Anyone run their bindings flat?

[zoltan]

I was wondering if anyone else ran their binding flat, with no lift or cant?

I've tried canting them and lifting them, but it always seemed to give me weird leg pains, and finally I ended up with a slightly narrower stance and flat bindings. Ultimately I know it's about whatever works best for you, but I'm still interested if anyone else ended up in the same place I did.

At least it makes setting up bindings easier...

[pokkis]

I'm on wide flat stance.
Flat since mid 90eens and wide since end of it ;)

[MUD]

I run a flat stance..... I really like it.

I don't know if I run a "wide" stance or not, I think that is relative.

I run about a 19.75" (50cm) stance.

I think I need to add, I run relatively low angles (54/51).

[Hans]

Only on my small width Virus Cyborg (14cm) I use a 3 degrees cant disk in the back, all my other boards I ride flat with 50cm/51cm stance width.

[BlueB]

Running flat would be a great way to torture myself... But we are all different. If flat felt good, just go for it.

[Jack Michaud]

A wider stance is generally more stable and more powerful. This is a simple geometric fact. The only time it may not be better is on a very short board where you could end up with more board between your feet than outside your feet.

You <i>should</i> be able to cant/lift your bindings such that it's more comfortable than flat, and thus run a wider stance. It takes some experimentation, but you should be able to get there. Everyone is different, you may prefer toe lift on the front foot and heel lift on the back foot and no cant, or you may end up with that plus some canting, either inward or yes, outward. Or you may end up with one foot flat and the other tilted. Play around and see what works best for you. But ending up with a narrower flat stance is usually a hint that you didn't find your optimum setup.

[MUD]

A wider stance is generally more stable and more powerful. This is a simple geometric fact. The only time it may not be better is on a very short board where you could end up with more board between your feet than outside your feet.

You should be able to cant/lift your bindings such that it's more comfortable than flat, and thus run a wider stance. It takes some experimentation, but you should be able to get there. Everyone is different, you may prefer toe lift on the front foot and heel lift on the back foot and no cant, or you may end up with that plus some canting, either inward or yes, outward. Or you may end up with one foot flat and the other tilted. Play around and see what works best for you. But ending up with a narrower flat stance is usually a hint that you didn't find your optimum setup.

:rolleyes: How wide is wide?????

[kieran]

:rolleyes: How wide is wide?????hammer-time wide.

[WinterGold]

I have about the same setup as MUD (check my profile). Maybe a bit wider stance, but otherwise the same. It works great for me.

[Buell]

Almost flat. Just a very small front toe lift.

[Jack Michaud]

How wide is wide?????

depends. I run about an inch wider than if I had flat bindings. I have about a 31" inseam and about a 19.75" stance. Sounds like I may want to go a bit wider on a plate.

[davekempmeister]

I always think that a better stance is out there waiting to be discovered and ride totally flat quite often as a baseline from which to work. As compared to stances I've observed others employ, I don't venture too far from flat anyway.

[Buell]

....But ending up with a narrower flat stance is usually a hint that you didn't find your optimum setup.

There are too many equipment factors and too many body types to say this. Even if it does follow that most riders can get a wider stance using cant and lift, I expect a proper use of cant and lift for a comfortable stance outweighs the use of them for a wider stance.

For instance, I have a 31" inseam and run a 21" stance width with about one and a half degrees of front toe lift and a flat rear foot. I have that minor lift to slightly adjust where my weight is on the board when in a neutral position, not to widen my stance.

From personal testing, I am also pretty sure that bindings with more flex give the rider a greater range of effective cant/ lift options. In other words, you do not need to be so precise when on a binding with some give.

[MUD]

There are too many equipment factors and too many body types to say this.

Just be glad it wasn't an equation......;)

[Bobby Buggs]

Running flat would be a great way to torture myself... But we are all different.

Quoted for Troof;)

[Flywalker]

I ran 3* out back and flat up front on Burton race plates and it seemed fine. My angles were quite different to what l have seen being used here... 48B/57F and around a 19" stance.

Plan on experimenting this year.

[caspercarver]

I ride my Ibex bindings flat and super narrow stance. works for me and i have track 700s which to me are are pretty forgiving and flexy. I used to ride with cants and lifts when i rode in ski boots but when i switched to the 700's i felt i no longer needed anything else.

