60/55 vs 55/50?

[Jack M]

12 minutes ago, BlueB said:

Yes, but then, as you mentioned, there's also the reverse bias... 

Ok, so call that reverse bias.

Whatever, I think it's all pretty silly.  I used to do it, thinking I was doing something meaningful and techy, but in reality it didn't improve the ride.

[BlueB]

3 minutes ago, Jack Michaud said:

Ok, so call that reverse bias.

Whatever, I think it's all pretty silly.  I used to do it, thinking I was doing something meaningful and techy, but in reality it didn't improve the ride.

[trolling] We could, but then the people who run the "reverse bias" as their default, would tend to call it just "bias" and would think of "reverse bias" as something similar to our g-spot bias... [/trolling] ;) 

I agree, it's mostly silly. But then, I know there is a point where the toe side turn initiation starts to suffer if one had a lot of heel bias in front. 
It actually might be that people use a lot of bias to compensate for otherwise incorrect binding toe/heel lift and cant? Like, the knee gets in an incorrect position, then try to correct it by offsetting the binding? 

Anyways, nowadays, I try to run boots centered across the board. I don't care if my standard bails stick out a bit. 

[Jack M]

Bottom line, stop calling it Gilmour bias.  As much as I like the guy, he didn't invent it.

[pokkis]

I buy board with width to fit my preferred angles.

I used bias when i used boards wider than i needed. Now with proper width board i dlont see how i could use it any more without over and under hung. 

[BlueB]

6 minutes ago, pokkis said:

I buy board with width to fit my preferred angles. 

This! ^ 

[Erik J]

I've been enjoying going back to steeper angles recently. I'm forced to on an 18 waist board. I feel like I'm really charging forward being steeper.

 

 

[big mario]

7 hours ago, Jack Michaud said:

Now I just say screw it and leave my boots centered over the bindings. 

I Likey. Lots.

Barry, here is a challenge:

center your bindings and let all of your boards dictate your stance angles. For example, I run about 45/38 on my tanker wide (25.6 waist)  all the way up 70/63 on my 18cm waisted boards. 

No tinkering, just ride and let us know how it works.

Mario

[barryj]

Hey Big M                   

 Interesting challenge but  I'm only going to change one thing at a time.                                                                                                                                                          I have reset my bindings to 50/45 and here's what 45 looks like on the rear foot with ~bias.                                                                             That's too much overhang to me.....especially for EC -     

What about 50/48??  48 would put it right up to the edge.   52/48??

 

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by barryj

[Corey]

Here's a good way to pick angles: 

Loosen the three screws that hold the TD3 baseplate on the cant ring. Try to have them just tight enough that the binding angle can be turned by two hands, but not so loose that it's easily knocked out of alignment. 

Then clip in the rear boot and play with the angle until it looks like Jack's picture on the previous page, or passes the Fuego/Cheerios test. If you can, use an L-shaped hex key to lock one or more of the loose screws. Then carefully remove the boot and read the binding angle. 

Most people then set the front a little higher angle than the rear. 

Guessing angles and trying them will drive you nuts. This is way simpler. This is why people end up with 53-degree (or whatever) angles instead of multiples of 5.  

When you start feeling fancier, you'll notice that the boot doesn't usually sit flush to both edges. Then you can shift toe/heel blocks along the baseplate to get each boot centered. 

[barryj]

Hey Corey                 

Well when I try your example/Fuego method it pushes my rear boot angle up to 60!  .......and remember I was at 55/50 before all this madness started! 

 If I stick with this 60 for no overhang then Ill be 65/60      Whats my priority?  no overhang or lower angles?? 

[Carvin' Marvin]

Is your rear binding still biased to the toe edge? Did you have overhang at 55/50? When you did the Fuego did you adjust your boot so that the heel of the REAR boot is near the edge or is there a lot of underhang? 

 I usually tolerate about ~1cm of toe overhang on my rear boot and unless you are trying to EC on firm snow/ice then it shouldn't cause much of an issue. 

[barryj]

Hey Carvin     Yep I'm still ~biased  on both boots.......  and with the Fuego I adjusted the boot so that the toe of the rear boot was right to the edge, which equaled 60 degrees

I was supposed to adjust the heel of the rear boot to the edge?   Not the toe?

At the original 55/50 I had little over 1 cm of overhang

[Lurch]

14 hours ago, lonbordin said:

1) Use the Fuego box method for your rear binding.

Can we stop calling it that ?! Boxed Tempranillo varies so much with 'vintage' it can hardly be an accurate gauge of your *Gilmour bias :)

*Apologies to Mr Michaud

[BlueB]

Barry, you are overcomplicating this... How about this: 

Center the boots on the bindings. 

Mount to your desired stance width. 

Align the heal of the rear boot to the edge for no, or very little, overhang. That would naturally give you a tiny bit of overhang by the toes, due to the geometry of the board. There's your bias. 

Then set the front binding few degrees higher, whatever your desired splay was. You are not very likely to have any overhang, but probably will have some natural offset towards the heel (geometry again). 

Good to go. 

 

The quest wasn't for higher or lower, or any specific angles, but to get as close to the edge of the board without lots of overhang. The angles will not be the same on your Swoard EC as on your pow Moss and they are not even supposed to be... 

[AcousticBoarder]

Also keep in mind that your canting may need to change as you adjust your binding angle. Not doing so can lead to that knee pain you speak of... 

