Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: New Bindings: Uprise v Phantom v Targa? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 
   

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
12-05-2011 12:21 AM
Nivek more often than not shop kids are knowledgeless dimwits. This is no exception. Companys are stiffer. Go for those.
12-05-2011 12:03 AM
Toecutter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakal View Post
...what I actually do ride. Which is normally speed runs focussing on turns on groomed days, or powder on snowy days.

As far as my riding approach is concerned, its all about powder, and ive tried to set up all my gear for that. Everything else is just playing in between powder days, so if im not fully equipped to take on the park, so be it.

So the Companys are a better choice for me than the 390 Bosses right?
Given how you ride, maybe the K2 Ever is worth the extra $50 over the Company? I have a set of Auto Evers (now named Ever) and a set of Auto Uprise (which look like the Company but with the Auto feature) and for freeriding similar to you I like the Evers a bit better. The lack of highback padding is not noticeable since I have a thick boot on, but the frame feels stiffer and I really like the Auto feature.
12-04-2011 11:49 PM
Zakal Ive all but made up my mind to get some of the Companys, but I can't find any of these around locally (Australia) to get my hands on and look at, so I sent someone I know in Tahoe around to the local shop to have a look, and hopefully to try a pair of my boots in the bindings to make sure there's no size issues.

Something in particular I was looking out for was this "suction" effect on the K2s that Angry Snowboarder was praising, but mentioned that it may have been to do with his pairing of the Companys with his K2 boots. I don't have K2 boots, so I wanted to check it still fitted okay.

When my mate got to the store, one of the shoppies told him to look at the Rome 390 Bosses instead saying they were stiffer than the Companys.

Now, from what I've read, both in this thread and in other reviews etc, that is not even remotely correct. Rome seem to advertise the 390s as being middle of the road on their "poppy/buttery" scale (which i presume is a stiffness/flex scale), and most other reviews ive seen refer to teh 390s as being a park binding of average stiffness.

I don't really ride park at all. And whilst I wouldn't mind getting better at it and perhaps doing it more, im not about to buy a set of bindings suited to that more than what I actually do ride. Which is normally speed runs focussing on turns on groomed days, or powder on snowy days.

As far as my riding approach is concerned, its all about powder, and ive tried to set up all my gear for that. Everything else is just playing in between powder days, so if im not fully equipped to take on the park, so be it.

So the Companys are a better choice for me than the 390 Bosses right?
11-26-2011 12:17 AM
snowklinger cool


tyvm.

11-25-2011 09:50 PM
Nivek Its really up to what kind of binding feel you want. Metal frame and plastic base with mini disc is just going to feel different overall than unibody plastic with standard discs. They achieve they same spot in the market but feel very different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowklinger View Post
nivek would you imply that the uprises are as soft as to be jib specific? i am NOT a jibber, pretty much all-mountain resort rider, kickers, side hits, back bowls when there is snow. i currently have ride contrabands and feel that they have very little response, lots of play, and would only be good for jibbing.

not looking for the ultra stiff ever, plus the 100buck difference seems nice, but i dont want to get uprises and find out i got another super soft unresponsive binding like the contraband.

was pretty much set on the uprises till i read what u said about them being a soft formula. care to elaborate?
They are not a jib specific binding. Honestly the softer feel is something that people like me and BA notice, but might be hard to feel or not noticable for most others. If you're worried about it just get Company's.
11-25-2011 06:43 PM
Zakal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nivek View Post
Companys are stiffer overall. Stiffer but not heavier means more $$.

Airbags are my personal favorite dampening system in bindings. All the shock absorbtion you need but not so damp you lose feel.

Second to that is harshmellow and if you have bad knees Companys will be better than Phantoms being canted.
Hmm, i'd forgotten about the Phantoms not having canting.

I wouldn't say I have bad knees, but they're not great, and I am fairly tall and ride with a wide stance (I like to think it helps spread my weight out more in deep powder), so I was thinking the canting would be a good idea.

Is the canting good enough to rule out the Phantoms due to their lack of them? I guess put another, is the Phantoms shock absorption that much better than the Harshmellow system on the K2s to warrant losing canting?

I was leaning towards the phantoms (plus I like the look of them the best), but now im looking at the Companys cos I don't know if I want that auto-tech anyway.
11-23-2011 02:04 PM
snowklinger nivek would you imply that the uprises are as soft as to be jib specific? i am NOT a jibber, pretty much all-mountain resort rider, kickers, side hits, back bowls when there is snow. i currently have ride contrabands and feel that they have very little response, lots of play, and would only be good for jibbing.

not looking for the ultra stiff ever, plus the 100buck difference seems nice, but i dont want to get uprises and find out i got another super soft unresponsive binding like the contraband.

was pretty much set on the uprises till i read what u said about them being a soft formula. care to elaborate?
11-23-2011 11:20 AM
Nivek Companys are stiffer overall. Stiffer but not heavier means more $$.

Airbags are my personal favorite dampening system in bindings. All the shock absorbtion you need but not so damp you lose feel.

Second to that is harshmellow and if you have bad knees Companys will be better than Phantoms being canted.
11-23-2011 05:44 AM
DanX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakal View Post
Awesome, thats exactly what I want. Want them stiff for good performance when going fast, but with enough dampening to absorb bumps etc.

So how soon are you going to be able to test them out and give us a first hand review? hehe
Not soon enough. Slopes within a 4 hour driving radius are snowless. But if you want any specific pics of the bindings in the meantime, I can accomodate.
11-22-2011 05:31 PM
Zakal
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanX View Post
Yea. The footbed has airbags and a rubber insert on the heel edge that dampen. There's some videos on YouTube that show them better than the typical manufacture photos you find on the web.
Awesome, thats exactly what I want. Want them stiff for good performance when going fast, but with enough dampening to absorb bumps etc.

So how soon are you going to be able to test them out and give us a first hand review? hehe
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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

 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome