Splitboard.com Forums

The World's first exclusive splitboard discussion forums






It is currently Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:43 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:05 am
Posts: 73
Location: Oslo, Norway
firstlight wrote:
Scooby2

I'm thinking maybe I'll mill two slots in each "Ski" to take the Std crampon?
This will be only for flat skinning but no good on icy steeps
Not sure what effect this will have on board strength?

Image

Cheers


Cool looking board :)

Did you try milling out slots for crampons? I really like this idea.

It might even be of advantage on uphill icy traversing.

Would consider doing this to my boards and thereby be able to use narrower crampons.

Difficult to know without any field testing, but I guess someone has to be first (and possibly last)

:)

_________________
Venture Odin 164
Furberg 167
Phantom Alpha's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
FirstLight, you are going to break the best skin track ever with that thing. whoever follows you isn't going to have any snow fall in on their board


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Wed Sep 18, 2013 12:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:05 am
Posts: 73
Location: Oslo, Norway
NorwegianDan wrote:

I really like this idea.

It might even be of advantage on uphill icy traversing.



Anyone care to share thoughts on this?

The reason I think it may be of advantage, is that when you are traversing uphill ("zig-zagging") on hard/icy conditions,
it is often difficult to get the crampons to be of good help. Because the crampons are so wide, the full width of board
gives a huge of leverage with the uppermost half of the crampon acting as a pivot point. You tend to go straight up instead...

With a crampon that is more narrow than the board one would get fetch both with the crampon AND the edge.

This naturally becomes more distinct the wider the board gets.

I am looking getting a new Furberg this year. The spec for tthe 173 says waist 270mm. The wideste dynafit crampon is 130. Though they are actually a little wider, and might fit if you round off the side of the board where the crampons go over but the slots may be a better idea.

_________________
Venture Odin 164
Furberg 167
Phantom Alpha's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 266
Location: Altadena SoCal
NorwegianDan wrote:
With a crampon that is more narrow than the board one would get fetch both with the crampon AND the edge.

This naturally becomes more distinct the wider the board gets.

While a cool idea (and a beautiful board), I'm not so sure. I wonder if the edge gained is worth the sacrifice in predictable flexibility.

The edge lost by crampon cover is only consequential in "banana rockered" and flat-underfoot boards; where— while skinning— bite happens underfoot. Cambered boards bite closer to the tip and tail; not where the crampon conceals edge. YMMV

The further away the edge is from the crampon teeth (i.e. the wider the board), the longer the teeth have to be; because in order to engage the crampon, the ankle must be tilted downslope (which scares the piss out of me!) and sacrifices edge hold. Otherwise you can't traverse with 'level' ankles (actually slightly tilted into the slope) which creates edge hold; and our whole goal here is edge hold + crampon bite.
I think Firstlight would be better off fabbing up some custom, ridiculously wide crampons.

On a more practical note. . . Unless you have elephant feet or weigh 150kg (300+ lbs.), this board was intended for nipple-deep Japow days. Right?
And if you are out on such a day and need to ascend some windswept, bulletproof snow where crampons are necessary in order to shred said nipple-deep Japow, does this not imply blower pow over ice? It is my understanding that should be taken as a message to STAY THE FUCK OFF THE MOUNTAIN and ride that wicked board on some mellower slopes today because this is a recipe for a very deep, soft-slab avalanche.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 352
I've never used crampons on a split (Utah), could you even not use skins on a good snow day and just use crampons?

Norw.Dan, I wouldn't cut into your new split for this marginal gain, I'd rather bend and rebend whatever crampons come with your dynafit rig.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:05 am
Posts: 73
Location: Oslo, Norway
Scooby2 wrote:
I've never used crampons on a split (Utah), could you even not use skins on a good snow day and just use crampons?


No, that wouldn't work.

Scooby2 wrote:
Norw.Dan, I wouldn't cut into your new split for this marginal gain, I'd rather bend and rebend whatever crampons come with your dynafit rig.


I agree it would be drastic to saw into a new board :shock: but I think it may be well worth while trying this on a old DIY.

Sure, I can get the 130mm dynafit crampons to fit - but are we not in the DIY and mods category here? :D

_________________
Venture Odin 164
Furberg 167
Phantom Alpha's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:05 am
Posts: 73
Location: Oslo, Norway
HansGLudwig wrote:
The further away the edge is from the crampon teeth (i.e. the wider the board), the longer the teeth have to be; because in order to engage the crampon, the ankle must be tilted downslope (which scares the piss out of me!) and sacrifices edge hold.
Otherwise you can't traverse with 'level' ankles (actually slightly tilted into the slope) which creates edge hold; and our whole goal here is edge hold + crampon bite.


The way I see it the leverage created from a wide crampon on hard snow is forcing the ankle/board/binding downslope..

If the crampons went through slots as described (ie narrower than the board/ski) they would make it easier for you to hold your ankle/board/binding tilted inwards toward the slope thereby increasing edge contact and possibly hold.

You are right though, the teeth would indeed have too be longer in order to engage the same amount at a given slope angle.

_________________
Venture Odin 164
Furberg 167
Phantom Alpha's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 163 WIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDE
PostPosted: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:04 am
Posts: 23
shaq size board anyone else it would be kinda big for...and heavy? i tried this wide style and w the tail being wide it makes it turn strange....
narrow tail fixes he problem....
and crampon's good joke if it's like that out take off your board.. and hike! i never! use those!
besides we are going boarding; touring, not mountaineering...that's for the ... crazies!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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

Search for:
Jump to:  








Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group