# "Wide" board doctrine - let's be mathematical



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

Has been widely discussed. not trying to revisit old topic but just looking at it from a different perspective.

1) obviously board manufacturer differ from another and even in the different models they sell in terms what they call "wide". e.g 2018 159W ww 263mm yes standard ww 264mm or 160 Salomon super 8 ww 264mm. wide waist width but no wide tag. Then you have 159W Yes basic ww 261mm and 158W Jones Explorer ww 262mm . 

2) Arbitrary recommendation of the magical size US 11. if you're in 10 or 10.5, you're in the grey zone, if you're 11 above, you'll need a wide board.

Then the same people recommending wide board based on the magical US11, are riding in long 159 or 162 board wearing a size 8.5 or size 9 boots.

3) the maths. Isn't it more scientific to compare boot size in mondo vs board waist width? (let's take tapering board out of the equation. too complicated)

https://snowboardbootsizer.com <= source of mondo size to snowboard boot size.


https://thegoodride.com/snowboard-reviews/jones-explorer-2016-2018-snowboard-review/

Video, James carved on it and felt 159 was the "right size" 
18+/-9 stance
size 9 riding 159 jones explorer of 254mm ww = 270mm boot - 254mm board = 16mm


2018 Jones Explorer Snowboard Review - The Angry Snowboarder
" Ripping super aggressive laid out Euro-carves was a dream on this board "
size 10 boot K2 (mental note poor reduced footprint but we won't change the formula)
21.5+/18- stance
280mm boot - 156 explorer ww 252mm = 28mm

the bigger the size difference, the more likely you'll have a toe drag.

https://snowboardingprofiles.com/jones-explorer-review-all-mountain-snowboard-reviews
first comments recommendation
user boot size 8.5. recommended him to use a 159 board
265mm boot - 254mm board = 11mm!
That's very wide! That's wider than a size 10 using a 158W of 18mm difference!

another user inquiry size US11 boot
If stance 15/15 , use 159 board
290mm boot = 254mm board = 36mm
If stance back foot straight-sh, use 161W
290mm boot - 264mm board = 26mm

US 11 boot 290mm - Jones explorer 158W 262mm = 28mm

Size 10 280mm - Explorer 158W 262mm = 18mm
Size 10 280mm - explorer 159 254mm = 26mm
Size 10 280mm - Salomon 160 264mm =16mm
size 10 280mm - Yes standard 159 261mm = 19mm

so if a size US 10 boot buys a Yes standard or Salomon super 8, shops do question that the board is wide. pick another brand that uses Wide tag, and you'll see the habit of "don't go wide" advice.


Jones recommendation on WW
https://issuu.com/zuzupopo/docs/jones_1819
page 46
US10-11 = 252-263mm

So yea. Just a perspective to consider. So it should be the foot size relative to board size, rather than a magical US11 go wide.


Maybe we should pool data on the size difference of boot and board waist of the users here. minimum criteria of 
1) board size must be good for them.
2) not a powder board i.e what's your groomers / daily driver WW.

Mine was 290mm boot - 253mm board = 37mm. Not a carver (yet). i am booting out already as I improved my technique. Current season boot down sized to US10. have yet to test the boot in action, but this should take my relative difference to 27mm.

Anyway, since I haven't seen it being expressed explicitly, just thought I'd share a random idea on "relative size difference" instead of magical 11 that shops love to use. Only a hint of "oh maybe you should use this ww, which alludes to it. 

what's the sweet spot range of relative boot difference? no idea.


----------



## taco tuesday (Jul 26, 2014)

I don't think it's really an exact science or mathematical equation. There is a lot more that goes into it than foot or boot size and waist width. Some of those factors are related to the board like flex, sidecut and camber profile. Other factors have to do with the rider like experience level, riding style, personal preferences. Yet more factors exist related to terrain and conditions a rider most frequently experiences in their given geographical location.


