Gremlin Posted February 25, 2018 Report Share Posted February 25, 2018 Interested in Catek OS 1 or 2. (What are the major differences?) Long plate. Standard Bails. Located in conus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted February 25, 2018 Report Share Posted February 25, 2018 OS 2 has more parts, a smaller baseplate/footprint, and is more flexible. You can use an OS2 upper on an OS1 base,but not the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted February 25, 2018 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2018 More flexible how/where? Smaller footprint sounds good, minimization of the dead spot they'll create in the flex. I'm not pleased with the amount of flex in my F2 race titaniums. Nor the options available for lift and canting. I like the seeming versatility of the cateks in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted February 25, 2018 Report Share Posted February 25, 2018 The parts on the OS2 are thinner than the same parts on the OS1, plus an extra slice in the stack, so when you bolt them all together, you get more 'give'. Smaller footprint isn't so good when you have a significant lever above the anchor point, and the apparent large footprint 'dead spot' is a handy excuse for iffy technique. If your goal is finite determination of cant and lift, without those variables being colored by binding flex, go for the OS1, or the predecessor WC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted February 26, 2018 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2018 Gotcha. That's the reason I'm dissatisfied with the F2s. The height requirement in the front toe with UPZs gives it a lot of squish. Makes sense. Indeed it is. Thanks for the help. Can I edit the post title here, or do I need to repost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveo Posted February 28, 2018 Report Share Posted February 28, 2018 On Mon Feb 26 2018 at 2:44 PM, Gremlin said: Gotcha. That's the reason I'm dissatisfied with the F2s. The height requirement in the front toe with UPZs gives it a lot of squish. Makes sense. Indeed it is. Thanks for the help. Can I edit the post title here, or do I need to repost? See you space cowboy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davekempmeister Posted February 28, 2018 Report Share Posted February 28, 2018 (edited) Gremlin, if it is flex that you dislike or want to lessen, i think the step-in version of the OS1 (w/intec) is way more rigid a transfer than OS1 outfitted with the Standards. just my .02 Cents. i have ridden both versions of OS1 and some borrowed OS2s and i prefer the OS1 with step-ins. I am well over 6 ft, about 220 lbs with gear and my boot size is 31.5. i like the larger diameter disc - dead zone and all. OS2 smaller diameter disc "feels" great but also "felt" to me like it'd yank the inserts out of some boards. the step-ins have been very reliable but the standard bails have bent and released, on occasion. my experience anyway. Edited February 28, 2018 by davekempmeister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 2, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2018 I'm not interested in intec heels. My understanding is that the increased stiffness is largely due to the heel being solid, rather than compressible at all. The increased heel height would force me to run an even more extreme lift under my front toe. I also dislike introducing more complexity and expense into a system without good cause. Instead I'll eventually buy or make harder sole blocks if I find the need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted March 2, 2018 Report Share Posted March 2, 2018 ^What boots are you in at present? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 2, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2018 299mm RC11s. I'm running a large lift block and two opposed cants under my front toe currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted March 3, 2018 Report Share Posted March 3, 2018 Didn't think swapping the original heel out for an Intec mechanism changed the heel height, but then I've been wrong before. Intecs are stiffer partly because the retention mechanism is more positive, and independent of bail tension/deformation. This, directly at the base of the 'lever'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 3, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2018 To be fair, I've never handled a set. This is basesd on old forum posts I found, which eveyone knows are 100% correct. Why more positive? I'd imagine the pins would need some small amount of slop in order to allow for reliable engagement. Is it due to to the greater contact of the front bail and a wider attachment point? The increased bail deflection makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beckmann AG Posted March 3, 2018 Report Share Posted March 3, 2018 150%. Always. If you look at the heel receiver on the binding, you'll notice the front edges of the wings are angled. There are ramped plastic tabs (stainless pins on the Fintec) on the sides of the boot heel section that wedge against the leading edge of these wings as the rider pushes the boot down and against the resistance from the toe bail. If adjusted properly, when the heel receiver and mating tabs/pins/toe bail are properly engaged, the larger retention pins will spring forth from the boot heel into the side holes in the receiver, preventing the boot heel from lifting out of mesh. Stock boot toe/heel pads are often rubber, or a softer plastic than the boot shell proper. These can provide significant 'give' in a bail closure system, so the Intec closure is generally preferred if extra flex and wobble isn't your thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted March 3, 2018 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2018 Ah, I see. Clever. Yes, I've been planning to replace mine since coming across that in your content. However given the cost or time and effort involved, fintecs are sounding much more enticing after that clarification on function. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teach Posted March 3, 2018 Report Share Posted March 3, 2018 I have some standard, long plate WC and possibly OS1. I'll dig them out and get some photos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurch Posted April 6, 2018 Report Share Posted April 6, 2018 Still looking @Gremlin? If so, there is a clean looking set on flea bay: https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/CATEK-Olympic-Series-OS-Plate-Bindings-Alpine-Snowboard-Red-Hard-Boot-Binding-2/173254135665?hash=item2856c04f71:g:l-4AAOSwh41axViR (not mine) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted April 13, 2018 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2018 Thanks Lurch. However, Wolf was kind enough to sell me a pair of WCs. Edited title to reflect. 1 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.