[Jack Michaud]

There are too many equipment factors and too many body types to say this. Even if it does follow that most riders can get a wider stance using cant and lift, I expect a proper use of cant and lift for a comfortable stance outweighs the use of them for a wider stance.

I agree about comfort. All I'm saying is, if you are comfortable with a (for example) 18" stance with flat feet, you should be able to use lift and/or cant to use, say, a 19" stance comfortably, and that will be better.


For instance, I have a 31" inseam and run a 21" stance width with about one and a half degrees of front toe lift and a flat rear foot.

See I would consider that an amply wide stance.

[Buell]

I agree about comfort. All I'm saying is, if you are comfortable with a (for example) 18" stance with flat feet, you should be able to use lift and/or cant to use, say, a 19" stance comfortably, and that will be better.


Yes, and I am saying they might be better off flat at the 18" stance. I expect we agree that each rider should determine what is best through testing different combinations.

Stance width is just one aspect of the stance setup. The trend is definitely wider (obviously I like a wider stance), but there are just too many good riders with all kinds of stance widths to argue that one should adjust their cant/lift just to widen their stance. Particularly if they are comfortable in their setup.

[Ear dragger]

Back in the days of factory prime, I too ran flat with a rear cant. when I changed over to new tech a couple of years ago, My riding vastly improved. I have found the toe/ heel lift corrects leg position for me. I think you can get lower to the snow with the lift, and I don't get fatigued as easily either. of course the stance width improved the power. I'm not into cant anymore, but that is different for everyones body.
I think the toe/heel lift (stance width) is something everyone should give a fair shake.

[corey_dyck]

Not sure if this is a valid test, but it was interesting to me:
While wearing your boots, stand with your feet at whatever stance width you normally run. Then turn them to about the typical angles you ride at. I found that my front toe and rear heel automatically lifted off the ground. I could force my feet flat on the ground, but it was quite uncomfortable. I then tried 6 and 6 cant disks in my Bombers and loved it. Maybe that test will give a primitive indicator of what kind of lift/cant you should try? Then adjust by feel on the snow.

Unrelated: I've noticed most of the racers run huge rear heel lift.

[pokkis]

If you run with step-ins then proper test would include standing on with bindings due typically heel of both boots will be raise several millimeters.

[zoltan]

All I'm saying is, if you are comfortable with a (for example) 18" stance with flat feet, you should be able to use lift and/or cant to use, say, a 19" stance comfortably, and that will be better.
I'm sorry, but have to ask just how much of a difference a 1' wider stance would make.

That said, I'd tried a wider stance with both cant and then lift, and both times it quickly burned my legs out, which is how my stance narrowed back down and my bindings went flat.

[Jack Michaud]

I'm sorry, but have to ask just how much of a difference a 1' wider stance would make.

It's significant, try it and see. The body is sensitive to very small changes.


That said, I'd tried a wider stance with both cant and then lift, and both times it quickly burned my legs out, which is how my stance narrowed back down and my bindings went flat.

Well it may not work for everyone, but it sounds like your cant/lift setup wasn't optimized for you.


If you run with step-ins then proper test would include standing on with bindings due typically heel of both boots will be raise several millimeters.

The toe block of step-in Bombers is taller to compensate for this.


Yes, and I am saying they might be better off flat at the 18" stance.

Can you explain why, mechanically/physiologically?


I expect we agree that each rider should determine what is best through testing different combinations.

yes.


Stance width is just one aspect of the stance setup. The trend is definitely wider (obviously I like a wider stance), but there are just too many good riders with all kinds of stance widths to argue that one should adjust their cant/lift just to widen their stance. Particularly if they are comfortable in their setup.

My biggest argument is that the days of 16" or 17" stance widths are long gone for anyone with a 30"+ inseam.

Canting and lifting should simply enable you move your feet apart along this circle:

http://www.smokescreendesign.com/images/Man-Leonardo-da-Vinci.jpg

[Istvan]

Board width and binding angle also has a lot to do with cants and lifts On a wider board you can have lower angles and hence less or zero cant and lift.

As the board gets narrower and the binding angles get higher the need comes for toe and heel lifts.

Just try it on the carpet by imitating the extremes, i.e. 0 and 90 degrees binding angle and a nice wide stance.


Cheers from Hungary :biggthump

[MUD]

OK, you guys have given me enough info to try playing around again this year....

I do have one question though.
Jack mention moving your legs out around the "circle". Isn't using cant / lift artificially moving you out around the circle? What does you board do as soon as you get into a carve? It turns into a section of a circle..... Are we shooting for comfort while standing? or while we are in the carve? If you are running a "wide" stance and it is uncomfortable while standing flat should that matter?

Get what I am asking?

I understand this does not apply for iso-plates since they are pretty much like standing on a flat surface all the time (theoretically).

[WinterGold]

Of course there are some general guide lines concerning canting and lift. And it is logical that you use canting for lower angles and lift for higher angles and all kinds of mixes in between.

BUT I don´t think that one special setup is more comfortable or has a better performance than another one in general. As I understand it, there are several people on this forum who use outward canting on their back foot. If inward canting and outward canting work well, why shouldn´t flat be an option?

And about the setup of professionals - it is true that most racers use rather a lot of lift and some also a high canting, but this is also not universal. Benjamin Karl, one of the top technicians in the world, uses only a minimal amount of lift in his setup.

I wouldn´t adjust my setup only carpet carving.

[philw]

What he said.

Cant... well that's an issue for people with legs which need it.

Lifts... I used to ride flat, then I changed my boots a few years back and found I needed to dig out the old wedgies. So in my case the boots I'm using affect what I like to ride with. Currently, well I changed my boots again and at the moment I'm still with the old lifts (1 toe, 3 heel). Not sure if I'll stick with them.

By the standards of some here I'd be on mellow angles I suppose - 50 degrees parallel (because I can't be bothered to change them when I switch from powder to piste and because my feet are of sensible size).

It's absolutely not about that diagram of a man. If nothing else, my feet are evenly displaced from the centre of mass, and the lifts are 2 degrees different: you can't do that on a circle. That's wrong and misleading.

I believe that front toe lift helps you pressure the front toe side edge; the back heel lift makes it a bit easier to bend that leg where it needs to be.

[MUD]

Are most of you runnning a mix of cant/lift? Or just lift?

If you are running just lift with either td2 or 3 are you stock with 3 or 6 degrees? If not, you are inducing cant as well, correct?

[corey_dyck]

Are most of you runnning a mix of cant/lift? Or just lift?

If you are running just lift with either td2 or 3 are you stock with 3 or 6 degrees? If not, you are inducing cant as well, correct?

I'm 5'11", 31" inseam. 19.5" stance. 6-degree cants are at 65F and 50R, feet are at 60F and 57-ish rear. So a little bit of outward cant on rear foot and inward cant on front foot. I'm going to try adding more heel lift to my rear binding as I find myself at the forward flex limits of my ankle (and boot) sometimes in bumpy/icy conditions.

I'm in the camp that everyone will have different stances that work for them. Just go anywhere public and look at people standing around. Everyone has different angles between their lower legs and the ground; forcing them all to have the same angle is going to make some of them really uncomfortable. As long as your stance feels good for you, go for it. But still experiment to see if there isn't a better way that you haven't tried yet.

[Jack Michaud]

That's wrong and misleading.

You know, I've found several of your responses to several people lately to be rude and/or condescending.


I do have one question though.
Jack mention moving your legs out around the "circle". Isn't using cant / lift artificially moving you out around the circle? What does you board do as soon as you get into a carve? It turns into a section of a circle..... Are we shooting for comfort while standing? or while we are in the carve? If you are running a "wide" stance and it is uncomfortable while standing flat should that matter?

Somewhere in between. I don't think your stance should be uncomfortable while standing. We do not carve 100% of the time on the mountain. Even when we are carving, we do not spend all of our time in a carve. The board goes flat between carves. During the transition, how you set up for the next carve is critical. How are you supposed to make swift, precise movements if your mobility and balance is limited? Being able to carve from the ankles up requires you to be at ease while the board is flat.


Are most of you runnning a mix of cant/lift? Or just lift?

I ride TD3s and TD2s and I use toe lift on the front foot with a little inward cant (62 degree binding angle, 80 degree cant disk angle, 3 degree disk). On the rear foot I use heel lift and some outward cant (60 degree binding angle, 45 degree cant disk angle, 3 degree disk)


If you are running just lift with either td2 or 3 are you stock with 3 or 6 degrees? If not, you are inducing cant as well, correct?

I think you may be confused about that. TD2 and TD3 allow customizing your blend of cant and/or lift with the 3 or 6 degree disks. See here:
http://www.bomberonline.com/articles/TD2_setup.cfm

[softbootsailer]

Good point Jack...

[Jack Michaud]

Actually I'm surprised by how little the board appears to be bending in that vid.

But even if our boards are flat a small percentage of the time, the times when the board is flat between carves are critical moments.

[jacopodotti]

I run flat and I think that from one side a wider stance help stability , but on the other a narrow stance help the board to bend concentrating the weight more close to the centre of the board.
There is a point from which to start and then find your right thing.
Vitruvian Man is a good concept but using math whith it will surprise everyone.

[Mr.E]

Depends on the board.

GS sticks I like heel lift on the back, toe lift on the front and a little canting.
Sl type sticks I prefer a little less lift and no canting.
Freeride/ powder boards I run flat.

All with approx. the same stance width and front foot angle. Rear foot angle changes based on board width.

At the end of the day it just takes some experimenting to see what floats your boat.

I chuck it all and start from scratch on every new board.

[philw]

You know, I've found several of your responses to several people lately to be rude and/or condescending.

My own test for "is this ok to say?" is broadly: "would I say it face-to-face?". Taking my text in context I'm not sure what there is to be upset about, but as you are upset, I'm sorry about that as it wasn't my intention.

My intention was to point out that attempting to explain your logic by analogy to that diagram is misleading for the reasons given, although you need to read the text in context. Your conclusion could be correct, but your argument is wrong.

[Ian M]

There are lots of ways to ride these funny sliding boards that we all like :)

When I rode flat for many years, I found that my front quad was always burning by the end of even short runs. After changing two years ago to bombers which allowed me more options, I spent an entire season experimenting with every stance that I could think of. What felt really good, and I kept coming back to, was 3 degrees of toe and heel lift, and then minor cant (0.5 degrees) just to make each knee happy.

The benefits I felt?

More balanced muscle work between both legs, and greatly reduced overall fatigue.
A wider stance that felt not only more 'stable' front-to-back but also more symmetrical and balanced.
A greater range of movement, particularly up/down and rotationally.Every body is different, so spend some time experimenting and find what works for you. Whatever your 'happy place' is binding-wise, (flat included!) I think it would be nice if you can say that you tried everything else and it wasn't as good for you.

Happy trails everyone!

[Cuban Carving Gooding]

No not flat, its tant simple.

[ursle]

You know, I've found several of your responses to several people lately to be rude and/or condescending.



http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=269810&highlight=fanboys#post269810

My favorite.

[BlueB]

Skating, Surfing, Walking and Boarding... to answer the question
What's the point of posting and deleting the same thing over and over?

[Jack Michaud]

What's the point of posting and deleting the same thing over and over?

I've been deleting his responses. The opinions of anyone who does not ride hardboots are not relevant to hardboot binding setup.

[Buell]

http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=269810&highlight=fanboys#post269810

My favorite.

And what is the point of this in this thread?

[Buell]

I've been deleting his responses. The opinions of anyone who does not ride hardboots are not relevant to hardboot binding setup.

I have had the same thought.

The answer to the post is that your feet are free to move, cant, and lift in all of those sports. Even wakeboarding and softboot snowboarding (two strap bindings anyway) allow loads of foot movement with their binding systems. Hardbooting, not so much.

[MUD]

There are lots of ways to ride these funny sliding boards that we all like :)

When I rode flat for many years, I found that my front quad was always burning by the end of even short runs. After changing two years ago to bombers which allowed me more options, I spent an entire season experimenting with every stance that I could think of. What felt really good, and I kept coming back to, was 3 degrees of toe and heel lift, and then minor cant (0.5 degrees) just to make each knee happy.

