Help me evaluate if I need more setback

[icebiker]

I've had two seasons on my Donek Axxess now (my first proper carving board). For the sake of consistency I set it up, stance-wise, similar to my prior boards (Burton Supermodel, Ride Yukon, both of which I'd say were more all-mountain sticks). Now I think I'm ready to experiment a bit more (after all, even Carver's Almanac states that carving is a sport of tweaking, followed by micro-tweaking, since carving performance is greatly affected by even small changes in your settings).

I'm good with my angles and cant/lift for now. I'd like to focus on one tweak at a time. Set-back is my focus at the moment. I sense that I may be positioned too "centered" on the board, not only because it looks that way (see picture...distance between "center of front binding to tip" is only about 1.5" longer than "center of rear binding to tail"), but also because I am thinking that if I move my stance back a bit, I'll have more length in the nose, which should theoretically mean the front of the board will flex more, and perhaps enable me to initiate sharper turns without as much leaning nose-ward as I think I do at the moment.

I've read the section on binding set up in the Almanac, and these statements seem counter to my theory. Hence checking with you all.

(From Carver's Almanac)

• You can decrease the setback (even a little forward of center) to increase edge engagement. It will be a little easier to initiate a turn, especially on ice, but you won't be able to hold an edge as well at the end of the turn, and the board will have no performance in powder. If your front shin is getting bruised, or your front leg muscles get sore quickly, it may be because you are putting too much effort into shifting your weight forward on the board, and decreasing the setback can help out.
  
• You can increase the setback, and your edge hold at the end of the turn will increase, but you won't be able to attack the turn as much at the beginning. If the board is hooking too much at the front when entering a turn even after you detune the tip, you can try to increase the setback to compensate.
  

Here is a pic of me standing on the board to give you a sense of how I am positioned. If its relevant, my angles are 46F, 36R. My board is 172cm. I am 6'3"

Thanks in advance for any advice.

-Greg

[Puddy Tat]

Honestly I'm not sure I agree. I think LDP on a skateboard is a sport of ongoing tweaking. I'm a free carver and have never raced I'm 6'2 and 220+lbs riding mondo 28 boots.

I use TD3 SIs with 3 degree cants front and rear. For me I generally center my 20" 'ish wide stance on whatever board I'm riding with the toe and heel lifted and outward canting until I'm comfortable. I'm bowlegged and without outward canting I get shin pain. Then I set my angles such that they are just inside the board edge using the Fuego method (http://www.extremecarving.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7172).

Then I just go out and ride. I'll only adjust setback after that if I'm folding the nose (too heavy for the board - increase setback), or completely unable to initiate a carve (too light for the board - decrease setback). Generally speaking any board that I've purchased from Donek (Sean) or Coiler (Bruce) that has been built for my weight I've just set up with a centred stance and it's ridden like a dream.

BTW how are you getting away with stance angles that low on an alpine board? I'm pretty close to your height and in order to keep my boots within the board edges I have to run 50F/45R on a Donek Incline with a 24.5cm waist. On a 21cm Schtubby I'm 60F/55R and on a 19.6cm Prior WCRM (R.I.P.) I was using 65F/60R.

Cheers,

Dave

Edited December 5, 2013 by Puddy Tat

[icebiker]

BTW how are you getting away with stance angles that low on an alpine board? I'm pretty close to your height and in order to keep my boots within the board edges I have to run 50F/45R on a Donek Incline with a 24.5cm waist. On a 21cm Schtubby I'm 60F/55R and on a 19.6cm Prior WCRM (R.I.P.) I was using 65F/60R.

thanks Dave. Good question, especially since I have mondo 31 boots. I had Sean build my board with a 26cm waist :o.

Question for you on the below statement, makes me wonder if I have the wrong definition of setback. If you increase setback, wouldn't that mean you're shifting the stance rear-ward, and in so doing making it even easier to fold the nose?

I'll only adjust setback after that if I'm folding the nose (too heavy for the board - increase setback)

Edited December 4, 2013 by icebiker

[Puddy Tat]

thanks Dave. Good question, especially since I have mondo 31 boots. I had Sean build my board with a 26cm waist :o.

Oh ok that makes sense. It also gives another reason why the board looks comparatively "short" (beyond you being 6'3" that is :rolleyes:) . Do you still pass the Fuego test with your binding angles on that then?

When you get a chance you should jump on something narrower. Maybe around 21-22cm. Narrow waisted boards make ridiculously fast edge transitions. While I wouldn't recommend you jump on a 18cm waisted board with a mondo 31 boot; with my mondo 28s I was on a 167cm Sims Burner with an 18cm waist one time that felt like it switched edges at the speed of thought. Made for an amazingly fun ride.

