TimW

Same here, 25-35 mph (40-50 kmh) carving. Straightlining it already takes some commitment to reach 60 mph. That 73 mph must be a bad GPS reading, that does not happen accidentally, it requires you to tuck in low on some gradient. I don't think I ever did 73 mph and I can keep up with good non-lunatic skiers.

I think that is one thing that is a bit unique to us. But I do >95% of my riding with my (non-carving) family and friends. Still I get more than enough chances to lay down some carves. In the 'round the resort' type of groups, I'd say normally > 50% of the trails are carveable, nothing wrong with that. It is normally more crowds that are a limiting factor. And I also enjoy the rest of the riding... (and the company!) Actually riding with my 77 year old parents is pretty good, they like nicely groomed runs....

Don't worry on using it, impossible to say if it is weaker or stronger than a 4x4, 4x2 or 4x6 bolt pattern without some fancy strength analysis. Your bolt setup is not more asymmetric than the binding plate itself diagonally stiffening the board, so it is not 'less correct' than the normal setup. The stresses in board, binding and bolt are a combination of your leverage on the board, and the binding locally stiffening the board(not wanting to flex with the board). Moving the bolts inwards or outwards can be good for good for one aspect, and bad for the other, so there is no easy answer.

I made my daugther very happy

Definitely to coolest looking board on this thread! (Although I am sure I will hate how it rides.....)

Definitively seems repairable to me. The only problem is that if the delamination has been there for a while, the inner surfaces may be dirty and it may be difficult to get a good bond. Some additional tips: - if you can, get vacuum infusion epoxy. These have very low viscosity. This helps getting a good penetration and wetting of the delamination. Also you can inject it with a syringe deep into the delamination. Furthermore most have a long pot life (3+ hours) so you have plenty of time to get it right. To help penetration get a pumping action by opening and closing the delamination a bit a few times (choice of words is accidental). - Unless the sidewall is still covered in epoxy and you did not sand/touch it: Make sure you flame treat the sidewall (or any plastic you want to bond)!!!!. This is essential for a good bond, more than roughening. And it is very easy to do. Just get a torch and quickly run it over the plastic a few times. Very short, plastic should not melt or burn or discolor (like <10 seconds to run the length of an entire sidewall. when I build a board I flame treat the sidewalls when they are already bonded to the wood core, so I 'treat' the wood adjacent to the sidewall as well. Time is so short it does not burn or discolor the wood) - Postcure the repair (after the epoxy is fully hardened). Heat helps the strength and bond of epoxy a lot. Heat guns (adjustable) are great for this. Last time I did a similar repair I used a PP 30mm pipe, cut it on one side along the length and pushed it over the side of the board. Then I had the heat gun blow through this tube to nicely heat the length of the repair. 70-90 degC air temp is good.Cure for a few hours.

I think it is difficult to separate the fact that a board has titanal from other design parameters. I don't know if any manufacturer keeps all other parameters the same if they change construction. E.g. if you compare a SG full race to the full race titan, is the stiffness and torsional stiffness the same? I design my boards for stiffness and I find the differences between my carbon builds and my last carbon/titanal build not that big. The titanal feels a bit more damp, probably because off the extra weight, nothing shocking. But that is for the same stiffness and torsional stiffness.

Ok, thanks for the feedback. I will put PA12 topsheet on both sides of the plate for protection, that is quite good for snow, so should be fine then.

Does snow getting stuck between a plate and the board ever become a problem? The plate I will make will be quite close to the board, I wonder if I should give it a bit of a V-shaped bottom and ptex it.

Nice to see a fellow Dutch carver on this forum! What is the blue board with the ugly bumpy top sheet, second one from the right?

For me it all depends on the execution. Some extremecarvers make it look fluent and 'extremely' good, others are just alternating falling down with push-ups. Same goes for freecarving, some have body parts flapping around, others do it gracefully. Must say that is is harder to please my eyes with extremecarving, it really requires proper execution.

The bails and lever look very burtonian to me, so if you broke the burton bails I'd have some hesitation.

Nice board! Have you ridden a 30 cm waist board before? Look forward to hear some feedback on how that rides. I built a 27.5 cm board last year and would like to have less overhang, but a bit worried much wider will make it a too cumbersome.

Started building the first board for this year. The board will have a plate (and the stiffness distribution will be such that it will not be rideable without a plate) A bit hesitant on the design now after I realized 174 cm effective edge is extremely long. It did not seem extreme to add less that 10% to the 'go anywhere' 160 cm for my everyday board, but it is longer that any commercially available board I have seen. Edit: Ah, Thirst snowboards just gave me peace of mind...

