Jump to content
Bomber Online Forums


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 02/11/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
  2. 2 points
    Granted, Slopestyle is not an alpine event, but that's quite an accomplishment for a 17-year-old and worthy of note. Kudos! BB
  3. 2 points

    Base Repair Question

    If a board is "beloved", forget the wax and DIY methods. Go to a reputable shop and ask for a base weld.
  4. 1 point

    Softboot Bindings for Carving/Freeriding

    I am still searching for the ultimate carve/freeride soft boot binding, and since I have ridden hard boots, a ton of soft boot bindings, both Catek FR1 and FR2's ( the weight plus too many pieces of hardware always coming loose led me to part ways with them), as well as the new diodes (which flex too much when the re-flex bases are put at angles over 20 degrees), now drive's , and am currently on Union T.Rice's and was not happy with the straps, so I took the plunge and purchased the Flow NX2 GT's and a pair of Now O-drive's in my search for the best soft boot setup for carving/freeriding. I am a bigger guy at roughly 220-225 lbs, size 28-29 MP boots (depending on brand) and pretty much only ride boards that are 182-205cm with Tankers and my custom Tinkler being my main rides. I love the Power Plates as my hardbooting days have taught me the value of cant and lift (but wish that someone would make a carbon plate vice the milled aluminum as this would save a ton of weight without loosing performance). Not sure if any of these bindings alone will convert me to getting rid of my Power Plates, but we will see as I want to do a comparison of direct mount and power plates once I get some more time on snow. My initial impression of the NX2's while floor surfing and adjusting bindings was great. Bindings look bomber and feel great with my feet strapped in. I do not have an accurate scale available, but they are only slightly heavier than the T.Rice's. The Union T.Rice is a good binding, but the straps on the L/XL are pretty short and will not accommodate a large volume boot over size MP28 (Union will send you an adapter if requested). Since I had an extra set of older Diode ankle straps lying around, I put these on the bindings and they have been much more responsive as a freeride binding with the upgrade. Of the three bindings I know have, the O-Drive appears to be the lightest, but is also the only one that does not have canted foot beds. Mounting the bindings and floor surfing felt pretty good and the O-Drives are significantly stiffer than the Now Drives and the T.Rice's. Interestingly enough, floor surfing response between the O-Drive and NX2 seems similar with the hard durometer bushings on the O-Drives. Based solely on the carpet surfing, both the O-Drive's and the NX2 look and feel like they have a lot of promise, and appear to be a cut above the T.Rice's, but we will see as the only true test is how they perform on snow which I will provide feedback on next month when I get all three on snow at Mt Baker. I hope that one of these three will be my go to soft boot carve/freeride solution. cheers, sandy
  5. 1 point


    Bob, you have a one-track mind Some our work this morning at Spirit Mt...
  6. 1 point

    Another vid for a laugh

    And who would be quicker? Uphill.
  7. 1 point

    Another vid for a laugh

    How do we get @b0ardski and @RyanKnapton riding together?!
  8. 1 point

    Alpine Snowboard Plate Systems

    1200 gr/ 1.5 cm
  9. 1 point
    yes it is... maybe try a Drone shot
  10. 1 point
    There. Now my butt's not sticking out as much.
  11. 1 point

    Alpine Snowboard Plate Systems

    Vist Duo
  12. 1 point

    Official/Unofficial ATC 2018 thread

    Here is a video from Highlands on the 2nd last day of the session: Music picked for length as it was a bit too boring without something. Hit mute and supply your own if you don't like it. ;)
  13. 1 point
    4! We need 4! One to run Bomber business, one to go rip and write posts on this site, one to go ski with wife and kids and one to keep his current job... 😉😎
  14. 1 point


    Early Mornin is a special time...
  15. 1 point
    Stickin your butt out is a Style choice, it is not required for a good cutback... Thanks Arnaud
  16. 1 point

