Jump to content

brodster_57

Member
  • Posts

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Details

  • Location
    Seattle, WA
  • Home Mountain/Resort?
    SugarBowl
  • Occupation?
    Engineering Student
  • Current Boards in your Quiver
    I sold all my carve boards!
  • Current Boots Used?
    Rachle AF700

brodster_57's Achievements

Member

Member (2/6)

10

Reputation

  1. Haven't been on here in ages but I was cleaning out my garage today and found my old boots. I bought them new to do racing back in 2001, if I remember correctly. The size of the boots are 28 according to the liners. Sole is stamped with 309mm. At the time I tried to squeeze a size 11 foot into them. The first season was painful. The next season I took them to a boot fitter in Spokane and had him work the toe box over. He did some grinding. The toe box does not feel overly weakened from the removal. Anyways, give me a holler if you have any questions. Email will be a bit faster since I am not too active on here: brodymahoney@hotmail.com $50 OBO on these boots. They aren't in perfect condition, but they are still very useable. Just want to see them go to someone who can use them. Thanks for looking.
  2. Thanks for the reply. I will check out those sites tonight. Yeah, some coaching would probably be in order in the future.
  3. That sounds like it might just work well. I don't know much about the model so I will be emailing you for more info. Thanks
  4. The first time I demo'd MTX, I was a bit apprehensive. Despite being young, I am rather old-school in my preferences. Anyways, I took one of the boards out for a spin with more dramatic MTX. As described above, it did seem to rip into the ice...sort of like a serated blade sawing. It seemed to increase the edge hold on the hardpack, but at the same time I really didn't like how it wasn't as smooth as a finally tuned edge. Fast-forward to last weekend. I tried the Banana Tech board for the hell of it (this is the reverse camber one). Of course, it was a bit awkward to get the board to initiate, but the MTX on that board was a bit more subtle. I found that this was a far better trade-off. It held an edge well, but was not too rough. I was impressed with that one. I probably won't ever buy one for myself, because I still attest to infinite points of contact, but I agree that it is definately worth a try.
  5. Well, maybe not completely new. I don't race anymore, and I have always wanted to get the right equipment for this style of riding. I have definately come across the Donek Blade and Swoard snowboards built specifically for this. However, I am curious if there are any tips you can offer me to get me started correctly. I was sitting here trying to think what type of boot or binding would be perfect for this. I currently have some old unmodified AF700's and I used to ride CATEK's. I have no board and binding as of now, so I am open to any advice. I also understand there are probably a million different preferences for the next one, but what are typical stance widths and angles? Edge tuning? Thanks for any info!
  6. As you can tell, I am not to specific. This is because I used to race, haven't been into carving for awhile, and want to re-establish my setup. I am looking for something that is in the 180ish region in length and is great for free carving. Hoping to do some euros, so I would love to step up to a width that would let me lay it down without boot-out. It would be a plus if I could use it to race on too. I am open, so please hit me with anything you got. Also, a nice set of used bindings would be sweet too. Thanks
  7. Here's the story: I came across quite a few examples in the past, but I am no longer sure where to look besides Catek. I have a Palmer Crown and ride Super plates on it. Right now I have some Union bindings, but the base plate has cracked because it flexes over the plates too much. Also, the teeth on the highback have worn out and they are not bullet proof at high forward lean angles and someone who weighs 210 lbs. Basically, I need a binding that will be compatible with the plates and be solid. I want one with a solid forward lean mechanism that will hold. I like responsive but tend to favor a binding that dampens well. I know these two can be a bit mutually exclusive, but I am willing to sacrifice a little response for great dampening. I remember seeing a binding with a spring/shock device on the high back awhile back. Does anybody remember what these are called? Thanks
  8. Yeah, I came to the conclusion that height is in fact a factor, but a very small one. I think for 95% of the people, height shouldn't even be considered. But should it be considered for the short and heavy or tall and light? I can't prove it yet. But in the end, height is still a factor. Thanks guys.
