# Men's Board vs Women's Board



## Romel (Dec 2, 2010)

So this season, possibly next season I'll be upgrading my board. At the moment I ride an '03 Burton Custom 158. I'm 5'7, 150lbs. So yea, I believe it was a bit big for me, but I still loved it. I ride all mountain a little bit of park so I'm hoping the lib tech TRS, maybe T.Rice pro, would be perfect for me. Any opinions?

Anyhow, back to the main topic. Once I do upgrade my board my wife was interested in taking over my Burton. She's 5'7, 135lbs. She's not a very good rider as she's only went out a handful of times. So would my old board work out for her? I'm not sure if there would be a difference between my board and a woman's board? I'll guess that the board is waaaaaaay to big for her, but I don't know. 

What do you guys think?


----------



## david_z (Dec 14, 2009)

no chance in hell.

You admit that the board is "too big for you" and you outweigh her by 15 pounds plus whatever difference in musculature inheres between men/women. And her feet will probably be too small to optimally pressure the edges on a men's board of that legnth. What makes you think that this would be a good option for her???

A 158cm board is massive for a woman. I'd wager most manufacturers don't even make women's boards that long and those boards are designed with the female frame in mind. Your '03 custom isn't designed with a 135 pound chick in mind. She needs a woman's board or a much shorter men's board.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

I don´t know your wife´s riding but I´d like to point out:
I´m 5´8 130lbs and I´ve been riding a Salomon Burner 157 since day 13.
This season I got myself a 159 Atomic. and my wife has declared she is keeping my Salomon, she loves it! 
She is 5´6 and weighs the same. 
Women specific boards are just marketing BS. Putting girly graphics on a perfect board for light weights. Not all girls are into girly graphics either. Stiffness is a personal choice. We like stiff boards.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

The Burner 157 we ride has 25.3 mm waist width. Our boot size is US 7.5 mens. 
It is difficult to find longer boards for smaller people without the nose/waist width progressively getting wider. I´d like to get a 161 and most boards go to 25.7 at that length. There are some that fits our requirements.


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

nimbin said:


> Women specific boards are just marketing BS. Putting girly graphics on a perfect board for light weights. Not all girls are into girly graphics either. Stiffness is a personal choice. We like stiff boards.


You sir, are stuck in 1999. :thumbsdown:

OP: david_z has it right. If it's too big for you, then it's definitely too big for her. Although women can ride men's boards, a women's board would be softer, come in smaller sizes, and have a smaller waist width.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

And you are sucked in by marketing. 
There are perfectly good boards from 5 years ago. 
Done any research on board make and width? Do you know that specs change year to year even on one model ? 
Like I said, stiffness is a personal choice. I fully recommend softer flex for a beginner, and I myself contemplated buying a women´s model. yeah, shitty graphics. But now we like stiff in the tail softer in the nose boards. 
I don´t think you know what your talking about and giving presumed ideas most people think as logical. If you have read my post, I stated facts from our personal experience. Are you our size anyway?


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

I´ll give you a good example. 

Rome Vinyl 2005 directional twin with setback, good all round board, heaps of pop, handles powder, etc. Very light. No girly graphics. for both sex. Transworld good wood. We have one. 

Rome Vinyl for the last few years, turned in to a twin tip center stanced, girly graphics women´s board. Don´t see many girls riding it.

ain´t no 1999.


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

"And you are sucked in by marketing." Not really. When I said that you were stuck in 1999, I meant that the days of shrink and pink are over. Many companies are making boards with women's needs in mind, employing female research teams. I did not mean that boards haven't changed since then.

"There are perfectly good boards from 5 years ago." True. 

"Done any research on board make and width? Do you know that specs change year to year even on one model?"
Uh. Yes. I'm not a fucking moron.

"Like I said, stiffness is a personal choice." No shit

"Are you our size anyway?" What is it with "us"? Apparently, you and your wife are the same height and weight, with the same strengths, have the same boot size, ride the same boards, and have the same flex preferences. That's....weird.... Regardless, I'm 5' tall, so I doubt you are my size.

And the Vinyl's a great board. I often recommend it for progressing female riders.


----------



## jkc350z (Jan 30, 2010)

Romel said:


> So this season, possibly next season I'll be upgrading my board. At the moment I ride an '03 Burton Custom 158. I'm 5'7, 150lbs. So yea, I believe it was a bit big for me, but I still loved it. I ride all mountain a little bit of park so I'm hoping the lib tech TRS, maybe T.Rice pro, would be perfect for me. Any opinions?
> 
> Anyhow, back to the main topic. Once I do upgrade my board my wife was interested in taking over my Burton. She's 5'7, 135lbs. She's not a very good rider as she's only went out a handful of times. So would my old board work out for her? I'm not sure if there would be a difference between my board and a woman's board? I'll guess that the board is waaaaaaay to big for her, but I don't know.
> 
> What do you guys think?


This board will be way too big for her. I am personally 5' 10" and I ride a 152 Sierrascope and a 153 Never Summer Evo. I would never ride a 158...I think it would be too big.

I recently got a Gnu B-Nice 148 for my gf...she is 5'7" 130-135 lbs. You should check it out. We got the 2010 version for $260. I really think this is a huge bang for your buck for the progressing female ride. Spend the extra bucks and get something thats right for her. Her riding will love it later....good luck!


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

If your lady is built like the Amazonian ladies, then toss her a men's board overhand and call it a day.

If she's more petite, she will no doubt benefit from a woman's specific board. I'm small and I like my board light, quick, and narrow, with stiffness when I need it, and softness when I don't. It's a lot to ask for, but there are boards that can do it. The NS Infinity is my stick. She's a beauty. My sister is around 5'6", 130lbs, and she likes being on a 149.

It's preference. Put her on the board. If she likes it, hurray! If she's struggling to turn the effing thing, then you have your answer.


