Os2

[RicHard]

did you see the thread at EC.com about putting Catek toe levers on TD2s? Shouldnt cost much...if its a huge issue to you it will solve your gripe

Thanks a lot for your answer. Yes, I saw it but I was thinking I could buy the toe bail/levers pieces and mount them on bomber... while it takes some kind of work to put (just) the catek lever on the bomber toe piece.

I think I'm gonna keep the original bomber one... even if... it's really a pity to need such high angles just for a toe bail/lever problem on a couple of bindinigs that are really wonderful.

:-\

I still hope that soon there will be available a "Version 2" toe bail/lever from bomber... ;-)

[astrokel]

its kinda funny to me how the new ones sorta borrow the full suspension idea from someone else :)

Only funny to you Dave :) ... the OS2's "suspension" have nothing to do with "someone else's". The "suspension" on the OS2's are exactly the same as the 1's except that the "power plate" have th urethane on their potential contact points as well as the mounting plate. The mounting plate is still directly mounted on the board itself and is not a movable/compliant system like the TD2's.

What I'm interested in is the comment from swt saying that the OS2's are more laterally compliant than the 1's. I wonder if this is because the addition of the power plate to the assembly or the extra machining to the top plate.

[swt]

What I'm interested in is the comment from swt saying that the OS2's are more laterally compliant than the 1's. I wonder if this is because the addition of the power plate to the assembly or the extra machining to the top plate.

The binding plate (top plate) itself was optimized specifically to provide increased lateral flexibility.

[gdboytyler]

...

did you see the thread at EC.com about putting Catek toe levers on TD2s? Shouldnt cost much...if its a huge issue to you it will solve your gripe

Catek Standard Bail Kit = $50

The kit includes 2 Levers, 2 Toe Bails, 2 Heel Bails and 2 Heel Blocks.

I only need the 2 levers and 2 toe bails, but Catek won't sell them separately. I'd rather spend the extra money to get a set of OS2's and find out if the OS2 takes care of all the complaints I've got about the TD2's.

[scotts.Scheinman]

I got the OS2's . the reasons ethat swaywed me were the canting and the toe peice didnt stick out as much.

[RicHard]

RicHard,

Not true about the Standard forcing steeper binding angles. The toe clearance for both SI and Standard is the same. i.e. The sole Block is identical for both and therefore the boot sole placement on the Sole Block is also identical.

I can't understand what you wrote (I'm not so good in english).

If you mean that the spaces occupied by the toe of the standard Td2 and the one occupied from the toe of the StepIn Td2 are the same...well... this is absolutely not true!

The standard Td2 loose more than 1cm due to the distance between the boot and the lever.

[scotts.Scheinman]

and there is still more canting options!

[D-Sub]

I can't understand what you wrote (I'm not so good in english).

If you mean that the spaces occupied by the toe of the standard Td2 and the one occupied from the toe of the StepIn Td2 are the same...well... this is absolutely not true!

The standard Td2 loose more than 1cm due to the distance between the boot and the lever.

you do realize that Bob Jenney designed the bindings...? what he is saying is that the positioning of the boot is the same in both. if the binding is "longer" with the standard, its really only on top of the boot, somewhere the majority of riders wont be affected by...

[scotts.Scheinman]

isnt bob jenny the one who desinged the TD2 and TD?

[AaronG]

I think what Richard is trying to get across here is that the actual toe lever, when closed, does not follow the contour of the boot tight enough. The toe lever where it bends at the 90 degrees, does not sit flush against the boot, this is where the additional length comes from. The lever is sticking out a little further than normal. This is why the EC guys modify the toe levers with the catek levers, the Catek levers follow the contour of the boot closely and does not protrude out beyond the toe of the boot.

Check out this thread, hopefully you can see where the lever sits tighter to the boot between the unmodified lever and the modified lever

http://www.extremecarving.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=671

NOt sure if this helped

[RicHard]

you do realize that Bob Jenney designed the bindings...? what he is saying is that the positioning of the boot is the same in both. if the binding is "longer" with the standard, its really only on top of the boot, somewhere the majority of riders wont be affected by...

Well, actually, I didn't know he is the one that designed the bindings. It's a honour to have his words! And...it's ok, I didn't understood what he wrote in the way you explained it (sorry again for my english comprehension! I would have to improve my english before than my ability to carve!!! :-) ).

Anyway, as you can see in one of the pictures, the most external point of the toe lever/bail is about 1.6cm out of the most external point on the boot toe (indicated by the red arrow). In the step-in version, the most external point of the toe bail is not only "not 1.6cm out" but even less external than the most external point on the boot toe.

