UPZ RC-10 M28 -28.5 Boots questions.

[piusthedrcarve]

I have worn M28 for HSP and Deeluxe boots and used F2 Race Titanium bindings Large.

When I switched to UPZ M28, noticed that the insole distance is significantly shorter than other boots.

When toe & heel blocks are adjusted for the UPZ boots, they are well inside of center.

Then I tried them on F2 Medium and it fits and still have approx. 1 cm to go bigger for each toe/heel block. Now I can go with Medium or Large but what's the advantage or disadvantage of choosing one over other? What do you recommend? I know F2 suggest medium for 24.5-27.5 and Large for 26.5-31.

Oh usual binding angle are 60/58 on < 19 cm width deck or 56/53 for > 20 cm width deck, if that matters.

Edited February 16, 2012 by piusthedrcarve

[0815-fahrer]

You might want to stick with the Large ones.

Last year I´ve collected F2 binding pieces and someone on the slope. Seemed it broke because he used medium bindings at it´s most outer settings.

The plastic was torn through.

[teach]

You should make sure that the Medium not only fit, but that you can actually center the boot with them. The UPZ boots have the heel inset, but not the toe, so they're off-center with respect to other boots. In other words, you probably need the range of adjustments for the toe block that the Large has.

[piusthedrcarve]

You should make sure that the Medium not only fit, but that you can actually center the boot with them. The UPZ boots have the heel inset, but not the toe, so they're off-center with respect to other boots. In other words, you probably need the range of adjustments for the toe block that the Large has.

Yup. I use 'Gilmour Bias' setting and it works on medium but then one of bail is at most outer setting. I will stick with 'Large' ones.

Thanks you all for recommendations

[tenorman]

hi PIUSTHEDRCARVE

the conventional wisdom is to go with the smallest possible bindings because they are stiffer--UNLESS YOU RIDE UPZ BOOTS! heed TEACHES' advice carefully. from your description it appears that you will not be able to centre your boots with the mediums. even if you enlarged the toe bail spacing to 0 cm from the largest outer limit and moved the heel bail to 2 cm from the largest setting from your current setting of 1cm toe and heel respectively you still would still be almost a cm away from the center of your binding (towards the heelside.) on my size 26 upz boots my centering mark is about 1.5 to 1.75 cm from the true centre (towards the heelside.) with your larger size 28 UPZ boot your problem worsens as this distance will increase. i am assuming you ride with your boots centered in the binding and that you don't deliberately set your bindings with significant heelside bias.

i am assuming that the 2012 f2 medium and large bindings are unchanged from 2011 in that they only have one set of holes drilled at each end of the baseplate. i just got my new 2012 size small f2 race titaniums today and noticed 2 extra sets of holes on the baseplate.

originally, i just bought them for the extra stiffness to use with boards where my desired stance width exactly matched the insert placement. as my size 26 boots is at the largest setting for the size smalls there is no chance to move the heel further in and the toe further out. the only way to centre the upz boot would be to mount the binding disks east-west instead of north-south so i could slide them towards the toeside. this maybe an option for you if your board's inserts are drilled at your correct stance width. however, since i got some extra holes in the 2012 size small baseplates i am going to use them after i get the okay from f2 (after i finish this post i am going to send an email to ANDREA at YYZCANUCK to get f2's permission to do so.)

you can leave this thread now as i am about to go off at a tangent. if you are still interested in the extra holes on the 2012 version of the size small f2 bindings then read on:

the size small bindings were shipped from the f2 factory via their canadian distributor with the toe/heel pieces mounted at their smallest positions (the inner most sets of baseplate holes.) when i removed the toe piece to move it to the outmost baseplate hole i notice an aluminum bushing (non-removeable/permantly mounted?) inside the mounting hole--this is new for 2012 as the bushing wasn't present in my 2011 or 2010 size medium race titaniums. the unused outer holes on my 2012 size smalls appear to be exactly the same (shape and dimension) as the holes of my 2011 and 2010 size mediums so i assume they are fully functional without the new aluminum bushings (barely visible in the first photo.)

now with my toe piece mounted on the outermost holes and my heel piece unchanged from the factory setting of the inner holes my binding is thankfully offset towards the toeside by the distance evident in the above photo and i can still get more centering by minimizing the heel sizing and maximizing the toe sizing--because moving the toe piece out (and leaving the heel piece as is) effectively increased the size of the binding (and hence their adjustable range!) so much so that i can get to the exact center of the UPZ boot! something that i was unable to do with the size mediums of previous years and had to live with the mild case of heelside bias. hooray for now as i hope that i don't find out from the dealer that we are not allowed to use the outermost holes and that they are only there because they used the same baseplate as the pre2012 size mediums.

the one glaring reason i can see for f2 nixing the use of the outermost holes is that the lifts and bail platforms would extend beyond the baseplate. i may do it anyway (and forfeit the warranty) since it looks pretty solid to me when i inspect it visually and flex it by hand. this coming from someone who has made some weird binding modifications over the years (duct tape, skateboard bushings, cutting board, nylon washers etc.) in other words do so at your own risk and DON'T SUE THE SNOWBOARD COMPANIES IF YOU FCUK UP AND HURT YOURSELF!

