| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
M`honri Newbie

Joined: 23 Jan 2011 Posts: 21 City: Farr West
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 6:52 pm Post subject: your oppinions please |
|
|
I am going with the CWB DB9 this year and need your input on the only two options they offer....I am 5'10" 190 lbs
Do I get the 138 or the 144?
Thank you guys and gals! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
STANG KILLA SS Wakeboarder.Commie


Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Posts: 2086 City: Killeen TX
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
138 _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Chattwake Wakeboarder.com Freak


Joined: 01 Jul 2005 Posts: 4064 City: Chattanooga
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Depends on your riding style. I know many many people your size riding 141-144. A shorter board is a bit more maneuverable and ever so slightly lighter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
M`honri Newbie

Joined: 23 Jan 2011 Posts: 21 City: Farr West
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I am fairly new but I like to switch alot so I take the fins off and get some good air. I ride CWB 140 +/- 1 and love their stuff. I'm just needing the wakeboarders input on this the only two opptions that the DB9 has to offer.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kyle f Addict

Joined: 14 Aug 2008 Posts: 835 City: Norris Lake
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
at 205 and 6' I like riding a Byerly 137 better than I did a 140. My suggestion would be the 138. Save some weight.... but consider you wil be lower in the water so technique will have to be done better. _________________ Always looking for others who ride on Norris Lake in TN
MB Sports B52 V23 with 2750lbs of Ballast Capable  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shaggyboarder Wakeboarder.Commie


Joined: 09 Nov 2004 Posts: 1631 City: ft. laud.... hook me up with a pull
|
Posted: Jan 23, 2011 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would go bigger. Im only 5'8 160 and I like to ride 138-140. The bigger the board the softer the landings and more stable it will be. 138 will have a narrower stance as well. Too bad they dont make a 141/2 144 seems like a big jump from138. _________________ Random Acts Of Dumbness Will Always Be Rewarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LakeIolaLuke Wakeboarder.com Freak


Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 3064 City: Lake Iola/Orlando
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah that's a big gap in board sizes, But I'd ride the 144, and I'm only about 175. I won't really ride anything under 140. _________________
| buckthis wrote: | | And another reason wakeboarding is better than surfing, you die less, that means you have another day to wakeboard, which is more fun than surfing anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Heez Newbie

Joined: 09 Aug 2010 Posts: 41
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My buddy is about your size and rides the 144. I'm 5'8" 155 and I ride the 138. The nice thing about the DB9 is that despite the longer length you are still going to be on a very light weight board.
Not the best board to ride without fins, it has no other bottom features other than the center spine. If you want to make it looser get some smaller fins. I ride a .8 inch fin and it's awesome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
M`honri Newbie

Joined: 23 Jan 2011 Posts: 21 City: Farr West
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the input. Where would one get the .8" fins?
The funny thing is.. Many of the other big brand names, i.e. LF gives over 200 lb max weight requirements for almost all of their 136-38 boards. Alot of Hypers do and some of Ronix do. Just not CWB.... I like to be unpredictable on the wake with a 3 stage but I want to try an aggresive continuous rocker to see if I can pick up some speed coming across and poping. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
STANG KILLA SS Wakeboarder.Commie


Joined: 16 Feb 2008 Posts: 2086 City: Killeen TX
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
what most of these guys dont realize is the DB9/Faction have a 17.8" mid section largest on the market by almost 1/2"
so they have a HUGE advantage in load carrying capability for there length. because they have a significantly larger surface area than a normal 138. probly near the same as a normal 142.
trust me on the 138  _________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
3MileBayWaker Soul Rider

Joined: 14 Jan 2011 Posts: 256 City: Syracuse, NY
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd go 138... But that is my own preference. _________________ 2010 Glastron GT 205XL ( Volvo 4.3L GL-J)
Low Profile Black Windshield
Roswell Wake Air Tower
2009 Liquid Force Trip 142/ 2008 CWB Answer
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LakeIolaLuke Wakeboarder.com Freak


Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 3064 City: Lake Iola/Orlando
|
Posted: Jan 24, 2011 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It says on their site "up to 160 lbs" for the 138. And I think that most board co's are pretty generous with the weight caps on their specs. _________________
| buckthis wrote: | | And another reason wakeboarding is better than surfing, you die less, that means you have another day to wakeboard, which is more fun than surfing anyway. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shaggyboarder Wakeboarder.Commie


Joined: 09 Nov 2004 Posts: 1631 City: ft. laud.... hook me up with a pull
|
Posted: Jan 25, 2011 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
STANG KILLA SS, I would take width into consideration but wouldnt replace length with it. They both make the board ride totally different but one doesnt make up for the other. cwb vibe for example is suppose to be an inch wider from tip to tail, and I still preferred the 142 over the 136. It really comes down to rider preference so in a sense everyone is right. _________________ Random Acts Of Dumbness Will Always Be Rewarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
M`honri Newbie

Joined: 23 Jan 2011 Posts: 21 City: Farr West
|
Posted: Jan 26, 2011 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I would jump on to a 140 or even a 142 but I am just not down with the 144... When you take my current 140 board and drop a few centimeters in length and add a few to the width I am almost certain I will love it. Besides the few centimeters in length that I will be losing only amounts to about 3/8 of an inch of length lost in the water at any given time if you consider you only ride one edge or the other... : ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|