Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums banner

41 - 60 of 68 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
FLUX:

"Look out for our DMCC-Light freestyle binding for the 2011-2012 season.
It is using a newly designed base and highback that make the binding 35% lighter.
It also incorporates titanium hardware.
It is freestyle oriented and ready for the park."

K2:

"Our lightest bindings are the Auto Evers. They are super light and fast to get in and out of.
My boot of choice is the Maysis they are nice and light, super comfortable, and have the Boa lacing system.
I do not have the weights of our product.
It is best to visit your dealer and pick them up to see how light they are."

BURTON:

"You did not miss it, we just do not publish the weight of our products online. I can tell you though that the C60’s are the lightest weight binding we make and the SLX boots are the lightest boots we produce."
and ok i do give burton a little credit for not trying to dance around the subject and giving it strait
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Please post the original responses.

I love K2 all like: "Hey go take it in your hand then you will FEEL the product, and you will LOVE it, BUY it and rub up against it at home, taking it to BED at night. Kach-ing."

I mean, I do that with all my new stuff. Wait. Don't tell anyone I do that, but ok this morning I woke up and had my helmet on. :/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,250 Posts
Because I already poop before I ride and still wanna shed more weight.
Because one might not always have the bowel control to time it such.
Because all the little extra weight does add up for someone "unstrong".
Because we want to spend an extra $200 on a pair of light bindings.
Because I may be fat and I am heavy enough as it is.
Because some people actually do feel the minute weight differences.
Because I dont like it noticeably heavier when dangling on a lift.
Because I respect questions most times tho I dont "get" them.
Because comfortable gets uncomfortable when its too heavy.
Because I genuinely believe it makes me a little better.
Really.
Fair.
Get strong.
WHY!?
If your fat and heavy then 3 less ounces is pointless.
Not while riding unless you go from a Lib with T9 to a Method with C60's
Boo. They last 6 minutes. Put your board on your other foot.
Internetz, so I don't.
Only on the lift, which lasts 6 minutes.
Placebo.

To get a lighter Force you have to double the price, to get a lighter Cartel you add $200. There is really only one "affordable" light binding that doesn't fall under more or less a park section, Auto Ever's. And those are still $300.

2-3 oz is not worth $200.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,967 Posts
Seriously, the products nowadays are plenty light. Build up your muscles, pussies
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
FLUX:

"Look out for our DMCC-Light freestyle binding for the 2011-2012 season.
It is using a newly designed base and highback that make the binding 35% lighter.
It also incorporates titanium hardware.
It is freestyle oriented and ready for the park."

K2:

"Our lightest bindings are the Auto Evers. They are super light and fast to get in and out of.
My boot of choice is the Maysis they are nice and light, super comfortable, and have the Boa lacing system.
I do not have the weights of our product.
It is best to visit your dealer and pick them up to see how light they are."

BURTON:

"You did not miss it, we just do not publish the weight of our products online. I can tell you though that the C60’s are the lightest weight binding we make and the SLX boots are the lightest boots we produce."
Shameful. Yes, we'll boast about how wonderfully "light" our products are, but no, we can't disclose the actual weights. Of course, we have the numbers at our fingertips and will even calculate an alleged 35% weight reduction so we can give you the hard sell about that too, but sorry, we can't release the figures to the likes of you. You're just a customer -- who knows what asinine conclusions you might draw?

Tennis racket manufacturers publish both the unstrung and strung weights of their rackets (along with length, racket face area, etc.). Weights are standard specs. Somehow Wilson has survived.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Tennis racket manufacturers publish both the unstrung and strung weights of their rackets (along with length, racket face area, etc.). Weights are standard specs. Somehow Wilson has survived.
I don't think that is a fair comparison. Tennis has repetitive movement with limited velocities/tolerances, i.e. the human body can only generate a certain amount of swing and they can over build for the exceptions. Bindings (or any part of snowboard equipment) could have an infinite number of angles of impact, weight of rider, strength of rider, etc. We invent new ways of breaking things all the time. Dropping a 40 footer and landing on the tail has totally different tolerances that steezing out a a front board on a 40 foot rainbow (which I would live to see).

I get your point, but I don't think that is apples to apples.

Should weight be published? Probably. Would that lead companies to building the lightest (and possibly weaker) product? Probably. Would we eventually realize that 35% of a 6 oz baseplate is only 4 oz. off of a 8 lb. setup (not including your 160lb frame) and then not really care anymore? Probably.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
I don't think that is a fair comparison. Tennis has repetitive movement with limited velocities/tolerances, i.e. the human body can only generate a certain amount of swing and they can over build for the exceptions. Bindings (or any part of snowboard equipment) could have an infinite number of angles of impact, weight of rider, strength of rider, etc. We invent new ways of breaking things all the time. Dropping a 40 footer and landing on the tail has totally different tolerances that steezing out a a front board on a 40 foot rainbow (which I would live to see).
What does any of that have to do with disclosing the weights of products? Even Apple tells you how much an iPad weighs. (Yes, I'm aware that a computer is different from a binding.) The point is that companies in other industries don't suffer from this laughable fear of publishing the weights.

