# Libtech C3 vs. traditional camber experience



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

Vtslashnburn said:


> Wondering if anyone can shed some light on C3 vs traditional camber. Is C3 really as locked in, springy and poppy as camber. There are some sick looking Lib boards that I want to get but I don't trust that passive rocker between the feet, at least not enough to drop 6 hundred on one yet. I had a board with C2btx and wasn't really into it. What's your experience?


C3 is camber, end of story. There is no rocker, it's simple marketing to allow people who still think they "need" some rocker for float or the like.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Its MEH imho. I have several traditional full cambers...one was an old gnu full camber, a couple old c2btx bpro and billygoat and have demoed a JL 20th Anniversary Phoenix with c3 for 1/2 day. 

"Is C3 really as locked in, springy and poppy as camber?" NO! again imho...I'd take full camber any day over c3. And c2btx is great for shredding 4-8/10" of firm-soft pow and chopped


----------



## Rip154 (Sep 23, 2017)

Think of it as camber with suspension. Not quite the same, but pops enough. They are a bit more stable, less lively, it really depends what you think.


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

C3 is basically easy ride camber. The "reverse camber" between the feet is too mellow to actually go reverse. But enough that the camber is zeroed between the feet. So instead of a continuous camber arc you get camber up from the contact point to the insert pack, then it levels and flattens to the next insert then cambers back down. If you understand your edges and are an adaptable snowboarder it rips. It makes it easier to engage the center part of your sidecut and it plains in deep snow a little better than full camber. The C3 stuff from Mervin is most of the stuff I like from them. 

What board are you looking at?


----------



## Vtslashnburn (Sep 10, 2018)

Thanks for the description. Checking out the Lost collab directional Rocket mainly, or any Jamie Lynn decks


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

I havent ridden any of the lost stuff yet, but of all the Lynn stuff the Dagmar is the only one I've liked. The C3 Phoenix felt like a dead plank.


----------



## txb0115 (Sep 20, 2015)

C3 is not camber. It’s more “camber like” than any of their other profiles, but it still doesn’t ride like a trad camber board, or even a rocker/camber/rocker profile. It’s a bummer because I love Mervin but I haven’t been able to ride their decks and enjoy myself for quite a few years now. I bought a C3 board a few years ago to give it a go and it lasted all of two days in my quiver and then got sold. 

I hope one day they will return to having some trad camber offerings in their line up.


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

txb0115 said:


> I hope one day they will return to having some trad camber offerings in their line up.


I've talked/begged with them most every year at LBS about bring back some traditional camber with mtx. But No..frick'n idiots...methinks they could sell a bunch.


----------



## freshy (Nov 18, 2009)

I'm a fan of C3, in fact I have an old cambered Dark Series and newer C3 Darker Series and I prefer the C3. The way I see it C3 rides just like camber, but can handle deep fresh pow a lot better.
I also have a 164 Atomic with camber and it feels like the most boring and non aggressive board ever, it is predictable ill give it that. I ride fast and aggressive and C3 suits me well.


----------

