# Jones Aviator - a carver?



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

What's the deal on the Jones Aviator's ability to hold a carve?

There is more conflicting noise on this board than any other i can think of. 
Some say it's 'washy'.. a phrase used on a popular review site, while others claim it's a carver. 
some say it doesn't inspire confidence while others say it has incredible edge hold. 
seriously how can it be both? sound fishy to me.
how many actual riders have buttered their face down the hardpack due to a washout on this board?
to me, if a board was washy surely you would lose it in spectacular fashion unless you're not pushing very hard.
or is it that it can't be trusted so riders are holding back inside the comfort zone? wheres the fun in that?

I'm skeptical that Jones would create a board(year after year) that can't handle a big hard turn on firm snow - unless it was a specific park or pow board which it isn't. it'd be bad for riders & bad for business & who would want one?..a stiff camber board that doesn't hang on? - & why bother with mellow mag? to help offset the loss of edge via the spoon nose?
am i the only one that thinks it just doesn't make much sense? 

what is up?


----------



## taco tuesday (Jul 26, 2014)

I don't have any experience with the aviator but I can't help but think that if someone says a stiff cambered board is washy they either don't know how to ride or they rode one that it way to small for them and should have mentioned that fact. I do have a Flagship which is not full camber(rockered nose and tail), has the spoon and is not washy at all. I have a hard time believing that a board from the same manufacturer that is billed as a stiff camber board would actually be some washy noodle. I could be wrong though.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Long story short: It's absolutely a carver, and Jones' description of it as a "resort razor" is accurate.

I own the Aviator in 158 and 160 cm. It's not washy at either length for me. I weigh 170-180 lbs; that said, the 160 does hold a better edge for me at higher speeds. It's a very predictable board and I can't remember it ever just "letting go/suddenly losing an edge." It's one of the most aggressive, hard-carving/charging boards I've ever ridden. In my quiver I compare it to the Prior AMF full camber, Lib-Tech Hot Knife and Burton Custom X full camber -- aggressive all-mountain freestyle. I ride it with Now Pilot bindings.

At this time of year you can get a ridiculously good deal on them, too, because they're not nearly as popular as some of the comparable boards from other brands. Around here you can still find it in any size you want, at 20-40% off depending on where you look. I think if more people got a chance to ride one it would be more popular. Maybe they're swayed by the existing reviews.

I agree with Taco Tuesday about reviews in general. Watch out for:
-the rider's weight vs board length being reviewed; some reviewers like shorter boards and often review shorter boards for their weight vs what I ride
-conditions of review (eg. spring snow)
-demo vs extended demo vs ownership

There are a lot of great/spot-on reviews of boards that were ridden as demos, but I've also read many where I completely disagree with the conclusions. I usually chalk it up to conditions, board size, board tuning/setup.


----------



## dwdesign (Mar 30, 2011)

Ugly jacket on an Aviator. https://youtu.be/v8Pj4p64ruk?t=186


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

taco tuesday said:


> I don't have any experience with the aviator but I can't help but think that if someone says a stiff cambered board is washy they either don't know how to ride or they rode one that it way to small for them and should have mentioned that fact. [...] I have a hard time believing that a board from the same manufacturer that is billed as a stiff camber board would actually be some washy noodle. I could be wrong though.





zc1 said:


> Long story short: It's absolutely a carver, and Jones' description of it as a "resort razor" is accurate.


Exactly what these guys said. Aviator is definitely a great carving board



zc1 said:


> In my quiver I compare it to the Prior AMF full camber, Lib-Tech Hot Knife and Burton Custom X full camber -- aggressive all-mountain freestyle.


Yup, those are very good comparison. But may be TheGoodRide idiots will decide that the Custom X is not a good carver either...


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Just stop listening to The Good Ride. The Aviator carves it's like a cross between the Flagship and the Mountain Twin making it a high end all mountain board. It rolls on edge and holds on. Is it a board I would go out and rip carves with every day and only carves? No. But it's a board you can go out and rip carves on and never have to worry.


----------



## SnowDragon (Apr 23, 2012)

zc1 said:


> I own the Aviator in 158 and 160 cm.


Out of curiosity, why?
Do you notice much of a difference from the 2cm when riding?


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

SnowDragon said:


> Out of curiosity, why?
> Do you notice much of a difference from the 2cm when riding?


Absolutely. The 160 is quite a bit stiffer. I own or have owned more than one size of several boards (Custom X, Retox, One Mag/LF, Super 8, Aviator, Hot Knife).


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

Jones Aviator is a great board but it’s not a great carving board. I suppose you could carve it some if you wanted to. But the cambered portion of the base is pretty small. The ratio of effective edge length to overall edge length is not that high. The board is made forgiving by having a fair amount of rocker at tip and tail. It’s also not nearly as stiff as a Custom x. Just using that board as an example of a off the rack mass market board that might be more capable as a carver. Then again, the custom x would not be as good for more general goofing around on the mountain. 

I’m sure the slightly larger version of board rides much differently. Flex, width, overall volume, and other specs would be changed to accommodate a heavier rider.

Put differently, if you want a good al around board to cruise on the Aviator is pretty good. If you wanna really really carve them there are better choices out there. And I’m not hinting that you need to go buy hardboots and a 17cm wide board. It really all depends on what you wanna do.


----------



## taco tuesday (Jul 26, 2014)

The effective edge to overall length ratio is pretty average for mass produced twin/directional twin type of boards. Sure there are some that have more. Custom x as you mentioned, Chairman also comes to mind and I'm sure there are others but the aviator is pretty in line with the norm.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

It’s a very middle of the rroad kinda board. Does a lot of things acceptably well. Personally I’d sacrifice pow performance or ease of turn intitiation for more edge, more camber, and a less flappy nose/tail. But I ride hardpack. I seek it out. It’s gotten to the point where I actually love hard snow. If you live someplace where it pows a lot (and you get to hit it while it’s soft) then this board probably makes more sense for you than a custom x. It all depends on what you wanna do. The best thing you can do right now, before you buy, is really think about what you’re going to be sliding on. What will the snow most likely be like? Then ask yourself what do I wanna do on that snow. Am I worried about float? Ice grip? Cheating landings when I’m coming off of a rail? Arcing pencil thin lines deeper than a gorilla dick on hard snow? No matter what the bullshit reviews or marketing literature says there’s no one board that excels at all of that. Once you truly answer those questions it becomes possible to pick a board that’ll be good for you. I suppose riding ability factors in there somewhere too but I’ll just assume you can ride anything you want to ride. Public service announcement: Novice riders should probably stick with softer boards.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

I agree that you could definitely find better boards than the Aviator if your sole focus is carving. I still maintain that it's actually a great board for carving, though. 

