Rome Targa vs Burton Cartel? - Page 2 - Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums
SnowboardingForum.com is the premier Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-24-2012, 09:20 PM   #11 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supra View Post
In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.
You cannot be serious!?
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-24-2012, 09:42 PM   #12 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 670
Default

i sure am! On EL there's a guy who pops in every now and then who has very close ties to the bindings division at B, so we get all those juicy stats :P
Supra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 09:37 AM   #13 (permalink)
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
BigmountainVMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sugarloaf, ME / Philly
Posts: 1,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supra View Post
In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.

and dude, how on earth can a binding be good for jumping and carving but not good for boxes and rails??? What exactly happens on a box? You ollie on and flex a press and ollie off. What's with the prophecy's that is deficient for this???
I should have noted that from what I heard, the Cartel highback is softer than last years model, but by how much I had no idea.

How can a binding be good for carving but not for boxes and rails? You should think that out a bit more. On the scale from flexible to stiff, a more flexible binding is better for rails/boxes, an intermediate flex is better for jumps and a stiff binding is better for carving. The Prophecy, in the year that I purchased them, had some lateral flex (longitudinal on the board axis) but less flex than the Malavitas. It was also relatively stiff heel to toe, which is why it was a good carving binding, and also good for jumps, but didn't have the OPTIMUM flexibility for rails. If it makes you feel better you can replace "not so hot for boxes and rails" with "not optimum for boxes and rails."
BigmountainVMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 05:01 PM   #14 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Triple8Sol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,063
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Either one will pair very well with that board.
__________________
15 NS Ripsaw . 14 NS Proto HD . 14 NS Cobra . 13 Gnu Space Case EC2 . 2013 Salomon Pow Snake
14 Now Drive . 13 Now IPO
14 Flow Hylite
Triple8Sol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 07:12 PM   #15 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supra View Post
i sure am! On EL there's a guy who pops in every now and then who has very close ties to the bindings division at B, so we get all those juicy stats :P
I am still calling bullshit on the 3%. There is just no way to quantify the different dimensions of flex that way. It makes no sense.
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 09:47 PM   #16 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 39
Default

I got the wife (5'11") a new (last seasons sale) setup this year, which included switching from 2010 Burton Lexa's (LG) to 2012 Cartels (SM)

I was really hoping that the Cartels would offer a higher and stiffer back to match the relative stiffness of the new board (2012 Rossignol Diva 156).

Glad to hear all the positive comments about them!
havin_a_ball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 11:41 PM   #17 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 670
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hktrdr View Post
I am still calling bullshit on the 3%. There is just no way to quantify the different dimensions of flex that way. It makes no sense.
How about if they have a machine which flexes the highback with a constant pressure until it snaps? You can then compare highback stiffness.
and yeah, there is 3% more torsional flex this year.

I know, I know, 3% sounds silly but seriously, if I was making it up, don't you think I'd use a bigger number?
Supra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2012, 11:48 PM   #18 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 510
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supra View Post
Actually, the highback on the cartels stiffened considerably in 2012. From 2011 and back for 5 or 6 years (i forget exactly) it was the same stiffness.
In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.

and dude, how on earth can a binding be good for jumping and carving but not good for boxes and rails??? What exactly happens on a box? You ollie on and flex a press and ollie off. What's with the prophecy's that is deficient for this???
+1 The prophecies are actually supposed to be the best of both worlds. The lower half of the binding is softer, so you should be able to get some nice lateral flex out of them

Could be the high back though, I think it predates zero forward lean.
I like a little forward lean though.
phony_stark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012, 10:32 AM   #19 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 39
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supra View Post
How about if they have a machine which flexes the highback with a constant pressure until it snaps? You can then compare highback stiffness.
and yeah, there is 3% more torsional flex this year.
If the material composition of the highback was altered slightly, and tests were done as described above, then the 3% sounds like it could just be a number the marketing team got ahold of.

Unless, combined with other changes in re:flex or whatnot, the sum of the small changes would be somehow noticeable.

I bet the margin of error for the stiffness of run of mass produced highback pieces is at least 1.5%.
havin_a_ball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2012, 06:15 AM   #20 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by havin_a_ball View Post
If the material composition of the highback was altered slightly, and tests were done as described above, then the 3% sounds like it could just be a number the marketing team got ahold of.

Unless, combined with other changes in re:flex or whatnot, the sum of the small changes would be somehow noticeable.

I bet the margin of error for the stiffness of run of mass produced highback pieces is at least 1.5%.
Exactly. The 3% number is complete bullshit. What specific aspect was measured that changed by 3% percent?
The force required to break the highback? Which would be completely useless information...
Or the force to deflect/twist the highback by a certain degree/extent? In that case how about a different degree/extent - I guarantee you it will not be 3% and could be 10% more or even 10% less.
It is bad enough that the industry is trying to rate flex for boards and bindings on a single number scale, but at least those numbers can offer some guidance. Stating that a highback is 3% stiffer is just complete and utter lunacy and completely meaningless (as pointed out by others already, even the manufacturing tolerances are more than that).
hktrdr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:18 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums