lowrider Posted April 5, 2010 Report Share Posted April 5, 2010 It's official plates are here for recreational users. Was detained by lifties for a period of time saturday april 2nd while ski patrol was called to decide if it was safe for me to use a plate and hardware set up mfg. by myself. Fed them a little BS and said there will be more to come so get on the bandwagon now. Person in charge seemed cool with the idea after i demoed the working of it for her.I guess not everyone has their head up their A$$ when it comes to hard booting.Now lets work on fair lift ticket pricing and truith in advertising and we have a good start. Happy slush riding plate is retired till the fall.:lol::lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjvircks Posted April 5, 2010 Report Share Posted April 5, 2010 yeah, but not every home-brew plate system will be well thought out and safely executed. We should expect a certain amount of well accorded scepticism and scrutiny for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.oldsnowboards.com Posted April 5, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2010 It's official plates are here for recreational users. Was detained by lifties for a period of time saturday april 2nd while ski patrol was called to decide if it was safe for me to use a plate and hardware set up mfg. by myself. Interesting, been on a plate of one design or another for many years, I have never been stopped or questioned of it's integrity or safety? Hundreds upon hundreds of days? Photos might help explain? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted April 5, 2010 Report Share Posted April 5, 2010 The real visual difference is that unlike Vist, Hangl or Kildie-flex the plate sits slightly off the board and as such draws your attention. The hardware is attached to the board with 8 screws same as bindings. the plate attaches to hardware again with 8 screws.;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenne Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 my plate made by me in carbon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 Have you ridden it yet?? Welcome to the fastest growing thread on bomber your post is important to home tinkerers around the world.I see you aren't willing to share details can you tell us the weight of the hardware and plate??? Welcome to PLATE WORLD! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenne Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 the plate tested already several times. it goes perfeckt. deteils are secret. the plate was developed of me. I am learned forge . greeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenne Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 still another picture. greeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenne Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 and still another picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 @wenne - plate looks nice, but a little more details would be interesting . Could you at least post the weight of your construction, as lowrider already asked you to? Apex Flex Plate Wing - the new version is fixed in the middle and the rest floats ... I have only spent one day on it, but the board/plate combination really rocked!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 Could something like a double burton channel system be used to offer the advantages of a plate, but without the bulk. Two channels (one each side of the board) with the bindings floating along the channels, having a strap connecting them, that can be anchored at any point in the channels. Some what like a rail ski binding, but with the rails built into the board (and being designed into the flex patern). The bindings would not be so isolated from the deck, but would move as the board is flexed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 The "bulk" as you call it has some major advantages (better leverage, more space against bootout, separating the rider from "board movements", dampening, etc.). So I don´t think that bindings gliding directly on the board would be a solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.oldsnowboards.com Posted April 8, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 Could something like a double burton channel system be used to offer the advantages of a plate, but without the bulk. Two channels (one each side of the board) with the bindings floating along the channels, having a strap connecting them, that can be anchored at any point in the channels. Some what like a rail ski binding, but with the rails built into the board (and being designed into the flex patern). The bindings would not be so isolated from the deck, but would move as the board is flexed. Like a REV snowboard with the front mounts left loose. Bridged with a plate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corey Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 There are clearly two entirely different approaches being taken here, I think it's important to distinguish between the two. These two plate concepts are very different, though they both are obviously beneficial for use in uneven snow. 1. Spread out the point loading of the bindings by using some stiffer material between the bindings and the board. When the board bends, the plate must also bend. Also allow one point along the length to be fixed to the board and the rest to slide fore-aft as the board bends. Example: Vist 2. Suspend the bindings/plate above the board on two pivot points so that the plate does not necessarily bend when the board does. All seen so far have point loads on the board where they attach the pivot points. One of the pivot points is fixed, one must have some allowance to slide fore-aft or the board wouldn't bend. Example: Apex Composites in Canada. The purpose of Type 1 seems to be to allow the board to bend smoothly without kinks near the feet, forcing the feet/lower legs of the rider to follow the bend of the board. The purpose of Type 2 seems to be to allow the board to bend without tilting the feet/lower legs of the rider, apparently not being concerned with the point loading on the board and the possible 'kink' in it's curvature. It gets even more confusing that Apex Composites' plate is type 2 while Apex Austria's plate appears to be type 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterGold Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 corey_dyck, interesting point, but I don´t think that the second approach is not concerned about the point load ... JJ explained in his video the smooth uninterrupted flex of his board under the Apex Comp plate ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacopodotti Posted April 8, 2010 Report Share Posted April 8, 2010 Hi Wenne Great job. Is the plate all made of carbon or it's a multilayer deck? How much is it thick? It seems that it has a pivot in the back and a runner in the front, am I correct? Something as this? http://www.linearmotion.skf.com/category.aspx?lang=en&cou=4&cat=120 Thanks J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunSurfer Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 There are clearly two entirely different approaches being taken here, I think it's important to distinguish between the two...... Within Type 2 there are two further different approaches. A: The rigid B Karl plate with no front extension, the rider of which has just won two World Cup crystal globes. B: Flex with front extension - e.g. the Apex Composites plate. Reading Jack Michaud's review of the NSR boards he seems to suggest that the latest Kessler & Coiler metal boards are pretty soft in the nose. Is a front extension of the plate useful to moderate this flexibility once the turn is initiated? Conversely, B Karl is riding the SG board and doesn't seem to need the front extension to win/place more consistently than any other racer. Is anyone able to make an informed comparison of the front end softness/stiffness of the SG in relation to Kessler/Coiler? SunSurfer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokkis Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 One note that construction of Karl's plate does not support so well adjustable nose dampening as ApexCompsite type plate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wenne Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 and still another picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 If you want to see this thread count increase you are going to have to give us the weight of you plate and hardware, lbs. or kilos ok! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokkis Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 This thread count will continue anyway :rolleyes: But certainly i also like to see weight figures, specially cause in pictures that plate looks very thick so i assume that it is either with wood core or with foam core ;) And not least cause that construction really looks really professional made one :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokkis Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 Setup looks vey high, but i believe we will have very interesting winter ahead, so i can not wait for next winter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roby69 Posted April 9, 2010 Report Share Posted April 9, 2010 If you want to see this thread count increase you are going to have to give us the weight of you plate and hardware, lbs. or kilos ok! :) binding: 1,7 kg plate carbon and hardware: ca. 3 kg ;) board:3 kg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowrider Posted April 10, 2010 Report Share Posted April 10, 2010 Is your plate solid carbon or carbon wood laminate? stiff or flexable? The hardware i made is 22mm high with the plate another 15mm on top of that.Tough to reduce height without integrating plate and hardware. Not sure if general public would be willing to pay the premium necessary to produce a more compact version. Have you found that riding with a plate on your board it acts like a board with a smaller side cut radius? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roby69 Posted April 10, 2010 Report Share Posted April 10, 2010 Is your plate solid carbon or carbon wood laminate? stiff or flexable? The hardware i made is 22mm high with the plate another 15mm on top of that.Tough to reduce height without integrating plate and hardware. Not sure if general public would be willing to pay the premium necessary to produce a more compact version. Have you found that riding with a plate on your board it acts like a board with a smaller side cut radius? solid carbon,a little flexable,25mm high with the plate, 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.