Forums Bindings Spark R&D Plate Binding Idea
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 21 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #573324
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Hi,

    I am aware of Bomber’s new version of the Sidewinder for splitters, and am glad that Fin put in the time to develop this option.
    But I am looking for a simpler, lighter, lower plate binding for us hard boot folks. I would love to see a machined baseplate (a la Fuse) where the boot sat directly on the plate, and the bails were mounted to the outside edges of the plate, with multiple mount positions for adjustment. A binding like this could offer a lower boot to board stack height, and reduced weight (even over direct mount toe and heel pieces to the Voile Slider Plate). This binding should make no concessions for touring mode, as it would be assumed that those using it would opt for Dynafit toe pieces on the board for touring mode-this will allow the low boot to board position, even for those with large boot sizes.
    Discuss…

    #628626
    Snurfer
    1448 Posts

    I PM’d Will about this. Perhaps he’ll give a shout back.
    Here is a (very) rough mock-up of the general idea (the bails are backwards, and the bottom of the slider is shown for context as to where material could be machined for the bails to attach)

    Shark Snowsurf Chuna
    Voile V-Tail 170 BC
    Voile One Ninety Five
    Spark R&D Arc

    #628627
    buell
    534 Posts

    Simplicity and light weight are primary for me in the BC. I love the general idea! Maybe Fin and Will can work together on the project. I don’t think Will has the ability to create the bails, but Fin has tons of experience doing that.

    I definitely think that the binding should be designed only for ride mode as, like Barrow says, it should be assumed that Dynafit toepieces are used for uphill travel. If the binding works for tour mode as well, great (seems like it would).

    I wonder if the bails could be made wide enough to mount directly to the sides of the slider and still have the hardware clear the pucks. A slightly narrowed puck system (not likely) might be ideal to connect the bails to the side of the slider and still hold the boot securely. Otherwise some fancy bail bending might be in order.

    As I mentioned in another thread, the rigidity of this design could be an issue. Barrows, I know you prefer a stiff binding, but I know for me a stiff binding really limits leg freedom and therefore ride performance.

    Vibration dampening will also need to be considered, at least for firmer snow conditions. I expect that an AT boot in a bail binding will transfer a lot more vibration and shock from the snow than a softboot on a Fuse binding.

    A micro adjustment system will need to be figured out. It will not work to just have a series of holes in the side of the slider plate. They will be too far apart to get a safe bail tightness on the boot.

    Nice start! It would be so cool to see something this simple.

    #628628
    96avs01
    875 Posts

    @buell wrote:

    I wonder if the bails could be made wide enough to mount directly to the sides of the slider and still have the hardware clear the pucks.

    A micro adjustment system will need to be figured out. It will not work to just have a series of holes in the side of the slider plate. They will be too far apart to get a safe bail tightness on the boot.

    These would be my 2 biggest concerns…very curious to see how this develops. Who knows I may just have to buy another pair of plastics (HBs) in the future after swearing them off a few years ago (as mountaineering-only attire). Good stuff fellas, like seeing the tech/options evolve. Cheers

    165 Venture Divide/Spark Frankenburners/La Sportiva Spantiks
    163W Jones Solution/Phantom Alphas/Dynafit TLT5s
    162 Furberg

