What bindings do you use?

[David Kirk]

As a follow up to the previous "binding set up" poll I hope you don't mind another question........I'm wondering what brand/model bindings do you use on your carving/race boards? If you use different bindings on different boards you should be able to tick more than one box to show your choices. I thank you for your feedback and time.

dave

[Corey]

Oops, I screwed up my vote.  Didn't notice Sidewinders had its own category separate from TD3s.  

[Pokolikrat]

Rather surprising to me. No wonder Fin gave up when more than half of the people on the Bomber was on different binding. I got F2 first time this winter with a board. Mixed feelings my next set will be regular TD3. I am using TD3 on front and Sidewinder on back.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Not sure if Fin gave up because of that or because he was just tired of it and wanted to move on to different challenges.  I got the impression it was the latter.

[Lurch]

ASB has almost 6500 members. If we assume 5000 have at least one set of alpine binding, from the poll numbers that is still ~ 2500 sets of TDs, plus the various related items like cant rings etc. Sure it's a niche market, but not insignificant. 

[Neil Gendzwill]

From my experience running forums, most of those 6500 members will be bots.

[Lurch]

Maybe so Neil, but I have multiple sets as I'd think most not-bot carvers do.

[scottishsurfer]

An old set of Santa cruz bindings.......

[cbrkid1981]

I have 2 pairs of head bindings, but I don't really know too much about them. 

[David Kirk]

I wasn't sure what to expect but seeing that F2's are the most popular brand did surprise me. This poll combined with the 'set up' poll is even more interesting. 

I thank you all for sharing your thoughts and preferences when it comes to binding brand and set up....I really didn't know what to expect and your answers where very informative.

I recently bought some F2 bindings and I really like the way they ride....that said I think they could be better made, more adjustable in terms of cant and lift, and more durable. And at the same time designing a binding that would give the wonderful ride of the F2 while adding adjustability and durability at that price point would be a challenge. Add to that the fact that the F2 is so light (nearly 2 lbs lighter than SW's per set) and it's a serious design and business challenge.

I earn my living in product design and I've long had ideas of how to achieve these design aims and have been toying with working on some prototypes of just such a binding. My rough plan is to baseline the F2 in terms of stiffness and flex with the aim of designing a binding that would replicate that while allowing real fine tuning of lift and cant as well as being more durable....all without a weight penalty. It's a tall order for sure and will be a fun diversion from my normal bicycle design work. We'll see.

Thanks again for your input.

dave

 

[AcousticBoarder]

1 hour ago, David Kirk said:

I earn my living in product design and I've long had ideas of how to achieve these design aims and have been toying with working on some prototypes of just such a binding. My rough plan is to baseline the F2 in terms of stiffness and flex with the aim of designing a binding that would replicate that while allowing real fine tuning of lift and cant as well as being more durable....all without a weight penalty. It's a tall order for sure and will be a fun diversion from my normal bicycle design work. We'll see.

I am sure if you got it to prototypes and to the market you would have no shortage of people willing to test! 

Another flaw I see with the TD3s as they stand is that they are not very friendly to small feet. I haven't had my hands on f2s to try them personally. 

Good luck to you and your endeavors! 

[Lurch]

1 hour ago, David Kirk said:

My rough plan is to baseline the F2 in terms of stiffness and flex with the aim of designing a binding that would replicate that while allowing real fine tuning of lift and cant as well as being more durable....all without a weight penalty.

Really interested to see where this ends Dave & wondering how that 'magic''stiffness/flex may be best derived. Perhaps modern board design made boots too stiff and thus a more flexible binding is providing a remedy?

I still find it astounding the elite level riders run in the equivalent of concrete boots attached to bindings that must feel like to noodles to them. If you are set on levering the beelzebub out of your board, why use cheese as a fulcrum (particularly when perched atop a lump of alloy designed to remove all nasty vibes and unwanted feedback).

[Neil Gendzwill]

The short answer is that they need to be able to move around on the board, they need some slop somewhere in the system. Racers are facing way more challenging conditions than recreational carvers and have different goals for their gear. 

[Bobby Buggs]

David, dont over think this. I have been on F2s for over 15 years and find the simplicity of them a bonus. 

Edited March 7, 2019 by Bobby Buggs

[charliechocolate]

14 hours ago, David Kirk said:

And at the same time designing a binding that would give the wonderful ride of the F2 while adding adjustability and durability at that price point would be a challenge

SG tried with their bindings but ended up with a more expensive product.

[Freezer]

I transitioned to F2 bindings a few years ago after Bruce Varsarva recommended them.  I was on Burton Race Plates for literally 20 years prior, and kept with them for the flexibility and the mobility on the board they allow.  The F2 Titanium Intec bindings have a fair amount of flexibility and I've found them comparable to the Race Plates.  Every time I tried a stiffer binding, from Catek, to Rat Trap to Bomber, they seemed to work great in one fixed body position, but took away all fluidity and riding style, so I found those stiffer bindings to not be fun at all to ride.