If you can get out to an expression session. Here's the link to ECES on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/pages/East-Coast-Expression-Session/174167805963323). Getting to ride with people at NES who really knew what they were doing changed my entire outlook on the equipment and technique I was using. It was a huge eye opener and completely changed the way I ride.

Cheers,

Dave

[Puddy Tat]

Question for you on the below statement, makes me wonder if I have the wrong definition of setback. If you increase setback, wouldn't that mean you're shifting the stance rear-ward, and in so doing making it even easier to fold the nose?

I'm not an expert on this by any means. And we are both thinking of shifting setback the same way. I've had this conversation with Sean (Donek) and he thinks of it the same way you do. That is to say "that the length of the board in front of your foot is a lever that you are acting on."

That viewpoint is counter-intuitive to me so I think of it as below; which gives an opposite result. I could definitely be wrong here (and I think Sean has a much better ability to describe this than I do).

The Carver's Almanac seems to agree with what I'm saying. I think of it as how easy it will be to get my weight forward. With a shorter nose (less setback) I can more easily get my weight onto the nose and initiate a turn. If it's easier to get my weight forward I can too easily get my weight to far forward and fold the nose. If it's hard to initiate a turn I'm having a difficult time getting my weight forward because my stance is set too far back.

Dave

[icebiker]

Dave, thanks again. I see your point. I'm inclined to leave things as they are based on re-thinking it with your and Ursle's input. Haven't tried the Fuego test, only eyeball, but will give it a shot.

Seeing as I'm going to be riding different bindings this year (SW SI's) I'll re-evaluate my situation once I see if/how the new bindings help my technique. I hear you on ECES...I've been trying to get to this for a while, but timeing hasn't worked out. This year is a good possibility however. I would love to move to a narrower board one day, but it will take much higher angles than I'm used to, and trying one out at an expression session would be the low-risk way to go. Reason for my lower angles is I find I need them for leverage when negotiating the tight icy trails of the Northeast....not so much for when carving, but more for those times when it's too steep, bumped up, icy or crowded to carve (all of which happen at some point on weekends). Another reason why I asked Sean to build a 9-11 VSR instead of the standard 10-12 that the Axxess comes with. That said, by picking up some tips at a carving event from those with more experience, I'm sure higher angles/narrower board/bigger radius is doable even for bigfoots like me.

Ursle, I ride with about a 20" stance, give or take. Thanks again guys for your input.

Edited December 5, 2013 by icebiker

[breeseomatic]

The method I use to set my bindings is to set the bindings all the way forward on the board. Ride the lift up and try to turn the board heel and toe side as you exit the lift and ride down the gentle slope to the area where everyone sits on their ass. The board will want to turn hard and the tail washes/slides out easily. Carve easy on the way down since the tail of the board will have very little edge hold. Adjust your bindings back one click/notch and repeat until happy. I look for stable one foot in, one foot out of binding performance from the lift exit, easy initiation and fully locked in carves. Once I find it I adjust set-back one more click/notch towards the rear since I can very easily pressure the board in the nose by shifting my weight at turn initiation.

The Fuego test is BS in my opinion. It's probably fun to drink 2 boxes of wine and play with your board, but if you can't get the board to tip over at 90 degrees to the slope, then there is no need to be at those high of binding angle to support the test case. And even if you could get up on edge, you would still have boot drag since the board edge would be cutting into the snow to provide a surface for the edge and base to ride on.

I like to ride with my front heel biased towards the edge and my rear toe biased towards the edge, known as Gilmour Bias. My heel and toe would not pass the Fuego test, however, I can drag a knee and hip in the snow no problem.

I hope that explanation helps you find your optimal setting.

[Beckmann AG]

The Fuego test is BS in my opinion. It's probably fun to drink 2 boxes of wine and play with your board, but if you can't get the board to tip over at 90 degrees to the slope, then there is no need to be at those high of binding angle to support the test case. And even if you could get up on edge, you would still have boot drag since the board edge would be cutting into the snow to provide a surface for the edge and base to ride on.

One consideration, beyond rider ability to achieve maximum tilt, is that of circumstance.

Specifically, the need to self arrest on extremely steep and hard snow.

If there is enough boot/binding overhang to preclude tip/tail contact @90, there is a good possibility of an uncontrolled slide, usually head first, into something solid.

