teach

More photos. Here is the newer Proton (bindings not included).

Please add me and my daughter to the list. Thanks, sounds great!

I have longer toe bails (very long) if you want. I'd say make that your last resort, though. I used Deeluxe/Raichle M30 with my TD3s with no issue at all, but those were the older (longer) bails. Correct, 319 mm bsl = M29 for the AF700/Indy/Track 700. The "29 - 32" is just the upper cuff (or tongue) -- the same part is used to assemble all shell sizes from 29 to 32. Good luck!

Pretty nice conditions lately. Softer than I'd like, the kind where you slow down more than you'd expect in a turn. That means straightliners have the advantage, and that scares me. Surprising with the temperature fluctuations -- I expected the perma-groom of the week before. They're still making snow. Very good coverage -- no rocks lately. My boards are pleased.

That sounds a little strange. What size are your boots, and are these Sidewinders or regular TD3? One possibility is that you're expecting the toe bail to clear the boot by a large amount. The TD3 bails are a very close fit and the lever from bail to boot ledge is very short, so it can seem like it won't work but it will. If they really don't fit, you must have boots bigger than M30? There are special extra-long baseplates for that, I gather. Just email Michelle and Fin at Bomber. They're very responsive and want your stuff to work. You may also be able to find some of the older toe bails that are longer.

I have three of these to sell. They're damp boards with a big scr (13 or 14 meters) and good ice grip. They excel in firm to super-firm, but start to get fussy with bumpy softer stuff (at least for me). Nice low-profile nose, 19 cm waist. EDIT: Only the red/black/grey one left, others sold. 1. Excellent condition, green, metal. This was my go-to board last season. I just realized I missed half of that season due to getting hit by a clueless boarder, so this has gotten less use than I'd have estimated. $120 plus shipping. SOLD 2. Newer model, can't tell if it has any metal in the layup as there's no tail cutout. I have not ridden this. I bought it two seasons ago here, almost unused. I may take some runs on it next week to be able to give an idea of the ride. Seems to be the same specs as the older 172s. $150 plus shipping. SOLD 3. An older one, metal, edges are maybe at 50 - 60% -- lots of life left, but definitely thinner than new. This has a few inserts that appear to be bulging a little. I posted here asking about this; there are close-up photos in that thread. I used this heavily until the beginning of last season when I noticed the inserts, and replaced it with the green one. $50 plus shipping? Affected inserts are the ones in the middle (5 x 2 pattern) so to be safe you'd want to use the inserts placing you in the center of the insert pack, which I think is around a 19.5" stance (will measure). AVAILABLE Photos (#1 and #3 and a 167 Factory Prime I forgot to include. Will include in a separate post with a few others): The bases of #1 and #2 are waxed but not scraped. #3 has some fairly superficial rock scrapes you can see. They're not deep.

I have some Salomon Malamutes in size 12 (M29). Too wide in the ankle/heel area for me. I also have some Northwave Kevin Jones in M30 that are a little too wide as well.

Really nice conditions lately. Best this season, and this season has been good overall -- better temperatures overnight and smooth grooming (none of the ravines, missed patches, or other surprises I got used to last season; a few rocks before the recent snow is all I can complain about). Tomorrow morning is supposed to be cold. Maybe that will keep the kooks away for a while? I may try to take advantage of that Anyone heading up tomorrow AM? Got lots of interest in my setup today, way more than usual. Even a "does that split in two?" I was riding a 185 Scott Strike, 19 cm waist... into two what? GS race skis? I suppose it's the plate bindings.

You seem to be not quite centered on the board -- a little biased to the heel side. Could explain some of your experience. Nice board!

Stance, angles, cant, lift... proper boot fit... with the more rigid setup these can become really critical to get just right.

Also, if you haven't seen it yet, the articles here on BOL, particularly the ones on "the Norm" by Jack Michaud. Proper binding setup took a long time for me, and some of what you're experiencing may be due to not getting that dialed in yet. Also, getting used to higher angles (above 50 degrees was the hard part for me). You fight the equipment a lot at first. I did, I mean! Good luck and keep at it!

