SunSurfer

Thanks Tufty. Your link explains this photo of Roland Fischnaller's base with a Karl type plate in use in an FIS race 2008-09 season (from the FIS Smugmug site). SunSurfer

One thing I've been thinking about through this whole process is the possibility of adding new, lateral mounting inserts into one of my current boards. I've looked for externally threaded inserts that might allow me to put some in without making holes in the P-Tex base. There are essentially none suitable available in NZ, and those listed on the Web seem extraordinarily expensive. Putting new inserts in through the base clearly involves making a substantial hole in the base which you want to be able to soundly and smoothly repair. I've searched the Web for info on home repairs for "core shots" and most of the fixes involve using part cured epoxy below the P-Tex patch. My concern about this is that very few adhesives actually stick well to polyethylene. Clearly whatever board makers use to stick the P-Tex on works well, and from what I can see from the "roll-yer-own" snowboard sites is that they use just straight marine epoxy to bond the boards together. Is this actually correct? Can either of our resident board makers confirm that the epoxy used in construction is just a standard epoxy, OR does it have some special sauce to help the P-Tex stick? Does anyone else have any experience in really successful core shot repair. I don't want to go down the path of making holes in my bases unless I KNOW I can fix it well. SunSurfer

From the point of view of mounting a plate system, using a 4x4 mount would be nice for backward compatibility. However a lateral mount system, as shown on the photo of Matt Morison's Kessler, has a significant mechanical advantage in transmitting tilting forces to the board edge. The insert mounting pattern for lateral plate mounting points should be identical for Apex and other plate designs, certainly in terms of distance between adjacent mounting points on the long axis of the board. How to fit this to narrower boards could be an issue, as any hinge/slide interface design is likely to have a fixed width, and the more lateral the attachment points the greater the mechanical advantage. To produce a system able to deal with a range of board widths may require more expensive tooling up and make it more difficult to produce at a reasonable cost. From the point of view of using the plate system Sean is developing on a range of boards with a range of stance distances the answer is simple. The hinge/slide interface between board and plate mounts wherever the inserts are on the snowboard. Anyone ordering a plate will have measured the distance between the inserts to be used on their snowboard. Just as we have boards made in a range of sizes and shapes now, so the plate attached to that interface is customised for plate width & length, stance width, stance setback, plate stiffness and camber. Sean can make both custom snowboards and custom plates. Sean, I like the way in which you have utilised the UHMWPE to create low friction but durable hinge and slide mechanisms. I was concerned about the wear characteristics of the apparently metal axle on metal frame & metal on carbonfibre/epoxy plate Apex design. It was also nice to see directly shown in the video the mere millimetres of slide movement that need to be accommodated to allow quite substantial board flex. I'll be thinking hard about the design concept you have come up with. Aaah, if only I had a computerised milling machine! SunSurfer

Have Becky & Larry got involved in a church locally since they moved in with you? If so, you could possibly go and have a talk with their pastor. The pastor may have more authority speaking with your relatives about the impact of their choices on those around them. SunSurfer

Look at the list of how you found the Apex Snowboard site on the Join mailing list page. SunSurfer

Apex Composites site shown above now appears live with announcement taking orders in late May. Site also notes that the Apex plate fits the Hangl inserts pattern. SunSurfer

The biggest problem with new technology/medication in any area of medicine is that it doesn't have a track record, you don't have an indication about how it is likely to play out over time. The first 5 - 10 years worth of patients are essentially experimental subjects whose long term follow-up results determine the true value of the "advance". One difficulty for the potential patient, with this kind of expensive new technology, is trying to work out whether their surgeon is - a) a pioneering genius OR b) an entrepreneurial doctor who, having made a large investment in expensive technology to try to corner the market, is trying to keep his bank manager happy, OR c) somewhere in between. I've seen all three, and the shades in between, in my medical colleagues. Caveat emptor! SunSurfer

Hi Pokkis, Thanks for your interest. I booted up and laid the board down on the floor. Lateral pressure is directly transmitted to the edges through the hinge line with relatively little flex in the ply/glass laminate. Forward and rear pressure produces definite flex, but nothing that I think the plates can't handle nor anything likely to cause permanent deformation of the alloy channel. We'll see what actual riding does. It certainly seems strong enough to me to stand up to routine carving. I figured that the boards we ride have wood cores and glass laminates and they hold together (most of the time). I'm particularly interested in the durability of the interface between the 2 UHMWPE slider guides and their epoxy surrounds. I haven't been able to come up with any other way, so far, to produce a fit of this precision using the tools in my garage. I'm not planning any deliberate crash testing! but I'm sure it will happen knowing the standard of my riding. SunSurfer