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

No idea what the what the actual number is? 

I like to be able to tilt my board on edge, with my boots in the bindings.
And have my board edge come to a 90 degree angle before I get boot out. 

Make sense? Haha. 


TT


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

timmytard said:


> No idea what the what the actual number is?
> 
> I like to be able to tilt my board on edge, with my boots in the bindings.
> And have my board edge come to a 90 degree angle before I get boot out.
> ...


Yea, I think i've read about the approach where the angle has to be at least 60 degrees. but that's something you can only measure if you setup the boot, bindings and board. It's harder to speculated as compared to boot size minus waist width size.


----------



## Rip154 (Sep 23, 2017)

Most of my boards are around 25mm ww/mondo. Have one thats 35mm. Dont have much heelouts since I got my bindings centered, aka swapped out Burton L for Bent Metal L (or Burton M for 3d setups, but they pinch my feet). Before that I would need down to 15mm, or Burton boots to avoid heelouts.

I think there should ideally be a backfoot measure, would include tapered boards too. 25mm vs ww is like the sweetspot for easy turning and strain I think, havent checked the backfoot measure. Front foot width doesnt matter much as its always equal or wider than back, and doesnt affect turning or strain, just taper/float.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Do you mount your board at the dead center of the waist? It's an unimportant number.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Doraibu said:


> Has been widely discussed. not trying to revisit old topic but just looking at it from a different perspective.
> what's the sweet spot range of relative boot difference? no idea.





taco tuesday said:


> I don't think it's really an exact science or mathematical equation. There is a lot more that goes into it than foot or boot size and waist width. Some of those factors are related to the board like flex, sidecut and camber profile. Other factors have to do with the rider like experience level, riding style, personal preferences. Yet more factors exist related to terrain and conditions a rider most frequently experiences in their given geographical location.


Dora...reductionist empiricism is generally clueless about real life. The sweet spot is based on what Taco notes. Btw, methought wide boards....but you don't list options for < 0...to which would be more applicable to the discussion of wide boards. To which, ime the past couple of years have been going wider, i.e., 24 mondo and 25-26mm wide boards.


----------



## Phedder (Sep 13, 2014)

You're forgetting sidecut, stance angle, and stance width, those all effect your width underfoot, you don't mount bindings at the waist. There's a lot of factors, the biggest one being personal preference.

You said consider your daily drivers, my most 'daily driver' is my Warpig, 270mm waist and I'm in a 9.5 boot so 275mm, 5mm difference. I had used a size 9 shell with a 9.5 liner, I'll probably try going back to that again next season if I can find a deal on the right 9s. For a more traditional board I spent most of the spring on a 157W Freethinker, 260mm, so a 15mm difference from my mondo boot size. Remember that's the length of the foot inside the boot, not the outer shell of the boot. For how I ride, I still boot out heelside at 260mm waist, and occasionally on the toes. Easier to recover from the toes, you can feel it catch it and have a split second to correct, heelside you're on your ass. I'd add 5-10mm of width to every board I own if I could, except for the Warpig.

For me turning them isn't a problem, a too wide board for someone is still rideable. Too narrow isn't. Once your boots hit the snow, you're done.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

Kind of cool taking such a mathematical approach. Math is a language I don't speak tho. My boots are usually around the 11 mark and I have 2 similar boards in a wide and regular I can compare. I have a couple of Libs: Dark Series 61W MTX pre bannas and a newer Darker Series 61 C3. I prefer the regular width by far because I want the edge to edge speed and I'll trade toe drag for it. The wide just felt way to sluggish for my preferred terrain which is pow in the trees. It's not that I could not use that board in the trees, it just took more effort, and I guess I'm a lazy rider. I also have kept a ~ 18/-15 stance since forever. I have always felt uncomfortable in a carver +/+ stance so never really experimented with the carver thing. I mean why ride groomers if there is powder somewhere?