    New Binding purchase assistance

    I've recently been through a learning cycle with the F2s, so I can address a couple of your questions relating to F2 Race and Intec bindings, but since I'm about 60 pounds lighter than you I can't speak to flex comparisons. First thing about the F2s are that the stock canting options are limited: the cant shims are 4*. If that works for you then you're golden, if not, you're into custom territory. I used to run 1* outward cant on my front foot on TD3 step-ins, but have found I can run no cant once I switched to F2 Race. It may be that the flex provided by the heel and toe bails on the Race accommodates the difference. You'll need a pozidrive #3 bit to work with the F2s (on amazon if you can't find one locally), if you use a phillips you'll destroy the bolt heads in short order. What's in the box: for both the Race Titanium and Intec Titanium (don't know about either Titanflex models), you'll get a single lift kit that includes a large and small ramp and 3 bolts (two 37mm, and one 27mm), and a 4-pack of cant shims. The large and small ramps are for heel/toe on the same foot, and the 4-pack will provide enough shims for 4* canting of both feet. If you're like me and want to have both toe lift in the front and heel lift in the back, you'll need to order a second lift kit when you buy the bindings, or ensure that the set you by used has two lift kits - make sure it's not just 2 ramps (1 lg and 1 small). The 37mm bolts are to mount the large ramp under the toe or heel piece. The 27mm third bolt in the lift kit is a mystery until you go to combine a cant wedge with a small ramp. The stock bolts are 22m long. When you stack a cant wedge on top of the small ramp, the 22m bolt on the the taller side of the cant wedge should be replaced by the 27mm provided in the kit to provide enough thread engagement. One thing that you can do to customize the lift is to stack opposing cant wedges so that they cancel each other out but still make a small flat stack. I wear UPZ boots and use both heel and toe lift, and I found that the extra boot ramp in these boots made the lift angles not quite right, too much in the rear heel and not enough in the front toe. I was able to stack two cant wedges under the large ramp to give more lift in the front toe using the 37mm bolts - still enough thread. I was also able to stack the remaining two cant wedges under the small ramp at the rear toe to reduce the heel lift on the rear foot. To do this I had to replace both the 22mm bolts on the rear toe with the two 27mm bolts that I had from the one lift kit that came in the box, and the second lift kit that I had ordered when I bought the bindings from Donek. If I also wanted to cant either foot with the stock 4* wedges, then I'd be into custom territory, but that would most likely be finding 30mm and 40mm truss head bolts (the bolt heads need to fit under the sliding part of the toe/heel pieces), and I'm guessing that I probably wouldn't need to grind them. Here you can see the large and small ramps under the front toe and heel, and the flat stack of 2 wedges under the front toe to increase the toe lift, and at the rear foot, the cant wedges stacked under the toe to reduce the heel lift.
  17. 1 point
    While not really a new thing, where carving an edge is concerned, dragging ass in this stance is. Thanks again for the hookup, my dearest Jack Michaud. Donek Sasquatch 170 28w full camber Photo cred to Steve "Riceball" Recsky at NES 2018.
  18. 1 point

    Racing v. Carving boards

    ...and a softboot snowboard is an SUV.
  19. 1 point

    Racing v. Carving boards

    I guess you'd have to ask a racer, which I'm not. My experience then is limited, but here it is... The main thing about my first and last GS race board was that it was designed to be ridden quickly. It was hard to find safe places to ride it that fast on piste, which makes perfect sense if you think about it. In powder that board was a plank - big enough to float, but completely unresponsive. No surprise there. My first and last "carving" board... Was easy to put on edge and not hugely responsive. It would get into a carve and didn't particularly want to get out of it again. The features of those boards were designed for their respective uses. I use the term "race board" or "race boots" when people ask me about my gear. That tells them something they immediately get and it's a very positive concept to most people: they "race" each other all the time. Or by analogy: the race board is a track car; the "carving" board is a grand tourer.
  20. 1 point
    The 3-D analysis is complicated to say the least. From an overhead drone point of view the rider's COM follows a similar curve but inside the line on the snow. Vertical position above the snow is less relevant in the dynamic setting of the turn, as gravity is just one of the forces the rider must play with and balance. The force of the snow groove side wall pushing the board into its' arc and changing the direction of the rider's COM momentum is the key force. The push back by the rider's COM momentum resisting the direction change must remain over their base of support, otherwise they will fall. Reference: The Physics of Skiing - Skiing at the Triple Point from page 98 available for legal download, in a range of formats, for no charge at https://archive.org/details/springer_10.1007-978-1-4757-4345-6 I'm of the opinion that their analysis of a snowboard carved turn is deficient, and reveals both the fashions of board construction at the time, as well as that the writers are not snowboarders.
  21. 1 point
    howdy dredman thanks
  22. 1 point

