Jeremy Jones on the Evolution of Snowboard Design (Ep.230)

Today we’ve got a masterclass on the history and evolution of snowboard design with Jeremy Jones, as well as Jeremy’s own philosophy behind product creation and refinement at Jones Snowboards. Jeremy and I discuss “progression bumps”; a new Jones board coming out this spring; prototyping; finding design inspiration in unexpected places; a number of the boards in the current Jones lineup; and more. Then, the ‘strikingly handsome Justin Bobb’ jumps on to offer one of his (many) Crashes & Close Calls stories.

TOPICS & TIMES:

  • Splitboards: why did you start with splits? (6:36)
  • Making gear work vs. dialing in gear (11:25)
  • Progression Bumps: Evolutions & Revolutions (13:55)
  • Jones Tweaker & Nose Shape (17:10)
  • New Board: the Jones Butterfly (19:55)
  • Philosophy of Product Changes (21:54)
  • Storm Chaser & Inspiration from Surfing (30:08)
  • Design evolution since the early 80’s (32:11)
  • Are you more picky about shape or flex? (39:14)
  • Manufacturing errors? Tolerances & Variations (43:32)
  • Supply Chain update (49:05)
  • Project X Boards (52:10)
  • Product Name Changes & ‘Know Thyself’ (54:06)
  • Jones Apparel (1:01:40)
  • Crashes & Close Calls (1:08:22)
  • What We’re Celebrating (1:16:14)

RELATED LINKS:

CHECK OUT OUR OTHER PODCASTS:

1 comment on “Jeremy Jones on the Evolution of Snowboard Design (Ep.230)”

  1. Really interesting. *My* question in reserve for Jeremy, should I ever have met him, was ‘I bought the 19/20 Mind Expander, marketed as an alternative all-mountain board (after demoing it and loving the ride). I found out on day 1 offpiste that it is fragile as f*ck, 1mm only of ptex and nothing behind the edge but wood. If you even look at a rock you push in the edge or rip out sections of ptex. How can you possibly have marketed this* as a ride for offpiste where rocks lurk’..?’

    Thanks to the podcast, I have my answer! Durability was low priority vs ride.

    But it still bugs me. If we want to not bin boards for the planet, shouldn’t we take into account real-world use and give something back to durability?

Leave a Comment