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

I'm with lilfoot on this one. If your girl is looking to progress as a rider, I would get her a nice woman specific board. They DO make boards that are stiffer in the female category. Sure, she may be able to ride your old Custom, but I'm almost positive she won't be able to make the leaps and bounds in progression that you did on it, assuming you did so... I'm not trying to stir up the shit storm, but who doesn't love taking a new board out for the first time and making it their bitch after a few runs?! :thumbsup:


----------



## david_z (Dec 14, 2009)

)(ood said:


> I'm not trying to stir up the shit storm, but who doesn't love taking a new board out for the first time and making it their bitch after a few runs?! :thumbsup:


 neither am I - I just think that putting the wife on an 8-year old plank that's way too long for her (by any brand's suggested size charts) when she's a "not very good rider" is a bad idea that's all.


----------



## )(ood (Aug 19, 2010)

david_z said:


> neither am I - I just think that putting the wife on an 8-year old plank that's way too long for her (by any brand's suggested size charts) when she's a "not very good rider" is a bad idea that's all.


I agree man. I'm mostly referring to the obscenities and personal attacks as the "shit storm"


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Obscenities and personal attacks? What r u talking about? You are taking it wrong. Sorry if you get that impression but not my fault.
The point is : I feel that a lot of people and marketing suggest to people to get shorter boards. It´s not all about board length. You got to look at width and your boot size, too. And regardless of how much experience people have they don´t make that connection because they are set in their own thinking. 
I have an Atomic Radon CT and it´s wide. 4mm more waist makes a big difference. It´s great in powder and carves well in hardpack provided the surface is smooth. When it gets bumpy, the wider nose picks them up and it becomes difficult. I have a 22 stance and my bindings are at max stance. If there was a hole to the nose, I´d love to move it. 
There are new boards out there marketed as powder specific, like Malolo, CharlieSlasher, Hovercraft, but they are just shorter wider boards. Great if you got the money to buy them, and if you are a heavier guy, I´m sure it´s attractiveness is about being a shorter board around 157. But My thinkings is, I have a US7.5 mens feet and I can ride a mid-wide board at this length with a big set back, not necessary new technology, and have myself a powder board.
It works. You can get a old board and cut a V in the tail (cut the edge with a hacksaw first before using power tools). You get a swallowtail. You can sink you tail to get a pivot in powder so the nose lifts. Don´t need Rocker in this case. 
The other way is for me to go longer keeping the narrow waist and nose but let the length give you float in pow and the effective edge for icy situations. Not to mention stability for speed.
I agree, it´s all personal choice and that is the reason I made this post. If you like your boards short, sweet as... If you try a new board, ie)longer, don´t expect to make a big leap just because of that. It took me a week to adjust from 151 to 157, but my wife dunnit in 2 days. Not about muscle, either. 
I don´t care if you agree with me or not, but it´s my personal experience, and if this gives some people to have a new look at board specs and your option, different way to think, I am happy for that. 
Brain storm. No shit storm.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Not to jack the thread but I wonder what the OP´s wife is riding now? 

We have 4 boards amongst us 151 ~ 159 in length. 
Don´t believe one board can do it all..

Rome Vinyl 151 2005
Santa Cruz TT Fusion 151 2006
Salomon Burner 157 2008
Atomic Radon CT 159 2008 

All bought as previous years´ stock. 
Don´t believe in manufacturers´ size charts either. If I did, I´d be riding women´s boards myself ( actually I lost weight, 120lbs at the mo) :laugh:
Seriously, I look for boards that gives me options to move my bindings. For example, Jone´s solution. max stance 28in. Very few people have a max stance of 28 but this will give me a lot of options for moving my binding. 
When I first bought 151 boards, I had to look for boards that had more than 22 in stance width. I had a rental board for two days in the beginning and worked out that´s what I wanted. 
You think board manufactures would know with their research team etc... NOT! Because it´s a short board doesn´t mean one has a narrow stance width.


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

nimbin said:


> I don´t know your wife´s riding but I´d like to point out:
> I´m 5´8 130lbs and I´ve been riding a Salomon Burner 157 since day 13.
> This season I got myself a 159 Atomic. and my wife has declared she is keeping my Salomon, she loves it!
> She is 5´6 and weighs the same.
> Women specific boards are just marketing BS. Putting girly graphics on a perfect board for light weights. Not all girls are into girly graphics either. Stiffness is a personal choice. We like stiff boards.


I'm calling Bullshit on you Broski.

Let me just give you one example and don't question my credibility, I'm surrounded by people who visit R&D facilities of many snowboard, ski, and other sports brands. I have seen plenty of videos (taken by our employees) of these places too.

Our board buyer, who is female by the way, visited K2/Ride's facility. First of all, they share the same building, but the R&D for each brand is totally separate.

She was invited to be a female tester for their prototypes. She saw the design and manufacturing process first hand. Female boards are designed specifically for females. Lighter, softer, more narrow, different flex pattern. The flex pattern is different because women have a different center of gravity so obviously the leveraging is different from a male's. Ride even employs a female designer. They take input only from female riders. No male testers whatsoever.

The reason why your wife can ride your board and love it is because in the end, any rider can enjoy any board if they want to. So why design a female specific board anyway then? Because the intent is to optimize the ride as much as possible for the female rider.

Hell, women could use male cologne if they want and still smell good. But why would they when there are fragrances for women? You know, all that sugary plant life smelling stuff.

So yea OP, your 135lb wife with whatever foot size can ride your 158 Custom... heck, she might even love it. But, especially if she is learning, she is going to have a better time on a board designed specifically for her body type and gender.

Nimbin, you are flat out wrong with your assumptions. As for manufacturer's size charts, they are important mostly for beginning riders. Also, they are not absolute and there are exceptions. You sound like you are one of those exceptions. I'm guessing that you are tall for your 120lb frame. This is an instant when height does come into board sizing for three reasons:

1) Boards in the 120lb weight range won't always accommodate a stance for someone that is say 5'11

2) Even though someone is 120lbs, they will have considerable leverage at 5'11 over a board in say a 151cm size causing it to flex softer than intended

3) Being really tall for your weight can also mean that you have big feet so a small board built for your weight might be too narrow for your foot size

Again, none of this matters in the end especially for experienced riders. We can adjust to any type of board. I'm sure those of us that are experienced could detach our front doors, cut a half-assed snowboard shape out of it, mount some bindings, and start riding. This is likely not going to be the same story for a beginner. Sure, a 135lb woman can learn on a mens 158 stiff board, but I'm sure she will have a better and easier time learning on a womens 152ish softer board.

