lonbordin Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Corey said: @Beckmann AG, I now realize the above could be taken as being disparaging - not my intent! I legitimately laughed at the comment that you'd also have spare change to make a phone call for help. Sorry for not being clear. It's too bad phone booths no longer exist. [plot hole] Edited January 24, 2018 by lonbordin don't worry I carry a smartphone like everyone else... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 24, 2018 Report Share Posted January 24, 2018 1 hour ago, Beckmann AG said: Try a regular clamp on the front foot. SW will soak up some ankle movement, and that might lead to 'The Troubles'. ... ... finer inputs suggest a lack of goo, especially at the front end. What's being referred to here? I couldn't see what was going on in that picture? Is it elastomer under the bindings, or such that's being referred to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 6 hours ago, jim_s said: What's being referred to here? Jim, The board on the left has Sidewinder binders. In the event you're not familiar, the toe and heel blocks will rotate or 'flop' a few degrees by way of a central pivot. The action is damped by elastomer pads sandwiched between the visible red top plates, and the lower base section. The travel, if you will, is a variation on the flex provided/allowed by the popular F2 clampers. Sort of like the old Emery Surf, but much more refined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, lonbordin said: It's too bad phone booths no longer exist. Say what now? Are we all supposed to carry walkie talkies, or wear two-way wrist TV's? Edited January 25, 2018 by Beckmann AG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 8 hours ago, Corey said: @Beckmann AG, I now realize the above could be taken as being disparaging - not my intent! I legitimately laughed at the comment that you'd also have spare change to make a phone call for help. Sorry for not being clear. No worries. It's not like you're the first person to disagree with me. --- This 10 hours ago, Corey said: I'd just ride it as is. It's not like it's a different sport. It's just more sensitive to edge angle. however, is just a bit too facile, and largely ignores the need to modify ones approach when using a different vehicle to negotiate a different type of track. As you pointed out, more or less, in your next post. The difference, I suppose, is that I consider the mechanical parts as well as driver conduct when modifying 'approach'. Each vehicle will use different suspension and steering geometry to meet a desired end within the limitations of the power train and chassis. If the mechanisms can be readily tuned to reduce the need for driver adaptation, it would seem foolish to do otherwise. If the 'give' in the binding requires the rider to tilt the board with knee and hip, rather than foot/ankle, the rider will always be reacting to the board, rather than acting upon it. I don't particularly care what people use for bindings, but since the topic at hand is reaction time of a slalom board, and the difficulty involved in sorting it, it seemed relevant to point out a detail affecting rider input. Edited January 25, 2018 by Beckmann AG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 45 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said: Jim, The board on the left has Sidewinder binders. In the event you're not familiar, the toe and heel blocks will rotate or 'flop' a few degrees by way of a central pivot. The action is damped by elastomer pads sandwiched between the visible red top plates, and the lower base section. The travel, if you will, is a variation on the flex provided/allowed by the popular F2 clampers. Sort of like the old Emery Surf, but much more refined. Wow, I didn't know such a thing even existed. My first thought would be, "OMG, why would you ever do that?" :-) I guess I could see where a very nuanced rider could take advantage of such a fine-tuning feature, though. Does it pivot around a vertical axis (ie, effectively changing the binding angle) , or does it pivot around a longitudinal axis of the length of the binding (ie, effectively changing the cant of the binding)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 18 minutes ago, jim_s said: My first thought would be, "OMG, why would you ever do that?" Because everyone that races uses more flexible plastic bindings, claiming the Bomber product is too stiff (as it may well be for those involved). Many enthusiasts follow the logic that what's good for the racers is good for the freecarver. So the Sidewinder is/was an attempt to provide 'tunable' flex to those preferring a more robust platform. The pivot is longitudinal, btw. And binding flex isn't a fine tuning feature. It somewhat obviates fine tuning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, jim_s said: Wow, I didn't know such a thing even existed. My first thought would be, "OMG, why would you ever do that?" :-) I guess I could see where a very nuanced rider could take advantage of such a fine-tuning feature, though. Does it pivot around a vertical axis (ie, effectively changing the binding angle) , or does it pivot around a longitudinal axis of the length of the binding (ie, effectively changing the cant of the binding)? Here's a video of a Sidewinder owner changing out the pads which highlights how the bindings flex and how they work. I use "blue" pads that don't deflect all that much under typical use. @Beckmann AG is aware I'm not "typically" sized so that I can introduce flex into the longitudinal (what happened to latitudinal?) axis of the binding. @Corey and @Beckmann AG are discussing the nuances that this flex introduces to the rider, @lonbordin, me. (Sidenote: F2 Carve RS bindings also flex in this axis due to their "soft" baseplate) My riding is admittedly not as nuanced as @Beckmann AG nor is it as pretty as @Corey. I'd be happy to race them through the gates, though. I'm not certain that the binding difference will really impact my ability to ride this horse... that said I'm donating my body to the cause. Edited January 25, 2018 by lonbordin Dammit.... EB was faster in the keyboard gates... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 ^If you were a bag of chips, you'd be what, 'party size'? -- Have you ever tried using a blue medial, yellow lateral bumper on the rear binding? 10 minutes ago, lonbordin said: I'd be happy to race them through the gates, though. Better find that phone booth. You'll want your cape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 Ah, interesting! Being a life-long Burton Raceplate rider, I guess I've probably always had a little bit of that going on. I've just recently moved to F2 Titanium Race bindings, but haven't ridden them yet (sitting out from a concussion, at present), but I've read that they're generally considered a little bit stiffer than the Burton Raceplate. Will be interested to see how they compare, when I get back out on the slopes again next week! Thanks for the explanation and video - the video really cleared things up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said: ^If you were a bag of chips, you'd be what, 'party size'? -- Have you ever tried using a blue medial, yellow lateral bumper on the rear binding? Better find that phone booth. You'll want your cape. Party sized, check. Never mixed and matched e-pads, check. (Don't own yellows) Capes will slow me down... you lookin' for a handicap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 18 minutes ago, lonbordin said: you lookin' for a handicap? If I wanted a handicap, I'd roto-brush with a frozen weasel.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryj Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 (edited) 2014 Olympic Silver Medalist Nevin Galmarini Is Tha Man and Boils Slalom Down to the Essentials in this Video! AND If you don't remember in the Sochi Olympics Quarter Finals he got thrown out of his line and should have crashed but instead of giving up he rode SWITCH! (on a Slalom Board! at Mach I !!) through the next gate, Recovered and still Won! That's SO Badd Ass!! He's is so smoove! His words and these images make a lot of sense to me. FYI at .10 you can see he's riding a modified Bomber BTS! Edited January 25, 2018 by barryj 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 14 hours ago, jim_s said: Ah, interesting! Being a life-long Burton Raceplate rider, I guess I've probably always had a little bit of that going on. I've just recently moved to F2 Titanium Race bindings, but haven't ridden them yet (sitting out from a concussion, at present), but I've read that they're generally considered a little bit stiffer than the Burton Raceplate. Will be interested to see how they compare, when I get back out on the slopes again next week! Thanks for the explanation and video - the video really cleared things up! After years of riding Bombers I tried a board with Burton Race Plates on it. Felt like rubber bands holding my feet to the board. Very unnerving. Last year I tried a pair of F2 bindings for the first time. I sized them the way I would size any toe-clip binding - such that it takes significant effort to close and open them. I felt no difference between them and Bombers while riding. This makes me think two things - 1, F2s are a shit-ton stiffer than Burtons, 2, I don't know why racers think F2s are softer and more appropriate than Bombers. Some people size toe-clip bindings such that they can be closed and opened with only one or two fingers. Maybe this is what racers do? I dunno. Personally I think this is inviting disaster, because I've had loose bindings pop open before. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corey Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 12 hours ago, Beckmann AG said: This however, is just a bit too facile, and largely ignores the need to modify ones approach when using a different vehicle to negotiate a different type of track. As you pointed out, more or less, in your next post. The difference, I suppose, is that I consider the mechanical parts as well as driver conduct when modifying 'approach'. Each vehicle will use different suspension and steering geometry to meet a desired end within the limitations of the power train and chassis. If the mechanisms can be readily tuned to reduce the need for driver adaptation, it would seem foolish to do otherwise. I think we could have an interesting discussion when we finally meet. :) My approach is tempered by my automotive racing experience. All too often, people spend an inordinate amount of time fine-tuning their cars to compensate for their own deficiencies/habits. If they tend to make the car understeer through their driving habits, they throw all kinds of parts at the car to make it oversteer more. But they would have been better off just adapting their style to meet a setup that's closer to 'normal'. Then they could hop in any other car and be similarly quick. At the top level, there are definitely two styles of drivers: Those that deal with what they have and those that micro-adjust things to suit their rigid style. Both work, though the former are generally consistently quicker over a wide range of conditions. Those that can't adapt struggle if something is slightly wrong; be it the car, the conditions, or their mood. But if everything is right, they can be very quick. I tried the micro-adjusting route, but it didn't mesh with my learning style. I carry this same thought process over to snowboarding and many other activities. Try the simplest thing (what you already have) first. After you adapt a bit, look deeper and see if a change would help you reach your goals. My point is that people should try both approaches and see if they prefer one over the other. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 hours ago, Jack Michaud said: After years of riding Bombers I tried a board with Burton Race Plates on it. Felt like rubber bands holding my feet to the board. Very unnerving. Last year I tried a pair of F2 bindings for the first time. I sized them the way I would size any toe-clip binding - such that it takes significant effort to close and open them. I felt no difference between them and Bombers while riding. This makes me think two things - 1, they are a shit-ton stiffer than Burtons, 2, I don't know why racers think they're softer and more appropriate than Bombers. Some people size F2s such that they can be closed and opened with only one or two fingers. Maybe this is what racers do? I dunno. Personally I think this is inviting disaster, because I've had loose bindings pop open before. I saw a pair of Bombers on a board one time - didn't get to try to clip into them or such. They were an engineering marvel, but looked gawdawful heavy and bulky, and seemed way taller than what I was used to. Don't get me wrong, I believe it when everyone says they're the top of the line in bindings, they were just a radical departure from what I was used to - the very minimalistic Burton Raceplates, with my front plate sitting flat on the board, and the rear with some heel lift and cant, but still pretty close to the board. The F2's are a little taller than the Raceplates, but are definitely closer to what I'm used to, profile-wise, than I remember the Bombers being. Sounds like it might be a good middle-ground for me. (As a 135 pounder, I tend to put a bit less stress on things than all you 'real men', so if you say the F2s are plenty stiff, I'm guessing they'll be more than stiff enough for my scrawny self!. :-) I'm definitely curous to feel the difference between the Burtons and the F2s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVR Posted January 25, 2018 Report Share Posted January 25, 2018 I am no Jack Michaud, but I can tell you, I agree with him on the loose binding bit. I have lost my front foot before and now I have my bindings extremely tight. I have burton bindings as well, and I keep them on my powder board for that rare day in NE when we actually get any snow. My TDs are much stiffer, and I feel much more secure with those in my Alpine board. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Brammer aka PSR Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 (edited) I saw a pair of Bombers on a board one time - didn't get to try to clip into them or such. They were an engineering marvel, but looked gawdawful heavy and bulky, and seemed way taller than what I was used to. Don't get me wrong, I believe it when everyone says they're the top of the line in bindings, they were just a radical departure from what I was used to - the very minimalistic Burton Raceplates, with my front plate sitting flat on the board, and the rear with some heel lift and cant, but still pretty close to the board. The above is cut & paste; Below is my response. OK, so what you're dealing with is the 'toe clamp compression', where your boot gets 'CLAMPED' in place, at the toe. On a Bomber, at your weight, you WON'T MOVE Laterally at All! You're Now Stuck In Your BOOT {Hey, YOU picked a Hardshell, don't even Bug ME about That!}, and that means, YOU NEED MORE FLEX, Freedom, and less Compression. Your choice, your boots. pick how they CLAMP DOWN carefully. Sidewinders. I tried to make then 'tunable', but, they HOLD, and FLEX. Otherwise, CATEKS OS-2's, 4-u. Edited January 26, 2018 by Eric Brammer aka PSR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 31 minutes ago, Eric Brammer aka PSR said: OK, so what you're dealing with is the 'toe clamp compression', where your boot gets 'CLAMPED' in place, at the toe. On a Bomber, at your weight, you WON'T MOVE Laterally at All! You're Now Stuck In Your BOOT {Hey, YOU picked a Hardshell, don't even Bug ME about That!}, and that means, YOU NEED MORE FLEX, Freedom, and less Compression. Your choice, your boots. pick how they CLAMP DOWN carefully. Sidewinders. I tried to make then 'tunable', but, they HOLD, and FLEX. Otherwise, CATEKS OS-2's, 4-u. I think I got your gist, but that was a bit more stream-of-consciousness than my concussion-addled mind can parse right now. <:-) So, I'm on RC10 boots - snugged down, but not absurdly so - I feel like I've got good flex in the boots, themselves, but can also pressure the cuffs well. Are you thinking that I might ultimately find the F2 Titanium bindings (*not* Intec, BTW) too stiff? Truth is, I have no compelling reason to abandon the Raceplates, other than I've been wanting to move away from the Unicant that I have under the rear - it takes up a fair stretch of longitudinal real estate on the board, and at least on my old SL board, I've seen a few mid-carve pictures of me where I could see the bend in the board change abruptly at the rear binding - my suspicion being that the big'ole Unicant was adversely affecting the board's flex. I haven't seen any pics of me on the MK yet, but I'd expect it to be much the same in that regard. LoL, on the hard shell choice - I tried softboots once (granted, back in the late-80's/early-90's timeframe) - after 3 days of absolute brutalization (first time on a snowboard, bindings that were basically 2 straps across my feet, made of thorns, I think..., in something like a soft snow boot...), I swore I'd never ride a board again. Once finding hard boots, I never skied again. (Not entirely true, I did ski again for a few runs one day, and quickly concluded that even my race skis had nothing on a hardboot board... :-) SO, no complaints or recriminations on the hardboots - I'm a lifer now, and happy about it!! :-) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Brammer aka PSR Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 So, with a 'unicant' can your posture be found in another 'fixed cant set-up? If not, hunt for CATEKS. Or, find a way to make the angles of lift/cant fit something already out there! Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 12 hours ago, Corey said: All too often, people spend an inordinate amount of time fine-tuning their cars to compensate for their own deficiencies/habits. If they tend to make the car understeer through their driving habits, they throw all kinds of parts at the car to make it oversteer more. But they would have been better off just adapting their style to meet a setup that's closer to 'normal'. Then they could hop in any other car and be similarly quick. At the top level, there are definitely two styles of drivers: Those that deal with what they have and those that micro-adjust things to suit their rigid style. Both work, though the former are generally consistently quicker over a wide range of conditions. Those that can't adapt struggle if something is slightly wrong; be it the car, the conditions, or their mood. But if everything is right, they can be very quick. I tried the micro-adjusting route, but it didn't mesh with my learning style. I carry this same thought process over to snowboarding and many other activities. Try the simplest thing (what you already have) first. After you adapt a bit, look deeper and see if a change would help you reach your goals. My point is that people should try both approaches and see if they prefer one over the other. I see your point, and agree to the extent that, if a particular 'vehicle' has been properly baselined, there's a lot the pilot can do without needless fiddling. That's why I asked a few weeks back if you'd ever done your own front end alignments, to see what happens when you're off one way or the other by fractions of a degree. (There are some interesting analogs between automotive steering geometry, and the design characteristics of skis/snowboards.) I don't think you'd send someone out on the track with loose steering gear, or under-inflated/mismatched tires. Speaking of which, I've had a lot of snow tires over the years, most of them of reputable quality. All of which have been used on successive models of the same car, all of those cars properly aligned. The set I bought last year was the model successor to the previous set, and yet there's a world of difference in how the car handles. The tread pattern is only slightly different, the stud pattern as well, but there's something there that makes me want to drive in the snow. On the visceral level. I could previously 'adapt' to poor road conditions, but now I don't have to. Or at least not at all in the same way. Point being, there's a time for adaptation, and there's a time to swap out serviceable components for exceptional components. Given the option, I don't see any point in knowingly leaving a driver (or rider)regardless of ability, in a disadvantaged position with regard to handling, unless the intent is to experience and overcome adversity. Riding well on a small sidecut board is more about nuance than power. The Sidewinder lends itself to, and in fact encourages using larger body movements to tilt the board. This approach will not lead to an optimal outcome*, therefore, there's no reason to encourage it. That said, I have no doubt that Lonboardin will have a grand old time regardless of what he's sliding on, so long as he's sliding. I also know that he's willing to think about 'unfamiliar' things for awhile, rather than simply rejecting them. *Referring to freeride slalom turns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 48 minutes ago, jim_s said: my suspicion being that the big'ole Unicant was adversely affecting the board's flex. Possible, but not likely. 11 hours ago, jim_s said: they were just a radical departure from what I was used to - the very minimalistic Burton Raceplates, with my front plate sitting flat on the board, and the rear with some heel lift and cant, but still pretty close to the board. There was a time, probably in the late 70's, where ski racers shaved the soles of their boots in order to get closer to the snow. Now they have restrictions on total stack height, or the distance between the sole of the ski, and the sole of the foot. Point being, there's much to be gained with a little height. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonbordin Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said: I also know that he's willing to think about 'unfamiliar' things for awhile, rather than simply rejecting them. @Beckmann AG is a swell fellow. My zest for this SL experience will have to continue to wait as temps haven't been below freezing for days and aren't forcast to be below freezing for days... Sigh. I remain committed to open mined SL riding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_s Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 50 minutes ago, Eric Brammer aka PSR said: So, with a 'unicant' can your posture be found in another 'fixed cant set-up? If not, hunt for CATEKS. Or, find a way to make the angles of lift/cant fit something already out there! Good luck! LoL - I'm on it! 3D Printed Cant-o-Matic - specify the boot sole length, the desired lift angle, cant angle and/or height boost (ie, toe and heel both raised the same amount vertically), and through the magic of parametric modeling, the 3D printer spits them out at will. Shown is a rendering of the model, and a printed toe piece (white - this one at 4 deg lift, 2 deg cant, 0.5mm boost) next to an original F2 cant shim (black). (Heel piece is printing as we speak.) They can be parameterized for a combination of lift and/or cant, and w/ or w/o height boost. I need to do a little more work on the model before they'll support toe lift, but that'll be an overall minor tweak. The latest tweak was getting the grooves and ridges to fit precisely, which they now do. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carvin' Marvin Posted January 26, 2018 Report Share Posted January 26, 2018 Back to the original question- Like this- WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSHHHHHHHHHHHHHH WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHH WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE SNIP SNAP SNIP SNAP WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHH Goes home after 2 hours to rest legs. 2 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.