  9. 100% I agree that the rider is the major factor. But if COG is an issue, than height is an issue? This is what bothers me. And on that note, if mass is a factor than height is a factor because torque is a consequence of force, which is a consequence of mass. Funny thing, my fiance just read me an article out of snowboarder magazine regarding selecting the correct board. The section has a small blurb on "physics" where the author concluded that weight is the only factor.
  10. Sorry, hope I didn't touch on a sensitive subject. I am just transferring into EEE. I love this stuff.
  11. I agree here too. I think the reason so many people don't consider height is because most manufactures don't even consider it. They probably think torque is too complicated for the average joe. And weight seems to deviate more than height for most people. With this in mind it would seem that weight is usually the primary concern. But there are the extreme cases, which are realistic: 6'3" 150 lbs (my brother) 5'2" 145 (I won't say, whe would kill me). If we follow only weight light tall guys would ride really short boards, and heavy short chicks would be riding boards over their head.
  12. Good posts. Not trying to start and argument here, but I do understand that any rider can create a variety of forces. And I also understand that style and preference dictates the majority of the choice. In fact this is my personal breakdown: 1. Style 2. Mass 3. Height 4. Ability And the overriding factor is always preference. But's lets assume we negate some things. Let's assume that we consider a group of riders with equal ability, preference, and style. Now only mass and height is left to consider. What then. Is it or is it not provable that height is a factor on board selection? I agree that height does not directly influence length. But outside of the carving world where riders do not understand the finer things in life as well, generally longer boards change in stiffness. Also it depends how far out that same stiffness is applied, which would produce a counter torque so to speak. With that in mind, if height affects stiffness (which I completely agree with) does affect length (in the real world).
  13. I've been riding just short of 15 years, and just short of about eight on hardboots and such. A question recently surfaced among some of my peers: Should height affect your choice when purchasing a snowboard. I read the prior post that touched on this topic, but I ended up getting the drift that there are just a bunch of opinions on this matter. However, I have heard no good argument supporting the perspective that mass is the only consideration. I heard nonsense such as the following: "Your board knows how much you weigh, but it can't tell how tall you are." Not trying to be too pompous I replied that boards do not have mental capacity and therefore cannot know either thing; they can only respond to forces and such. I claimed that height is always a factor because we live in a 3 dimensional world and not in a flat plane. I argued that a consequence of this is that boards experience torque, and that torque is a product [vector cross product] of radius and force. Thus, we have to consider height as a factor(however large of a factor that may be) when choosing a board. I would assume since snowboarding is governed by the laws of physics, that it is provable one way or the other. Plus I know there are some physicts and engineers roaming around on this site. I have to know, it's driving me crazy listening to nonsense.
  14. I have been off my carving board for a couple of seasons, but I am back at it in full swing. It didn't take long before I remembered the potential dangers of carving: Other snowboarders and skiers, who typical ride straight down the hil without turning, do not expect the way a carving board can turn and the paths we take (especially on a 15m sidecut turning GS turns). It scares me everytime I lay one over and skier or boarder whizzes by me at mach 10 nearly taking me out!. Since most of you have more experience than me, I am sure you guys have had some close calls or nasty wrecks. Now, I sit and wait for the slope to clear and always look behind me when I lay over an unexpected turn (especially in the flats near the chairlifts!)
  15. Thanks for the response. I ended up changing my stance to 63/60. I like the way that feels. I would try flatter angles; however, my board is not wide enough. As for other changes, I put more forward lean on the back foot and less on front. I am not sure what the numbers would equate to because the AF700's have the bolt and spring adjustments for forward. But there is approx. 1/4" difference between the two boots. It feels good. Another issue was my technique. I played around with this some more, and my tail chatter was reduced. I have a problem getting too far over the front foot. I was checked after I flew over the nose a couple of time hard. Thanks again.
×
×
  • Create New...