Here's another analogy for this:

Why give a driver's ed student a Ferrari or Hummer to learn on when you could give them a Civic? Don't you think it would much easier for them to learn how to drive in a Civic? I've been driving for over 11 years. I can drive any production car now just fine. When I was learning, I had the misfortune of driving my parent's massive Town Car. Parallel parking that boat was not fun. It was much easier in my friend's Civic.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Quote/ Female boards are designed specifically for females. Lighter, softer, more narrow, different flex pattern. The flex pattern is different because women have a different center of gravity so obviously the leveraging is different from a male's. /unquote

That´s bollocks. Women´s center of gravity being different to mens. Pure rubbish, generalised.
Bend your knees and your center of gravity will drop close to the board.
Your center of gravity falls somewhere in between your legs, and it changes by slope angle and you can change it.

The reason that having female testers are their keen sensitivity. When you don´t have the weight to muscle things, you do things differently. 
That´s my point. I totally agree by optimising the equipment.
That means - The boards should not be a male/ female thing.
There are light weight people regardles of sex, and I certainly think it would be a benefit, when that classification is broken. Nothing wrong about women desighning for light weight males IMHO. :laugh:

The only women´s specific equipment should be boots. Different anatomy, ankle and calf shape. 
But then again, people have all sorts of shape.


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

nimbin said:


> That´s bollocks. Women´s center of gravity being different to mens. Pure rubbish, generalised.


Wow, I think I'm done debating with you haha. I can't believe you just made that comment. I suggest you look up some human anatomy. You should have learned about this difference in center of gravity in basic biology. Hell, I learned it in 8th grade science.

Do this with your wife...

Get a chair, make sure the back of the chair is no higher than waist level. Put it against a wall. Stand in front of the wall facing it, and bend down at 90 degrees and have the top of your head resting against the wall. Pick up the chair and without bending your knees or dropping the chair back down, stand upright. Remember, don't bend your knees or anything like that, just lift your body straight up while still holding the chair up.

Have your wife do the same then tell me the results.

By the way, what experience are you speaking from? I guess all those facilities and tours are bullocks. Companies love wasting money on seperate R&D for women specific gear.


----------



## Romel (Dec 2, 2010)

Wow, lots of opinions on this. I appreciate every pov on it! I guess when it comes down to it she can try my old plank and see what she thinks. If it's a no-go, we'll get her a new board.

She was riding random boards this whole time. Just whatever board she could get her hands on for the day. I'm sure that's a huge reason why she hasn't really progressed. Once we get her on a stick meant just for her I'm sure she'll come up nicely though. 

So, to continue the thread, any cheaper boards out there that would do her well? Again, she's 5'7 135ish lbs, size 8 men's boot... not sure what the equivelant would be to women's sizes :dunno:


----------



## jkc350z (Jan 30, 2010)

Romel said:


> Wow, lots of opinions on this. I appreciate every pov on it! I guess when it comes down to it she can try my old plank and see what she thinks. If it's a no-go, we'll get her a new board.
> 
> She was riding random boards this whole time. Just whatever board she could get her hands on for the day. I'm sure that's a huge reason why she hasn't really progressed. Once we get her on a stick meant just for her I'm sure she'll come up nicely though.
> 
> So, to continue the thread, any cheaper boards out there that would do her well? Again, she's 5'7 135ish lbs, size 8 men's boot... not sure what the equivelant would be to women's sizes :dunno:


GNU B-Nice...my local shop as has it for $255 right now. Its the 2010 model and graphics are a bit odd...but you cannot beat it for the tech GNU puts into them. Banana tech, magnetraction, etc. Soft flex, hand-made, and durable. Can't go wrong. Good luck. Your girl's also go some pretty large feet for her size...make sure you are getting the right boot size and waist width of the board.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

She should go and demo some boards, esp higher end ones. The pros she can progress into taking advantage of the better design/specs. The cons she might not be able to appreciate the better design/specs of it. The past few years my board was a women's Option Trinity 158 due to my small feet...men's 6.5 to 7 ...5'6" and 180#, its the women's version of the Vinson (discontinued in 2005). First year that board kicked my ass til I became aggressive enough (2nd year) to ride it instead of it taking me for a ride...its a great board, love it...its beastly and imho any woman that can ride that thing is a monster rider. Anyway the more experienced/skills the less the design of the board factors in...however with more experience you develop preference for different design aspects to better take advantage of what you want to do. OTOH folks learn with what the got and on the terrain they have available, i.e., you are what you ride...terrain and board.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

jkc350z said:


> GNU B-Nice...my local shop as has it for $255 right now. Its the 2010 model and graphics are a bit odd...but you cannot beat it for the tech GNU puts into them. Banana tech, magnetraction, etc. Soft flex, hand-made, and durable. Can't go wrong. Good luck. Your girl's also go some pretty large feet for her size...make sure you are getting the right boot size and waist width of the board.


I used the 2008 155? gnu b nice, used $50...for groomer days last year, 2008 was last year for the cambered version with mag...really fun board. Sadly the first day out this year, I snapped the tail.


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

I'm going to have to agree with Leo.
I've misplaced all my anatomy credentials at the moment, but the main on I have is that I am a woman. And having a different pelvic structure, I would more than assume, would make my center of gravity different than my boyfriend's.

I rode a couple men's boards. When I switched to women's specific boards it was night and day. You can argue all you want, but this is coming from a woman who experienced both sides of the coin.

I can get on my man's new Lib 154, but no part of me would be comfortable. Maybe in 4 feet of powder, but if I were learning on his board, forget it!

It's not just marketing crap. As a female rider, I WANT women's specific gear. I wish more companies put more into their women's gear. I am constantly disappointed. It has taken me some four years to hunt down the gear that works for me, and my current set ups are women's boards with men's bindings.

That's like suggesting that there should be no difference between men's and women's undergarments.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

Well, I rode a girls board. The girl is an inch shorter than me but lighter. Its a 154 cm womans board. Lets just say: It was not a great ride. Doable but basically like riding a kids bike. And in powder in was just sinking and had no real control. No rise, nothing. Had to lean waaay back to get going, else the nose would dig in.

