Loc Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Congrats on the new arrival but Louis, you can't post a thread like this without photos! I'm anxiously awaiting my VSR 168 and you just made me more antsy haha. Hope you get to enjoy it soon. It's still rockboard season in California. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCrimson Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Was about to say that but look at how the plates on the Volkl are rigidly indexed as opposed to being slotted.. Maybe he indexed them for specific angles. EDIT: Oops, Bryan posted saying that the plates looked like they were for Cateks and Bombers but the post is gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danked Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 wait? so people don't like F2 bindings because of the slight flex and forgiveness built it... don't bomber bindings have E-Rings for that particular purpose? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeoffV Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 What are those? Those are Beckmannized bindings that have been made in his living room. ;) This is OT for this thread, but... Just to plug Erik Beckmann's work. I highly recommend his custom footbeds. If you are ever up at the Loaf get some custom footbeds from him. I pushed that off for years and didn't think it would make a difference, boy was I wrong. :rolleyes: I can now ride all day where before my legs were shot by 2pm. It is soooo much less effort to turn a board now with custom footbeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 No scientific analysis here, but I've never seen ski bindings with any give, other than complete release.I know this is an old thread and I'm quoting an old post but... ski bindings do give a little bit, and actually that's a feature I like in them. It's a different kind of give though - if they take a good shock such that the boot displaces, a good binding will snap the boot back into place if the force does not continue. This prevents premature release when you're going hard. Now my last ski bindings are 15 years old but I don't expect this aspect of binding design has changed much. If bindings were completely binary that would be awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Built for proof of concept. Beckman surfaces at last!! Welcome old friend! Did everybody notice the version on the right is for Catek? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Those are Beckmannized bindings that have been made in his living room. ;)This is OT for this thread, but... Just to plug Erik Beckmann's work. I highly recommend his custom footbeds. If you are ever up at the Loaf get some custom footbeds from him. I pushed that off for years and didn't think it would make a difference, boy was I wrong. :rolleyes: I can now ride all day where before my legs were shot by 2pm. It is soooo much less effort to turn a board now with custom footbeds. +1. My Beckman footbeds are still going strong 10 years later. And if you think those bindings are scary... you should see his car! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chewy Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 +1 on footbeds anything is better than stock I am close to moving up, after 4 years on the superfeet corks,best skishop customs, to custom soles made by an orthopedist ....400-500$ seems like alot. But if the improvment I felt upgading before continues I'll be in foot heaven+ its + - 100$ for each set after so that makes it easyier to swallow, then come skate shoes, workboots, hiking boots. Those have superfeet greens now (50$). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Fin and Jeff Caron were kind enough to leave a few clamps behind after ECES 04. I liked features of both, but was not satisfied with either. Obviously, they can't go about making one-offs at the drop of a hat, so I made the parts myself. To answer your question, Lonbordin, I proved to my own satisfaction that the TD would ride better with a thicker intermediate plate, and greater contact area between the boot and the binding. With the CATEK version, I suspected that a bail with a shoulder bolt pivot would ride better than the one piece bail of the original. It does. The CATEK plate has two more set screws than stock, as I had to make one complete turn of the rotary table to do four, and two more holes seemed like a good idea at the time. Chewy, They are not so much stiff as they are transparent. These parts are not for sale, but anybody that wants to make the trip to the remains of the Rebel base on Hoth is welcome to try them. Geoff and Jack: Thanks for the free PR. Other than the engine being put in 'backward', what's so scary about a SAAB? Scary is trying to service a modern German car. ...And I didn't surface. I landed. With regard to footbeds, Chewy, most orthopaedist-built footbeds are intended for dynamic gait, and as such may not be suitable for skiing or snowboarding. Part of this is due to design philosophy, and the other part concerns the method of casting and construction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted November 23, 2009 Report Share Posted November 23, 2009 Thanks for the explanation... There has been much debate on the forums on stiff vs flexibility in regards to bindings. Am I wrong to surmise that this setup is much stiffer than stock (either TD or CATEK)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 most orthopaedist-built footbeds are intended for dynamic gait, and as such may not be suitable for skiing or snowboarding. Part of this is