I need to do a back-to-back of the current-gen Custom X 158cm vs Aviator 158cm. That's on the agenda for next season...or a couple of weeks from now if I manage to get out for one more trip during my week off. I did it for the previous-gen (2016) CX 156 vs the current-gen (2018) Aviator 158 but that was a pointless comparison. I replaced the 2016 156cm CX with a 2018 158cm CX so it's time for a rematch. My gut tells me that I'm still better on the Aviator, but I've had it for almost a full season, now, vs just a month for the new CX.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

I disagree on the Aviator's performance on hardpack and ice as well as being flappy at any speed. What year were you riding? Was it a demo board? I haven't ridden one prior to the 2017-18, and it's outstanding on hard and icy snow.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

zc1 said:


> I disagree on the Aviator's performance on hardpack and ice as well as being flappy at any speed. What year were you riding? Was it a demo board? I haven't ridden one prior to the 2017-18, and it's outstanding on hard and icy snow.


How can a board that has camber maybe 40% of the base be really outstanding on ice? On real ice you’d likely have a third or even half of the board not making contact with the mountain at the beginning of the turn. If you can somehow mange to completely decamber the board, then there’s not really that much effective edge to use. The rockered nose won’t grab onto the ice. It’s made to be out of the way. It’s made to float in pow and to go over stuff. You can’t load it with weight like you can a on board with all the way camber. That’s pretty crucial to carving a turn or engaging edges on ice. Doesn’t matter make model or year. Show me a RCR board and I’ll be looking at a compromise board. No dis intended. Sometimes compromise is what you need. It can be good especially if it’s your one board or if you’re gonna go somewhere that conditions vary a lot. But every cm of that board that isn’t camber and effective edge is a compromise away from excelling at ice riding or carving hardpack. 

If I had to ride a RCR board on ice I’d make the edges hella sharp and I’d wear crash pads. If I could pick any board for riding ice it would be full camber, long effective edges, medium flex (not hard flex) and medium camber covering almost all the board (not super high camber). I’d want it to be longer than an all around board (for stability) and not too wide (so it’s easier to change edges). It should also have very good latitudinal stiffness. That’s important.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> How can a board that has camber maybe 40% of the base be really outstanding on ice? On real ice you’d likely have a third or even half of the board not making contact with the mountain at the beginning of the turn. If you can somehow mange to completely decamber the board, then there’s not really that much effective edge to use. The rockered nose won’t grab onto the ice. It’s made to be out of the way. It’s made to float in pow and to go over stuff. You can’t load it with weight like you can a on board with all the way camber. That’s pretty crucial to carving a turn or engaging edges on ice. Doesn’t matter make model or year. Show me a RCR board and I’ll be looking at a compromise board. No dis intended. Sometimes compromise is what you need. It can be good especially if it’s your one board or if you’re gonna go somewhere that conditions vary a lot. But every cm of that board that isn’t camber and effective edge is a compromise away from excelling at ice riding or carving hardpack.
> 
> If I had to ride a RCR board on ice I’d make the edges hella sharp and I’d wear crash pads. If I could pick any board for riding ice it would be full camber, long effective edges, medium flex (not hard flex) and medium camber covering almost all the board (not super high camber). I’d want it to be longer than an all around board (for stability) and not too wide (so it’s easier to change edges). It should also have very good latitudinal stiffness. That’s important.


I know you're not dissing me. It's nice to have real discussions here without people getting angry. All good.

I get what you're saying, but I'm not talking about what it looks like on paper. I'm talking about how it actually rides. The reality is that it rides *great* on ice. If I had to choose one board in my quiver to ride on ice it would actually be my first choice (and I've done it, intentionally, on numerous occasions). I agree that on paper the fact that it has rocker on both ends doesn't scream "you'll love this board on hardpack and ice" but the reality is that riding it on hardpack and ice is actually great. It's not apples to apples but it's better than my full camber Prior AMF (156 cm board) in that setting.

FWIW I just went out and did some measurements. 83% of the EE is actually camber. The EE itself is 75% of the board's total length. This is for the 158. I didn't bother taking the 160 off the wall. Doing the one was nerdy enough :wink:


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

zc1 said:


> I know you're not dissing me. It's nice to have real discussions here without people getting angry. All good.
> 
> I get what you're saying, but I'm not talking about what it looks like on paper. I'm talking about how it actually rides. The reality is that it rides *great* on ice. If I had to choose one board in my quiver to ride on ice it would actually be my first choice (and I've done it, intentionally, on numerous occasions). I agree that on paper the fact that it has rocker on both ends doesn't scream "you'll love this board on hardpack and ice" but the reality is that riding it on hardpack and ice is actually great. It's not apples to apples but it's better than my full camber Prior AMF (156 cm board) in that setting.
> 
> FWIW I just went out and did some measurements. 83% of the EE is actually camber. The EE itself is 75% of the board's total length. This is for the 158. I didn't bother taking the 160 off the wall. Doing the one was nerdy enough :wink:


While there are some X factors and surprises when it comes to how a board rides compared to its specs, in my experience -owning I dont know maybe 60 different boards over time and trying out maybe about the same again— the spec sheets speak volumes and boards don’t ride much different that what the specs say. Unless you’re talking about a board degrading over time and getting softer or less aggressive, you pretty much know what a board is built for when you see the numbers. So the aviator feels good for you on the ice. First of all I’m glad for you. But then I wonder: What’s your frame of reference? Good compared to what? Perhaps it works and you can make it down the ice mountain without crashing hard or shitting your pants. That’s the goal in ice after all. But have you ridden a longer Burton Custom (not x) with edges set to -1 base, -2 sides with Diodes and Driver X boots? If yes, would you say that’s a better ice rig than the Jones Aviator? Or how about a Oxess BX 163-10 with some nidecker carbons on it? Is there More stability and edge control on ice there? I’d say that something along this line will hold on ice pretty much as good as any softboot board possibly can. Or how about a Never Summer Snowtrooper? Just kidding. No matter how much you sharpen that thing it’s gonna be shit on ice. Rocker between the bindings is a death sentence basically. 