I imangine for her it would be the same just the other way around. Kinda like riding a bike thats way to big. Doable, but not very agile. On the other hand, a big stable platform without wax may be great! For about a day or 2.


----------



## MistahTaki (Apr 24, 2010)

as long as it slides it rides


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

MistahTaki said:


> as long as it slides it rides


That's what she said.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Let me get something straight.
What Leo and Starcommand is saying is that boards are designed by parameters such as:
1)difference in body´s center of gravity (what ever that is?) that is different between sexes.
2)Pelvic structure 
I seriously doubt that. 

Let me put an example of what might be more relevant than comparing cars driving and snowboarding, Driving cars have nothing to do with moving your centre of gravity or bending knees.:laugh:
Example is Wung-shu kung fu. Originally developed by two females. Does that make Wung-shu female specific? NO. 
Martial arts and snowboarding have something in common. That is developing awareness of your own body, bringing the center to your naval region. Since no one has the same body proportion and bone mass etc, The issue is not about difference of center of gravity. Your posture, how you stand itself can change that. 
Since it has a lot to do with how we feel, your taste in style, I suggest we refrain from psuedo-science arguments to sound things creditable.
I get the feeling Leo is confusing upperbody strength, which body muscle is more developed generally in sexes, with center of gravity. 
That´s a physics term. Are you saying that a difference in upperbody mass and lower body becomes a parameter for snowboard design? Nothing to do with anatomy. Because it´s up to us how we use our given body. 

Since you may be more convinced by recommendations given by manufacturers, how´s this. 

Arbor Element 157 suggested rider weight 122 lbs - 202 lbs
tip 29.5 waist 25.2 tail 29,5 
Arbor Element 161 rider weight 130 lbs - 210 lbs 
tip 29.9 waist 29.4 tail 29.4 

Salomon Burner 160 rider weight 120 -164lbs 
tip 29.7 waist 25.1 tail 28.9

The flex rating is 5, and I went to a shop tonight to check it out. Not stiff at all. They are intermediate freeride boards.
My Salomon Burner is flex rating 9. 
It is interesting to note that a lot of manufacturers are making softer flex on boards this size. That is a development. I wouldn´t have been able to find that 3,4 years ago. 
That is good but also it would be great if they kept and offered stiffer versions, too. 

Since my argument is about 157-160 size boards are not too big (yes, big but good max length) and there are boards designed for my body and boot size, regardless of which sex, including OP and my wife, etc...
And I am glad that we can get a great board from Top manufactures without this marketing BS :thumbsup:


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Seasoned/experienced/aggressive women and men do ride differently....why, I don't know. Generally women are smoother and more finesse, while men are more angular and do power slashing; neither style is better or worse, just different. My daughter has been riding as long as I and at about 4 years ago started to be able to bomb past my geriatric ass; she is way more smooth, faster acceleration and seems to float down the hill at warp factor speed, while I am riding at the point of being out of control and feels like I'm just holding on...its been at least 2 years since I have been able to beat her to the chair.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Smooth is fast. It´s cool. Jerry Lopez on snow. 
Funny that, my missus is a better rider than I. And, she hates to ride like a chick. She´s beginning to crank it up. She´s got stronger legs than I, and now has my Burner. She was riding a 151 last season. I´m casing her now, :laugh:


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

You have your own experiences, which are valid, but just because something is true for you doesn't mean it's true for all. 

If you don't believe us when we talk about a woman's center of gravity (due to the difference in pelvic structure), fucking Google it. Seriously. It's all there.

Not only do women have a different center of gravity, they also tend to be weaker, smaller, and less willing to take risks. Although these generalizations don't hold true for every women, this does tend to be the case. So...different boards are produced for a different clientele.

Anyway, if female-specific boards is a marketing ploy, why are they less expensive than men's boards? If there is a marketing ploy in place, wouldn't they be MORE expensive?
Case in point: Never Summer SL retails for just over $500. The women's version (Infinity) retails for around $450. Say what?






nimbin said:


> Let me get something straight.
> What Leo and Starcommand is saying is that boards are designed by parameters such as:
> 1)difference in body´s center of gravity (what ever that is?) that is different between sexes.
> 2)Pelvic structure
> ...


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

You keep trying to argue that women don't need women specific boards and shouldn't want them because your wife rides a men's board.

I want a women's specific board. It's not a marketing ploy if there's a market for it. If all the boards were unisex, I would still wonder where the women-friendly technology was.

Leo is right about center of gravity, whether or not you decide to believe science.
Center of Gravity

A woman's center of gravity is lower than a man's. It's science. And it's because women's lower bodies are built bigger and stronger than men's because we have to carry around effing babies in our guts for nine months and then push them out.

Just because your lady likes men's boards doesn't mean it's not beneficial for someone else.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Ok 
this is interesting.
I learnt something about center of body. Thanks :thumbsup:

Some points. We are talking generalization. 
Starcommand, I can take it that from your statement, women have stronger core strength and lower body. In that case if you do actually ride using those assets, wouldn´t you be riding differently? more powerful than men, without using so much upper body strength? Wanting a stiffer board? haha ! That´s how my missus rides. Like I said, *It would be so good to see same shape, choices in flex. Would be great if we can pick the graphics. *

IMHO, *It doesn´t matter if someone has a lower center of gravity than another. *
ie) (a)someone with a shorter leg (b) racial feature (c)body shaped from what you have been doing....
My point is that *WHEN YOU BEND YOUR LEG YOUR CENTER DROPS*
You find boarding without much legs bend more relaxing, that´s fine. 
Equally if you board using your upper body (Nth.American style) no probs. You do what you like. Personal style. 
*I don´t have a problem about your consumer choices. Buy what you like*. I´m sure that how company sells things, by feeling out how to promote their goods, *so they sell*.
But if you read what you have written, don´t you agree that because of this marketing ploy that is " *Female designed female specific boards that are 50 dollars cheaper*" idea appeals to you more and consequently narrows your purchase choice? Compare to " *Female designed soft flex boards for lightweight people *

No nose/waist/tail width or flex, effective edge length, sidecurve radius difference between the two. 

I´m not interested in arguing with you lot. I have presented points of argument. Believe in what you like. This is not about right or wrong. Just perspective.