Then you gotta factor in bindings. If you have some lift and toe ramps you reduce boot out significantly. 

I've also just got used to having toe drag over the years of riding as well I guess too. It's nothing some adjustments can't deal with. But it sure is nice having no boots sticking over my super wide YES 420.


----------



## drblast (Feb 28, 2017)

I'm Mondo 28 and typically ride +/-18.

The only boot out problems I have are in icy conditions where the heel loops or toe of my boots hit the ground and the board lifted up and lost contact. Most of the time a narrower width hasn't been that big a deal for me and I think the conditions and how you ride will determine if it's a big deal or not. 

That said, I'm really impressed with the Yes Optimistic 157 and the 157 Lib Lost Mayhem Rocket which are both pretty damn wide but still felt really easy to turn on groomers. And I love my 159w Mullair. So if I can, I'll buy a wide board because I don't really see any downside.

I think Ryan Knapton is onto something.


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

Interesting insights guys, thanks

Yea, there are so many variables like side cuts, tapered, boot footprint reduction etc and yes, bindings are not placed at the waist but you have to simplify things to make it easier to compare. I don't think the shops even consider those variables anyway when recommending. like i said, magic number 11. 

Waist width is at the dead centre of the board, and also the narrowest width in non tapered board. It's not the width where you place you bindings, but you can expect the board width to be wider than the WW under the binding. 
Not to mention, centred vs set back would place the binding at difference width as the board shape widens up (non tapered). Then there's sidecuts etc.

There's a reason why the industry decides to refer to the waist width when talking about board width in general. It keeps the conversation simple I guess. I say industry because shops, reviewers and even manufacturer uses waist width to help boarders on how to pick their board size. (look at the Jones, manufacturer, WW recommendation in the first post)

So once you have a rough idea what's your waist width range sweet spot, you can add other mental note on tapered, stance, side cut etc yourself. 
It's easier for reviewer to pick the best board for themselves because they have better access for trial. 
For mere mortals likes us? It's either demo day (which not all places have one, and if they do, may not have the board you are eyeing on or the size you have in mind) or friend's board, or just take the plunge.
Surely there's a better formula to predict the outcome if you're taking the plunge! 

I've been thinking about this relative difference for awhile. So I do find it weird when, some people discouraged a buyer from getting a wide board because it's a slow turn, and sluggish edge to edge. But then when you do the math on their own specs, you're like, hang on, you (recommenders) have small feet but are using a regular "non-wide" board which has a pretty big waist width in comparison to your foot size. You're actually happy using a "wide" board without realising it. 

So it's like an inconsistent advice because people get so hung up on the "wide board" label, instead of looking at the raw numbers itself.


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

wrathfuldeity said:


> .but you don't list options for < 0...to which would be more applicable to the discussion of wide boards. To which, ime the past couple of years have been going wider, i.e., 24 mondo and 25-26mm wide boards.


Didn't I? Less than zero is negative, which is option 1. As it's rather difficult to achieve negative number on non-custom board, i didn't list each negative breakdown e.g neg 4- neg 1, neg 9 to neg 5. 
Maybe I should but, I can't find the option to edit the polls , lol


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

Phedder said:


> You're forgetting sidecut, stance angle, and stance width, those all effect your width underfoot, you don't mount bindings at the waist. There's a lot of factors, the biggest one being personal preference.
> 
> You said consider your daily drivers, my most 'daily driver' is my Warpig, 270mm waist and I'm in a 9.5 boot so 275mm, 5mm difference. I had used a size 9 shell with a 9.5 liner, I'll probably try going back to that again next season if I can find a deal on the right 9s. For a more traditional board I spent most of the spring on a 157W Freethinker, 260mm, so a 15mm difference from my mondo boot size. Remember that's the length of the foot inside the boot, not the outer shell of the boot. For how I ride, I still boot out heelside at 260mm waist, and occasionally on the toes. Easier to recover from the toes, you can feel it catch it and have a split second to correct, heelside you're on your ass. I'd add 5-10mm of width to every board I own if I could, except for the Warpig.
> 
> For me turning them isn't a problem, a too wide board for someone is still rideable. Too narrow isn't. Once your boots hit the snow, you're done.


5mm?? Wow, that's really wide... I've read that you like wide boards, but didn't expect it to be that wide :surprise:
I'm sure you lay out a sick carve but you don't find it not too sluggish for quick turns/ going edge to edge/ tree runs ?


Yea it's easier to just stick to length of foot (mondo) rather than outer shell length. Too much variables and outer shell length is something you need to manually measure rather than on the label.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Most people that think they need a wide don't realize that waist widths have gotten wider in the last 10 years. What was considered a wide then is now a mid wide and what was considered a ultra wide is just wide. Most companies aren't even promoting that their decks are technically mid wides because there's this weird stigma from the 90's where wide boards were considered inferior and sluggish. Truth be told any wide counterpart is going to work exactly the same as its regular. 

3 things that matter when deciding if a board can carve or not. Weight, torsional flex of the board, stance width. That's it. I've ridden more boards than anyone on this planet and I can safely say that. I don't even look at a sidecut radius anymore. 

Also FYI when companies offer decks to me for review more than half the time you have no say in what length you get and even when you do that other half of the time about 25% of it they send you the wrong stuff. Thankfully I'm not an idiot and know how to ride as well as can objectively say "who would this be for", can't say that about The Good Ride, then again I can't say anything positive other than it looks like he finally figured out how to not skid turns.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Doraibu said:


> Didn't I? Less than zero is negative, which is option 1. As it's rather difficult to achieve negative number on non-custom board, i didn't list each negative breakdown e.g neg 4- neg 1, neg 9 to neg 5.
> Maybe I should but, I can't find the option to edit the polls , lol


Ya, I is a maths dingus...not genius. 

Your system is useful for mainly intermediate/advanced folks; for beginners...its wut are you talking about. And for seasoned/expert level folks there are more salient factors. As a small footed fat fuck there have been situations that 20mm wider difference was dreamy...but for daily drivers its 7-10mm


----------



## Phedder (Sep 13, 2014)

Doraibu said:


> 5mm?? Wow, that's really wide... I've read that you like wide boards, but didn't expect it to be that wide :surprise:
> I'm sure you lay out a sick carve but you don't find it not too sluggish for quick turns/ going edge to edge/ tree runs ?


The Warpig is a short fat so it's designed to be ridden wider, it's got a very tight sidecut and is quite stiff torsionally, so it's actually quite quick to tilt on edge, and once it is tilted properly, it engages and turns sharply. I had a 164W Burton Custom X that was 261mm. There's no way I would want to own that board at 270mm waist, too long, too stiff. Absolute blast on wide open groomers or steep faces, and I did take it into the trees, but I had to be on my game.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Boot: 24.5 mondo
Daily ride: Jones Flagship 154: 24.3ww -> 2mm
(That's _not_ a short-fat deck; just the weird circumstance that womens boards are _all_ wide; the Jones is among the rather narrow ones).

The shorties I ride are NS Maverix with 24.6ww -> -1mm
or Jones Hovy 24.7ww -> -2mm
so your poll should include minus numbers...


----------



## buller_scott (Jun 10, 2018)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Thankfully I'm not an idiot and know how to ride as well as can objectively say "who would this be for", can't say that about The Good Ride, then again I can't say anything positive other than it looks like he finally figured out how to not skid turns.


hey man that's not really fair - he also has lovely hair that is so nice that he can't go 5 seconds without touching it, in his reviews.


