Hugh Posted September 14, 2005 Report Share Posted September 14, 2005 As far as I know it was Joel's first run with the new Intec heels. Todd has some great advice for new equipment, very wise to take it slow with new untested product. New bindings almost always need retightening, new boots need cant or lift changes and new board sidecuts take some physical and mental adjustments. I'm opting for new Catek standard bails for my new 5 buckle Head boots. Stiff race board, stiff racing boots, no plastic Intecs for me. I still have a pair of Intec heels, but they are on my Raichle 413 boots (soft) and ridden on softer boards (Prior 4x4, 4807 and Purecarve Maverick). Dangerous sport, but not more than flame throwing out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shred Gruumer Posted September 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2005 Scott why yes I have! our other facility is located in Devens..formerly Ayer Mass.. I may move some time in the future maybe!.. they are looking for a Sr. Software Quality Engineer with FAA experiance with RTCA/DO-178B.. I declinced for now! but its open if anyone knows anyone.. have fun with that.. been there done that.. as Im also an FAA-DMIR, and a Sikorsky DQR among other things.. hmm networking what a good Idea.. I wonder if there are any good paying SR, QE jobs in Colorado or Utah (Aerespace prefered) $$$ ha! Right Said Shred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Randy S. Posted September 14, 2005 Report Share Posted September 14, 2005 hmm networking what a good Idea.. I wonder if there are any good paying SR, QE jobs in Colorado or Utah (Aerespace prefered) $$$ ha! Right Said Shred Doesn't Ladia work in a company like that here in the Bay Area? Maybe Litton or something? Plus there's all that Nasa stuff right down the road at Moffett field. Shred, get your a$$ out of Cleveland now! There are mountains with more than 400 vertical out there, you just need to travel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 I suppose I'm asking in vain, since nobody has been able to answer my question about it being very doubtful that Joel "has" to sue Bomber to get to F2. Well, nobody here that is, I've had several lawyer friends say that he does not. But I digress... Tonight on my way home I heard a famous radio show host endorsing herbal diet pills. If I take these and get a heart attack, can I sue the radio host? Another point: someone I talked to compared this to the case where Ford was liable for Bridgestone tires delaminating on their SUVs. That comparison is invalid, because Fords were being supplied with the faulty tires as original equipment. Intec heels are not the only option on Bomber bindings. I think when the end user specifies what parts they want on their product, it shifts responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 I'll echo everyone else here in that I wish all the best for Joel and hope that he can fully recover. I also hope that, when all is said and done, the case will provide some kind of constructive input for the manufacturer (ie - more rigorous testing, improved design, better quality controls in processing, etc.). REALLY hope that the case against Bomber will be dropped! I've really come to enjoy the intec system and feel that it is a very solid and stable riding platform. I also think that Todd hit it on the head - check it ALL frequently. Definitely when it's "new", but maybe even more importantly after the "break-in" period. I'll check and double check my heels before going out (wear, cracks, tightness) and always do a trial clip-in/out for each boot while the board is on my tuning table (looking for fit issues, etc.) - BEFORE I hit the hill. Short breaks, lunch, etc. - check 'em again! Come home pull bindings, check bails, inspect heels - gear gets tended to before I do anything else. That includes EATING - 'cause I'm usually starving when I get home!! That's how important it is to me Oh yeah, uh ... make sure pins are engaged before taking off! Like me, a lot of folks here love the fact that you can click in these puppies on the fly. I really try to take a more cautious approach and make sure those pins positively engage. ANY doubt, like sticky snow days (build-up on heel), I stop, tap the heel and double check. Rear foot came out on me ONCE on a powder day last season because I didn't take the time to make sure. No injuries - just scared the hell out of me WILL NOT let that happen again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonerider Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 I suppose I'm asking in vain, since nobody has been able to answer my question about it being very doubtful that Joel "has" to sue Bomber to get to F2. Well, nobody here that is, I've had several lawyer friends say that he does not. But I digress...Tonight on my way home I heard a famous radio show host endorsing herbal diet pills. If I take these and get a heart attack, can I sue the radio host? Another point: someone I talked to compared this to the case where Ford was liable for Bridgestone tires delaminating on their SUVs. That comparison is invalid, because Fords were being supplied with the faulty tires as original equipment. Intec heels are not the only option on Bomber bindings. I think when the end user specifies what parts they want on their product, it shifts responsibility. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 Another point: someone I talked to compared this to the case where Ford was liable for Bridgestone tires delaminating on their SUVs. That comparison is invalid, because Fords were being supplied with the faulty tires as original equipment. Intec heels are not the only option on Bomber bindings. I think when the end user specifies what parts they want on their product, it shifts responsibility. From what I read a while ago, I thought it was the Ford production chain that was damaging the tires because of the excessive width of the new generation of Explorers. Maybe it was another issue that occured later. Regards to Joel, wishing him a good recovery like CarvCanada's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C5 Golfer Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 Some have mentioned comparisons like Ford Exploder and tires and others where they sue the distributor to get to the manufacturer. I am thinking this may not always be the case since the big law suit against Merck I believe is not including every drugstore that sold the pills. Wonder where the lawyers draw the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 I have been reading this thread with much concern. First and foremost I am worried about a fallen fellow carver, and of course about the companies that make the products we use. But now I am worried about my choice to go to a hardboot setup. Where I live is not known for its winter sports, so I have relied on the Bomber community for advice and pointers. I appreciate all the advice folks have given me. Last season I made the almighty transition to hard boots and a carving board. At the end of February, I was at my favorite local resort, and my back foot came out of its standard bail binding in the middle of a carve. I ended up stretching a tendon in my left ankle and was out of commission for about 5 weeks (and missed the best spring we had seen in years!). I know that it could have been much worse. Anyway, a friend I met through this forum helped me get my situation resolved, and I now just about need a jackhammer to get out of the bindings. But I do wonder about the overall equipment failure issue for this sector of the sport. I acknowledge that my injury was 99% my fault for not having the bindings tight enough. But prior to that, in 7 years of snowboarding I never had an equipment failure issue at all. Now,the benefits of the new setup for me are great - my carving has improved greatly and i have this sh@t-eating grin at the bottom of every run. But I could carve in my soft boot setup, and didn't have any equipment issues. How many folks out there have experienced equipment failures? Someone help renew my confidence in the hard boots! :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 How many folks out there have experienced equipment failures? Someone help renew my confidence in the hard boots! :rolleyes: I've had bail bindings pop open on me from not having them tight enough as well. Fortuntaley, I was going slow. Oh, and soft boot equipment can fail too. I've broken the strap on a Burton Custom strap bidning and crashed. Apparently a kid died at Mt Hood Meadows two season ago because of a soft bidning failure at high speed. "Ride at your own risk and enjoy every minute of it" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Dold Posted September 15, 2005 Report Share Posted September 15, 2005 Bails have to be enough over-center as well as tight. I frequently see people with bails tight as hell, enough to require both hands to close the lever, but the levers are barely over center so that when the boot flexes, they pop out. I don't think bails have to be as tight as some people make them if they are set up properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donek Posted September 16, 2005 Report Share Posted September 16, 2005 As a manufacturer, I am rather disturbed by this development. It is my biggest fear that someone be seriously injured on a product I have made. I can assure you that this is the primary concern of anyone in this industry. I do not believe Bomber or F2 would produce a product they felt was flawed in some way and knowingly sell it. As manufacturers, we do everything in our power to ensure the safety of our customers. Having watched this thread for several days I am incredibly surprised at the reactions. Based on one lawsuit, people are questioning equipment that has served them faithfully for years. Engineers who are very competent have failed to ask the most important question. “Was the equipment installed and mounted correctly?” Unfortunately, I doubt we will ever know. Because they are the first to be sued when a problem arises, ski shops ensure that their techs are extensively trained in the mounting of bindings to skis. Due to the mail order nature of our industry and the desire for flexibility in the equipment, the customer becomes the tech that mounts the bindings. This puts the primary liability on the customer as he is charged with the task of properly mounting his bindings. It is commonly known that most failures are a result of operator error. I don't know more than what has been posted here, so can only provide theories. I have never heard of an intec heel spontaneously falling apart when properly mounted. I have heard of certain problems resulting from improper use/installation/environmental conditions. I myself have been quite scared by stepping out of a binding that didn't engage due to too much snow under the heel. A heel coming apart could be a result of a number of conditions resulting from operator error. The heel could have loosened up on the boot. The stresses resulting from this could cause cracking in the heel piece. The binding could have been adjusted improperly or not tightened down enough, resulting in excessive stresses on the heel piece. If you don’t pay careful attention, it is possible to mount the intec receiver tighter (closer to the toe bail) on one side of the boot than the other. This could result in stresses that could cause failure. I had nothing to do with the engineering of Bomber bindings, so can only comment on my experience with them. I am sure that Bomber could come up with a number of other scenarios (no doubt they have been advised not to expound on them publicly). Mr. Broadbent’s accident is a terrible tragedy. Hopefully he will recover fully and be back on snow some day. When we engage in dangerous activities such as sliding on snow at excessive speeds, we do so with full knowledge that we are risking life and limb. I hope we all remember this fact and approach the maintenance and assembly of our equipment accordingly. Sean