Jump to content

TimW

Member
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

TimW last won the day on April 4

TimW had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19 Good

About TimW

  • Rank
    New Member

Details

  • Location
    Netherlands
  • Snowboarding since
    1986
  • Hardbooting since
    1986

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. TimW

    BOOTS 2.0

    It has been tried in the past... This was the softboot intec system. Doing two pins like you suggest might be better, but I actually think the above system is fine for the interface, the pin for lateral moments, the sole for fore-aft bending moments. I think the key thing is the hard shell on hardboots. And that hard shell also limits walking. A more logical sole / interface design may improve it, but I actually do not mind that much. For ski boots also alternatives have been made to improve walking etc., but nothing ever caught on. But if you do go commercial, do something like above, add a plastic shell, and I'd gladly give it a try.
  2. I was thinking the same, if it is flexible it could be great for getting fatigue failures of the bolts, or loosening them.
  3. Does anyone have the dimensions ( insert locations) for UPM & Allflex mount? I intend to built a snowboard + plate, but want to use the standard insert patterns so I could use other plate designs as well. (The board will be plate specific so I will not include 4x4 inserts, as the board should not work without a plate anyway) If anyone has the dimensions or would be willing to measure them for me that would great. As I understand Allflex uses standard distance between front and back inserts, UPM I am not sure.
  4. Problem is that the steeper runs are the most fun, nothing beats a nicely groomed black run! For me it is simply endlessly looking around, frequently stopping, and waiting for a quiet moment. I never assume skiers to anticipate the lines I ride. I'd love to do non-stop runs from top to bottom, but it is simply too tricky. Just on how tricky it can be: one day this year I went of a final run at the end of the day, slopes were already empty. My 8 year old son joined me. At some moment when I initiated a frontside and my board hit something and I washed out. Expected to see a rock or something that my board went over, I looked back and it turned out to have been my son's ski. Luckily he was not harmed, just both a bit shaken. Now my son, though young, always rides very controlled and is a good skier. He is always with me, knows exactly which turns I make (tries to copy them) and still I managed to surprise him. Let alone a skier who hardly ever sees a hardbooter. Moral of the story: always be extremely careful, never assume others to anticipate your turns.
  5. TimW

    I Want one

    Advertising has changed a bit over the years.
  6. TimW

    I Want one

    I had a Hot Logical 172 (1990 I think), which was the first board I really started carving on (beyond just tipping the board on its edge). I guess it also was my first board that was really suitable for carving with a good sidecut and stiffness. A lot of camber also, it was good at launching you from one turn into the next one (at least that was my impression, maybe more due to my skill & weight at the time...) After that I had an F2 Beamer 162, and on that I learned that asyms were not working for me. I consciously had to bring my weight back in heelside turns not to go over the nose. But I still love the way asyms look! Actually tempted to make a board with a longer heelside edge, to have a skewed nose and tail, just for the looks of it
  7. The kessler website says Clothoid, but according to the image in the link below the center is constant and the tip and tail deviate. http://www.kessler-swiss.com/en-US/technology/kesslerShapeTechnology My guess would be that the image is an engineering approximation of the clothoid curve that the difference is negligible for practical purposes. If somebody feels the urge to do the math..... edit: I noticed that I did not read up to the end of the thread when I posted this.....
  8. I guess it makes nose grabs easier?
  9. For a flat run it is quite easy to calculate the the G's you feel based on (overall body) inclination angle: 1/cos(inclination) That gives you 2 G (absolute) for a 60° and 3 G for a 70° inclination. That is for clean carving without cheating (putting any part of your body on the snow, which would lower the G's). I don't think anybody can carve a clean 70° turn, so the 1.5 relative (=2.5 absolute) the guy is pulling in the video is a realistic maximum. Of course curvature in the run can add to that. If a concave section in a run would give you 2 G vertical (instead of only 1 from gravity), that would increase the total Gs. If you would also have the speed to get the centripetal force, you could theoretically double the numbers above. Above neglects the inclination of the run, which would lower things a bit. Tim
  10. I built a metal top sheet board this year. I considered adding a protective layer but did not do because of the additional weight a complexity in manufacturing. I use vacuum infusion as a fabrication method and that becomes it a bit complex if you add non-porous metal layers... Damage / impact is defnitely a concern. Bonding strenght is critical or metal boards and an impact therefore is more likely to cause a delamination in a metal board than in a composite board, and a delam is more likly to grow. Furthermore the aluminum scratches easily, affecting the good looks. And actually a ski (or board) could easily make a deep scratch, taking out considerable strength. Local loads from bindings I also see as a concern. This could be solved by some protective plates. I ride it with td2s directly on the board and it has been fine. But I only have ~15 days on it so far, so no final judgement yet, although I have had several boards that did not last me that long.....
  11. Yes I got the 2019 version. The reversible ankle strap looks nice, but to be honest I wonder if it make a significant differences.
  12. Flat on both bindings, the curvature of the board in a carve provides me with all the lift & cant I need.
  13. Thanks for all the advice. I bought the Ride El Hefes. They fit well to my boots and the it is now the heel of my boot and not the binding anymore that is limiting edge angle. I also liked the adjustability (centering etc.), I don't have much to compare but everything I need is there. The bindings hold my boots a lot better, the shape matches well and the straps without cushioning is better, I do not have to do them overly tight anymore to remove play. Thanks.
  14. Both the o-drive and the nidecker have L as largest size. With the o-drive a mondo 305 is the upper limit, for the nidecker it is out of the range. The El Hefe and Podium both come in XL where I am right in the middle of the range, so that seems like a better choice to me?
×
×
  • Create New...