two people that weigh 160lb. but one is 6'2" and the other is 5'6." The board is not going to handle the same under these two very different height/weight proportions.


An alternate opinion: This is actually a perfect example of why height does not matter and should not be considered at all. In your example of the two riders separated by 8 inches in height, in any given model they would be best suited by the same size board. Consider how (and from where) you do leverage a snowboard. It is not by leaning your height out from the head to feet in a line to leverage an edge (or the nose and tail). Edge control is primarily generated by subtle centered adjustments transmitting rider weight through the feet. Height has no impact on this.


----------



## The Legend (Oct 14, 2013)

Here you can try this.

Snowboard Sizing Guide, Size Calculator


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

The Legend said:


> Here you can try this.
> 
> Snowboard Sizing Guide, Size Calculator


Again, height has nothing to do with board size. 

I ride a 155 park board, this thing has me riding a 159. Not even my all mountain board is a 159.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Here is ours


----------



## Triple8Sol (Nov 24, 2008)

Wiredsport said:


> An alternate opinion: This is actually a perfect example of why height does not matter and should not be considered at all. In your example of the two riders separated by 8 inches in height, in any given model they would be best suited by the same size board. Consider how (and from where) you do leverage a snowboard. It is not by leaning your height out from the head to feet in a line to leverage an edge (or the nose and tail). Edge control is primarily generated by subtle centered adjustments transmitting rider weight through the feet. Height has no impact on this.


So I get that equal weight will stress the board the same way in terms of how soft/stiff it feels, and the subtle foot/leg inputs (hence why I love the NOW bindings) but I guess I still picture it differently when factoring in stability, etc... Using a motor vehicle like a car/motorcycle/boat prob isn't the best analogy, but think of how different each of those handle with purely COG differences. What am I missing?


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

Weight if your buying a board the way the manufacturer intended... Personal preference if you know what kind of flex and size you like under your feet... A good rule of thumb is if your new to snowboarding follow the manufacturers guidelines, if you been doing this for a while ride what you like and what you feel is going to suit you... 

I park on a 154 Operator that I'm too heavy for, and run on a 164 slayblade that I'm just hitting the recommended weight range when I do big mountain trips with the boys... A 159 Uninc that I'm ideal for sits in the storage, the misses won't go bigger than 145 and she's been doing this for 23 years... When you know your way around it's all personal preference... 

The numbers are there as guidelines, not a rule set in stone...


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Triple8Sol said:


> So I get that equal weight will stress the board the same way in terms of how soft/stiff it feels, and the subtle foot/leg inputs (hence why I love the NOW bindings) but I guess I still picture it differently when factoring in stability, etc... Using a motor vehicle like a car/motorcycle/boat prob isn't the best analogy, but think of how different each of those handle with purely COG differences. What am I missing?


Hi,

Each one of those motor sports are affected by very different laws of physics from each other as well as from snowboarding. If we rode pencil straight and did not have hinged feet, ankles, knees, hips, etc then height would play a larger role  but as it stands we adjust with body weight transmitted through our feet and adjusted by our lower bodies. Height is not a factor.


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)

Snowboard Sizing Guide, Size Calculator

height does seem to effect their calculator though, try dropping your height by 1 foot....hmmm, not sure what they were thinking


----------

