Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

Critique my newb setup?...

6K views 50 replies 12 participants last post by  OldDog 
#1 ·
K2 raygun 159 w/K2 formula bindings

Went with recommended stance width/binding position then slid the bindings as close together as they would go in those holes. The full width put a little odd pressure on my knees. This gives me about a 1" setback stance maybe 20-20.25 wide if I measure at the centerline of the boots over the ankle. Not sure how you are supposed to measure stance width?

I centered up my straps, but left them in the same position (didn't "re-pin?" the ends or anything).

I used the "offset?" mounting disks to set the bindings back toward the heel as much as possible and fully extended the gas pedals. My us10 Salomon still overhangs quite a bit (over 1") but it looks pretty centered eyeballing down the board with the boots strapped in.

Went +15/-9 as it was comfortable and I figured easier for learning than full on duck?

Rotated my highbacks to align with the egdes (roughly) and set a 15 degree forward lean. The forward lean makes it comfy to stand in a good stance with bent ankles, knees, and hips. I can still stand up straight, but it feels awkward and my hips are pretty far foward. Also, the lean makes it feel pretty equal to engage both the toe and the heel in terms of effort. The adjustment goes from 0-25 degrees and at 0 it was more difficult to rock up on my heel edge. In fact, I fell on my ass in the living room trying because my ass was out so far trying to sit back and I wasn't holding on to anything. :eek:

OK, let the flames (I mean critiques) fly.

Thanks!

OD

PS: I tinkered with this shit for over 2 hours. I think the wife is convinced I'm insane... :D
 
See less See more
#4 ·
44 views and no comments? Guess I did OK? So much of it is personal preference, I guess it's tough to comment on someone else's setup?

I was most curious about the forward lean.
Everything you did sounds fine - including the forward lean.

I agree that 0 degree forward lean makes heelside turns less than ideal... but a lot of wannabe park rats want to be back to the old no-back days - pay them no heed.

I have narrow hips and so my stance is also a bit narrow (20.5"-21") - I've tried wide but my knees and ankles just don't like it (even with canted footbeds). I typically ride 15/-15 or 15/-12... but that's because I ride switch 40% of the time. I think anything from 15/0 to 15/-9 is well in the range of normal preferences.
 
#5 ·
44 views and no comments? Guess I did OK? So much of it is personal preference, I guess it's tough to comment on someone else's setup?

I was most curious about the forward lean.
Yeah it all seems pretty good to me. We got none of YOUR stats though so a little hard to guess.

FWIW I'm 5'7" and ride with 21.25" stance width, -9/+9 stance.

Stance width is measured from the centre of the mounting discs.

Forward lean is good. My GF started with very little forward lean, got used to her board but was having trouble shifting from sliding to carving. We gave her a fair bit more lean and she's carving a lot better now.

Main thing is you gotta get out on it and try it! We can tell you all we know but it still might not be right for you. :D
 
#10 ·
I think my wife is going to kill me if I keep trying to Ollie in the living room. :D
Yep. Plus it's hard on the carpet and it makes the dog crazy. :laugh: Tylerkat posted a pic of a 4x4 balance beam in another thread. I had made one last year as did slyder, and they're really good for getting the feel of the board. Also great exercise. Also an excuse to put the equipment on when there's no snow.
 
#12 ·
Stance width measure...

OK, from disk center to center my stance width is 21 3/4"

I have about a 7/8" setback as the crow flies from tip to disk center.

Here is a pic of my setup, I'll post more in other replies for different views.

From the nose...

 
#22 ·
I can't help but feel while reading this thread that Burton is not so out to lunch with the EST/ICS system. It's nice to have a virtually infinite mounting range! :D

That said, I think I'd sacrifice ideal stance width to attain ideal centred overhangs.

Hard to tell from the pics, but here's how I setup my board(s): Put the board (with a towel under it if you want) up on your kitchen counter, and then tilt the board up on either edge, while pressing the edge into the counter. Tilt up until the boot/binding makes contact with the counter, and check the angle. My Nokia has an angle meter so that helps, but you can eyeball it or use a piece of paper and fold it to match the angle.

