Jack M

hence the Geckos...

It doesn't look to me like that is accomplishing much, Shred. The four points of that bottom plate are nearly touching the board, so I don't see how there would be any movement for that mystery pad to get involved.

Do the slots in the baseplate of the TD1 line up with 4x4 inserts? IIRC, they don't, but I want to make sure. If so I may want to try this. Can anyone still using TD1s confirm? The discussion of the ALC binding got me thinking. Perhaps the ultimate freecarve binding setup would be Geckos with something like TD1s without the cant disc, and shims under the toe/heel pads to achieve cant and lift. I believe the height of the Geckos is similar to the height of a TD1 cant disc, so the height and weight of the total system would be similar to bare bindings without Geckos. So then you'd have the benefit of Geckos without the height and weight penalty. Of course such a binding could also be used on an isolation plate with similar benefit. The binding baseplate could be made thinner to allow for some flex if desired. I realize an F2 binding is already close to being this, but the height of their toe/heel blocks seems a little higher than what could be possible. Thoughts?

I don't think that's fair to Fin, or Jeff Caron for that matter. This binding appears to be heavier and to have a much higher stack height, which for me are two things that leap out at me as real negatives whenever I ride a plate. Also I see no suspension system. Of course Fin was well aware of the Burton Unicant and he considered copying it, but decided against it for a number of reasons. More parts, more complexity, more weight, higher cost, more height, less room for suspension, etc, all for the ability to choose cant angles other than 0, 3, 6. IIRC he also did not like the idea of a kingpin. That didn't enter into it, and, I doubt it. The binding appears to be all or mostly metal, so it will probably not be widely accepted by FIS racers. It does address a complaint of the TD in that it allows more choices of cant angle. Otherwise, yeah.

Nice. Similar to what I had in mind for the TD4. The mechanism looks very much like the old Burton unicant.

lol - Welcome back CMC! One of the best carvers I've seen. I had noticed CMC hadn't logged in since December so I thought perhaps he missed the transition from BomberOnline and dropped him a note. Got his old username back too (formerly "Ripturns"). CMC dates back to the original BOL forum from day 1 in 1999. Glad to have you here.

Guys, eBay links were always allowed at BOL and it was never a problem. The issue seems to be self-policing. We're just carrying on with the precedent here. If it becomes a problem, we will address it, promise. JohnE, sorry for the threadjack. I like selling in October because the air is starting to crisp and people are getting horny to snowboard. I think the chances are better in October than November that they haven't made quiver decisions yet, but November is still good.

Please see the rules here, thanks. http://forums.alpinesnowboarder.com/topic/46751-the-rules/

I hear ya. Of course nobody wants to see the classifieds fill up with eBay links. But in nearly 20 years it hasn't happened. Ebay links have their place. For now just don't click on them if they upset you. If it gets out of hand we will revisit.

Feel free to use the Report Post function on those, I haven't noticed them.

I think the general distaste for running auctions here, and by extension on eBay, is that it pits members against each other, and creates the possibility for sore feelings between members. Truly, the best way to win at eBay is to snipe, which is not exactly friendly. But, then again there are times when you simply have no idea what something is worth, so a link to eBay is tolerated. A prolific eBayer would not be welcome to link all their auctions here. Remember eBay's 10% commission when tempted to list something there, and the fact that buyers can return goods for no reason and force a refund whether you say you allow returns or not.

Why not start a new thread? You've got a whole forum now!

Now that is a fine woman! Loving reading all these.

I use and believe in the oven method as detailed here on yyzcanuck.com. I want the outside of the liner to mold to the boot, especially since I have a step-in cable. The rice sock method won't do this.

Let's hear your story. Short answer: because I can't fly an F-16. Long answer: I've always loved the sensation of carving. I started snowboarding when I was 13, but before that my ski buddies and I would drag race each other down narrow, winding green trails in a then-unpopular area of Sugarloaf only serviced by a T-bar at the time. We would tuck and only turn where the trail turned and go as fast as possible. Back then this was the best way to ride what little sidecut we had and purely carve. Those are some of my best memories of skiing. My first in-person glimpse of people snowboarding was my friend's older brother and his friend chasing each other on their Burton Cruisers down the trail under the chairlift I was riding. I was blown away by how much they could lean in and surf their turns. At that moment I told myself I need to do THAT. The next season I took a lesson with my dad at Stowe and we got certified, January 10, 1988. I bought a Burton Elite 150 with babysitting money. Soon afterwards I was drooling over the 1989 Burton catalog, trying to decide if my next ride would be a Mystery Air, or a Safari Comp II. I realized a few things - 1, I really liked just cruising the mountain and going fast. Carving was practically impossible with the Elite's V-shaped sidecut and concave tail, so I figured the Safari would be a big improvement in that department. 2, I didn't have a ton of aptitude for freestyle. 3, there were way more groomer days here in the east than anything else - there were no parks or halfpipes or manicured glades back then. So I bought the Safari on sale at the end of the season and figured I'd get good at carving next season. My one snowboarding buddy at the time had a copy of Burton's Snow Rules which we watched religiously all summer. I was mesmerized by the turns in this 10 second clip of Peter Bauer in Chamonix: https://youtu.be/riHicmC5_DU?t=6m53s Even though it's powder, that was the style I wanted to learn. I knew it would translate to corduroy. I've been chasing the perfect carve ever since. I rode Burton 3 strap bindings and the gray and white 1989 Comp Boots. Late in the 1991 season a Rossignol snowboard demo van appeared at Sugarloaf. They had full alpine setups, so I figured I'd give hardboots a try. They set me up with a VAS Race 173 and Alpina boots. As I was already carving on my softboots, the very first run on hardboots felt something like this. I switched to hardboots the next season. The sensation of carving is my meditation and my church. It's what I call an "absolute activity" - something that while you're doing it you're not thinking about anything else. It's also my personal roller coaster, motorcycle, and fighter jet. The equipment keeps getting better and better, and I feel like I get better every year. I'm not looking forward to the day that stops. Hope everyone has a great 2019 season!