----------



## Jibsaw79 (May 24, 2018)

I have Mondo 28.0, and ride 15°/-15° with about 22" stance width
My Adidas Boots are the shortest with about 300mm
My Burton Ions are about 10mm longer

With the Adidas Boots I didn't have any boot-outs yet on boards with 252mm waist or above even when carving with my elbows on the snow or my straight arm on the snow behind my back when on the backside.
With the Burton Ions I often get boot outs riding the same maneuvers.

With wider boards over 258mm and the Adidas I can even carve with my shoulder or torso on the snow, when the snow has enough grip.

Almost every board is 10mm wider at the bindings than it is at the waist because of very similar sidecut radius of about 8m. You can calculate it with the sidecut radius and the stance width.

300-252 = 48mm is okay for me, 58mm is too low, 300-258 = 42mm is very good
300-10-252 at the bindings 38mm, so about 19mm overhang on each side is okay for me, for really deep carving about 16mm on each side.

I don't have any issues riding wideboards except for one board: Elan Crest 167 (270mm Waist) which felt like a barndoor. I had to manhandle the board on edge and through turns. My other wideboards feel nimble and almost effortless to ride (Birdman 170, T.Rice 161, Templar 156 Wide...)

For safety every snowboarder should get his straight arm easily on the slope, also on black ones, before he has a boot out. Because he can catch his fall and it does not hurt when the hand is already touching the slope. I switched boards with some women (240mm waist) and had bootouts without my hand on the slope. It really hurts to fall on the wrist or the knees from that high position onto hard slopes.


----------



## f00bar (Mar 6, 2014)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Most people that think they need a wide don't realize that waist widths have gotten wider in the last 10 years.


certainly true for me!!!


----------



## Deacon (Mar 2, 2013)

Way overthought. Hop on and rip it.


----------



## Rip154 (Sep 23, 2017)

I think this is a nice factor to consider. Saying it doesn't matter at all is oversimplifying. It all matters, but without enough experience you can't think of everything. Getting closer to this "sweetspot" when buying a board, ensures you will have a good time. Having boards with softer flex and narrower width makes them easier to turn at low speeds, so you don't discard them as "deathplanks". The narrower your stance is, the more you can let the board follow it's sidecut, and so the sidecut will matter more, but at the same time, a wider stance will give you some more leverage for manipulating the boards flex. If you can avoid booting out on carves, while at the same time keeping it as nimble as possible, it will be better. Of course, riding a board in powder, you can go wider without feeling tired, and the width will give you more float, but once you get on hard snow that changes. As with everything, that is also something you can get used to, but for an average weekend warrior, it's often unnecessary pain. For alot of boards, specially freeride, the focus is getting stiff boards while improving torsional flex, which is to make them easier to ride in challenging terrain without making them too narrow so you lose float, take Johan Olofssons work with Burton as an example. Boards have a better construction these days, and the focus on narrower boards doesn't need to be that high. With alpine boards you still want a board that is stiff as hell torsionally for stability through high speed turns, and as narrow you can get it to keep leverage.
I'm sure there's something to pick apart here, but if I knew everything, I wouldn't have bothered reading the thread.


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

wrathfuldeity said:


> Ya, I is a maths dingus...not genius.
> 
> Your system is useful for mainly intermediate/advanced folks; for beginners...its wut are you talking about. And for seasoned/expert level folks there are more salient factors. As a small footed fat fuck there have been situations that 20mm wider difference was dreamy...but for daily drivers its 7-10mm


Expert riders already know what they want and need, yes. Intermediate-advance riders are probably the target audience. They are 
- moving away from their first gears; ill sized boots and boards.
- likely to buy a few more boards while figuring out what suites them best
- the ones who are asking for board size recommendations in the forums.

As mentioned, in an ideal world, everyone gets to test ride multiple boards before purchase. In reality, you're more likely to simply gamble on board size at the shop/ online. So the more comparative data available to the community the better 



neni said:


> Boot: 24.5 mondo
> Daily ride: Jones Flagship 154: 24.3ww -> 2mm
> (That's _not_ a short-fat deck; just the weird circumstance that womens boards are _all_ wide; the Jones is among the rather narrow ones).
> 
> ...