The bail pictured would not work as a toe bail for my boots -- too narrow. But the same is true for some TD3 toe bails, so I admit this isn't conclusive. I dragged out the Deeluxe Indys I used before I switched to UPZ and it's the same fit. Part of the issue is the heel height (I think that's what Dingbat is pointing to) making the angle of the heel hoop not quite horizontal. I tried some ski boots and that seems to be what the bail was meant for: with the lower heel, the hoop is horizontal. Still a larger than necessary radius, though. It didn't occur to me when I posted to mention that the green boots are new -- first use at the very end of last season. So Beckmann's point about the ledge deforming goes double, I suppose. There is good contact and no slop when clamped in (I'm using fairly high tension -- one-handed closing is possible but not easy). KC, I have a pair of Sidewinders and they work great. I don't want to use them at higher angles, though. On the other hand, I find higher angles easier on my knees. Reading through alpinecarving.com and Catek's site (it's still there, even the 2002-2003 site introducing the Olympics) I saw mention of change in bail fit. These OS1s are the first generation, with the 12 mm kingpin and the 5 mm donut ring, just like the WC. So it's possible they came with other WC hardware as well. Thanks to everyone for the help!

Thanks for the input. In case some were thinking I'm proposing anything barbaric, here are some photos to explain. My idea is to put the bail in a vise, with plywood facing on the jaws, and crank down to compress the heel hoop at the ends, expecting it to bend a little toward the middle. I think that would cause the ends to be a little more skewed to each other (if anything). I'm only after maybe 1/4" less width. Only semi-barbaric? Mr. E., those bails look like what I'm after. What Cateks are they from? I was a little worried about the points Beckmann and Lowrider brought up. Are the bails heat-treated in some way after bending to relieve stresses? Are they stainless steel, or spring steel, or something else? Yooperboy, hammering is a type of cold-working, as are bending and drawing, which should make the material more brittle, if I understand. King Crimson, do you mean the process of altering the bail geometry will cause problems (as Beckmann and Lowrider are warning) or that a different bail geometry is likely to increase failures? I've seen many shapes of heel bails... how would a slightly narrower hoop be less safe? KC, Are you suggesting this as an alternate fix? You taped the sides of the bail, or the hoop? Do you have a picture? Lowrider, if you no longer have use for the bails, I'm definitely interested. But I wouldn't want to deplete your stash of spares if you still use Cateks. Looking at the photos makes me think I'm worrying too much. When looking at the heel bails while clipping in it looked worse. But looking from these angles shows that there's more of the heel getting grabbed than I thought. The bails? Maybe so. How often do people feel it's safe to go on a heel bail? Beckmann, did you use the same heel bail on the TDs or did you replace them according to some schedule? Thanks!

I have some older Catek bindings and the heel bails would fit my boots better if they had a tighter curve where they wrap around the heel. I thought it might be possible to just put them in a vise and crank down a bit. Anyone do something like this, or is it a bad idea? Also, some of the bails are welded where the ends meet and others are not. Is there much reason to consider welding the the ones that aren't?

I had the Throttle from the previous year. Very similar specs, but totally different ride, I gather. The Throttle was really damp, extremely friendly, and, by the way, had a very low-profile nose. The only thing that sounds familiar in michael.a's description of the OP's board is that it's not great on ice (and by that I mean the east-coast definition, "clear frozen water"). I chalked that up to the 2 degree base bevel those boards came from the factory with. Could also be somewhat related to technique (cough, cough). Strange that Rossignol would mess things up so thoroughly in one year.

