Soft Step Ins for carving?
wye...@my-dejanews.com
step in bindings would be acceptable?
I am looking at getting a Nitro ARX or Range EX board and I presently have
Burton SI bindings and Ruler boots.
Would my boots handle the higher speed carves?
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Mark.Russ...@ntc.nokia.com
wye...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I am considering purchasing a freecarve board and I am wondering is using soft
> step in bindings would be acceptable?
>
> I am looking at getting a Nitro ARX or Range EX board and I presently have
> Burton SI bindings and Ruler boots.
>
> Would my boots handle the higher speed carves?
>
I was at a show a while ago, looking at Intec soft boot stepins and I was
very impressed - The boots were very stiff (more like a soft freecarve 'hard'
boot)and the boot/board interface seemed very secure. If you want to carve
with soft boots then you could do a lot worse than this. For use on a soft
freecarve-type board you may find that stiff soft boots (is that an
oxymoron?) are fine and nicer to use for general riding than plates.
For real carving, though, hard boots are the thing - As well as being stiffer
than soft boots thay also allow more adjustment to get you into a good carving
position (e.g. forward lean on the rear foot.)
-Mark.
og
weight to make the board work. I couldn't get any flex out of the
board.
sw
slinkster
>I am considering purchasing a freecarve board and I am wondering is using soft
>step in bindings would be acceptable?
>
>Burton SI bindings and Ruler boots.
>
>Would my boots handle the higher speed carves?
Theoretically you could do it, of course, but I would NOT recommend it.
The interface is way too flexy. The only soft step-ins I've ever heard are
any good for carving are K2 Clickers with the stiffest boots they make
(can't remember which model).
If you really want to squeeze performance out of a freecarve board, you
have to get hardboots.
--mark
--
. . . . .
mark bock
ta...@clark.net
Rene
IMHO to make a freecarve board work has nothing to do with boot weight. it's a
matter of riders weight, boot stiffness, boot-binding interface and boot fit.
what clicker boot did you try?
r.
og wrote:
> I tried Clickers on my Alp and they didn't have enough stiffness and
> weight to make the board work. I couldn't get any flex out of the
> board.
>
> sw
>
og
I agree. It was K2 Yeti. Pretty heavy and stiff but not enought to
work an Alp. You really need a stiff sole to flex an Alpine board
steve
Stephen Yiu Wah Lau
: In article <70jprm$ik7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <wye...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
: >I am considering purchasing a freecarve board and I am wondering is using soft
: >step in bindings would be acceptable?
: Theoretically you could do it, of course, but I would NOT recommend it.
: The interface is way too flexy. The only soft step-ins I've ever heard are
: any good for carving are K2 Clickers with the stiffest boots they make
: (can't remember which model).
I rode my K2 Ginsu with K2 Clicker Yetis and it carved fine...
Using even stiffer Guide boots this year... Mind you it the
Ginsu isn't the stiffest freecarve out there but I haven't
had any problems leaving trenches... Sort of disappointed
that K2 discontinued them... Wouldn't mind trying a Morrow
Indy or the like with my Clickers...
S
--
Stephen Lau --> syw...@ucalgary.ca | I'd really love to tell
The University of Calgary | the devil to go chill...
Department of Chemistry |
http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~sywlau/ | Office: SB429A/437 Lab: SB436
Phil Wigglesworth
>Using even stiffer Guide boots this year... Mind you it the
>Ginsu isn't the stiffest freecarve out there but I haven't
>had any problems leaving trenches... Sort of disappointed
>that K2 discontinued them... Wouldn't mind trying a Morrow
>Indy or the like with my Clickers...
I guess it's all a question of perspective. If you think that's a carve
board then I'm sure soft gear works fine with it. If you get something with
an 18cm waist then you may want to try a slightly more direct approach to
connecting your drive....
wye...@my-dejanews.com
ta...@clark.net (slinkster) wrote:
> In article <70jprm$ik7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <wye...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> >I am considering purchasing a freecarve board and I am wondering is using
soft
> >step in bindings would be acceptable?