It does. Pick option one. (negative is minus btw. otherwise it's too late to change the poll)



Jibsaw79 said:


> Almost every board is 10mm wider at the bindings than it is at the waist because of very similar sidecut radius of about 8m. You can calculate it with the sidecut radius and the stance width.


Your observation is similar to snowboardingprofile 
https://snowboardingprofiles.com/how-important-is-snowboard-width-sizing-and-how-do-i-get-it-right
In his observation 
#sidecut radius

252 waist width at 6.5m sidcut radius = 263 at insert

252 waist with a 9m sidecut = 260mm at insert


----------



## The Chairman (Aug 17, 2009)

Great to see this thread. I'm a firm believer in wider boards, have mad respect for Ryan Knapton and what he's doing to progress snowboarding. I've been a proponent here at Never Summer Industries on making wider boards and we're working on some even wider models in the future. I believe people riding boards that are to narrow for their boot size is holding back progression. Most riders I see on the mountain are riding with too much overhang. I think it's holding people back from really being able to angulate and really lean a board over and truly "Euro carve". You have to eliminate toe and heel cup drag. My background from when I really started to carve was on plate bindings and race boards. With boards like these you can't have any overhang or drag. So, I'm acustomed to riding with no overhang. With soft boot carving, I spent many years grinding off toe and heel soles of boots. I feel by starting to ride mid-wide boards in 2014 (Chairman 161X & later Swift 162) I'm carving harder then ever before, even more so then being on plates etc. I'm currently riding boards with 26.2 & 27.0 waist width, but I have a 10.5 boot and ride pretty angled stance. I think we need to offer some wider boards for people with that 11.5+ boot size to allow them to breakthrough and the ability to truly carve on a snowboard.


Carving is so addicting and even when I found conditions not ideal for it, I still find myself trying to lay out turns. I really look forward to working on really pressing into heel-side turns. I want to be able to drag my ass on every heel-side turn, no matter what the angle of the slope.


----------



## drblast (Feb 28, 2017)

The Chairman said:


> I think we need to offer some wider boards for people with that 11.5+ boot size to allow them to breakthrough and the ability to truly carve on a snowboard.


Hey The Chairman, I've got a wide split West and a non-wide Twenty Five, and they're kick ass boards. It's good to hear you guys are paying attention to width; even the ___X boards from Never Summer aren't wiiiiide.


----------



## The Chairman (Aug 17, 2009)

drblast said:


> Hey The Chairman, I've got a wide split West and a non-wide Twenty Five, and they're kick ass boards. It's good to hear you guys are paying attention to width; even the ___X boards from Never Summer aren't wiiiiide.


:thumbsup:


----------



## deagol (Mar 26, 2014)

I actually got a chance to ride (albeit in crappy snow conditions) with Ryan Knapton this past year late in the season. He also uses 2 additional shin straps duct-taped to his highbacks...
Never got a chance to see him lay it down hard due to the snow (it was like choppy compacted slush) but was interesting to see that setup. and yes, the board is quite wide.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

deagol said:


> He also uses 2 additional shin straps duct-taped to his highbacks...


Old school early 90's style! Remember the old Burton Torque style bindings that were around during one of the earlier "Wide Waves"?


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

Wiredsport said:


> Old school early 90's style! Remember the old Burton Torque style bindings that were around during one of the earlier "Wide Waves"?


I just had a mint pair of those.
Sold em less than a month ago. 

They may be old, but old dudes still want em haha. 

I also have Burton's only adjustable heel cup bindings. 
And a pair of the OG X-Base? Carbon fiber adjustable heel cup bindings.. 
I have no knowledge on the last ones. 
I'd never seen em before. 
Very weird looking & uncomfortable looking lol. 


