Forums Splitboard Talk Forum SPLITRIPPIN logging in for 1st time…lookin for monk151
Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #570433
    SPLITRIPPIN
    709 Posts

    Well 1st time on the splitboard site.. don’t know why it took me so long… Powderjunkie told me to get my butt in gear…

    Anyhoo.. I’ve got a couple Malolos I wanted to see if I could hire Monk151 to split them for me? I saw his work, and it’s pretty friggin incredible.

    Feel free to email me directly at filterdrum@yahoo.com

    split :rock:

    #608722
    powderjunkie
    1669 Posts

    Glad you found the site splitrippin. It’s been a while since the Couloir forum days.

    You should just Private Message Monk151, but I’m sure he’ll eventually check this thread.

    .

    #608723
    deejayoh
    50 Posts

    Seems as good a place as any to ask this question:

    can you split a burton? Thinking the hole pattern is not going to go with the voile pucks. perhaps I am just thinking too much inside the box

    One thing for sure, the big move to ICS for them this year means you won’t be able to for long.

    #608724
    bcrider
    4149 Posts

    @deejayoh wrote:

    Seems as good a place as any to ask this question:

    can you split a burton? Thinking the hole pattern is not going to go with the voile pucks. perhaps I am just thinking too much inside the box

    One thing for sure, the big move to ICS for them this year means you won’t be able to for long.

    Burtons with 3-hole have been split before. Jimw did one so maybe he can provide some insight. I’m sure with Monk’s talet anything is possible.

    On a side note. I’ve wanted to have a split mfg use ICS in a split almost as long as I wanted a split specific binding, 5 years +. The binding got made thanks to Spark and I’m still waiting for ICS. Since Burton owns the tech they would be the obvious mfg to use it. I suggest it to them annually and actually just did again this year earlier this week. Imagine ICS in place of the inserts on a split. It would only take 4 channels instead of 24 inserts and allow for easier set-up and more precise stance adjustments. :headbang:

    I thought of it first! 😉

    ps. For those not in familiar with ICS, it means Infinite Channel System.

    [youtube:2dm3nf3y]jnmTCjykPPE[/youtube:2dm3nf3y]

    Oh yeah, almost forgot…welcome SPLITRIPPIN!

    #608725
    Monk151
    185 Posts

    hey splitrippen –

    email sent – let me know if it shows up. i switched servers and my sent mail has been showing up about 80%… not real happy with them so far…. check the ‘junk’ – brian@customsplitboards.com

    up front – jimw has more experience cutting burtons than me. if you’re the adventurous type I’d be more than happy to lay into one of your malolo’s as a first ascent… I’ll do one for free (labor)…. i do have a plan in my head.

    ….about the ICS – I see it as an opportunity more than a setback…. and BCR – I’d love to get in on a joint venture concerning your split-track system :drinks:

    #608726
    SPLITRIPPIN
    709 Posts

    Monk.. I did get the email. It was in the spam box…..

    Say… so, I got to thinkin.. I’d really like to get out to meet some of you all, and do some rippin… preferablly CA seeing I’ve never ridden there, and I love some of the photos…

    I propose a 5-6 day festival/trip/whatevs to get out there, and rip it..

    After I get my 1st probationary year done with the govy.. I’ll be able to do longer trips.

    Anyhoo… let’s start the conversation on this…

    yeeeeeeee-ow! :thatrocks:

    split :band:

    #608727
    Killclimbz
    1165 Posts

    Unimpressed with ICS myself. All Burton is doing with that is to have something to replace their stupid 3 hole system because the patent is running out. They need to have their exclusive system. I know I’ve never felt that my stance would be so much better if it was .05 centimeters closer or wider. The 4×2 pattern has served me well. I am all for improvements, but this is just another Burton move to try to stay on top of the market. Of which Lib Tech is eroding away from them in big chunks by actually coming up with ideas that make a real difference. Not that I am a huge Lib Tech fan, but their innovations are light years ahead of Burton’s.

    #608728
    Killclimbz
    1165 Posts

    @splitrippin wrote:

    Monk.. I did get the email. It was in the spam box…..

    Say… so, I got to thinkin.. I’d really like to get out to meet some of you all, and do some rippin… preferablly CA seeing I’ve never ridden there, and I love some of the photos…

    I propose a 5-6 day festival/trip/whatevs to get out there, and rip it..

    After I get my 1st probationary year done with the govy.. I’ll be able to do longer trips.

    Anyhoo… let’s start the conversation on this…

    yeeeeeeee-ow! :thatrocks:

    split :band:

    Scrubfest…

    #608729
    ikkin
    130 Posts

    monk, if you haven’t split SPLITRIPPEN’s malolo yet, would you try splitting a supermodel for me? 🙂

    let me know…eager to hear back from you. thanks!

    #608731
    bcrider
    4149 Posts

    bump for a recent pic of a do-it-yourself split that had ICS on it. .

    Imagine your puck screwing into the two inserts in the ICS track and then sliding up or down for adjustment. It could be much easier and precise than the current insert method in my opinion.

    #608730
    fustercluck
    668 Posts

    Is that a split made from scratch with the ICS built in, or a Burton board cut not exactly in half? If it’s a total custom board, I’m just curious who the builder is. Maybe he can build the dream Magne-Traction, Structurn,, rockered, p-tex sidewall board with ICS. :bananas:
    I’m not too convinced on the ICS. I’ve seen one case of the inserts ripping right through the topsheet. Even before that, I thought it just doesn’t look like something I would trust. I suppose using it on a split would double the strength.

    #608732
    bcrider
    4149 Posts

    @mtnman wrote:

    Is that a split made from scratch with the ICS built in, or a Burton board cut not exactly in half?