> >
> >Burton SI bindings and Ruler boots.
> >
> >Would my boots handle the higher speed carves?
>
> The interface is way too flexy. The only soft step-ins I've ever heard are
> any good for carving are K2 Clickers with the stiffest boots they make
> (can't remember which model).
>
> have to get hardboots.
>
Well the ARX is pretty wide for a freesarve, about 23cm. I wanted to know if
the soft steps could flex the board enough to carve and hold edge at faster
speeds than a standard all terrain board.
wye...@my-dejanews.com
WHat I want to know is whether a freecarve board with a 23cm waist can be
matched up with soft step in bindings. If the general consensus is NO then
I'll consider trading in my Burton SI and boots for a hard boot setup, but I
would like to hear what people think first.
All I know is once you start carving you don't want to go back.
Stephen Yiu Wah Lau
: In article <70llo6$14t$1...@pheidippides.axion.bt.co.uk>,
: "Phil Wigglesworth" <no_...@btinternet.com> wrote:
: > >I rode my K2 Ginsu with K2 Clicker Yetis and it carved fine...
: > >Using even stiffer Guide boots this year... Mind you it the
: > I guess it's all a question of perspective. If you think that's a carve
: > board then I'm sure soft gear works fine with it. If you get something with
: > an 18cm waist then you may want to try a slightly more direct approach to
: > connecting your drive....
Well, K2 considers it a freecarve, like the Morrow Indy as well...
More so than a freeride... I also wouldn't compare it to say, a
Burton Alp or Factory Prime but the Ginsu does carve pretty well...
: WHat I want to know is whether a freecarve board with a 23cm waist can be
: matched up with soft step in bindings. If the general consensus is NO then
My Ginsu is around 23cm, so in my opinion, yes you can. I go between
45 and 30 degree angles depending what and where I ride and have a
fine time... some toe drag at 30 degrees when you're all laid out
I must admit, but then again, if you're going to lay out a fast
carve, I'd generally be riding at the higher angles...
: All I know is once you start carving you don't want to go back.
Gotta agree...
slinkster
>WHat I want to know is whether a freecarve board with a 23cm waist can be
>matched up with soft step in bindings. If the general consensus is NO then
>would like to hear what people think first.
>
The easiest answer is: there's no such thing as a freecarve board with a
23cm waist. With the exception of Randy's custom Prior, which is an
oddity, any board with a 23cm waist is basically a freeride board with
slightly stiffer flex. Since by the last statement you make above it's
pretty clear you intend to get serious about carving, my advice would be
not to bother with the sort of board you describe. You'll outgrow it in no
time. At least go with something like a Burton Alp or Prior 4WD. Even that
you'll probably outgrow pretty quickly -- there's nothing for carving like
a race board. Get yourself a long, skinny, stiff board and a stiff
interface (4-buckle hardboots and stiff bindings) and you'll REALLY be
able to carve.
In other words, if you really think carving is what you want to do, then
trade in the SI and get hardboots and plates. And while you're at it, get
an alpine board.
RP Pelletier
I'm currently running a prior 190 umm.. alpine board. I'm using three year old
burton systems with three year old atlas boot with one year old burton reactor
hardboot inserts, foot bed sucks but the cuff kicks. I'm 85% sure that I'll be
paying off my burton si's to use on this board (10% switching my mind and going
with clickers and 5% going for stiffers.) If I do get the si I will be making
modifications to the front binding or using my three strap in the front (probably
the modification) I believe you would definately want the drifter as every little
extra bit counts for desired 'carve' performance, but that's only my opinion,
which, as stated in prior posts is pretty much fact ;o) Your weight/strength also
needs to be taken a bit into account as well because when the surface gets hard
your strength and form make a monumental difference.
As far as your boots handling...well your form will pretty much dictate which
boots you can use and which ones you can't. You probably need to pay particular
attention to the boots flex from your current binding angles. For instance you
probably want latteral outside stiffness and forward flex would be second to that.