[bigwavedave]

I think I have 5 pairs of sidewinders, everything from early prototypes to the last version Fin made. I have 1 pair of F2-like bindings (labeled "Head") for my soft set-up, though I checked both boxes. If you lump all Bomber bindings together like F2-like bindings are, then the tally looks different. There are a lot of F2 style bindings of varying quality out there like Blax and the first plate bindings I had which were labeled RadAir, all metal and I broke a bail on those.

Are Snow Pros in the F2-like category? I had several pairs of those in the past, similar design to F2, but seemed more substantial.

Racers typically replace their bindings (as well as everything else) each season, but like Neil says they put way more stress on equipment than a recreational carver does.

[JRAZZ]

This is one of those things where you go: "I bet I can make a better one". The bindings we have just don't look all that slick and it certainly seems that a lot is left to be desired.

This is not really the case. I have a feeling that a lot of work went into the Bomber, F2, and other bindings. Making something new with an advantage is pretty difficult. Not saying it can't be done but that this is a deceptively difficult task. I know, I've been knocking around ideas for the past 4 years and have not been able to find that "killer" design advantage. Still looking though.

I'm kinda pissed though. The Korean ACT bindings that have popped up in my FB feed lately? The way that they set up the angle is an idea I had mocked up 3 years ago. I'm pissed that they beat me to it

 

[David Kirk]

18 hours ago, Lurch said:

Really interested to see where this ends Dave & wondering how that 'magic''stiffness/flex may be best derived. Perhaps modern board design made boots too stiff and thus a more flexible binding is providing a remedy?

I still find it astounding the elite level riders run in the equivalent of concrete boots attached to bindings that must feel like to noodles to them. If you are set on levering the beelzebub out of your board, why use cheese as a fulcrum (particularly when perched atop a lump of alloy designed to remove all nasty vibes and unwanted feedback).

I think the stiff boots are needed so that the rider can effectively apply fore/aft force with the lower leg. A boot soft enough to allow enough lateral movement to keep the rider from getting jacked around would not be stiff enough to apply power to the edge.

The F2, and to a much lesser extent the Sidewinder, allows movement side-to-side while they are plenty stiff fore/aft. This side to side movement is the key to edge hold as it allows the board to bounce and rattle over the surface without the lower legs getting yanked around.

I think most look at flexi bindings with a skeptical eye and I get it. At the same time I think it's helpful to look at it the other way....

Most look at the binding flex as something that prevents the rider from applying lateral boot force to the board but I think one benefits from looking at it 180° from that....what does the board do to the boot when it encounters a rough surface? As the board encounters vibration it tends to change edge angle slightly and if the boots are rigidly attached to the board the boots (and the riders legs) have to follow as the force is too much to resist effectively. But if the bindings have lateral flex the board can do all kinds of small movements to slide over the less than perfect surface without pulling the boots with it. So the rider ironically feels stable and calm as the board does it's thing down there. One can see it happen if you watch very closely....it's pretty cool. The rider holds his line and the board moves around some and changes edge angle a small amount while the rider's feet are calm and relaxed and the legs are looser and more able to make fine adjustments.

Good stuff.

dave

[Lurch]

Can't argue wth any of that Dave. I get that some flex somewhere in the system may be conducive to a more comfortable/ controlled ride to us mere mortals with an average - to-poor feedback loop response. Carpet surfing my stock TD3 I can get a noticeable lateral deflection - from your findings F2s must give a lot more. Guess it is that additional play which is damping the feedback to a point which feels more comfortable. I have never tried soft elastomers on my TDs ( ~ 200 lbs)  but might give it a go now.

Guess I was more commenting on racers using an iso plate as part of their 'system'. If the plate is meeting it's purported design, it is allowing the board to do all that stuff you have mentioned without transmitting it to the rider. Which should allow them to use a rigid interface between boot and plate to transmit max force as quickly as required. 

[Corey]

Interesting data point: Fin had a few Skwal riders try Sidewinders - they universally hated them. Something funny happens between 50-70 degrees of most alpine riders and the 85-90 that Skwalleurs run. 

Neat project David! Bring on another binding option! 

[David Kirk]

22 minutes ago, Lurch said:

Can't argue wth any of that Dave. I get that some flex somewhere in the system may be conducive to a more comfortable/ controlled ride to us mere mortals with an average - to-poor feedback loop response. Carpet surfing my stock TD3 I can get a noticeable lateral deflection - from your findings F2s must give a lot more. Guess it is that additional play which is damping the feedback to a point which feels more comfortable. I have never tried soft elastomers on my TDs ( ~ 200 lbs)  but might give it a go now.