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

Nice Nimbin, you ventured into another territory where I have experience... Martial Arts. I have 9 years of Tae Kwon Do experience and have been practicing my own style since I quit that discipline when I was 14.

Your analogy does not work here because Martial Arts is about controlling your own body. In snowboarding, you are relying on a board to keep you above the snow and moving downhill. 

You are trying make it seem like all of us are trying to say that Women can't use Men's boards. This is not the case. They absolutely can. What we are trying to say is that there are boards specifically made for them that will most likely make their riding more enjoyable.

Even in Martial Arts now and in history, there are weapons made specifically for females. Female ninjas, Kunoichi, used cat claws which were long fingernails made of iron. They also used to dress as Geisha and used those paper fans that had blades attached. Sure, they used male weapons too, but these female specific weapons enabled them to take full advantage of being a female. 

Sorry for my rant... I love debating 

As for why and how a board is designed for lower center of gravity... Simple... the flex is more forgiving on female boards. This is due to women generally being weaker and having a lower center of gravity. Having a lower center of gravity means you have less leverage over the board which coupled with the fact that they are generally weaker, makes it that much more difficult to flex the board.

Think of it this way... A see-saw with a higher mid-point will teeter at a wider angle than one with a lower mid-point. Flip that see-saw upside-down and you have yourself a male vs a female snowboarder. The male having a higher center will have more leverage and will be able to flex and lift their nose/tail higher than a female on the same board.

In the end, we are both right Nimbin. You are correct in your assumption that females can certainly use mens equipment. You are however incorrect about female specific designs being purely marketing hype (a level of marketing factors in regardless of gender). Women don't need women's specific boards. A really athletic and experienced female snowboarder needs it even less. But the option is there. Just like women can wear a guy's jeans, but they have the option to wear girl's jeans which are more fitted to their body shape.

Some reading:
http://www.winterfeelsgood.com/winterfeelsgood.php?section=sports&page=buy_w_board_tips
http://www.the-house.com/portal/why-buy-women’s-specific-snowboard-hardgoods/

Also, you say your wife loves your board. I dare you to buy her a good quality womens board fit for her measurements and then tell me what she thinks. You have the female riders on these forums telling you first hand they stick to womens boards.

I am surrounded by female shredders in my work and I only know one who rides a mens board, the Skate Banana. However, she loves good womens boards like the Feelgood as well. She is a park rider and is really good so she is one of those athletic experienced riders I mentioned above. One fact does remain though, all of these ladies recommend womens board to other female riders. None of them go around telling a female rider to buy a mens board.


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

Here's a clear example for you. Shay from shayboarder.com is a rider who provides some of the best snowboard reviews I've ever seen. She is an experienced rider who gets in more than 100 days a year. She is active in the industry, traveling to SIA every year, interviewing industry insiders, and touring production facilities. She is a larger female, weighing in around 170 pounds, I think. She is also an aggressive freerider and pipe rider. Earlier in her snowboarding "career" she road men's boards. In the past few years, however, she has started to demo both men's and women's boards and now includes a mixture of men's and women's boards in her quiver. Her board of choice, the one she rides when she is traveling and can have only one board, is the Never Summer Lotus (women's). Below is a comparison between the men's NS Premier and the female version.

"First Impression: Honestly I’ve been waiting for this board when I first heard about it last season that NS was going to release a women’s premier. I have wanted to ride it since then and so by the time I got on snow with it…I was stoked from day 1. The board is breathtaking in person, I don’t pay too much attention to graphics (hence why I don’t review graphics) but it’s a beautifully made snowboard. It rides as good as it looks.

Size: 157cm

[Board ] Weight: Average women’s weight.

Flex: I consider the flex in between the old premier and the new premier F1.* It is a softer flex than the men’s versions*. But it has a multiflex camber making it easy to turn on while still stiff enough to freeride with and stable at speeds. Stiffer tail so when you riding powder, it holds you consistently as you lean back. Softer mid flex allowing the easy turn initiation. Since the flex is different longitudinally, it gives you a variety that allows for all mountain riding. Torsionally, it’s stable with some give to it.

Turning: The Lotus takes on the turning of the new premier F1 making it easier to initiate turns. Once you are on edge, you can power into each carve, holding the speed and then powering out ready for the next carve. *With the narrower waist designed for women’s boot sizes, you can quickly adjust from edge to edge on each turn. I have no problem laying over quick short turns. It was nice having such a quick response when you get close to other riders and need to avoid them downhill.*

Stable: I’ve been riding the 157cm as my everything board, in so many conditions. I’ve only had one moment in moguls where I felt out of control and really that’s cause I suck at huge moguls. At faster speeds, the dampening holds you stable as it absorbs the conditions.

Pop: I like that with a stiffer tail you can roll back and spring off to pop some ollies. Since I ride a lot of halfpipe with it, I’ve found myself having to control the pop at the deck to make sure I don’t make flat landings but it’s great when I’m riding a halfpipe with undervert where you need to pop to stay in. The dampening really comes in handy during halfpipe, I’ve had moments where I’ve thrown a 360 that sucked ass and this board saved me from a scorp’d fall of death.

Rails: I am not a rail rider by any means but I took my Lotus on a couple smaller rails which handled fine. Even on wallrides, you can still come up to butters or with the light swing weight, throw spins. With a stiffer tail it takes more effort to butter the tail, I found it easier when I’m doing butter presses in circles on the mountain.

Switch: The Lotus is a directional board with a softer mid flex giving you a board that still can ride switch. I’m also used to riding directional boards switch but I had some fun day here in Steamboat riding switch on the groomers.

Powder: I’ve been able to spend some powder days on this board. I was really surprised at first with how well it floated through some heavier powder. It’s got a slightly tapered, dual-radial sidecut which in powder makes it super easy to stay above and still make sweet powder turns. 

Pipe: I’ve spent a lot of time in the halfpipe with this board and it’s my new all mountain do everything board. Since it’s a stiffer freeride board with more aggressive sidecut you can really hold a edge on it and power it through which works great in the halfpipe. My only downside with it in the halfpipe is it’s set back stance so I can’t center the bindings on it which means i’m riding halfpipe with more nose than tail.