So I don’t know your frame of reference. I don’t know what you were riding on apart from The Aviator. But I know that I can think of about 50 boards id rather ride on ice or carve on hardpack than a jones Aviator. 

Now as for a single board that I’d want to spend one week during peak season at a large resort in Colorado with I’m not sure I can think of one that I would bother to argue was a better all arounder than the Aviator. Maybe the Burton Custom Camber. But if it really pows then I’d rather have the Aviator. In reality I’m going on that trip to CO at peak season with probably 3 boards, a general purpose board, a carve board, and a pow board. I can do it all with one set of bindings and boots though. No need for extra luggage fees. I keep the bags light by not wearing underwear or changing clothes more than twice a week.

I can look at the specs and tell you without hesitation that a Subaru Outback AWD does better in snowy conditions than a Honda Accord with front wheel drive does in the same snowY conditions. Snowboards are the same. Some stats are dispositive as to performance abilities and limits. There is no magic in there.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

I ride all my boards with stock edge angles. That's a good point. To compare fairly it would make sense to tune them all to the same. 

I had a 158 custom camber until a couple of months ago. I didn't enjoy riding it. Under my feet, the Aviator and Custom X both hold an edge better. Different strokes. I'm no professional, but I do ride a lot of boards. How many I've ridden, I couldn't tell you but I have twenty-four at any given time (that's all that I have space for on the garage wall). To buy one I have to get rid of one. Just checking my docs, this season I sold 11 and gave away 2. I haven't ridden Driver X boots with Diodes. I ride T Rice boots and Now Pilots or Drives (and a few others) for the most part. I've ridden different brands in the past, but now can get the DCs at a good price, replace them yearly and they work for my ankles for most of the season -- by the end of the season they're toast, hence the replacing yearly -- so I'm just sticking with those. You do you, I'll do me.

I defer to your experience and knowledge of how numbers translate to on-snow feel, but I do know what works under my feet and have a good idea of what I expect from a board as well. I'm still sometimes surprised, and that keeps it interesting. I haven't seen it all, by any means, nor do I suggest that I have. I'm just giving my own personal experience with the board that is being discussed.

Edit: In fairness, it was the previous generation (16-17) Custom camber. The Custom X is 17-18 with the reworked specs.
Edit: On the other hand, most people don't ride their boards with edge tunes different from stock so comparing them in stock spec is also reasonable.
Edit: OP, I hope you got your answer before we took over yet another thread. Sorry.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

Take a lesser loved camber-ish board from your collection and do something like base -.5 and sides -2. Detune around contact points. Then feel the insane edge hold on hard snow. Especially when you really work it to a nice edge with progressively finer files and stones you end up with something dangerously sharp. The reality is that most boards ship with 0, 0. That’s kinda like the safety chain that comes on a new Stihl chainsaw. It’s safe but kinda sucks. After a few rides or any kind of damaging incident you’ll need to tighten the edges up a little. It’s basically impossible to keep sharp 0,0 edges over a full life of usage unless you only ever ride perfect fluff. You could get back to 0,0 after a base grind. but how many people are paying real money to get a $459.00 deck base ground and or tuned? Super rare. Even with edges sharpened on the Aviator I’d rather ride the Custom camber with full edges on ice.


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

zc1 said:


> .. OP, I hope you got your answer before we took over yet another thread. Sorry.


not at all *ZC1*.. it's been an excellent discussion, & i'm stoked to hear of Your first hand experience on the Aviator(s).

I think the 'washy' myth is *busted*.(unless someone else comes on with the horror stories.)

The Aviator will be my 1 board for the looming 2018 season in the southern hemisphere(nz).
Thanks also *Fielding* for confirming this as a good choice. would you recommend any specific edge tuning to increase hold (i'm not doing boxes or rails)

cheers all


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

auben said:


> not at all *ZC1*.. it's been an excellent discussion, & i'm stoked to hear of Your first hand experience on the Aviator(s).
> 
> I think the 'washy' myth is *busted*.(unless someone else comes on with the horror stories.)
> 
> ...


If you’re looking for a board and a top concern is edgehold then you shouldn’t buy a RCR board like the Aviator. It’s more of a general purpose board with significant compromises made that hinder ice hold and carving performance in order to do well in pow. Wanna really really carve? Then you should buy a camber board.


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

Fielding said:


> If you’re looking for a board and a top concern is edgehold then you shouldn’t buy a RCR board like the Aviator. It’s more of a general purpose board with significant compromises made that hinder ice hold and carving performance in order to do well in pow. Wanna really really carve? Then you should buy a camber board.


cheers, no carving's not THE top concern i like other stuff too. i just wanna have confidence if i wanna do some carving it'll hang not wash.

i'm not talking bullet ice euro carving in the olympics i'm talking everyday mere mortal carving.

you already pointed out you'd do the aviator as a 1 board for the resort for all round so starting at that point.. 
if/how would you tune the edges or would you leave them. i only ask because you seem to know more about this stuff than me.

again we're talking average conditions & riding - not extremes, my surname's not jones.

appreciate your advice


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> Take a lesser loved camber-ish board from your collection and do something like base -.5 and sides -2. Detune around contact points. Then feel the insane edge hold on hard snow. Especially when you really work it to a nice edge with progressively finer files and stones you end up with something dangerously sharp. The reality is that most boards ship with 0, 0. That’s kinda like the safety chain that comes on a new Stihl chainsaw. It’s safe but kinda sucks. After a few rides or any kind of damaging incident you’ll need to tighten the edges up a little. It’s basically impossible to keep sharp 0,0 edges over a full life of usage unless you only ever ride perfect fluff. You could get back to 0,0 after a base grind. but how many people are paying real money to get a $459.00 deck base ground and or tuned? Super rare. Even with edges sharpened on the Aviator I’d rather ride the Custom camber with full edges on ice.


I never do the edges other than deburring. I leave the proper sharpening to the shop. I know that Jones ships with 90* edges but I'm not sure if it's 0/0; never asked. Burton does 1/1. The only board I've actually asked specifically about was my AMF as it was a custom build (0.5/1). When getting the edges tuned up once they start looking gnarly I've never asked for any specific changes to the default/factory angles and never bothered to get tools to measure or modify them myself. That's an area that I'm happy to let the shop manage. I want to build another AMF next season, so I might try a more aggressive tune then, but everything 'off the shelf' will stay at factory angles, whatever they may be.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

auben said:


> if/how would you tune the edges or would you leave them. i only ask because you seem to know more about this stuff than me.


