Rocker_Binding Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 I saw this 2007 post on bomberonline.com forum about 3 strap bindings. I’ve come up with a similar design which has the 3 straps and a hinge for rotation. I have some pictures up at www.rockerbinding.com. I was wondering what you thought of them. I’ve been designing this as a general snowboard binding not as a race or carving binding although I think it could be done. Right now the standard angle adjustment on my binding can be set to a max of ±20º which probably isn’t enough for racing/carving. I think for higher angles the hinge would have to be shifted relative to the base plate of the binding. I posted to the thread and sent messages to some of the posters because I’m not sure what is the best way to do it for a post which is old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 Nice! I have always believed 3-strap bindings are the gateway drug to hardboots, and are awesome on their own. I like the rocker idea, but I have to admit it looks heavy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 For low angle riding you don't really need 3rd strap (ok, I kinda liked it when I still rode softies, but majority of riders don't)... For high angle riding you don't need the rocker, as the softy setup is already too floppy for the angles over 45*... Otherwise, great effort! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 Thanks. That was a quick response. I wasn't the expedience on a 2007 post. They are heavier than normal (3 lbs 13oz each). Since I am making low quantities right now, the highback is cut from plastic sheet which is less than ideal. I think I could get the weight down for each binding down a pound if I was injection molding the plastic parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 For low angle riding you don't really need 3rd strap (ok, I kinda liked it when I still rode softies, but majority of riders don't) Sure you do. The majority of riders... well, let's just say if the majority of riders' decisions mattered, we wouldn't be here now would we? For high angle riding you don't need the rocker, Hello, Sidewinders? as the softy setup is already too floppy for the angles over 45*... Hence the 3rd strap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 For low angle riding you don't really need 3rd strap (ok, I kinda liked it when I still rode softies, but majority of riders don't)... For high angle riding you don't need the rocker, as the softy setup is already too floppy for the angles over 45*... Otherwise, great effort! I got your message about starting a new post on one of the other threads but for some reason I could see it in the email notification but not when I tried to go to the page. Can anyone start a new thread or post or whatever they are called? Ok. Just figured it out. Sorry. I'll start a Rocker Binding thread. I was just trying to post on some of the relevant 3-strap ones. There were several that the 3 strap was secondary to the main conversation. There is a lot more talk on this forum about 3 strap binding which I guess makes sense since carvers would care about this a lot more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 I've been working on a snowboard binding design and am looking to see what people think of it. The binding has a hinge which allows it to pivot along the length of the board (tip to tail) about 5 to 10 degrees. The hinge allows a shin s...trap to be put on the highback which gives support on toe edge turns (without the hinge you can't shift your weight tip to tail). Toe edge support is taken out of the board and your leg and is put in the binding. I'm not sure if you can put pictures here but have some up at www.rockerbinding.com . Let me know what you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 "Quote: Originally Posted by BlueB For low angle riding you don't really need 3rd strap (ok, I kinda liked it when I still rode softies, but majority of riders don't) JM: Sure you do. The majority of riders... well, let's just say if the majority of riders' decisions mattered, we wouldn't be here now would we? Quote: For high angle riding you don't need the rocker, JM: Hello, Sidewinders? Quote: as the softy setup is already too floppy for the angles over 45*... JM: Hence the 3rd strap." Jack, Yes, Sidewinders, or some sort of elastomer, or floppy bases/bails for hard boots. What I ment is that for high angle riding on soft boots you do not need the rocker as the setup is already sloppy even with the 3rd strap... He, he, I like your "majority of riders" comment! RB, Thanks for starting a separate thread! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpinegirl Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 sadly, it is possible to establish fore and aft (tip to tail) movements on a snowboard with standard bindings. however, last season i believe that forum snowboards released a binding with a hinged disc to allow the board to flex more fluidly and this season burton has released it's reflex series of bindings that feature a hinged baseplate. i will gladly acknowledge that while your concept isn't "new," your design is unique and appears to be more dynamic than any of these other two designs. it greatly reduces the footprint on the board. companies have been exploring how to allow greater movement tip to tail while creating a smaller deadspot along the board due to bindings. ride did this over 5 years ago with their higher end bindings and salomon carried a soft heels binding for a while. i am not aware of their current line up thus concludes some pointless info for the evening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carvingchef Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 i think i still like these better http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=30507 smaller footprint on the board than your normal soft-boot bindings cant and lift adjustment to your liking 3 different set of elastometer soft medium hard (yellow, blue, red) will take any existing binding with the 4 hole center disc and if you really need a third strap you can add a booster strap (they also come in different stiffness) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 sadly, it is possible to establish fore and aft (tip to tail) movements on a snowboard with standard bindings. however, last season i believe that forum snowboards released a binding with a hinged disc to allow the board to flex more fluidly and this season burton has released it's reflex series of bindings that feature a hinged baseplate. i will gladly acknowledge that while your concept isn't "new," your design is unique and appears to be more dynamic than any of these other two designs. it greatly reduces the footprint on the board. companies have been exploring how to allow greater movement tip to tail while creating a smaller deadspot along the board due to bindings. ride did this over 5 years ago with their higher end bindings and salomon carried a soft heels binding for a while. i am not aware of their current line up thus concludes some pointless info for the evening Yeah, forum had their Shaka technology last year and Burton owns forum. I'm familiar with that technology. Are you talking about the Salamon Relay bindings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 i think i still like these better http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=30507smaller footprint on the board than your normal soft-boot bindings cant and lift adjustment to your liking 3 different set of elastometer soft medium hard (yellow, blue, red) will take any existing binding with the 4 hole center disc and if you really need a third strap you can add a booster strap (they also come in different stiffness) Did you make those? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sultan Guy Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 I've been working on a snowboard binding design and am looking to see what people think of it. Let me know what you think. I have studied your design. Interesting. It appears that your high-back may still have quite a bit of flex in it. When I got pretty decent at carving using softies combined with the stiffest Burton bindings at that time. I really noticed that high-backs with more flex made carving harder to accomplish. How is the flex in these? Of course when I switched to hard boots I noticed the advantage immediately! I like the adjustable idea. Always great to see something new and inventive. Now you just need to figure out how to sell it to all those jibbers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 For soft boot carving, I would like a high back with a pivot point that allows fore aft movement. So the high back would move with me as I shift my weight forward into the turn, but not the binding base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carvingchef Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Originally Posted by Rocker_BindingDid you make those? no i didn't, Fin at Bomber made the prototype i was just lucky enough i got to use them, it looks like he is going to make them available but it's going to be later in the season, he is too busy making Boiler Plates right now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big D Posted January 14, 2011 Report Share Posted January 14, 2011 Rocker, I started riding in 88/89 and the shop I frequented in Mammoth (Storm Riders) used the Burton "Comp Flex" binding I think it was called, on their rental boards. This was a high back with the shin strap. The first time I used them I was immediately in love as my toe side turns were far more immediate than without them. I always thought it was a loss when they stopped making them. Hell I was ready to grab a Sears leather belt and wrap it around my shins ha ha. I was just telling this story a few days ago and Ta Da here are some reincarnated! I hope you continue working on these as I will purchase them as soon as they are ready for mass consumption. I love carving but like probably everyone else there is nothing like fresh tracks in bottomless powder. Because powder takes more strength to ride in and for me invites a more carefree riding style (jumps) and general ear to ear grinning and tom foolery, it is nice to roll in a light flexible freestyle boot at a much lower stance angle and still have the ability to crank out big goofy footed front side turns with the help of the all mighty high back shin strap! Kudos to you and keep me posted, I am on board..."long live the shin strap" D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sinecure Posted January 15, 2011 Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 Rocker: re: language. If you're going to call it a rocker binding, why not be consistent in language on your site? You talk about the binding "rotating". I was looking for how it was going to rotate (change angle). You should say it can "rock". Or angulate. But it doesn't rotate (well, it does, but along an axis that matches your binding angle). It confused me when I looked at your site. Of course, your inability to speak