Guess I was more commenting on racers using an iso plate as part of their 'system'. If the plate is meeting it's purported design, it is allowing the board to do all that stuff you have mentioned without transmitting it to the rider. Which should allow them to use a rigid interface between boot and plate to transmit max force as quickly as required. 

Yes....the F2 has MUCH more lateral flex than the TD3....much more. In my mind, after spending time on the F2 the TD3 feels nearly perfectly rigid.

The F2 feels downright odd the first time riding at low speeds. I stopped to check that the boot length adjustment was OK because it felt like the boot wasn't properly attached! And then I made some hard turns with them and the huge light bulb came on over my head and for the first time I 'got it'.

My wife is a top shelf skier (full time professional ski guide) and has been watching me carve for the past few decades and knows what she's looking at. The first time she saw me on the F2 she could see the difference and noted how easy and calm it looked on the very same slopes that a week before were not easy and calm. I can feel it and she can see it. They really work.

In my mind the ideal binding would have the lateral flex (and low weight) of the F2 while allowing the rider to set the lateral spring rate....in other words a design that lets the rider experiment with more or less movement. The F2 works because it moves....would it be better if it moved more?.....or less? Hard to know. I know that for me the SW doesn't move enough and that the spring rate is too progressive (I think due to the thin, short travel and temperature sensitive urethane elastomers used as springs) and that the F2 is, for me at least, a step above in terms of performance. The SW is a much better build piece for sure...hands down. And it also costs and weighs much more.

I have experience designing and tuning bicycle and race car suspensions and the binding project could draw on those things. The challenge will be weight and cost. Could be fun if I can make the time.

dave

[BlueB]

6 hours ago, bigwavedave said:

Are Snow Pros in the F2-like category? I had several pairs of those in the past, similar design to F2, but seemed more substantial.

I run those on my carving boards and voted "other". They are similar, but different enough. 

Btw, the Snowpros are the only bindings I never had any failure, with, appart from small angle creep. 

[bobdea]

On 3/7/2019 at 1:34 PM, charliechocolate said:

SG tried with their bindings but ended up with a more expensive product.

A better product. It’s significantly stiffer. Not far off from a sidewinder but has the same f2 feel. 

I like the sigis a lot, having a hard time getting used to the canting.......

[David Kirk]

I've been riding alone a good bit lately and this means time alone on the lift to think...."a dangerous thing" as my dad would have said.

I've been trying to puzzle out, and put into words, what is going on with flexible binding and I think I have it worked out. I've done a lot of work on bicycle suspension so tend to think in those terms.

I think in the end it boils down to the frequency and amplitude of the vibration we encounter.....and how easy, or hard, it is to deal with it.

If you ride a bike through a pump track you are encountering very low frequency and high amplitude movements - the surface is smooth and the bumps are tall and round. These come at the cyclist slowly (less than 1 hz) and the skilled rider can absorb the bumps with their joints and the ride is smooth. The tires stay on the ground and braking and steering is good. While suspension might be nice in this case it's hardly necessary. However when the frequency increases we get in trouble without suspension. Our joints can not react quickly enough to keep the wheels on the surface and the bike ends up skipping and rattling over the bumps (think riding over wash-boarded dirt). Good suspension can all but eliminate this but the compression and rebound spring and damping rates need to be just right or the suspension will "pack up"....meaning that the suspension will compress on the first bump but not be able to rebound before it hits the next bump...so it gets low and stays there...not good. When this happens the bike effectively goes rigid as if it has no suspension at all.

Now to snowboarding. When the rider enters a turn the board sees a very high load against the snow and the vibration it encounters is very high frequency and very low amplitude (buzz or chatter). And since the system has no suspension most all of the buzz and chatter are transferred to the rider's feet. The rider then becomes the suspension. The problem is that we can not deal with the high frequency movements very well. The vibration is way over 1 hz (one cycle per second) and our bodies simply can't absorb a small bump, push the board back down and do it again and again many times per second. So what we tend to do is go rigid. We tense our muscles in an effort to resist the movement....but of course going rigid is the worst thing we can do to try to keep it in control. Our muscles tighten and resist any movement and our suspension "packs up" just like it did on the poorly set up bike. We loose the ability to keep the edge firmly and consistently engaged with the snow and the board chatters and our smile goes away. Not good.

So...like the bike we need suspension to deal with the motions the board is trying to transfer to our feet....we need a filter of sorts to take up the small stuff so that we can just focus on the big stuff. This is where flexi bindings like the F2.

The binding alone can go a good bit. It will effectively filter out the buzz so that our muscles can stay relaxed and supple and deal with the task at hand. Fully rigid bindings to not do this well at all.

So not that you asked but this is what I think is going on with binding flex. I've found that switching to the F2 bindings and installing the BTS in my boots that I've improved more this year than I have in the past decade. I feel more stuck to the snow, have better edge hold and have less fatigue all while carving harder.

My two cents. Thanks for reading.

Dave