Forums Splitboard Talk Forum Toe/Heel Drag Allowance (hardboots and softies)
Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
  • #580343
    Skijor AK
    33 Posts

    My friend got some hardboots and has some new overhang issues. I also have (a little bit) more with my Fitwells than my old softies.
    We are wondering how much we can get away with.

    Have you guys ever heard of the 60 degree rule? Where the angle between your toe/heel, and the edge of the board must be greater than or equal to 60 degrees?

    ___________) toe


    Edit, found this picture:

    My board has a 257mm waist and I have 29.5 Fitwells (10.5-11 US), and Spark Fuses. My buddy has 28.5 TLTs (11.5 US), and (I think Phantoms) and a 255 waist.

    The only reason we ask is because conventional snowboard wisdom goes out the window with the projects and steep lines we are eyeing.

    367 Posts

    You guys need wider boards….

    251 Posts

    …or steeper angles.

    Skijor AK
    33 Posts

    Thanks for the detailed replies.
    Maybe I should have started a hard boot vs. soft boot thread instead 🙄

    797 Posts

    Since boot overhang distance, boot toe and heel shape, and boot height off the board all contribute to edge-to-boot angle, edge-to-boot angle is the best measure to use.

    I haven’t heard of the above 60* rule, but I will measure my set ups that do not exhibit boot-out problems and report those angles back soon.

    Given a size 12 foot and just about a straight across back foot, this is an issue I’m constantly mindful of when configuring a set up, though usually I just eyeball it. I never go less than 27cm waist width on boards, but where width matters is underfoot, and underfoot board width is also affected by sidecut, taper, and stance width. It will be interesting to put some angle numbers to it.


    Skijor AK
    33 Posts

    Taylor, I would love to see what you come up with.
    I measured my angles.
    Back foot: Heel= 56* and toe is 62*
    Front foot: Heel = 54* and toe is 60*

    While these indicate that I should move my bindings forward to equalize the angles, I am hesitant to do so as of right now the boots are centered (maybe even more forward than backwards?!).

    The problem is that the Fitwell’s toe is appropriately beveled/rockered while its heel is flat and blocky, making it stick out more(?!) when the bindings are at an angled stance (I usually do front foot 20* and back foot 5*), than when they are straight (0* angle). While this heel shape makes crampons “fit well” it is rather unfortunate for people like me in the mid-wide board category.

    The over-all length of the Fitwells are only 3/4 an inch longer than my old Forums but that flat/squared heel is kind of a problem! Also, I hate wide boards. I would be ok going up to 260 from 257 but don’t want to get into the 265+ range.
    I am 6′ but only weigh 150 and have trouble jump turning the wide boards.

    291 Posts

    I have Fitwells size 300 and went for boards with 270-275mm waist to avoid toe drag.
    Every mm less leads to crashes due to toe drags, when carving on a hard surface.
    (and could be seriously dangerous in a steep wall or couloir)

    601 Posts

    @FloImSchnee wrote:

    Every mm less leads to crashes due to toe drags, when carving on a hard surface. (and could be seriously dangerous in a steep wall or couloir)

    @Zude wrote:

    You guys need wider boards….

    @b0ardski wrote:

    …or steeper angles.

    Yes Yes. And Yes.

    The tipping point for wide boards is 10.5/11. Larger feet require steeper stance angles or wider boards. This wasn’t a problem for me until I upgraded to Spark Deeluxes.
    My :twocents: . . . I’m used to 0º rear and it seems I get better milage (better edge/boot-angle with fewer degrees steeper) with a duck-stance than alpine.
    But the real answer is I need a wider board. I won’t even look at a board with less than a 26 cm waist; 27 is primo.

    Be sure to bookmark's Recent Activity page...

    668 Posts

    @Skijor AK wrote:

    I am 6′ but only weigh 150 and have trouble jump turning the wide boards.

    Jump turns make me think of an old Scott Schmidt ski movie. Eat a few sandwiches and muscle that thing around! 😆

    Skijor AK
    33 Posts

    @fustercluck wrote:

    @Skijor AK wrote:

    I am 6′ but only weigh 150 and have trouble jump turning the wide boards.

