|Overall Rating||Liked it!|
|Riding Style||All Mountain|
|Riding Level||Intermediate - Expert|
|Fits Boot size (US)||8-10|
|Manufactured in||Dubai by SWS|
|Camber Profile||Mostly Camber|
|Approx. Weight||Feels Normal|
|On Snow Feel|
Where To Buy
No obligation, but these links & ads support the site.
Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber 2017 Review by The Good Ride
The Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber is a pretty fun board that we all liked over the Rocker version. If it had a little more directional float in powder then it would be a board we’d want to own and something we could easily recommend. It’s a fun ride and could find a great role in someone’s quiver.
Ethics Statement: We don’t get paid by the manufacturer to write these reviews. No one is perfect and we do make money from the “Where To Buy” links below, but this is our best attempt at an honest and objective review from an average riders’ perspective.
How This Review Happened: We borrowed this for an extended demo and then returned it and also got a few laps on it at the demos.
Conditions: Some hard snow, some really good snow, and some windblown Sierra powdered sugar.
Riders: James (Size 9, 5’10” 185-195lbs), Jimbo (Size 11, 5’11” 160lbs), Zobel (Size 11.5, 6’ 180lbs, Peter (Size 8, 5’11” 185lbs), Jack
Boots: Burton SLX, Burton Rover, Burton AMB, Burton Imperial,
Bindings: Union Atlas, Burton Genesis, Burton Genesis X, Arbor Cypress,
Set Up: Almost centered almost 23″ wide 15 front -15 back
Approximate Weight: Feels pretty normal
Flex: Our board was a demo model and the flex was really mediumish. Not what we expected for how this board was described. Looks like it was stiffened up though in production from the demo we had so it seems like it’s now more med/stiff.
Sizing: The 156 fit our specs pretty well and especially so our boot size for those with 8.5-9 boots but I think the 159 would have been the better call. However, Zobel and Jimbo with their 11’s would not be happy with this model sizing at all and they would need something more in a mid/wide.
On Snow Feel: So it feels almost like camber until you get to the tip/tail. It’s got this fender tech that lifts a little portion of the end of the effective edge like a fender does on a car….so yeah it is what it’s described to be. It’s very good for making camber not feel catchy and it doesn’t have that TBT washiness on semi-committed to carvy turns. It’s got a stable non-catchy camber like feel and it’s the kind of board you want to take out on groomer days. It’s a slightly tapered somewhat directional board with a centered stance. So it feels a little mountain freestyle, a little surfy/freeride but not really committed to either side. It’s like a lot of all mountain boards are that we ride. For it’s shape it might be a touch more surfy/freeride than some of it’s peers but it’s still more of a chameleon type of board that likes to accommodate different moods and riding styles.
Edge Hold: System tech grip is great and it’s a really fun board.
Turn Initiation: Pretty quick edge to edge and the Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber goes where it should quickly. There doesn’t seem to be any lag time and that’s great for riding in tight spots.
Turning Experience: I really thought the fender tech would fuck this boards ability to turn up but it was really fun and it allowed us to push it without as much consequence as traditional camber.
Carving: You could lay this out really well and it felt like a fun carver. It’s like riding a camber board with a little early rise in the tip/tail so you only feel a little camber taken out of the turning equation so it’s really fun for laying it out and trying new carves without worrying about the end of the effective edge catching as much as traditional camber.
Skidded Turns: It’s not super easy like the continuous rocker Bryan Iguchi board, which is super easy, but this is pretty easy for camber for sure.
Speed: Even though our demo flex was mediumish it still held well when picking it up a bit. I bet the stiffer production model would be even better for really opening it up.
Uneven Terrain: We had no problem weaving in and out of bumps and it has a touch of a rubbery feel that will absorb the shock so your body doesn’t. You could ride this all day on a crowded Sat.
