Expand Quote
Expand Quote
If you put the board graphic down on a flat surface, is the only contact point the middle of the board? Or is the contact points at the front and back trucks and a gap in the middle?
Dead center seems to be the lowest point, and it curves up slightly towards the trucks. Very subtle though, not enough to make it seem odd compared to most other boards. If you set it on a flat surface like you said, I'm guessing the nose and tail would each be raised about 1/8" at the point where they start curving upward. You can feel the quality construction holding the plain deck, but all of the features come together skating it. Basically, if you don't know how to do a 360 flip of course you won't immediately start landing them because you get a Low Pro board, but I did notice being able to land tricks I know more consistently, and even started doing some that I've lost over the years.
New Deal had this style of construction back in 91. Justin Girard pinball girl had that rocker style concave.
For as long as I've been skating, aside from preference for concave and tail and nose steepness, deck technology construction just doesn't do anything ground breaking.
I have trucks on the board so answer your 1st question I just put a small wooden rod in the middle and noticed it didn't touch the nose/tail area, left about 1/8" gap. Not the most scientific test. I agree with your comment about not much being groundbreaking, and depending on what people expect this may or may not be the case here. Is it better though? I think so. I like to use 1031 as an example when it comes to proper construction. Their non-budget boards are based on a simple concept: high quality wood, high quality glue, and good shapes. The result is that they have some of the best boards on the market. Again, just my opinion.
Where I think Real mostly went right here is with the combination of methodologies. They already made pretty damned good boards, I've had a ton of Real and AH decks and have liked them all, but they took the center press method (used in '91 or not it's a different ball game on modern decks), re-worked the concave, applied a higher grade epoxy, and thinned out the ply's. The boards are definitely springy, stiff with just enough flexibility, they're light, and super responsive. Like I said before, these boards might not be groundbreaking in the sense that they automatically make people better at skateboarding, but being strong, light, with great pop (and pop retention), I think this combination of features gives you more for your money than any other comparable board. I can only speak from my experience. I'm picky about boards, only ride from certain wood shops, and have never cared to try a board made from anything but straight plywood. If you buy a Low Pro expecting it make you 10x better, you might be let down. If you're realistic and just expect it to skate well, then you'll probably get what you expect out of it. Regardless of what claims they make about the technology, I knew after a few minutes of skating that it is easily one of my favorite boards that I've ever owned. Hate! mentioned in his review that after several weeks of skating 3-4 times/week it still has a good crisp pop, that alone is reason to give them a shot. Fuck, if you're not paying a ton extra for it then you have nothing to lose by checking one out for yourself. What you won't get is something that looks or feels awkward because they tried too hard to make a super board, but you will get some high quality shit.
Topic: Real Low Pro (Read 11988 times)