Then do the same thing on the other edge. If they're not almost identical, adjust until you get it as close to identical as possible.
 
#26 ·
I can't help but feel while reading this thread that Burton is not so out to lunch with the EST/ICS system. It's nice to have a virtually infinite mounting range! :D

That said, I think I'd sacrifice ideal stance width to attain ideal centred overhangs.

.
thank you, as I got to the photos I said to myself, this is easily solved with the est/channel system. burton haters flame on...
 
#31 ·
There is no heel cup adjustment. It may not have been super tight against the highback when I took the pics from the base side as I just strapped in the empty boots rather than stepping in.

However, when I was strapped in it was still a pretty good overhang.
 
#36 · (Edited)
Yup, I pulled the laces tight and strapped them in. The only thing is the heel is quite tight and they don't sit all the way down and back without considerable force, e.g. standing in them. Like I said before, when I step in they are a little farther back. I might be able to step in, strap down and then get my foot out if I don't lace up, but I doubt it. If I can I'll take another pic to show you what I mean.
 
#38 ·
I stomped in as tight as I could and strapped down and then pulled my foot out of my unlaced boot. There is a gap right at the heel, but the highback angle just won't let it go back any further. The boot is right against the highback a couple inches above the heel.

Looks like to me it is about 1/4" off-set to the toe side. 1/8" further back would be center. The only way I can see to even this out any more would be to decrease the highback angle so I can push back a bit more. I may try taking it down to 10 degrees rather than 15.

Toe side



Heel side

 
#40 · (Edited)
It's not just the pics, they've got a pretty good angle on them. They go from 0-25 and I've got them set at 15 degrees. With them at zero it was pretty hard to rock back on my heel edge. After watching the SA setup vid I figured I'd be better off with some angle. I could try a little less.

What's more important, boot perfectly centered, or balanced force for engaging both toe and heel edges? :dunno:

OK, so I went to 10 degrees on the highbacks and rotated them back inline with the binding rather than the heel edge. Now my boot goes all the way in and the overhang is equal at ~1" heel and toe.

If I rotate my highbacks to line up with the heel edge, the outside edge contacts my boot first and keeps it from going all the way to the back of the heel cup. So, I know highback rotation is a contested subject. That said, centered boots with highbacks aligned with bindings or 1/4" off-set (toe side) with highbacks rotated inline with the heel edge?
 
#42 ·
I don't know about specific angles, but I've got my highbacks at just slightly more angle than my boots. My personal opinion -- and I'm no expert -- would be that a little less heel overhang is better than a little less toe overhang because the torque you can apply with the highbacks more than makes up for the lack of leverage at the heel. You still have the "weight not centered" problem, but given that we naturally adjust our balance anyway, that's probably not going to be a killer.

If it's a choice between using the disk holes to get just the perfect stance width or using the disks to get just the perfect centering though, I'd go with centering.

Everything's compromise though. You'll never get it perfect. Plus you're not stuck with your first choice. I've re-mounted my bindings while on the mountain before because i just didn't like what I started with. Just don't drop one of the bolts. :D
 
#44 · (Edited)
Has nothing to do with disks. Go back a couple pages and look at the offset disk vs the 90 degree rotation slid all the way back to the heel. I edited my last post. It's all in the highbacks. The rotation seems to be more of an issue than anything. :dunno:

If it's a choice between using the disk holes to get just the perfect stance width or using the disks to get just the perfect centering though, I'd go with centering.
 
#45 ·
As long as you are close with the heel/toe overhang, I wouldn't kill yourself about it till you break the gear in a few days or you have a problem engaging one edge or the other. Riding in them will change how your boots sit in the bindings after a few days on the mountain.

But I would also elect for slightly more toe edge overhang than heel. Just not by too much.
 
#49 ·
My formulas are 2012's. I actually took the F20's back and tried Burtons before I settled on 32's.

As for thermal forming boots, the owner of my local says it's good if you have a specific fit problem. Otherwise it just breaks down your boots sooner.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top