# Is weight or height more important? (size help)



## Bagels (Sep 27, 2008)

Weight is more important. That board is too small for you. You need a 152-156, depending on how you use it.

Stay away from Burton, and get last years products and you will can have a pretty decent set up. Try on the boots. Get what fits the best.


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

Well, if I get something like a 154, it'll come up to my forehead. Is that ok? Also, I've heard that longer boards are harder to control, which concerns me since I haven't gone in so long. Lastly, my weight tends to fluctuate between 130lbs and 140lbs.

Edit: Just curious, why should I stay away from Burton? From what I remember, they were a good name.


----------



## Bagels (Sep 27, 2008)

Height really has nothing to do with your board size. Generally, the taller you are, the wider your stance will be, thus you need a longer board. Just get what your weight tells you to get.


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

Ok, I'll keep that in mind. Although, even the size calculators showed that I should be riding something around a 149 for my weight. I made a last minute edit on my earlier post regarding Burton boards too. Just wondering what was so bad about them. Thanks again for you help


----------



## lilfoot1598 (Mar 7, 2009)

Length calculators are funky. Two different calculators will give you two drastically different answers. Weight definitely matters far more than height - although the height myth is very prevalent. I'm short as well and my snowboard looks pretty long, but it's actually just right for my weight. I weigh 105 and ride a 145, which is actually on the longer end of what I can ride for all-mountain.

You are definitely not small enough to even consider a child's board. You wouldn't want to ride one anyway - they're generally poorly constructed. 

Listen to the people who give you advice here. They know snowboarding and you can trust their opinions. For the most part.


----------



## BurtonAvenger (Aug 14, 2007)

Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


----------



## jimster716 (Feb 11, 2009)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


I only ride a 155. :dunno:


----------



## linvillegorge (Jul 6, 2009)

jimster716 said:


> I only ride a 155. :dunno:


So... you're a weakling with a tiny dick??? :dunno:



:cheeky4:


----------



## eastCOASTkills (Aug 5, 2009)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


Wow if thats right I should be rocking a 743873!


----------



## DC5R (Feb 21, 2008)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


Wow, if this is true, I should be riding a board the length of the Empire State Building...based purely on cock size :cheeky4:

On a serious note to the OP, you can go down to a 148 and still be able to take the board all mountain. You don't need a wide board, though.


----------



## Woosenheimer (Nov 13, 2008)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


I ride a 164 but I think its because of my inflated online ego.


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm in a similar situation (5'4", 160 lbs, 8ish street shoe {although I'm a 25 mp boot}). Weight is more important, but height also plays a role. Your limbs are shorter so you have a little less leverage. I'd take what the weight calc. suggests, then go to the short end of the range. I'd suggest something 150-152ish. It can get frustrating when everyone tries to put you on the shortest, softest board because of your height, even though you tell them you want to freeride.


----------



## mOnky (Feb 8, 2009)

Too many factors go into choosing a board size.. but definitely weight over height


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

If you're a normal posture, wouldn't it be logic if weight gave the same result as height?

After all, with weight comes with length...


----------



## mOnky (Feb 8, 2009)

BoardingBanana said:


> If you're a normal posture, wouldn't it be logic if weight gave the same result as height?
> 
> After all, with length comes weight...


LOL..

have u ever seen someone 6 feet tall weighing in at 100lbs soaking wet.. or better yet, someone 5 feet tall weighing in at 150lbs


----------



## MunkySpunk (Jan 7, 2009)

My wife says width is more important than length, but length is good too. :dunno:


----------



## DaBonner (Jun 25, 2008)

I am 5'7 and ride a 150cm board , so I reckon something like that will be perfect for you. I have size 7 feet so don't get a wide board as they are harder to turn. Hope you find something , I have got a Stepchild JP Walker which is perfect.


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

Weight is definitely more important than height. If the rider is too light, he/she won't be able to flex the board and if the rider is too heavy, the board won't be stiff enough to stabilize their weight. The height thing, even though it shouldn't be used for length, is that a taller rider has more leverage and can prob ride a little longer than weight dictates.
And, just like wide boards, some boards come in narrow widths, although they're hard to find. Your feet don't have to overhang, they can be flush with the sidecut. Check out Venture Snowboards. Don't go with a child's board, they're made for children and are way too soft.


----------



## Guest (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm a big dude and I ride a board too small for me but they get trashed pretty quick.


----------



## arsenic0 (Nov 11, 2008)

Im 5'6 and 140lbs ...ride a 151 and it always feels right...


----------



## Gnarly (Mar 12, 2008)

With the advent of reverse camber, you can ride much shorter boards without issue. But before you buy, please try multiple sizes out. Rent for your first few trips to see whether you like long or short boards.

IMHO, a 150 would be an ideal length to do everything.


----------



## Kanilas (Mar 28, 2009)

BurtonAvenger said:


> Psh the true method is cock size x how much you bench press x how big your online ego is! Jeez!


162 Wiiiiiiide :laugh:


----------



## legallyillegal (Oct 6, 2008)

Gnarly said:


> With the advent of reverse camber, you can ride much shorter boards without issue.


This is an absolutely false myth perpetuated by Mervin.


----------



## Fold (Feb 25, 2009)

Also, if you have a specific board that you're interested in, check out the manufacutrer's website. Sometimes they will publish their own recommendations for what lenght to buy. I think they're generally based on weight, but I would think that would give you a more accurate range than a more universal formula.


----------



## Guest (Aug 29, 2009)

*get a loner one*

I think you might be needing a longer board, as height has nothing to do with the size of the board that you use.. you need to have a longer board as your stance may be wider because of your height, and balance the board according to your weight too. Thanks.


----------