It has been tried in the past... This was the softboot intec system. Doing two pins like you suggest might be better, but I actually think the above system is fine for the interface, the pin for lateral moments, the sole for fore-aft bending moments. I think the key thing is the hard shell on hardboots. And that hard shell also limits walking. A more logical sole / interface design may improve it, but I actually do not mind that much. For ski boots also alternatives have been made to improve walking etc., but nothing ever caught on. But if you do go commercial, do something like above, add a plastic shell, and I'd gladly give it a try.

I was thinking the same, if it is flexible it could be great for getting fatigue failures of the bolts, or loosening them.

Perfect! Thank you guys!

Does anyone have the dimensions ( insert locations) for UPM & Allflex mount? I intend to built a snowboard + plate, but want to use the standard insert patterns so I could use other plate designs as well. (The board will be plate specific so I will not include 4x4 inserts, as the board should not work without a plate anyway) If anyone has the dimensions or would be willing to measure them for me that would great. As I understand Allflex uses standard distance between front and back inserts, UPM I am not sure.

Problem is that the steeper runs are the most fun, nothing beats a nicely groomed black run! For me it is simply endlessly looking around, frequently stopping, and waiting for a quiet moment. I never assume skiers to anticipate the lines I ride. I'd love to do non-stop runs from top to bottom, but it is simply too tricky. Just on how tricky it can be: one day this year I went of a final run at the end of the day, slopes were already empty. My 8 year old son joined me. At some moment when I initiated a frontside and my board hit something and I washed out. Expected to see a rock or something that my board went over, I looked back and it turned out to have been my son's ski. Luckily he was not harmed, just both a bit shaken. Now my son, though young, always rides very controlled and is a good skier. He is always with me, knows exactly which turns I make (tries to copy them) and still I managed to surprise him. Let alone a skier who hardly ever sees a hardbooter. Moral of the story: always be extremely careful, never assume others to anticipate your turns.

Advertising has changed a bit over the years.

I had a Hot Logical 172 (1990 I think), which was the first board I really started carving on (beyond just tipping the board on its edge). I guess it also was my first board that was really suitable for carving with a good sidecut and stiffness. A lot of camber also, it was good at launching you from one turn into the next one (at least that was my impression, maybe more due to my skill & weight at the time...) After that I had an F2 Beamer 162, and on that I learned that asyms were not working for me. I consciously had to bring my weight back in heelside turns not to go over the nose. But I still love the way asyms look! Actually tempted to make a board with a longer heelside edge, to have a skewed nose and tail, just for the looks of it

The kessler website says Clothoid, but according to the image in the link below the center is constant and the tip and tail deviate. http://www.kessler-swiss.com/en-US/technology/kesslerShapeTechnology My guess would be that the image is an engineering approximation of the clothoid curve that the difference is negligible for practical purposes. If somebody feels the urge to do the math..... edit: I noticed that I did not read up to the end of the thread when I posted this.....

I guess it makes nose grabs easier?

For a flat run it is quite easy to calculate the the G's you feel based on (overall body) inclination angle: 1/cos(inclination) That gives you 2 G (absolute) for a 60° and 3 G for a 70° inclination. That is for clean carving without cheating (putting any part of your body on the snow, which would lower the G's). I don't think anybody can carve a clean 70° turn, so the 1.5 relative (=2.5 absolute) the guy is pulling in the video is a realistic maximum. Of course curvature in the run can add to that. If a concave section in a run would give you 2 G vertical (instead of only 1 from gravity), that would increase the total Gs. If you would also have the speed to get the centripetal force, you could theoretically double the numbers above. Above neglects the inclination of the run, which would lower things a bit. Tim

I built a metal top sheet board this year. I considered adding a protective layer but did not do because of the additional weight a complexity in manufacturing. I use vacuum infusion as a fabrication method and that becomes it a bit complex if you add non-porous metal layers... Damage / impact is defnitely a concern. Bonding strenght is critical or metal boards and an impact therefore is more likely to cause a delamination in a metal board than in a composite board, and a delam is more likly to grow. Furthermore the aluminum scratches easily, affecting the good looks. And actually a ski (or board) could easily make a deep scratch, taking out considerable strength. Local loads from bindings I also see as a concern. This could be solved by some protective plates. I ride it with td2s directly on the board and it has been fine. But I only have ~15 days on it so far, so no final judgement yet, although I have had several boards that did not last me that long.....