[Jack M]

7 hours ago, barryj said:

Hey Corey                 

Well when I try your example/Fuego method it pushes my rear boot angle up to 60!  .......and remember I was at 55/50 before all this madness started! 

 If I stick with this 60 for no overhang then Ill be 65/60      Whats my priority?  no overhang or lower angles?? 

Fuego method (lol) is only necessary if you're really trying to carve at 100%.  We don't know your priorities. ;-)

 

8 hours ago, Corey said:

When you start feeling fancier, you'll notice that the boot doesn't usually sit flush to both edges. Then you can shift toe/heel blocks along the baseplate to get each boot centered. 

That's because of the flare of the sidecut.  The board is wider under your rear foot heel and front foot toe.  If your rear heel or front toe appears to have underhang, it doesn't necessarily mean the boot's not centered.

[Zone]

Looks like he's setting this up on a Swoard Gen 4

[Corey]

1 hour ago, Jack Michaud said:

That's because of the flare of the sidecut.  The board is wider under your rear foot heel and front foot toe.  If your rear heel or front toe appears to have underhang, it doesn't necessarily mean the boot's not centered.

Right, I meant centered as in both toes and heels were right over their respective edges. 

I have my bindings set up assymetrically to achieve this, with the rear toe/heel blocks offset to the heel side compared to the front binding. 

[barryj]

I'm going to stick with the  ~ bias (I know that works) and go back to 55/50 (I know that works) and then micro adjust for minimal overhang.   

Blue B changing everything above is changing too many (don't know if it works) variables all at once for me............. 

 

Sculler......sorry for jacking your thread.       I'm Out!

Edited February 2, 2018 by barryj

[bigwavedave]

A little overhang is likely insignificant on typically soft snow in western US, but I can't imagine why one would put any overhang on a board meant for EC. On hard snow any overhang can cause boot-out when you get the board up on edge.

Cory's description is pretty much how my bindings & boots get set up. Toe and heel blocks moved to get toe/heel of boot over the edges, not centering boots over the bindings. In theory the binding bias thing makes sense, but I couldn't tell the difference, and prefer to have maximum and even edge pressure (toe to heel) without boot-out.

One way I test for edge to edge balance at home is when I think I've got it where I want it, I mount one boot at a time and feel the amount of leverage it takes by hand to tip the the board side to side. Not a scientific measurement, but I can feel when it's harder one way than the other. Then I try it with both feet in boots (carpet carving) tipping the board side to side and see if it feels balanced.

Then go ride. You can tell a lot by analyzing your tracks on a day with firm groom and it will be obvious if your boot/bindings are plowing through the snow. You should have nice thin lines on both heel and toe side turns. It's nice if you can carve under a chair where you can have a view of several turns from above for comparison.

 

Edited February 3, 2018 by bigwavedave

[pokkis]

On hard surface i prefer no overhang, and on softish slope i prefer little underhang, to keep better speed and avoid boot slide.

[Jack M]

11 hours ago, Corey said:

Right, I meant centered as in both toes and heels were right over their respective edges. 

That’s not centered though...

[lonbordin]

23 hours ago, barryj said:

Interesting challenge but  I'm only going to change one thing at a time. 

@barryj  We're not giving up on you that easily. 

I'm trying (and most of the other folks who have offered guidance) are trying to get you to an established baseline. 

Think of binding setup as a system, so when you make a change you will be changing more than one thing at a time it is impossible not to...  

Example: If you change your front binding angle you will be moving your knee in relation to the center of your board so you will need to adjust lift to get the knee centered again. 

Most of the longtime riders have a few markers they want to hit no matter the angles. Front knee position, boot centered, boot even with board edges, etc.

Mahalo.

[digger jr]

11 hours ago, pokkis said:

On hard surface i prefer no overhang, and on softish slope i prefer little underhang, to keep better speed and avoid boot slide.

Yes I have 3/8 to 1/2” underhang on front heel for soft snow board. Boot slide out sucks.

[Eric Brammer aka PSR]

23 hours ago, barryj said:

If I stick with this 60 for no overhang then Ill be 65/60      Whats my priority?  no overhang or lower angles?? 

Well, how hard IS Your Snow, anyhow? Ours, here, in New England, can be like the cubes in your freezer...

If you're Not on Boilerplate, lower angles won't 'nip' you until you're REALLY Deep into a turn.

And, not to put ya on the spot, but, how Low do You Get, usually? I've worn out boots at the heel where-in the Boot has rubbed on the snow; I also have snapped toe bails. That's Layin' it over. 

Lastly, the BOARD WIDTH should Dictate the stance options, not the other way around. The lesser angles do this; they Blend the Best of Fore-Aft moves with refined Toe-Heel control movements. Higher angles limit the 'soft touch' of the natural balance/pressure moves that we use when walking/running, of Toe-To-Heel motion. Less than 20* at the bindings takes Away from fore-aft pressure control, but then increases the dexterity of natural balance motions, thus, meaning that the control is suited better to low-speed motion. The forces built up along a spring-board-under-your-feet do require some fore-aft control. Hardboots, high angles, do well in dealing with the motions the whole-of-the-body needs to make to keep atop said Board. The TRICK HERE, is to find that POINT OF BALANCE that lets YOU control not just 'toe/heel' but also 'fore/aft' motions. Hence, 45* is a good starting point, in Hardshells. If Soft-boot bindings were made a bit differently, they could also do this, but, currently, 40* is as far as any current SB binding supports.