Should weight be published? Probably. Would that lead companies to building the lightest (and possibly weaker) product? Probably.
Probably not. I don't understand this paranoia that simply publishing weights, so that customers can access this information conveniently, would lead to some sort of counterproductive arms race. Snowboarders aren't fools. How many people really care more about the weight of a board or bindings than anything else? Performance, durability, price, and even aesthetics are at least as important for most riders, IMO. Weight is a factor, not the factor. Most snowboard companies already offer some products that they tout as "ultralight" (though in a vague way, as noted). This has not led to all the "normal" boards and bindings being pushed out of the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Why do people respond to threads when they have nothing to contribute. The thread didn't ask what your personal opinions are on lightweight bindings. If you want to bitch and cry that people want lightweight shit, start a new thread! You can complain all you want. We get it, you don't care... we don't need your .02 telling us why. Ever think people may have bad knees or other body parts that CAN feel the extra weight? I strength train almost every day and I still want light gear. Why the hell not? If I want a BJ before I go snowboarding then I'm going to get one. Either way, you shouldn't care... same goes for this topic.

Ride Contraband's = 1 lb 9.60 oz (info from buddy, not sure if accurate)
Union Force SL = 1 lb 15.81 oz (with hardware)
Burton Cartel = 2 lb 0.70 oz (with hardware)

Just a couple I've run across.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Bikes are also full of weight specs.

Just saying. So I wonder, which company will start posting specs on weight? I say Rome and NS will.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Probably not. I don't understand this paranoia that simply publishing weights, so that customers can access this information conveniently, would lead to some sort of counterproductive arms race. Snowboarders aren't fools. How many people really care more about the weight of a board or bindings than anything else? Performance, durability, price, and even aesthetics are at least as important for most riders, IMO. Weight is a factor, not the factor. Most snowboard companies already offer some products that they tout as "ultralight" (though in a vague way, as noted). This has not led to all the "normal" boards and bindings being pushed out of the market.
Ahhhhhh, the voice of reason. I agree.

Most of my friends could care less about weight, I'm in the minority. I think most snowboarders don't really care as long as the product is quality. Publishing weights wouldn't destroy the quality of the industry, that is foolish. Of course rising costs and a crumbling economy.... sure that could take down a bunch of companies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Joe, an example of companies trying to build lighter stuff, it not working, and we come right back to where we were is Hyperlite making the Sub 6 wakeboard. It was expensive, sold poorly, and delamed a lot (even though it had their "Phalanx Construction"). I am just saying that it is more probable, than not, that some companies would try to one up each other (they already do now, just with hearsay, "our board x is just as light as the Method, we just don't brag about it") in weight savings. I think the point is that we have a lot of great stuff that is probably all within a few ounces of 2lbs for a set of bindings; there is not need to spend $400 or get weaker product to save an ounce or two.

Smitty, I posted a few binding suggestions for the OP as well, I just didn't put weights on there as you did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Smitty, I posted a few binding suggestions for the OP as well, I just didn't put weights on there as you did.
Fo sho, I definitely wasn't talking about you. Just for people that chime in with absolutely no substance relating back to the original question. I can understand most of the responses if the question was, "What do you guys think about lightweight bindings?"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,213 Posts
If you are a Flow fan... The NXT-FSE's are super light.

To sort of chime in with the rest of the posters...

I have a pair of Flow Pro FS's that I got in '08 sitting in my cube. I rode them for one season and upgraded due to weight. I kid you not... they weigh more than my board.

However, they are beasts. I don't think durability is an issue with those. Just too heavy for my tastes.

Other than that, I'm not really that concerned with weights as long as they aren't in the extremes like the above mentioned bindings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
The B link...someone explain to me how a M Cartel is lighter than a M Cartel EST??? Maybe I should quite assuming that open cell foam is lighter than Burton's Magic Plastic...

All of those pics on the scale were pretty nice thought...all of the bindings came in pretty close.

I am not down for heavy bindings, I just don't know if I need to seek out the world's lightest (although having a pair of Contraband Nitranes, it looks like I might already have them...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
366 Posts
The B link...someone explain to me how a M Cartel is lighter than a M Cartel EST??? Maybe I should quite assuming that open cell foam is lighter than Burton's Magic Plastic...

All of those pics on the scale were pretty nice thought...all of the bindings came in pretty close.

I am not down for heavy bindings, I just don't know if I need to seek out the world's lightest (although having a pair of Contraband Nitranes, it looks like I might already have them...)
Another post in the same thread said the nylon % in the baseplate is different from EST vs. non-EST. And the mounting disk was not weighted

As for the weight of bindings, I think it should only be used to make a decision when you have a "tie" when choosing your bindings, and then again, if you can't feel the difference in your hand, you most likely won't feel it when boarding. Other factors are much more important!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
Discussion Starter #59
RIDE:

"These are not published ever... every manufacturer keeps this fairly secret. I can tell you the Contrabands are typically about the lightest bindings and depending on size, weigh in at just under 3.5 lbs per pair. The Phy-Top is our lightest boot, but those specs too are unavailable, and unfortunately I do not have a sample to weigh."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Another post in the same thread said the nylon % in the baseplate is different from EST vs. non-EST. And the mounting disk was not weighted
That makes sense. The difference seems too much to me though. I guess that they really have to over built the EST baseplates (which adds weight) so that they don't blow up.

I will choose to believe that the B has secret stash of unicorn hoof dust that they use to make their bindings weigh less than air yet not float in air...or water...it's all an illusion. Even though the scale says 1.80 they really weight -5.0...back to reality.
 
41 - 60 of 68 Posts
Top