Originally Posted by hktrdr
Wrong. As I have stated before, Union prefers not to get into flex ratings for a number of reasons (people misunderstand the whole flex/responsiveness thing, changes between models from year to year, flex of different parts of the bindings, etc.), but the facts are quite clear:
- SL and MC have fundamentally the same baseplate - Atlas Stage III. However, MC is cored out - hence, not as stiff. Stage II baseplate on the Force is 'beefier' and stiffer than either.
- SL and MC highbacks are very, very similar - carbon is used in the MC to reduce weight, not to increase stiffness. Force highbacks are quite different, but at least as stiff in most respects.
Therefore, overall stiffness: Force > SL > MC. Which is how all our shops have marketed them - and incidentally entirely consistent with my personal experience.
The machine cored carbon injected MC baseplate is significantly stiffer than the regular Atlas baseplate. I can't tell any difference in stiffness between the Force baseplate and non-carbon injected Atlas baseplate.
For Highbacks the Force is stiffer than the SL's and MC's torsionally. But you can't really compare because the Force flex pattern is symmetric, whereas the SL and MC's stiffness changes based on the pressure applied to particular parts of the highback.