Stance Width In Relation To Board Length

[utahcarver]

This past season I added more width to my riding stance and found that I have more control, less chatter, and can flex my knees deeper and keep them more apart. Keep in mind, this stance I used on a Tanker 200 and a 181 Mojo swallowtail.

When I ran my stance width (20.5 inches) on my Burton UP 162 I still felt very comfortable in my stance but, it seemed as though I was overpowering the board. So, I did some experimenting. First, I kept the same width but I moved the whole stance toward the tail. This helped immensely and let me load up the nose to initiate turns. Secondly, I moved the whole stance forward and did several Superman launches going into both heelside and toeside turns. My final experiment was to shorten my stance width (18.5 inches) and kept a centered stance in relation to the effective edge for the 162. This really helped settle the board down and I was still able to flex my knees as much as I needed to.

Sidebar: At the USASA Nationals in Tahoe 2 weeks ago, I was on hill watching both the GS and Slalom events for several groups who had wider stances were running faster times and looked like they were in control. The racers who had narrower stances seemed to be fighting their boards. It was like watching someone walking a tightrope in high winds.

Is there a general rule (of thumb) to shorten or widen stances in relation to board length? I've read articles and comments about widening stance to get more control while riding. And my experience with closing my stance so that I could ride my UP has opened up my mind to the aspect that there is a direct relationship between board length and stance width. Comments welcome.

Mark

[Blackbird]

Pretty good question... I'd be very interested in what people have to say on this...

I run very tight stances on my alpine boards...about 17" or 430mm(reference stance on my FP's and very tight on my freeriders.... basically the closest the inserts will allow... only have a bit of trouble going very slow on the alpine boards once I get up to speed I'm railing it

The freeriders I can do anything on...

I'm 5'11" about 180lbs

So yeah please guys throw in your 2c

Steve

[Bordy]

Bigger on SG 21 GS 20 SL 20 what I ride

[Dr D]

From what I have learned from John Mcginnis it would depend entirely on the flex pattern of the board. length wouldn't have anything to do with it.

[kjl]

I set my width at the point where I am actually physically capable of decambering the board in the middle of a turn. As a light guy (~145 lbs) that means a narrow stance (16.5" on my 173 F2 Speedster).

I haven't tried narrower, because that's as narrow as the inserts went on that board, my Swoard, my Donek, etc., etc.. When I set it wider the edge between the bindings will engage and disengage and generally chatter and bounce in a carve. That was with 18", which I think is on the narrower side for most people.

So for me I would assume that you would place your stance width as wide as it would go before you can no longer bend the board correctly, and that would depend on the flex/length of the board and your weight.

[Derf]

I don't know about this, but I started to notice since I got my Catek bindings. I ride a 166 (147 effective edge) and before the Catek I had some Burton bindings set at stance width of ~18¼" (reference stance for the board) with both bindings flat. The position felt natural for bending the board, but was not the most natural legwise. Then I got some Catek, set them at 19¾" with 3 degrees front toe lift and rear heel lift. The stance now feels natural legwise, but it seems a little longer than the natural flex of the board. Could it be that I'm not used to a wider stance or is it my board that doesn't flex right for this stance width? We'll see, probably next winter...

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

It has definitely been growing in distance over the years. Some of the early boards would max out at 17-18" , I currently ride betwee 19.5" and 20.5" depending on board/canting etc.

Wider= stiffens effect feel of board flex/ stability

Narrower= Softens effect feel of board flex / flexy= easier to get snappy, fast, tight turns. IMO.

[Blackbird]

It has definitely been growing in distance over the years. Some of the early boards would max out at 17-18" , I currently ride betwee 19.5" and 20.5" depending on board/canting etc.

Wider= stiffens effect feel of board flex/ stability

Narrower= Softens effect feel of board flex / flexy= easier to get snappy, fast, tight turns. IMO.

Makes sense.... I really don't like wide stances.. they don't feel right to me... (I'm talking freeriding here) when watching others with really wide stances it just doesn't look right....

I guess it's a case of trial and error and what feels most right for you.....

Hmmmmm

.... Any racers out there wanna add to this topic???

Steve

[Steve Prokopiw]

It's interesting how widely varied the stance preferences are here.I personally have gone all the way from about 16&1/2" in 1992 to 21&5/8" now.I prefer this on both all mountain and carving boards as I like the feeling of being able to 'manhandle' the board with alot of flexion both torsional and longitudinal.I feel like the board handles me with a narrow stance so I have gone progressively wider even as my stance angles have begun to increase back toward the numbers I used to run in the old days.My bindings are 3 degrees canted front and rear with no toe or heel lift and at 50 degrees front and rear for all mountain(including park riding)and 60 when the emphasis is on carving with a narrower board. I like to blend freestyle oriented movements with carving so that's what works for me.