due to design philosophy, and the other part concerns the method of casting and construction. This is true, so it is a good idea to make sure that your Orthotist knows what you are going to use them for so that they can make the appropriate modifications. I have orthotics straight from my Orthotist for all of my boots. All of them were sport and boot specific. I had to give them my boots for each pair. I would never ride without them again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeoffV Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Erik it's great to have you on BOL. You can add a ton of value for us here. Thanks for posting and keep it up. For those that don't know Beckmann, he is one of the pioneers of carving he deserves a huge amount of respect. Jack, myself, TrailerTrash and many more have had lessons and footbeds made from him. We are better riders because of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 ursle, Anything that contours to the underside of the foot without causing pain is a step in the right direction. Better contour means more data collection points and a tighter feedback loop. Contouring is one thing, support is another, and this is where most custom footbeds come up short. Most simply do not address the mobility of the bones in the forefoot to the tolerances to which the human balance mechanism functions. To do so takes a good cast, fairly dense posting material, time, and experience: these criteria do not fit well with the business plan of the average retailer. The quick and dirty way to see if your footbeds are doing anything at all, is to stand on one of them, one footed,(as though you have a ski on the lifted foot, hands hanging at your sides, looking straight ahead) on a hard level surface. If the muscles in your lower leg and foot twitch about less while on the footbed than with nothing underfoot, then you have gained at least something. If not, you have wasted your money. When a footbed is doing its job properly, there should be almost no movement whatsoever, I.E., radio silence. If there is movement, it should be slight and more or less symmetric in origin. I do what is called a semi-weighted cast. This seems to be the best means of accounting for the mobility of the bones in the foot without muscular interference, while still providing an accurate contour map of the plantar surface. Telemark and Nordic skiing footbeds get tweaked the most,as far as fine tuning, due to the involvement of the forefoot. Weighted casting generally captures the contour of a collapsed foot, and can sometimes be compromised by reflexive muscular activity in the foot. Non-weighted casting often provides too much arch fill, and requires secondary forming of the forefoot to account for fat pad expansion under load. This often compromises forefoot support. If you want more information, just ask. I'm not a fan of the Surefoot product (assuming they are still using the Amfit system), but I am certain that there are many out there who love them. lonbordin, Yes, they are stiffer. I gave a pair to Chuck Norris and he sent them back. (Along with a tear-stained hanky). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 ursle,<snip> lonbordin, Yes, they are stiffer. I gave a pair to Chuck Norris and he sent them back. (Along with a tear-stained hanky). You sir are funny! :lol: Thank you. If I could be a bit of a :AR15firinkilljoy... You thought "a thicker intermediate plate, and greater contact area between the boot and the binding" would result in a better ride. Why did you think this? It seems like the "Industry" is headed towards dampening systems that further remove the binding from the board and put many points of cushioning in between the boot and the binding and others lean toward systems where the bails are more flexible. You seemed to go 180 degrees in the opposite direction with these plates... further removing flexibility from the systems. Thanks again for sharing your insights! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 oh boy.... Personally I believe that very flexible bindings are like play in a steering column - not where I want my "give". But I get skewered for that by those with real racing experience. I haven't tried Erik's bindings yet though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I now see that my questions might be misconstrued as trying to ignite a long standing debate... This could not be further from the truth! As a "new" person to the hard (dark or light:confused:) side of snowboarding I am interested in digesting as many viewpoints as I can in regards to setups. Especially since I too like to tinker and build things. As well as I'm a little outside of the norm so I find I have to read between the lines of expert advice to see how it applies to my situation. