Splitboard.com Forums

Definitely interested.
Any idea of the weight and price ?

from the cad image it looks like it could work with standard tour brackets making
multi-board setups more reasonably priced for us mountain ghetto dirtbags

I would highly recommend purchasing a pair of Dynafit toe pieces, the touring advantages are worth it (better stride, better pivot position, much less weight on the feet when touring). You can swap a single pair of Dynafit toe pieces among multiple boards with ease: either by using Spark adapters, or the way I do, using Quiver Killer inserts in your boards for the toe piece.

FL: What aluminum is your baseplate machined from?

the slider is to short for boot s more than 8
and what make the rotations point.... take a picture in climbing up modus ... and you need riser for touringbrackets ....
look: http://www.wildschnee.de/index.php?opti ... Itemid=233




burton

Guys
A little insight into the thought process.
As Splitboarders we all know our sport is about compromise.
My objectives for this design were to have a low strong HB setup that used the Voile Pucks.
This raises a few issues.
The STD voile hole pattern and the manufactures stance widths are the constraint to the design.
I would love to make the base plate longer but this would then mean:
-You wouldn't be able to use the Voile puck as they are designed for STD slider plate length.
-You would be able to use the STD toe pieces for touring as your toe over hang would be less.
-The hole spacing for the climbing bars would be too short, although it would still work.
-You may have clearance issues with your rear pucks in tour mode.

My design prerequisites
-Used STD Voile pucks or FirstLight / Wildschnee plates.
-Uses Dynafit toe binding for touring with Spark R&D adaptors.

Therefore I think I have a system that is quite universal and can be used by the majority of splitters out there that used Hard Boots.

Feedback welcome.

Cheers

Barrows
Im going for 6061 due to the fact that is anodises better than 7075.
Again thoughts-feedback welcome

Cheers

I'm very interested. What's the price and expected delivery to a US customer? What post production support do you plan to offer to early adopters who give you feedback and see improvements based on that go into the next generation?

My dynafit compatible boots show up on Monday and there is snow in the forecast for this weekend already so you could get feedback pretty quickly.

For some design feedback:
I'd like to see a chamfer or radius on the outside bottom edges that are most likely to make contact with the top sheet of the board. The last thing that I want to do when I'm miles deep is to fold a board along a hard and sharp edge of a binding. Talk about a potential stress riser. I'd much rather have a flexible connection under my foot. that still allows for good response but reduces chatter, vibration, and stress in the system.

I looked a second time and I see the small chamfers that you have in the CAD rendering. I'm not sure if that will be enough or not.

In regards to the touring bracket compatibility: couldn't you extend the plate under the toe and add a second hole for the pin? One pin could be used to hold the plate tight against the pucks and the other pin hole could be used with the touring bracket. For those of us who plan to use Dynafit toes it will just mean some extra weight that could be taken off with a hacksaw for those that are truly offended by it. The same could be done in the rear if a longer plate is needed to accomodate larger boots.

Correct me if I am wrong Adam. I would think since the hardboot is already at it's lowest point using a Voile plate design and the boot has a flat bottom, extending the plate with a second hole now brings toe drag issues (more like slider track drag at this point). Remember, the lowest contact point that would overhang is only mm's above the topsheet of the board. That plate wouldn't have to extend passed the sidewall very far and could be a huge problem dragging into any icy or rock filled turn. You might not be able to slide that bad boy back off if it bends while in ride mode.

the firstlight lowtech slider bindings will work with voile pucks .... and with dynafit too pice corecct.

but for climbing up you need.... a longer slider.

for longer slider you need a other contakt point for the slider pin and the backside push point (the houlder on the ende of the binding) but this is a littel work lession. ore longer custom pucks 2 option that will work.



markus

I have a Karakoram set up on my split so that's what I'm most familiar with but my room mate has a voile set up on his board. I'l have to take a look at it compared to the width of the board. There might be room to put the touring pin holes higher off the surface of the board to allow for more clearance and still have a touring pivot that is further forward. You'd have to be sure to consider this in conjunction with the touring bracket design. The other option for a good range of motion while touring would be to leave the plate alone and to put the axle on the touring bracket up higher to allow for more clearance for the toes.

Guys
A little more on the plate.
See picture below



This is the size the plate will be but made out of one piece like the spark base plate.




The only reason for toe drag will be boot length and the angle you use.

Again this will only suit if you want to use Dynafit for touring



This shows the distance between the toe and the base




Plate height off the board, these will be a little tighter when the unit is made out of one piece.





All edges will have a radius and the sides will have enough of a angle trim to take the 5 deg cant.


Hope this clears up a few points.

Looks good, dyna toes are my plan so it works for me. My ideas were intended for the people who don't want the Dyna toes for whatever reason. Now that I see your pictures with a boot in the pictures too I see why that would be a big challenge.



It clears up everything but the cost and timing of the pre production run. Keep up the good work.