You gain 1.6cm of length. I don't say that the Standard should be the same of the step-in but I think that 1.6cm out is a little bit too much...

For Oldvolvosrule:

yes, you got what I was meaning! ;-)

[D-Sub]

thanks for the clarification bob..and sorry to Fin :)

[AaronG]

Just got through with scrolling most of the photos on the EC site, it appears that on toe side turns that Patrice and Jacque are gettin their boards at nearly a 90 degree angle to the snow surface. It appears that for EC riding the 58 degrees that BobJ states does not allow for enough snow to toe lever clearance. This maybe true with the EC style of carving, expecially on toe side turns, but with the bomber style that most of the NorteAmericanos use this seems to be a non-issue.

[RicHard]

So, if I understand the issue correctly, and I think I do, modification to the bail lever should not yield a significant increase in snow clearance. It should also not drive the stance angle as the boot sole is still the driving factor.

Does this make sense?

Thanks a lot for your answer. It makes sense and it's a right reasoning.

But... I think that you're starting from a point that could not be true everytime.

You choosed a point (as the edge of the board) that is not really the one everybody could choose (the red circled one).

Many peoples (as me) use to put the most external part of the boot toe exactly on the edge (watching it from the bird point of view), as suggested on many sites, from many racers and many instructors, due to the fact that especially when you carve hard the steeps in the second half of the carve, with no very icy snow, the inclination of the board on the steep terrain and the fact that the board dig a little bit into the snow can make your boot-toe drag the snow (arghhhh!).

So, if we assume such point (the green circled one in the picture) as the edge point, the calculation bring to different results: the blue line shows the lenght of the bail/lever overhang (the 1.6cm I was talking about) compared to the boot-toe... and the problems that it could represent! ;-)

I think I was able to explain it properly... :-\

Anyway, I agree with you about not modifying the binding. That's why I'm really hoping that an "official" solution will come soon to the only "improveable point" I found on a so well engineered bindings that I'm proud of.

:-D

[astrokel]

Just thought I'd point this out... From Richard's photo (shot from above) it looks like, at the angle the binding is set at, the bail wire/rod is more of an issue in terms of contact point beyond the board edge than the front edge of either the boot OR the lever. It seems that the absolute length of the boot/binding assembly is less important than the radius of the assembly... the only time the absolute length would be important is if the bindings were set perpendicular to the board edge.

[RicHard]

Just thought I'd point this out... From Richard's photo (shot from above) it looks like, at the angle the binding is set at, the bail wire/rod is more of an issue in terms of contact point beyond the board edge than the front edge of either the boot OR the lever. It seems that the absolute length of the boot/binding assembly is less important than the radius of the assembly... the only time the absolute length would be important is if the bindings were set perpendicular to the board edge.

I think I understood what you mean.

Well, even at the angle you see in my picture, the bail is about 1.3cm out of the most external point of the boot.

So, we can "not take" the maximum length from the boot to the lever (1.6cm) but anyway the length from the boot to the bail is always a little bit long (1.3cm)...

(I hope I got what you wrote)

[RicHard]

Bob, thanks a lot once more for your posts that (I know it) require a lot of your time to be written.

I think that they are really helpful to understand many things about angles, lengths, etc...

I realize just now that what is valid for me could be not valid for everyone, so we have, as first, to agree about the fact that it's really helpful in many conditions to have the boot entirely inside the edge.

Let me add some opinions about your statements:

(cut)... even at 58 degrees of clearance per my 1st illustration, you rarely, if ever, experience boot contact with the snow.

Using your illustration, the angulation is even more extreme at 64 degrees and therefore even less likely to experience boot-out. (See pic)

FYI - It has been my experience that very few carvers angulate beyond 55 degrees. (Relative to the slope) Not that it’s not being done, but reaching 64 degrees of angulation is very very rare and will happen on only the steepest of slopes.

Well... as you can see in the pictures (it's me)... maybe I'm one of them. As you can see, even if the slopes are not so steep, I think the angle of the board on the snow is (much) higher than 55 and 64... That's why I have to keep all the boot/bindings inside the edge.

The same could happen to a carver that carve less inclinated but that's carving a steeper slope. If the slopes is steep and not icy... well.. the drag become... #£$%&%$£! :-D

And yes, I’m with you in regard to deeper/softer snow or deeper trenches being more of an issue. It’s still rare to have a major issue as far up as the bail.

I’d love to see evidence of consistent bail/snow contact. Anyone have any pics of their standard binding that has wear or impact marks that are due to booting out?

Well, maybe it will depends on the way I carve (a high edge angle, especially on steep slopes), but if I have overhang of just 3mm, even on well packed snow I can see my toe drag on the snow. I've never taken picture of it but... I could. Obviously, with just 3mm I can see the track but such track cannot make me fall down. But it means that... something more... could. Anyway we are talking of more than 1cm of overhang.