The design of the plate has as much, if not more room, for experimentation & personal choice than the design of the system that attaches it to the board. 1/ Plate attachment points to board in relation to attachment points for bindings. 2/ Heel & toe pieces only vs. standard binding inserts and full binding rotation variability. 3/ Plate Flex: Flexible plate - a) what materials b) how much flex (rider weight & ability) OR Non-Flex plate a) what design, including how much torsional rigidity to build in (torsion box?). b) what materials 4/ How much adjustability do you want in the design and at how much extra weight for those adjustability features. Pokkis, the initial plate I've built has significant torsional rigidity coming from the channel section aluminium. The amount of twist in the ply/glass sections at either end is also limited by their attachment to the hinge units below as these run across approximately the middle of the length of each piece. I debated building a torsion box design plate but decided against it on the basis of the extra weight involved. I can always build more plates with different designs, because the hinge/slide mechanism is not in the plate with this design, and new plates can be easily attached/detached. How it will actually perform I have to wait to find out. Our ski fields in NZ will not open till mid June at the earliest. SunSurfer

http://www.apexsnowboard.com/ Site clearly not yet completed, but worth watching. SunSurfer

Now for the first plate. (Mk.1 version) Made from marine grade 7-ply plywood, with a fibreglass/epoxy laminate to either side, epoxyed and screwed into an aluminium channel extrusion on either edge. Bindings are attached to stainless steel T-nuts epoxyed into the underside of the plate. I use SnowPro Race standard at the front & F2 Intec Race at the rear, heel & toe pieces only. Rear foot wedges shown are set at 6 degrees, made from the same marine ply - 'glass - epoxy materials. Final weight comparison: Conventional (SnowPro & F2 bindings used normally) vs. Plate (Hinge Units, Plate & Binding heel & toe units including all screws/bolts etc. used to hold it together) "Plate" is 1416 gram extra weight. Note that Conventional setup minus screws to attach bindings to board weighs 1508 gram SunSurfer

This is the Mk. 1 version. Since the previous post I found that using 4 approx. 1x1cm UHMWPE posts still allowed the front unit to wiggle more than I was happy with. In version 3 I turned the 4 holes in the aluminium into 2 parallel slots. UHMWPE sliders are now nearly 3cm long each. Then beefed up the securing plate to 6mm aluminium and bonded on the P-Tex underneath it. Result: NO WIGGLE. Slides well. Photo shows unit with the securing plate to one side. SunSurfer

Lighten up BJ. At the time I wrote that I wasn't sure how the plate system worked, hence my question to Vapor which you did not quote. Vapor's subsequent posts & photos show that the plate attachments at each end have the standard hinge & hinge/slide functions. I'm still not clear what it is that is protruding through the middle section of the plate, and what, if any, function it serves. SunSurfer

Best piece of vaporware I've ever seen! Can you explain for us what is happening at each of the points where the plate attaches / rides on the split board below? I'm guessing at a centre pivot/hinge & at each end the mechanism allows the plate to slide over the surface of the splitboard. It looks quite different from what we've seen on the B. Karl & Apex Composites plates so far. SunSurfer

Photo of Matt Morison shows the insert pattern, unfortunately no dimensions. SunSurfer

http://www.vimeo.com/9676792 1994 parallel slalom racing from Norway. SunSurfer

Final plate to secure hinge/slide now shown, together with slide forward and back. Final slide shows the crucial <1mm gap between this final piece of aluminium and the unit below which allows the sliding motion to occur. In the end I cut off the bridge between the UHMWPE inserts but left them protruding about .5mm above the hinge/slide unit top surface. This allows the securing plate to be firmly screwed down but still leaves the gap. Now have to wait a couple of months to find out how durable this all is! SunSurfer

Read the description gentlemen. The plastic bridge is approx 1.5mm thick. I'm still not finally decided about whether to keep it. But the whole thing will be covered by an aluminium plate, 3mm thick, held down with the mounting screws that go through the UHMWPE inserts and into the board. Between this fixation plate and the sliding unit is another layer of 1.2mm P-Tex. If I leave the plastic bridge in then I have to make a cutout in the P-Tex. If I remove the bridge then the P-tex layer is only perforated by the mounting screws. The pictures don't show the plate to allow you to see the slide mechanism.

