Softcarver

Of course most of us strive to maintain control at all times. I however also strive to improve my skills and that means pushing the boundaries of my ability. There is no way to improve without testing and pushing these limits. Pushing those limits means occasionally crossing them. A patch of ice or an unexpected obstacle can throw even the most seasoned riders into a state of temporary loss of control. Stories like this just make me nervous about moments like that. I am not talking just about this case. It's hard to tell from the articles how the fault should fall. In some ways it sounds like the defendant hit the boy although it is possible that the boy rode into the blind side of the rider since he claims to have not seen the boy. Either way it doesn't look good that the defendant claims to have not seen anyone. I think stories like this are going to open a new age of riding. Perhaps riding insurance and mountain police are down the road for us all. My personal thoughts on suing on the hill are as follows: As has been mentioned we all accept the fact that riding is a dangerous sport and must accept the consequences of engaging in this sport. However if someone is found grossly negligent than a criminal and/or civil case is warranted. I would never sue someone on the hill unless I felt that the accident was caused by an extremely reckless act on their part. And even then I would have to be seriously injured (in other words permanently) and they would have to have a very bad attitude about it. Of course no-one actually knows how they will react until they are in that situation so this is merely speculation on my part.

I've been very dissapointed checking the weather reports. The whole reasone we wanted to go to snowbird was due to their epic POW. Looks like were s.o.l. on that one. Let's keep our fingers crossed for that storm later in the week. If not at least I can sleep in.

I agree with this statement as well as other points you have made. I do admit that it is most likely that the accused did recklessly cause the injury by traveling at a high rate of speed for that area. I am sure the criminal court would not have sentenced him if he didn't rightfully deserve it. (Unless of course he had a hack attorney. LOL. ) I was just pointing out a few things that it seems some did not consider. And although a misdemeanor conviction may not ruin ones life it may prevent them from entering or staying in certain professional fields thereby greatly affecting it.

I know it's spring but I am in the middle of waxing the boards for my Utah trip next week. I use Dominator wax and was using their Bullet after applying the base prep so as to have a harder coat to protect the board from burn. I am using their zoom on top of that followed by a high flourinate from racewax. I will not be bringing my tuning equipment so I wanted the wax job to last through my stay. It just seems that the Bullet is so hard to apply. It doesn't melt on that well and I find myself doing extra passes to get it to melt in. If I do my first pass any slower I am worried about overheating the base. Then the scraping is difficult as well. Is this typical for most hard/cold weather waxes? Is there something that I'm missing or are there any other waxes that may be easier to apply with as good performance?

Love it. I hope so. LOL

I think that a lot of posters are jumping to conclusions without having the facts. I am all for punishing someone who intentionally rides recklessly and causes injury to another. But: 1) What exactly is the speed limit in a slow zone. I have never seen one posted. Perhaps the accused is capable of extremely high speeds and 30 mph seems slow to him. (Not that I do 30mph in a slow zone) But more importantly.... 2) Who exactly clocked the accused at 30-35 mph. Was the ski patrolmen also certified to rate speed by eye or did they have radar guns installed on the trees. 3) Was the accused intentionally speeding or did something happen to make him lose control making this merely an accident. Without knowing all the variables I would find it hard to pass judgement. Given the proper circumstances I would see the punishment as just, but I would need some hard proof of negligence or reckless behavior. I am sure that many of us have been involved in situations (wether recent or long ago while we were learning) where someone was, almost was or could have been (a close call) injured in a situation involving us. Think about it. Would you want to go to jail for an accident on the slopes. I am sure that an on slope investigation is not going to be as thorough as one involving a MV. Would you want your future on the line based on what someone said you did. Yes we all have a responsibility to stay in control, but we're supposed to do the same things in cars and look how any accidents there are when the rules are clear and concrete with strict enforcement. The skiier code is fairly vague as are the rules of the hill (ie. what does slow entail) Until there are speedometers, cameras and other safety devices installed on our hills and boards this is all left to an individuals perception. Again, if he was really being careless then a punishment is fitting, but is this really where we want the future of snowboarding to go. I for one like to enjoy my time on the slopes; responsibly.

I have a set of aluminum oxide stones for my base edge tuning. After a season worth of usage they are slightly scoredwhere they were worn by the edge. This seems to happen very quickly. (like I have to use a new spot for each time I do a board) Is this normal? Is there any way to re-fresh the stones or do I have to just buy a new set?

I've done that half by accident a few times. I don't think that I would ever wrench my body around like that on purpose, but it does make falling look a lot cooler.

but I ride with between 45 and 50 up front and 5 less in the back. I was at 45 for a while and just upped to 50 last time I went out. I didn't notice any issues and actually felt more comfortable. I do ride Catek's with a mildly stiff boot. I am half considering demoing a narrower board with some hard boots for next season to check out some higher angles. Maybe then all these people that look down on us softies will finally accept me. LOL

For some reason all my ride bindings are the same. The slots are a bit too wide but if you are careful you can get them caught without drilling and use the slot to adjust. Just leave the screws very loose until you get all four caught. As far as the high back it is what it is. I ride with 45-50 up front and 5 less in the back and I have not found it to be that much of an issue. I haven't found many bindings out there that rotate that much anyway.

It appears as though you did not appreciate my comment. My intent was not to offend anyone, but rather offer some possibly helpful information. I was not suggesting that you sell your board. I was merely relating what information I have received from a reputable source. My local shop carries Burton for at least 50% of their inventory. They wouldn't have given me tha heads up if there weren't a lot of complaints about the channel system. This also seems to be supported by the 20 sets of replacement hardware Burton sent out. However, if you feel comfortable with the system than by all means use it. It was asked if anyone else had experiences with the channel and even though I have not I felt it pertinent to share this info. I personally do not ride or buy anything Burton even though I used to own only Burton. This is due to several bad experiences I had with the company and their products. I am not going to get into it and bash Burton at this time. I personally would not feel comfortable having only two screws holding me to the board where if one came off it could spell disaster for my knee. I also weigh in at 215 as opposed to 135 so I need a very durable binding. I am sure that the channel has its benefits to other mounting systems including increased board feel, but it is just not for me.

Thats good and bad news. I think that is what is going on with mine. I am not sure how large the aluminum deck is but it seems as if the edges of it started the crack in the topsheet. Hopefully I will have luck with a replacement and a set of spacers will help out with the longevity issue.

That sounds like bad business practice to me. I just cracked a Lib-Tech board on a tree this season and even though it was clearly my fault they provided me with a "B" grade board at no charge. My friends and I all buy Lib-Tech and will continue to do so in part due to their excelllent customer service. I hope Nidecker stands behind their product or they will lose one. I even spoke with the rep before I mounted my Catek's and he did not see an issue. Now there are two minor cracks running just to the outside of my binding mounts on my front foot after about 15 days. I am making two polycarbonate spacers similar to Catek's to protect from further damage so I can ride in Utah next week. How do you like the Ultralight as compared to the Megalight? What differences do you notice? If they warranty my board maybe I will see about upgrading.

Have you sold the spacers? If not are they the race or freeride ones?

I have actually never ridden it nor will I ever, but from speaking with the guys down at my local shop the screws loosen up often. And with only two screws holding you to the board this can be very bad. Besides not being compatible with other bindings the burton channel bindings have limited angles which do not accomodate an aggressive stance.