Jump to content
Note to New Members ×

Switching to narrow waist boards, binding setup secrets?


michael.a

Recommended Posts

I tried two Virus boards recently with 15? and 17cm waists, I didn't have any time to really to tinker with my binding setup, just set the angles so there would be no boot out with 5 degs on splay and used the same lift/cant like always: 3 degs of toe lift up front and 3 degs of heel lift in the back.

After a fun runs I got accustomed to the width of the board but my rear leg just felt weird, like it wanted to pull out of my hip, I had the boot pressing hard on the sides of my shins and my knee felt like it couldnt move up or down.

I might have an opportunity to try a few more narrow boards but want to get this dialed in right, are there are secrets with binding setup?

Just spectulating, but it felt like I should use 6 deg of heel lift in the rear or more and actually have a ton more splay, cept the only problem is my rear angle was in the high 70s, so I'd have to go up to 80 something plus to to make that work.

Help :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general your setup is a very good starting point. With a 15cm waist you should end up somewhere round 80°. Please bear in mind that the whole mechanics work differently with this setup. Thus you could think about reducing your stance. That should give you a bit more comfort. Just try it out.

If the problem with your rear leg still persists, I see two options.

1. The binding has an inward canting. Throw that out. You just need toe- and heellift. Probably try riding totally flat in order to get a starting point for your setup changes.

2. In case there is no inward canting, put it in again on the rear foot - but - mount it the other way round, so that your rear knee is pushed towards your toe-edge (Edit says: Chris was faster and descirbed it as outward canting.). If you make pictures or stand in front of a mirror, you will see that this setup is able to correct and inward movement of your rear knee. This inward movement comes inevitably with the high angles and the resulting "face-the-nose" postion on the board. It sounds strange, but it works. Try it in your living room and watch yourself in the mirror. Do some carpet boarding in order to check, how you feel with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi! I know what "narrow" means :) I'd go for 6 deg lifts front and rear with no canting. Plus set the rear boot's lean adjuster much more forward than the front one. Stand in front of the mirror barefoot in your stance and see how your rear ankle is much more inclined to see what I mean. I am risking getting flamed here but try no splay and a narrow stance... Give it a chance and you'll be sorted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont get set on the 5 degrees of splay. I run 2 degree difference on my virus. You may like that. Also as you probably know check for boot bias. Mount boots on board on the bench and make sure they are as centered as possible. When I started riding wider boards I had to adjust the bias quite a bit. Hope that was worth me writing. Virus boards are awesome!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On really narrow boards I actually like toe-in (negative splay if you like) with the back foot at a higher angle than front. I also reduce stance width by at least an inch and usually even more. I kinda like the outward cant idea if your body geometry allows it, although I've never tried it (mine doesn't really - blown pelvis, blown knee - getting my knees locked in is about the only safe way for me to ride, oldfashioned though it is). The point being I guess, that heelside is always going to be magic on these setups, and finding a way to get early leverage toeside is the tricky bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On really narrow boards I actually like toe-in (negative splay if you like) with the back foot at a higher angle than front. I also reduce stance width by at least an inch and usually even more. I kinda like the outward cant idea if your body geometry allows it, although I've never tried it (mine doesn't really - blown pelvis, blown knee - getting my knees locked in is about the only safe way for me to ride, oldfashioned though it is). The point being I guess, that heelside is always going to be magic on these setups, and finding a way to get early leverage toeside is the tricky bit.

How about the boardcontrol? With a smaller stancewidth you have less boardcontrol I experienced. Or doesn't that count with smaller boards? Never tried a smaller stancewidth on my Virus' boards. May be to consider? What's the advantage? Like to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the boardcontrol? With a smaller stancewidth you have less boardcontrol I experienced. Or doesn't that count with smaller boards? Never tried a smaller stancewidth on my Virus' boards. May be to consider? What's the advantage? Like to know.
i found that my boards decamber much more easily with a narrower stance. feels less stable though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the boardcontrol? With a smaller stancewidth you have less boardcontrol I experienced. Or doesn't that count with smaller boards? Never tried a smaller stancewidth on my Virus' boards. May be to consider? What's the advantage? Like to know.

It's not so much what's the advantage, it's avoiding a big DISadvantage which is that with the high stance angles you're forced to use by the narrow waist, your back knee and ankle are forced to carry a lot of bend all the time just to keep you over the middle of the board, with resultant fatigue and loss of power. Take the extreme opposite case of 0°-0° or even 10-10 duckfoot, at as wide a stance as you like - you could ride, if you wanted to, with both legs virtually straight and your weight balanced, and you could drop your butt all the way to the snow without losing that centeredness. At 90-90 as on a Skwal, with your body in riding position the back leg is always way more bent than the front. The closer your feet are, the less difference there is, so the less excessive back-leg fatigue becomes.

It's less stable for sure, and you have much less leverage for skidded turns, so it's always going to be a compromise to some extent, and you'll need to be comfortable with a lot of waist angulation. However, with a narrower stance you are able to drop much lower without running into the limits of the back boot and back ankle. You're also centered over the sweet spot of the board, and as you compress into the turn you stay centered.

As a demonstration, put yourself in a 70-70ish stance at 20" or so just in bare feet, and drop down to where your elbows are below your knees. Impossible without either an absurd amount of bend in you back ankle or letting your weight get way back. If you narrow your stance a bit you can get much lower without strain or excessive shift backwards.

I love to ride a 17 (15 is too much for me) but because I so rarely get on truly open slopes on truly good snow, at my age I compromise with 18-19, for better manueverability in tighter conditions, and more chance to rescue myself if I hit the slick stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...