[utahcarver]

While at WTC '07 this past February I got to see a set of Sigi plates and had them 'splained to me by Mr. Bordy and others. The reasoning for the plates is to let the bindings 'float' on the board thus minimizing the footprint of the binding on the overall flex of the board.

I know that all the talk right now is about metal boards, and with good reason. But, from my vantage point as a freerider I can see THE POSSIBILITY that Sigi plates and their knock-offs are going to be the next big thing in racing and freeriding. As a snowboard consumer, I'd be more willing to shell out 2 or 3 hundred dollars on a combo plate-riser that eliminated dead spots in the flex of my board (and, I can use the same plates on multiple boards). This is certainly not going to give me the dampening and edge hold of a metal board but, hey, it's in the price range of a lot of us blue collar riders.

Example: At WTC '07 Fin brought a few BTS's to sell. $75 buckaroos a pair. Or, I could buy new Deeluxe's at almost $400 dollars. Guess what I did? I bought the BTS's and love'em. Sure, I can already understand some of the limitations of the BTS (boot cuffs can only deform so much) and I know that eventually I'll fall in love with a better boot model. I got an affordable upgrade. Which is what, I think, the floating plate system might do for us working slobs who ride on weekends and a few weekdays when the boss isn't looking.

Dr. D's insight into flex patterns might become unneccessary with a 'float plate' upgrade from Bomber or Catek. I sure hope Fin is reading this. Drop the suspension kit and develop a plate that will truly suspend the TD2 or OS2's and sell it as an add-on for TD2 owners and as a price point upgrade to TD2 buyers.

That or keep trying to sell metal to us Joe Sixpacks.

Steve: I'm with you on the wide stances but, after having tried widening my stance over several seasons it gave me so much more control over the bigger boards I was buying. When I tried to apply wider stances to shorter boards it became more difficult to control the board. I still try for the widest stance I can be comfortable with and not let the board get to tail happy or the nose to want to pearl (we haven't covered 'pearl' in snowboarding verbage yet on BOL, so I'll also use 'auger' which covers woodworkers, farmers and military types in the CC).

Bryan: Yes, wider is better for stability and feel. Narrower is better for more staccato-like turns for acceleration (read: pump). A wider stance gives more stability and encourages a more powerful drawn-out turn. Great for freeriding on open slopes.

Mark

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

and 60 when the emphasis is on carving with a narrower board.

Like when someone forces you to ride a 18cm waist Identy 185cm Race?

[Steve Prokopiw]

Funny you should mention that Brian; because I came home and experimented with my stance on the am board I reluctantly had to ride after all the fun on the borrowed boards at OES.The revelation I had riding those boards with you guys is that the chronic pain my right knee that had been having for weeks before OES went away on the Identity and the Coiler.It turned out that for all the fun alot of underhang toeside had been for the past few years (deeper toeside trenches mainly),my knees were now telling me I can't continue to ride that way now as it puts so much strain on the lateral side of my right(rear)knee(meniscus is my guess based on a similar injury to the other knee years ago).Riding your narrow boards with my toes much closer to the edge was the cure even more than the increased angles which I also increased on my am board when I got home.So, on my 25.0 waist am board I cranked the angles to 50 front and back and moved the back binding across to the toe edge more and eureka; cured! Still riding in the park and spinning on the tail,just no more pain.Still can't wait to get that Coiler though!

[Rob Stevens]

I think I had a 14 inch stance on my first alpine board. A Kemper Asym. The later F2 Sunsets and Beemers I got weren't much wider.

Now, I'll go as wide as the factory stance will let me and I have t-nutted boards to add more width.

20" on alpine 22.5" on F/R and 10" to 30" on the noboard. I'm 6'1" and 220 lbs, with average leg / torso size.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

The revelation I had riding those boards with you guys is that the chronic pain my right knee that had been having for weeks before OES went away on the Identity and the Coiler.

Way cool, less pain is a GOOD thing!

Your reward for giving it a go!

Well done Steve, yep, you really were at home on that Coiler, good choice!

Bryan

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

I think I had a 14 inch stance on my first alpine board. A Kemper Asym. The later F2 Sunsets and Beemers I got weren't much wider

Like so? Those were the good old days!! Looking good Rob!!

[Bordy]

Tall poll SL thoose where the days!!!

NOTTTTTT!

I still have welts...

[Rob Stevens]

Wow, Bryan... That's a way-backer... 15 years now.

Your archive is deep, if it runs into the "never was" category!

The stance was so narrow then, that my back toe and my front heel were both at board centre, or close to it.

Yeah, Bordy... rapid gate slalom. My bell helmet has never recovered, but is still serviceable.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Wow, Bryan... That's a way-backer... 15 years now.

