# Rossignol One Magtek vs Templar



## mariush (Nov 3, 2014)

Hi,

I will be buying a new board and narrowed down to a couple of Rossi boards - One Magtek and Templar Magtek. 

I am 5'10", 227 lbs and 9 boot size. I usually ride groomers, quite often in bumpy and/or icy conditions. Steep reds are my favourites. 

I am thinking of getting 161-162 long board to keep good manoeuvrability and would like to get a board, which turns easily and can be controlled without much effort. I am coming from a Nidecker Icon 163 (stiff, traditional camber board) and it has been too hard on my legs.

I am inclined to the One Magtek, but not sure how well it is going to handle the bumpy uneven slopes at the end of the day. Do you think the Templar would be a better choice for my case? I've been snowboarding for 2 years and I doubt I will be able to utilize all the benefits of One Magtek.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Unless you like a really soft board, you'll hate the Templar. At your weight that thing will be a noodle. 

I'm a good 25# lighter than you at my heaviest and a 158 Templar was borderline noodle for me.


----------



## SnowDogWax (Nov 8, 2013)

linvillegorge said:


> Unless you like a really soft board, you'll hate the Templar. At your weight that thing will be a noodle.
> 
> I'm a good 25# lighter than you at my heaviest and a 158 Templar was borderline noodle for me.


+1

Had the Templar & sold it, OneMag much better choice


----------



## mariush (Nov 3, 2014)

Thanks for advising, so I'll go with One Magtek then, it seems to be the more future-proof option too.

I am getting a bit confused with the weight ratings, however - the weight ranges for both 159 and 163 are the same, the only difference is in the max shoe size. Do you think I can do with 159 or should better go with the longer one?


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

mariush said:


> Thanks for advising, so I'll go with One Magtek then, it seems to be the more future-proof option too.
> 
> I am getting a bit confused with the weight ratings, however - the weight ranges for both 159 and 163 are the same, the only difference is in the max shoe size. Do you think I can do with 159 or should better go with the longer one?


Based on the snow conditions and boot size you mentioned up there ^, the 159 will work. But if you want hard fast carving and stability (and/or more float for pow) the bigger one will be better. It's your choice really, depends what you want to optimize for.


----------



## SnowDogWax (Nov 8, 2013)

I have 161 OnMag it rides smaller than it's size. IMO go with the larger board.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

Templar is a pretty decent board, but not at 200lbs+. The published weight range for the 158 is 130-175lbs.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Yeah, my only beef with the Templar is that it is NOT the board they market it to be. If that's a 6/10 on their stiffness scale, I'd hate to get on something they consider soft.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

It's stiff if you actually pay attention to the weight range


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

jtg said:


> It's stiff if you actually pay attention to the weight range


I don't think anyone has actually looked at published weight ranges on a snowboard since the late '90s. How many 130 pounders are riding a 158? Hell, a lot of 175 pounders are riding something shorter than 158.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

Really? I always do, otherwise you have no idea where you fall relative to the flex rating. I have a sweet spot that I use for a rough guideline, but if I see a board in that length and notice the weight range is way below me, I know to size up on it. It is a weight _range_ of course, it's going to sound funny if you only compare the extremes. I usually shoot for the middle.

That said, I'm pretty curious how they come up with those numbers. They do seem somewhat made up.


----------



## KayZ (Jan 19, 2014)

linvillegorge said:


> I don't think anyone has actually looked at published weight ranges on a snowboard since the late '90s. How many 130 pounders are riding a 158? Hell, a lot of 175 pounders are riding something shorter than 158.


190lbs here riding a 156... a GNU park pickle at that, pretty noodly

with that being said, the templar is really noodly. more so than most 6/10 flex boards


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

jtg said:


> They do seem somewhat made up.


And there you have it. It's like the old "pick a board that comes up to somewhere between you chin and your nose" thing. Hell, that's a good 3" gap for most people which equates to roughly 8cm. So, anything between say a 152 and a 160 will work just fine? Same thing with these weight ranges. Most are like 50# ranges. That's a huge gap. They're worthless.


----------



## nsrider121 (Jan 22, 2012)

I just told my brother to buy the Templar. He's 180lbs, and what I'd call a good beginner. Can cruise down greens no problem and can make turns on blues. 

Makes more sense than renting for the 5-8 times he gets out every season?


----------



## KayZ (Jan 19, 2014)

nsrider121 said:


> I just told my brother to buy the Templar. He's 180lbs, and what I'd call a good beginner. Can cruise down greens no problem and can make turns on blues.
> 
> Makes more sense than renting for the 5-8 times he gets out every season?


The templar is a great bang-for-the-buck board especially at its $150 price tag at evo right now, but keep in mind its noodely as all hell. Squirelly at even normal speeds, and the pop isn't that great. Its just a board to fool around on, if you know what you're doing. If you are learning, it might actually be an excellent tool to cut your teeth on. Forgiving rocker, with magnetraction.

