Hows it workin out in the field on a sticky / freezy / deep pow day ? any stickiness issues or things to worry about, lets get the word out for the second batch !
How about on jump landings / exposed faces, any ejections out there ?
I'm already on the list but always concerned about this after having been burnt in the past these days I truly and honestly do carry two sets of plates in my pack as I dont trust what I have. Not trying to be hater only to improve on what we've got out there
Post subject: Re: Phantom Splitboard Bindings, Group Order (Hardboot Specific)
Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:29 pm
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 10:17 pm Posts: 199
I just finished setting up the new Phantom bindings----I am in awe of the system design. I also stepped up to a new pair of TLT5 boots. Early boot mods include booster strap removal and filing/enlarging the forward lean opening. My real world review is yet to come but based on my extensive carpet surfing this evening, this combination feels like a game changer. Not only is the binding design super slick, the boot feel and binding ride height combo seems to be exactly what I was hoping for. I can't wait to get out there and give the system a whirl. Awesome job Keffler!!!
Just as a point of reference, my previous set up consisted of Black Diamond Primes with Voile mountain plates and Bomber Sidewinders.
Post subject: Re: Phantom Splitboard Bindings, Group Order (Hardboot Specific)
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:40 am
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:05 am Posts: 1182 Location: Colorado
NorwegianDan wrote:
Great work! This really looks like my ticket into hardboot riding.
Just wondering if its possible to mount to sidewinders on the plates?
Cant seem to find this discussed in related threads.
Dan: the short answer is no. The Phantom binding is a dedicated system, designed to provide a lightweight, highly responsive binding set up with low boot to board height. Adding the Sidewinders would defeat the purpose of this binding, making the boot significantly higher off of the board, and making the system much heavier. The Phantom system is designed to hold the boot securely, giving on direct response from the sole of the boot to the board. As such, it is assumed that one will use boots which incorporate enough medial and lateral flex into the shaft of the boot itself. I much prefer the flex to come from the boot, with the sole of the boot relatively firmly connected to the board surface, as this provides a ride which is similar to how traditional soft boot/binding combos feel.
Post subject: Re: Phantom Splitboard Bindings, Group Order (Hardboot Specific)
Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:16 pm
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 7:38 pm Posts: 302 Location: Eugene, Oregon and Eden, Utah
barrows wrote:
I much prefer the flex to come from the boot, with the sole of the boot relatively firmly connected to the board surface, as this provides a ride which is similar to how traditional soft boot/binding combos feel.
I just tried the Phantoms today for the first time. I ride them one setting tighter than Keffler (Edit: I had played with some prototypes in August and found that I liked my sole length adjustment 2.5mm closer than Keffler. When he sent the production bindings, he set them up 5mm closer instead of 2.5mm. I expect improved lateral flex with the new setting but still less than Keffler gets at his setting) Keffler's looser setting allows even more lateral flex from the boot / binding interface, but I am not comfortable running them that loose. I do not know how tight you run your bindings Barrows. If you run your bindings at Keffler's setting or even my preferred setting, we could actually be in complete agreement on how much play should come from the bindings verses the boot.
From my experience with alpine carving, AT splitboarding, and softboot riding I find both the binding and the boot should have some flex. I think it allows for better body mechanics and easier riding in less than perfect snow conditions than a stiff binding with a softer boot. For me, it allows a better flow between the board and my lower legs.
Alpine snowboard racers, particularly high level, universally have a more flexible binding system (F2 Race Titanium), than many freecarvers who often ride much stiffer Cateks and Bombers. The racers have to deal with race ruts at high speed while freecarvers tend to only ride fresh smooth groomers.
I have not seen a softboot binding that does not allow some movement of the sole of the boot relative to the binding. Even with a tight boot fit, most softboot bindings themselves have a tremendous amount of flex compared to the attachment one can get with a stiff hardboot binding.
I never set up a Burton toe and heel block on the Voile plate, so I do not know how they ride. My F2 toe and heel blocks have quite a bit of lateral flex when the boots are securely set in the bindings. Keffler's bindings blow that set up away for board connection and low height.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum