RCrobar

Hey DrZone I think the BTS springs will work in the Northwave housing, better check this with Fin to be sure. A few years ago, pre-Fin’s BTS, I found a Canadian spring distributor that had the Imperial version of the Northwave (Metric) springs; buying the Imperial version of the flat wire springs was quite a bit cheaper than the metric in the same size. The outside (OD) and (ID) inside diameter of the springs I am using in the Northwaves is very close to OD 5/8” and ID 3/8”. Maybe Dave and Andrea at YYZCANUCK.com sell the BTS and springs in Canada? Hope this helps:) Rob

Hehe I love this sound, but I have noticed that it is very hard to sneak up on my wife!:D Interesting. The variable that has not been mentioned with regards to a linear feel is the resistance created by the boot tongue. The springs, boot tongue and the control over your calf muscle are the only reasons that I can think of for not feeling a dead zone. Thanks for your thoughts Fin, JP1. Rob

Hey Fin Why? Is the pre-load to keep the upper and lower nut from moving, due to vibrations etc., while riding? Thanks for posting the BTS pictures. Rob

No problem at all Hans. Thanks for taking your BTS apart and checking, I thought I was loosing my mind as it generally is the first thing to go:) Merry Christmas Rob

Is anyone able to post a picture(s) of a BTS that has been disassembled? Fin, could you help out here? Thanks in advance for doing this. Rob

Hi Hans 1000 apologies as I have been comparing the Northwave spring system to the BTS system, I should have stated this! I have only seen web pictures of the BTS and was convinced the two systems were a very similar design. Please excuse this error! I guess if I owned a BTS the next modification I would be experimenting with would be an internal divider in the BTS housing ... this in turn would lead to more highly biased opinions;) I found this old thread, it has A LOT of different spring pictures for anyone interested: http://www.extremecarving.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3631&start=0 Cheers Rob

are the other boots.

Interesting post Ken, I enjoyed reading the nerd information! It never ceases to amaze me how riders come to different conclusions when setting up carving gear to best meet their needs; a lot of ways to skin a cat comes to mind and/or highly biased opinions. Case and point: When reading this part of your post it surprised me that you were trying to eliminate a space in the spring set up. I have gone out of my way to create a space between the upper and lower springs and have tried to determine the size of the space that felt best for me. I personally do not want the lower spring affecting the upper spring; I want very different spring resistance for a heel side vs. a toe side turn. So, for me which spring is placed on the top vs. the bottom is very important and does make a difference. Thanks for your post; it got the gray matter going! Rob

Do the racers using the TD3 'Race' version tend to prefer the Standard or Step In TD3's?

Wow! A paradigm shift, didn’t expect to hear this when asking about a racing design trend! I guess pictures of the prototype are out of the question!;) Are you able to explain the design philosophy that seems to be causing this shift? Can you give this away without letting the cat completely out of the bag? Thanks Rob

Hi Phil Would you mind giving the masses a bit more information as to what specifically the racers like about the TD3? What are they saying? Am I right to assume that most racers are using a plate system with plastic binding parts made to fit the plate or is the shift to TD3’s taking hold? What is the trend you are seeing with regards to bindings and racers? Thanks for taking the time to type. Rob

Take a paper clip and slowly bend it back and forth repeatedly, eventually it will break. The side-to-side movement of your boot in your rear binding bail is placing micro movements, like the paper clip being bent back and forth, on your binding bail. This movement will eventually break your bail. As a rider I am NOT very hard on any of my equipment, breaking almost no equipment over the years. I have, however, broken almost every rear bail I have owned, regardless of the binding. Note: I have experimented with my binding set up on my standard bindings, setting the toe lever so that it is loose, medium and tight when closing the bail. In my experience this has made NO difference in stopping a bail from bending and/or breaking. Carry a spare bail in your pocket. My guess is you broke your bail and the two parts fell into the snow without you noticing. Rob

Thanks Booster JJ is a bionic super man, just watching the video made my legs burn and heart start banging! I love watching slalom, the slow motion PSL recoveries, toe and heel side, are unreal! Thanks again for posting the videos. Rob

Thanks Bruce, I really appreciated the detail your posts provide! I was under the impression that your Coiler EX was also a metal built board. Have you built or experimented with a metal EX? How would a metal EX compare to your metal Schtubby? Again, thank you in advance for your time! Rob

Hello If someone has ridden both the Coiler Schtubby and the Coiler EX I would love to hear a description of the similarities and differences in the ride. I found this post by Bruce (Varsava), it shed a bit of light on my question; is waist width the main difference between the Stubby and the EX? Bruce, if you have time your feedback would be appreciated. http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=18687 Bruce Varsava writes: Thanks in advance Rob

Thanks Fin, it all makes sense now. Hey Jack, the soup Nazi says ... "No slop for YOU!":D

Thanks for responding Jack. Fin, Jack, for discussion sake, I have a hypothetical question. Is it possible to use the older and thinner TD2 (2mm thick) e-ring with the new TD3 center disk? The goal here would be to use a thinner e-ring to maximize the travel. Would the new, thicker TD3 center disks with longer mounting srews place too much stress on the board inserts? Would or could this damage the bindings in any way?

Hi Fin Could you elaborate a bit on how more movement is gained with the new thicker e-ring and center disk? I don’t understand how the new TD3 center disk and thicker e-ring combo were modified to get the improved movement while using the previous TD2 Cant Disk design. Thanks again for your time.

Congratulations Fin, it really is impressive how you listen to the Bomber mob and keep the improvements coming. Did Bob have his hand in this version of the TD? My questions regard the heel bails on the standard model and the movement delivered by the thicker e-ring center disk combo: 1) Is the material used in the TD3 bails more resistant to bending than the TD2? 2) How much movement or deflection does the TD3 center disk and e-ring combination allow? IE-In 2003 Bob explained to me that the TD2 had the following movement: Thanks in advance for your time!

