Softboot Carving Angles?

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

Well, Duh, of course CK's "tuck knee" stance mellowed out... Cant became less in angle, as stances widened (again, in '85-86, there were few 'narrow' stances), and, drumroll here, in late '92, Harry Gunz unleashed the 4x4 Holepatten, with F-2's FULLY ROTATIONAL binding systems. Burton then, decided the old 200mm-wide 5-hole insert system was done, and then craftily made the 42mm 3-D triangle (that conveniently fit into a 40mm square!) insert system. This meant you could put Burton Bindings on any 4x4 board, but not every 4x4 binding could fit onto a Burton. (BTW, HARRY and PAUL did NOT issue an INTERNATIONAL PATENT, thus, they made NO MONEY while making EVERYONE's LIFE BETTER with the 4x4!) Burton risked it, hoping only 3 , 6mm, screws could hold you on the board. It, obviously, worked most of the time (cracked discs aside). The co-evolution of stance angle and stance width meant that canting need only be a few degrees at best. That's when CATEK stepped in with a full-cage plate binding that rested on stacked shims, and while limited compared to later Catek's, had the ability to cant in any angle from the footbed up to 4 degrees/toe/heel, and+- 6 degrees in supination, while rotating thru 45 degrees without any restriction. Meanwhile, softboots became (with Dale boot liners in Kamiks) quite a good bit laterally softer than Sorels with Mountaineering liners (Mc-Kinley/Scott Downey models),or the half-hardshell Kemper boots (which, scarily, could click into plates, but with no highback support!), so suddenly, TWEAKAGE was very accessible! Skaters got it, instantly! Look and LaCroix even made boards with cut-away nose/tail profiles to help with moves like 'Cross-rockets' or Crail-to-tail nose-pokes. Once I was (again) back to a 19"-20" stance, I certainly was happier, and often took my insert system (meant to secure ski-screw-mounted decks to their bindings in a better means;ahem!) and simply added to Burton's old 5-hole (using the center insert as the inner point in the triangle) with 4 or 6 inserts, to give Safaris and such(like early PJ's, or M's!) new life beyond the 17"-18" they came with, and finally let them Carve as they should! With freestyle boards, the inserts, as an add-on, let many riders push-it-out, and by '93, I was seeing riders with up to 25" stances on boards meant to mount with Ski-Screws (btw, ski-screws are designed to 'break off' at the head after a mere 500 ft/lbs of force; a 6mm/or/1/4" machine screw can hold against a full ton. NO ONE should ride with Ski-Screws only holding the bindings on! Ever!). Since then, Jibbing kinda took off, as skater/surfers could finally 'set' their feet where it was 'comfy' to do so. Carvers, meanwhile, only really expanded the stancing from about '95-2000, about 2"-3", and then went out to 20"+ after that. Coincidentally, that was when Catek went to the pintle/turntable binding. So, canting had a part in that evolution as well, but this time, was easily adjustable. IMHO, the FR Catek was really close to being the ultimate binding; But, it was heavy, too stiff, and could come 'un-coupled' at the pintle angle/set-screws, and till needed a 'winged' highback or 3rd-strap-kit.. Close, darned close, but not quite there.  This is why I continue to look back, to develop what I think will be next. Anyone recall Gnu's old tongue softboot binding from '88-'92? I figured out how to put those tongues onto the T-9. It's gonna be a great kit-fix, well, IF, if, I get it out to market (similar, but way better than the old CK Tongues, btw). Jim saw them, but... well, we will see, won't we?

 

Edited December 7, 2016 by Eric Brammer aka PSR

[barryj]

Great info and conversation guys!        From your suggestions I'm gonna back way off and re-start with 35/25 angles and work down as needed.

Am I reading this right, that the short stance tuck knee position...... is considered a relic and bad style??   Explain please.......   

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

Barry, the 'tuck knee' style worked, for grabs and, often, powder. But, it is a relic, imho. The cants then (at 17"-18" stances!) were often as severe as 7 degrees, big overkill! Bindings then just SUCKED, period. We'd carry extra parts, even vice-grips, with us to ensure a full day of riding. Yeah, not fun, that...

Angles are up to you; Board width, mission intended, foot size(boot length), risers added (or not)  will all contribute to how you figure it out. Personally, I'd say 30-21 degrees up front, and then at the rear, fit ('gilmourian style') the rear boot so it doesn't 'boot-out', but at least 6 degrees less than the front (unless you are pidgeon-toed, then match how you stand/walk). So, 24-12 at the rear, possibly with a slight inward cant /and/or heel lift if you're BX-ing, riding Pow, or Racing in Gates/Banks, to add thrust at the end of turns (which will adversely affect switch riding, fyi). I watch my binding's 'touch points', too. Many toe-ramps now intrude when set at high angles, and stick out past the board's edge. Heel-cups can do the same as well.You may have seen SVR's photos of his Tanker, laid over, with softies in it! Good stuff there, as He won't 'boot out' until the board is tipped WAY far onto it's edge (like 75-80 degrees from flat!!). That's what to aspire to for carving, or slush-riding.

