michael.a Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 What's the general take on modifying stance in terms of longer/shorter boards? I've got a F2 Speedster RS 183 cm with a 16m sidecut. For some reason I'm having trouble decambering the board to tighten up my turns so it rides like a freight train on rails, which is fine and all but somehow I feel disconcerted that I don't have the strength to flip this board around. Surprisingly, I also have an identical F2 RS that's 177 cm also with a 16m sidecut that does whatever I want to. Bindings on both boards are centered with the same stance width (52.7cm = 20 3/4 inches) My next step is to actually go a bit forward of center on the 183, but I also thought about narrowing my stance width. Generally, for me, the shorter the board the narrower the stance as that's what feels the most comfortable, but somehow it's come to my head that I should do the opposite here. Any ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieran Posted March 9, 2013 Report Share Posted March 9, 2013 pics! i find with longer boards that i'm more forward relative to the inserts, but i also have lift/cant at play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTB_DH11 Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 I am running 21" on both SL and GS boards. Also running cant/lift heel/rear foot. What do you weight? Maybe too lite to decamber the big board. I am 185, so weight might have something to do with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted March 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 205 pds, trust me, I've got the gut to make a board do its thing :) Ever though the 183 is stiffer than the 177 by about, I dunno, 20%, I know I've got the power to make it move but somethings not working. I'm sure I have to beef up my technique, but I thought fiddling with the settings might help a bit in the right direction Kieran, but you use the same stance width? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieran Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Kieran, but you use the same stance width?comparing to a 164 radial sidecut board, on my 14-20m 185cm donek i found i had to go wider and more forward, and more heel lift. on the 184 RT GS i'm just more forward, centered on the board rather than the inserts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
two_ravens Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 (edited) I've got a F2 Speedster RS 183 cm with a 16m sidecut. For some reason I'm having trouble decambering the board to tighten up my turns so it rides like a freight train on rails, which is fine and all but somehow I feel disconcerted that I don't have the strength to flip this board around. Surprisingly, I also have an identical F2 RS that's 177 cm also with a 16m sidecut that does whatever I want to. Bindings on both boards are centered with the same stance width (52.7cm = 20 3/4 inches) Any ideas? What bindings are you using on the 183? I'm having a similar experience - two boards that are supposed to be the same but I can't bend the new one enough to survive on my skinny hill. The change that has brought the most benefit so far is putting more flexible bindings on it - it was night and day! At your weight a softer binding might be scary, but your profile says you have a set of F2 intecs in your binding quiver - have you tried those? (p.s. I have been told that it's the difference in the binding footprint, not the flex in the binding that made it work better - either way, it might be interesting to try a something different on this board.) On my board, moving the bindings all the way forward helped some. For me the narrower stance didn't give any noticeable benefit. Edited March 11, 2013 by two_ravens more info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.oldsnowboards.com Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 205 pds, trust me, I've got the gut to make a board do its thing :) Ever though the 183 is stiffer than the 177 by about, I dunno, 20%, I know I've got the power to make it move but somethings not working. I'm sure I have to beef up my technique, but I thought fiddling with the settings might help a bit in the right directionKieran, but you use the same stance width? MORE BEER!! Pack on another 25 or 30 pounds and ALL boards will submit to your demands :) All seriousness aside . Narrower the stance = more bend / further apart = stiffer. Picture the board suspended between two bricks. If you put 200 pounds at one point in the middle vs splitting 200 lbs and putting 100 lbs at a foot from the tip and tail. This is an extreme example to demonstrate the effects of widening the stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted March 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I'm an idiot. The bindings on the 183 were not centered on the board, I think I was half dead when I mounted them with the manufacturer's setback of 20mm or so. Duh Set them up as on my 177 (which is centered!) this time, I'll report back in a few days how things work out :) two_ravens, on the 183 I've only ridden with my F2 intecs, but I totally agree, after mixing and matching I found certain bindings complement different boards, not just in terms of ride but practicality... which is worthy of thread itself I gotta say. oldsnowboards, no no no, you're older than me but still it's time to lose the weight not add more. PM me and I'll share you a diet plan that's actually not a diet. Let's you keep drinking Brewdog's and Dogfish head :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I'm an idiot. The bindings on the 183 were not centered on the board, I think I was half dead when I mounted them with the manufacturer's setback of 20mm or so. DuhSet them up as on my 177 (which is centered!) this time, I'll report back in a few days how things work out :) two_ravens, on the 183 I've only ridden with my F2 intecs, but I totally agree, after mixing and matching I found certain bindings complement different boards, not just in terms of ride but practicality... which is worthy of thread itself I gotta say. oldsnowboards, no no no, you're older than me but still it's time to lose the weight not add more. PM me and I'll share you a diet plan that's actually not a diet. Let's you keep drinking Brewdog's and Dogfish head :) Dude... I love drinkig' Brewdog and Dogfish Head. My favorite US brewery and my favorite non-US brewery. I love the Camden Brewdog brew pub almost as much as the Rehoboth Beach Dogfish Head brewpub. Don't hold back this incredible "diet". The people need to know! :) I'm a fairly solid 245 without clothes so it doesn't seem to matter to much where I put my binders. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieran Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 brewdog? this will be 10 minutes away from me by bicycle. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Back in the Pleistocene, it was common to go a little wider for Super G than for GS, presumably for stability by way of a lower COG. While the board may bend easier (further) with the narrower stance, that also implies that it may have more rebound potential, and you might then be at a disadvantage with a shorter base of support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boarderboy Posted March 17, 2013 Report Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) brewdog? this will be 10 minutes away from me by bicycle. :D look like?? Does it require a wide or narrow stance? Edited March 17, 2013 by boarderboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael.a Posted March 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2013 Reporting back here, centering the bindings along the 183 plus narrowing my stance by 1 cm (from 52.7 cm to 51.7) did the trick. I'll open my stance up on wider slopes. One side story is that I played around with toe/heel lift and have come to the conclusion I need six degrees, not three. Btw, a few people emailed me about that diet, it's called the 5:2, relatively new so doesn't have a bunch of peer-reviewed articles backing it up but most evidence seems promising, I also feel it tunes into how our bodies actually functioned tens of thousands of years ago, we often starved, and when we had food, oh we ate and ate and ate. I wasn't even looking for a diet, just a better way of eating that takes into account my ever so often binges of beer, steaks, and chips :) 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.