Jump to content

Beckmann AG

Member
  • Content Count

    1,912
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Beckmann AG last won the day on June 10

Beckmann AG had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

557 Excellent

3 Followers

About Beckmann AG

  • Rank
    Alpine Ace/Interpreter of Maladies

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://beckmannag.com

Details

  • Location
    221b
  • Home Mountain/Resort?
    Sugarloaf/USA
  • Occupation?
    Person of interest/champion speler.
  • Current Boards in your Quiver
    ...Ain't nobody's business but the Turks...
  • Current Boots Used?
    modified Lange Plug
  • Current bindings and set-up?
    TD1 top, TD2 base, proprietary middle

Recent Profile Visitors

2,533 profile views
  1. One of the many advantages of the Backland is that it's a viable boot with roughly half the boot board ramp of Intec compatible shells. Maybe you don't care about such nuance. Maybe you should. Either way, put a few hours on the new boots and see how you stand with lower heels. Might be you value the convenience of a more centered and relaxed stance more than the convenience of step-in bindings.
  2. Jcar, If your intent involves ‘baselining’, or higher resolution adjustment, you’ll want less flex in the binding. While the Catek OS2 offers more support than a fresh box of Kleenex, it’s not, by design, as solid as the OS1 and WC. The ‘short’ plate versions of the WC, OS1 and 2 are .375 inch thick, while the ‘longs’ are .5. While your internal processor is sensitive to a very small increments of change, there’s a point where ‘rider philosophy’, and the fit/flex/geometry of your boots will render such increments moot. The standard bails are, for the most part, interchangeable across the three variants. Heel loops came in both narrow and wide versions. There are both coarse and fine grooved patterns used to locate the toe and heel blocks on the WC. Boot sole length adjustments are much faster on the WC than the OS series. Toe and heel blocks can be reversed on all variants. This may be necessary to accommodate odd combinations of boot sole length/boot center and boot size. Spherical kingpin nuts are different between each variant. If you don’t have access to a lathe, take care not to lose them. Toe flip levers are more or less interchangeable, though the later versions were more svelte/stylish than the earlier. An OS2 top assembly can be mounted to an OS1 base, but not an OS1 top to the OS2 bottom. In a pinch, you could mount a WC top to an OS1 base, but you’d need a bushing to center the king pin. The WC has the fewest parts to lose/misunderstand, the OS2 has the most. Of the three, the WC is the easiest/most versatile for ‘on snow’ adjustment, as one can affect toe/heel height, canting, angle, and boot offset without removing fasteners. Critically, cant and lift can be altered independent of each other. (These parameters are co-dependent on the TD series). ->The compromise: In order to change stance width, or binding location on the board itself, you’ll need to disturb established cant and lift settings. Similarly, the means by which adjustments are made can make it very easy to get lost in the process. Fortunately, you can get a digital protractor app for your phone, and from what I understand, pocket-sized notepads and pencils are still available. -- Lacking a better picture of where you are with your riding, and where you want to be, it’s not appropriate to suggest Cateks will or will not serve your needs/wants. In general, the Catek platform is a significant asset if you want to better understand/resolve the relationship between interface geometry and various rider outcomes. ->So long as you’re capable of methodical practice and entry-level critical thinking. If you find yourself at a loss before technical monoliths like the adjustable spanner, multi-speed bicycle, and shoelaces, you should probably avoid the Catek.
  3. And a few other considerations.
  4. He exclaimed with pleasant surprise; simultaneously striking the tasty (yet obscure) stout from his shopping lisp.
  5. True, but then the sport hews closely to this line: “Moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess.” A mindset that likely contributed to Wilde's premature demise.
  6. For snow removal at the ski house. (Representative photo)
  7. Probably not. To resolve that particular problem, you can invest time toward making better use of the equipment you already have. However, if you want a plate, buy a plate. Then budget for the next plate that you hope will resolve the issues not adequately addressed by the plate you have.
  8. In light of the board wandering about in search of a home, I propose Iambic pentameter for the essay. What about that set of ersatz danglies under your Daihatsu?
  9. Are we using the term 'boot board' correctly? Typically, the boot board ( integral to the shell mold, or as a separate component) establishes the ramp of a boot, though from your description the MS BB could be used to flip Japancakes? Certainly has a spatulate form. Howdy 'Half Tiresias'... Given your penchant for wearing the nose and mustache on the inside of the goggles...
  10. 'B' shell: +/- 10 degrees, removable hard foam bootboard.
  11. 'Suitable' depends on what one asks of their equipment. If you can't tune your ramp, and don't have access to other options, then by default what you have is suitable. If you can tune your ramp, then accepting 11 degrees as appropriate is absurd. It's not like a bunch of boot designers got together in the early 90's and compared data from 50 years of hardboot development before building molds around a standard step-in module. More likely, it was a matter of prioritizing market demand for a convenience feature over something that would be overlooked by the average consumer. If you have access to a band saw, (or an outdoor power equipment dealer), a minimal investment will provide material for off-season experimentation. Might be you already have what you need. Might be you find something significantly better. Edit: To clarify, you can use the bandsaw to make a set of wedges representing the ramp you have, or the ramp you think you want, so as to test one against the other. (Not as a means of sawing the shell in half to see what's inside). Similarly, these plastic felling wedges measure out at +/-4.8 degrees, in the event you don't have access to, or proficiency with power tools.
