Rob Stevens

Yeah, but u ditch is kewl.

No, because death.

On the wider board, I really feel like I need to “steer” hard at the switch. I don’t want to go stiffer in the boots, as I feel I’ll give up versatility. The solution? Probably a less aggressive camber profile, so as above, I’d likely ditch full camber and go to something more inclined to turn on its own with the decambered or even rockered nose. My front ankle hurts at the start of a turn. If your back ankle hurts at the finish, maybe you need a more forgiving tail?

The 28 Donek I’m on is the widest I’ve used. I’m pretty confident that what you say is true, where if you go wider, you’d run into issues at edge change. In one respect, it’s a case of it actually being slower, but is this a problem you can’t get around? I’d say you can be faster at the switch with different techniques. Where it gets vague for me to say that to you is in the fact that I don’t know your “scale” relative to the board. I’m a bigger person. 6’1” 220 lbs, with a 10 foot. I’m lucky in that my foot isn’t that big, where I don’t need bigger than a 28 waist, but also have the leverage to make it manageable everywhere on the mountain. I’d also offer that I have to be at my best to make it work via very aggressive and early above-the-fall line edge changes. If your feet are bigger and you’re shorter, your problems will be amplified over mine. Where flex is concerned, I’m of a mind to keep it fairly stiff lengthwise, as making it too soft would have negative implications torsionally. (Yes builders? That seemed like what you were saying Carl) To get around that, my custom board will still be pretty rigid, but will be decambered up front.

And NBC gives it to the skier. Thanks NBC.

The Quebec Snowboard Commission. Stan Kain and Mike Fabbro.

Bulgaria, eh? Pleaseplease do a trip report. When you talk about adjusting where the binding sits on the board, I'm a bit confused... you mean you can only adjust the Now's heel and toe and not tip to tail? Normally, you'd get to pick either, but not be limited to only one. If I had to pick, it would be heel and toe edge offset. Strangely, my Donek only has a 4x4 pattern and not 2x4. My ideal stance is somewhere between where my bindings are and where they would be if I moved them in one set of inserts. The former is wiiiiide, while the latter is much too narrow. I'll take wide over narrow any day. Seems like an oversight on Donek's part, as most high end manufacturers use 4x2.

Back before CASI, formalized instruction came out of eastern Canada. I had been teaching for a few years before that, in Calgary at COP, then at Whistler, the first year they allowed snowboarding. Greg and I had our own progression, but it fit in pretty well with what we were shown. The Quebec guys were all in hardboots. I used Koflach Hunters (a lace up, with a Vibram sole, with no support above the ankle) at the time and Greg was in some of the first purpose made softboots. Our first executive director when we became CASI (he's still our ED today) used to give me stick for my setup... "those aren't softboots" he'd say. "You shouldn't conduct courses in those". "They're not what the candidates will wear". As you've read over the years, I'm a bit stubborn, so I'd laugh and tell him to fuck off. As one of the founders, in it before him, I could do that, but it was a source of... friction. Not long after, Dan put together a set up much like yours. Duck in hardboots. Now he was the one getting the piss taken. Worked well for him, but I always thought his boots were too stiff. If Greg is holding you back, you should just ask him "What about Dan Genge?" I couldn't describe it better than you have, as to when my front outside ankle hurts... "flex and roll under load. I'm going to have to do something about that.

I've never seen one first hand, but I can't imagine that would get by the design phase!

My mental image of what I first thought you meant caused physical pain in my lower extremities. Glad we cleared that up! Any outdoor shred this year?

In some cases, I'd be used to the lift, but not the sag. With most new bindings supporting under the toe, they feel quite firm. With the Palmer risers, it was like taking the board deck away and replacing it with... nothing. Very excite to try the Now's myself.

With those ones, unless you had an aluminum or carbon baseplate, where the cushion insert (bolt cover) was fully supported by the baseplate (few are) the binding would sag over the riser.

0% and 100%. Looking to change that up, perhaps.

I haven't ridden a riser since the Palmer's of yore. The tippy feeling, which I kind of got used to on hardpack carving, didn't get me frothing on more freeride terrain. I just felt like it wasn't needed for the latter. I don't know much about new plates like the Gecko, but it seems like the baseplate could be unsupported. A plate binding with a riser is rigid, while a soft binding flexes at its ends if it's not sitting on a firm surface. Does the Donek or Gecko plate sit under the entire binding, or is there overhang?

That board you had on Facebook you said was for smaller riders with smaller feet looks like a great shape to blow out to a 28 waist, with all the other dimensions expanding accordingly.

30 + degrees for me! I like the front knee more set up to work laterally, initiating edge to edge, with the back foot aligned for pure pressure contro along the running length of the tail.

I might look into an AT boot, or a soft hardboot. My ankles are getting worked.

Really interested to see what might happen with a board like the one you describe, layed up with the triax. If it has to be stiff lenghtwise as well, I suppose a little early rise up fron might mellow that out? Ultimately, I think if you can build boards that Chuckie G doesn't break, your gear likely holds up really well. Maybe see you on this bike this summer, like days of old with the WBC boys.

The endorphin release in the moment I read this was remarkable.

When out with the cat groups, people look at noboarding as though it's some kind of magic trick I tell them it's simple. In regular snowboarding, on hardpack, your bindings are there to allow the board to be on an edge when it would otherwise want to sit flat. In powder, the whole base is supported, so the snow takes the place of the binding. If the board is tilted over, when you push against it, or it is pushed, it will bend. As it bends, it makes part of the turn shape. If you can follow or lead that shape, you're turning.

Dave. You, more than anyone, need a custom width board. What do you use right now when your back foot is at 6?

I'd like to see a Tom Burt pro model where all the dimensions are blown out around a 28 waist. We could get into some pretty unwieldy nose widths, but I might just go custom and take my chances, if the press will go that wide. Keep me posted on that KK knock off... N+1.

I like that board of yours. You said it was a Seth Westcott design? Makes sense. At higher angles, I feel as though I can change adges noticably faster, but I make more pressure late in the turn and feel more balanced in rough terrain, especially toeside, at that "effective 0" angle I described above. Technically, it's duck, but once referred to as "barely quacking". If I came across your board, I'd probably set it up exactly as you have it.

That's my impression, as much as I think I'd really like the non-existant heel loop. My long-standing objection (armchairing this one, as I've never even had a pair on) is that they seem like it'd be literally impossible to put them on while standing on a steep slope. How would you even get the mech open? I'm thinking of pitches too steep to even think about facing uphill and kicking in a heelside stopper. I'd probably set them up on a dedicated board that wouldn't see much besides strapping on in the flats. As for the Now's, I really had a hard time imaginging how that movement was beneficial. The guy who designed them is a pal. I should liberate a pair from his home the next time I'm over there.

It's all in the board. What's the widest board you can immediately get your hands on? Something like a Yes 420 is fairly easy to find. I'm hoping Yes delivers on a longer board in that model (keeping the 28-something waist), but in the meantime, the wide Donek I'm using is a 28 waist. Yes? Donek? Somthing else custom maybe. In other threads, we've talked about the choices being pretty thin on the ground for proper wide boards. Want to go over 160 (again, c'mon Yes)? It gets really hard in the NA market. Forward + groom = Ideal. I think that if I were back amongst Ontario's glorious peaks, I'd be 55 and 45 as of days gone by. The steep freeriding slopes, which tend to finish with groomers at Lake Louise, see me at -3 in back. At -3, the inside of my foot, centre of heel to ball of big toe / big toe, are straght across the board. With pure carving being unrealistic as way to approach the pitch, that setup slarves swell, then handles the carve in a balanced way.