Why not ride whatever board you end up getting, first, then decide if you actually need a more aggressive edge tune. In relative terms, it's "easy" to make it more aggressive, and you can do it in increments until you get it to where you're happy with it. Besides, more data points can be very helpful.


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

zc1 said:


> Why not ride whatever board you end up getting, first, then decide if you actually need a more aggressive edge tune. In relative terms, it's "easy" to make it more aggressive, and you can do it in increments until you get it to where you're happy with it. Besides, more data points can be very helpful.


good points ZC thanks again. enjoy your boards! all 20 of them! 

i was just wondering what fielding might do to it if he wanted to increase hold. i'm not about to bust out the file just yet ;-) i dont think it would end well..

i guess the answer's in his earlier post which is sharpen edges & change angles to get better hold.

thanks guys for all your great feedback.

do we have consensus, the Aviator is a carver & it's not washy & it's not a dedicated all out carving board but does pretty well?


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

Fielding said:


> Jones Aviator is a great board but it’s not a great carving board.


Have you actually ridden one?



Fielding said:


> But the cambered portion of the base is pretty small.


No it isn't. It is about the same or more as most cambered boards. 



Fielding said:


> The ratio of effective edge length to overall edge length is not that high.


Not really true.



Fielding said:


> The board is made forgiving by having a fair amount of rocker at tip and tail.


No, it does not have much rocker at all. About the same as any 'traditional' camber board.



Fielding said:


> It’s also not nearly as stiff as a Custom x.


Actually it is pretty similar.



Fielding said:


> Put differently, if you want a good al around board to cruise on the Aviator is pretty good. If you wanna really really carve them there are better choices out there.


In your world of hardboots and dedicated carve boards that may be true. But for the general softboot resort crowd the Aviator and Custom X are more carving boards than 90-95% of the other decks on the hill.



Fielding said:


> If you’re looking for a board and a top concern is edgehold then you shouldn’t buy a RCR board like the Aviator.


Except that the Aviator is not what would be called RCR.



Fielding said:


> It’s more of a general purpose board with significant compromises made that hinder ice hold and carving performance in order to do well in pow.


Aviator has very little characteristics for pow performance - less than any other board in the Jones line-up. That's why it is the one board in the Jones line-up that is marketed primarily as a resort board.



Fielding said:


> Wanna really really carve? Then you should buy a camber board.


Aviator is a camber board.



Fielding said:


> How can a board that has camber maybe 40% of the base be really outstanding on ice?


Except that this is not the case for the Aviator.



Fielding said:


> The rockered nose won’t grab onto the ice. It’s made to be out of the way. It’s made to float in pow and to go over stuff. You can’t load it with weight like you can a on board with all the way camber. That’s pretty crucial to carving a turn or engaging edges on ice. Doesn’t matter make model or year.


Aviator does not have more of a rockered nose that any regular camber board.



Fielding said:


> Show me a RCR board and I’ll be looking at a compromise board.
> [...]
> If I had to ride a RCR board on ice I’d make the edges hella sharp and I’d wear crash pads.


Aviator is still not an RCR board, no matter how often you claim that it is.



Fielding said:


> If you’re looking for a board and a top concern is edgehold then you shouldn’t buy a RCR board like the Aviator. It’s more of a general purpose board with significant compromises made that hinder ice hold and carving performance in order to do well in pow. Wanna really really carve? Then you should buy a camber board.


Did I mention already that the Aviator is a traditional camber board (not RCR) and without any compromises to enhance powder performance.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of your theory...


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

auben said:


> do we have consensus, the Aviator is a carver & it's not washy & it's not a dedicated all out carving board but does pretty well?


Pretty much that. Although again, the Aviator is more of a carving deck than at least 90% of the softboot boards that you'll see on any given mountain.


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

see, this is why i love hanging out in this place, there is so much knowledge you guys have. i realise i dont know sh$%t but im learning (sometimes the hard way) .
i really am blown away by how much you all know & how readily you're willing to share even when it doesn't always line up. 
no-one gets over excited they just keep adding value.
awesome guys.

i started this thread because the mixed reviews just didn't sit right. 
from what i see here the Aviator is fine for carvng & that video link was kinda hard to ignore.

i wonder how many other boards get ho hum reviews but actually are pretty good?
probably any board is better than nothing if the truth is known & we're all a bunch of very lucky people to have all these choices.

at least for now i think the myth is busted about Aviator being washy. which is kind of what i suspected.

thanks for all your excellent input poeples.

peace out!


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

auben said:


> do we have consensus, the Aviator is a carver & it's not washy & it's not a dedicated all out carving board but does pretty well?


I don't think Fielding agrees, but for what it's worth, under my feet it carves and is my board of choice for that.

The specs are one thing. The way it actually rides is another. I and others have described how it actually rides. It rides like a camber board, regardless of what the specs say. There has only been one objection to the description, so I would call that close enough to consensus so far. 



auben said:


> at least for now i think the myth is busted about Aviator being washy. which is kind of what i suspected.


I don't know why it felt washy to some -- some possibilities were mentioned earlier. It's not the least bit washy under my feet.

Stiffness-wise, Aviator vs Custom X, I don't know. I don't feel a difference between the 158s. They're both stiff but the 160 Aviator is more stiff than both 158s.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

auben said:


> good points ZC thanks again. enjoy your boards! all 20 of them!
> 
> i was just wondering what fielding might do to it if he wanted to increase hold. i'm not about to bust out the file just yet ;-) i dont think it would end well..
> 
> ...