Nils, Patrice etc. Want to add to this thread?

I really would like to have their opinion too...

Anyway, the problem comes from the fact that the need is to have the minimum bindings/boots space wasted due to the fact that a narrow board has some features that larger doesn't have. But a long binding/boot system make you choose higher angles. Too high angles can give you some problems, so... that's why the need is to have shorter bindings/boot system. ;-)

On larger boards, it doesn't matter. But I thing that on my 195cm wide board, 65/60 degrees (what I need to be inside the edge) are too high. What about mounting the Td2 on my silberpfeil (184mm waist width)? I fear such attempt and I'm not doing it! ;-)

And think about the fact that I have a very small foot (26.5)...what about bigger feet? ;-)

Thanks a lot in advance for your comprehension and answers!

Regards, Richard.

[RCrobar]

Hi Bob

When extremecaving the board/binding interface regularly reaches an angle of approximately 84 degrees.

(Jacques Rilliet experimented with and clarified this point to me.)

What I personally found was that in soft snow the longer TD2 bail did not cause boot out, the trench in the snow left a deeper mark from the toe lever hitting. The rider/carve was not really affected.

When riding on harder snow the longer TD2 bail consistently caused the edge to kick out of the carve. It did not matter whether the slope was very flat or very steep.

FYI (23.1 cm wide board, 13 m sidecut, Mondo Point 28.5 boot, 46 degrees rear)

The only way to avoid the toe lever over hang was:

1) to use higher angles, something I did not want to do

2) or eventually modifying the Catek lever to fit the TD2’s.

I love my TD2’s, but I really wish the damn toe bail/lever didn’t stick out so far.

Rob

[D-Sub]

nice pics, Richard! (toeside looks a little stinkbug though...EC toe turns don't look good to me.) heel turns are awesome though.

One thing to note...bombers werent designed for eurocarving :)

[skategoat]

Guys:

Does the OS2 give you more adjustability for boot sole length? One thing that bugged me about the OS1 was the fact that you had 3 or 4 holes on the plate and 3 or 4 screw positions on the heel and toe blocks. I know it's a lot of combinations but I prefer the micro-adjustability of the TD2 bails or the worm-screw mechanism in the F2s and others.

Henry

[philw]

..EC toe turns don't look good to me.) heel turns are awesome though.

One thing to note...bombers werent designed for eurocarving :)

Hmm. When I was a lad, a EuroCarve didn't involve that diving-into-the-snow business. Perhaps the language has shifted, but I think the ducking-into-the-snow thing isn't the same as a Euro-carve, which is a fully laid out carve IMHO and doesn't involve diving to the piste and scrubbing your hands on it.

Each, own, to. But they're not the same. I can euro carve, but I wouldn't be seen dead doing that diving stuff.

[D-Sub]

I just basically refuse to use the word extreme in relation to anything ;)

[bobdea]

Guys:

Does the OS2 give you more adjustability for boot sole length? One thing that bugged me about the OS1 was the fact that you had 3 or 4 holes on the plate and 3 or 4 screw positions on the heel and toe blocks. I know it's a lot of combinations but I prefer the micro-adjustability of the TD2 bails or the worm-screw mechanism in the F2s and others.

Henry

seven spaces on the toes and seven on the heel, you sould be able to get it pretty well tuned

[skategoat]

If they are exactly the same positions as the OS1, then I'll have the same problem - either too loose or too tight. The too tight position actually deformed the soles of my boots. If I went one position longer, it was fine at room temperature but too loose on the hill.

[nils]

Here is my advice on the subject, it does not reflect jacques or patrice position on it, since there is no real "rule" i think when it comes to settings, tuning, or riding.

I think the toe bail drag is an issue when it gets icy, or very hard conditions only, and that makes me not want to lay down turns anyway: not a real issue for me. I know that P and J and some other riders like to dive down even if its icy, taking more risks, and in that case the toe clip of the TD2 does drag, and may cause edge slip. And this is why Jacques tried adapting the catek lever to the tD2 bail. ( after first riding with a modified TD2 bail).

Some people with engineering in mind (24/7) like jacques, like to experiment and tweak things to the max, this is why he ended up at once waxing the sidewalls, milling down the TD2 base a bit, making custom tempered bails, and adapting those levers. I will try the catek mods on the TD2 bails to see if it allows me to lay frontsides on the icy slopes! But I don't think its an issue with 99% of the carving community really. Same goes with the TD2 bails that the majority of the riders will never bend anyway.

Happy 2006 to all

Nils

Nils