6° front lift with UPZ boots and TD3?

[Carvin' Marvin]

6 minutes ago, 1xsculler said:

Not that anybody cares BUT If you’re riding UPZs with TDs and you have a 6° TD disc producing front toe lift and a 6° TD disc producing rear heel lift the soles of your feet are: front 4° heel lift and rear about 12° heel lift, just sayn. That’s about what my digital level says. 

That's great and all but really irrelevant.  You are the only one using these metrics as far as I'm aware.  No one is actually riding with their front toe in the air, just enough lift to get in a comfortable and powerful position.  When people say they ride "flat" they mean that the bindings are flat and not their feet relative to the board.  Forward lean is good. You should have the sensation moving forward not statically standing upright.

Your ski boots are the same way.  Ramped forward.  

You are way to obsessed with your own methodology and the numbers.  There are many people on this forum wayyyyyyy smarter than I that I have listened to and learned from to get to the point I'm at now.  I strongly suggest you don't eschew the conventional wisdom.

[Carvin' Marvin]

2 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said:

To accomodate the Intec heel module. There is no other practical reason for those boots to have so much ramp.

Of course you can't change it, so you can't know whether or not the ramp you have is the ramp you need to ride to your potential.

Instead, your potential as an athlete and rider is limited by a design concession.

FWIW, internal ramp of the front boot on the front binding should be somewhere around +2,+3.

 

Ski boots need a certain amount of ramp so that the bend in that platform can easily be concentrated 'ahead of center'. This allows the skier to hold the ski in reverse camber through the duration of their turn.

Otherwise everyone on skis would be rolling over backward due to premature rebound.

Snowboard hardboots and bindings should be configured to do the same. That might mean different internal ramp angles on each boot, depending on skeletal structure and movement philosophy.

The highest function of ramp tuning/heel and toe lift is to ensure that the board sees a neutral pressure change along it's length when the rider moves through their range of motion, as they flex and extend their legs.

More often than not, heel and toe lift are used to accommodate impractical boot geometry, or fashionable stance configurations.

In general, if your equipment configuration is drastically different than the established norms, it means you're chasing the wrong variable, you have a structural anomaly, or you're trying to do something that nobody else wants to do.

Yet.

If ever.

 

This is one of the smart guys I referenced.  King of the setup over here. Listen to this man. I was mostly self taught for my first few seasons and wouldn't have progressed without his setup methodology and expertise.

[1xsculler]

When you say large blocks under your toe and a large block under your heel (F2bindings?) have you ever laid a digital level across the heel and toe of each binding?  I’m not saying it’s a good idea or that it will yield meaningful info but I was surprised at what I found.

Today and last Friday I rode my UPZs/F2 stepins with 9° of toe lift measured across my front binding (equals a flat foot) and no lifting blocks on my back binding (equals about 8.5° of heel lift  Again, undoubtedly useless information to you more experienced carvers but interesting to me.

 

[1xsculler]

8 minutes ago, Carvin' Marvin said:

This is one of the smart guys I referenced.  King of the setup over here. Listen to this man. I was mostly self taught for my first few seasons and wouldn't have progressed without his setup methodology and expertise.

I’m sure Beckmann has forgotten more about carving and the fine points about equipment and setup than I will ever know.

[lonbordin]

8 minutes ago, Carvin' Marvin said:

When people say they ride "flat" they mean that the bindings are flat and not their feet relative to the board.

You could go with softboots @1xsculler they predominantly ride flat, still can get that thin line.

As for binding ramp angle... there's been more than a few discussions around here.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=binding+ramp+angle+site%3Aalpinesnowboarder.com

 

[1xsculler]

On 1/25/2021 at 8:31 PM, lonbordin said:

You could go with softboots @1xsculler they predominantly ride flat, still can get that thin line.

As for binding ramp angle... there's been more than a few discussions around here.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=binding+ramp+angle+site%3Aalpinesnowboarder.com

 

Do soft boots have some ramp built in...how much? Just curious. 
 

Update:  I just measured the ramp inside a new pair of size 11 Burton soft boots...8.1°. 

[johnasmo]

Wow, hot thread here.  Might as well throw my story into the hat.

This years setup:  Size 28.5 UPZ shells, size 10 Flo liners, custom foot beds, no canting in the cuffs.  TD3 Sidewinders, 6 degree disk in front, 3 decree disk in back.  Around 20.5 inch stance width.  Angles always fit to board, but I like narrow boards so often riding 65/60 or so.  Mostly just toe and heel life, but a little off.  Front disk at 10 or 15 degrees more than boot, so a tiny bit of inward cant there, but rear is almost same angle so near zero cant.  Lock front cuff in high position, rear one or two down from there.

I've been on my alpine journey for about 15 years now.  Every year my riding progresses and my setup along with it.  The more experience I get, the more I learn to notice what I'm doing wrong and how my setup is helping me do wrong.  For example, I started on TD1s with 0 disk in front and 6 in back.  Why?  Because that's what I found used on eBay.  No other reason.  After years of front leg burn, I finally switched to 3 and 3 sometime in the TD2/TD3 era.  Why?  Because I knew 0 and 6 wasn't right for me and I knew good riders using 3 and 3.  But still I was setting them at 90 to the board, so quite a bit of inward canting.  Why?  Emulating others, and because I still wasn't good enough to know better on my own.  Contorting just seemed like part of learning to ride alpine.  Last year I finally started exploring my canting, and this year I finally started exploring 6 lift in front.

Conclusion?  It's easy to say your stance/angles/cant/lift should be whatever it takes to feel neutral and balanced.  In practice, it takes quite a bit of experience to actually recognize neutral and balanced.  Fifteen years for me, and who knows what I may realize next season?  If you don't have 15 years to spend on this, listen carefully to @Beckmann AG's expert advice to shorten your journey.

[1xsculler]

8 minutes ago, johnasmo said:

Wow, hot thread here.  Might as well throw my story into the hat.

This years setup:  Size 28.5 UPZ shells, size 10 Flo liners, custom foot beds, no canting in the cuffs.  TD3 Sidewinders, 6 degree disk in front, 3 decree disk in back.  Around 20.5 inch stance width.  Angles always fit to board, but I like narrow boards so often riding 65/60 or so.  Mostly just toe and heel life, but a little off.  Front disk at 10 or 15 degrees more than boot, so a tiny bit of inward cant there, but rear is almost same angle so near zero cant.  Lock front cuff in high position, rear one or two down from there.

I've been on my alpine journey for about 15 years now.  Every year my riding progresses and my setup along with it.  The more experience I get, the more I learn to notice what I'm doing wrong and how my setup is helping me do wrong.  For example, I started on TD1s with 0 disk in front and 6 in back.  Why?  Because that's what I found used on eBay.  No other reason.  After years of front leg burn, I finally switched to 3 and 3 sometime in the TD2/TD3 era.  Why?  Because I knew 0 and 6 wasn't right for me and I knew good riders using 3 and 3.  But still I was setting them at 90 to the board, so quite a bit of inward canting.  Why?  Emulating others, and because I still wasn't good enough to know better on my own.  Contorting just seemed like part of learning to ride alpine.  Last year I finally started exploring my canting, and this year I finally started exploring 6 lift in front.

Conclusion?  It's easy to say your stance/angles/cant/lift should be whatever it takes to feel neutral and balanced.  In practice, it takes quite a bit of experience to actually recognize neutral and balanced.  Fifteen years for me, and who knows what I may realize next season?  If you don't have 15 years to spend on this, listen carefully to @Beckmann AG's expert advice to shorten your journey.

Appreciate your sage advice. I definitely DO NOT have fifteen years to spend on this unless I am still carving at ninety-two...sounds like I should start wading through Beckmann’s stuff to become more efficient in my learning. 

[Jack M]

On 1/25/2021 at 11:14 PM, Beckmann AG said:

To accomodate the Intec heel module. There is no other practical reason for those boots to have so much ramp.

Mountain Slope/Northwave were never compatible with Intec.  My recollection is that Northwave thought it would be a selling feature to shove the heel forward to reduce boot length and boot drag, and that UPZ (then UPS) followed suit.  Or maybe it was the other way around, but who cares, the value of that decision is debatable.  Considering the cost of boot molds, we are stuck with it for the foreseeable future.  Deeluxe achieves less ramp than UPZ while being Intec compatible because the heel is in a more typical place.  But many riders and I report worse heel retention with Deeluxe.  Personally I will take the ramp with the better heel hold.

[Beckmann AG]

10 hours ago, Jack M said:

Mountain Slope/Northwave were never compatible with Intec. 

Coals to Newcastle. 

10 hours ago, Jack M said:

Considering the cost of boot molds, we are stuck with it for the foreseeable future.  Deeluxe achieves less ramp than MS/NW while being Intec compatible because the heel is in a more typical place. 

Last I measured, MS/NW starts out lower than Deeluxe. I think it was a size 26, and they measured about 11, as opposed to the 9.7 degrees for the same size MS.

You may have noticed that your MS have a removable foam zeppa, which means you can further reduce the ramp if you have access to a sander, or a clean section of asphalt and a skilled driver.

Can't do that with the Deeluxe, on account of the boot board being incorporated into the shell to accommodate...

the Intec heel.

10 hours ago, Jack M said:

But many riders and I report worse heel retention with Deeluxe.  Personally I will take the ramp with the better heel hold.

Heel retention is better with the UPZ/MS largely due to shell contour in the ankle pocket. Both are shaped more like the aft end of a foot.

The Deeluxe has about as much contour as the inside of a Quaker Oatmeal drum.

