Location: Blackcomb, BC & Loveland, CO
Snow Conditions: Blackcomb, BC was hardpacked & ice to slushy bumpy snow. Loveland was powder and groomers to bumpy snow.
Setup: I rode the Jones Mountain Twin with my Union bastardized bindings and Vans Veil Boots size 8.
Size: 157cm
First Impression: I’m don’t ride like Jeremy Jones or Jonaven Moore but I can still ride this board and the pow was the best for it.
Weight: Tad heavier than average
Flex: The mountain twin lives up to it’s name, it’s flex is on the stiffer side but meant to handle the bigger mountain freestyle riding. It features a directional flex so the nose is softer for powder riding and the tail is stiffer to handle the powder riding. Overall the torsional and longitudinal flex is stiffer on the mountain twin. I found once in a turn, it held an edge and remained a stable ride down the mountain. Torsionally and the waist width were a bit sluggish for quick responsive turns especially when I took it in the trees. The mountain twin has camrock which is slight camber between the feet and a tip/tail rocker for some playfulness on the mountain.
Turning: The quicker short radius turns weren’t as easy and smoothe for me in the trees. I definitely let the board ride me in spots and struggled to get quicker response out of it. I felt more comfortable riding drawn out S turns on the mountain twin in wide open runs and terrain. Once on edge, it gripped the snow with the mellow magne traction and especially at Whistler for the first run on the icy hardpacked spots.
Stable: On the really soft slushy bumps and bumpy terrain, you felt bounced around and it didn’t absorb you as well as in the powder. When cruising on groomers, it was no problem and kept you charging down the mountain. In the powder, it was the best feeling and you stayed afloat with the camrock rocker in the tip and tail.
Pop: I didn’t play with the pop on this board, I did try to butter and press it…it wasn’t easy and definitely required all my weight to do it.
Switch: The mountain twin is a twin shape but a directional flex. I mounted up the board centered and noticed some difference when riding switch but it’s still capable of the mountain twin name it lives up to.
Overall Impression: For a freeride who makes the whole mountain a park and rides powder in the backcountry, the mountain twin is that ideal board for big lines, drops and powder. I wish I had more powder days on it but powder in May is harder to come by. The mountain twin handled the resort riding and there were times where I knew it could ride me but also times when I expected more from it.
Shay’s Honesty Box: Slushy conditions are really hard to judge a board so I ended up asking to take the mountain twin back to Colorado with me to try it in a variety of more conditions. In the powder and groomers, it was a good ride and much more favorable than slushy bumps down the mountain. It didn’t make me ride like Jeremy Jones but it was fun to try it on the mountain and pretend I could ride as good as him.
Ready to buy? Head over to evo for men’s snowboards or shop their full line of snowboards
On Snow Photo
[singlepic id=9204 w=400 h=300 float=]
[singlepic id=9203 w=400 h=300 float=]
Jones Mountain Twin description
[singlepic id=9205 w=956 h=629 mode=watermark float=]
Review Disclosure: I borrowed this board on my way to Whistler, BC where I rode it and took it back to CO to ride it at Loveland. It’s been returned to the company.
oxi
June 2, 2010 at 8:37 amThanks for the review! Been waiting for somebody to try this one out. How does the camrock compare to libtechs c2?
JP
June 2, 2010 at 9:47 amThanks for the review, I have been waiting to hear about the Jones lineup. looks like my initial thoughts are confirmed. These boards just may be too much for the resort rider. I think I will be sticking with the NS Premier I picked up at the end of the season rather then trying the Mountain Twin or the Flagship. I am sure these are sick boards when in their element, but for the east coast and occasional trip out West, I wouldn’t even tap half their potential.
Oxi: Camrock is pretty much the opposite of C2 or Never Summer’s RC tech. As Shay mentioned, Jones uses slight camber underfoot leading to raised tip and tail. C2 and RC are rocker with a slight camber outside of the binding inserts.
oxi
June 2, 2010 at 11:06 amHow does it ride though? Camrock to me looks like a toned down camber board? Would it be more stable than the C2/RC then? Thx thx!