TT


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

These weird looking things. 
I think you have to open the heelcup to adjust the forward lean? 
Not sure but they look like they'd explode haha


Burton X-Base - BluSource Energy, Inc


TT

The base plate is only about 3mm thick. 
The heelcup is thin plastic, with steel banding supporting it. 

Wonder how many exploded before they packed er in? 
All of em I'm thinking lol


----------



## deagol (Mar 26, 2014)

Wiredsport said:


> Old school early 90's style! Remember the old Burton Torque style bindings that were around during one of the earlier "Wide Waves"?


Yes, I remember the Burton highback shin-straps. RK's were not that clean, lots of black duct tape going on and there were 2 shin straps, instead of just one


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Occasionally, I will use a velcro power strap off an old pair of ski boots. Just weave through the highback and around the boot...usually just on the leading boot/binding.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

wrathfuldeity said:


> Occasionally, I will use a velcro power strap off an old pair of ski boots. Just weave through the highback and around the boot...usually just on the leading boot/binding.


One of the reasons people liked (and possibly still like) the old Torque bindings is that the highback locked to the heelcup making it essentially fused. That allowed riders to lift the heel edge with less effort. That was helpful with the Wider boards that were popular back then and also because all boards of that generation had less refined flex and lean was much more of a factor even in normal width boards. It makes sense that we would see variations of this now on wide boards to help add some leverage back into the equation.


----------



## f00bar (Mar 6, 2014)

I'd be happy that finally my boots would match the shoes I show up and leave in.


----------



## Tom James (Feb 8, 2018)

I'm an advanced rider (but not expert) and ex-instructor. With a MP27.5 I can't carve aggressively on my 26.5 waist width board (stance +21/+6) and have a lot of trouble with boot out doing short turns and side hits in softer and slushy conditions. I've been slowly getting wider boards and think I'll be on a 28/28.5 next. I think people in general ride boards that are much too narrow and snowboard shops seem to always recommend narrow boards so it's very hard to get good info when buying a board... I think a pretty good general rule for an intermediate rider is a board that their barefoot doesn't overhang at the inserts, especially if they want to learn how to carve.


----------



## Rip154 (Sep 23, 2017)

When ppl are talking about extreme aggressive carving, is it making tight controlled turns at high speed, or bellyflopping across groomed slopes mostly?


----------



## Tom James (Feb 8, 2018)

there's is a pretty good video on youtube called 'snowboard carving style' by kagayaki326 that is what I would call aggressive carving. can't post the link sorry


----------



## Seppuccu (Dec 4, 2012)

Tom James said:


> there's is a pretty good video on youtube called 'snowboard carving style' by kagayaki326 that is what I would call aggressive carving. can't post the link sorry


Here you go:





Those are pretty damn wide boards...


----------



## Doraibu (Aug 13, 2017)

Tom James said:


> I'm an advanced rider (but not expert) and ex-instructor. With a MP27.5 I can't carve aggressively on my 26.5 waist width board (stance +21/+6) and have a lot of trouble with boot out doing short turns and side hits in softer and slushy conditions. I've been slowly getting wider boards and think I'll be on a 28/28.5 next. I think people in general ride boards that are much too narrow and snowboard shops seem to always recommend narrow boards so it's very hard to get good info when buying a board... I think a pretty good general rule for an intermediate rider is a board that their barefoot doesn't overhang at the inserts, especially if they want to learn how to carve.


And yet there are a lot of board reviews reporting they euro carved on a board that's too narrow for their boot size...


----------



## Tom James (Feb 8, 2018)

Doraibu said:


> And yet there are a lot of board reviews reporting they euro carved on a board that's too narrow for their boot size...


Yeah i know haha. I guy in a snowboard shop tried to sell my a a 26cm waist width board a few weeks ago saying it was the best board he had ridden for euro carving, he had size 12 boots... So much misinformation around about board sizing - at least people are getting more aware about boot sizing, although most of the shops near me still don't stock half sizes


----------