 

[svr]

Awesome trip back down memory lane PSR.

Remember these...Elfgen CX-911s had great support but the ratchets were terrible, but they did go well with Sorels.

cheers,

sandy

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

GOD-DARN-IT, Sandy, that's the Tongue, exactly, that I have and am talking about!!  THANK YOU! (btw, those highback pads went into my kid's Chopper bindings when their feet were too far from the toe-edge! Size10 toddlers left them 1/2" from the edge,otherwise. Fixed that, though!)

These tongues were set-up to be centered across the foot. They're padded, and you can ride in high-top sneakers if you want to. They make for effortless toe-side turns, too.That binding fit Burton's old 5-hole, and Gnu's Large 4-hole diamond/square pattern, with very limited rotation options. They were also really narrow at the toe (we'd put our Mc-Kinley's on a belt sander and take 3/8" off each side of the flange up front!), so, size 11-12 men's need not apply... I only broke three of these bases, ever. I still have 4 pair, two fitted with straps from parts-bin, one with original tongues, and one with Flow tongues. Awesome to see again!! ;-D

 

[svr]

PSR, I thought that was what you were talking about. I can remember the same issues with my Sorels and the fix was the same belt sander trick.

Craig's bone out strap was a good idea, but it was too flexible and did not cover enough of the top or the forefront of the boot to make it really viable.

Flow's are definitely the closest thing to these today. 

Sadly Elfgen had a run of Softboot bindings that used some really terrible plastics and they never really recovered from the warranty backlash or stigma of it. Those bindings were very progressive and way ahead of their time.

Cheers,

sandy

Edited December 7, 2016 by svr

[Corey]

Those Elfgens were pretty neat. I liked the fore-aft support but the tongue shape caused way too much pressure on the top of my high-arched foot. 

The last few times I rode softboots, I put slightly-trimmed Raichle hardboot tongues between the boot tongue and the laces. It rode very nicely, but the toe area of the boot couldn't support the loads, so my toes/forefoot felt pretty squished on toeside turns. 

[JRAZZ]

DONE!  Thanks for posting that video, I feel validated.  I've believed for a couple decades now that the vast majority of softbooters just set up their boards like their favorite pipe rider and never give it another thought.  26", 5/-5 or some such ridiculousness.  Unless you truly want to ride ambidextrously, e.g. Knapton, I think most freeriders would have an epiphany like Mr. Bang there if they tried a narrower, more directional stance sensible for actual freeriding.  He looks so much more fluid in that video than most.

CK was the epitome of softboot style for me.  Re-watching his old movies, the tuck-knee thing looks dated and a bit overdone, but he was a joy to watch regardless.  I seem to recall he mellowed out on the knee tuck in later years.

When I learned I was told to set up Duck.  I rode 18/-12 for the first two years.  Then after reading something I tried going with a forward stance.  Never went back.

I think that most riders don't think about their stance or setup too much.  Either that or the park the shiz man.

Edited December 7, 2016 by erazz

[TLN]

What are typical angles for bx racers? I think for freecarving you wang something like 45/30 or 39/24, while bx is 27/9 or so. Am I right?

[Jack M]

9 minutes ago, TLN said:

What are typical angles for bx racers? I think for freecarving you want something like 45/30 or 39/24, while bx is 27/9 or so. Am I right?

Wescott runs 27/9.  However as I said above, I got back into softboots last year thinking I wanted steep angles for freecarving (36/27) and discovered I much prefer 27/15 for both freecarving and freeriding, after listening to some advice from a good softboot carver.

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

It is, truly, a function of what leverage you can get going into the heelside turn. 33* is about it, with 'power-wings', or 3-rd-strap, up front. Then, you want a slight splay (well, usually) of at least 9* differential. Boots, Bindings, they all have variable (and, inconsistent!) flex rates/heel-hold, so, that back foot needs to take up the slack on Toesides, too. Boot/Binding drag is a big issue, be aware of that.So, 27 F, low 20's rear would be very aggressive, and not at all 'switch friendly'. 

 

[BlueB]

My general recommendation, when soft carving wannabes ask me, is not higher then 35 front, because of the already mentioned highback issue. 

But, lo and behold, one of the young instructors who attended my carving clinics last year, upped his softie angles to match my hard 45/30 and carved an absolute storm. 

[Mig]

@svr and @PSR: I was also a fan of the Elfgen/Gnu tongues.I used them in all my bindings until I forgot them in a gondola in Whistler. Biggest mistake ever! My feet and Achilles reminded me of that one for many years after that trip...

[jtslalom]

I ride about 54 dgrees front and 57 degrees back on softboots for hard carving days. 20 front and 20 back for softer carving and riding switch and in the woods. It seems like there is quite a bit of advice given already so to make it short follow a this simple rule to softboot carving. If you feel like you can't carve at certain angles its not your binding angles causing you not to carve. Its you not knowing how. Any good carver can carve on any angles with any equipment.