JT
June 2, 2010 at 3:46 pmThanks for posting this review. I really want to grab one of these decks for next season!
Tweets that mention Snowboard Review: 10-11 Jones Mountain Twin – Shayboarder.com -- Topsy.com
June 3, 2010 at 2:36 am[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by shayboarder and shredunion.com, Girls Learn To Ride. Girls Learn To Ride said: Snowboard Review: 10-11 Jones Mountain Twin http://bit.ly/913fPI […]
keither
June 3, 2010 at 3:36 amC2 is the bomb bizzle. I’m lovin the fact that companies have opened their minds to new shapes and designs. Look how far we’ve come from the cambered/capped crap of ten years ago. For me, all this new tech is a matter of preference. Some people like C2, some like camrock, others zero camber. And even still, some love camber and despise anything else. Some love MTX, some hate it. Try them all if you can, because they all have their own perks. Except for camber (opinion). Camber sucks.
masl
June 7, 2010 at 4:39 amtry all… i rode the new Dark Series c2BTX, a new Nidecker Camrock (wich is the same because Jones is build by Nideker), a NS SL-R and a Signal Omni with Wavelength. C2 by Mervin and NS are comparable, but riding is completely different, Camrock and Wavelength are comparable, riding is similar. Camrock und NS are the stable ones, C2 and Wavelength are more lively.
Patrick
August 11, 2010 at 10:38 pmCurious to if you rode the 155 or 158? I did not see the 157 size listed on the Jones Snowboard site. Also curious how you would suggest sizing a board with camrock? It seems to be the opposite of C2 and Banana tech. I have friends with skis that have camber under foot and rocker tip and tail and they tend to size up a little bit from normal due to a shorter contact length than that of a normal camber ski in the same size. Curious if you think that this school of thought should apply to camrock with YES and Jones boards. Banana tech seems to have a longer contact length for the board size than a normal camber board would in the same size, this is the Lib Tech argument that they gave me for sizing down a little bit.
Thanks for reviewing this board, hope to see you review more of the Jones lineup. Also wondering where to look for these I can’t find a shop here in Montana that is carrying them this coming winter.
Dylan
September 19, 2010 at 1:14 pmGreat review. How would you compare a jones or yes board (camrock) to a rossignol board(amptek)? Also how would you compare camrock or ampek to lib techs c2, or never summers tech?
Joe T
September 19, 2010 at 7:04 pmYo Guys,
I want to to jump in while the conversation is still hot. Ohhh all of the different camber stories. This is a ploy specifically designed to confuse and mis-lead the consumer in to buying something they don’t want…… Well, maybe not really, but here is the thing. It is obvious, riding rocker makes the board float better and turn quicker. On the flip-side, no rocker, or rocker camber/C2/camrock mix, will ever make a board turn and hold an edge or ollie like full camber.
That being said, the industry is in a dogfight right now to see who will pop out the rocker board that comes the closest, because the whole idea is to have one board for everything, right?
Go to your local demos or shops and demo boards, this is by far the best way to decide. The idea of Camrock (YES/Jones) is that you have a shorter effective edge, but it is complete, from binding to binding giving the board a slightly more traditional feel. C2, V-rock, and everything else will still give you that edge hold, but by splitting the camber under each foot, It gives the rider a little more individual foot steering if that makes sense.
Lastly, for board sizing, don’t go bigger. The rocker is designed to make shorter boards float better without having to jump up a size into a potentially more cumbersome board. If you do go up, you will achieve slightly more edge hold, but then you are defeating the purpose of the rocker boards. Banana Tech will always have less effective edge because the edges curve away from the snow, imagine riding a wakeboard on snow, it would feel similar.
Hope this helps!
Peter
September 30, 2010 at 6:57 amThanks Shannon! Excellent review as always. I am still a little undecided though. I want to love the board, but may opt to a NS. I’ll keep you posted.
Pete