Martin Donek Snowboards Inc. smartin@donek.com http://www.donek.com/ phone:877-53-DONEK P.S. I have worked carefully on this post for 3 days. It is not my intention to diminish what has happened to Mr Broadbent in any way. I do not wish to insult, merely to add a layer of perspective to what could have happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Dahl Posted September 16, 2005 Report Share Posted September 16, 2005 It must have been dificult to post on something that hits so close to home, in more ways than one. In the CYA environment we live in you really do have to watch what you say in light of what is being discussed here. I will express 100 percent faith in my TD2's with the Intec system without the slightest qualm. That being said, I also keep my insurance up to date because I realize the nature of what I do. I've had a good run, not been covered by any avalanches to date, etc. etc. but accept the possibility of injury/death in the pursuit of mountainous snowbound fun. It is just a fact of life. Live it, love it, and always look forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted September 16, 2005 Report Share Posted September 16, 2005 and always look forward. and backward too, so you dont end up like Tim Tuthill!!!! no comment on the rest. support Fin all the way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjvircks Posted September 16, 2005 Report Share Posted September 16, 2005 Here is a thought about the Intec heel, having never seen one ( I'm a softbooter from Iowa, hoping to join the enlightened this season ). In molded parts, anytime material must flow around a full-through-hole it will meet on the other side and form a "knit-line" or seam where the two material fronts come together and freeze. With good design this seam can be influenced to occur in non-critical areas and the seam can be almost as strong as the parent material. With poor controls at the molder or varying properties of the resin very weak knit lines can occur. I'd suggest looking closely at new heels for this potential trouble spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik J Posted September 19, 2005 Report Share Posted September 19, 2005 I'm very sorry to hear about Joel's injury, I hope he heals quickly and completely. I've been using intec heels for about 8 or 9 season's now, never less than 60 days in a season. I've never once had a release. I'm not easy on my equpiment either. I buy quality so that I can ride hard. I've broken my TD1 step in TOE bail and stayed in the binding because of the heel connection (and decided I could finish the run with the broken toe bail - kind of a reverse teleboard experience). I'm only adding this info to give one more opinion. I'm not saying that my TD's are infalable and I'm not telling people what to buy, but I personally have the utmost of confidence in Bomber's products and will continue to use them. I can't really justify switching to TD 2's because my TD 1's don't seem to have an end to their life. I'll only make the switch because I just plain want them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateW Posted September 22, 2005 Report Share Posted September 22, 2005 I eyeballed my Intec heels the other day, and there's no visible "knit line" around the pins. Maybe the holes are bored after molding, so avoid that possibility entirely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dano Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I'm VERY sorry you were so very unlucky and got so f'ed up, but sh*t happens. That's life in the world of "extreme" sports. I'm over 200 lbs and it's always in the back of my head that most american carvers wiegh less and euros seem to be even lighter. That's why I use cateks with big bails. Leave Bomber alone! Don't let your lawyers take your soul. I'm sure it's their idea to drag Bomber into this for more $$$... If you put Bomber under, you will never forgive yourself. I hope it's not too late! You know DAMN WELL fin would never knowingly sell defective equipment,and would do anything possible to make our sport better and safer. Go after F2 and your crappy Doctors if you must, but c'mon! don't drag Bomber down with you. You are still part of our loose clan, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipstar Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I look at this whole thing not having really spent anytime with the US courts system, which I understand to be crazily out of control with regards to suing. However, I feel that the manufacturer should take responsibility for their defective product. If they are not willing to do so, then that is what a court is for. A distributor should take responsibility and sell products in an appropriate manner. If there is any evidence that the F2 binding is not suitable for people of 200 pounds, then any retailer/distributor should try to get this information across. The consequences may be great, but it is small compensation for someone who loses their leg...without consequences, what incentives do companies have to improve their products and practises in this case? I see that a thorough and objective review of the facts would reveal whether the fault lay with the rider, or the equiment. The rider (who I know of from Tahoe Carvers) seems to feel it lies with defective equipment. We currently cannot comment that he should have been riding slower, or faster, or less powerfully or whatever without having seen it. In a perfect world, justice will prevail, and the case will either agree with him, or not. Let's hope that this occurs. It is an incredibly inefficient way to solve the problem, but since no one seems to be able to agree who is to blame and one guy is there with no use of his leg....well I guess this is about the time that it should go to court. I don't really agree with the idea that he should "suck it up" to save our sport. If the equipment sucks, this isn't made clear and someone gets hurt as a result of that then I would rather the equipment gets changed and the maker gets