On a new general purpose softboot board I usually lift the base .25 and bring in the sides 1. That's a start point. You can always take material off. But you can't put it back on. The only way to take the base back to 0 is to get a grind. That costs real money and you can only do it a few times on any board. For boards that ship without a stonegrind I usually steel brush the base to make sure theres a little structure there. Then I set the edges. Then I wax, scrape, brush. On a new board (I probably had 8 this past season, some of which were keepers) I start with my bindings in the reference positions or slightly back (slightly back because I always ride + + angles and I want my body weight on the reference binding positions not out front). I put on the bindings in my basement and put my boots in the bindings and strap them in. Then I adjust binding angles and position by moving the base plates around to get the boot centered on the board with the toe and heel right up to but not over the edges of the board. Then I take the boots out, take a few pics with my phone so I know how I started out. Once I get to the mountain I d a couple or a few runs just like that. I carry a tool with me and make some adjustments later. If I get the board dialed then I take a few pics with my phone of the ending positions. Some boards never feel right. They move on to new homes! There are a few that I couldn't make right but I keep them anyway because I know that it's a good board that I should be able to ride well. So I revisit those boards every so often. That's the process.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

zc1 said:


> I don't think Fielding agrees, but for what it's worth, under my feet it carves and is my board of choice for that.
> 
> The specs are one thing. The way it actually rides is another. I and others have described how it actually rides. It rides like a camber board, regardless of what the specs say. There has only been one objection to the description, so I would call that close enough to consensus so far.
> 
> ...


I think it would definitely feel washy to anybody who has ridden something like these on hardpack or ice:

https://www.donek.com/product/flux/#topsheet
Kessler Ride Snowboard | Apex Sport
SWOARD

I think the Aviator would also feel washy to anyone who regularly rides a Burton Custom camber or other mid-stiff pure camber board on hadpack or ice.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> I think it would definitely feel washy to anybody who has ridden something like these on hardpack or ice:
> 
> https://www.donek.com/product/flux/#topsheet
> Kessler Ride Snowboard | Apex Sport
> SWOARD


That probably excludes 99% of the snowboard reviewers who have reviewed this board.




Fielding said:


> I think the Aviator would also feel washy to anyone who regularly rides a Burton Custom camber or other mid-stiff pure camber board on hadpack or ice.


Except that it doesn't.

If you're in Banff at all next season then give me a shout. You can ride all of them back-to-back and see how they compare.

I can't do more than that. The specs may say one thing, but riding them is another story altogether, and since you don't trust anyone's opinion but your own, that's the best I can offer.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

SGboarder said:


> Have you actually ridden one?
> 
> 
> No it isn't. It is about the same or more as most cambered boards.
> ...


You again? What you did here was just say the equivalent of “you’re not right” over and over again after each point I had made earlier. At first it really piqued my interest. I was flattered that you had read my post so closely as to be able to break apart the main ideas and then respond to each one. I kept thinking that you were going to post some facts or new information or something to support your positions. But then you didn’t. I wish you would have. If you had posted links in there or if you had done some measurements or taken some pictures then I’d definitely consider your assertions -or, more precisely, your broad refutations of my points. This shouting “no! You’re wrong!” style post reminds me of your participation in a certain waxing thread. In that thread you vehemently refuted everything I said about waxing but offered nothing in the way of your own waxing advice. The post I’m responding to here seems similar. So let me offer some links to support my earlier points. Maybe I should have done it earlier. But I figured that everybody here looks at this stuff. So I didn’t. I had just assumed it was common knowledge. Here’s some random data about the board:

https://www.evo.com/outlet/snowboards/jones-aviator-snowboard-2017

https://thegoodride.com/snowboard-reviews/jones-aviator-2014-2018-snowboard-review/

https://www.jonessnowboards.com/gear/mens-snowboards/aviator.html#details

Just google Jones Aviator and you’ll get the links for all the usual board reviewers and marketing shills and stuff. And you’ll get the big online shops with their spec categories and little camber profile diagrams. Check it all out. If you can find one that says that the Aviator is all camber from tip to tail (naturally there must be some upturn at the ends so I’m talking about substantially the entire board, not the entire board) then please post the link. I’d gladly consider it. 

Before you go off on your search for supporting links, let me call your attention to the Jones website write up on the Aviator. This is their own marketing verbiage so we have to assume that it’s coated in fluff, if not completely made of bullshit. The Aviator is an all mountain board. It’s a board that they want to sell as being all things to all people! (No dis here, it’s what an all mountain board is and it’s what all companies that want to sell shit do.) According to Jones: “The nimble handling and supersonic acceleration result from [sic] the Spoon 2.0 nose and tail plus the Power Camber profile. The Power Camber between the contact points [...] while the Spoon nose and tail eliminate catch....” So here we have Jones, Inc. telling us what I told you earlier: it’s an RCR deck. The camber stops at the bindings. The nose and tail are softened and feature the ultra advanced forgiving but also aggressive properties that Jones has apparently trademarked “Spoon nose an tail.” It’s got less camber than a Custom. 

I’ve ridden the Nidecker equivalent board. Same specs. Bought one for my kid. He rides it now. He needs an all mountain board at least in part because he isn’t done growing and therefore isn’t in a good position to put together a quiver. For his learning progression we’ve gone from pure unforgiving camber to CRC to RCR like the Jones Aviator. It’s a very competent all mountain board. A quiver of one must, by definition, be a compromise.

I love that you hit me with the “in your world” stuff about hard boots and me holding myself as somehow to cool for school. You’re still thinking of my old smirking avatar, right? I ride all kinds of stuff. I like to ride. I mess around on a bunch of different boards. I like boards. What I don’t like is board marketing and some of the intentional misguidance that goes on out there. For the record, I don’t think Jones is really misguiding anyone. But I do think that capitalizing “Power Camber” and “Spoon” is pretty silly looking. Just call it an RCR board. 

Here’s the thing that probably bothers me most of all about the current state of snowboards and riding them. Excluding the park -I don’t do park and I really don’t know anything about it- most people on the mountain ride like shit. They buy boards that don’t suit the kind of riding they want to do. They buy multiple boards that are damn near the same. Especially older bros like me: they say they wanna carve. Hell, they even say that’s what they do. Often what they mean by that is that they cruise. And by cruise I mean slide down the hill while ruddering some turns and just generally enjoying the scenery. I’m not talking about that thing you do at highway rest stops and airport bathrooms. If you wanna cruise the slopes then buy an all mountain board. If you wanna cruise only then stop saying you’re really interested in carving or that what you are doing is carving. It’s not the same thing. 

Now if you want to carve, consider buying a fairly long, stiff, camber board and get down to business. Are you ready to pursue carving? Truth be told it doesn’t take any great strength or skill. There is a bit of a learning curve. And it does require the right tools. It’s probably not worth even thinking about carving if you go riding less than 10 days a season. Just cruise. If you’ve got insane pow and back country at your disposal then consider doing that. Wanna stand around in the park and smoke weed and piss in the woods? Do that. I’m just kidding. Not trying to besmirch park dudes. There are some awesome park riders and people who throw themselves off big jumps. Much respect to them. I don’t mess with that stuff due to age and physical limits and admitted lack of courage.