Hope this help, I have to cut my spew short. Let me know if you have any
question.
R.
wye...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> I am considering purchasing a freecarve board and I am wondering is using soft
> step in bindings would be acceptable?
>
> I am looking at getting a Nitro ARX or Range EX board and I presently have
> Burton SI bindings and Ruler boots.
>
> Would my boots handle the higher speed carves?
>
wye...@my-dejanews.com
ta...@clark.net (slinkster) wrote:
> In article <70m005$dcq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <wye...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> >WHat I want to know is whether a freecarve board with a 23cm waist can be
> >matched up with soft step in bindings. If the general consensus is NO then
> >I'll consider trading in my Burton SI and boots for a hard boot setup, but I
> >would like to hear what people think first.
> >
> >All I know is once you start carving you don't want to go back.
>
> The easiest answer is: there's no such thing as a freecarve board with a
> 23cm waist. With the exception of Randy's custom Prior, which is an
> oddity, any board with a 23cm waist is basically a freeride board with
> slightly stiffer flex.
I guess they have placed the ARX board I am looking at in the wrong section.
It's a cross of a race and a freeride for boardercross use (speed, really
quick turns, jumping) and called it called a freecarve board.
You can check out the specs at http://www.nitrousa.com/prodfset.htm
> Since by the last statement you make above it's
> pretty clear you intend to get serious about carving, my advice would be
> not to bother with the sort of board you describe. You'll outgrow it in no
> time. At least go with something like a Burton Alp or Prior 4WD. Even that
> you'll probably outgrow pretty quickly -- there's nothing for carving like
> a race board. Get yourself a long, skinny, stiff board and a stiff
> interface (4-buckle hardboots and stiff bindings) and you'll REALLY be
> able to carve.
>
Well.. the last statement is what I have heard. I might give my setup a shot
for more "all aound" use and then pick up a prior and hard boots when I
really want to pull some g's and pencil line thin arcs.
Thanks for the info though.
Winston
Rene
i got the k2 sherpa. it's supposed to be stiffer and i hope it will work on my f2
roadster. i'll find it out on nov 14. in tignes.
bye
r.
dynam...@aol.com
sacrifice at 120. Almost 70 percent off. Will take best offers if
reasonable.
email me
dynam...@aol.com
Doug Taylor
>The easiest answer is: there's no such thing as a freecarve board with a
>23cm waist. With the exception of Randy's custom Prior, which is an
>oddity, any board with a 23cm waist is basically a freeride board with
>slightly stiffer flex. Since by the last statement you make above it's
>pretty clear you intend to get serious about carving, my advice would be
>not to bother with the sort of board you describe. You'll outgrow it in no
>time. At least go with something like a Burton Alp or Prior 4WD. Even that
>you'll probably outgrow pretty quickly -- there's nothing for carving like
>a race board. Get yourself a long, skinny, stiff board and a stiff
>interface (4-buckle hardboots and stiff bindings) and you'll REALLY be
>able to carve.
>
>In other words, if you really think carving is what you want to do, then
>trade in the SI and get hardboots and plates. And while you're at it, get
>an alpine board.
I agree with the above except I would caution against going directly
to race equipment. Stiff boots, bindings and board are awesome once
you can handle them, but it would be a challenge to learn to on them.
I have painfull memories of struggling on a too long, too stiff race
board with racing ski boots about 5 years ago when I should have been
on something more forgiving. I suugest moving from the freeride soft
boot / wide board set up to a freecarve set up with a medium flexing,
no longer than 165 cm directional board, regular plate bindings, and a
soft flexing hardboot. Even if you outgrow the freecarve board for
groomed high speed trench digging, it will still be handy once the
snow gets deep, choppy, or bumpy.
.
--Doug Taylor
dta...@servtech.com
http://www.hyperski.com/articles/oct96dougtaylor.adultsnowboard.htm
Phil Wigglesworth
>to race equipment. Stiff boots, bindings and board are awesome once
>you can handle them, but it would be a challenge to learn to on them.