Just dont expect to go hitting 30 foot kickers and have a stable landing, or to bomb down blacks at mach 6 on that deck.


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

Great beginner board IMO. Very forgiving.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

KayZ said:


> The templar is a great bang-for-the-buck board especially at its $150 price tag at evo right now, but keep in mind its noodely as all hell. Squirelly at even normal speeds, and the pop isn't that great. Its just a board to fool around on, if you know what you're doing. If you are learning, it might actually be an excellent tool to cut your teeth on. Forgiving rocker, with magnetraction.
> 
> Just dont expect to go hitting 30 foot kickers and have a stable landing, or to bomb down blacks at mach 6 on that deck.


See, BurtonAvenger said pretty much the opposite. I took it up to 50mph+ and not a hint of instability, unlike some of my other boards. I always felt locked in on that thing, RCR helps a lot (it's not a rocker board).

2014 Rossignol Templar Magtek Snowboard Used and Reviewed -



> Stability: Getting into the chopped out bumps from the heavy wind loaded powder this board proved how stable it was. It’s not the most damp board but it’s still solid enough to not worry about it folding when going mach 10 through a mogul field covered in powder.
> 
> 
> Ollies: The camber provides the snap we all know and love while the rocker gives it a skate style pop. The snap is pretty abundant and easily noticeable when you’re launching off natural features or boosting over obstacles in your way.
> ...


Dunno why such contrasting opinions, I can only guess you guys are too fat for the size you were on :dance1:

Edit: Ah yeah, 190lbs and 200lbs...it probably fully decambers at that weight and seems like rocker


----------



## KayZ (Jan 19, 2014)

jtg said:


> See, BurtonAvenger said pretty much the opposite. I took it up to 50mph+ and not a hint of instability, unlike some of my other boards. I always felt locked in on that thing, RCR helps a lot (it's not a rocker board).
> 
> 2014 Rossignol Templar Magtek Snowboard Used and Reviewed -
> 
> ...



hahaha :hairy:

200 lbs 6'3 here so yea thats possible


----------



## eelpout (Mar 1, 2009)

The big change and I think for the better this season is the 2015 One Magtek inherits the Templar's 5s Magnetraction. This is a mellower cut and I think will help the One in wetter snow and powder, where it had a tendency to grab with the old profile.

And now it has a blunter tip too. I think there is no question Rossi has the Jones Mountain Twin in their sights.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 19, 2010)

*How about for a 135lb size 7 boot?*

135 lbs (maybe 140 with gear)
Size 7 Boots
5'5" male
Intermediate
Central New York (small hills)
Just groomers, no park

How would the Templar be for my weight vs the One. I am not a very aggressive rider. 

Right now I am on a 151 Ride Antic which has been pretty good to grow on but want something that I can turn quicker and get on edge more.

I am considering 153 Templar, 153 One, 155 Templar, 156 One

thanks


----------



## rpadc (Mar 10, 2014)

I'm also close to pulling the trigger on a Templar 158 or a One Magtek 159.

5'8' 190lbs. Size 9 boot. No park. Want to shred whole mountain and hit natural features on my runs. Maybe bust some 180s so need to practice switch. Riding mainly ice coast but travel sometimes for pow. Solid on blues now and have hit a few blacks recently.

Regarding Templar noodlage, Angrysnowboarder is 175lbs and reviewed the 2015 155cm which tops out at 165lbs recommended rider weight.



> Stability: Riding over crusty snow and into wind lips this board never faltered. It’s surprisingly stable and damp which was great since the evil Crustasaurus was lurking under the snow.


2015 Rossignol Templar Snowboard Used and Reviewed -

Maybe those size charts really do matter. :shrug:

I'm leaning towards the One but could save some $$$ with the Templar. Just worried that I'm too hefty for it as the 58 tops out at 175lbs. Maybe +10lbs is the Templar Noodle Zone.

Any recs on what bindings to throw at either of these?


----------



## PorkCereal (Dec 28, 2013)

I'm about 170 and ride a 158 Templar. It's pretty stiff to me. I'm actually looking for something more playful. Where it excels is on the East coast hard pack and ice.


----------



## rpadc (Mar 10, 2014)

I wonder how much this dude weighs. This is the 2014 model though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NuDRryx1xA


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

He's 175lbs according to the ripsaw video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnoYCEayU4c


----------



## rpadc (Mar 10, 2014)

If he's bending a 158 Templar that much without any effort at 175lbs, that stick would be linguine under my weight.

Found a sweet deal on a Templar but now I'm swinging back towards The One.

Then I started looking into the Jibsaw and ruined my progress towards making a decision.


----------