The benefits I felt?
More balanced muscle work between both legs, and greatly reduced overall fatigue.
A wider stance that felt not only more 'stable' front-to-back but also more symmetrical and balanced.
A greater range of movement, particularly up/down and rotationally.Every body is different, so spend some time experimenting and find what works for you. Whatever your 'happy place' is binding-wise, (flat included!) I think it would be nice if you can say that you tried everything else and it wasn't as good for you.

Happy trails everyone!

GREAT reply! Thank you!

I would also add, maybe it's time to go back and try again (as in my case) if you are riding new bindings, new board, or even new boots. Things change, sometimes it's best to change with them.

[Ian M]

Thank you MUD, I'm happy you found my post helpful :)

Yes, I believe Mr. E suggested trying different settings for new equipment earlier in the thread. Makes sense to me also!

Cheers :biggthump

[BlueB]

I've been deleting his responses. The opinions of anyone who does not ride hardboots are not relevant to hardboot binding setup.
Ok Sailor. I didn't know that was the case.


The answer to the post is that your feet are free to move, cant, and lift in all of those sports. Even wakeboarding and softboot snowboarding (two strap bindings anyway) allow loads of foot movement with their binding systems. Hardbooting, not so much.
You are very right! Yet, better foot support could be beneficial to those sports too.
Here are some examples. In the photo below, I ride a slalomish course on a flat board. You can see my toes lifting in attempt to maximise pressure on the heel rail:
http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=22988&stc=1&d=1279501479

Or even more extreme:
http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=22945&stc=1&d=1278955921

Then I built a slalom skate with lots of concave and big rocker/tailkick. Result was feet planted safely in place:
http://www.blueb.biz/skate/Coq20101016-Train3.jpg
I effectivelly have toe/heel lifts and some canting... Also, the majority of slalom riders use similar concept.


If I ever go back to soft boots, I'm going to install at least some heel lift on the rear binding. I always ended up riding with more lean in the rear hardback, to compensate for the lack of the heel lift.
I would also argue that most of higher end bindings have toe ramps ("gas peddals"), which are actually the toe lift...

[Buell]

Great shots of the concept blueb!

The other day in the water Rebecca mentioned that my front foot toes were off the board during an off the top. I replied that happens all the time. During fast backside waves my back foot rocks onto its inside as my knee drives forward and toward the board.

There is tons of freedom in those sports for the feet to adjust to your body position.

[zoltan]

Well...this is embarrassing. :o

I was working on my board and realized my front toe is raised, as is my back heel. Oops.

[BlueB]

Well...this is embarrassing. :o
I was working on my board and realized my front toe is raised, as is my back heel. Oops.
But you've got guts to admit it! Hats off!

[MUD]

Hey all,
I know this is a rehash. BUT.
I would like to say thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread..
Last night I got to try my new set-up with a wider (21" up from 19.5") stance and some 3 degree plates on my sidewinders.
I REALLY liked it! Very comfortable and responsive. My VSR is an X-tight so it is quite the leg burner.
I am glad I gave it a go.
This thread is a good example of how an open mind and some good discussion can really pay off.

I am going to keep on playing to see if I can make it even better.

[BlueB]

I would like to say thank you to everyone who has contributed to this thread.. Last night I got to try my new set-up with a wider (21" up from 19.5") stance and some 3 degree plates on my sidewinders. I REALLY liked it! Very comfortable and responsive. This thread is a good example of how an open mind and some good discussion can really pay off.
You are welcome!

[Ian M]

^ Glad to hear that you found something better Doug, whether it's lifted or not. Enjoy!