 

[SunSurfer]

55 minutes ago, Beckmann AG said:

Heel retention is better with the UPZ/MS largely due to shell contour in the ankle pocket. Both are shaped more like the aft end of a foot.

I've thought for a long time that the attachment points and pull angle of the ankle cable/buckle on the NW/MS is also a factor in helping with heel hold down. It's distinctly different from the Deeluxe & UPZ boots. So much so that I modified my rear UPZ RC10 to have essentially the same direction and position of pull. I had found that heel hold was more of an issue with my rear foot (much improved by the buckle position mod), and I don't find myself lifting my front heel with the standard position in my riding.

Interested in your take on that design feature of the NW/MS @Beckmann AG

[1xsculler]

1 minute ago, SunSurfer said:

I've thought for a long time that the attachment points and pull angle of the ankle cable/buckle on the NW/MS is also a factor in helping with heel hold down. It's distinctly different from the Deeluxe & UPZ boots. So much so that I modified my rear UPZ RC10 to have essentially the same direction and position of pull. I had found that heel hold was more of an issue with my rear foot (much improved by the buckle position mod), and I don't find myself lifting my front heel with the standard position in my riding.

Interested in your take on that design feature of the NW/MS @Beckmann AG

Can you show us how you modified your UPZ?

[SunSurfer]

@1xsculler

 

[lonbordin]

Disclaimer:
First I want to emphasis starting at the baseline... For me and a lot of others this is the baseline. 

@1xsculler you are heading off into the deep woods without establishing your baseline... trouble ahead.  I would wait until after MCC to leave the trail.

Now for the good stuff UPZ boot mods!

First why? 

I have tall feet, robust arches, large feet, wide forefoot, and svelte heels. I rock the 28.5 (312 BSL) shells and my largest foot is 29.2.  Less than a finger fit, aka race fit.

The 5 buckles of the stock UPZ are ridiculously spaced and complete overkill, IMHO.  The third buckle kills my navicular area in it's stock location and needs to be tight to keep my heel from rising.  So I took inspiration from @SunSurfer's mods on his heads and other UPZ mods I've seen here.  I have no issues with the boots in their current condition other than my liners have seen better days.... will be getting zip-fits sooner than later. I have fantastic insoles from a fantastic fellow (the one who's baseline I earlier referenced) who also expanded the forefoot area as needed.

Mods:
-Moved my third buckle from it's original location to the hinges
-Removed the fourth buckle
-Removed plastic from the cuff below the fourth buckle location to eliminate any clash (This is the only destructive mod all others can be undone)
-Added the World Cup booster which I run inside the tongue.
-Added spare hardware and tape to seal third buckle holes

 

Edited January 27, 2021 by lonbordin
why the sole focus on ramp angle??? setup is an ecosystem not a single variable...

[1xsculler]

2 hours ago, lonbordin said:

Disclaimer:
First I want to emphasis starting at the baseline... For me and a lot of others this is the baseline. 

@1xsculler you are heading off into the deep woods without establishing your baseline... trouble ahead.  I would wait until after MCC to leave the trail.

Now for the good stuff UPZ boot mods!

First why? 

I have tall feet, robust arches, large feet, wide forefoot, and svelte heels. I rock the 28.5 (312 BSL) shells and my largest foot is 29.2.  Less than a finger fit, aka race fit.

The 5 buckles of the stock UPZ are ridiculously spaced and complete overkill, IMHO.  The third buckle kills my navicular area in it's stock location and needs to be tight to keep my heel from rising.  So I took inspiration from @SunSurfer's mods on his heads and other UPZ mods I've seen here.  I have no issues with the boots in their current condition other than my liners have seen better days.... will be getting zip-fits sooner than later. I have fantastic insoles from a fantastic fellow (the one who's baseline I earlier referenced) who also expanded the forefoot area as needed.

Mods:
-Moved my third buckle from it's original location to the hinges
-Removed the fourth buckle
-Removed plastic from the cuff below the fourth buckle location to eliminate any clash (This is the only destructive mod all others can be undone)
-Added the World Cup booster which I run inside the tongue.
-Added spare hardware and tape to seal third buckle holes

 

Interesting. These are some of reasons why, when I had RC 10s and RC 8s sitting on my work bench for comparison, I decided to keep the 8s and sell the 10s. The boots were nearly identical, same height, same lower shell, same upper shell with nearly imperceptibly more flexibility (I couldn’t discern any) and the 8s had four instead of five buckels which I considered an advantage. 

[Jack M]

12 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

Last I measured, MS/NW starts out lower than Deeluxe. I think it was a size 26, and they measured about 11, as opposed to the 9.7 degrees for the same size MS.

Ah, I guess I misremembered your measurements.  Corrected.

 

13 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

You may have noticed that your MS have a removable foam zeppa, which means you can further reduce the ramp if you have access to a sander

Wouldn't you also have to make up the difference with more padding on top of the instep?  If your foot won't fill the extra space that is.