*Overall Impression: My favorite board has been the Never Summer Premier and now it’s been replaced with the Lotus. I had a hard time putting this board down to ride the other Never Summer’s that I should be riding more. Similiar to the premier but with a narrower waist width, this board excels in everything the premier did.*"


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Look, Leo 

If you package the same product but put different graphics (girly) and lebel differently (female specific), and that sells because a segment of consumers (in this case women) like that, combined with a reduced price, THATS MARKETING 
It sells more , more total sales, more profit. 

Where you guys are getting the wrong impression is 
I´m not recommending anything here. I didn´t say that women should ride mens equipment.
I said you should not be limited by this MEN label. 
If there were no label from the start (uni sex), this debate is simply not here. 
Like I said over and over, stiffness is personal preference. 
My missus likes stiffer boards and doesn´t like girly graphics. Can she find that in girls boards? NO.

I will still state that:
Females need specific body protection- Back protectors and especially Impact shorts.
Boots
But female specific snowboards are just a myth (in Keven Costner voice) 

I´m not going to discuss martial arts or physics (I did applied physics at Uni) here but I really have a problem understanding your example and analogy Leo.
Especially with this lower center of gravity and leverage stuff.
Simply put, One can flex the board by Force, in this case body mass mulitplied by Velocity. The faster you go it´s easier to flex the board. In our case, we are light weights but we like going fast (beating skiers) and enjoy some big fast carves where you can feel the board´s stored energy from us ( we control this by bending our knees ) putting it on the edge and the Camber springing back at some point.
Stiffer, longer boards needs widening one´s stance and hence bending your knees more. meaning your center of gravity is lower. Contrary to what you say.
You have also stated that snowboarding is relying on a board going downhill. not about controlling your own body? You gotta be kidding. Then in the same post, how can you say that one´s center of gravity (or levegage) coming from someone´s height/build/sex/race has something to do with snowboard design parameters.
There´s enough to choose from. length, width, flex, sidecurve, camber....

Like I said, dispite this new female specific category, lots of longer freeride boards are getting softer in flex so a lot more people can ride it.
Have alook at the weight range that is quoted on that Arbor,
It covers like 120lb to 200 lbs :laugh: see what I mean ? It makes you wonder about trend and manufacturer recommendation huh? 

I want to see soft and stiffer offerings for the same model. 
Arbor boards look great IMO and their Green tech, 
Would be nice to see choices in graphics like Prior ... Didn´t Burton used to do that, too?


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Shit lilfoot1598
That´s sounds great. I´ve gotta demo that! 
IMHO I like narrower waist width and stiff tail, softer towards the nose. 
I´m size US7.5 male and I find 25.4 is the widest I´d go in waist width. 25.2 is optimum.


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

nimbin said:


> Look, Leo
> 
> If you package the same product but put different graphics (girly) and lebel differently (female specific), and that sells because a segment of consumers (in this case women) like that, combined with a reduced price, THATS MARKETING
> It sells more , more total sales, more profit.


I don't know why you can't get it out of your head that female boards aren't re-marketed male boards. I told you that there are plenty of people in this office that have seen the process first-hand. I have provided you with articles stating the differences. Yet, like an old man that just can't let go of the past, you can't let go of the fact that female boards are made differently. 



nimbin said:


> You have also stated that snowboarding is relying on a board going downhill. not about controlling your own body?


This very comment shows your lack of comprehension. Nowhere did I say that we don't use our bodies in snowboarding. I said that in Martial Arts, it is about total body control. That's it. You don't rely on objects in Martial Arts. You have weapons, but those are optional. In snowboarding, you are in fact relying on a board. You can't snowboard without a snowboard so this is not an option. Yes, you do need body control as well, but you need the snowboard first and foremost. That was all I was saying with that comment. How you got what you got out of what I stated is beyond me.



nimbin said:


> Like I said, dispite this new female specific category, lots of longer freeride boards are getting softer in flex so a lot more people can ride it.
> Have alook at the weight range that is quoted on that Arbor,
> It covers like 120lb to 200 lbs :laugh: see what I mean ? It makes you wonder about trend and manufacturer recommendation huh?


Again, you are making comments making it seem like we are trying to tell you that females can't ride mens boards. None of us said that. Everything said and done, measurements being equal, that Arbor will flex stiffer for the female than the male.

You provide zero proof with anything you are saying. You have this thought in your head and it is blinding you from all the evidence that we are providing. You are arguing with the people of the very subject matter we are debating... FEMALE RIDERS. That's the equivalent of me arguing with LeBron James over how the game of basketball works.

You say you aren't recommending anything, yet you came into a thread to make a comment that has no grounds of validity. Just speculation and assumptions.

If you have difficulty in understanding why a lower center of gravity matters in snowboarding, well you need to retake that physics course. Bend down? What are we? Skiers? Do you ride full tuck? When I ride, I bend lightly. When my wife rides, she bends lightly. The only time we do any type of tuck is during aggressive carves or jumps and perhaps the occasional branch ducking. These are momentary. Still, bending or not, women have a lower center. I guess if you do the gaper tuck while bombing straight down the slopes, flexing the board really isn't your concern is it? And that is what we are talking about right? Board flex?


----------



## J.Schaef (Sep 13, 2009)

nimbin said:


> But female specific snowboards are just a myth (in Keven Costner voice)


You are an idiot.


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

Okay... 

His foot size is a 7.5 mens... That's almost the same size foot as me. Clearly he can ride women's boards because his feet are small enough.
Try to suggest a narrower board to the dudes on here with size 13 feet. Just because it works for you doesn't mean it's good for everyone. You are basing your information on your own experience and your study in applied physics. The entire world isn't built like you. Obviously, you and your woman have the same build so you use men's and women's boards equally. I can't. So I don't think women's boards are men's boards with pretty graphics and extra wordage.

My boyfriends board is softer in flex than my women's board. If I got on it, I would not be able to maneuver it like he does. It's wider than mine.



> Some points. We are talking generalization.
> Starcommand, I can take it that from your statement, women have stronger core strength and lower body. In that case if you do actually ride using those assets, wouldn´t you be riding differently? more powerful than men, without using so much upper body strength? Wanting a stiffer board? haha ! That´s how my missus rides. Like I said, It would be so good to see same shape, choices in flex. Would be great if we can pick the graphics.


