the lightest setup everrrrrrrrrrrrr (hardboot)

vapor · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:48 pm

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

karkis · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:00 pm

hey BCR i was jus givin ya a hard time, ykno, fer fun :lol:

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:

barrows · **Posted:** Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:15 pm

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.

christoph benells · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 1:21 pm

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.

barrows · **Posted:** Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:08 pm

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.

Powder_Rider · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 8:25 am

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.

barrows · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 9:41 am

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).

Powder_Rider · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:16 am

A pair of Dynafit Radical Toe Pieces weigh 341 grams.
The Vapor/Voile binding (pair) is 757 grams = 1.66889932 pounds

What is the weight of Dynafit low-tech toes pieces (pair)?

What about these toe binders from http://www.pierregignoux.fr/France/Accueil.php

see frame 0:24 - 0.46
Could some one from Europe check Pierregignoux.fr to see if these toe binders are compatible with other AT tech boots, what do they weight and are they willing to sell the Toe binders to a USA splitboarder?

For engineer types:
Has anyone considered a titanium slider plate, or an aluminum (or titanium) carbon sandwich slider plates? I assume one needs a metal to puck interface vs. a carbon only to puck interface. Can on use carbon alone?

What are the limitations the above alternative slider plates compared to a aluminium voile slider plate?

Can an alternative Voile Slider plate (TI or C) achieve similar weight of the Dynafit toe pieces?

keffler · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:03 pm

Powder_Rider wrote:

A pair of Dynafit Radical Toe Pieces weigh 341 grams.
The Vapor/Voile binding (pair) is 757 grams = 1.66889932 pounds

What is the weight of Dynafit low-tech toes pieces (pair)?

see frame 0:24 - 0.46
Could some one from Europe check Pierregignoux.fr to see if these toe binders are compatible with other AT tech boots, what do they weight and are they willing to sell the Toe binders to a USA splitboarder?

For engineer types:
Has anyone considered a titanium slider plate, or an aluminum (or titanium) carbon sandwich slider plates? I assume one needs a metal to puck interface vs. a carbon only to puck interface. Can on use carbon alone?

What are the limitations the above alternative slider plates compared to a aluminium voile slider plate?

Can an alternative Voile Slider plate (TI or C) achieve similar weight of the Dynafit toe pieces?

I emailed the manufactures and they said that their toe piece only works with their carbon fiber boot. I think it is just going to take some time for there to be a larger enough market of splitboarding hard booters to drive the technology our way. Until then, us DIY guys get to play engineer in our garages to push/ pursue new ideas.

christoph benells · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:02 pm

barrows wrote:

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.

seems like if you machined a U out of a single piece of aluminum in just the right shape it would provide plenty of stiffness, if not more than a viole plate. use that with some pucks like firstlight makes you'd be fine.

there are other ways to pull the boards together. K-clips. What if your pin was slightly oval so you slide it in and twist, and it pushes the halves together?

and even better, what if the pucks met the shape of the sole of the AT boot perfectly?

Thread driiffft

ieism · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:10 pm

One of you hardbooter brethren send me a message a while ago about those carbon toe-things. As I explained in detail then, I think this is a very good idea and can easily be made by laying up the carbon yourself.

I would not hesitate to try it if I were a hardbooter, but the guy in the lycra outfit in that video is not who I want to be at all.

I don't think Pierregignoux will ever sell you the toepieces separate if you look at the prices of those boots.

barrows · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:23 pm

Powder_Rider wrote:

A pair of Dynafit Radical Toe Pieces weigh 341 grams.
The Vapor/Voile binding (pair) is 757 grams = 1.66889932 pounds

What is the weight of Dynafit low-tech toes pieces (pair)?

I use Speed Ultralights on my furberg, they are about 76 gms. each, so 152 gms per pair. Remember for comparisons you must also add the weight of the touring bracket, as you do not use this with the Dynafit toe.

What about these toe binders from http://www.pierregignoux.fr/France/Accueil.php

see frame 0:24 - 0.46
Could some one from Europe check Pierregignoux.fr to see if these toe binders are compatible with other AT tech boots, what do they weight and are they willing to sell the Toe binders to a USA splitboarder?

Already done, they do not sell these separate from the boots, and they say these toe pieces are not compatibile with any boots but theirs. Additionally, I would not want to use such a fiddly thing in the backcountry, with very light options available from Dynafit, Plum, and ATK. The Dynafit Speed Superlight toe pieces are actually lighter than a Karakoram touring bracket. I suspect things will change with new requirements in Rando racing for DIN release standards and the really tweaky stuff like Gignoux will go away.

For engineer types:
Has anyone considered a titanium slider plate, or an aluminum (or titanium) carbon sandwich slider plates? I assume one needs a metal to puck interface vs. a carbon only to puck interface. Can on use carbon alone?

What are the limitations the above alternative slider plates compared to a aluminium voile slider plate?

Can an alternative Voile Slider plate (TI or C) achieve similar weight of the Dynafit toe pieces?

You can get carbon slider plates (maybe) from SB.com member "burton" in Germany. Unfortunately, I cannot communicate well enough with him due to the language barrier.
But you will never achieve a lighter touring weight than Dynafit toe pieces with the plate binding in your pack. This is already a proven and superior system, there is no need to reinvent the wheel here.
Additionally, you are overlooking the primary benefits of the Dynafit system-the pivot is in a much more efficent place for touring, and the weight lifted on the foot is only that of the boot. With a traditional binding and a touring bracket, every step you take, every time you lift your heel off of the board, you lift the weight of the boot and the binding, this is much less efficient.
As for the slider plate, honestly the best way to make one of these is to use machined aluminum, nothing can be made stiffer and lighter more easily, while retaining adequate durability. Now the Voile bent piece of cheap aluminum could be much improved upon, as Will has done with his (CNCed) Spark baseplates.

Powder_Rider · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:16 pm

Barrows: Thank you for your comments: I jumped directly into Dynafit-Splitboard with the Scarpa F1 AT boots, Now my wife wants a Splitboard. So based on your comments, I am looking to DIY a Venture Euphoria and add the Dynafit toe pieces.

Concerning Pierregignoux.fr thread drift. I think a toe binding similar to Pierregignoux.fr one's would be easy to make as a split-specific touring binder. Benefits are:

1) direct mount into the Voile's 3 hole pattern,
2) be lighter in weight, and
3) moving parts design.

Kinda like the old 75mm 3-pin telemark binding, before it was over-engineered to accommodate plastic telemark boots. That said, the Dynafits rock!

I finally found a pair Burton Race plates at a reasonable price, to mod onto a pair Voile slider plates. Since Burton Race plates are now ITEC or Speed TC by Carve Company see http://www.carvecompany.com/index.php?id=single-view&L=1&tt_products%5BbackPID%5D=34&tt_products%5Bproduct%5D=26&cHash=491ad9635c2ce504a9793f0b513a58aa

Perhaps, Will or Rughty could purchase toe and heels of the Speed TC and use the Speed TC binding's hole pattern to drill into to their CNC plate.

Quote:

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.

I sending an email to Will

Back to this thread: So our best bet is a CNC aluminium plate to drop the wait further, Right?

Splitboard.com Forums

the lightest setup everrrrrrrrrrrrr (hardboot)

Who is online