the one glaring reason i can see f2 allowing the use of the outermost holes is the situation is unchanged from prior to 2012. if you look at the photo of the rubber foot with the bail platforms mounted in the innermost holes (the default 2012 f2 factory settngs) you will notice that part of the t-nut holding the bail platforms is exposed!

i assume this is ok with f2 since that is how they are shipping them out of the factory and they actually enclose a separate piece of paper warning that the rubber boots must be in place or they wouldn't be responsible for topsheet damage. if you used the outermost holes like i did with my 2012 size smalls then the rubber foot completely covers the t-nut (exactly like it did in 2011 and earlier.)

i have yet to try using the bail platforms from my 2011 and 2010 bindings which are smaller than the platfoms on the size small bindings (yes that is correct--the 2012 size smalls use the LARGE platforms.) the size MEDIUM bail platforms on the pre-2012 platforms would completely eliminate the problem of the bail platforms overhanging the baseplate when using the outermost holes on the 2012 size small baseplates but you might not be able to shift both bails toward the toe side as much as you could with large bail platforms. hopefully i can still get enough toeside shift using the smaller pre-2012 size medium bail platform to eliminate the baseplate overhang. again assuming i am allowed to use the outermost hole in the first place.

btw as a precaution i covered up the exposed part of the t-nut with duct tape when using the f2 factory settings as shown in the photo.

i guess the fact that f2 ships their bindings like this gives tacit approval for leaving the part of the t-nut exposed beyond the rubber foot--unless the 2012 rubber boot was redesigned to reach farther towards the mounting disk to completely cover the t-nut and that i got shipped the wrong rubber feet by mistake.

p.s. sorry for the crappy cellphone photos as i am about 3 hours away from my camera. will post better photos later if and only if requested.

Edited February 16, 2012 by tenorman
mixing up heel and toe duh

[tenorman]

HI PIUSDRCARVE

oh crap. my post was so long that you already figured it out before i finished lol. i'll just leave my post intact in case someone else needs this info.

the only other thing i can suggest is to find out if the 2012 medium plates are drilled with 2 sets of holes and can be used with large bails?

Edited February 16, 2012 by tenorman
further suggestion of asking about dual holes in mediums

[piusthedrcarve]

WOW. That I didn't know. For centering boots, I like heel-biased on front but toe-biased on rear (at least that's what I've been taught). Yes. if base plates has 2 extra holes, it would be ideal for ppls who are in-between F2 binding sizes. Just to make sure, I will take look under few of my F2 bindings tonight.

tenorman, Thank you very much for your insight and Please let us know when you find out.

One more thing... How's your new F2 Silberpfeil Carbon treating you? Just put up mine (07) for sale. Your earlier review post was very tempting to get one. Any more update to reveal its riding characteristics?

[tenorman]

hi PIUSTHEDRCARVE

just got an email from DAVE at YYZCANUCK. f2 does not allow the outermost holes to be used. just so i don't screw up the relaying of very important information, these are his exact words:

Doug... This is Dave. NO, those holes are NOT to be used. ONLY the inside

holes as the bindings came assembled.Regards, Dave

bummer! now i will have to go back to my original plan of only using them maxed out by my size 26 boots on boards that are drilled to my exact stance width so i can mount the mounting disks east-west instead of north south to slide them toward the toeside.

however, since i got some extra holes in the 2012 size small baseplates i am going to use them after i get the okay from f2 (after i finish this post i am going to send an email to ANDREA at YYZCANUCK to get f2's permission to do so.)

if you look at the photo of the rubber foot with the bail platforms mounted in the innermost holes (the default 2012 f2 factory settngs) you will notice that part of the t-nut holding the bail platforms is exposed!

[ATTACH]29632[/ATTACH]

i assume this is ok with f2 since that is how they are shipping them out of the factory and they actually enclose a separate piece of paper warning that the rubber boots must be in place or they wouldn't be responsible for topsheet damage.

i guess the fact that f2 ships their bindings like this gives tacit approval for leaving the part of the t-nut exposed beyond the rubber foot

no comment was made about the partially exposed t-nut so i guess f2 feels that it poses no threat to the topsheet.

How's your new F2 Silberpfeil Carbon treating you?

i haven't ridden it yet as i got it the same time as the 2012 bindings. just by hand flexing it it feels the same as the 2011 model. so if it rides at least as well as the 2011 model then i will be happy. the only difference appears to be the 2012 graphics. the snow coverage is getting thin on the local vancouver mountains so i don't want to risk hitting a rock so i'll bring it up to whistler this weekend and ride it with my older bindings as i won't be able to use the 2012 size smalls since the inserts are not drilled at my desired stance width so i need to mount my 2011 or 2010 bindings which have a greater adjustment range for centering.

will let you know how the 2012 carbon silberpfeil handles next week after giving it a few rides.

[piusthedrcarve]

Bummer 2 !!

will let you know how the 2012 carbon silberpfeil handles next week after giving it a few rides.

? then, do you have 11 and 12 also? If you like 2012 one, any chance to share your love of F2 away? (2011 one) :)