Powder: So the fender tech makes this board catch free but not floaty. It’s good for a camber board with a centered stance but it’s not as good as many of the similar hybrid shapes out there. You would need the rocker version if you want a lot of float but then I don’t like the drive in steep terrain that the continuous rocker solution has. If you have another board for real powder days this could work. I wish they could tweak the fender tech to also give this board a little more float to compete with many of it’s peers but as it stands it’s not bad for a camber ride.
Buttering: Ours was very doable when it comes to buttering but not sure about the production model.
Switch: For a board with a little taper this rode pretty well. It feels different but not so different that you couldn’t easily get used to it with just a little bit of time.
Jumps: The fender tech is good in some ways and questionable in others. I noticed that the first day when I tried to Ollie I loaded the edge near the tail and that’s where the fender tech is so I washed out instead of popped. You get this feeling like you have an edge from tip to tail throughout most of the board but then not on the edge. I got used to it but it’s a little weird. It’s good though when you are off your game and need to spin out. It’s less likely than camber to send you slamming into the ground so that’s good too.
Jibbing: Our softer demo model would be ok but the production model would be pretty bonky.
Pipe: This was really fun in the pipe and it made a not so great pipe rider feel more confident. I like how the tech
So, all in all, we unanimously liked this board over the rocker version, it does a lot of things well, it’s a fun board to go out and turn. It’s not a perfect one board quiver but I think it can make a lot of people happy as long as they know the boards limitations.
Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber Specs
Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber Images
Arbor Company Information
Arbor Bryan Iguchi Pro Camber User Reviews
Mid Year release was stiff
Have to agree with Rich as well. I am guessing that if you
Purchased the mid season release, it was a stiffer board than the 2016-2017 full release. I bought my during the winter of 2015 in December, and this board is stiff. Like Lib Tech T Rice stiff. Guessing they made it less stiff to appease more riders? Makes me happy because I like the flex as is.
It’s a phenomenal board. And I don’t neccessarily agree with the review. It’s obvious this group loves directional free ride boards. This is a twin that is built to rip turns, land switch, but still have solid capabilities directional in powder, and I cannot think of many twin, camber dominant boards with a tail meant to sink should you find powder.
The review mentioned that they would like it better with more of a directional build, and some early rise in the nose. Well, that’s not who this board was built for. This is built for the guy that wanted a little more powder friendly twin in a cambered stick. This was built for people who ride like Guch. Landing switch on a flight attendant sucks. I’ve done it. The Guch was supposed to cover that. But if you wanted to go hike and hit a shoot, you could do that too.
No offense to the review. We all pick out poison. But as a long time reader, it’s obvious this group likes side cut tech for grip, directional freeride sticks with early rise noses, and damp boards.
While that is great, many other riders like different things. So to try and alter this board into a Pick Your Line, or Mullair doesn’t make sense to me. That’s not what it was built to be. And as a guy who really appreciated a twin, it’s a really neat concept to add some tech to this board to also gives it some big mountain ability. You can ride this from shoot to glade, to slack country, while having a free style flare.
If I could request something for future reviews. Focus less on forcing boards into categories of boards you enjoy, and talk more about the build, snap, Sweet spot, flex pattern, where the play is and where it stiffens up, dampness, etc. Snap is huge here. Some sort of description off a tranny and amount of “send it” ability would be great. Amount of spring out of carves, etc. Less about how about how you would build it to be a Burton Flight attendant. Because if I wanted that, I would buy that. Constructive criticism...
Response: Thanks for the review Pete and your feedback. You have some valid points and I\'ll take into consideration your suggestions. Also your review reminded me I didn\'t finish up the written portion which often rounds out the review so just did that. Thanks! I think it addresses more of your critique but just to be clear we never want it to be a PYL, Mullair or Flight Attendant style of ride. We like the shape but just wanted more from their fender/lifted tech in the tip and tail since it already takes that part of the effective edge out of play.
Mine is stiffer than yours!!
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.