pinged. Boards and More are a huge company, and certainly would appear to be able to handle the cost of this sort of thing; quite why Bomber is involved is unclear to me; the only thing a lawyer could ever pin them for would be unless they knew or should have known that the product would not work for someone that size and that is impossible based on what I know, since they would not have dispensed any advice in this case; I cannot see what question would have ever been asked. (edited so people understand exactly what I meant by this phrase). I hope it all gets resolved, but most of all I hope our fellow rider gets his health back and one day can ride with the Mt Rose massive :-) For those of you worrying, perhaps buying a new set of bomb proof bindings is in order; at least you can stop worrying about breakage. I personally think that the binding with toe clips, the toe clip should clip onto itself, not the weight of the past 1/2 way concept which to me seems inherently risky. I have popped out of bindings a few times; a few times with the back leg and once the toe clip broke and I was riding in the back seat for a while.... not a fun situation...that's also why I ride well slow... I know I ain't that good. Kip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Im sorry but...you seem unaware of the details of this situation. the equipment wasnt even standard bindings...the failure was in the intec heel supposedly, and F2 is a legitimate defendant in this case. not a single individual has questioned that fact what is BS is that bomber is being sued. They sell a product that literally hundreds, perhaps thousands of people have used, are using, and will use in the near future, and yet...for selling that product, they are being included in a lawsuit. the suit itself sounds legitimate. if a company manufactures a product and it fails, causing injury, the manufacturer should be held responsible but should the salesman? the distributor? no. absolutely not. the fact that this can even be insinuated is a perfect example of the failure of our so-called legal system. failure and nothing short of it. disgusting to say the least. I know jack about the legal system, and claims have been made that you have to sue everyone involved. sounds like crap to me, and the fact is...the plaintiff should tell his bottom-feeder lawyers to stick to the point and go after the true defendant, if there is one. if fin and bomber go down, well...damn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 quite why Bomber is involved is unclear to me; unless they knew or should have known that the product would not work for someone that size. I find it wildly offensive that this even enters into your brain as a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 For those of you worrying, perhaps buying a new set of bomb proof bindings is in order; at least you can stop worrying about breakage. I personally think that the binding with toe clips, the toe clip should clip onto itself, not the weight of the past 1/2 way concept which to me seems inherently risky. Kip I thought that the setup in question WAS new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vahur Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 I read this filing behind shred's provided link (which BTW states that accident happened/happens?? on Dec. 24, 2005) and it seems to me that BI is dragged to court not only because he sold F2 Intec heels, but also for providing new bindings to Joel. If I read description of accident (front binding's bail failed and Intec heel), then it seems to me, that most likely binding was the first which failed and thereafter Intec heel couldn't hold and broke too (otherwise if heel would have failed first, then boot would pop out of binding most likely and front bail would be intact). (This is of course pure speculation from my part!) But even if binding failed first, then I don't think that it's solely BI-s fault: seems like Joel had great speed (his new TD2's blow out on him at full speed this morning , I did three and a half twists ) and it could be just defect in binding structure which gave up and resulted in such accident. I don't think that one could provide real "bomb-proof" bindings anyway (and if one attempts to do so by double-checking with ultrasound scanning or whatever each detail, then what would be the total cost of it and how many people would buy such things?) and as already pointed out, if forces go too strong, then something has to give up. If not binding or heel, then boot, board or leg. People should accept responsibilites about their own actions, doing full speed tests on new equipment and suing manufacturer afterwards does not seem to be responsible behaviour for me. Such case could result in withdrawal of small SB equipment manufacturers from US and leaving marked to big (ski) companies with deep pockets. Or it would result in situation, when you have to sign liability agreement before purchase and can't neither mount nor adjust your bindings yourself without voiding any warranty (unless you have passed bindings screwer exams and have certificate to provide). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtnpig Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Just curious but being that most of us (uncertified technicians) set up our own equipement could there sometimes be a situation where the toe bail is not adjusted to the proper length of the boot? Would this would put a larger load on the heelpiece? I did a bad job at this and the boot flex popped out of the front bail (loosening the bail in the binding mount). Then the heel somehow twisted out of the rear mount. I was very lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Yes, failure due to setup is possible, and unfortunately there is no way for Joel to *prove* he set everything up properly. HOWEVER, my understanding of the incident is that the Bomber binding did not fail at all, the entire failure happened in the Intec heel. 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.