[jtslalom]

I ride flat now but have gone through alot of changes over the years with binding cants and lifts. I used to cant in on both the front and back foot in belief that it would bring my knees closer together in order to create a pivot point. This was late 80's and early 90's idea on asym boards. Once I started going back to symetric boards I still left the cants on both bindings but started to seperate my knees more and use them independently and less of a pivot. When I started riding more and more like this(mid 90s) I decided that the cant plates were actually counter productive and took them off. In the late nineties I bought a few pair of new bindings in which one pair had a sophisticated cant system. It was both a riser plate and cant. I messed around with all types of cants and lifts so much that I didn't truly know what was best. I ended up scrapping that cant/lift system all together started to ride completely flat since the early 2000's.
The Leonardo Divinci diagram of the circle posted above does give a good idea of proper foot position when standing totally perpendicular to the length of your snowboard. However, as binding angles increase one must take into consideration the distance the lines running through the length of the bindings are apart and NOT the stance width. This distance minimizes the use of cant plates. In this sense think about a person riding with both bindings straight down the length of a snowboard. This person would not have a need for cants what so ever.
In short I would think that canting and lifting is more of a preference than a need and once again it comes down to whatever the rider feels most comfortable with. However I do think that every one should experiment with them.
Quote from above by Jack Michaud.

The opinions of anyone who does not ride hardboots are not relevant to hardboot binding setup.
Slow down a little Jack, slow down. I may not ride hard decks anymore but my 15 + years experience riding them must give me some sort of right to express an opinion, I think it does.

[Ian M]

However, as binding angles increase one must take into consideration the distance the lines running through the length of the bindings are apart and NOT the stance width. This distance minimizes the use of cant plates.

Agreed, it seems to me that with common HB angles 45-60 degrees only minimal canting is required; mostly for knee comfort. Toe and heel lift I've found much more useful, though. Pure toe/heel lift was not an option with most one-piece 'cant' discs.

[Jack Michaud]

In this sense think about a person riding with both bindings straight down the length of a snowboard. This person would not have a need for cants what so ever.

That person would still benefit from toe lift on the front foot and heel lift on the back foot.


Slow down a little Jack, slow down. I may not ride hard decks anymore but my 15 + years experience riding them must give me some sort of right to express an opinion, I think it does.

Sure it does.

[Tabatha]

I have been riding flat since I began (last season). Been reading the posts on this thread and decided that I should try adding lift. Last weekend I finally figured out how to add the lifts to my F2 bindings and I took the new set-up for a ride tonight. All I can say is WOW! Maybe it was the conditions, maybe I was in the right head space, but with a little front-toe lift and back heel-lift, I just felt I was able to initiate carves so much easier and shift my weight around. I had no idea I was riding so rigid. Now there were no other carvers on the hill ... so maybe I was having a terrible day and did everything really wrong, but it felt right.

Looks like I have moved over to the dark side and will keep the lift for a while.

Thanks for everyone's comments; helped me figure a few things out.

[Downhill Racer]

I suggest to riders that, if they feel a need to cant, they may simply have their stance too wide as it is.
A flat stance will always be the most stable stance.

[saille]

I suggest to riders that, if they feel a need to cant, they may simply have their stance too wide as it is.
A flat stance will always be the most stable stance.

i supinate pretty badly. without cants my knee wants to drive to the outside of my ankle unless my stance is less than 12". it isn't comfortable, and it probably wouldn't be good for my long term joint health.

to go back to the person who said if your bindings were inline, you wouldn't need cants... that emphasizes this point. if that were true, there would be no skiers or mono-skiers who use cants. i sure did when i did both. i was never without cants in my ski boots.

cants allow you line up you knee so that when you drive it forward its over your ankle. that gives you a more efficient application of the gross power of the quads, while also allowing you to engage the finer tuning your ankle can provide.

can you ride without doing that? sure. but i submit that doing so will fatigue you more quickly, and potentially produce additional joint wear, needlessly.
some people are lucky enough that their knees line up quite nicely at 19 - 21" and the angle their board/boot sizes dictate. but many don't... many pronate, supinate or have valgus deflections that make the knee not quite align over the ankle. of those, many can compensate simply by working harder... but just because one can do something doesn't mean its being done in the most efficient manner.

because the most efficient stance width is partly a function of the board itself - canting allows one to ride the board close to its optimum configuration while also approaching their own physically efficient position.