>I have painfull memories of struggling on a too long, too stiff race
>board with racing ski boots about 5 years ago when I should have been
>on something more forgiving
Fair point. I have a GS plank from a few years back which is fine at about
80mph but a pig to turn on a dry ski slope.... I'd buy "race" kit as Mr
Slink suggested, but you need to be careful that you get the right stuff. If
you have to ask, then I'd avoid big GS boards (you can tell these as they're
generally pretty stiff, longer sidecut radius, wider waist & longer). Get
something which you can flex and which isn't at the edge of the envelope.
Most "race" kit is pretty detuned in any case so you should be ok. If you
live in the US/Canada, just test the stuff on the slopes; it's obvious after
about 5 meters if the thing's "right" or not.
Phil
Jason Ross
: I agree with the above except I would caution against going directly
: to race equipment. Stiff boots, bindings and board are awesome once
: you can handle them, but it would be a challenge to learn to on them.
: I suugest moving from the freeride soft
: boot / wide board set up to a freecarve set up with a medium flexing,
: no longer than 165 cm directional board, regular plate bindings, and a
: soft flexing hardboot.
Anybody have any time in yet on some of the boardercross inspired boards?
Burton has the wire series which are narrow enough to pretty much require
hardboots. And I would think the Palmer channel board would be similar
but wider so softies are possible. But, how do they ride/carve? The idea
sounds great... something stiff enough to let you rail around on it, but
with enough width to handle crud snow nicely. I'm not trying to say they
are equally good carving tools as race boards, but sometimes a race board
just isn't what turns you on. I'm looking for something sorta between a
supermodel and an alp in Burton-speak.
Jason
yun dong
nice ride
quicker and snappier than the supermodel
but not as agressive as an alp
wye...@my-dejanews.com
jr...@millcomm.com (Jason Ross) wrote:
> Anybody have any time in yet on some of the boardercross inspired boards?
> Burton has the wire series which are narrow enough to pretty much require
> hardboots. And I would think the Palmer channel board would be similar
> but wider so softies are possible. But, how do they ride/carve? The idea
> sounds great... something stiff enough to let you rail around on it, but
> with enough width to handle crud snow nicely. I'm not trying to say they
> are equally good carving tools as race boards, but sometimes a race board
> just isn't what turns you on. I'm looking for something sorta between a
> supermodel and an alp in Burton-speak.
>
> Jason
>
This is the question I am trying to get an opinion on. I think the Wire would
have been a way better board if Burton placed a sintered base on it rather
than a crappy extruded one.
I have their soft SI step in system and am trying to decide on one of
two/three "boardercross/freecarve" style boards: Nitro ARX 159, Morrow Indy
158 or Winterstick Cirque 158 (if I can get Winterstick where I live).
I want a steup where I can go at mach speeds, lay a carve, hit the pow and get
some air off a kicker.
IMO This I think is the true "freeriding" concept.
wye...@my-dejanews.com
Looked at the specs and the board is too wide. It's still a freeride board. I
am looking for somethin narrower apprx 22-23cm in waist width and 9m sidecut
on a 160cm board
RP Pelletier
template. Though it definately pushes the alp side of things (and then some)
however the widths are supermodelisk but not quite so fat.
R.
Kevin Kan
board like the ARX or the Ginsu or the Indy will work well with the
Burton SI stuff if he keeps his angles relatively flat. However, the
more he bumps up his angles, the less effective this set up is going to
be. I think the natural foot roll that is built in to Clickers and the
Burton SI is great for flatter angles, but screws things up when the
angles get increased.
kev
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Kevin Kan (510) 534-7379 |
|ke...@kan.org 936 Bayview Ave. Apt. A |
|www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Arena/8612 Oakland, CA 94610 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Neil Swingler
carving.
You want that extra toeside support and lateral stiffness.
On the subject of the ARX. I have a test here in the french mag "Snow
Surf".
It really is quite soft at 21kg/m2 for the 159(yes they measured the flex
of the boards).