I know I make some assertions and I offer some conclusions. All of them are ready to be abandoned in the face of conflicting evidence. I’d love to discuss boards or waxing with you but I need more from you than just “no you’re wrong” if I’m going to do that.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> Here’s the thing that probably bothers me most of all about the current state of snowboards and riding them. Excluding the park -I don’t do park and I really don’t know anything about it- most people on the mountain ride like shit. They buy boards that don’t suit the kind of riding they want to do. They buy multiple boards that are damn near the same. Especially older bros like me: they say they wanna carve. Hell, they even say that’s what they do. Often what they mean by that is that they cruise. And by cruise I mean slide down the hill while ruddering some turns and just generally enjoying the scenery. I’m not talking about that thing you do at highway rest stops and airport bathrooms. If you wanna cruise the slopes then buy an all mountain board. If you wanna cruise only then stop saying you’re really interested in carving or that what you are doing is carving. It’s not the same thing.


This is the heart of it, I think.

If I understand correctly then you're suggesting that carving isn't carving unless it's on a 'true' carving board. That's like saying that jibbing isn't jibbing if you're not on a true park board.

Like you, I've ridden and still ride all kinds of boards, but the ones that I like most (at present; this is ever-changing) are all-mountain freestyle and all-mountain boards as well as some freeride(-ish) boards. I have others as well, but that's where I gravitate. I like the fact that boards from different brands have their own 'personalities' and that each has a reason for existing as well as some thing(s) that it does better than others. It's fun to go out and ride them and feel those differences. I do carve on the Aviator. I do carve on my other boards as well. What you say is exactly correct, though. It's not a pure carving board...but it can carve very well IMO.

Am I interpreting you correctly?


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

zc1 said:


> That probably excludes 99% of the snowboard reviewers who have reviewed this board.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you’re based in the northern Rockies then the Aviator is probably a good board for you. I’d expect you get a lot of pow and can pick spots to avoid ice. I used to live not too far south of there. Now I’m East Coast and have somewhat refocused my riding on carving hard snow. I probably wouldn’t want most of the boards I own now if I lived where you live. My guess is that your conditions are usually forgiving (and awesome) enough that you really don’t want a super stiff all camber board. You also probably need the rocker nose to float and get over lumps. When somebody tells me they want to carve hard snow I start thinking of (nightmares I still have) refrozen after the rain New England bulletproof ice corduroy. If I was at the top of the mountain looking at that kinda snow below me and I had a fucking Jones Aviator under my feet I think I’d fake an injury and let ski patrol sled me down to the lodge.


----------



## Phedder (Sep 13, 2014)

Fielding said:


> Just google Jones Aviator and you’ll get the links for all the usual board reviewers and marketing shills and stuff. And you’ll get the big online shops with their spec categories and little camber profile diagrams. Check it all out. If you can find one that says that the Aviator is all camber from tip to tail (naturally there must be some upturn at the ends so I’m talking about substantially the entire board, not the entire board) then please post the link. I’d gladly consider it.
> 
> The camber stops at the bindings.


All of those links and descriptions show a board that is camber for the vast majority of it's EE, and certainly well past the bindings. Yeah, it's technically RCR as it has a very short rocker section before the contact points, but has a lot more and longer camber section than many RCR boards out there. 

Easiest way to settle this pedantry is for @zc1 to snap a side on picture of the boards profile.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> If you’re based in the northern Rockies then the Aviator is probably a good board for you. I’d expect you get a lot of pow and can pick spots to avoid ice. I used to live not too far south of there. Now I’m East Coast and have somewhat refocused my riding on carving hard snow. I probably wouldn’t want most of the boards I own now if I lived where you live. My guess is that your conditions are usually forgiving (and awesome) enough that you really don’t want a super stiff all camber board. You also probably need the rocker nose to float and get over lumps. When somebody tells me they want to carve hard snow I start thinking of (nightmares I still have) refrozen after the rain New England bulletproof ice corduroy. If I was at the top of the mountain looking at that kinda snow below me and I had a fucking Jones Aviator under my feet I think I’d fake an injury and let ski patrol sled me down to the lodge.


Lol. I ride it in everything, including the conditions you describe. Do I love it on ice? Nope, but I don't love anything on ice. For me that's a 5-10% scenario though. That said, at Nakiska (just outside Banff) it's literally blue ice a lot of mornings.

But we weren't talking just about carving on ice...or at least I wasn't. That's probably part of the problem.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Phedder said:


> All of those links and descriptions show a board that is camber for the vast majority of it's EE, and certainly well past the bindings. Yeah, it's technically RCR as it has a very short rocker section before the contact points, but has a lot more and longer camber section than many RCR boards out there.
> 
> Easiest way to settle this pedantry is for @zc1 to snap a side on picture of the boards profile.


I was actually in the process of doing that, but then my wife asked me why I was getting so caught up in this to go to the extent of snapping photos. I shrugged and put the boards back... Only did the Flagship before aborting.


----------



## Phedder (Sep 13, 2014)

zc1 said:


> I was actually in the process of doing that, but then my wife asked me why I was getting so caught up in this to go to the extent of snapping photos. I shrugged and put the boards back... Only did the Flagship before aborting.


Should have just showed her this >










(I don't think anyone's wrong, we're basically arguing semantics and degrees of camber vs RCR)


----------



## taco tuesday (Jul 26, 2014)

zc1 said:


> Phedder said:
> 
> 
> > All of those links and descriptions show a board that is camber for the vast majority of it's EE, and certainly well past the bindings. Yeah, it's technically RCR as it has a very short rocker section before the contact points, but has a lot more and longer camber section than many RCR boards out there.
> ...


Tell her it's very important that we get pictures! It must be done.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Phedder said:


> Should have just showed her this >
> 
> (I don't think anyone's wrong, we're basically arguing semantics and degrees of camber vs RCR)





taco tuesday said:


> Tell her it's very important that we get pictures! It must be done.


She would argue that getting my daughter to her appointment and fixing the door lock are more important :|


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

That's Aviator 158 and Custom X 158 quickly. Would have been more clear with no paper but the edges are sharp...