    Jump turns make me think of an old Scott Schmidt ski movie. Eat a few sandwiches and muscle that thing around! 😆

    I like being skinny for the skinning! I can skin/run up!
    But I should pack more sandwiches to “beef” up at the summit! Problem solved! :thumpsup:

    367 Posts

    I’ve been moving toward wider boards for the last few years to avoid the dreaded toe drag(sz 13’s). Wider boards will be a little more cumbersome yet provide a little more float. I would say step up to 26 to 26.5 at least. I’ve got a board for this year that has a 27 waist but I’m 6’1 and 200 lbs so I feel I have leverage on the wide waist. Wide boards open up more stance options…..blah blah :twocents: Any way enjoy the lines you guys are going after, peace.

    163 Posts

    I was actually thinking of the problem yesterday. I like many are considering a move to fitwells. The problem is my 13 street shoe size. I do have a board with a 27 waist but I was wondering if anybody had size 13 fitwell experience. Thanks

    797 Posts

    So, to follow up, I measure between 62 – 70* on my set ups. Having eye-balled those angles, I much prefer 70. I notice the metal is scuffed on the binding heel cup that measured 62*, indicating some drag (grainy corn, probably). So, although I haven’t experienced boot-out, there is some drag on angulated heel turns at 62*. Therefore, I now consider 62* too little edge-boot angle.

    Also, having looked at it, if I were riding a lot of hard snow, high-consequence steeps, I would take every precaution and push those angles up to 75* or so. Given that you’re explicitly targeting steep objectives, I suggest that your edge-boot angles of 54 – 62* may be a hazard. If I were you, I’d improve those angles. It’d also be good to hear from some of the mountaineering-focused riders on the forum (which I’m not).

    One or more of these steps will increase edge-boot angle:

    (1) increase your stance angle;
    (2) get a wider board;
    (3) get a boot with a shorter boot sole length (see this post:;
    (4) bevel your boot toes and heels (at the cost of traction on hard snow and ice);
    (5) elevate your boot and/or binding.

    Hope that helps.


    251 Posts

    I booted out on a steep icy chute 😯 a long time ago. I didn’t like that. :nononno:
    y’all can take this with a grain of salt because I ride with alpine angles for that, and other reasons like bio-mechanical comfort.

    On a 25w board with size 27 boots around 306 bsl at 25/40 binding angles the back foot has 80+ edge to boot angle and the front foot has slight underhang.
    zero issues holding an edge on 50* hard pack as long as the edge is sharp and surface isn’t pure ice.
    Plate bindings put the boot sole about an inch off the topsheet, hasn’t bothered me or compromised my riding for over 20yrs.

    1382 Posts

    Fyi to new fitwell owners who run K’rams. I ride boards with a 25.2cm waist with 10.5(290) fitwells and the way the boot fits in the heelcups I had to go to a small heelcup on my old Superlights as to not have too much heel drag (it’s perfect with smalls as the width of the binding is really the same so no need to worry about room for the boot). However, I just bought new medium K’ram Primes and am having the same issue with medium heelcups. I have a 55 degree heel hang at maximum adjustment (on back foot at -3). I measured and am considering just slicing the back of my sole to make it 65 degrees as I was thinking this should be good even on super steep high consequence stuff and it won’t compromise my boot integrity or I might just get some small heelcups. I’m not sure what to do cuz I want to ride my new binders but I hate that they don’t fit my boots.

    I also have a pair of K2 T1’s and these don’t work at all with K’rams. The way that boot is shaped I have tons of heel drag with K’ram heelcups that can’t be fixed even slicing deep into the boot. I’m the only person I know of who’s had this problem. I was wondering how much adjustment Spark magneto baseplates have as K’rams only allow for 5/16 of an inch play. I’d never consider running angles I wouldn’t run normally. That’s not acceptable. I feel for those with feet >10.5. Kind of a curse if you’re a snowboarder imo.

    update: I just checked and I only have 62 degrees on my toe now so a smaller heelcup wouldn’t work. I’m gonna slice my heel. It’s funny, the new K’ram heel lock safety latch actually hits at 63 degrees without a boot in the binding. I might take it off as it gives me an extra 5 degrees of play without it. I guess the last 2 years I must have been riding with only 60 degrees (or less) on my back toe and I rode plenty of steeps and encountered no problems so I’d venture to guess that 60 degrees is totally safe for the steepest of gnar. If Jones would make his boards 4 millimeters wider and I wouldn’t have any issues with 290 fitwells!

    Jesus, I’ve never geeked out on heel/toe drag so much!!! 😆

    Skijor AK
    33 Posts

    Just got a Furberg. Heel drag issues eliminated!

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.