By comparison, the Burton Wire (154) is 28, Alp (158) is 31 and Palmer
Channel (155)
is 37. The true beast of boardercross boards is the Oxygen Supercross (164)
at 43.
They describe the ARX as more freeride than alpine and good off piste.
Maybe the ARX isn't too stiff for the soft boots but the 23cm waist will
force you
too a fairly high angle.
--
Neil Swingler
wye...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<70nqks$8si$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
wye...@my-dejanews.com
"Neil Swingler" <neil.s...@span.ch> wrote:
> Personally I would prefer a step-in boot with an internal high back for
> carving.
> You want that extra toeside support and lateral stiffness.
>
> On the subject of the ARX. I have a test here in the french mag "Snow
> Surf".
> It really is quite soft at 21kg/m2 for the 159(yes they measured the flex
> of the boards).
> By comparison, the Burton Wire (154) is 28, Alp (158) is 31 and Palmer
> Channel (155)
> is 37. The true beast of boardercross boards is the Oxygen Supercross (164)
> at 43.
> They describe the ARX as more freeride than alpine and good off piste.
>
> Maybe the ARX isn't too stiff for the soft boots but the 23cm waist will
> force you
> too a fairly high angle.
> --
Thanks for the info. This is the type info I was looking for. I wanted to know
how stiff the ARX is compared to real alpine board or the Wire. Based on the
numbers you posted it isn't that stiff (stiffer than an advanced freeride I
hope).
The specs on the Oxtgen Supercross are incredible. Based on the flex rating I
probably couldn't flex it with my soft step ins or have great control over it.
Where can I get this review?
Rene
intresting stuff. is there a site where i can get the values of other boards?
i would be intrested in f2's values.
thanks & bye
r.
Neil Swingler wrote:
> Personally I would prefer a step-in boot with an internal high back for
> carving.
> You want that extra toeside support and lateral stiffness.
>
> On the subject of the ARX. I have a test here in the french mag "Snow
> Surf".
> It really is quite soft at 21kg/m2 for the 159(yes they measured the flex
> of the boards).
> By comparison, the Burton Wire (154) is 28, Alp (158) is 31 and Palmer
> Channel (155)
> is 37. The true beast of boardercross boards is the Oxygen Supercross (164)
> at 43.
> They describe the ARX as more freeride than alpine and good off piste.
>
> Maybe the ARX isn't too stiff for the soft boots but the 23cm waist will
> force you
> too a fairly high angle.
> --
Neil Swingler
> Thanks for the info. This is the type info I was looking for. I wanted to know
> how stiff the ARX is compared to real alpine board or the Wire. Based on the
> numbers you posted it isn't that stiff (stiffer than an advanced freeride I
> hope).
>
The ARX is pretty floppy. The most flexible Burton tested was the Charger (156)
with a stiffness of 14-22-16 (kg/m2 front, middle, back). The ARX is 10-21-10.
They say that the lack of stiffness in the nose and tail is typical of an alpine
board.
They categorised it is an easy to ride boardercross board. Other boards in the
category were Burton Wire, Empire Lagoon, F2 Breezer, Hot Wish, Original Sin
Smile, Pogo Reefer.
> The specs on the Oxtgen Supercross are incredible. Based on the flex rating I
> probably couldn't flex it with my soft step ins or have great control over it.
>
Their comment is that you need to be on EPO to bend it as the flex is full on alpine.
It is supposed to be a versatile board though.
> Where can I get this review?
>
In a French magazine. You might be able to get it in Canada. I live in Europe.
--
Neil Swingler
Neil Swingler
Rene <re...@gmx.net> wrote in article <36316855...@gmx.net>...
> hi neil,
>
> intresting stuff. is there a site where i can get the values of other
boards?
> i would be intrested in f2's values.
No site as far as I know.
Cruiser 162 12-29-12 (kg/m2 nose, middle, tail)
Boxer 156 13-23-12
Eliminator 159 13-32-14
Breezer 158 11-27-14
Speedster RS 172 12-42-14
I found the difference between the Eliminator and Boxer interesting as in
all other respects (width, sidecut, effective edge) they are almost
identical.