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 That's a bit heavy, don't you think? Is your wrist Ok after typing that? lonbordin, Seeking knowledge hardly qualifies you as a killjoy. Why would you suppose that a more solid interface between boot and board would not provide a better ride? Do you pad the keys on your keyboard to negate errant keystrokes, or do you learn how to type? A snowboard is analogous to a computer, in that it will respond predictably to specific inputs. The problem is, most users are not aware of the inputs they are providing, intentional or otherwise. The industry is heading toward a more forgiving interface largely because voices in the market are clamoring for such. If you make the boot/binding interface more forgiving, you make the sport more inclusive. You make the sport more inclusive, the market thrives. Not necessarily a bad thing. The balancing mechanism of the body is extremely sensitive, and very effective, so long as it can operate within its effective range of movement. Ideally, while standing, you will balance with small movements of your feet. If you cannot balance off of your feet, you will balance from your knees. If you cannot balance with your knees, you will balance with your hips and so on. The further from the ground you go, the less accuracy you have, as you are moving larger and larger limb segments. So, if the intuitive movements of your feet are lost in cushy liners, rubber sole blocks,and flexible bindings, you have effectively negated your ability to remain upright using a system that you have been honing ever since you learned to walk. And then you must make use of the next best thing, further up the chain. Doesn't make much sense to me. On the other hand, very few have the time, resources or inclination involved with setting up a truly effective interface between rider and board. It's a system, and all pieces must be in place. As far as I'm concerned, there is no debate; rather, just differing opinions tied to their respective goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 Thank you for your response! I have to agree with your point of view... that I'm not a killjoy. ;) I've recently gone with flat thin footware for my running and daily wear for many of the same reasons and I am very satisfied with that choice. I've also found the same footwear to be really fantastic when I skate the local park as well. In addition, I love surfing in the winter but have never been as comfortable in the heavy booties that one has to wear in the NE to surf all winter long. It just feels more stable in bare feet. May we all have a more effective interface between rider and board! Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordy Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 A snowboard is analogous to a computer, in that it will respond predictably to specific inputs. The problem is, most users are not aware of the inputs they are providing, intentional or otherwise. The industry is heading toward a more forgiving interface largely because voices in the market are clamoring for such. If you make the boot/binding interface more forgiving, you make the sport more inclusive. You make the sport more inclusive, the market thrives. Not necessarily a bad thing. The balancing mechanism of the body is extremely sensitive, and very effective, so long as it can operate within its effective range of movement. Ideally, while standing, you will balance with small movements of your feet. If you cannot balance off of your feet, you will balance from your knees. If you cannot balance with your knees, you will balance with your hips and so on. The further from the ground you go, the less accuracy you have, as you are moving larger and larger limb segments. So, if the intuitive movements of your feet are lost in cushy liners, rubber sole blocks,and flexible bindings, you have effectively negated your ability to remain upright using a system that you have been honing ever since you learned to walk. And then you must make use of the next best thing, further up the chain. Doesn't make much sense to me. On the other hand, very few have the time, resources or inclination involved with setting up a truly effective interface between rider and board. It's a system, and all pieces must be in place. As far as I'm concerned, there is no debate; rather, just differing opinions tied to their respective goals. Eric first off not every one has a CNC machine in their living room, It is very easy to support your own creations, and personal likes. Also to claim the induction of a more supple system is on the bases of provideing a prodect that more people can us is just alittle onesided, based on your likes, and is just a simple statement that is easily answerd by the fact that the most proficant snowboarders in the world are collectivley behind the progression of the current gear, not just one guy and his CNC machine who thickend up a particular prodect. The Idea that a stiffer system requires more control to operate and is more precise is not what the major of athletes coaches and board builder would agree with. If this was indeed the case all items that are dynamic and remain in motion while projectiing there own path would be solid pieces with out flex, such as your snowboard, a car suspension, Wings of fighter jets, etc. Now if your center of gravity was truley your feet then your comments about remaining in balance, and losing balance as you move your inputs away from your feet would be correct, but since your bodys natural center is in your true center of mass around your pelvis, a little lower if your a women. Then this is the true area that your body uses as it referance as well as it's major mass. By creating a system that allows the rider to move more mass over and through the contact area of the snowboard you can create greater forces and much better balance then trying to maintain balance while levering of a stiff boot binding system. Again this is proven physics and not my rules, but the true rules of gravity and inerta, also by providing a supple system you allow the oppertuniy to absorb, and stop energy from amplifing and creating chatter, while allowing your bodys true center of mass to asorb and still make balance correction, just like trying to walk on a balance beam or slack line, you can make adjustments with your feet but you will grow tired quickly