Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


philw last won the day on July 6

philw had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

235 Excellent

1 Follower

About philw

  • Rank


  • Location
  • Home Mountain/Resort?
    Ski Rossendale
  • Occupation?
    software & other stuff
  • Current Boards in your Quiver
    Kessler 156 SL
    Powder boards as available...
  • Current Boots Used?
    Atomic Backland Carbon
  • Current bindings and set-up?
    F2 Race Ti
  • Snowboarding since
  • Hardbooting since

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. <shrug> To me there seemed to be a shift around the time of the "new race method", in consumer race gear. The PJ had seemed cool, but once things moved to symmetrical, I never felt Burton cared, as above. I'm well aware of the history, but that's still how it felt to me at least.
  2. I'm not sure you mean "tensile". The F2 race bindings take a lot of force without problems if they're set up correctly. You could of course take those forces on the side, but I'm finding it hard to see what the benefit would be, and you have a mechanical disadvantage, not that I think it would be critical. My own angles are 45 parallel. Perhaps you are assuming significantly steeper angles, although I note that mono-skiers also use toe-heel bindings without problem. I take your point about "heritage", but I think the fact that our feet tend to be inserted into everything from windsurfer straps through rear-entry-boots to shoes in a toe/heel manner may have something to do why we tend to build things this way. The only advantage I can see would be reduced boot/binding length, which (a) I don't need; and (b) you could also achieve by putting recessing the binding under the boot or other approaches. -- As a backland person, I'd be more interested in a snowboard-specific binding which maybe made use of the existing structure of the soles of that type of boot. They have some stuff in them for the uphill people, and maybe that'd be fun to make use of. I guess I'm thinking that ideas like the Phantom Link Levers are where I'm expecting hard booters to gain performance in the future.
  3. Yes, but clearly the boot geometry is a major factor. I found that out the hard way when changing boots years ago - some boots are good for me flat (Rachlies from what I remember), but others (Suzukas and Head) need a bit of toe and heel lift. Kind of obvious once you know they have different geometries, but they don't tell you that in the brochures.
  4. Don't waste your money on a new set of speakers<br/> You get more mileage from a cheap pair of sneakers. Says the bloke with a couple of pairs of PMCs. Well you know.
  5. The lightness is great - saves my shoulders taking a pounding carrying the suckers around the world's airports, plus it seems like less weight stuck on the end of the feet is generally a good idea. I'm slightly worried they may be too cold; I've not tried them in the cold. But I can always get boot heaters (extra weight... ) if that's an issue. What I really like is not using 20 or more year old technology, which just feels like a bad idea to me. I'll get the springs as soon as they're available...
  6. Here you go, Phantom Snowboards are going to produce the springy things: https://www.phantomsnow.com/shop/link-levers-for-atomic-backlands "Provides forward lean adjustment from 6-26 degrees." That'll work.
  7. Interesting. Although I came here because I rode an Atomic snowboard in 1989.
  8. I can google it, but do you guys know if these can be shipped (in the hold) of planes? I was just thinking that the UK price is £1 to $1, so it's much cheaper (especially as I switched to dollars before brexit) for me to buy one in dollars, probably when I'm next in the US.... but that only works if I can carry the thing back with me. And I wasn't thinking of catching a steamer.
  9. Can you clarify - are you saying that as you reach the top speed, the board does something to tell you to back off? That looked pretty brutal.
  10. It doesn't bother my boards in the slightest. My Burton Dump Truck powder board has no issues, as you'd expect with a channel board. My Kessler SL has conventional inserts but doesn't have any visible issues either. I wax both boards with the bindings on, if they happen to be on. As people will be aware, you can see where the inserts are whilst the wax is hot because the conductivity of inserts is different from the rest of the board, but that's about it. I fit my F2 bindings with the same sort of tool I expect to have available in the back country, I don't want a lot of torque on them or they'd be impossible to tweak in the back country should I accidentally put them in the wrong place for the conditions. F2 bindings do have rubber gaskets on the bottom, so the thing which compresses is that, not the board itself. I'm not sure you'd notice dimples in the centre of the base in powder or on the edge.