I do ride differently than a man. My strength is in my legs. I do like a stiff board. The NS Infinity is a stiffer board, but with some good flex, great pop, and a narrow waist to accommodate my smaller boots.

And it has nothing to do with your center dropping. When I bend, my center is in my pelvis area. Yours is just below your sternum. If we both bend our knees, unless you're standing in a hole, mine is still lower than yours.



> You find boarding without much legs bend more relaxing, that´s fine.


What does this even mean? I have a 23 inch stance at 5'3". If I don't bend my knees I will dislocate my hips...


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

StarCommand said:


> What does this even mean? I have a 23 inch stance at 5'3". If I don't bend my knees I will dislocate my hips...


I think he has this idea that we all snowboard like this the entire time:


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

You mean, you don't??!?!


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

Only on green groomers :thumbsup:


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

Leo said:


> Only on green groomers :thumbsup:


You should try a women's board. Might straighten up that posture for you. What? Oh, your toes hang 3 inches off the edge? Hmm... *fires up the chainsaw*


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

"Females need specific body protection- Back protectors and especially Impact shorts."

WTF. Seriously. :dunno:

Why exactly do I need a freaking back protector and impact shorts? 

Holy hell. Until you grow a vagina and can speak from experience, you have no grounds for any further comments.


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

nimbin said:


> Shit lilfoot1598
> That´s sounds great. I´ve gotta demo that!
> IMHO I like narrower waist width and stiff tail, softer towards the nose.
> I´m size US7.5 male and I find 25.4 is the widest I´d go in waist width. 25.2 is optimum.


Yeah, you missed my point entirely. I'm not fully convinced you know how to read.


----------



## jkc350z (Jan 30, 2010)

nimbin said:


> I don´t know your wife´s riding but I´d like to point out:
> I´m 5´8 130lbs. She is 5´6 and weighs the same.
> Women specific boards are just marketing BS. Putting girly graphics on a perfect board for light weights. Not all girls are into girly graphics either.





nimbin said:


> Our boot size is US 7.5 mens. There are some that fits our requirements.


Dude...even tho you and your girl are the same weight and have the same shoe size, which I would say is kind of freaky and should be more cause for concern for you than nit-picking on women's boards, does not mean women's boards are NOT made different.

I just do not get what you are not getting in all these posts. Obviously you have several experienced people, some being women riders, agreeing with you that women and men can ride each other's boards. The point is womens boards are made for a specific audience: WOMEN! This is not just a marketing gimmick. 

You are beating a dead horse. I am not trying to be an ass, and I apologize if I misread anything, but I just think you should just stop and find something else you and your girl can both fit into. May I suggest panties or something cuz they are def. not made differently between the sexes right...I kid, I kid....oops, I am being an ass.

Also, not all women's boards have "girly" designs and graphics. This is just a douchebag remark.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

J.Schaef said:


> You are an idiot.


You too. up yours :cheeky4:


----------



## StarCommand (Dec 21, 2010)

/end scene


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Leo,
I don´t understand what you are talking about.
Maybe it me. OR your explanation.
I don´t have problems reading physics textbooks but you are all over the place. 
Maybe we don´r write well altogether. 
But you have so far not provided a single proof other than heresay, quote/ ...I know someone who went on a factory tour, blah blah..
Then some Ferrari and ninjas, and some weird exercise and a upside down seesaw analogy. I can´t make any logic out of it. 
I thank you for pointing me out that center of gravity. But you haven´t provided me any proof that a board is designed by that parameter. 
Before you sprout bullshit (reminding you that you were the one first to make that call on me) why don´t you check you mouth before judging me..


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Maybe I´m wrong with my way of thinking. But clearly I am not convinced by any numbers of people, male or female, that my point of view is moot. How can anyone convince me something using sheer numbers that there are more people who believe the other way. Is this some religion or what!?


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

jkc350z said:


> Dude...even tho you and your girl are the same weight and have the same shoe size, which I would say is kind of freaky and should be more cause for concern for you than nit-picking on women's boards, does not mean women's boards are NOT made different.
> 
> I just do not get what you are not getting in all these posts. Obviously you have several experienced people, some being women riders, agreeing with you that women and men can ride each other's boards. The point is womens boards are made for a specific audience: WOMEN! This is not just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> ...


Yeah, OK after looking at NS Lotus. That´s cool. 
I´m not picking on women´s boards. How the hell do you get that idea!?
When a product is made for a specific audience (like you said, in this case women) THAT is marketing. 
Why ? the same board can be marketed for men with similar height, weight, boot size. THAT is marketing, too. 
I am making this same point over and over. People have different body size, shape, long legs short legs, fat, skinny, muscles, strong, not so athletic... REGARDLESS of sex, nationality. race.... 
Most likely Westerners are bigger than Asians. 
The boards are made in factories. One factory might produce for different brand, manufacturers. Similar spec. different board. After that they are MARKETED to "specific audience" like you said. 
A soft flex narrow board will be ideal for smaller sized Japanese men so it could be marketed for Japanese men. There is no proof that there´s anything special in manufacturing process, technology that is specific to Sex.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

StarCommand said:


> Okay...
> 
> His foot size is a 7.5 mens... That's almost the same size foot as me. Clearly he can ride women's boards because his feet are small enough.
> Try to suggest a narrower board to the dudes on here with size 13 feet. Just because it works for you doesn't mean it's good for everyone. You are basing your information on your own experience and your study in applied physics. The entire world isn't built like you. Obviously, you and your woman have the same build so you use men's and women's boards equally. I can't. So I don't think women's boards are men's boards with pretty graphics and extra wordage.
> ...


Finally I understand your point. 
What I am saying is that your center doesn´t change from one location to the other (like from your pelvic region to your thighs) I am saying that it comes closer relative to the board when you bend your knees. 
So, that is no different with men. 
Totally agree that narrow waist is good for small boot size. 
If we are going down moguls, a shorter board with narrow waist and shorter side curve radius is much easier. something close to 24cm 
The reason we like 25.3 is because we go for knee deep powder on most of our days and that "just a little wider width" gives us a little more float. It´s a compromise. 
I am not avocating for the whole world. I just said people with similar weight height and bootsize. There are no one size fits all, snowboards in the world last time I looked lol. 
All I am doing is trying to share my experience and an alternative way at looking at this topic. Some may find it pretty unique, antagonizing for others ... Frankly I am more amused at the reaction.