and be very uneffective, how ever if you use your bodys center of mass you can make simple correction with out any energy while still staying centered, This is how a harmonic dampner works, and part of the reason building and bridges can be "earthquake proof" If your ideas where correct then all you would need is stronger footings, but this is not the case. Its great to see you on Bomber I enjoyed reading your well writen post and after seeing your bindings and you riding them at ECES enjoy your passion for the sport, it nice to hear some one who enjoys a stiffer binding say there is not a debate since so many other stiff binding riders seem to think so. Ok now this.. I agree with "On the other hand, very few have the time, resources or inclination involved with setting up a truly effective interface between rider and board. It's a system, and all pieces must be in place." But there is a group that does have the time resources, inclination and funding to proform true world testing, and a entire world tour based around challanging ,athletes, desighners, and coaches to create the most efficant and progressive snowboarding gear(system) and technique out there. When you use examen the current gear and entire systems used to carve a snowboard it is not a stiff, interface, becuase of entire national teams R&D world wide, yearly...... It is much more then the notion that the market is "clamoring" for it, Its becuase based on the Scentific research to create the best gear for the best turn by the best people in the industry world wide, this is where we have progressed to. I love the BOLers from Maine and NE, I was once one myself, and what they contribute to the Alpine community here on BOL. But I just can't watch while more bad info is spread. I have been fighting this battle with Jack long enough to not want to watch he and Geoff promote these bogus Idea's Finnaly Jack is going to ride some progressive gear and with his position as a moderator we were hoping that he would become educated on his own. And allow the spread of true info based on current progression, not outdated info based on the ideas and preferances of just a few people in one little area...Jack has already been representing this group. As I said glad to see you here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordy Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 oh boy.... Personally I believe that very flexible bindings are like play in a steering column - not where I want my "give". But I get skewered for that by those with real racing experience. I haven't tried Erik's bindings yet though. That would hold merit if snow board had moving parts, and linkage? I am so dissapointed that online at a alpine snowboard forum so much bogus info is spread by peope that have somehow established themselves as "experts" with out any true modern experance based on the current progression of the sport. This includes you Jack, I love your passion and drive as well as your ability to contrubite to the Forum. I hate that I have never seen you and a industry meeting, Race course, or as of latley even a SES. Great that you and Geoff throw ECES, thank you for getting people together to carve. You BOL articles are out dated, based on old technology and ideas that the current REAL WORLD alpine community has devoloped based on the best feedback from the best members of the world wide community. Now here on the ONLINE WORLD of BOL there has been a great influx of new riders and you and your, out dated, un educated crew are sharing decade old info with new riders, and they are buying it hook line and sinker.... Stop it Man your killing the progress of the sport, You have not even Ridden the current crop of gear but still your sticking by your Lame I hate slop, Ideas with out any point of referance to back it up????? This is unreal... How about you Beckmann??? What do you think of the new blended radius rides that have become common place at al levels of the sport When you rode them and Your COPY of some one elses prodect on your Vokkl back to back what was you comparision, Did you mount your bindings on a varible radius stick? How was tha abilty to pressure the Nose and tail indepentantly while using such a stiff binding, Are you still riding skiiboots that have metal strapped and bolted onto them. when you rode the New UPZ, Deeluxe or Head boot back to back was was the differance? Did you feel the Vist or Hangle system works best with your binding when you tested it while free riding, or in a race course. When you rode other bindings on the Vist or Hangle plates what were your dislikes and why have you continued to ride your set up over the current crop of alpine hotness, Could you please post pictures of you and the new gear your compared your COPIED binding system and talk me throuogh your comparison process that has EDUCATED you to provide this board with such up to date info based on your IDEAS versis the current progression of alpine snowboarding at the world level?? Jack need to stop pretending your a expert in this field, offer your advise remind people its based on your personal jouney enjoying alpine snowboad, over how ever many years it has been. You are really just giving outdated, old school info that is over a decade old. All this does is keep the sport stagnet, and does not allow any rider the oppertunity to enjoy the current level of alpine snowboarding. You post are nothing more then empires new clothes latley. If you keep telling the board the same thing over and over they beleave it becuase your a moderator, not becuase your info is true, or current.. FN stop it dude your killing me and the sport all by your self... Step up to your respnability as a moderator on this board and start realizing the sport has progressed and you are no where near the current progression. You keep pitching your personal ideas like they are where the sport is at. STOP IT DUDE. your just keeping the sport in the same place it was 10 or 15 years ago. I just can't stop crying when I read this crap........