Jan 14, 2017 by Rich in Sweden
Ability Level: 25 years •
Riding Style: All mountain •
Days You Ride A Year: 10 - 20 •
Height, Weight And Boot Size (for Boards, Boots & Bindings): 6'2" 87kg EU 43
I just seen your Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro review. I actually got my 162 model in December 2015 and have riden it for 14 days in the Austrian alps. Dude! It is one of the siffest boards I have ever riden! On your review, you say it has a nice medium flex and I can see you prove that when you flex it with your palm when you are standing with the guys. So why is mine so stiff? Is it a dud? Does it need breaking in? Has the flex changed since the early prototypes? I am not kidding you mine is as stiff as a door. I can't flex mine even a quarter the amount like you did with your demo. These are the previous boards that I have owned…
Burton Iguchi 155 (1996)
Burton Custon 159 (1997)
Burton Olofsson 162 (1998)
Nitro Shogun 166 (1999)
2x Lib Tech Emmagator 165 (2000 -2001)
Ride Timeless 164 (2002)
2x Nitro Darkhorse 165 (2003 – 2005)
Unity Ultra Light Series 164 (2008)
Jones Mountain Twin LTD 160 (2014) - current board
Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro 162 (2015) - current board
The most stiff boards I had owned previously were the Nitro Darkhorse and the Unity ULS. I have progressively gone stiffer with my board choices in the past when I was riding a lot more, up to 40 days a season. Now I get maybe 20 days, I am older, 42, and I like cruising with my own two kids. The Jones is awesome. Still reasonably stiff, but about a third less stiff compared to my older decks. So that was a nice transition down for me. However, as I said, the Arbor is super stiff. I was not expecting that! I like the board, but I am kind of bummed because I was expecting a more mellow board like the one you tested.
That said. The thing absolutely rocks at warp speed and has great pop, but it took a bit of adjustment when loading up for a big ollie. It takes a lot of power to get it to pop, then it really takes off. Basically, everything works better above 40 mph! It's not a board for morning legs or tired legs.
I really don't like the 'uprise fender system' though. I like the way the contact points bite on a traditional camber board. I find it reassuring either as I rebound from edge to edge or when I edge into a spin. I felt that the additional grip provided by the 'grip tech' was wasted by the addition of the uprise fenders. I felt the board lose grip for a split second between turns, which I guess is the purpose of it, but when I was pushing hard it washed out a couple of times. It also washed out a couple of times when I was edging slightly off kickers or into spins. Combined with the Jones I suppose I have everything I need, but it's a shame the Arbor is so far towards stiff end of the scale.
I have written to Arbor to ask if it is possible that there could be a difference in flex between an early test board and production board, but I have not yet had a reply. I almost wonder if my board accidentally got the core from one of the stiffer boards in the Arbor range during a power black out?! I am pretty sure the boards are partly hand made, especially when it come to laying up the fiber glass and the carbon stringers. I have done a bit of this and it is not an exact science, so I could imagine that one board could feel slightly different to another to a very experienced rider, but not the difference I believe my board has compared to the board TheGoodRide tested.
I'd be curious to know what anyone else thinks of this board.
All the best. Rich in Sweden.