Why is the Swoard symmetrical?

Post by **Jack Michaud** » Monday 14 February 2005, 18:43

I was going to post this in the Swoard forum, but figured it had more to do with technique.

So, why is the Swoard symmetrical, or, why isn't it asymmetrical? It's a wide board for use with lower stance angles, right? Seems like that's what Pureboarding is doing, but their board is asym.

Do the EC and push/pull techniques work better on a symmetrical board, or is it just that it's more economical to build sym boards?

I would think that it is a matter of technique and not economics, but I'm curious to know from you guys.

Post by **rilliet** » Monday 14 February 2005, 20:44

Hi Jack,

One of the most important reason is that the bindings (most of them) are symetrical today (Bomber, Cateck, etc..) or have a base plate (F2, Burton, etc..) that gives them a quite "not so asymetrical" behaviour. Remember: in the early asy time there was no 4x4 insert and all bindings had two plots per foot. The mechanical strength transmission was much more asymetrical.

Another reason is that basicaly a symetrical board works better. An asymetrical board tends to slightly twist when bending and is not as stable when riding strait down.

But it is also true that these board are more expensive to build.

Jacques

Post by **Jack Michaud** » Monday 14 February 2005, 22:18

interesting, thanks. But just for the sake of argument, what if somehow an asym could be built to the same quality so it didn't twist? Also neglecting the straight-line stability, would an asym theoretically be better or worse for EC/push-pull carving?

Post by **rilliet** » Tuesday 15 February 2005, 7:41

Yes it could work great. As I remember, an asym is specialy good in backside turn but less good in frontside. Probably a few degrees (let's say 5 - 10) should make a great board. But more would lead to a poor frontside behaviour.

Jacques

Post by **Mattias** » Tuesday 15 February 2005, 16:03

Hi
I´ve been wondering about asym vs sym boards a long time. I've been riding sym boards for several years but just bought two asym boards to test them, where they better or worse? So last week I rode my F2 GTS 158 -2004 vs Nitro GT 156(asym)1998?

and a prototype 170 cm asym(10.5 m radius 23 cm wide).
When riding my F2 I do have a bit of a problem initiating heelside turns, both ordinary and EC. I also tend to get a lot of frontleg burn and my front knee tends to hurt after a hard day of riding.

So what are my conclusions after this testride?
- Heelside turns are definitly easier to initiate with a asym board - no contest here! you don't need to move your weight as far forward and It's also a lot easier on my knees - I can now ride a hole day without problem, 'cause you don't need to overload your frontleg to initiate a heelside turn.
- Frontside - no difference, you just need to change your weight distribution a tiny bit but you cannot say that either one is better.
- High speed in a straight line (and I do mean HIGH speeds) Sym boards are a little bit more stable.

So what does it means?
- Sym - to create a sym board that will be as good as a asym board (on the heelside)you need to have a soft nose ( and thus more unstable...)
- Asym - a really good newly designed asym board will probably feel better to most, but the are more difficult to design and will be more expensive.

For me and others with kneeproblems should definitly consider trying(and I can bet on it, buying) a asym board.

Until there is a newly developt asym board I will stick to my current asy board.

Matt

Post by **Felix** » Wednesday 16 February 2005, 12:09

For knee problems. Try to give an extra 5 deegres to your front binding. I need 5 deegres more than the flattest possible in order to get the pressure of my badly damaged knee. It's impossible for me to board 55/55 I need to go 62/55 for my technique at least.

Post by **plop** » Thursday 17 February 2005, 17:52

My board is assymetrical and frontside are a piece of cake.
It does get a bit wobly when going straight but who cares.