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ursle Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 So let's sum up what we've got here Softbooters Softbooters with clickers (hard softboots) Hardbooters with soft bindings F2, Burton, TD3 Hardbooters with hard bindings Bomber TD1, TD2, Cateck OS1, OS2 (unsure about the F2 titanium stepin) I like hardboots with hard bindings, I like the torque that happens on firm snow, I was on Burton carbon fiber, titanium race plates, for two years, on a Volkl Zebra (think 168 tanker), when I mounted OS2's on the board it was night and day. Turned from a powder board into a carving board. If I had a soft interface I wouldn't be able to enjoy the feeling of torque I get when, (honestly) I get lucky enough to carve a nice turn. Right- I'm the old guy with more money than talent (7 nastar) and I've spent years figuring out how to get comfortable(mentally) on a carving board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bordy Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I am not attacking any one I just wasnt to know what process was used to determin that this is truley the best system for these riders, and moderators. It is very easy to say i love this item and I support it as such based on my usage of said item. But when comparing to other items you must also use the other items to make the comparison. I am not saying one way is right or wroung, or that you can not have fun on anything, from a sled to a vist mounted black pearl with your bindings of choice. I am saying there is a progression in alpine riding, many members and moterators have not ridden the newest gear or the system so many of us have worked so hard to devolop and promote through real world riding. All I am saying is that in order to make a real review, or recomendation then you must have been educated to do so. If I rode one snowboard and then came back and compared it to other snowboards I have not ridden would this be a fare review? Or in Jacks case if I just keep saying how much I love my snowboard.. It sucks to see this happen to a entire snowboard setup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loc Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 You BOL articles are out dated, based on old technology and ideas that the current REAL WORLD alpine community has devoloped based on the best feedback from the best members of the world wide community. Now here on the ONLINE WORLD of BOL there has been a great influx of new riders and you and your, out dated, un educated crew are sharing decade old info with new riders, and they are buying it hook line and sinker.... Hey Bordy - as a relative newcomer to alpine I would personally appreciate it if you wrote new how-to guides. They would help us newbies a lot. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I am not attacking any one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeoffV Posted November 24, 2009 Report Share Posted November 24, 2009 I love the BOLers from Maine and NE, I was once one myself, and what they contribute to the Alpine community here on BOL. But I just can't watch while more bad info is spread. I have been fighting this battle with Jack long enough to not want to watch he and Geoff promote these bogus Idea's Finnaly Jack is going to ride some progressive gear and with his position as a moderator we were hoping that he would become educated on his own. And allow the spread of true info based on current progression, not outdated info based on the ideas and preferences of just a few people in one little area...Jack has already been representing this group.As I said glad to see you here. "I am not attacking any one I just wasnt to know what process was used to determin that this is truley the best system for these riders, and moderators." Not attacking....right....honestly that's all you do lately is:boxing_sm and:smashfrea Billy you've been very cranky lately buddy, I thought being a new dad would have calmed you down a bit. What exactly am I promoting? All I said is that Erik can provide some great knowledge to our little alpine community regardless of old school or new school riding gear. Yes of course there will be differences in opinions and riders can pick and chose what they want to process and try out. You are a racer and will have different needs for equipment than myself or most riders on this forum who are freecarvers. This does not mean that I disagree with you because I am open to trying any gear. After I've tried it I will make a decision if racing gear will work for my free carve needs. This debate is the whole point of Jacks comparison of a Kessler, Coiler, Donek and Pior's new shapes. Jack wants to see if the Kessler will work for freecarving or if our local board builders serve that purpose better. Try to be open minded and take a deep breath before you dive in here. Your negativity on posts is a big downer and will steer people away. Your credibility is slowly slipping because your just not a pleasant poster any more. What's up man, what happened to the happy go lucky Billy I met years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.