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Prior AMF (full camber) and Rossi One LF (40% camber)

Better without the paper. I might repeat the others when I get back this afternoon.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Mtn Twin 157


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

zc1 said:


> This is the heart of it, I think.
> 
> If I understand correctly then you're suggesting that carving isn't carving unless it's on a 'true' carving board. That's like saying that jibbing isn't jibbing if you're not on a true park board.
> 
> ...


If you’re on a mid flex RCR board then there’s a level of carve that’s simply not accessible to you. That’s assuming you have access to nicely groomed or just naturally smooth, firm snow. Those are carving conditions. Assuming you’ve got the conditions -and not pow, slush, broken snow, etc. then you can do some big carving. A mid flex board with just a little camber, a disengaged nose and tail, and not a lot of effective edge isn’t going to allow the same kind of load the nose, jam the turn, shoot up across the fall line, zero-g carve, trampoline effect orgasm turn that you can get on a more purpose built carving board. It just can’t. It might be a great board for many things but it’s not a carving board designed for carving conditions. Carving conditions is a thing. Sometimes conditions are such that you can’t really carve. Sometimes conditions are non-carvable. I like to carve and I’m a student of carving but I always want the best board for the conditions. Sometimes you gotta leave the carve board at home. How often depends on where you live and the snow. If I was back in the northern Rockies I’d probably spend a lot of time on my Dupraz 6+. That board carves some. But it’s real virtue is that it’s a surfy big mountain mixed conditions board. That’s a board that gets very limited usage where I live. Similarly, I get a lot of good use out of a Flux on the east coast. 

Carving means turning by decambering the board. The tip and tail follow the same line. The snow around the edge line is minimally disturbed. The rider controls the turn shape by squeezing out the camber and then releasing it. And by angulating the board. Those two things substantially control turn shape. When you’re carving your speed is controlled by turn shape and by bleeding off speed by riding uphill. When you’re above somebody who is really carving on the mountain below you then you can typically see a lot of the bottom of his board as he turns back into the fall line. That’s pretty much something that can’t happen in soft conditions (slush, pow). When carving the rider can and often does engage his downhill edge at the start of the the turn. That’s usually the recipe for a slam. But when you carry speed through your turns and stay up front on a stiff nose then there’s no slam. The rider can load the nose of the board and initiate the turn off of the downhill edge. It’s a glorious feeling. Trying to explain what carving is is like trying to explain how a helicopter works.

Let me add this: carving in the true sense as described above is pretty much the one thing that makes most dyed in the wool skiers say damn I wish I was on a snowboard. 

Also: carving is not just the absence of skidding. 

Finally: just have fun. Look around you and figure out what kind of riding you want to focus on. If I was in a place like Banff I’d probably be getting into split boarding and mountaineering and shit like that. I want to do that when my kids finish school on the east coast. My youngest is in kindergarten so I have a ways to go. So for now I have access to the kind of conditions that allow me to pursue carving. I suppose I could also pursue park but as I described earlier I’m not that guy. Though I do like to smoke weed and piss in the woods right next to the lift. Sometimes I carve through the park just for the hell of it.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

I think the answer we're looking for is 42.


----------



## Fielding (Feb 15, 2015)

And thus concludes another fine season of riding (the gear is all put away) and snowboardingforum shitposting. I know it was shitposting. But it was all sincere. Now I’m going to go ride my
motorcycle or maybe fuck around with some drones or something. But first I’m gonna drink some beer. See you right here next December. Until then, don’t let them sell you the same board over and over again. Insist on buying something different than what you already have. Buy a board that’s really made to do what you want to do. Better yet, buy three.


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

Plenty of rocker in that aviator.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Fielding said:


> And thus concludes another fine season of riding (the gear is all put away) and snowboardingforum shitposting. I know it was shitposting. But it was all sincere. Now I’m going to go ride my
> motorcycle or maybe fuck around with some drones or something. But first I’m gonna drink some beer. See you right here next December. Until then, don’t let them sell you the same board over and over again. Insist on buying something different than what you already have. Buy a board that’s really made to do what you want to do. Better yet, buy three.


See you in a few.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

ItchEtrigR said:


> Plenty of rocker in that aviator.
> 
> Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


Looks like it doesn't it? The camber zone is still 83% of the effective edge (99 of 119 cm) on the Aviator. I didn't measure the CX but it's going to be closer to 90% -- even though the CX's camber zone is longer, so is its effective edge.


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

Your measuring wrong, Load the camber (step on it) then measure how much rocker there is, loading the camber accentuates the rocker in the board.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Sure does. On pretty much every other board as well. And if you put a heavy enough weight in the centre you can decamber it entirely.


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

Loaded and unloaded on a cambered deck
















Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

ItchEtrigR said:


> Plenty of rocker in that aviator.
> 
> Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


Not noticeably more than in any regular old full camber board (Custom, Custom X etc)


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

Fielding said:


> So let me offer some links to support my earlier points. Maybe I should have done it earlier. But I figured that everybody here looks at this stuff. So I didn’t. I had just assumed it was common knowledge. Here’s some random data about the board:
> 
> https://www.evo.com/outlet/snowboards/jones-aviator-snowboard-2017
> 
> ...


Those links do not support your point, they support my point and expressly refute yours: The Aviator is traditional camber in terms of camber profile (not RCR). It has some other things going (lifted contact points and recently spoon tips) but none of those affect the camber profile or it RCR.
Maybe time do some reading instead of so much writing...



Fielding said:


> Before you go off on your search for supporting links, let me call your attention to the Jones website write up on the Aviator. This is their own marketing verbiage so we have to assume that it’s coated in fluff, if not completely made of bullshit.


Did you actually read the website and board description? Quoting from the Jones site (highlight mine):


> An innovative *traditional camber profile* tweaked to offer the insane edge response of camber without the usual hang-ups. The camber radius tapers to flat toward the tips and the base is beveled up one degree at the edges from the contact points of the camber to the ends of the board. The base beveling releases the edges where they like to hook which balances the pop and directional stability of camber with a looser, less-catchy feel.


In all the descriptions on the Jones site (and in the catalogue...and in most reviews...and on most retailer websites...) there is not a *single* mention of added rocker.

So even the sources you linked to state that the Aviator is *not* RCR...



Fielding said:


> According to Jones: “The nimble handling and supersonic acceleration result from [sic] the Spoon 2.0 nose and tail plus the Power Camber profile. The Power Camber between the contact points [...] while the Spoon nose and tail eliminate catch....” So here we have Jones, Inc. telling us what I told you earlier: it’s an RCR deck.