clearly and articulately can be quickly explained away by your choice of schools. M Go Blue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 I have studied your design. Interesting.It appears that your high-back may still have quite a bit of flex in it. When I got pretty decent at carving using softies combined with the stiffest Burton bindings at that time. I really noticed that high-backs with more flex made carving harder to accomplish. How is the flex in these? Of course when I switched to hard boots I noticed the advantage immediately! I like the adjustable idea. Always great to see something new and inventive. Now you just need to figure out how to sell it to all those jibbers There is very low flex in these binding's highback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 For soft boot carving, I would like a high back with a pivot point that allows fore aft movement. So the high back would move with me as I shift my weight forward into the turn, but not the binding base. Are you talking about motion from the toe to the heel of the boot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 15, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 Rocker: re: language. If you're going to call it a rocker binding, why not be consistent in language on your site? You talk about the binding "rotating". I was looking for how it was going to rotate (change angle). You should say it can "rock". Or angulate. But it doesn't rotate (well, it does, but along an axis that matches your binding angle). It confused me when I looked at your site.Of course, your inability to speak clearly and articulately can be quickly explained away by your choice of schools. M Go ****. Lol. Too bad I don't have control of what's posted. I would blank out the B word you like to drop. I'm split on my michigan feelings. On the one hand I want to see you guys get back on your feet so there is a little competition in the rivalry. On the other it would be kinda of neat for OSU to beat Michigan so many time for the last game of the year to the point Michigan keeps firing their coaches and run their football program into the ground although this would mean we would have pounded you into submission and there would be no more rivalry : ( Tressel also needs to pick up his game and be a little more Woody with the trash talk. He's too PC. I'm confused why you don't like my alliteration. What verbs don't you like? rocker? rotate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueB Posted January 15, 2011 Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 Semanthics... Yeah, roation. While it is technically correct for any radial movement around any axis, maybe it is not the best term for what your bindings do... In my mind, when I hear "rotation" I either think of the motion around the Z axis - what bindings do around the disks, or I think of riding technique. Motion about X axis is mostly called "roll", but where's Rock, there should be Roll too ;) so, I can totally buy the "rocking" term. The only downside is that rocker is so much used in snowboard terminology nowadays, that it might confuse the consumers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted January 15, 2011 Report Share Posted January 15, 2011 Are you talking about motion from the toe to the heel of the boot? No. I meant that when carving at lower angles in soft boots, the high back resist movements fore/aft along the length of the board. This might involve a pivot point on the high back where it normally sits on the back of the binding base. How this could be done, and still allow the high back to fold down, I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 Semanthics... Yeah, roation. While it is technically correct for any radial movement around any axis, maybe it is not the best term for what your bindings do... In my mind, when I hear "rotation" I either think of the motion around the Z axis - what bindings do around the disks, or I think of riding technique. Motion about X axis is mostly called "roll", but where's Rock, there should be Roll too ;) so, I can totally buy the "rocking" term. The only downside is that rocker is so much used in snowboard terminology nowadays, that it might confuse the consumers... I know what you mean about the rotation. When I started on it took me a while to establish a coordinate system so that the different types of rotations could be distinguished. I'd agree with roll but I'm not sure the Roller Binding sounds all that good. Do you think the prevalence of Rocker with other technology is a positive or negative? or just potentially confusing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker_Binding Posted January 16, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 No. I meant that when carving at lower angles in soft boots, the high back resist movements fore/aft along the length of the board. This might involve a pivot point on the high back where it normally sits on the back of the binding base. How this could be done, and still allow the high back to fold down, I don't know. Are you talking about a pivot in the highback itself? There was a patent by Salomon (us patent 5967531) about this type of idea. http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=pYoWAAAAEBAJ&dq=5967531 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnuts514 Posted January 16, 2011 Report Share Posted January 16, 2011 Is that highback made out of sched80 pvc? sure looks like it.....if so that's gonna break in a heartbeat. 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.