WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Wakeboarding Discussion (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Big Air board? (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=776458)

westlake_waker 02-23-2010 12:46 PM

I am landing 360s and can do small tricks, and now i am looking to take it to the next level and i have a beginner cwb right now. Which boards should I be looking at?

sidekicknicholas 02-23-2010 12:53 PM

I love my slingshot recoil... others with a hard bucking pop: <BR>Ronix Ibex <BR>LF Shane <BR>CWB Marius <BR>Slingshot response <BR> <BR>everyone is going to recommond whay they ride.... or say the board doesn't matter (which is mostly true)

westlake_waker 02-23-2010 12:59 PM

what would be an ideal size <BR>i weigh 175 and 5ft 9inch

spearing 02-23-2010 1:02 PM

What kind of CWB do you have? A lot of height comes from the rider digging in and loading the line. Your current board might be fine. <BR> <BR> But if i was to suggest a couple: <BR>Ronix Ibex <BR>LF Shane <BR>CWB Marius <BR>Byerly Monarch <BR>Hyperlite Marek <BR>CWB Vibe

sidekicknicholas 02-23-2010 1:32 PM

I would go in the 138cm~ range... unless you go slingshot, then go bigger because thats just how flexboards ride

eubanks01 02-23-2010 1:37 PM

Go 142 for sure...flex board or not. Most of the boards mentioned will be fine.

andy_nintzel 02-23-2010 1:54 PM

Everyone is wrong the obvious choice is the O'brien Decade!!!!! <BR> <BR>That thing will change your life!

02-23-2010 2:04 PM

Liquid Force Lyman

eternalshadow 02-23-2010 5:11 PM

It's going to depend on what you're looking for in a board. <BR> <BR>Lots of boards will allow you to pop big but the question is what board will fit your riding style and allow you to do this? <BR> <BR>Do you want edgy and fast? Edgy and slow? Loose and fast, loose and slow? Do you want abrupt straight up pop, transitional, or more of an out than up? <BR> <BR>Everything is going to ride different for you, it's a matter of finding the right combination that excites you. <BR> <BR>For me it's the Liquid Force Lyman which offers an edgy board that carries speed through the transition and has significant pop. <BR> <BR>If there's any way for you to demo, or to try friends boards, any way at all for you to get an idea of how different boards ride take advantage of it! Then with your new found knowledge get the best board for you!

stang_killa_ss 02-23-2010 7:56 PM

pretty hard to leave the Watson out of a lineup when talking about pure vertical pop

da_kamp 02-23-2010 8:08 PM

Lyman <BR>Ibex

benjaminp 02-23-2010 8:55 PM

You are basically looking for a big rocker (and if it gives you this kind of information, a late kick), and a wide middle. Every company has one or two boards like this, most of them have already been mentioned. The type of rocker probably doesnt matter, 3 stage is traditionally bigger vertical but Chad Sharpe holds the record on a continuous rocker board, so you make your own decision there.

bogartsomeday 02-23-2010 11:17 PM

I know two people mentioned the Marius but i couldnt disagree more. I rode a transcend all summer and loved the pop that the 3 stage rocker gave, rode the watson-loved that boards pop, rode the kink-liked the pop on that board (not as much as the transcend though)....i rode the marius and the number one thing that i cant stand about the board is there is absolutely no pop to it! I rode my buddies marius platty too which is suppose to have more pop due to increased stiffness, and NO POP! I had to cut into the wake much harder to get the same pop out of the marius that i did the transcend. I gave the marius several chances to redeam itself and all times were a disappointment. If you want "air", STAY AWAY FROM THE MARIUS! I love the pop that the transcend ans the watson gave, the transcend is a little more consistent but that could be only cause i rode it all season and knew how to edge, push of wake, etc. I've heard the Shane has some good pop too...im pretty sure the shane also has the biggest 3-stage rocker in LF's quiver.

westlake_waker 02-24-2010 8:12 AM

What year on the Transcend and Watson?

stang_killa_ss 02-24-2010 11:35 AM

i would recomend the 09+ because thats when the switched to 6" spacing on bindings. unless you have the old 8" bindings. any 09+ gear will be compatible. <BR> <BR>codi i have a 08 shane 140, i really love everything about it, other than weight. its a pig.

wakeordie 02-24-2010 12:13 PM

LF lyman

guido 02-24-2010 2:38 PM

What CWB do you have? A lot of the so-called beginner or package boards are pro-model boards from a few years back. <BR> <BR>Unless it is a very old board (pre-'00) or too small, then I doubt it's holding you back. More likely it's rider, rather than board. <BR> <BR>That being said, there's nothing better than a new board. The CWB Transcend is an awesome board. I've not talked to anybody that didn't like it. If you have a chance, demo a few sticks to see what you like.

bmartin 02-24-2010 3:05 PM

Congrats on the 3s, but big air has mostly to do with your edge and body position, then the wake, then what type of board you ride. A board can make a difference, but only so much. Lots of good suggestions and I am partial to the 3-stage flexers.

bogartsomeday 02-24-2010 6:53 PM

Michael P._ Idk if you were asking me about what year of the transcend and watson, but in case you were, i had the 08, 09, and 2010 transcend, all 3 years were great shepes (yes i know the 09 and 2010 are the same shape). I have the 08 watson that i rode which from what i know, its been the same shape for the past 3 years other than 2010. I mlookin to size down from a 142 to a 138 or 139...havent chosen to go with a lyman or watson again....

westlake_waker 02-25-2010 1:54 PM

Right now i have a 2004 CWB Sol 134. If you guys think that board is fine and i just need to improve my load and position thats fine, i would rather save my money.

bogartsomeday 02-25-2010 4:06 PM

Michael P.- A 134 is def too small if your 175 lbs...yes someones riding level is not all on the board, but there are certain cases that a board can become a hinderance to a persons progression. Its all about bein comfortable on the board/in the bindings. Having too small or too big of a board can be a slight hinderance if someones on one of the extremes. I think in your case, a 134 is really really small. You need to be on a 138 my friend. Thats my opinion but im sure many others would agree a 138 would be better for you. I think you'd notice a positive difference moving up to the right size.

stephan 02-25-2010 4:19 PM

Not the worst board ever made but the designs have definitely come a long ways since that shape first came out (2001). I'd agree with Codi, you need to be on at least a 138, a 142 is probably preferable. It's tough to nail one board down when there are literally hundreds of shapes that ride well and everyone has their preference. Best of luck, enjoy the search.

jasonpav 02-25-2010 6:09 PM

I used to ride a 2004 sol. It isn't the worst board I've ridden or owned, but by far it isn't the best. I tried it out again for a day last fall just to see what it was like, and I could definitely tell that current board technology makes a difference. I would definitely suggest getting a newer intermediate level board from within the past 3 years. I would suggest anywhere from 138 to 142 in size. If you still like CWB you can try something like this <a href="http://boardersmall.com/xcart/product.php?productid=19894&amp;cat=598&amp;page=2 " target="_blank">http://boardersmall.com/xcart/product.php?productid=19894&amp;cat=598&amp;page=2 </a> but I would shop around and check local shops before buying anything

jasonpav 02-25-2010 6:12 PM

Also, you might want to look into newer bindings. I saw your profile said "Crappy CWB (2005)". Newer bindings not only perform better, but the are much easier to get into, and they do not hurt your feet like old ones did

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:59 AM.