Forums Bindings the lightest setup everrrrrrrrrrrrr (hardboot) Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 82 total) 1 2 … 5 → Author Posts March 11, 2012 at 3:41 am #576580 vapor 350 Posts Just to see what i could come up with an set the bar for other setups March 11, 2012 at 5:17 am #653223 bcrider 4149 Posts yeah but………….. just kidding, congrats on your set up ps. you should edit the title to read “the lightest hardboot setup everrrrrrrrrrrrr” 🙂 March 11, 2012 at 5:58 am #653224 vapor 350 Posts No probs Bcrider, us fruitbooters can take a few shots at are preferred equipment 🙂 March 11, 2012 at 8:18 pm #653225 karkis 270 Posts nice work vapor!! :thumpsup: butttt…… phuk the ‘hard boot content’!!!! BCR, ya gots some liter softy setup??? throw it down buddy!! oh yeh, taxes… 😳 never summer snowboards phantom splitboard bindings dynafit touring atomic boots March 11, 2012 at 10:03 pm #653226 keffler 319 Posts I like where this thread is going. Markets driving down weight. Come on BC Rider, it’s valid for all setups. Looks like this setup needs to go on a 25% diet. I think it can be done, but Vapor, that’s a really light setup. My pair comes in at 1024g. March 11, 2012 at 10:31 pm #653227 bcrider 4149 Posts @karkis wrote: BCR, ya gots some liter softy setup??? throw it down buddy!! oh yeh, taxes… 😳 I never claimed to have a lighter softboot set up. If I were obsessed with having the lightest set-up possible I would learn to ski I guess. 😉 Luckily for me it hasn’t come down to that. I’m not trying to shoot down product evolution either, there should be more HB options for splitters in the market that’s for sure. I’m just saying that for me personally this particular option doesn’t come without sacrifice and is sorta moot for the riding I do. I ride in pretty small mountains and terrain for the most part. If I rode in more gnar terrain maybe my thoughts would be different. For me, while I’m definitely weight conscience, I’m not willing to change or sacrifice the feel of a softboot setup that I’ve become accustomed to after a couple decades of snowboarding. I have no idea what the actual weight is of my set-up (again not obsessed) but I do know that it’s the lightest it’s ever been, which puts a smile on my face. Soon it will get even lighter with some 2012/13 Spark Blazes. Beyond that I can’t see it getting too much lighter (unless the Edison system provides it) which I’m fine with. Right now having a better fitness level is more valuable to me than small weight savings. I know yourself, Joey, and lots of other folks are having great success with HB setups and I’m stoked on that. I know with proper tweaking and mods the flex can be pretty similar to what I’m used to. For my use though the biggest hang-up I have with it all is the lack of a highback. I just dont want that support built into the boot…I want it independent of the boot. I want my boot to flex in all directions (except backwards) within the binding…and then bam….the highback is there when and where I want it. I came up with a saying a number of years back that I still believe in, “it all comes down to the descent”. To me this means that while I want my cake and eat it too by having the lightest gear possible, the feel that I desire on the descent trumps all. This is for bindings, boots, and the board. Sorry for the thread drift, please carry on! :thumbsup: and thanks for the reminder about taxes………………argh. March 12, 2012 at 1:05 am #653228 vapor 350 Posts No gear wars allowed!! 😆 For me its not what your riding, its the knowledge/dedication the people i’m with that counts. It a big leap of faith into hardboots for somebody and the reality is everybody starts in a softboot setup with angles, technique that have to be relearned. My goal with this is to get rid of as many negatives that people use against hardboot setups while keeping the positive ones…not just light, so if anybody has any questions or if local and wants some help developing something similar i’m here to help. March 12, 2012 at 3:29 am #653229 keffler 319 Posts BCR, I was just kidding around. I’m really not that focused on weight, but for the spring time, it does start to add up for those longer days. It’s also an easy metric to compare one setup to another, but you are right that in the end, what really matters is that the feel is right. I think hard boot setups have more to go to get that right, but it’s fun to push the boundaries and it seems pretty close to me so far. A lot of creative people out there and it’s fun to see what they are coming up with. Not trying to start a gear war, Ok, well kinda. In the end, I’m just hoping for a really nice simple, lightweight, reliable system that feels like soft boots (ie, loads of fun!). If this means I buy it from someone, great or if it means I get to play around and design one up, that’s cool too. I can say from playing around so far, it would be a lot cheaper if I could just buy it off the shelf. I think sometimes that we forget just how much blood, sweat, money and tears