# Never Summer SL vs Proto - what woud be better for me?



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

My current board is a Burton Process VRocker 152 and I really don't like it. In the last two days I tried...

Evo 152
SL 151
Proto 157
Evo 154
Skate Banana 154
Ride Machete 154

Out of the bunch, I liked the SL and Proto

I'm 170 (plan to lose 20lbs eventually) and 5'8. I think the 157 felt a little too big and 154 seems to be the sweet spot. I also heard that Never Summers ride like longer boards? So a 152 would ride like a 156? Is that true?

Anyway, I'm looking for a all around board. I have 0 interest in doing anything in the park but I'd still like to do some jumps and buttering. I'm leaning towards a Proto but I only had a ride on the longer board for a few runs. Do you guys think that board will do it?

Also what does Never Summer's dampness Meter mean


----------



## binarypie (Nov 29, 2009)

I have 12 days on snow with my 154 proto CT.

I'm 5'9" and a 150lbs.

It does not ride like a 156. It rides like the 154 it is.

It isn't a very stiff board and I've caught myself overpowering it several times.

That being said it is a very fun board. 

Freestyle first. All-Mtn second. Is how i'd describe it.


If you want a board that is more fun outside of the park (not a pow board) but can make due in the park i'd get the SL.

If you want a board that is more of a park board that can also make due elsewhere (for sure not a pow board) i'd go with the proto CT. 

If you live in the park get the EVO.

If you want a pow board go buy a K2 Gyrator or Jones Flagship


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

andy_d said:


> My current board is a Burton Process VRocker 152 and I really don't like it. In the last two days I tried...
> 
> Evo 152
> SL 151
> ...


I'm 5'9" 155lbs. Being riding for 15 seasons at roughly 30 days a season. I've owned the 2003 Evo 153, 2008 SL 155, 2009 SL (first year with R.C.) and after demo-ing the 2012 Evo 153(?), Proto 154, SL 153 and 155, I got the Proto CT 154 for this year. I ride the park around 60% of the time, freeride/powder 40% of the time, hence why I switched from the SL to the Proto CT.

I suggest the Never Summer SL 158, only get the SL 155 AFTER you lose 15-20 lbs (which no offense to you... will probably in a season or two).

The Proto CT has blunted tips (as if they sawed off a bit of the material) so a Proto CT 154 has the effective edge of a 156... so I agree that Proto 157 would have felt a little long for you as an equivalent SL would have been around 160cm long.

Ignore "Never Summer board ride longer" maxim as it is too vague to be useful (different Never Summer boards ride differently).

The dampness meter is a relative indicator of how much the board will soak up bumps, vibrations and chatter for you - giving you a smoother ride.

Me riding the 2009 SL 155 last season, which I used as a 50/50 park/freeride board (if I was doing mainly freeriding... I would have gone a little longer or gotten the Heritage or Raptor, although those boards didn't exist back in 2009)


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

Ok thanks guys. I'm leaning towards the SL 

Binarypie - would you not use the board at all in pow? I saw the description of the Legacy on Never Summers page and it says it would work in powder as well and it's just a wider version of SL with a little more flex. Wouldn't that mean SL would work as well? I also have my reverse camber Burton board - would I use that for powder days instead

Lone rider - I plan to do a cleansing between now and mid January. Losing 20lbs won't be an issue. 155 in that case?


----------



## Beschatten (Oct 4, 2011)

The Proto CT sure as hell isn't a "park board".

I got one and it's a mountain slayer. Can't even imagine what the SL would be like.


----------



## ArmyOfSkittles (Dec 13, 2011)

just got a proto ct and its sexayyy


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

Beschatten said:


> The Proto CT sure as hell isn't a "park board".
> 
> I got one and it's a mountain slayer. Can't even imagine what the SL would be like.


Ok fine - park / freestyle? Its still more geared for the park than it is for everything else?

What have you guys been riding and what size for your build


----------



## Beschatten (Oct 4, 2011)

andy_d said:


> Ok fine - park / freestyle? Its still more geared for the park than it is for everything else?
> 
> What have you guys been riding and what size for your build


157 proto, 6'3 200lbs, size 11 boots.

the only thing that makes people claim it's geared for park is it's twin, carbonium sheet, and blunted edges. if i was on a 160 ct i could charge HARD.

and i already charge hard.

the board is damp dude. even for my weight. you even said so yourself. i dig the graphics on it more than the sl, and i like the twin more than directional. it really doesn't matter which one you get. i wouldnt go sl since buttering would suck nuts on it. if i went evo, i'd go a 154. a proto i'd go 154. 

fuck the skate banana. and instead of the machete, i would get get the ride buckwild instead.