[Neil Gendzwill]

11 minutes ago, jtslalom said:

Any good carver can carve on any angles with any equipment.

That's patently ridiculous.  How about I give you an 8' long 2X6 set up +90/-90 duck with one old Sorel and a Burton Furnace, but you have to wear them on the wrong feet?

Edited December 15, 2016 by Neil Gendzwill

[TLN]

You're unable to carve in +90/-90 in Sorel boots? :)

[sic t 2]

49 minutes ago, Neil Gendzwill said:

That's patently ridiculous.  How about I give you an 8' long 2X6 set up +90/-90 duck with one old Sorel and a Burton Furnace, but you have to wear them on the wrong feet?

As long as the 2x6 is cheap pine, the pow is deep enough, I'm allowed my own setback, and I can choose a really loose boot size.... I could definitely carve that ! :).   

[Neil Gendzwill]

11 minutes ago, sic t 2 said:

As long as the 2x6 is cheap pine, the pow is deep enough, I'm allowed my own setback, and I can choose a really loose boot size.... I could definitely carve that ! :).   

Now you are putting restrictions on it, he said any equipment. But if you can truly master the 2x6, you are ready for the noboard experience using a Krazy Karpet and flip-flops. 

[steven]

mig- are you saying you would put the plastic tongues between the liner and shell of your soft boot?

I like this idea.

anyone know of an available plastic tongue one could use with a malamute?

[slopestar]

1 hour ago, steven said:

mig- are you saying you would put the plastic tongues between the liner and shell of your soft boot?

I like this idea.

anyone know of an available plastic tongue one could use with a malamute?

I have friends that cut down 5 gallon buckets and put between the boot and liner to stiffen the cuff. And there is always Mr Knapton and the the 3 strap/Folgers/Lazy-boy high back. 

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

Steven, a few years back the Burton Ruler (edit; Mig noted the "Driver" boot) came with a plastic tongue that fit in a sleeve on the outside of the shell's tongue. It was very thin, kinda soft, but increased the stiffness a good bit. I would think they could be found, and then perhaps stitched or riveted into your boot's outer tongue.

The Elfgen tongue was really cool, because you could set it's center over the instep, and it usually took the place of the straps other bindings used. The instep strap of the binding didn't actually connect to the tongue (so, in that, it was better than the Kelly tongue kit), but connected at the toe strap. Later on, I think '91-'92, Elfgen offered the tongues with thin web straps that let you keep them secured to the outside of your boot, thus, suddenly, Sims bindings could be used for carving (which, broke my Sims highbacks, then my Kempers, then two Burton Flex, where-upon I went back to using the tongues only on Elfgen bindings)!  Two seasons back, I had the epiphany that my T-9 bindings could 'center' the straps with their two-ratchet-per-strap system, which was very similar to old Gnu bindings. Thus, I've run the Elfgen tongues in my T-9's with excellent results, except that the tongues are now really old, and I split apart 3 tongues. So, I'm just waiting on when someone in the industry wants to put out either a 'kit', or actually put this out there in a new binding. More than likely, though, someone will simply read this and take the idea without giving any due. By now, I ought to be used to it...

 

Edited December 17, 2016 by Eric Brammer aka PSR

[Corey]

A Raichle/Deeluxe SB tongue fit my old Salomon boots with only a minor trim near the toe. I put them on top of the tongue but under the laces. 

Granted, these are probably 15- year old boots. 

[Mig]

16 hours ago, steven said:

mig- are you saying you would put the plastic tongues between the liner and shell of your soft boot?

No, they were too bulky to fit between my liners and shell. And lacked comfort for me to be used that close to my feet. I would just lay them on top of my boots and close the anklestraps over. During the following years, I did experiment with different ski boot plastic tongues placed between the laces and the softboots tongues without ever finding the perfect feeling and response. All of this was solved for me when Burton came out with the Driver X. I have been using these ever since. Some years were much better then others. My favorites have been the 2008 and 2014. I have not tried any of the newer ones after the 2014, though. I dump the stock liner and use a powerwrap style moldable liner with a custom powerstrap.

[MUD]

I have said this before, but I am a softbooter who rides hardboots sometimes.

Softboot angles 23/7, or so.

Hardboot angles 53/50, or so.

For those thinking of a wider softboot board. I have sz 12 feet and ride a 27 wide freeride board. As the boards get wider, they get to be harder to ride in crud, they get on top of it (sometimes that's ok), instead of blasting through.

Thanks for the flashbacks, sometimes I forget how far we have come. By contrast, I rode Sims bindings then Burton freestyles with the really soft Burton freestyle boots. I HATED the Elfgen/Gnu bindings. 

[Neil Gendzwill]

7 minutes ago, MUD said:

I rode Sims bindings

Those old Sims bindings were what pushed me into hard boots.