  11. Hmm. US law is likely different, but... The Montreal Convention means they're liable if they lose or break stuff they accept. Under EU law the same thing's true: they lose or break it, and they're liable (within a maximum which will cover a snowboard easily). Obviously you're not flying here. I think it would be hard to argue that a snowboard is "fragile". Note that their wording is very carefully chosen: they explain that other airlines avoid paying for "fragile" items, but not that other airlines class snowboards as "fragile", which in my experience they do not. I travel a lot and have had a few disagreements with airlines over the law. British Airways actually instructs their "customer service" people to insist that it's possible for a customer to waive basic consumer rights, which is legal nonsense. I just tell them I'll issue proceedings (which is cheap to do here) and they pay up. It's a bad customer experience, having to threaten a supplier with legal sanction, but it works ever time. It may be different there, I've had BA lose snowboards and also damage snowboard bags (not the boards, the bags!), for which they're 100% liable. I'd love them to argue in court that a snowboard bag is somehow more fragile than any other bag
  12. There's a server running on my Synology NAS, can't remember what that software is - the standard built in package (although you can run Asset there too). I mostly use Media Monkey, which I set up to "play" via uPNP so it completely bypasses the PC's audio systems as noted. I want to use the Naim DAC, not anything in the PC! In the past I've tested most free servers and found the free Asset upnp server best for my general use. You also need control software to drive that, of which there's plenty to chose. Audient looks interesting, thanks. I like big speakers, probably because my dick is so small That said, I know small speakers can sound really good.
  13. I'm currently using Naim integrated amp/streaming with PMC speakers for my PC sound and also music. I have another Naim streamer as a radio alternative. Those companies are very local stuff to where I live. Even with WASAPI and optical I can't get the same quality out of the PC directly, versus if I stream it over uPnP from there or elsewhere. That degradation isn't noticeable for gaming (!) or voice radio (192kb/s), but very much noticeable for FLAC. I can always tell the difference between A and B. The problem is working out which I like best, and then working out if it's worth the difference in price. I think it's like wine - you need to work out where your sweet spot is and then buy whatever they have at that price. I kind of like the idea of huge monster systems, but the technology changes fast and I don't want to live with antiques, and cheaper stuff is easier to change. When the Sondek ruled, accepted wisdom was that the source was the most important thing, although most people ignored the obvious quality issues in the vinyl when claiming that. These days the UK fashion is to spend most money on speakers, which is at least good in creating lots of choice in speakers.
  14. I thought a fair bit about how to get a better angle on that back foot... options seemed to be: Ride in walk mode As above, works ok, but seems a bit unsatisfactory and may cause me trouble in different snow conditions or on piste. Modify the boot angle adjuster to get more lean out of it There's a little metal plate (see centre of image) which could probably be augmented with something which has a larger offset. I was thinking about this and a mate with metallurgy skills, but then... Just use more heel lift I have a few pairs of old F2 bindings, so I've no shortage of plastic F2 wedges. Here below on the rear foot is a "double bubble" heel wedge, which appears to give me more lean as the image shows. It's hard to be sure of the precise angle from a picture, but Photoshop tells me the front is at about 77 degrees upright where as the back is 65, so a fair bit of difference now. I'll try it next season. It looks a bit "high heel" kinky, but maybe it'll do the job. I cut a couple of M6 bolts to length and replaced the original shorter bolts, using the same t-nuts on the bottom. If this is too much I can always dump some of the wedges until it's the right stack height for me, adjusting the bolt length at the same time with a file.
  15. As they said... I've used ski boots in the original F2/Proflex bindings, and again this season I'm using AT (ski) boots in the current gen F2 non-step-in-bindings. They work fine, the fit's actually better with the new bindings than the old ones, not sure why, but it's fine.
  • Create New...