SkiMD has a site with a lot of information. There is a "Tuning tips" page, http://www.skimd.com/tuning-tips.html Brief synopsis: Wax Whizard good, heat bad unless done without heating past the base. As for hot boxes, "Hot Boxing has also proven to deform base profile due to heating the entire ski instead of just the base." and "REMEMBER, HEAT IS WHAT'S USED TO BUILD SKIS, AND HEAT IS WHAT WILL TAKE THEM APART!". I hot wax only if I'm applying base prep wax. Then I use a sheet of paper between the iron and base as I'm paranoid about heat on plastic, even before seeing SkiMD's tips. You don't need much heat to get the wax (Dominator Zoom Renew) to penetrate -- 100 C is enough. The Wax Whizard works really well for regular waxing in my experience.

Those are some enviable turns! Nice photos, too, and a downright great idea! Props to those who made it happen.

I'll take the TD1s.

Photos. Including photos from your computer in a post can be done as follows. Go below the text entry box to "Attach Files", click "Browse", and find your photo. Click the "Attach This FIle" button. Repeat if you have more. Then each attachment will have a clickable option "Add to post". Click it and it will add a line like to your text. Put that wherever you want the photo to be. Hope that's helpful. Location. I could swear I saw locations appearing under avatars a few weeks ago. I entered mine, but I don't see my or anyone's location any more. Did something change or am I just confused?

Bump -- Malamutes still available. $100 + shipping. (edited original post to reflect lowered price)

SOLD! I've had this sitting around for a long time. A 163 (as the board says, 5'3" - 5'5"), I think, with about 26 cm waist. Has a repaired base gouge. With a base grind and tune it might work nicely for someone. Outstanding artwork on these. Any interest? SOLD, thanks!

These are very soft plate bindings (standard, not step-in) for lighter riders, or for powder duty or for use on freeride boards with hardboots. Excellent condition, very light use (on freeride boards). Bought new (NOS, since Proflex is now part of F2). Includes four cant wedges. The Freecarve doesn't come with heel lift wedges (you have to buy a "Tune Up" kit separately for that). But you can use a pair of cant wedges opposed to get a little lift (that's how they're currently set up). $45 plus shipping.

Burton Chicklet 126, nice shape. This board is cambered, with flat base and edges that work. No 5 degree base bevel or convex base or rocker in these older Burton boards. My daughter reluctantly gave this up when her boots were too big to fit bindings that would fit on the board! $30 plus shipping. Burton LTR 110 with Freestyle Junior bindings. The bindings have one ratchet to decrease the frustration factor. They worked great. I think we used them up to size 6 women's boots, but that was the limit for sure. Probably best for size 2 to 5. Board is also cambered (a little) with flat base. Edges are dull and have some rust, but removable. Kind of ugly but at my daughter's age when we got it, the fact that it slides on snow was the only salient feature. $20 for the board, $20 for bindings, plus shipping. (I'll sell the bindings with the other board if anyone wants that setup.) I also have two larger boards suitable for bigger kids (100 lbs +, probably) or lighter riders. I'll get photos of them and post separately. Oxygen "Divine 39" 139 cm and Ar 45 (145 cm, wide waist).

Have your daughter mark the position with a paint pen, and maybe add a few racing stripes...

Could be that your boot shells are too big. It's not uncommon to use hard boots a size or two smaller than your soft boots. When there's too much room, you tend to exert a lot of muscles to maintain your foothold, so to speak. How much room do you have when you put your bare feet into the shells without liners? Experiment with canting, as other have said. How are you currently set up? Cant discs sloping along the long axis of the board, or along the long axis of the boot, or...? "No cant" is sloping along the long axis of the boot, so the angle setting on the cant disc and binding are the same. If that's where you are now, try rotating the cant discs a notch inward (lower angle in front, higher in rear). If not, try no cant as your starting point. And as others have said, footbeds may be the issue, especially if you have the others covered. Eric Beckmann has a very informative collection of articles on his website. For binding setup, http://beckmannag.com/hardboot-snowboarding/hardboot-binding-configuration and also see the articles under "Alpine Skiing" on boot fitting and footbeds.