Granted, not everyone has access to, or the wherewithal to ride the steep and dense.

However, while most riders may never get near maximum board tilt while riding, they do exceed that when they make mistakes and 'fall'.

And that's what you plan for regarding overhang.

On the setback thing:

You could try more setback, but might first refine your binding setup such that body weight defaults to between the feet, rather than toward the front foot (as in the photo).

Beyond that, go with the CA recommendations, which are accurate within reason.

When you get to the point where the board feels both nimble and neutral (surface Rockwell notwithstanding), you're probably there.

(All other variables having been resolved, of course).

Edited December 5, 2013 by Beckmann AG

[Puddy Tat]

The Fuego test is BS in my opinion. It's probably fun to drink 2 boxes of wine and play with your board, but if you can't get the board to tip over at 90 degrees to the slope, then there is no need to be at those high of binding angle to support the test case. And even if you could get up on edge, you would still have boot drag since the board edge would be cutting into the snow to provide a surface for the edge and base to ride on.

Well I dunno. I've had, as Corey once described it, a spectacularly craptasic day when my boot cuff was hitting the snow and levering the edge out of the snow on heelside turns. My boot cuff is six inches above the board edge. Since that point I've used a box, or carpenter's angle, to ensure the boot is inside the board edge. Strangely no problems since then.

Personally I was unzipping my rear pocket my forward facing hip in heelside turns last year. I also find the board tends to get pretty vertical to the snow especially when you cut hard on steeper pitches.

Cheers,

Dave

[Puddy Tat]

If its relevant, my angles are 46F, 36R.

Maybe it is maybe it isn't I guess it would depend on your technique. I know the PureCarve guys ride with much lower angles. But perhaps they ride with more of a rotating,or rotated style?

Anyway it occurred to my that if I tried to ride, with my style,with your stance angles my weight shift would be diagonally across the board rather than along it because of where the ankle joint in the boots would direct my center of mass as I flexed the boot at that joint.

Incidentally don't let the angles of your bindings dictate what you can or can't do. The more you ride with whatever angles and equipment you like the better you will get. I consider myself pretty intermediate in hardboots but I'll jump turn the Incline (50F/45R) down off piste double black steeps I've taken the Schtubby (60F/55R) through moguls, and done nose rides on it. I've found as your angles steepen skidding a board, or flipping it around in a jump turn, starts to come from your rear hip.

Definitely get out to ECES. At a minimum it will let you see what is possible. The first time I went to NES I considered giving up and going back to softies because the reality check was so substantial. I stuck with it, changed my equipment (softening my boots), and changed my technique (unlearning a huge number of bad habits that I wasn't even aware I had), and now I can actually hang with them when I go down there. I've still got a ways to go but it's feeling better every year.

Cheers,

Dave

[kieran]

Do you still pass the Fuego test with your binding angles on that then?

fuego!

regarding the OP's stance, i'd suggest to leave the front foot where it is, move the back foot rearwards a touch and add some inward cant on the back foot to improve comfort.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Icebiker, I used to ride with 40/35 (still do on my Tanker) and now use around 55/50 on my Nirvana with 21.5 waist. I don't want to go much higher as I like the leverage lower angles give for bumps and steeps. The transition wasn't that big of a deal. I suggest you try it on the board you've got. It won't be ideal with the underhang but it will give you some feel for the stance.

You might consider a 23 cm waisted board, it will let you keep the angles lower.

[icebiker]

Thanks Joe, Beckmann, Kieran and Neil. I definitely want to move toward higher angles over time and a narrower board for quicker edge-to-edge. Will plan on ECES this year and see if I can demo something like a 23 cm waist. Would love to add a new board to the quiver.

Funny, after purchasing a new mountain bikes, the SW SI's and assorted other toys in the past 12 months, my wife asked me the other day..."So, we're done with stuff for you for a while, right?" Right! :D

Kieran, I may give your idea a shot. For what it's worth I already ride with 7 degree inward cant (the bindings in the pic are Race Plates with a Burton cant). The SW SI's I just purchased have the 6 deg rear cant. I went with 0 deg front (like my current set up) but now wondering if I should have tried a 3 deg inward cant (in line with Beckmann's advice..to get my weight less "front foot" oriented and more centered.

I'll try all the advice on here in increments and see what works. Thanks again.

-Greg

Edited December 6, 2013 by icebiker

[Donek]

You want to mount centered on the hole pattern. Mounting off center will typically result in poor performance. Simply find the center between the front and back sets of inserts and center your stance there. Some riders will find they like being slightly forward or back of this point due to a habit of riding more front or back footed.

