Flux bindings

[dhamann]

does anyone have experience carving with the cv, cv ltd or xv model bindings? the xv has a carbon highback where the cv and cv ltd do not. xv is "stiff" flex where cv/cv ltd are "medium". however, what intrigues me is that the heel cup on cv and cv ltd is 15mm higher than xv and appears to be a lot beefier. looks like the higher heel cup puts ankle strap higher on foot. my assumption is that these combinations provide greater support, hold and response, especially laterally. ie also somewhat restrictive? unfortunately, with the higher heel cup on cv/cv ltd it doesn't appear one could swap an xv carbon highback onto the cv or cv ltd, given different molds. feedback appreciated. (not a fan of flow, broken too many odrives, have a set of odrive backups and brand new in box jones apollo; looking for more without going metal) i see a bit of surplus with these bindings towards the end of the season so if they fall apart somehow, i should be covered. are they worth a try?

[crackaddict]

@dhamann  I have two sets of XVs, these are the bindings I use for testing boards (that's why two identical sets).  I have ridden the CVs too though not a lot (they were borrowed).

The XV is hands down the stiffest and highest performing soft boot carving binding I have ever tried; very stiff, boot-crushing ratchets, low profile, good adjustability, fast in and out, lightweight...  However, I do develop some pain in the outsides of my lower legs when I ride them too much and I've heard this from other Flux riders also.  When the pain comes on, I just switch to softer more comfortable bindings for a few days and then back to the XVs as soon as possible!  Love the feel and the ride.

The highback on the CV is way softer and the extra flex is noticeable for sure.  To me it's weird that they put the higher heelcup on the softer binding.  I would love to ride that CV heelcup with the XV highback.

[dhamann]

thanks for the feedback @crackaddict. i see that the cv ltd has the same base plate composite make up (nylon/carbon) as the xv but beefed up and higher by 15mm at heelcup and the high back is essentially the only different component between these bindings. ankle straps look more reinforced than apollo or odrive too so those'r good. my thinking is that... would a more forgiving high back allow for a little more margin for error at high speeds or just create more rebound (ie bounce/chatter)? curious if this balance actually jives in practice while carving both soft or hard groomed or chunder conditions (ie a tracked out race track)? the regular cv has a nylon/fiberglass blend base and the same highback as the cv ltd but the higher heel cup. i'm sure the xv performs very good (seen your riding. ), even without having to put a soccer shin pad in the boot but the slightly softer high back may balance this out (to a degree). i think it's a sleeper binding and might just have to try em out. carbon high back on cv ltd would be the jam, but doesn't exist. thanks again. any other experiences with any of these models, keep em coming.

[crackaddict]

Yeah... 

I think the bindings should match the boots should match the board should match conditions...  No sense coupling the stiffest bindings with a too soft boot for example, you'll just have to ride the binding loose to keep from crushing your feet and then you might as well have the higher heelcup too.  The stiffer your interface the better your board will carve in great conditions; I'll loosen the boots and bindings for very soft or icy surfaces though. 

There's no such thing as too stiff in the soft boot carving world (unless you want to throw in some Knapton style flatland tricks).  Hardboot stiffness might be too much some boards sure, but I just order stiffer boards and it's not a problem.  I'll take some of the stiffeners out of my boots and ride Drake Podium bindings on my production NeverSummers (mid-wide West Bound DFs) for example.

I like the O-Drives for poor conditions, slow speeds, and high comfort; the Podiums are fine for all mountain riding on production boards; the Flux XV is for high performance direct responsiveness on my fastest boards.

 

[protocarver]

Current Flux quiver: 3x XV, 2x XF, 1x CV.

I ride the XVs on my primary boards and the XFs are on a powder deck. I love XVs – phenomenal buckles; functional, burly mounting discs; I like the straps a ton; and the best boot control I've found (comparing to Catek FR1/FR2, Union Atlas, and Burton Cartels).

My kiddo has a size 12 boot and needed to migrate away from a failing pair of FR1s, so I thought the newly minted CVs would be perfect. And everything but the highbacks fell right into line with my expectations of excellence. The CV and XV baseplates feel, to hand, similarly stiff. The straps and buckles are identical. The heelcup is higher (about 11-12mm) and protrudes less heelward due to profiling. So...minimized heelcup drag that might net a few millimeters saved board width requirement. 

But...back to the highbacks. Take a 100% pass on Gen1 CVs. Massive fail rate. Far too soft a material. My kiddo killed the first in 5 days, the second 7 days after that, the third is faring a bit better. Gen 2 highbacks are a stronger opaque material (original Gen1s were semi-translucent). If you're set on trying CVs, I'd recommend the 23-24 models, which look great and are supposed to have solved the highback issue entirely.  

FWIW #1: I know from experience that you can, in fact use a carbon XV highback on the CV chassis – as long as you use at least moderate forward lean. If you like your highbacks very upright, no go because of the positioning block location on the highback (lower on VX/XF, higher on CV).

FWIW #2: Although the sidewalls and heelcup of the CV chassis are taller (and provide a stiffer chassis than the XF, and similar to XV), the highback and ankle strap mounting points are not significantly higher on the sidewall. Like <5mm. Not a massive thing. And, as mentioned, the boot hold of the XV/XF chassis is peerless.

I'm pretty sold on the XVs.