Jack M

I hope so, but there are no other numbers adjacent to 3 in either keypad that would make sense!

What?! That is way too narrow for any snowboarder. You don't even know what size her feet are!

OK, first things first - make sure you can comfortably do The Norm on your softboot gear to the point where you can consistently change edges before the board points downhill. If you can get this down on softboots first, you'll have a MUCH easier time making the transition to hardboots.

Hi Lez, welcome to BomberOnline. Honest question - do you know how to carve your board so the edge is slicing cleanly through the snow with no skidding? That is the first step towards being able to use an alpine setup efficiently. If not, there are some articles in the links below to help get started with that. Good luck!

Agreed. I find in order to do this I often end up with my front boot shifted towards the toe and rear boot shifted to the heel - the opposite of what is known as gilmour bias.... do you? I like almost parallel bindings, maybe 2 degrees forward on the front foot. hehehe... BOL didn't dub it, Gilmour himself dubbed it Gilmour bias. I had to chuckle when I saw that because I had been playing around with it for years. I never thought to call it Michaud bias. Hmm... or maybe Jack Offset? Has a certain ring to it...

Probably if you ride with your front foot flat. As you rotate your front boot more forward, the boot's forward lean moves your front knee further forward. But I use toe lift on my front foot, so I don't change width with angles.

It's significant if you have big enough feet. I don't run g-bias anymore because of it. On a Madd 158 with 18cm waist and big sidecut flare, I actually used reverse g-bias to help keep angles down. IIRC, on that board it was a difference of like 4 or 5 degrees.

And the more "gilmour bias" you use, the higher angles you have to run. This is because the board is narrower where your front heel is and where your rear toe is.

My only point was that I have seen MUCH better carving done on softboots, so saying this is what softboots can do isn't accurate. Yeah, I threw my stuff in the dump because it was 12 years old and clapped out. I didn't replace it because we don't get enough powder here to justify it, AND, my Coiler Schtubby does so well as an all-mtn board anyway. An honest question, sailor... have you tried hardboots?

I am loving my 2003 330xi four door sedan. It had 39k miles on it when I bought it 18 months ago, for less than what you can spend on a new Civic. 225hp inline 6 (best engine ever) and it gets 30mpg on the highway. And it is unstoppable in the snow. Need to haul boards and lots of luggage to the hill? Get a rack and a box. And/or get the wagon.

yeah... not my idea of good EC or good carving. also it looks like there's plenty of good snow to work with there, so i wouldn't call this "what is possible" on softies. i've seen a lot better (Vin Q).

EC guys size their bindings too loose, to allow for a lot of boot roll in the binding. This creates a lot of excess torque on the bails. I've suggested maybe a braided ss cable would do better in that application.

Post of the month!

What are softboots? ;)

Outstanding. Thanks for the update.

Cool! Sounds like many of the BX boards that are popular now. Although I wonder if you tried any longer radii in your prototyping? 10m seems very short for a 168, also 10.5m for 175.

I met Joe at the 2008 East Coast Expression Session and he was very friendly, and easygoing. As a moderator/admin of this forum I can vouch for the fact that we have several members here who play a "character" on the forum that is in no way who they really are in real life. Joe C is one of them, with his character John Deere. I am a software engineer, husband, and father of two. I personally would not have a friend like the fictitious John Deere, but I can laugh at his posts because they are just that - fictitious. We enjoy having Joe as part of this online community, and as a participant at our real-life snowboarding events.

TD2 and 3 are lighter than the TD1. The size of them is dictated by the cant/lift adjustment mechanism. The screws that mount the top plate to the cant disk have to reside on a circle outside the center disk. TD3s can be unmounted and re-mounted whole, without disassembling or changing any settings. And on TD2s and 3s, all settings are quantifiable and readable right on the binding - in other words, easily repeatable. Also once mounted, the settings cannot move, back out, wiggle, rattle, etc. TD2s are lower than TD1s. TD3s are slightly higher than TD2s (maybe the same height as TD1?) due to the improved dampening mechanism which was enlarged due to popular demand. And if you want any cant and/or lift, you are going to have to accept some increase in height no matter what binding.

I'm in Falmouth. :) You won't be disappointed with the TD3, and you'll be able to upgrade it to Sidewinder if you want. Racers seek flexible-flyer bindings because they have to deal with bone-jarring race ruts. We freecarving weekend warriors do not. See you up at the loaf??

http://www.catek.com/Kessler-snowboards.htm

No disrespect to Mr. McConkey, but for most influential of all time I'm sticking with Stein Eriksen.

Then they'd have to go after skiers. That wouldn't last.

Wow, that's what the Saab 9-2X should have looked like.

99% sure Shred named that board. And if that is true, then I am 100% sure it says "The Cornholer".