    Sorry I didn’t post the source thread: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5801

    Its a Jeenyus board. I use the term ICS loosely too as that is just the name Burton has given it. The concept has been around for a long time actually and a couple different versions have been made (I think). I wasn’t aware of any durability issues but its worth considering.

    #608733
    peacefrog
    376 Posts

    Not that I’ve been here very long :ninja:
    but it seems to me like the ICS system is really only a novelty; with micro adjust inserts (like avalanche used to have when they were a real Co) any stance and combo is possible. I’m sure most of you are familiar with the micro adj insert but for those who aren’t it’s just the normal insert pattern except there are twice as many inserts (I hope that makes sense :doobie: )
    to me it seems like the real progression will be getting rid of the slider plate, like the guy who made the door hinge bindings did, is the future. Once the board has been split it seems to me there is no reason the inserts can’t still be used as normal. You don’t need the slider plate because the base plate of the binding is solid (in either skin or ride mode). Where snowboarding got it right and skiing got it wrong is in standardization. Any binding goes on any board, and boot goes in any binding. That is the kind of thing we need to move toward in splits. Accessibility is the answer not only from a user perspective but also from that of a marketer(I do have a degree). You want to make it easy, and cheap, for people to get into your market; because then you can sell to them. When you’ve got to spend $1200 retail for a split interface and skins you’re limiting the number of people you can sell to.
    Bottom line, forget ICS figure out using existing bindings flat one the board and still having a tour mode :banghead: The guy in his basement with a door hinge did :bow:

    #608734
    bcrider
    4149 Posts

    @peacefrog wrote:

    with micro adjust inserts any stance and combo is possible. I’m sure most of you are familiar with the micro adj insert but for those who aren’t it’s just the normal insert pattern except there are twice as many inserts (I hope that makes sense :doobie: )

    Possible yes but how easy or difficult is it? With the current system of inserts the user has to unscrew the pucks, remove them, place them in a different set of inserts, reset the angles, measure, and tighten. With a slider system, the user simply loosens the screws (but not so much that the angles move), slide to desired width, measure and tighten. No screw extraction (just loosening), no lifting the pucks, resetting the screws, resetting the angles equate to a faster, easier process and better experience for the user.

    In regards to using twice as many inserts. Now you added more weight and cost to the split. :scratch: A slider system is lighter, easier to produce (I think), and makes binding set-up/adjusting a breeze. :rock:

    @peacefrog wrote:

    to me it seems like the real progression will be getting rid of the slider plate, like the guy who made the door hinge bindings did, is the future. Once the board has been split it seems to me there is no reason the inserts can’t still be used as normal. You don’t need the slider plate because the base plate of the binding is solid (in either skin or ride mode).

    We haven’t been using the slider track for a couple years now thanks to the Spark Ignition bindings and door hinges are not the future. 😉

    @peacefrog wrote:

    Any binding goes on any board, and boot goes in any binding. That is the kind of thing we need to move toward in splits.

    We have that. It’s called the Voile Universal Interface. 🙂

    @peacefrog wrote:

    Accessibility is the answer not only from a user perspective but also from that of a marketer(I do have a degree). You want to make it easy, and cheap, for people to get into your market; because then you can sell to them. When you’ve got to spend $1200 retail for a split interface and skins you’re limiting the number of people you can sell to.

    Agreed but that’s on the high side. You can get a new Voile with interface and skins for $849 (or less if it’s on sale). You can also pick up used splits for less. Looking and ski gear pricing ($800 skis, $600 boots, $400 bindings), I think splitboard pricing is pretty reasonable.

    #608735
    powderjunkie
    1669 Posts

    You want to make it easy, and cheap, for people to get into your market; because then you can sell to them.

    We do? paging UTAH.

    When you’ve got to spend $1200 retail for a split interface and skins you’re limiting the number of people you can sell to.

    What the problem is? 😉

    Keeps boarders from getting a splittie and moving to Bozeman. Elistism at it’s finest.

    Just busting your chops peacefrog. I am tempted to use your door hinge quote as my signature though. :drinks:

    the slider inserts seem like a great idea to me. What the problem is?

    #608736
    peacefrog
    376 Posts

    No worries PJ, after the reaming I got from BCR 😥 your post was like throwing a hotdog down a hallway 😆

    Seriously though

    peacefrog wrote:
    to me it seems like the real progression will be getting rid of the slider plate, like the guy who made the door hinge bindings did, is the future. Once the board has been split it seems to me there is no reason the inserts can’t still be used as normal. You don’t need the slider plate because the base plate of the binding is solid (in either skin or ride mode).

    We haven’t been using the slider track for a couple years now thanks to the Spark Ignition bindings and door hinges are not the future.
    peacefrog wrote:
    Any binding goes on any board, and boot goes in any binding. That is the kind of thing we need to move toward in splits.

    We have that. It’s called the Voile Universal Interface.

    Soooooo any boot goes with any binding and any binding goes with any board as long as you get sparks binding. Where does the any binding fit into that :scratch: And like I said if you use regular inserts to go directly into the board you don’t need the Voile Universal Interface which, believe it or not, also adds weight :poke: My point is that bindings can mount on a normal insert pattern once it’s split. All you need is something for the tour mode. Door hinges are not the future, but that kid is moving in the right direction IMHO.

    That aside your point about having to take bolts all the way out and put them all the way back in, on top of a mountain, in the snow, is totally valid. That would suck :thumbsdown: and your change out time would go way up, which would also suck :thumbsdown: You would also undoubtedly lose screws, that you need, in the snow; which again would suck :thumbsdown: Anyway that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong. :twocents:

    #608737
    lifelinksplit
    282 Posts

    Keeps boarders from getting a splittie and moving to Bozeman. Elistism at it’s finest.

    Ouch!!! 😛

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.