    Adventures in plates (3D Printed)

    Same here
  23. 1 point
    ^Was I on foot? Was I on skis? Was I developing a ski product? Or is that all just misdirection/obfuscation?
  24. 1 point

    Adventures in plates (3D Printed)

    BTW, you can bump up the $fn on the sphere in the minkowski operation a fair bit - something like $fn=60 will add a few seconds to the render, but end with much smoother edges. ($fn=45 might even be a good compromise between smoothness and speed) ex - just adding "$fn=60" to the sphere command module component_plate() { minkowski() { hull() { //note the adjustment for edge_rad contribution to X and Y that will be added back by minkowski() translate([-len/2 + wid/2, 0, 0]) cylinder(r=wid/2 - edge_rad, h=.001, $fn=120); translate([len/2 - wid/2, 0, 0]) cylinder(r=wid/2 - edge_rad, h=.001, $fn=120); } sphere(r=edge_rad, $fn=60); //<<== $fn=60 added here } }
  25. 1 point

    Adventures in plates (3D Printed)

    I hope it helps! :-) A great deal of things are done in OpenSCAD rather counterintuitive to how one initially thinks its going to happen - like, just about every single thing I design, at least... :-) Sometimes its just 'an OpenSCAD thing', and sometimes - like this one - its because the 'standard' way ends up being gawdawful to render. (I tried 3 different approaches - 2 sort of 'standard' approaches, each w/ their own issues (one of which is *still* trying to render), then this sort of 'cheat' approach, which worked the best.) I'll play around a little more for the opposite cant and lift options - its just a matter of moving the piece to the opposite side of the X and/or Y axes, if there is a negative cant and/or lift value, then doing the rotate around X and Y in that orientation, then moving it back. I also want to take some more time to learn more about Onshape - you've got my interest in it piqued! As you noted, its lots of fun to be able to combine the hobbies, isn't it?? :-)
  26. 1 point

    Adventures in plates (3D Printed)