    Chris

    #628629
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Cool to see these ideas. Here is some more of my thinking:
    As far as micro adjust is concerned, I have used a lot of different plate bindings, and one needs adjustment in about 8 mm increments at the smallest: remember an adjustment bolt on the toe lever can fine tune retention force to some degree.
    I am seeing a design that has small aluminum blocks which hold the bails, then these blocks mount into the edges of the baseplate via two machine screws. The block and baseplate could have a tongue in groove interface, which would distribute some of the shear forces, so that all the shear is not transferred directly to the screws. By distributing shear forces this way, one could probably use M5 hardware, allowing for closely spaced threaded mounting holes in the baseplate.
    Vibration damping: I do not personally find this a concern, there is some in the Voile Puck Gaskets, but adding extra height and weight through adding some kind of damping does not interest me. AT boots do have real rubber soles as well. IMO, best to choose a damp board construction (Venture, Never Summer) if damping is important as this makes a much bigger difference.
    Flex: for those who want a lot of flexibility in a binding, the new Bomber Sidewinder is the clear choice. Having the boot directly on the baseplate as we are discussing here will result in less flex between the base of the boot and the surface of the board, this is the whole point of this binding idea as I envision it: it is for people who want their boot sole to board interface to be tight ( to me the ride feel of such a setup is closer to a soft boot feel with tight straps, with the foot to board feel being very direct), and who will get the lateral and medial flex they need out of their boots and not from the binding interface.

    #628630
    Snurfer
    1448 Posts

    @barrows wrote:

    I am seeing a design that has small aluminum blocks which hold the bails, then these blocks mount into the edges of the baseplate via two machine screws. The block and baseplate could have a tongue in groove interface, which would distribute some of the shear forces, so that all the shear is not transferred directly to the screws. By distributing shear forces this way, one could probably use M5 hardware, allowing for closely spaced threaded mounting holes in the baseplate.

    Cool! This is sort of what I was thinking of in terms of machining the Fuse channel differently (sans any actual experience on the required adj increments). Good stuff :thumpsup:

    Shark Snowsurf Chuna
    Voile V-Tail 170 BC
    Voile One Ninety Five
    Spark R&D Arc

    #628631
    b0ardski
    251 Posts

    The sparks plate is a bit wide for AT application but could work with a specially shaped bail.
    From looking at the bottom of the sparks plate and the bomber bails; I’m thinking if the plate was made as narrow as possible keeping the standard puck width, with mount holes as close together as possible, any extra micro-adjustment needed could be accomplished with longer threads in the lugs & the end of the bails. With extra threads on the bail ends they could be cut or ground off to tighten up the fit if necessary. As discussed in other threads canted pucks could be used to dial in a comfortable stance.
    It could be used with lace up mountaineering boots.
    Any slider system will need a retaining pin so a voile style touring mount would still be standard if a dynafit toe isn’t used with no alterations to the plate.

    This would definitely be lighter than any strap set-up with fewer breakable parts.

    #628632
    foolishrider
    12 Posts

    I like the flex of the bomber but not the weight. I think we all need to keep working on these kinds of ideas but for now, I don’t see it getting better then the Burton race plate adapted to the Viole binding plate. Does any one have mounting and installation instructions for direct mounting my Dynafit toe pieces to my Mojo 166? Specifically, I am looking for information on locating the holes, what size drill bit to use and how deep to drill the holes. I was planning on mounting the Dynafits slightly closer to the centerline of the board then the standard touring brackets. Any tips or instructions would be appreciated.

    #628633
    jimw
    1420 Posts

    @foolishrider wrote:

    Does any one have mounting and installation instructions for direct mounting my Dynafit toe pieces to my Mojo 166? Specifically, I am looking for information on locating the holes, what size drill bit to use and how deep to drill the holes. I was planning on mounting the Dynafits slightly closer to the centerline of the board then the standard touring brackets. Any tips or instructions would be appreciated.

    Spark has you covered:

    http://www.sparkrandd.com/products/dynafits/

    #628634
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    Snurfer – If there is room for both a heel bail and a highback (removable?), the binding could be compatible with mountaineering boots.

    Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page...
    http://splitboard.com/activity-2/

    #628635
    HansGLudwig
    601 Posts

    Re: Micro adjustments – If the ends of the bail wire are straight, they could be threaded up to an inch away from the end of the bail wire. The shank with the eye (through which the bolt mounts the bail to the plate) could be threaded on the inside acting as a long nut.
    To fine tune the length of the wires, twist the shank in 1/2 turns. That along with multiple mounting holes allows for any length boot.
    Threaded wires, when adjusted asymmetrically, in combination with footbed inserts allows for canting w/out ordering custom pucks.

    Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page...
    http://splitboard.com/activity-2/

    #628636
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    A couple of things I’ve noticed as I’ve just started using an AT boot/plate set up in the last couple weeks.

    In comparison to the previous bindings I was using(Sparks) there seems to be more ‘pulling’ on the pucks.
    The Spark baseplate has the advantage of having an extra cm on either side of the binding distributing force, which is then translated to the board more efficiently. With a ‘soft boot’ set up I feel like I ‘push’ more force through the binding, giving more responsiveness. If we are to see a plate binding I would want a similar plate with the extra width to better translate force.

    Canting.
    I think most are using it in a plate set up. Canted plates or in the binding.

    If people are going to use canted pucks with a new plate binding, like the one mentioned above, each plate will have to be machined at the same angle so it could sit flat on the board.
    I think this is a must.
    If regular pucks are going to be used, then canting will have to be built in to each plate separately.

    my :twocents:

    @j.memay

    #628637
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    Meanwhile if Will isn’t going to have Barrows suggestion for next season how about an easy mod of these.

    Right now the baseplate holes are 3.5 cms apart but change the them to the standard 4 cms with vertical slots(like the bottom outside ones) and away ya go with plate adaptable baseplates.Just take a slightly different pattern. Trim off some of the sides and they should be the same weight at Voile Plates.


    Borrowed these, didn’t want to take off the ladders


    Ladders, trying to keep the extra weight about the same

    Should be quick and easy until there is something else.

    @j.memay

    #628638
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Jamie: what about the toe ramp. I wonder if it can be bent flat without damage so as to not interfere with the toe piece. I know that my toe pieces will not fit with the toe ramp the way it is.

    #628639
    firstlight
    721 Posts

    Guys
    I have just finshed a plate and are now trying to mount the bails to my prototype HB low profile binding.
    Uses a Std voile slider plate and either bomber bails or modified Voile bails.
    Will post pics soon. The prototype will have a fixed boot lenght but im thinking of a way to make it adjustable.

    Cheers

    Adam West

    www.firstlightsurfboards.com.au
    www.firstlightsnowboards.com.au
    www.splitfest.com.au
    www.snowsafety.com.au
    www.mrbc.com.au
    www.backcountryglobal.com
    www.alpinefirstaid.com.au

    #628640
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    Barrrows, I think you said you have a 28 boot?
    This is the size I have.

    I just put the toe bails on and saw they only overlapped the toe ramp by about 10mm. I didn’t bend the toe ramp. I don’t think having to bend it would affect it much. With the cant raising it slightly I tightened the bolts and it cinched on great. Have not had any issues yet.

    I think you may be able to put your toe pieces on without a problem, or bend the toe ramp very minimally.

    ]

    Adam, looking forward to what you have. Will be on snow till the end of July if you need any extra testing.

    @j.memay

    #628641
    barrows
    1490 Posts

    Thanks for those details Jamie. I am in a 28, but my toe pieces are much longer than yours. Certainly I will have to bend the toe ramp flush, but this does not look like a problem-it is clear that Will makes the toe ramp through bending (rather than machining) in the first place, so bending it back shoudl not be too difficult.
    Now to see if I can finagle any surplus baseplates out of Spark…

    #628642
    keffler
    319 Posts

    Nice work there WM. Where did you get those cants? I’ve only been able to find ski cants from Tognar. The ones you have seem to be wider :thumpsup:

    http://www.tognar.com/ski-binding-cants-5-1-1-5-2-2-5-and-3-degree-strips/

    #628643
    whistlermaverick
    312 Posts

    The cants directly under the bails came with the binding I was given.
    The ones under the pucks I have are ski binding cants

    @j.memay

    #628644
    keffler
    319 Posts

    Bummer. I thought you might have some super top secret source for better cants. What kind of bindings were they that came with those cants? Maybe they sell just the cants? I’m guessing whoever made those bindings are out of business like most of the carving companies. Thanks!

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 21 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.