----------



## Chef Jer (Apr 3, 2011)

Beschatten said:


> 157 proto, 6'3 200lbs, size 11 boots.
> 
> the only thing that makes people claim it's geared for park is it's twin, carbonium sheet, and blunted edges. if i was on a 160 ct i could charge HARD.
> 
> and i already charge hard.


I'm 150 and ride a 155 Heritage... if you think a 160 proto would be a hard charger at 200lbs..... I can't imagine what you would think of a heritage:dunno: Proto is definitely at the playful end of the NS scale (demo'd one last weekend). Rode a SL last year and thought it was great all mountain deck!!!!

Lonerider is spot on with his recommendation!


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

andy_d said:


> Ok thanks guys. I'm leaning towards the SL
> 
> Binarypie - would you not use the board at all in pow? I saw the description of the Legacy on Never Summers page and it says it would work in powder as well and it's just a wider version of SL with a little more flex. Wouldn't that mean SL would work as well? I also have my reverse camber Burton board - would I use that for powder days instead
> 
> Lone rider - I plan to do a cleansing between now and mid January. Losing 20lbs won't be an issue. 155 in that case?


So long as you don't gain the wait back after your "cleansing". Yes al 155 then.

Binarypie was referring to his proto ct which has blunted tips, because the tips are shorter and now as upturned urge board will not plow up and over powder as easily. (Oops... misread his post on my phone.). The SL is decent in powder (better than most boards), but it can't really compete with a dedicated powder board either.

Beschatten means jib board. I own both the proto ct 154 and a SL 155. The CT is more freestyle oriented and pretty playful (I've demoed the 2012 Evo 153 as well).

The SL/Legacy is a bit more hard charging... next is the Heritage, then the Premier, and finally the Raptor. The Proto CT is actually the second most playful board next to the Evo/Revolver. The fact that there are the majority of Never Summer's boards are more free oriented than the Proto CT probably just blew Beschatten's young mind


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

He actually did say that the SL is not a pow board 

What if I want to go into trees? 

Chef Jar- Why did you get the Heritage?


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

andy_d said:


> He actually did say that the SL is not a pow board
> 
> What if I want to go into trees?
> 
> Chef Jar- Why did you get the Heritage?


Oops... you are right. Made my last post on my phone. I just updated it (you can go back and read my new changes).

SL is not a dedicated powder board... but it is not "bad" in powder either. I rode it a couple times last season in 3+ feet of powder when I didn't have my powder board (Prior Khyber 160 split) - it floated well. SL is good in the trees. In my opinion (fter riding the Evo, CT, and SL) the SL is the most versatile board out of those three. I suspect it's more versatile than the Heritage, Premier or Raptor as it is still very park/pipe friendly (I won't get to try a Summit until next month).


----------



## Chef Jer (Apr 3, 2011)

andy_d said:


> Chef Jar- Why did you get the Heritage?


I wanted something that was more of a hard charging freeride board. I don't go in the park at all... so the Heritage fit the bill. It's not completely out of the playful range... but it's a good step away from it when compared to the SL I had last year. 

Based on what you've indicated in this thread... I agree with Lonerider that the SL fits what your looking for.


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

Hi. Bumping this up as I never got around to purchasing a new board  Got hurt early in the season which took me out for a few months so didn't bother.

I'm thinking of the Never Summer Heritage and wondering if the opinion is still Never Summer SL

I still live in New York so I would want a board that can handle itself well enough in the ice as it does in powder conditions. Still 0 interest in park but may still want to butter and hit small jumps off of groomers

New weight - 158
Height - 5'8
Size boots - 8

Size will be 155 which is the smallest Heritage


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

Does it make a difference if I travel a lot? Last season I was in Steamboat, Aspen, Tahoe and Whistler. I spent less days here because of the crappy season. I probably won't have a repeat of that but I still plan on having at least 2 big trips

Just not sure if I want something closer to the rocker side since I don't really like my Vrocker. It could be different enough though. I did enjoy riding the SL when I was in Steamboat for the little time that I had with it.


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

andy_d said:


> Hi. Bumping this up as I never got around to purchasing a new board  Got hurt early in the season which took me out for a few months so didn't bother.
> 
> I'm thinking of the Never Summer Heritage and wondering if the opinion is still Never Summer SL
> 
> ...


I am 5'9" 155 lbs, Size 8 boots. I've owned the 2008 (regular camber), 2009 SL 155 (first year it was hybrid rockered) and demo'd the 2012 SL 153 and 155.

For you I would go with the SL in a 153 as well since you are East Coast and you still want to try a little buttering. If you were West Coast, I would suggest the SL 155 (it is a subtle difference, would be incrementally more stable... but slightly harder in tight spaces and slightly stiffer).

I've ridden my friend's Burton X8 VRocker and didn't really like it, it felt pretty sloppy (i.e. didn't engage the edge as immediately as I would have like) compared to the Never Summer hybrid rocker profile. How long did you get to ride the SL? What don't you like about the VRocker? (It might be something different from my impressions).