go into each of the great systems out there. Lots of respect for Will, the brothers and the others out there. Great work Vapor! Really cool setup and keep up the innovation as it will push this area of the sport to new places. March 12, 2012 at 2:07 pm #653230 shasta 143 Posts Thats sweet. I want to do something similar and get all the rise out of the bail system so I’m right down on the voile plate. Guess I better get a drillin on my spare plates. Did you swipe bails from another set of plates? March 12, 2012 at 7:20 pm #653231 rughty 620 Posts put those on a triad baseplate and watch the weight drop off. Did you make those bails yourself? March 13, 2012 at 2:18 am #653232 vapor 350 Posts The bails are made from the material that came from the voile plate bails, just bent ,cut and threaded to the correct shape. Here is a shot showing the cant on the rear binding and the shaft that runs through the plate replacing the stop(shortens the puck up on one side) For those that are familiar with alpine setups i use to run catek bindings that had unlimited toe lift/heel lift and canting which is as important to me as boot height off the board. March 13, 2012 at 6:35 am #653233 Powder_Rider 498 Posts Vapor I love your bindings :clap: I might have to scavenge the bails off my Bomber Sidewinders (or get a set from Finn) and try this setup! So could one reverse (or create) a plate ( U – Shape) and have attached this binding the Spark R & D’s Edison interface? March 14, 2012 at 12:03 am #653234 barrows 1490 Posts Well done Vapor. If someone with a CNC mill takes on this project, we will get there. A better slider plate, with bulges at the ends, would allow the shoulder yokes to bolt directly into the plate with an M6 titanium bolt-this could allow for boot size adjustability (multiple threaded holes in the slider plate) and the elimination of your steel cross piece/bolt. With a little attention placed on the machining of the slider plate, it could also beat the Voile plate in strength and weight (ala Spark machined binding baseplates). I think using this idea in conjunction with some custom canted pucks from FirstLight could be the way to go. A question: what thread did the Voile bails take (M5 perhaps?) Chris (BCrider)-I am not trying to convince you to switch to HBs, but, please accept that the feel you (very precisely) describe can be achieved with a hardboot system through careful modification of the boots: solid highback support, with forward, medial, and lateral flexibility is totally possible, and the exact amount of flexibility in each direction can be dialed in by the rider through careful boot mods. Yes, off the shelf this is not available, but with work, any level of flexibility in each direction can be achieved. I just must point this out (again) because the notion that there is a compromise with riding performance when using hard boots is inaccurate. I do not accept compromised riding performance with hard boots, and in fact, feel that hard boots can offer better (especially more consistent) flex than many (but perhaps not all) soft boot set ups. One big problem with lots of soft boots, especially the stiffer ones which I prefer, is that they often flex by creasing of the shell materials-this way of flexing offers an inconsistent flex pattern. Well engineered hard boots, on the other hand, can be designed to offer a very consistent, smooth, progressive flex. I am interested in putting together a new soft boot set up for next season, as I would like to experience some of the new soft split bindings coming up for next year (not to replace my HB set up, just for learning and variety), and am right now researching soft boots, trying to find a stiff one, which still offers a smooth, progressive flex profile. Next up to try on is the Ride Insano… March 14, 2012 at 3:48 am #653235 vapor 350 Posts Thanks Barrows Voile uses 3/16 stainless rod so threaded it 10-32. M5 and 10-32 are so close in dia and thread pitch that strength is similar. I agree with you on canting pucks as canting above the plate is a pain. Threading into the sides of the plate opens up the problem of the bails getting too wide ,specificly the rear bails borderski commented to me awhile back that if your making custom pucks anyway just narrow them to to have normal bail width and would solve that problem. I wanted to create something simple using mostly off the shelf parts to make this. The eyelets were simple to make and any local machine shop could whip them off. Powder rider Since the edison is still in prototype stage its not a given but from what I see it could be done. Hopefully Will has some free time on his hands to cad one up. Someone else making a plate from scratch including the locking mech would be a big project and probably stepping on Wills toes to boot if you tried to sell it March 14, 2012 at 4:00 am #653236 karkis 270 Posts hey BCR i was jus givin ya a hard time, ykno, fer fun 😆 not war we canuckistani, peasful n shit but i do hear that alot ‘hard boots, mite az well