This unit is constructed identically to the fixed hinge unit except for the slide features. Base is again 1.2mm P-Tex from an old snowboard. Four rectangular cutouts have been made in the unit. 1cm thick, extra abrasion resistant, ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene inserts have been made (see photo) and placed in the cutouts then screwed into the binding moutings. Epoxy has then been poured into the gaps to create an absolutely precise fit between UHMWPE and the cutout sides, taking great care to avoid getting epoxy on the snowboard. Epoxy doesn't effectively bond to the UHMWPE so it's an easy task to tap out the plastic and trim the rear edge of each peg that goes into the cutout. Only 2-3 mm of space is needed to accommodate the sliding motion of the board when carving (see thread on Sagitta Arcs Chords). To finally hold it all down an aluminium plate with yet another layer of 1.2mm Ptex between it and the sliding unit will be screwed onto the UHMWPE inserts and into the board. In this way all the sliding surfaces will be P-Tex/UHMWPE based and wear should be minimised. Weight of this unit without the final attachment plate is 382 gram. Stack height is the same at 18.2 mm. Obviously the thickness of the chosen plate needs to be added to this. I am planning on attaching the binding heel & toepieces directly to the plate that sits on top of these units. The resulting weight saving for my Front & Rear bindings combined is 425 gram total. My nearest ski field is planning to open in late June, weather permitting so no ride reports for a while yet. I have no commercial interest in this design. My day job pays all the bills. I hope that this sparks peoples interest in plate design and that we see more detail of other "homebake" plates! Like some others, I just like problem solving and playing around in my workshop. Like bj vircks, I had figured out the general layout of the Apex Composites plate (see plate designs thread), and also looked closely at the Karl plate. There had to be other ways of solving the same problems with the materials I could lay my hands on. I have some ideas for trying to fabricate an Apex Composites style design but haven't begun to work on those yet. The only power tools used in the making of these were a circular saw with a tungsten carbide blade, a Black & Decker hand drill, and more recently a second hand drill press. SunSurfer

Version 2 hinge & hinge/slide units now completed. Units are made of predominantly 3 mm aluminium plate, bonded with Araldite & screwed together. Fixed hinge unit shown in this post. Has 5mm marine 316 alloy stainless steel hinge pin. Mounting screws are in the 4cm x 2cm standard inserts on my Riot snowboard but are not the final mounting screws that I will use. Outermost inserts are 50 cm apart on this board. Plate attachment part of the hinge unit has stainless T-nuts epoxyed to it. Unit has a 1.2mm sheet of P-Tex from an old snowboard base underneath it, base aluminium plate is 3mm, and hinge extrusion is 15mm, for a total height of 18.2mm. This unit weighs 372 gram. See following post for detail of sliding hinge unit.

Within Type 2 there are two further different approaches. A: The rigid B Karl plate with no front extension, the rider of which has just won two World Cup crystal globes. B: Flex with front extension - e.g. the Apex Composites plate. Reading Jack Michaud's review of the NSR boards he seems to suggest that the latest Kessler & Coiler metal boards are pretty soft in the nose. Is a front extension of the plate useful to moderate this flexibility once the turn is initiated? Conversely, B Karl is riding the SG board and doesn't seem to need the front extension to win/place more consistently than any other racer. Is anyone able to make an informed comparison of the front end softness/stiffness of the SG in relation to Kessler/Coiler? SunSurfer

Thanks Anke, I think I'll stick to my current all mountain board, an original Avalanche Chris Saunders 167cm model, still with plenty of camber, stiff, but slightly narrower than the specs I've seen for the later Eliminators. SunSurfer

This has turned up on a local auction site. Anyone able to come up with model year, specs etc? Haven't been able to find anything myself for this actual model. SunSurfer

6mm cork floor tile only. Ditto to lowriders comment about compression and having to be careful with mounting screws. Grips binding and board well. Used for 10+ days without problems of cracking/fragmentation. SunSurfer

FIS have a Smugmug site where they have very high definition photos of World Cup Events. Photos from the whole snowboard World Cup Season are there inc. La Molina. http://fis.smugmug.com/ http://fis.smugmug.com/Other/LG-SB-FIS-WC-Finals-La-Molina/11529040_ytuXk#813374894_p6wPW 2010 La Molina event photos SunSurfer