Your archive is deep, if it runs into the "never was" category!

The stance was so narrow then, that my back toe and my front heel were both at board centre, or close to it.

Yeah, Bordy... rapid gate slalom. My bell helmet has never recovered, but is still serviceable.

Perhaps Rob, but it is a great shot none the less!!. Strong, Focus, Classic "Gettin After it"

Was doing some back ground research and stumbled on it. Comes with a nice blurb about you too! Nice!!

[Guest]

I find all these crazy narrow stances, especially from tall people, odd. I'm a short guy at 5'6", and I ride with a 19.5-20 inch stance, no matter the board. I'm pretty bowlegged, and I ride with outward cant as well.

Am I crazy? I've experimented with different widths, but when I go narrower I find that the control I have over the board plummets, and that I get too locked into a carve.

[bobdea]

yeah, I've never ridden smaller 17 and 3/4 and that was in 1996 when I was 16 and did not know any better

[bobdea]

now I'm at 18 and 3/4 to 19.5 depending on a few things but if I go any further in either direction I'm not happy

[utahcarver]

Seems like the recurring theme is starting with a narrow stance and then building up to a wider stance. Some of you have stayed with the narrow stance especially on shorter boards.

When I started with some Burton hardboots a few years ago, I rode a 17-inch stance mainly because I couldn't flex the boots and I wanted to keep my knees together. I slowly widened my stance over the years as I improved as a rider and I got better interfacing between me and my boards. Now, I focus on keeping my butt and hands out of the snow. I keep my knees apart so that I can bend a bit deeper. Also, I lift my toes on heelside turns. I've read that when other riders do this it is like a revelation of sorts. From what I can determine, lifting my toes helps the ankles flex a bit deeper and my heels dig into the heelcups of the liners a bit more. Prior to this, it felt like my ankles and toes were fighting each other for priority. Toes pushing down, ankles pushing down and I couldn't get the edge to bite completely. Toes up, INSTA-BITE!

But, working my way up to a wider stance has been an overall benefit. The problem I keep running into is knowing when to go narrow. And, we haven't even touched on bias yet. Maybe that would be a good thread for summer. I'd like to know if Bordy or anyone else has an opinion on any need for bias (bindings not in line with each other) in freeriding or racing. And, what would cause the need.

I personally avoid bias but, I have found that when I use a binding bias on powder days I can crank deeper toesides. Why? Hell, I don't know. It just seems to work that way.

Mark

[Rob Stevens]

If you've create bias (splay?) by lowering the angle of your back foot, you might see that as your source for a more powerful toeside. With the lower back foot angle, more edge angle can be created in the leg, without having to drop the hip as much, keeping you centred.

You might also find that like keeping your knees apart, splay helps you bend your knees more, too. Point your feet in the same direction and squat... Now do it with your toes pointed out from each other with some splay... Different?

Of course, the flatter your back foot is, the greater the effect will be on your heel turn, but that's a story for another time.

[utahcarver]

Rob,

I'm glad that you brought up the term 'splay'. As I understand it, splay refers to the difference of the angles in a binding set up. For instance, your front binding is at 60 degrees and your rear binding is at 55 degrees. The splay (difference) would then be 5 degrees.

Bias, as I understand it, is the amount of offset from the centerline of the board. On my binding setups, I always mount the bindings off of the centerline of the board to begin with. It is rare that I adjust a binding closer to a toe or heel edge. It is done mainly for finesse. Which was the case for riding powder this past season.

If I'm incorrect in my understanding of these terms, please help me to understand the correct meanings of splay and bias.

Thanks,

Mark

Overheard at the Boozapalooza Store tonight: "Where are your wines?", asked a patron just entering the door and standing in front of 20 rows of racks of wine which account for almost 100 different vintners and wines ranging from chardonnay, merlot, reisling, and champagne to shiraz and mead and covers 80 percent of the floor space of the building.

And I wonder why people in the liftline ask me why I'm wearing skiboots on a skiboard.

[Blackbird]

Rob,

Bias, as I understand it, is the amount of offset from the centerline of the board.

Thats a spot on explanation on bias...

I find that my back foot is biased "heel-ward" to stop toe drag, only slightly... it centres the boot so it's even across the board it's a matter of 2-3 mm,

I remember asking someone about this (Can't remember who...) and they said on the average board small differences in bias between the front foot and rear foot won't make too much of a difference in the way an Alpine board rides (when it's more than a couple of mm's and especially if it's a torsionally soft board then it "may" impact the performance by twisting it more than it should...

Never really put too much thought into it... I figured as long as they are evenly biased (More or less) and the bindings are mounted properly then it's nothing to worry about..

But carving is one of those sports that is dictated by a try and see personal preference thing...

One more setting to tweak is what it's all about...