BC musings -
This goes back to something Lars got into recently, which is the way Mervin defines their setback. I've always found their directional boards feel a bit too far forward at reference for me, and it's usually because their setbacks are based on material length, not effective edge like the norm. That doesn't mean they can't still put the inserts in the same spot as a board that defines setback based on the edge, but a lot of of theirs tend to be more centered in that regard.
The BC is listed at 1.5", and this is true when measuring from the tips (3" longer nose), but it's only about 1/4" back on edge (1/2" longer nose-edge) due to the difference in kick lengths. I measured by taping the contact points with board tilted on edge, so it's fairly accurate.
The only board of theirs I can think of that I didn't set back more was the original mullair, but he was telling people to mount their stance all the way forward on that deck. They changed the setback after the first year to match how he rode them, thus I started to set them back more to match the first one.
I had a first year mayhem rocket, and because the nose kick was so much longer than tail kick, I think their true
setback was likely slightly forward on edge, or at least centered. I had to set it back quite a bit for it to feel balanced for my taste.
Not a problem, just interesting that they do it this way. Took one look at the BC and knew I would be adding setback per my taste, and I'm simply starting by using one insert pack behind ref - which gives just over 1" actual setback - that's around what I'm used to, and just looks correct to me on this board. It's now virtually identical to how I rode the mullair.
If you like a more centered feel, their factory setback is the way to go on this one, and you'll still get some float benefit from the nose kick. If you like directional boards and having some setback, it's food for thought if you have a Mervin deck.
Also to note - I think we discussed this earlier, but their contact length accounts for early rise. The contact on the 160W is listed at 114, which is pretty accurate, but the actual edge is more like 121 (I'm not accounting for sidecut, but it barely changes the number). I'm not sure why they only list contact length and not EE.
A comparison example - the classic korua platform with 269 waist (TF 57, pencil 64, dart 56, cafe 59) all have a 120 EE very similar to this BC, but they have shorter contact lengths (they call it running length) because they have longer early rise on each end. It's kinda cool to have both, but I'd pick EE if it were only one.
- IMG_0962.jpeg (1.71 MiB) Viewed 9983 times
Cannon is better at snowboarding, so I'd copy him