Jump to content

CATEK Patent Expiring—Anything new?


Mord
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I did some digging and found CATEK's patent. It's U.S. Patent #6,189,911, filed Jan. 9, 1998. This means it expired almost exactly two years ago. Has any new brands popped up making CATEK style bindings? The kingpin + set screw design seems to be the best way to go in terms of adjustability and rigidity.

I also cannot seem to find Bomber's patent for whatever reason. Does anyone have anything on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those ALC Bindings certainly look interesting... two interlocking plates to independently adjust cant and lift. It's like two Bombers stacked on top of each other! I wonder how someone can solve the stack height problem though. Seems inevitable with a cant plate based system like that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Ohob said:

Judging by the images in the patent, they look like the OS1’s, not OS2’s

I cannot find anything similar to the OS2 bindings filed by CATEK, so I assume they're both covered by one patent. They operate very similarly anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hello all. 
I am a machinist located in SLC UT. 
I’ve  been riding Catek’s since the late 90’s. 
I’m thinking of reproducing the OS1’s in step in configuration only and looking to se if there’s any interest. 
I’ve reproduced all of the parts digitally and am about to start cutting a few pairs. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Johno212 said:

I’ve reproduced all of the parts digitally and am about to start cutting a few pairs. 

 

18 hours ago, Johno212 said:

I’ve reproduced all of the parts digitally and am about to start cutting a few pairs. 

That's pretty cool! You should start a new thread so it doesn't get lost in this one. 

A second thought: change the rear heel bolt spacing so you can use the steel Bomber step-in receivers. They're much better than the aluminum ones. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Corey said:

A second thought: change the rear heel bolt spacing so you can use the steel Bomber step-in receivers. They're much better than the aluminum ones. 

^ great idea!

It might be too much to ask but make the base plate usable with TD3 (or other thick) elastomers somehow, thus adding more cushioning to the OS1.

Wow I wonder if a "superbinding" could be produced using the best parts from various bindings with a few newly designed parts to tie them together...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a plate adaptor that replaces the catek base plate and mounts to bomber lower just to try out that idea. Hopefully will have a ride report and pics this weekend.  Initial impression is that it will be a bit too high and heavy but worth a try.

Really wish the 0 degree bomber plate was lower asi it is like 2 inches tall for 1/4 inch of elastomer. 

 

Please  go with the steel bomber heel

 

Edited by neanderthal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't used the BP but my understanding is that this  part is made to mount a TD binding directly to the BP without an elastomer. Catek already does this. My goal was to add some elastomer under Catek if possible with off the shelf parts.

If I am wrong sorry I  - please show me the BP specific elastomer for this plate.

 BigWaveDave

I have that binding.  It is neat and certainly VERY strong.  Only issue is that you have limited options for angles. On some boards I need a slacker angle on my rear for than the binding allows.

If your angles work with this binding it is good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order to utilize the steel heel receiver from Bomber I’d need to create a spacer that provides clearance for the 2 rear canting screws. 
OR

I create a steel receiver that utilizes the Catek hole pattern and clears the canting screws

OR

I just reproduce the aluminum one. 
Thoughts?

What is the rub with the Aluminum heel anyway?

fit? I can adjust that

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Johno212 said:

In order to utilize the steel heel receiver from Bomber I’d need to create a spacer that provides clearance for the 2 rear canting screws. 
OR

I create a steel receiver that utilizes the Catek hole pattern and clears the canting screws

OR

I just reproduce the aluminum one. 
Thoughts?

OR widen the Bomber/F2 Steel receiver slots to accommodate Catek spacing.

 

1 hour ago, Johno212 said:

What is the rub with the Aluminum heel anyway?

fit? I can adjust that

Fintec heels quickly gouge aluminum receivers.  Intec heels do not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...