Has anybody ridden the new Lyman pro model? I haven't seen much discussion about this new pro model and was wondering what everybody thought.

Boards awesome! I ride it.

Do you ride the 135 or the 139? I'm about 160 lbs and can't decide. I would be at the top of the weight range on the 135, but I've been riding a 132 which is too small (I know) so I think a 139 would feel like a boat.

What part of Tennessee are you from? I have been looking at the this board, the shane, and the one, but I am in the same situation you are 5'6 160lbs and don't know how big a board to go with

I sent you an email replying to your PM. Im from Dickson, TN. We ride on Kentucky Lake and sometimes make it up to Center Hill for long weekends.

Well the size does have to do with weight and Height. So if your 160 and and between 5'3 and 5'8 then you should be good with the 35. If you 6'0 or over I would say go with the 39 or 43. but it is up to you. Some people like bigger boards and some people like smaller boards. Good luck!

jmb, brandon, <BR>a group of us from wakeboardnashville.com will be at the boat show tomorrow night (sat)in nashville. give me a call if you want to meet up with some of us. we are a friendly bunch and love to meet new wake addicts. if not, look us up online and say hey. <BR>alan 615-944-7358

dude the lyman is the best board ever. i got it not too long ago and i rode it behind boat at OWC right after christmas. i love it. i dont think anybody could be dissapointed with the lyman. im 5 foot 6 and 149 lbs and i ride tha 135

Owen, I was at the show on Friday night. It was awesome. Did you see the blacked out 247 LSV. It looked like a limo. <BR> <BR>I've been leaning towards the Lyman 135. I just don't think I'll be able to get used to the 139 coming from a 132

Oh yeah, will I feel a big and or bad difference since I'll be putting Hyperlite bindings on the Lyman (liquid force). I ride the 3DS and the Byerly both 2007 models

jmb, <BR>yeah, i saw that, it was awesome. i loved that big sub they had mounted under the steering wheel. those 247's are insane.

JMB. You can ride hyperlite bindings on a liquid force board. The only thing you may have to do is put a couple extra washers on the screws or file the screws down a little. I ride the 07 Murray's on an 07 watson.

The Lyman is an awesome board. It's one of that fastest boards I've ever been on and even without the inside fins it tracks really well. With the inside fins on it feels incredible and it doesn't feel any slower with them. It has tons of pop with a really steep rocker line. The landings are pretty soft too. It looks really hot with the new black Shane bindings.

lol JMB i have CWB bindings on my Lyman with no remorse. <BR> <BR>Can't effing wait to ride it, countin them days down <IMG SRC="http://www.wakeworld.com/MB/Discus/clipart/happy.gif" ALT=":-)" BORDER=0>

I guess any black bindings would look hot with this board.

Thanks guys. I knew I could ride Hyperlite bindings on a Liquid Force board just wanted to make sure that the bigger base plate on the hyp bindings didn't hinder the performance of the board (probably overthinking it.) Thanks for the help. <BR> <BR>Carson did you ride the 135 or the 139? I'm 5'6 160lbs and figured the 135 would work for me.

I ride the 143 but I'm 6'2" 205lbs. In my opinion too small is worse than too big. If it's too small it will really slow it down in the water. If it's a little too big the only thing you might notice is a little extra swing weight win your in the air. I say try the 139. If you still can decide then just go with your favorite color.

Thanks for the help. I'm gonna try to demo before I purchase. I feel like the 135 will be big enough but the landings on the 139 will be better.

does 4 cm really make a huge difference in your riding? I'm 6'1 and 185... ive been riding the shane 140 and have been looking to try a smaller board. the 139 lyman seemed like the best candidate at this point... I'm trying to keep the same amount on pop and soft landings... but get a board that will roll on edge a bit easier, quicker, and faster. I'm tentative to think the lyman 143 wouldnt make much difference than the shane 140... what do you guys think?

I haven't ridden the Lyman yet but as you can see in posts above it is one I am considering for sure. As for your question I looked at the specs to try and see (this is just my opinion) <BR> <BR>2008 Lyman 139 mid width 17.05 inches <BR>2008 Lyman 143 mid width 17.32 inches <BR>2008 Shane 140 " " 17.64 in. <BR>2007 Shane 140 " " 17.60 in. <BR> <BR>I know that these differences are very minor but its all I had to compare. So both lyman models are more narrow than your shane and they don't have the "full shape" like the shane does so i would say they will both roll onto edge quicker while still providing soft landings and great pop. As for the difference between the Lyman 139 and the 143 i would say the either one will work fine for you just depends if you want to jump on a board that is a little longer than you are used to (may be harder to spin?).

john, <BR>i think you pose a good question, and i have been riding for 2 years, at my ability level i still say no, i couldn't tell a difference. <BR> <BR>i was 6" 205 lbs last summer and riding an already small 138 board. my daughter got a 134 that i wanted to try out, which would have been very small, but i couldn't tell a huge difference. i rode it for a couple of days and just had the boat pull me 1 or 2 mph faster. <BR> <BR>of course here i am talking about going 4cm smaller and you are talking about going 4 cm bigger, even better. that 143 would be plenty good, the surface area would probably be about the same. a lot of people say a bigger board will pop better.

i really want to ride it. i saw one in the local shop and it looked really cool

i ride the lyman with the new shanes and it is HOT!

i'm jelous of all the people that get to ride theirs, all i have is to look at it's sexyness with all black bindings on it (08 Vapors)

ive only got to ride mine once. and i didnt have my new shanes when i got to ride it. i rode it with the 07 ct watsons.