utahcarver Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 After seeing a couple of Skwals for bid over on eBay and after having spent several seasons contemplating if I'd ever want to buy a Skwal, I've come up with a question: What would be the negatives of setting up a race, freecarve, or even a freestyle deck to ride like a Skwal? Stance angles, that is. Aside from the obvious differences of board width, slower edge to edge transitions, and maybe flex, what might be some glaring differences? My TD2's look like I could set them to a Skwal stance angle without having to buy Skwal-specific binders. Any comments welcome. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Just a guess as I've never ridden a skwal, but would you be able to pressure the edges adequately? Leaning side-to-side works on a skwal 'cause they're narrow, but when you're leaning side-to-side on a 18-cm board and your feet are a couple of centimeters in from the edge, you're not going to be able to turn well. At least, that's how it seems to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 My TD2's look like I could set them to a Skwal stance angle without having to buy Skwal-specific binders. You can set them at Skwal angles easily. There exits Skwal-specifioc TD bindings because the TD2 can only fit on so narrow a board - I would have to guess about 16cm by eyeballing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utahcarver Posted November 22, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Dan, that sounds like a big minus to my idea. I hadn't/should've figured about pressuring the edge of the board. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toddflyingdog Posted November 22, 2005 Report Share Posted November 22, 2005 Sure- you can ride as steep of angles as your bindings can handle but that doesn't mean it will be any fun.... you want to be on a squall though to ride 90 or 0 degrees cause you'd have basically no edge pressure on a standard width (20 cm or so) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zone Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 Have not tried the Skwal, however you made me look. And it looks very interesting. I attached this interview where one of the inventor of the Skwal talks about how much he has using soft boot setting on a 17cm waist board. The picture is about 1/3 way down. http://www.skwalzone.org/itw-thias.php He also talks about using soft boots but heavily modified to make them a lot more rigid laterally. I might just have to try this set up on my old F2 roadster, 19cm, 7 or 8m sidecut. Just for fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfj04 Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 I have ridden a skwal and it's not about edge pressure - it's about weight transfer. Just like waterskiing - you aren't weighting the edge - you're shifting body weight to utilize the edge and the shape of the radius Having said that - I have not ridden a regular board with 90 degree angles because the skwal scared me enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chillaxin.nl Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 I own a Thias Skwal 173 Carve and ride it quite often. It's like said before; just shift your weight from left to right and vice versa. When it comes to the ultimate carve feeling, the skwal comes very, very close. Even closer than a alpine board, and i have many alpine boards ranging from Donek to Virus boards. I would advice to mount step-in bindings on them, since it's a hell to bend down and close your bindings, since your feet are only a few inches apart, thus first you close your back binding and then your front. With step-in, just step in with your front foot first and follow with your back foot and you are off to do some nice vitelli's! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpinegirl Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 serious question though. many alpine bindings have reduced platforms that do not actually go edge to edge, hence the actual physical contact that is being made does not reach the edges of the board. if you set up your stance how i do and match your heels and toes to the appropriate edges, then they don't actually touch anything. but my perception on this setup makes me comfortable riding like this and i do feel better able to pressure the edges, even though the actual physical contact being made between me and my board covers the same area within the edges (some bindings are nowhere near the edges). it doesn't matter what angles i am rocking or where my toe/heel is actually in relationship with the board edge. i have watched people rock super steep angles and come nowhere near the board edge. and they rip! it's yet another one of those people are different things. sorry about being redundant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utahcarver Posted November 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 Is that really a Skwal the rider in the softboots is on? It looks a bit too wide to be a Skwal. Either which one, the photo shows me what I'm looking to know. I'm can't wait to get on the hill and try to experiment with some higher angles. My goal would be to be as front-facing the nose of the board. After seeing the pic I'm convinced that I wouldn't be attempting suicide by snowboard. As far as the softboots, I wonder how the boots were stiffened laterally? Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ-PS Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 It's all about the step-ins. I too was able to get out on a skwal, an old Lacroix, and found that it took 1/3 of my time on the mountain just to try to clip-in. Getting off the chairlift was a lesson in Falling 101 at The 3 Stooges University. Luckily after the first try I made sure the lifties allowed me to go on solo. They were more than conciliatory after the pile up :D . Although it still didn't keep me from introducing myself to objects faster than I would have liked. I would recommend a softer board to start like the smaller one on eBay if you don't already layout turns with really aggressive angles. Oh and btw going faster makes it easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timinor Posted November 23, 2005 Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 What's the sidecut radius of a skwal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utahcarver Posted November 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2005 The Skwal website lists: Freeride 168cm 12m Freeride 173cm 10m Carving 183cm 15m There's a few more on the site: skwal.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zone Posted November 24, 2005 Report Share Posted November 24, 2005 Is that really a Skwal the rider in the softboots is on? It looks a bit too wide to be a Skwal. Either which one, the photo shows me what I'm looking to know. I'm can't wait to get on the hill and try to experiment with some higher angles. My goal would be to be as front-facing the nose of the board. After seeing the pic I'm convinced that I wouldn't be attempting suicide by snowboard. As far as the softboots, I wonder how the boots were stiffened laterally? Mark Thias is quoted as saying he modified this board to adapt to soft boot, presumably you are seing the modified board: http://www.thiaskwal.com/fgamme.htm He is using the step-in Rossignol when using the soft boots, and says that these bindings are bad for snowboarding but good for Skwal, since it goes across the boots allows for better transfer edge to edge. He is using a 'spoiler' (what ever that is) on the outside of the boot and a 'scratch' (what ever this also means) on the inside of the boots to make it rigid laterally. Hope that helps. Any more translation and I will have to charge!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokolikrat Posted November 24, 2005 Report Share Posted November 24, 2005 My TD2's look like I could set them to a Skwal stance angle without having to buy Skwal-specific binders. I do not think so. I just measured TD2 and it would be too wide for my Skwal. And another thing, check the orientation of 4x4 pattern. It is turned by 45 degree on Volkl, but it came with their binding included. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skwalleur Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 The Thias Skwals does have the standard 4x4 (I've got the 178 Freeride), but on the Völkl it's not standard at all. I had to drill an extra hole in the Intec TD Skwal disc to make it work, even then it only goes on with three screws and not centered. I could never fit a regular binding onto any of my skwals. The old Lacroix skwals does not have inserts at all - the bindings are screwed-on ski-style. /Teddo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tufty Posted November 28, 2005 Report Share Posted November 28, 2005 He is using the step-in Rossignol when using the soft boots, and says that these bindings are bad for snowboarding but good for Skwal, since it goes across the boots allows for better transfer edge to edge.He is using a 'spoiler' (what ever that is) on the outside of the boot and a 'scratch' (what ever this also means) on the inside of the boots to make it rigid laterally. My reading of 'spoiler' is 'hi-back', and the photo looks like he's using 'ride' type bindings, although the writeup would tend to imply the 'two pins at the side' type binding. Colour me confusled. I'd be a bit cagey about using the spanwise pin type binding for this application, I've seen a good few of the 'bars' bent all to **** by 'normal' snowboard usage, and they are not terribly strongly attached to the boot itself - self tappers, I believe. Maybe he's made some bastard ride/rossignol binding hybrid? 'scratch' is most definitely velcro - i.e. the 'power strap' shown at the top of the front boot. Looks like he's strapping the boot to the binding at the top of the high back, which would make sense to increase lateral stability, I guess. my €0.02, and probably not worth that. Oh, and skwals are fun. Terrifying, but fun. Simon 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.