    @erazz - here is a modified and commented version of what I first posted. The first approach applied the OpenSCAD minkowski() operation to a linear_extrusion() operation, which does rounding/smoothing, but takes absolutely frickin' forever. This modified version uses minkowski() in a more conservative way, and fakes a linear extrusion, which runs in a different way, and renders instantaneously. It should be producing the same output as the fist approach, but I can't confirm, as the first approach (tried rendering it at a higher resolution) seems to be following Starman around the inner solar system, and hasn't been heard from again... I documented the various params, so you should be able to twiddle with those to get your desired dimensions. Note that at present, this Q&D little test only supports left cant and heel lift (that having been said, you can flip it around, and what was left cant becomes right cant, and what was heel lift becomes toe lift. If someone wants left cant w/ toe lift, though, its not going to work. Its totally do-able, just not with this proof-of-concept model.) Let me know if this is not behaving as advertised or needed - again, this was a quick & dirty attempt, so there'll definitely be something I've hosed up, LoL. :-) len = 200; //total length wid = 100; //base width (twist will result in wider overall dimensions) edge_rad = 4; //edge radius of top and bottom surfaces ht = 10; //minimum height (cant and/or lift will result in taller overall height) - NOTE: ht must be >= 2*edge_rad twist = 10; //degrees of twist cant = 4; //degrees of cant - this simple demo only supports positive (leftward) cant lift = 6; //degrees of lift - this simple demo only supports positive (heel) lift steps = 100; //smoothness factor - more steps = smoother sides //this adjusts the total height, to take into account height added due to the edge radius - shouldn't be changed by user adj_ht = ht - 2*edge_rad; //call the plate module to initiate the render plate(); //because OpenSCAD performs all rotations around the X, Y and Z axes, it is necessary to move the geometry to // proper relative position wrt X, Y and Z. Cant and Lift will be rotated wrt X and Y axes, respectively, so // for Cant and Lift rotations, the geometry should be aligned with X and Y axes //for Tiwst rotation, because this needs to be around the center of the plate, the geometry must be centered // on the Z axis, which requires moving the piece so it is centered at Z, rotating around Z, then moving it // back to where it needs to be (it needs to be in a different position for Z rotation than for X and Y rotation...) module plate() { translate([len/2, wid/2 + (len - wid)/2 * tan(twist), edge_rad]) //move finished plate to the positive quadrant for (s = [0:1:steps-1]) { translate([0, 0, adj_ht/steps * s]) rotate([0, 0, twist/steps * s]) translate([-len/2, -wid/2, 0]) rotate([cant/steps * s, -lift/steps * s, 0]) translate([len/2, wid/2, 0]) component_plate(); } } //generate a plate of the desired length and width, with a thicness of 2*edge_rad (this how minkowski() works) // minnkowski operation here is cheap/quick, as its applied to a very thin piece of geometry //$fn value should be high on the end radii, for smooth side surfaces on the end module component_plate() { minkowski() { hull() { //note the adjustment for edge_rad contribution to X and Y that will be added back by minkowski() translate([-len/2 + wid/2, 0, 0]) cylinder(r=wid/2 - edge_rad, h=.001, $fn=120); translate([len/2 - wid/2, 0, 0]) cylinder(r=wid/2 - edge_rad, h=.001, $fn=120); } sphere(r=edge_rad); } }
  27. 1 point
    Ha ha, i put a 2* base and 0* side on your board and you didn’t even notice!😘 Not my fault, Snowman showed up.😎
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point

    Snowboard (non) development

    Anyone that has skied the deep and Steep...knows why I am bringing this up...this float on the surface technique is missing that ability...I assume you skied before you put on the Stick...I am not aware of anyone including winter stick that has pursued the ability to truly Submarine on a snowboard...Float is Great Ok but once you disappear, you will never go back
  30. 1 point
    45 45, figured half of 90 was 45...same 20.5" stance for all equipment from 173 down to a 156 with toes on Edge and Heels on Edge...just lucky I guess, same set up for over 30 years and over 30 different Sticks New SB Carving is no different than Old SB Carving...You either Carve or you don't Actually I see a lot more Skiers Carving lately up on Ajax, with maybe 5% of the SB there getting some as well
  31. 1 point
    No. Get up to speed first. http://www.apexsnowboard.com/graduated-plate-system/
  32. 1 point
  33. 1 point
    Big D

    N. CA Not Looking Good!

    I am in Mammoth and have been since Wed. the 7th. Temps are hitting low 50's on the hill. If you get out for first chair Stump Alley and the runs off of it are acceptable and I would rate the snow on a 1-5 scale for carving (5 being best) at a 3-4 depending on the run. Snow gets better as you go higher but those steeps are beyond my skill level. Here's to hoping for a "Miracle March"!
  34. 1 point
    I have to admit, I'm a bit of a gear junkie, a little bit impulsive at times with gear purchase... Got 2 small children at home, not getting as many days out on the mountain as I used to, plus just came back from a week in Whistler riding pow.
  35. 1 point
    No need for a plate on packed pow. As it gets choppy, you'll still be able to cut through it without help of extra devices. Once it gets more bumpy, learn to ride the terrain in a playful way, rather then forcing your way though.
  36. 1 point

    F2 Titanflex vs. TD3

    In my opinion the greatest percentage of shock absorption with be derived from an isolation plate. Your choice of bindings after that will have a lesser effect. These observations are derived from riding mostly ice and man made groom. The softer the flex of the plate the more shock absorption. Plates provide results that changes in boots bindings and even boards can't. A plate will make any type of board perform better in less than ideal conditions.