No, that is not what they're saying. They're saying that it is a camber deck with some tweaks outside the contact points.



Fielding said:


> The camber stops at the bindings.


No it doesn't, as clearly stated on the jones site and shown in the pictures on this thread. You seem to be confusing binding locations and contact points.



Fielding said:


> The nose and tail are softened and feature the ultra advanced forgiving but also aggressive properties that Jones has apparently trademarked “Spoon nose an tail.” It’s got less camber than a Custom.


What happens in the nose and tail has nothing to do with camber profile.



Fielding said:


> I’ve ridden the Nidecker equivalent board. Same specs.


So that goes to my earlier questions whether you have actually ridden the Aviator. What the Nidecker equivalent board with 'same specs'. Pray tell?



Fielding said:


> I love that you hit me with the “in your world” stuff about hard boots and me holding myself as somehow to cool for school. You’re still thinking of my old smirking avatar, right? I ride all kinds of stuff. I like to ride. I mess around on a bunch of different boards. I like boards. What I don’t like is board marketing and some of the intentional misguidance that goes on out there. For the record, I don’t think Jones is really misguiding anyone. But I do think that capitalizing “Power Camber” and “Spoon” is pretty silly looking. Just call it an RCR board.
> 
> Here’s the thing that probably bothers me most of all about the current state of snowboards and riding them. Excluding the park -I don’t do park and I really don’t know anything about it- most people on the mountain ride like shit. They buy boards that don’t suit the kind of riding they want to do. They buy multiple boards that are damn near the same. Especially older bros like me: they say they wanna carve. Hell, they even say that’s what they do. Often what they mean by that is that they cruise. And by cruise I mean slide down the hill while ruddering some turns and just generally enjoying the scenery. I’m not talking about that thing you do at highway rest stops and airport bathrooms. If you wanna cruise the slopes then buy an all mountain board. If you wanna cruise only then stop saying you’re really interested in carving or that what you are doing is carving. It’s not the same thing.
> 
> ...


So many words, so little sense. And all still based on the false premise (comprehensively disproved by now) that the Aviator is an RCR board.


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

zc1 said:


> Fielding said:
> 
> 
> > I think it would definitely feel washy to anybody who has ridden something like these on hardpack or ice:
> ...


Exactly that. on both points.


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

SGboarder said:


> Not noticeably more than in any regular old full camber board (Custom, Custom X etc)


Might be, is there some sort of 3d base going on in the aviator? Picture I posted is the Burton operator, pretty much a older model custom (don't know if the shape/ camber has changed since then), only a few mm more rocker when loaded as compared to unloaded. 

That aviator he posted seems to have quite a bit more rocker in that photo, you can see the lift about halfway from the inserts to the tip, could be a flat section before the tip, anyhow he can find out how much rocker it has if he just loads the camber and measures if he wants, not that it matters, it's predominately a cambered deck, like you or someone else mentioned before in this thread or another all boards even full cambered decks have a bit of rocker before the contacts. 

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

ItchEtrigR said:


> Might be, is there some sort of 3d base going on in the aviator? Picture I posted is the Burton operator, pretty much a older model custom (don't know if the shape/ camber has changed since then), only a few mm more rocker when loaded as compared to unloaded.
> 
> That aviator he posted seems to have quite a bit more rocker in that photo, you can see the lift about halfway from the inserts to the tip, could be a flat section before the tip, anyhow he can find out how much rocker it has if he just loads the camber and measures if he wants, not that it matters, it's predominately a cambered deck, like you or someone else mentioned before in this thread or another all boards even full cambered decks have a bit of rocker before the contacts.
> 
> Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk


Yup, Aviator has lifted contact points. So the edge not touching the ground/table around the end of the EE is not due to any rocker but because of a 'sideways' lift/bevel.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

I've avoided discussing the details of the profile because I think the Jones literature is a bit messy when it comes to the Aviator. 

They describe it as full/power camber. They also describe the spoon bevel that starts at the *rocker* zone as well as a 1 degree base edge bevel starting at the contact point. Then their diagrams (website) show what looks to be a rocker zone on each end. I suspect that this is a poorly-drawn representation of the actual profile and is meant to refer to the transition zone from camber to flat to 1 degree base edge bevel at the contact point. It's presented better in their catalogues, and I think the diagram on the website is erroneous.

The marketing is not clear, and does the board a disservice (as do sloppy reviews), but the way that it rides is a different story. 

As we've said, it rides like camber. It's camber. If you were blind testing this board, strapped in at the top of the mountain, sent on your way and then asked what you thought the profile was at the bottom it would be unequivocally full camber. Cartoons and numbers don't always tell the full story and this board is a case in point of that if you just rely on their website for info.

The first attached image is from the website and the second is from the catalogue. Neither is great, but the website one (which is the only one most people will see) is worse and the text doesn't help much.


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

Actually now you mention it is quite a confusing board with a bit going on. I put mine on the glass dining table, the first thing i notice is no edge is touching the glass. The spoon nose lifts the contact points up. Im sure once it gets 1 degree of lean it touches down again. Other thing i notice is what looks like camber most of the way until i squash it flat of course. You can see the spoon tail in the first pic & the camber in the 2nd


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Photo of the topsheet, please? That's a 2019, correct? Enjoy!


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

Fielding said:


> I think it would definitely feel washy to anybody who has ridden something like these on hardpack or ice:
> 
> 
> Kessler Ride Snowboard | Apex Sport
> ...


dang!! that donek link https://www.donek.com/product/flux/#topsheet made me wanna start practising asap so one day i can justify buying one!:grin: - such nice boards..


----------



## auben (Feb 24, 2018)

zc1 said:


> Photo of the topsheet, please? That's a 2019, correct? Enjoy!











No its only a 2016/17 model 162. But pic attached anyway.

I'll be getting the topsheet wrapped in clear 3M protection film(like the car bonnet film), which we did on my boys salomon ultimate ride to keep it nice for him.(my wife works in that industry).
If i can find a blue or yellow tint film i'll get that which will make it look purpleish or orange while protecting it- something a bit different eh.

& yep thanks, i'll definitely enjoy the looming season ..just waiting on more snow to arrive.

thanks to all for your contributions. i learned so much not only about the aviator itself but also changed the way i think about carving too & made me look more closely at the reviews for other clues.

Peace..


----------