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

What if I wanted something more stable? I think I trail my friends at times because I don't feel that stable on my Burton when going faster. That's a 152. Then again, they do a lot more backcountry / tree riding so it may make sense to be more maneuverable. And the stability issues could be my due to my current board as well?

The vrocker - I never felt like I had good control when I was riding anything that weren't ideal conditions. And if I hit any ice patches, I wouldn't have any grip. Skating sometimes an issue too as it just wanted to spin most of the time.


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

andy_d said:


> What if I wanted something more stable? I think I trail my friends at times because I don't feel that stable on my Burton when going faster. That's a 152. Then again, they do a lot more backcountry / tree riding so it may make sense to be more maneuverable
> 
> The vrocker - I never felt like I had good control when I was riding anything that weren't ideal conditions. And if I hit any ice patches, I wouldn't have any grip. Skating sometimes an issue too as it just wanted to spin most of the time.


If you wanted more stable, I would go with the SL 155. However, Never Summer boards are already generally going to be more stable than Burton board because of their construction (i.e. the materials used, the layers of fiberglass, the number of carbon fiber stringers, etc).

A longer length/stiffer board is going better when bombing down groomers and through chunky/choppy snow (that bounces you around). It is going to be less of a help in tree riding (I'm not sure I understood you last sentence... you are having trouble keeping up with your friends on groomers... or in the trees?).

Regarding VRocker - sounds about right. I just wanted to make sure. Don't worry, the Never Summer boards are all hybrid rocker (sort of a combination of rocker and camber) along with a edge profile that gives you much more reassuring edge grip on slippery snow conditions.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

The 54 proto is perfect for you, but if you hate all that tech and carbonium, as linvillegorge said recently "the proto is basically an upgraded sl", save money and get sL. 54-58 is an acceptable range, although i wouldnt get a proto that big(58).


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

snowklinger said:


> The 54 proto is perfect for you, but if you hate all that tech and carbonium, as linvillegorge said recently "the proto is basically an upgraded sl", save money and get sL. 54-58 is an acceptable range, although i wouldnt get a proto that big(58).


I actually own a 154 Proto (after demo'ing the 154 Proto, 153 and 155 SL - I bought the 154 Proto) and I personally see it as more of an upgraded Evo because it has the Evo shape (I believe the 2012 Proto had the exact same shape as the 2012 Evo), the Evo dampening (or lack there of), but with more of a SL type flex (i.e. stiffer) although the carbonium topsheet adds a little bit of "taut snapiness" at the tip that the SL doesn't have.

SL is noticeably more damp (and hence will be more stable).


----------



## andy_d (Jan 14, 2011)

Ok thanks guys for all the feedback. I'm going to go with the SL 153. I'm buying it from backcountry so if there are any issues I can always return. I don't expect there to be any!!

lonerider - I meant that I have trouble keeping up with friends bombing down groomers. Mostly because I don't feel that stable on my board when going fast. But not sure if it makes sense to up in size just for that as I have more intentions of riding around in trees / backcountry where moving quickly would be more important I would think


----------



## nickoto (Sep 6, 2012)

I don't see any reason to start a new thread to ask the same question, so rebumpity.

After reading a ton of threads, I'm still a little torn between the sl and the proto. I'm based out of Ottawa, so I'll be spending most of my time on hills within a couple hours of home, and I'm going to be spending 6 weeks in bc this season (and quite a lot more next!). I'll mostly be riding groomed trails and some trees (75%), but I want to spend a bit of time in the park (probably stick to jumps, nothing big), buttering, doing switch work - depends how many days I can get out how far I get with that this season. I /think/ the SL is probably the better fit given that.

Stats:
Weight - 145 (down from 180 when I started riding)
Height - 5'9"
Size boots - 9.5"

From that standpoint, I was considering the SL153 or 155, but I'm wondering if that will be wide enough given my foot size. I don't think I want to move to the legacy. tia!


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

9.5 is small feet. You do not need a wide board yoda.


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

nickoto said:


> I don't see any reason to start a new thread to ask the same question, so rebumpity.
> 
> After reading a ton of threads, I'm still a little torn between the sl and the proto. I'm based out of Ottawa, so I'll be spending most of my time on hills within a couple hours of home, and I'm going to be spending 6 weeks in bc this season (and quite a lot more next!). I'll mostly be riding groomed trails and some trees (75%), but I want to spend a bit of time in the park (probably stick to jumps, nothing big), buttering, doing switch work - depends how many days I can get out how far I get with that this season. I /think/ the SL is probably the better fit given that.
> 
> ...


you don't need a wide. SL 153


----------



## nickoto (Sep 6, 2012)

Great, thanks!


----------