----------



## ev13wt (Nov 22, 2010)

If the girl and the guy are in the same weight range and there is a board for that, of course it will work out.

But there is no board for a 160 CM 35Kilo girl. Thats a kids board. Like my bros wife. I can pick her up with one hand. (Well almost, you get the point.)

So I think the girl range goes down much further.


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

nimbin said:


> Leo,
> I don´t understand what your talking about.
> Maybe it me. OR your explanation.
> I don´t have problems reading physics textbooks but your all over the place.
> ...


This post was a pain to read. My inner grammar Nazi just puked. :laugh:

Anyway, there are plenty of members on here that have been reading my posts for a while now. Most know I work in the marketing department of a sports retailer and many in fact have done business with this company so they know that I indeed work here. I gain nothing from anything I do here (I do PPC Advertising, Google AdWords, etc...). I do it for the love of the sport. I give gear advice because I like to help new riders. So when I tell you that some manufacturers do in fact have a totally separate design process for female boards, I mean it. I say some because I won't argue with you over a brand like Bitch Boards. A brand like that is pure marketing, no argument there. Even if you take it as hearsay (I'm going to toot my own horn here), I still have more credibility than you. What are your credentials? How many boards have you demoed? How many snowboard brand representatives have you spoken to? How many people in the snowboard industry do you know? So far, the only credentials you have provided is a physics class.

You say I'm spouting bullshit, yet you are the only one doing that. You also lost credibility after being proven wrong about your assumptions on the difference of center of gravity between men and women. Look back and check your own mouth (read posts) and see how condescending you were about that subject.

Snowboardingforum members 1

Nimbin 0

Then female riders chimed in to back the fact about women specific boards.

Snowboardingforum members 2

Nimbin 0

I rather liked my analogies. Female ninjas using women's specific weapons when they could have used mens weapons... hmm... sounds VERY familiar to me. I don't know why. Maybe I'm just crazy?

Just keep riding womens boards and have your wife ride mens boards. As long as you have fun, that's all that matters. But don't sit there and spout bullshit like women's specific boards are pure marketing.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Who are you to judge credibility.
Aren´t you the one who asked me NOT to ask about credibility. 
You keep coming back when you said yourself you are done arguing with me.
If you can´t take crit from other´s don´t do it. 

By the way, I´m Japanese decent. I gotta laugh about your Ninja crap. 
Watched too much telly or comics, i take it. 

I have an offer to make, Spare me with your bullshit ang get out of my face. I´ll return the favour. Have fun. 

sorry about my spelling. fixed it for ya


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

Nah, having practiced Martial Arts, Ninjas, Samurais, Shaolin Monks, etc... are always of interest to me. I don't even know what you mean by "Japanese decent."

I'm not judging your credibility. I never asked you not to bring credibility up either. Honestly, are you actually reading anything I post? I said "don't question my credibility", as in I have plenty of credibility. It's a figure of speech. A very common one might I add.

All I did was point out that you did not provide anything to lend you credibility. Why did I point that out? Because you keep calling "bullshit" on everyone without any valid arguments. You say we "sprout" bullshit, yet you are the one doing that.

You got called out bro. Just admit it. You didn't even know that men and women have a different center of gravity.

I take other side's point of view just fine. Is this not the purpose of these types of debates?

True story: I'm bored from the lack of shred time so these forums fill my void. When people like you make some outlandish claims, I call them out. That's just how I am. I'm not always right and in fact have been proven wrong on here many times. I always concede to good arguments. That's not a problem for me. 

Sorry, but your arguments are just plain silly. I can comfortably say that you are flat out WRONG.


----------



## nimbin (Dec 31, 2010)

Not to mention rude and no respect for someone who claims to study martial art. 

Especially shows in your comment about "old people" 
I´m done with you talking apples and oranges


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

nimbin said:


> Not to mention rude and no respect for someone who claims to study martial art.
> 
> Especially shows in your comment about "old people"
> I´m done with you talking apples and oranges


Haha rude? You weren't exactly friendly to people here. And I'm talking before I even jumped in this thread.

As for the comment you are referring to, I used an "Old man who can't let go of the past" example. That's not old people. That is in fact a type of person that exists in this world. What? You never met a sour old man who is stuck in old traditions before?

Just because I study Martial Arts does not mean I am going to respect everyone. I give respect until that respect is not returned. You sir showed disrespect to people here by making comments like "you are falling for marketing ploys blah blah yaddi I know nothing yadda".

Let me be like you for a second and twist that comment of yours like you do mine. You basically said everyone who thinks differently about female specific boards are mindless sheep who fall for dumb advertisements.

Let me make a comment about that 2005 Rome Vinyl you first talked about. IT WAS ALWAYS A WOMEN'S BOARD, GRAPHICS AND ALL.

Are you saying this is a men's graphic?
Rome Vinyl Snowboard - Women's - 2005 BCS from Dogfunk.com

Furthermore, being more "girly" as you love to say is subjective. Actually, the way you make those comments is pretty damn chauvinistic. You use the term "girly" like it's a negative thing. So what if it's pink? I'm pretty sure that if you took a worldwide survey of favorite girl's colors, pink would be somewhere on the top.

More females snowboard now than ever. So what if a company wants to cater to the majority? It's not like they make these boards thinking that a guy is going to be riding it.

But yea, I'm the rude one. That is especially horrible since I study Martial Arts. I'm just a rude old people hating Ninja lover. It's okay though, since you are Japanese decent.


----------



## jkc350z (Jan 30, 2010)

My NS EVO has a pink base...haha


----------



## Leo (Nov 24, 2009)

jkc350z said:


> My NS EVO has a pink base...haha


GuesS that can only mean one thing... IT'S ALL A MARKETING PLOY TO GET WOMEN TO BITE AND BUY IT WITH IT'S FLASHY PINK AND GIRLY GRAPHICS RAWRASAURUS!!!!


----------

