TWM

This is an interesting question. This season is my first riding an ultra wide (30.5 waist) soft boot carving board. Given size 12s, boot-out from my relatively slack rear foot angle has, until now, precluded truly high-angle heel turns with soft boots. On a wide board I'm finding that, while soft boots have less leverage than hard boots (of course they do), they've enough leverage, especially paired with the right binding--plenty of leverage, in fact--to drive controlled, high-angle heel turns, even with a ~40* front foot. This, in a very short time, has destroyed my long-held assumptions about soft boot cross-board leverage. It's not to say that soft boots are optimal for alpine racing, but, the right boot paired with the right board and binding surely affords leverage adequate for aggressive, high-angle free carving.

I hope to be still railing turns at your age. Cheers; well done. Yours is quite similar to my soft boot carver this season -- a Donek Saber with 30.5 cm waist, Nitro Phantom Carvers, and Nidecker Talons. I'll post full reviews, but, thus far, I've found the combination of damp, controlled, high-angle carving and a plush, firm boot-binding interface very fun and comfortable.

I truly hope they do not break. Binding failure--being left one-footed at speed, and especially on rail--is one of the most terrifying paths to bodily injury. I've never been injured as a result of forces imposed on the body during a carve, but I have snapped cores and bindings mid-carve. Given the choice between board and binding failure, I'll choose board each time. In my experience, board failures are simply safer. This is why I'd prefer aluminum baseplates; I've never had one fail. But yes, I'll test these and post up a review.

After researching soft boot carving binding offerings, I ordered these today. I will post a review later. On paper and pictures they seem good; purposefully built for carving. Among current offerings, they seem to check the largest number of my boxes for materials, features, and adjustability: - Canted footbeds (3*) with plush padding and 4mm of heel rise - Three-position rotating carbon highback with wide range of forward lean settings - Low-profile aluminum heel cup with slide adjusting for precise foot positioning relative to board edge - Cable-reinforced straps (I didn't know I wanted this, but I like it) Misses: I would have preferred an aluminum baseplate paired with the aluminum heel cup and a wing on the high back. Likely mods: I would like to see more highback rotation range. It'd be easy to do (drill more holes) and I'll probably do so.

I think you're on the right track. Eager to see it reduced to its smallest and simplest form.

Great discussion. I love hard-booting, but I prefer the feeling of soft boot carving. It begets the flow, fluidity, and body English that, for me (and perhaps not you) gets to the heart of what's beautiful about snowboarding. Think: Craig Kelly. I was lucky, early in life, to take a few groomer runs with Craig at Snowmass. Seeing him ride in person burned into my brain a peak potential of soft boot carving, or, for that matter, any carving: very, very fast, always on rail, pencil-thin lines, very large radius turns, and very controlled but with very pronounced use of hips, a rear driving/rudder arm, and fore-aft weight throws accelerating out of turns and off of terrain. And then he'd flip around and do it fakie--at the same speed. Craig's soft boot carving blew me away at a time, in 1990 I think it was, when we were first pioneering 55 degree stance angle and hip-dragging heel turns on steep groom--pioneering in the sense that, back then, before the days of youtube or social media, we were making turns that we'd never seen others make. It was a revolutionary and exhilarating time. Yet, even amidst that, Craig's carving was clearly supreme. His aesthetic of grace at speed deeply influenced my own riding. It drew me, after my racing stint, quickly back to soft boots. I sought out long boards--like the 195 Glissade big guns--that afforded deep, damp stability railing long radius turns at high speeds. At the heart of that transition from hard back to soft boots were heel turns and the issues of shoulder squaring, hip rotation, stance angles, boot-out and lost lateral leverage. For me, a front foot at 35-40 degrees and a forward-driving back knee, helped by heel lift and/or canting, affords hip rotation I need for a heel turn to feel right. The resultant forward pressure requires boards with enough forward profile and stiffness to not fold. Extra stiff boots--especially on my front foot--Talons--help with lateral leverage. Extra wide carving boards at long last resolve boot-out. Admittedly, when I do break out the hard boots--and it's rare these days--I'm guilty of still riding 90s-era race board prototypes. They rip, but are also lively to the point of being rude and rambunctious--too much so for a guy nearing 50. I like to think they showcase a rider's rustiness. Many posts on these forums mention the advances in GS alpine board technology--grippier, quieter, more stable and easier to ride. I'm eager to try one. It may well draw me back into more hard booting days.

I have seen them in person. They did not shrink. They looked exactly like pictures you see on Nidecker's website and videos posted on this very thread: very bulky.

I too have used Talons for several years. I'm on my third pair. They are the stiffest soft boot that I've found, and also compact (but it has a much longer BSL than my AT split boots). I was disappointed that Nidecker discontinued the Talon this season. Their new top-of-the-line boot, the "Index," is an "expedition" and backcountry boot with an over-instep/ankle zipper.

This heel loop is much larger than most other heel loops, and much larger than other Nidecker binding heel loops. Unless one rides a very wide board or very steep angles, this binding will cause boot-out at lower edge angles than bindings with comparatively compact heel loops. In fact, it may do so even on a very wide board for big-footed riders. Photos of this and other bindings on Nidecker's website, and the photos (and reports) in this thread, provide an easy way to see how large it is--and how large it is relative to other more typical bindings.

This makes lots of sense, a full solution for the problem that rotating highbacks, for lack of more rotation, only halfway solve. Any updates on your second generation design?

This massive heel loop is disqualifying for me. Bad design for carving. Boot-out city.

What is AFC?

For a dedicated softboot carver, I had Donek press a 170 Sabre. It's 30.5 cm at the waist (size 12), 10-13m radius, and extra stiff for my weight (I was worried about additional torsional leverage from the wide width, and, I'm a big dude who puts lots of pressure on a board on rail). It feels adequately stiff hand flexing. The workmanship is beautiful. The radius is shorter than my usual go-to. This is my second Donek; I was quite pleased with my first (a deeply tapered and unsinkable 187 big-nosed split, years ago). As with any new board, I'm interested to feel how she rails. And, I look forward to finally having a softboot carver that I can tip all the way over heelside absent bootout.

Board Rossignol XV Wide, 174 / 26.4 / 9.9 scr, ridden dozens of days in one season Rider 6'3" / 225 lbs / 12 boot (Nidecker Talon) / 26" stance at 35 / 0 degrees / Donek binding riser plate Carving Review A strong on-piste carver given that it's a big-mountain shape, but with a too-narrow waist and a sometimes hooky big mountain shovel. Forward-bias stiffness provides a stable chassis overall Rails stable, hard turns at medium and high/large speeds and radii up to moderate edge angles Too narrow for high edge angle railing even with riser plates (boot-out); this forecloses railing steeper slopes Rails best on hard snow, ice, and in mixed spring slush Serrated edges increase grip on ice, boiler plate, and when slarving steeps, but at a speed penalty Prone to heel-turn folding in cold, soft cords, where shovel rise and sidecut engage a tighter radius than the rest of the board downstream