https://exegi.ca/about/

Biaxial - fibers running in 2 directions Triaxial - fibers running in 3 directions The fiberglass or any fiber reinforcment used in snowboards starts out as "cloth" with the "threads" (fibers) aligned in certain directions. Say the direction along the length of the board is 0 degrees. Biaxial can mean that the fibers are aligned at 0 and 90, or 45 and -45. Triaxial usually means 0, 45, -45. 0 degree fibers strengthen and stiffen the board lengthwise. 45 degree fibers strengthen and stiffen the board torsionally. To see or imagine why, take a piece of chalk and twist it until it breaks. The break will be a spiral shape with the edges of the break at 45 degrees to the length of the chalk. The forces of torsion are highest at 45 degrees. 45/-45 biaxial cloth is usually used in boards that are meant to be softer lengthwise but torsionally responsive. This also saves some weight. Tombstone, yes! Thanks for that information. How is it that I'm just learning of your boards now?? Do you have any stock shapes or is it all custom? Looks like your layup differs from other carbon topped boards like Oxess - yours is glossy, theirs is rough, what's the difference?

You could try these: https://www.tognar.com/ankle-wrap-pads-pair/ or these: https://intuitionliners.com/shop/c-pad/

There is also the effect of dissimilar materials in the layup which further reduces vibration. I would expect a carbon + glass or carbon + rubber board to perform better than just carbon alone.

Yes, Donek is the US Deeluxe distributor/retailer now.

If you like toe lift while carving, you'll probably still need some toe lift on the front foot to offset some of the boot's built-in heel lift. Then if needed, blend in some inward cant until your knee feels good.

There are many variables at play. Yeah you could trace an outline of the board, but that's only one piece of the puzzle. The harmony of sidecut, flex profile, stiffness, camber height and shape, nose/tail shape, and vibration characteristics is crucial. Madds had a lot of "stuff" going on, like the mystery non-radial sidecut, "forward loaded" camber (and to my eye non-radial camber), the CF wing, and whatever black magic is inside. The tooling to make these boards was destroyed in some catastrophe at the factory in Italy, and some of the materials are no longer available. The Donek MK was designed to go beyond the original 158, not just duplicate it. If your size, weight, riding style, and usual riding terrain are a good fit for the board, I would say mission accomplished. I felt the magic, but it was just too turny for me at Sugarloaf. This original 158 turns longer than the MK and I found it to have a wider bandwidth of carve sizes, but at the end of the day it's just too short and narrow for me. I also couldn't exactly fit my stance to the g-spot of the board with the available inserts. Between this 158 and the MK I had, the warnings in this thread about getting launched and avoiding solid objects seem more appropriate for the MK, which Robert already has. I don't know if the original Madds had the same issues of copy-to-copy variation as the later incarnations. I tried Shaggy's original 158 at the 2012 ECES at Stratton and fell in love. I tried an early MK prototype then too, and again at the 2014 ECES, and also fell in love both times. When I got both these boards home to Sugarloaf, which is generally steeper, the experience was different. I've had this happen a number of times with other boards - getting a different impression at a demo at another mountain than at home. I'll be interested to see how Robert finds this board. Loon has a good number of trails similar to Stratton.

12m sidecut at 60 degree bank would make about a 6m turn. To balance this, you need to be going about 10m/s (22.5mph), and you'd be pulling about 1.7 g's. http://alpinesnowboarder.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Physics-of-a-Snowboard-Carved-Turn.pdf http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

All set?

Here it is, the unicorn, the Ice Piranha. I bought this a few years ago from the original owner - Fin Doyle. The hype is real, but it's just too small and narrow for me. Inserts are good, I used the board with longer screws which I recommend doing. I'd say I put 10 days on it tops. Fin did not use it much as it wasn't very well suited to where he rides. Plenty of camber and edge material - as much as any new board I've ever had. Board has always been stored upright. I have never touched the edges or base with a file, stone, or grinder. Base has NO issues whatsoever. There is some light rust in places on the edges from standing in a ski locker, so no more photos of the bottom right now. I will have the board tuned with your choice of bevels before shipping, or you can take it as-is. $695 shipped to the 48 states. I will pay the first $30 of shipping elsewhere. Direct link to full resolution photo: https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-3M2CNxw/0/5931cb93/O/i-3M2CNxw.jpg