I agree with you Neil. Your statement reminded me of a thread from a while ago. http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=17530 Boostertwo did a great job of elaborating on this, here is his post: It seems to me one other reason that slightly wider boards are being used is that a lower stance angle allows for bigger and more powerful pivoting movements. While pivoting is generally detrimental to carving (as it can result in skidding, scrubbing speed), when the course requires it most successful racers are able to pivot their unweighted boards in the transition, and to 'lock on' to a carve to maintain a fast line. It has been my experience that lower angles are much better than high ones for these pivoting, 'leg scissoring' moves. You can feel this for yourself by standing up now, as you read this. Try standing with very high stance angles and then then try stepping your feet to move your legs through this pivoting move. I think you'll find that higher angles allow a smaller range of movement than lower angles. Lower angles also recruit stronger muscle groups and allow for further pivoting movement through using the knee as a hinge to 'sweep' the foot. Not only does this result in quicker, stronger, accurate movements, it also results in better balance, as it seems that riders with extremely high angles have to make additional movements of the upper body to get the board around, resulting in imbalance and a jerky, edge-of-control look to their turns. It seems that for these biomechanical reasons (larger range of movement from the ball-and-socket joint in the hip, using stronger muscle groups, and, when necessary, using the knee/ankles to further sweep the board) that slightly wider boards are more useful whenever the course requires pivoting moves. If you're free riding, lower angles are useful in situations where you might need to quickly, powerfully, and accurately pivot the board, such as bumps, trees, steeps, crowded slopes, etc.

Great post Rob, it has inspired me to throw a few thoughts at you. I have to agree here. I don’t fully agree with this statement, but have to admit I am in the process of understanding how the mechanics of the rotation make the rotation an important movement. IMHO it is definitely NOT a wasted motion; sorry Jack, we will have to agree to disagree:) A clear example of this, in my experience, is when trying to do the same tight steering tight turns, that you described, off piste in rough West Coast conditions, moguls, steep chop, Western Cement, etc., I have found that when turning the board with a quiet upper body it is much more difficult to eliminate counter rotations when compared to rotating in the same conditions. When rotating, I have found that it is much easier to all but eliminate counter rotations, which leads to more control. The control gained when doing rotation turns in very rough conditions, off piste moguls, etc. makes me believe that there is in fact a mechanical necessity or perhaps a better way to say this is a mechanical 'trade off' when turning with a quiet upper body vs a rotation. The trade off I have found, off piste, is that when you rotate you may loose speed and quickness but you may gain stability and control. A rider that has both turns in his/her bag of tricks, to be called upon depending on their mood or situation, gives them the best of both worlds. It seems more constructive to point out the positives of a given technique rather than trying to prove that one is superior to the other, the latter seems to always end badly. For the record, I am NOT for a second trying to claim any absolutes here, I have NOT found the sorcerers stone;). Please don’t take this too seriously, as I don’t. Cheers PS - Jack, could you pull a few strings and get Fin to post a new TD3 teaser picture?

For me boards are getting wider because of the size of my boots and my preferred stance angles. Gone, for me, are the days of having a boards’ waist width dictate my stance angles. My mondo point 28.5 boots, a preference for standard toe-bail bindings and carving angles set at 50 Front and 45 Rear, require a board with a 23 cm waist. If I had smaller feet, I would require a board with a 22 or 21 cm waist width. The faster or slower edge to edge time are not nearly as important as having the balance and stability I feel I get when my feet and knees are where I want them to to be rather than being forced into a position dictated by a board that is too narrow for my foot size.

Does anyone know if Art is still making board sleeves/bags under his Phunnybaggs.com web site? His web site seems to be down or done? Looks like a very nice product. Link to the Bomber thread from last year: http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=16738&highlight=custom+board+bag Link to Art's Profile; http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/member.php?u=120 Rob

Interesting discussion, interesting thoughts Jack. IMHO I feel that a riders preferred riding technique and a riders overall size/weight will have a significant effect on his or her preference for TD2 standard vs TD2 step ins. When I mention riding technique I am speaking to standard carving on a standard freecarve or almountain board with plates; NOT racing or ECing! Just to play devils advocate, here is another very accomplished rider/builder's opinion on the TD2 standard vs TD2 step in discussion. TD2 Standard http://www.extremecarving.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=671&highlight=td2 TD2 Step In http://www.extremecarving.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=732&highlight=td2+step Cheers Rob

I only know Fin Doyle and Bob Jenny through this forum, they both seem like people I would like to meet. Only through this forum have I learned that both gentleman have been through some very difficult life events. Amazing to me if these TD3 rumors are true, I don't know how they would be able to pull it off so quickly! TD3 Race bindings ready for the Vancouver winter Olympics in 2010 would be very cool. I am not a racer, but it seems to me that many racers are asking for softer boards and a softer boot-binding interface. It is my understanding that the reason many racers are using F2 bindings is the desired movement and softness; the heavy rutted race coarse vibrations are NOT transmitted to the rider by a very stiff binding. Please correct me if this is a misunderstanding. As a recreational rider who often rides very POOR grooming, I feel I would love softer more flexible race style bindings. For the record, my TD3 wish list: -TD3 binding would have more movement and an even softer feel The dream: controllable, micro adjustable binding flex; a BTS equivalent for the binding. -TD3 binding with much stronger bails on the standard model -TD3 low profile toe lever -TD3 bail system that makes it impossible for the bail to flop down I'd pull the credit card out for these features:)