  12. In simpler terms, internal ramp change will affect plantar pressure distribution, while external ramp change will affect both pressure distribution and leverage. Meanwhile, both internal and external ramp will affect the fore/aft relationship of the center of mass ( with respect to the long axis of the board, depending on binding angles) during flexion/extension. This, in turn, will affect overall pressure distribution along the length of the board. If you have additional questions, I'll be on the monkey bars. Will trade additional beta for that packet of Pop Rocks you hide under the Snoopy thermos in your lunch box. Correct. 'Ideal' ramp angle will vary from athlete to athlete, depending on limb segment length, etc., and what works for me probably won't work for you, regardless of preferences for one 'technique' over another. That said, analogous study suggests 4-5 degrees as a reasonable starting point, in part because that puts you in tuning range using available bindings (external) and Gorilla tape (internal). Haven't had a chance to pull and measure the bootboard from a pair of Full Tilt boots, but I suspect they're lower than 7-8, and should take well to modification.
  13. World Cup? Water Closet? Wench Cafeteria? Werewolf Convention? Warlock Cemetery? Wildling Congress? If you accept that the primary inputs to your board are the pressure applied perpendicular to the topsheet, and the tilt of the board relative to the snow; It follows that the pressure applied through the soles of your feet should be largely independent of the leverage as applied through the boot cuff. And vice verso. If 11+ degrees of ramp in the boot is too much, and you resolve (through some ingenious device), that what you really need is +2 degrees net at the front boot, and +9 degrees net at the rear ('net' being boot on binding). ->As this amount of ramp will allow you to 1) stand evenly weighted without bodily contrivance, and 2) allow your center of mass to remain centered along the length of the board when you flex and extend your legs within a reasonable and comfortable range, thereby providing superiour grip and agility. That means you'd have to use a binding with 9 degrees of toe lift at the front. ->Good luck finding one of those. ->Even if you swiped the single 9 degree base disc known to exist, you'd have no adjustment left for canting. ->A 9 degree toe lift would put the boot cuff back of vertical (which more or less locks your front leg), unless you seriously advance the forward lean. At which point you've used up much of the forward flex inherent to the boot, and probably altered the nature of the remaining flex. If you don't advance the forward lean, your (locked) front knee is probably going to be offset toward the heel edge of the board, which means the toe/heel leverage ratio is biased to one side, and the board will probably be twisted while turning. To get 9 degrees total at the rear foot, you'd have to use a two degree toe lift. Again, your boot cuff would be in the way, (too much leverage) or you'd compromise available flex. Also, two degree toe lifts purchased where? And think of the ridicule... If you can't change the internal ramp, you either have to convince yourself that 'too much' is fine, or tilt the bindings (somehow) and face a leverage/ flex problem. Probably both. There are other considerations, but it's time for recess.
  14. Thoughts: 1) Don’t believe everything you read on line. 2)The point isn’t to have a ‘flat’ front foot. The point is to attenuate that obscene amount of ramp such that you can bear weight evenly/selectively on the entirety of both feet without twisting yourself into a wad of taffy. ->Depending on your skeletal structure and desired outcome, that may be anywhere from negative 1 to plus 3 degrees (net) at the front foot, and 7 to 10 plus (net) at the rear. 3) Technique is a byproduct/outgrowth of interface. If your interface numbers are excessive, odds are good your technique will be similarly excessive. E.g., ‘heelside toilet zombie’. 4) Small changes (tenths of a degree) can make a significant difference if you’re close to the target, whereas larger changes (full degree or multiples thereof) can make almost no difference when you’re off the mark. 5)Internal and external ramp changes are not interchangeable. 6) Front boot internal ramp and rear boot internal ramp may need to be different in order to get the desired effect. 7) Front boot ramp and rear boot ramp serve distinct purpose, and each will either contribute to, or impair range of motion at the hips, knees and ankles, especially when the board is on edge and loaded. #8) Binding toe and heel lift should be used to support an effective stance, rather than be used to make a wider stance more comfortable. 9) To some extent, the more accurate your ramp configuration, the less flex you’ll probably need in your boots. 10) Points 1-10 are likely moot. From memory, the Deeluxe Indy, size 8 measured around +/- 10. The amount of heel elevation in a pair of shoes is usually related to the intended use of those shoes, and the postures they should 'support'. Which is one reason why wildland firefighter's boots have more heel height than indoor soccer shoes. Different 'work' requires different postures, requires different heel heights. Otherwise injury.
×
×
  • Create New...