Love the innovation, but it reminds me too much of the failed burton system.

Thanks!

Good stuff, his adventures and videos are awesome!

I’m not so sure he’s really that qualified to comment on the “future” of backcountry snowboarding though being a skier and all. 😉 That would be like us splitboarders talking about the future of skiing. 🙂

There is some truth to what he said though. Splitboards clearly are the future. Dynafits may or may not be part of the future and as we all know, hardboots are not for everyone.

http://greghill.squarespace.com/

He tours big days out of revelstoke/rogers.

@Snowjunkie wrote:

How many people are able to convert from skis to board without unstrapping.

Not anyone here. But how many times do I have to ask how you are handling the patent issue? Voile is pretty good about not worrying about things like Will’s Spark binders as they are just one part of a split, and they don’t have the $$ to battle Burton or Atomic for infringement, but I know for a fact that a start-up trying to make a new interface and split is going to get their attention. Just curious on your plan for this, since you are asking for investment, and most serious investors will want this answer. As one key feature of investing is getting a return on your investment, if your product can never be sold there is little chance of a return.

Like I said, I’m all for the concept of step-in/step-out, but I have other concerns with your execution of the concept. Anything with that much metal/plastic/etc underfoot stands a good chance of getting damaged and packed with snow or debris during the step-in/step-out process. May work fine in powder with good coverage, but what about at the top of a slick spring couloir? I’d probably rather step out for many transitions.

UB

I didn’t totally digest the design drawings so…

I think for it to be marketable it needs:

1. to be easy or almost as easy as Voile system

2. as light or lighter than Voile system

3. similiar price to Voile system

4. pieces that cannot break or be lost (this design looks to similiar to the old Burton system)

It would be great to not have to unstrap to convert, but it really isn’t a big deal to do so.

It is cool that you’re working on something like this, but in the end if it is to expensive to make, if you have warranty issues, and if it costs too much to buy and does significantly improve on the Voile system, then I wouldn’t be dumping $$ into your R&D.

My question is: Why do you keep ignoring Unruly Bakers important point (which really interests me too) and some of the other questions posted here!???
It doesn’t exactly work in your favor!

In regards to weight if I go to a integrated binding I feel confident I can match the weight of anything out there.

Where is the binding? You mention that you can attach standard strap bindings but I don’t see how this is considered integrated.

Can plate bindings be used?

When I read words like “springs” and “release arms” I get nervous. Parts do break.

If you need to rotate the binding 90* to set it, will the climbing bars or touring bracket get in the way?

What about tour mode? How does that work?

@Snowjunkie wrote:

With regards to the questions about the patent I don’t know who is reading this post and I am not going to give up sensitive information. .

What’s your application # or provisional patent #? I can find out for myself if it truely is patent pending. But I can’t find any record of your patent, unless it was submitted last Friday, they update the database every Thursday. I’m still interested in having a discussion on how you are circumventing both Burton’s and Voile’s patents, as it is something I deal with a lot in my job. I’ve been on both ends, I’ve had stuff I worked on get sniped, and I’ve sniped other patents. You can bet someone at Voile has seen this thread.

@Snowjunkie wrote:

With regards to the reason why anyone would want a new system the answer is the speed of transition and weight. Maybe transition speed isn’t a great concern for a lot of people if it’s not I wont pursue it. In regards to weight if I go to a integrated binding I feel confident I can match the weight of anything out there.

My opinion:
No one is going to switch for “matching weight”. You need to set a new standard to get people to bail from the current standard. You do an integrated binder, and you may have Will’s patent to worry about. Application number: 11/409,860 although his may be too specific to the Voile interface. Need to read it more carefully.

@Snowjunkie wrote:

In terms of durability the only critical elements under foot or the engagement tabs and the pins. The pins are protected behind the engagement tab which are made out of .1 inch stainless. I wouldn’t go walking across a scree slope or on blue ice everything else should be fine.

So you’ve tested this?

I know there are a lot of folks including myself busting your balls on this. But take it as constructive criticism, many of us want something new and better. Most of us are probably being extra critical because we don’t want to see another wasted effort like Burton and Atomic.

Criticism #5: Your interlocking hooks extend past the sidewall and don’t pivot out of the way, this could lead to damage of those as well as loss of traction when edging in ski mode on hard traverses etc…

Criticism #6: I run both Voile Mountain plates and hardboots and Will’s Spark Binders and softboots depending on conditions and the tour. Can your set-up do both? If not, you are not going to be able to target a portion of an already small market.

UB

@bcd wrote:

I was confused at first, but now I am seriously baffled.

Are you for real?
You wouldn’t go walking across a scree slope with it?

I don’t understand what this product is, or what it’s supposed to be used for.

I thought it was a splitboard, but splitboards are meant to be used outdoors. You know that, right?

I think he’s talking about walking across a scree slop/ice with the interface and binders strapped to your feet, not skinning across one. But in the case of skinning across one I could see damaging the interlocking hooks that stick out.

Personally, a lot of the wear on my board comes during skin mode traversing rocky ridges and skiing down short sections. And that is in primarily CO and Wasangelas, areas with less snow might be even harder on boards in skin mode.

UB

Looks complicated! The Buddha say’s “Simplicity is the essence of life.”