Skwal riders?

[tufty]

I spent the afternoon cutting the core for my new board today. 180, 9.5-13m radius, 12cm underfoot, decambered nose.

Personally, I have the "standard" 4cm between boots stance, possibly because that's what I started with (and my SK200 wasn't inserted, so I had to stick with what I had), but I have tried the widest possible stance on my Panther and didn't like it. A wider stance might be more forgiving, but if you wanted an easy ride you wouldn't be on a skwal, right?

I rode for a bit with a colleague the day before yesterday, I don't think he's a fan. Roughly translated, what he said was "that thing runs like a high-speed train and carves harder than anything I've ever seen, but you still look like a spastic riding it"



Simon

[trailertrash]

...but if you wanted an easy ride you wouldn't be on a skwal, right?

Why does one actually ride a skwal? What is the point? What is the device good at?

I am curious.

[tex1230]

Why does one actually ride a skwal? What is the point? What is the device good at?

I am curious.

They are actually pretty fun. I don't think I would do it every day, but it will teach you to commit to your carve. In my experience, it's very difficult to skid.

If you ride high angles, going from 60+ degrees to 87.5-90 isn't that big of a switch. The tough part for me was Thias skwals (the one I had) are set for pretty narrow stances.

Plus, you get to ride Deer Valley - unlike on an alpine snowboard.

[queequeg]

Why does one actually ride a skwal? What is the point? What is the device good at?

I am curious.

They are extremely fast edge-to-edge. They also seem like they would be pretty good in the bumps.

[tufty]

Why does one actually ride a skwal? What is the point? What is the device good at?

Why does one ride a skwal? Why not?
What is the point? It's the bit at the front.
What is the device good at? Carving.

Seriously? an excerpt of what I posted on the skwalzone forums:

Elegance. A turn is it's own justification. A skidded turn is a wasted opportunity. It's not enough to "get down" a slope, perfect lines are a must. Speed is irrelevant. Jumps are pointless. Rubbing the snow is not a goal, but it happens. Beauty, simplicity is everything. When people say "I want to be able to do that", you have won.

...

Last year a friend's father (no slouch on skis) said of my boarding, "That was beautiful. It looked effortless". The greatest compliment I've ever had, especially as it was after a 1000m descent through late march fresh snow / chop at the end of the day on a slalom board - it may have looked effortless, but I could hardly stand at the end of it

So now I'm back to searching for nirvana, purity of carve, on a skwal. It's hard, and it hurts. Which is why it's wortwhile.

The skwal is pure carving. Totally committed, almost totally pure, little "backside and frontside" to consider, no wimping out. It's hard to do. It's harder to skid than to carve. It's like the switch from softboots to hardboots. Once you've tried it, you run the risk of not wanting to go back.

They're pretty damn good in the powder, too.

[RobertAlexander]

If I may politely ask and explain my take on skwal vs alpine stance. i ride a 20.75" stance using 3 degree front and rear, with about 1.5" setback from midpoint. From looking at many skwals I conclude that the rear binding position is about the same as an alpineboard in relation to midpoint, however the front bindings are anywhere from 3" to 4" further to the rear(at or just in front of midpoint) as alpines are. Is this because as your angles climb to 80/85/or above, it is more comfortable to move your front foot back. Why not move both bindings inward equally? Has anyone tried this? curios, Thank you

[obi one]

if you can make it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM-xXowOX7Q

come and see

obi one

[Dan]

Why does one actually ride a skwal? What is the point? What is the device good at?

I am curious.

You know how your alpine board is much quicker edge to edge than your freeride board? Well...edge changes on a skwal are that much faster -- feels really quick/nimble and it's definitely a lot of fun.

And remember, boards were trending skinny just a few years ago, so the skwal fits that progression well -- it was just a few steps further down the path. I think that anyone who rides alpine would have fun trying out a skwal, even if they don't adopt it as their primary sliding mode.

[mikel45]

Why a skwal? . . . titanal + alpine speed + progressive (slingshot) sidecut = big smile wicked carves

[*Ace*]

More fun than alpine snowboarding!

[Jack Michaud]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM-xXowOX7Q

That guy looks very tippy and unbalanced. He reaches for the snow a lot. Not something I'd want to emulate.

You know how your alpine board is much quicker edge to edge than your freeride board? Well...edge changes on a skwal are that much faster -- feels really quick/nimble and it's definitely a lot of fun.

I haven't ridden a skwal, but super quick edge-to-edge speed has never been a big draw for me. Do you honestly get to the bottom of a run and think "man, those were some sick edge changes!"? I don't. I'm loving my 21cm wide Stubby 171. I have no complaints about the edge changes, I can do them as quick as I want to. Whenever I get on an 18cm wide board I feel like I'm on a balance beam. Meh.

And remember, boards were trending skinny just a few years ago,

If by a few years ago you mean like 16.

I think that anyone who rides alpine would have fun trying out a skwal, even if they don't adopt it as their primary sliding mode.

It looks like it would be a gas to try, but I don't see any mechanical advantage to them, so I'm sure I wouldn't make it my primary ride. The ability to make strong fore/aft weight adjustments is one of the biggest advantages we have over skis. It looks like you'd give a lot of that up on a skwal.

[sabestian]

I haven't ridden a skwal, but super quick edge-to-edge speed has never been a big draw for me. Do you honestly get to the bottom of a run and think "man, those were some sick edge changes!"?

Actually... yes, I do! But that's not the thing that makes me pick up the skwal over my board almost every time. It is rather their immense edge grip.

It looks like it would be a gas to try, but I don't see any mechanical advantage to them, so I'm sure I wouldn't make it my primary ride. The ability to make strong fore/aft weight adjustments is one of the biggest advantages we have over skis. It looks like you'd give a lot of that up on a skwal.

Erm... no. And the mechanical advantages become quite obvious when you start riding them. For one, the way you can dumpen the bumps with your knees without disturbing the edge grip or becoming unbalanced is absolutely unbelievable.

Sorry for stating the obvious, but you just have to try a skwal for a few days (just enough to get some control over it ) to understand. The rest is just speculating. Simple as that.

[RobertAlexander]

first time out for an hour on skwal, conditions were sad as I looked for spots that had snow to lay it over, stability was fine once I got some speed, I need more time with it in good snow. I did switch back to my alpine board for the second hour to get a better comparison with the conditions that prevailed, like I said , i need some carving snow to make a better judgement, quick question, how many days do I put in on this 16.75" stance at 80/80 w 3 and 3 degrees, before I realize that something must change, or will I start to feel comfortable after a while?? Thank You

[RobertAlexander]

172/10.7/20/14/20

[*Ace*]

Nice!
Who made it?

Took me a good 3 days to feel comfortable on my first Skwal. The first day was a lot of experimenting with the stance.

[RobertAlexander]

me,myself,I(message to short)

[*Ace*]

Any more pics?

Are you starting a company or just pressing your own boards?

[Jack Michaud]

when is it a skwal and when is it a skinny alpine snowboard? Seems like angles of 80/80 still give you a heelside and a toeside. that seems antithetical to the skwal thing, no? I also thought stance width was supposed to be a lot narrower, if not heel-to-toe...?

[tex1230]

when is it a skwal and when is it a skinny alpine snowboard? Seems like angles of 80/80 still give you a heelside and a toeside. that seems antithetical to the skwal thing, no? I also thought stance width was supposed to be a lot narrower, if not heel-to-toe...?

I think the cutoff is around 14cm... I think the skinny virus boards are questionable.

[sabestian]

I don't think you'd be able to ride that board like it was a skwal with these settings. Too wide stance and alpine angles.

But I've heard about riders that use wide stances on a skwal. Also, there are wide skwals for powder and softboots.

The Virus has both narrow alpine boards and skwals in the offer. Perhaps we should ask them what they think is the difference?

