# Some Board Advice Pls



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Get something mid-flex with a camber/rocker/camber profile. Mid-flex will allow you to take it anywhere on the mountain while having rocker between the bindings will allow you to butter it fairly easily.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Hi WB,

To your question about female specific boards vs men's (unisex) models, female specific boards are typically narrower underfoot to accommodate smaller foot sizes, softer flexing (core and sometimes laminates) to accommodate lighter weights and the graphics are different (often to accommodate imaginary girls that don't actually snowboard  ). 

Cramping can come from a wide range of things. Struggling to turn too wide a board is certainly one of them. What is your foot size?

STOKED!


----------



## WestBam (Aug 2, 2015)

Thank you so much, my shoe size is 39, so pretty big. Any board suggestions? Also what size should I be getting all the rental places seemed to be giving me different board lengths.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Thanks for that additional info. 39 Euro equates to a US women's size 8 (or men's 7). When you rented were they giving you a female specific model or a men's/unisex board? If you remember the model/size that would be helpful as well.


----------



## WestBam (Aug 2, 2015)

The times I've rented they gave me men's boards in a few different sizes: 156,154,and 151. Other than that I've borrowed a friend's (female) board which was 148. The 148 felt pretty small and was really flexy, not really my preference. Sorry that's all I got I remember the friend's board was a Burton, but that doesn't really do much without the model. Thank you.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Got it. The good news is that it is unlikely that you have ridden a board which is a good match for your specs yet.

Please measure your foot using this method:

Kick your heel (barefoot please, no socks) back against a wall. Mark the floor exactly at the tip of your toe (the one that sticks out furthest - which toe this is will vary by rider). Measure from the mark on the floor to the wall. That is your foot length and is the only measurement that you will want to use. Measure in centimeters if possible, but if not, take inches and multiply by 2.54 (example: an 11.25 inch foot x 2.54 = 28.57 centimeters).


----------



## WestBam (Aug 2, 2015)

Okay I measured it how you told me to, and it measured out to 25.2 cm.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Perfect. 

The 148 female specific board you were riding will all but certainly have been designed around a 110-120 lb rider. That is the norm for that cm size range in female specific models. There are exceptions but they are actually very rare. It was likely a good fit for your (relatively small) foot but a poor match in terms of flex. 

For the men's boards, a size 7 men's foot size is almost always well smaller than the width of the board at the inserts at normal stance angles which makes riding much more difficult (especially for newer riders) and very commonly results in the cramping that you experienced. 

In selecting a board for you we want to make sure of two things. 1. The flex is correct for your 160 lbs. 2. Your barefoot length (25.2 cm) exceeds the width of the board at the inserts at the stance angles that you ride. When we achieve this you will notice a huge performance increase in terms of leverage, control and comfort.

The Arbor Swoon in 156 cm is one great choice.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Wiredsport said:


> 2. Your barefoot length (25.2 cm) exceeds the width of the board at the inserts at the stance angles that you ride.


... and this you won't find. 
My feet are the very same size as OPs. I've read that hint in an older thread before and since my boards are way out of that range, it made me curious, I went to all local shops, grabbed all the smallest women's boards they had and _none_, not even tiny 145 ones were narrow enough to fulfill this rule, not even for my relatively large women's feet - so they would be way more out of scope for girls with "normal" smaller feet. 
Does this mean that women's boards - even tho narrow_er_ - are actually still not narrow enough, or that this rule is off?


----------



## WestBam (Aug 2, 2015)

Really? from what I remember even the men's 151(don't remember the 154 but it wasn't too uncomfortable) had the width he is describing. Can't imagine that even the smaller women's boards aren't narrow enough. What worries me is their flex. I've heard that women's boards are flexier in general, but I really do prefer a stiffer ride.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

neni said:


> ... and this you won't find.
> My feet are the very same size as OPs. I've read that hint in an older thread before and since my boards are way out of that range, it made me curious, I went to all local shops, grabbed all the smallest women's boards they had and _none_, not even tiny 145 ones were narrow enough to fulfill this rule, not even for my relatively large women's feet - so they would be way more out of scope for girls with "normal" smaller feet.
> Does this mean that women's boards - even tho narrow_er_ - are actually still not narrow enough, or that this rule is off?


Hi Neni,

The waist on the Swoon 156 that I suggested is 24 cm (but of course nothing happens at the waist). It is 24.6 at the center inserts. That will give WestBam .6 cm of barefoot overhang with her 25.2 cm feet at zero degree angles. Some (or all) of that .6 cm will be eaten up getting to "normal" stance angles but it should leave her very close to the ideal. That is the norm for size 8 and above, even on larger female specific boards such as this one.

It is common for 145 cm women's boards to be in the mid to high 23 cm range at the waist which typically deliver suitable widths at the inserts to satisfy this advice in terms of maintaining overhang at the inserts for boot sizes of women's 7 and above.

What are the measurements of your decks at the inserts? What models and sizes?


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

WestBam said:


> What worries me is their flex. I've heard that women's boards are flexier in general, but I really do prefer a stiffer ride.


That is certainly a valid concern. Many women's models are designed to be (overly?) forgiving. The Swoon however has a structural bamboo layer as well as a trix/biax blend. That is a relatively robust laminate schedule. 

At 160 size 7 (men's) you really are dealing with same issue that comes up a lot for male riders at similar weights with sub size 8 feet. There are a few great threads here on SBF that cover that. Many of those guys end up buying women's board to get to or closer to their ideal width.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

I own womens boards in 146, 153, 156 and 159.5 size. None of them fits the rule at my angles (15/-6). Just an observation; they all ride very well with my feet, so no problem .

Not all women's boards are soft, don't write them off in general . They are _in general_ softer but there are nicely stiff ones as well. My Ride Farah and Jones Mothership are of a nice flex if you like boards on the stiffer side. Salomon Idol was a nice ride as well. 

It's really an advantage that they're more narrow. I've been riding mens boards for years, but having a width more adapted to ones feet makes it recognizable less work for the toes.


----------



## WestBam (Aug 2, 2015)

Haha thank you so much Neni and WS for all the help and suggestions. Will check those boards out.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

neni said:


> I own womens boards in 146, 153, 156 and 159.5 size. None of them fits the rule at my angles (15/-6). Just an observation; they all ride very well with my feet, so no problem .


*Stoked* Neni, that's a deep quiver!

There are a lot of female riders who would benefit like you do from longer lengths (156 +) and firmer flex patterns in female specific models. Sadly the market in North America is very scared of these sizes and very few (models and quantities) are produced. This is due to historically poor sales and a market that has conditioned female riders to buy sub 150 cm almost regardless of rider specs. In 156 and larger you are absolutely correct and care is required to find widths to fit this suggestion. That is because most of those larger boards assume the largest female riders and therefore also assume larger foot sizes. There are exceptions however. 

In 153 cm it actually becomes fairly easy to get a good fit for a size 8 (women's) and smaller and under 150 cm it becomes the norm.


----------