[west carven]

howdy icebiker

i tend to ride forward of inserts, but a good way to find center of board is on

heelside on a steep pitch slide straight down and feel if the nose or tail tends

to grab more. if nose grabs more try moving forward on inserts and so with

the tail. there should be even pressure on nose and tail and slide down straight.

it is just a general guide thing i use.

[kieran]

Kieran, I may give your idea a shot. For what it's worth I already ride with 7 degree inward cant (the bindings in the pic are Race Plates with a Burton cant). The SW SI's I just purchased have the 6 deg rear cant. I went with 0 deg front (like my current set up) but now wondering if I should have tried a 3 deg inward cant (in line with Beckmann's advice..to get my weight less "front foot" oriented and more centered

best of luck. a thing to be particularly aware of when using canting is any associated knee discomfort. if it doesn't feel right, it probably isn't. don't persevere, get off and change it.

[philw]

I'm always very wary of any movement away from centre of the sidecut as marked, which sounds like a bad idea.

My reasoning is that you want to ride centered, so you can load the edge evenly and also simply shift your weight slightly fore/ aft through a turn.

If you start (in this case) at the back, then you're going to find it hard to load the edge evenly, something the whole edge and the decamber is designed to help you do. Then when it comes to that little shift back at the end of some of those turns... you're already standing on the tail, so you've no where to go.

Me, I'd set it centred, right where the manufacturer designed you to be. As far as the original issue, I'd play with angles and maybe lifts (not cants, way old school), and the boot lean and stiffness so you feel that the front edge is behaving the way you want it to. If that doesn't nail it, I'd try some other boards. I'd not worry about how it looks, it's how it works...

[Bobby Buggs]

You want to mount centered on the hole pattern. Mounting off center will typically result in poor performance. Simply find the center between the front and back sets of inserts and center your stance there. Some riders will find they like being slightly forward or back of this point due to a habit of riding more front or back footed.

Was hoping for this response from the builder himself

[icebiker]

Thanks guys, Based on your input, I feel better already knowing that my current stance may not be too far off. My rear binding is using the front-most set of rear inserts, and my front binding is using the set of binding inserts that is 1 row in front of the rear-most set of inserts. In diagram below, * are the inserts, and 0 are where the bindings are mounted.

<--Tail **00 ---- *00* ----Nose-->

<--Tail **00 ---- *00* ----Nose-->

So, it would appear I'm already slightly front of center? (which is something a few of you recommended) and moving the rear binding back one row (Kieran's suggestion) would truly center me (as recommended by a few others). Do I have that right?

[Neil Gendzwill]

Thanks guys, Based on your input, I feel better already knowing that my current stance may not be too far off. My rear binding is using the front-most set of rear inserts, and my front binding is using the set of binding inserts that is 1 row in front of the rear-most set of inserts. In diagram below, * are the inserts, and 0 are where the bindings are mounted.

<--Tail **00 ---- *00* ----Nose-->

<--Tail **00 ---- *00* ----Nose-->

So, it would appear I'm already slightly front of center? (which is something a few of you recommended) and moving the rear binding back one row (Kieran's suggestion) would truly center me (as recommended by a few others). Do I have that right?

Yes. That will widen up your stance slightly, but that sounds like it may be a good thing as you're probably pretty narrow right now.

[Beckmann AG]

Kieran, I may give your idea a shot. For what it's worth I already ride with 7 degree inward cant (the bindings in the pic are Race Plates with a Burton cant). The SW SI's I just purchased have the 6 deg rear cant. I went with 0 deg front (like my current set up) but now wondering if I should have tried a 3 deg inward cant (in line with Beckmann's advice..to get my weight less "front foot" oriented and more centered.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting you cant either of your feet inward, unless bone structure dictates. Cant and lift are often used to accommodate wider stances, but that is not necessarily their best use.

If you have the time and inclination, ride that board on very easy terrain, slowly, with your softboots/bindings. Move the clamps fore and aft slightly until you have the most 'balanced' response from one arc to the next, at very low edge angles. Then gradually add in the support of hardboots and plates, and replicate your previous maneuvers to verify effect. Then wick it up a bit.

Bear in mind that the hard shells will contribute more variables by way of boot ramp and forward lean, to say nothing of reduced mobility. Consider the contribution of binding cant/lift as well.

Centering oneself geometrically does not guarantee centered performance in motion.

[Shred Gruumer]

All I got on this one is....WOW!!! Made my head hurt... tinker tinker...solves everything.