I was actually well surprised how large was the difference in riding with this couple of centimetres missing. Much bigger than I anticipated. There must be some kind of a treshold, a border to your setting, crossing which changes the way you ride a board from alpine to skwal technique. It's a small adjustment (i.e. front binding at 0deg(90deg)? I donno) that changes everything.

[KingCrimson]

My 21 cm Tomahawk feels faster edge to edge than my 20 cm Coiler because it's so much more balanced. Having the additional stability of 7-8* lower angles more than makes up for whatever sluggishness could be attributed to the wider waist.

[zarkod]

I don't think you'd be able to ride that board like it was a skwal with these settings. Too wide stance and alpine angles.

You are right.
But the stance is not really the point, the real difference resides in the angles.
The skwal technique requires 0° on the front foot (and from 0 to some degrees on the back foot).
There is theorically no "front" and "back" turns, both should be similar.

[sabestian]

If the stance is not a problem for you (I find a wide stance on a skwal awkward and tiring, plus they require lots of heel/toe lift) than there should be no problems with setting these bindings to zero... I think it is your obligation to try this as a skwal. It is the right thing to do.

[KingCrimson]

I think the reason there is no front and back is because your heelside isn't afforded the mobility...It becomes as intrinsically weak as a toeside.

[tex1230]

I think the reason there is no front and back is because your heelside isn't afforded the mobility...It becomes as intrinsically weak as a toeside.

Have you ridden one? If you had, I would bet that you wouldn't make that comment. I found "heelside" to be much easier on a skwal...in fact, after riding a skwal in the morning and switching to my 19cm wide board in the afternoon, I found my heelside turns improving.

[*Ace*]

Its like the Swoard guys saying you need a certain stance and a certain board and a certain technique to EC, when that clearly isn't the case.

The stance, wide or narrow, is really meant to face the body more forward. There is no toeside or heelside because of your body in relation to the board. On an apline board or any regular snowboard you are limited to the amount of upper body heelside rotation due to the stance angles on your board. It becomes easier to rotate as the angles get higher. The Skwal eliminates this giving you equal upper body rotation to board sides of the board. I find that I still have a favorite edge to be on.

Slight angles and cants are signs of the progression of the sport I think. A wider range of equipment that suits an individual's personal style.

[KingCrimson]

Have you ridden one? If you had, I would bet that you wouldn't make that comment. I found "heelside" to be much easier on a skwal...in fact, after riding a skwal in the morning and switching to my 19cm wide board in the afternoon, I found my heelside turns improving.

Yup. Thias Easy Jungle. It felt very toesidey on heelside. Maybe this effect would be diminished if I spent more time on one.

[sabestian]

Mate, you have to be able to ride the skwal, to actually say that you have tried it. Again, sorry for stating the obvious.

[KingCrimson]

Mate, you have to be able to ride the skwal, to actually say that you have tried it. Again, sorry for stating the obvious.

Burning ten runs on one was enough for me to find it wasn't my cup of tea.

Rocking the 8m sidecut or whatever the Easy Jungle had was fun but the stance just didn't work for me.

Riding 90/90 angles was still not symmetrical from what I experienced.

[BlueB]

I've got an Easy Jungle too. It's been about 2 years since I rode it last, but this is what I remember of-hand:
It has lots of offset, I rode it forward or ref. stance.
I rode wider stance then ref. stance suggested, with toe/heel lift.
It hooked wicked turns. I was able to put my heelside hip to the snow right away, on a green run.
Toe and heel side differed a lot in initiation. Heel was easy, just drop the hip and it hooks in. Toe was struggle, I had to dive into the turns. That was with 0 front and about 85 back.
Later I backed angles a bit, somthing like 85 / 80 and toe side became a bit easier to initiate.
It worked in softer snow too and on mini-bumps on mild blue run. Didn't ride it on anything very steep...
Thias bindings that came with it are actually Skwal version of Snowpros. Came with lots of shimms.

Now I'm getting inspired to scrape it and give a go again. Well, after this period of rains and pow has gone...