EC99SS

I'm thinking of widening my stance to try it out. On my old deck the reference points on the inserts were 22" and I had my bindings there. On my new board the reference/default stance is about 21". I'd like to try 22.5 or 23" (I'm 5'6" with 29" inseam). So should I move the bindings out together from the reference points? As opposed to keeping the front where they are and moving the rears only? I guess I don't know the diff between the two methods.

Thanks!

Sick-Pow

Depends if you want more nose or tail. If you want perfect twin, you will need math skills.

I always like a little more nose, if only.25" on my fun board.

Ryan_T

On my directional twin, I measure how wide I want them (23") and tried to position them as centered as possible on the board. Problem is, it still has 1cm more on the tip vs tail. I ignored the reference points completely. This feels good to me. My rear leg burns a bit, not sure if maybe I need to play with this again.

On my twin board, everything's centered at 24".




Somewhat related, but does it even make sense to pick a stance and work into them? Are those reference stances designed to keep leg burn minimal or do I just need to do more conditioning..? Or maybe it's a technique issue..

I like symmetry, and have kept mine to as perfectly centered as possible with mirror angles, but I wonder if I should play around and see if there's something better. And if so...how to go about finding it...? By that I mean, does moving your back foot back give you more or less torgue on the turns, etc...?

__________________
Ryan - flickr

EC99SS

My new board is slightly set back (.5"). It's a BSOD. So If I increase my stance equally (front and back), does that play with the setback? I basically don't want to mess with any setback or recommended positions other than increasing my stance width. Just not sure if in order to keep it as stock (for lack of a better word) do I move both bindings equally?

Not sure if that made sense...

Ryan_T

^ My understanding is, the reference stance is the suggested center of mass, and if you want a wider stance, you should push them outwards evenly.




But I completely violated this rule by putting my binders in the center (ignoring the reference) on my directional twin...and it felt right (albeit leg burn). So maybe I'm wrong.

__________________
Ryan - flickr

Sick-Pow

Sidecut and binding placement is more important than set back in concept.Set back is focusing on how much nose or tail, but playing with sidecut placement dictates much in how the board rides.

Where the stance is set, in relation to the sidecut ,is for sure fun to play with for sure. When you hit the magic spot with a board, good things happen. I am just at 23.25, can't push it much farther without feeling my hips be a little less mobile. I tried 23.5 on my last pow day (early Dec), and I have to say, it was some of my fastest and most string riding ever.

EC99SS

WOuld you be affecting the intent of the sidecut for your directional board by trying to center yourself on the board? A true twin board has a centered stance and a sidecut that works with it. In retrospect a direction board would have say a setback stance and a sidecut that works with that. Wouldn't trying to move your stance setback to the middle affect how well the sidecut works for you (or anyone)?

I'm just taking a guess. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

solucien

correct, usually a directional board has set-back stance and sidecut, with the ref-stance centering on the 'sweet-spot' of the sidecut.
centering up your stance measuring from tip&tail, will place you forward on the sidecut and flex-pattern, and might feel a little weird.

centering on a twin is natural, a little setback on a twin will work too.

moving your stance, if you want to stay 'centered' regardless of on twin (centered in relation to tip&tail) or on direction (centered on sidecut&flex), you should move both bindings.
if you don't mind a little setback, moving out only the rear binding could work too (shortening up the tail)