--
Neil Swingler
wye...@my-dejanews.com
"Neil Swingler" <neil.s...@span.ch> wrote:
> wye...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article <70r4pk$e2h$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
> > Thanks for the info. This is the type info I was looking for. I wanted to
know
> > how stiff the ARX is compared to real alpine board or the Wire. Based on
the
> > numbers you posted it isn't that stiff (stiffer than an advanced freeride I
> > hope).
> >
> The ARX is pretty floppy. The most flexible Burton tested was the Charger
(156)
> with a stiffness of 14-22-16 (kg/m2 front, middle, back). The ARX is 10-21-10.
> They say that the lack of stiffness in the nose and tail is typical of an
alpine
> board.
>
That's weird. They (Nitro) states that this is a pretty firm board
considering the application it was meant for. If the numbers that you spec
are correct this may be a bad thing for me to have discovered.
> They categorised it is an easy to ride boardercross board. Other boards in the
> category were Burton Wire, Empire Lagoon, F2 Breezer, Hot Wish, Original Sin
> Smile, Pogo Reefer.
>
I looked at some of these boards. The Burton was a choice but the base
sucked. I can't get an Empire, F2, Pogo or Hot where I live (can't find a
dealer) and the OSin was a demo unit.
I finally saw an Oxygen Supercross (used) and it is as stiff as a standard
race board. Unfortunately I am unable to demo a lot of these boards since
they are not as much in demand as a freestyle/freeride board. I'll have to
take a leap of faith and hope that Nitro is as good as their advertising,
hope that the numbers that the review posted are off and that the ARX is
going to be stiffer than the Option I ride now. Phew!
Still praying for snow....
Neil Swingler
wye...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article
<70ub73$6sh$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> That's weird. They (Nitro) states that this is a pretty firm board
> considering the application it was meant for. If the numbers that you
spec
> are correct this may be a bad thing for me to have discovered.
>
they also descibe the board as quite soft. In the shop, you could try
comparing
the stiffness to a reference board.
> I looked at some of these boards. The Burton was a choice but the base
> sucked. I can't get an Empire, F2, Pogo or Hot where I live (can't find a
> dealer) and the OSin was a demo unit.
>
Being a French magazine it is oriented to Euro manufacturers.
--
Neil Swingler
Iain Duncumb
> The ARX is pretty floppy. The most flexible Burton tested was the Charger (156)
> with a stiffness of 14-22-16 (kg/m2 front, middle, back). The ARX is 10-21-10.
> They say that the lack of stiffness in the nose and tail is typical of an alpine
> board.
Anyone tell me how these measurements are made and how you end up with a
figure in kg/m2?
/Iain
Neil Swingler
in absolute terms, they might be useful when comparing boards.
According to the mag, they are measured with a "flex machine"
(obviously), in the centre and at the extremities of the effective
edge.
Roughly translating:
"For those who want to become engineers of the snowboard, here is
the flex fomula. If a board is placed on 2 points spaced by a distance
of L and one deflects it by a distance F with a weight P placed
between the two points, the average longitudinal elasticity over L
is:
E=(P*L^3)/(48*F)"
--
Neil Swingler
Iain Duncumb <I.P.D...@DELETE.THIS.lboro.ac.uk> wrote in article
<363447E0...@DELETE.THIS.lboro.ac.uk>...
The creature from Greenwood Lake !
I am looking for the same type of board this season and again want something more than a
Supermodel. I am really interested in the Nitro ARX but found the web site for Avalanche and took
a liking to the 164 Sanders. Anybody have experience and/or an opinion about it:
http://www.avalancheusa.com/sand.html
Ken.....
Rene
the eleminator is a wood core board, the boxer has a wood foam core. imo
thats the reason.
>
> --
> Neil Swingler
thanx for reply.
unfortunately the roadster is not listed but i guess it's somewhere between
the eleminator and the speedster.
the stiffness of the f2 boards in comparison with burton boards is intresting
too.
r.