ski!!!’ hello! we aint skiin!! we shreddin!! and otherwise i totally agree, its all bout the down! thats why i BURNED my 32 softboots, unloaded my ride binders with an old split set up (i bin hatin strap binders since i was 13 and they havent rilly improved that much since then), and bought plate binders for my resort deck more comfort, more control now all i need is this kinda work in progress, lighter lower bindings. :thumpsup: never summer snowboards phantom splitboard bindings dynafit touring atomic boots March 14, 2012 at 4:15 am #653237 barrows 1490 Posts @vapor wrote: Thanks Barrows Voile uses 3/16 stainless rod so threaded it 10-32. M5 and 10-32 are so close in dia and thread pitch that strength is similar. I agree with you on canting pucks as canting above the plate is a pain. Threading into the sides of the plate opens up the problem of the bails getting too wide ,specificly the rear bails borderski commented to me awhile back that if your making custom pucks anyway just narrow them to to have normal bail width and would solve that problem. Yup, but I think some creative bending could overcome this problem. I am not so sure that making the pucks narrower is a good idea. The extra width would only need to be about 1.5 mm per side more than what you show here (to have adequate thread depth for strength) so only a ~3 mm wider bail spacing is necessary. Some offset could also be engineered into the shoulder yokes. I wanted to create something simple using mostly off the shelf parts to make this. The eyelets were simple to make and any local machine shop could whip them off. Of course, and I totally agree. I am thinking of this approach, and how it could be adapted to a commercial product, by someone with a CNC mill. DIYing something as I described would be very expensive, as the CNC set up and machining time would be cost prohibitive. This is why Spark R & D went all in and purchased there own CNC mill. Powder rider Since the edison is still in prototype stage its not a given but from what I see it could be done. Hopefully Will has some free time on his hands to cad one up. Someone else making a plate from scratch including the locking mech would be a big project and probably stepping on Wills toes to boot if you tried to sell it Will has expressed interest in possibly making a plate binding based on the Edison interface. As I have mentioned before, anyone who is interested in this, please encourage him to do so; I am sure input from potential customers makes a difference for him. March 14, 2012 at 8:21 pm #653238 christoph benells 717 Posts why not stand on the pucks and have a U with bails on it that slides around the pucks and a pin at the front just like the slider plate? that would be the lightest setup everrrrr you may just float away and it seems like you could strip down a spark to the base plate and attach bails to that somehow. spark could even sell a conversion kit if they were hip enough. March 14, 2012 at 9:08 pm #653239 barrows 1490 Posts @christoph benells wrote: why not stand on the pucks and have a U with bails on it that slides around the pucks and a pin at the front just like the slider plate? that would be the lightest setup everrrrr you may just float away and it seems like you could strip down a spark to the base plate and attach bails to that somehow. spark could even sell a conversion kit if they were hip enough. Because there would be nothing holding the board halves together and making the interface stiff, bails pull outwards on the board halves. You need the plate across the board to make the board interface work. March 15, 2012 at 3:25 pm #653240 Powder_Rider 498 Posts If one is using a standard AT boot (an AT boot that does not flex under the ball of the foot); are there any benefits of using Dynafit toe binders vs a non-canted Vapor/Volie Slider track binding (757 grams)? My wife uses the Scarpa Magic AT boot. March 15, 2012 at 4:41 pm #653241 barrows 1490 Posts @powder_rider wrote: If one is using a standard AT boot (an AT boot that does not flex under the ball of the foot); are there any benefits of using Dynafit toe binders vs a non-canted Vapor/Volie Slider track binding (757 grams)? My wife uses the Scarpa Magic AT boot. Yes, absolutely. Using Dynafit toe pieces gets the weight off of one’s foot and into the pack. Less weight on the feet means more efficient touring. Consider that with Dynafit toe pieces, when one makes their stride, only the weight of the boot itself is actually lifted. Additionally, kick turns with the lighter set up are significantly less strenuous. Honestly, I do not think that having flex under the toe of the boot (as with the TLT5 and Scarpa F1) is important at all, it is the reduced weight which is the advantage of the Dynafit toe piece. Most rando racing boots are moving away from the toe flex design to save more weight (like the Dynafit DYna race boot, and Scarpa Alien). Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 82 total) 1 2 … 5 → You must be logged in to reply to this topic.