[Downhill Racer]

i supinate pretty badly. without cants my knee wants to drive to the outside of my ankle unless my stance is less than 12". it isn't comfortable, and it probably wouldn't be good for my long term joint health.

to go back to the person who said if your bindings were inline, you wouldn't need cants... that emphasizes this point. if that were true, there would be no skiers or mono-skiers who use cants. i sure did when i did both. i was never without cants in my ski boots.

cants allow you line up you knee so that when you drive it forward its over your ankle. that gives you a more efficient application of the gross power of the quads, while also allowing you to engage the finer tuning your ankle can provide.

can you ride without doing that? sure. but i submit that doing so will fatigue you more quickly, and potentially produce additional joint wear, needlessly.
some people are lucky enough that their knees line up quite nicely at 19 - 21" and the angle their board/boot sizes dictate. but many don't... many pronate, supinate or have valgus deflections that make the knee not quite align over the ankle. of those, many can compensate simply by working harder... but just because one can do something doesn't mean its being done in the most efficient manner.

because the most efficient stance width is partly a function of the board itself - canting allows one to ride the board close to its optimum configuration while also approaching their own physically efficient position.


Supplant canting with wider stance and more obtuse mounting angles.
canting for supinated stance often simply transmits/amplifies the issue to your medial meniscae, which then suffer more permanent damage.

[ursle]

Originally Posted by jtslalom
In this sense think about a person riding with both bindings straight down the length of a snowboard. This person would not have a need for cants what so ever.


I suggest to riders that, if they feel a need to cant, they may simply have their stance too wide as it is.
A flat stance will always be the most stable stance.


Hmm, If yr in softboots this is a moot discussion(why? Because everything is squishy, as in if I can find my keys we can drive out of here)
But if you ride hardboots...

Cant being side to side, lift being front to back(toe-heel)
When I get on a thin board I cant the front foot outward to the point that I'm comfortable with the rear edge, err, without canting outward if I touch the rear edge I can't get off it;) so I cant it outward to the point that I have to move my body out over the edge a ways before it reacts(grabs), wider boards aren't as twitchy.
Wide is 19+
Thin is 15-
Length of stance makes no difference but if it's to small I lose the ability to crouch, and almost all my balance:)
This is a discussion about setup not technique.

[b0ardski]

In hard shells (ski or board) forward lean and lateral cant of the cuff are important for comfort and efficiency of leg position. The inherent floppiness of softies make this almost a non-issue, but I have seen some soft riders us canted pads underfoot.

wide stance + flat hardboots = unnatural position

[carvedog]

I suggest to riders that, if they feel a need to cant, they may simply have their stance too wide as it is.
A flat stance will always be the most stable stance.

Actually a balanced stance will always be the most stable. It may be easier for some to achieve balance easier with canted bindings. You can't comment to someone else's biomechanics and body, without seeing how it lines up and works.


Supplant canting with wider stance and more obtuse mounting angles.
canting for supinated stance often simply transmits/amplifies the issue to your medial meniscae, which then suffer more permanent damage.

Should read:
Canting for supinated stance can transmit/amplify the issue to your medial meniscae, which can then be injured.

Something like that.

It could also be that canting can reduce the amount of angulation and pressure necessary and thus reduce the amount of pressure, irritation and inflamation.

[tufty]

Riding with absolutely flat bindings almost certainly results in a twisted board whilst riding. It may result in a permanent twist on your board. I have 3 boards from 3 separate manufacturers with the same twist. I now run lifts toe and heel.

[KingCrimson]

Riding with absolutely flat bindings almost certainly results in a twisted board whilst riding. It may result in a permanent twist on your board. I have 3 boards from 3 separate manufacturers with the same twist. I now run lifts toe and heel.

Boards twist anyway, regardless of your stance.

[benttech]

Weird I ran my front bindings flat today and I dont know if it felt better but my toesides were much much better. Im at that phase where I prefer heelsides to toesides and all of sudden I started loving my toesides, will test it on other boards :)

[Scott Petrie]

A wider stance is generally more stable and more powerful. This is a simple geometric fact. The only time it may not be better is on a very short board where you could end up with more board between your feet than outside your feet.

You should be able to cant/lift your bindings such that it's more comfortable than flat, and thus run a wider stance. It takes some experimentation, but you should be able to get there. Everyone is different, you may prefer toe lift on the front foot and heel lift on the back foot and no cant, or you may end up with that plus some canting, either inward or yes, outward. Or you may end up with one foot flat and the other tilted. Play around and see what works best for you. But ending up with a narrower flat stance is usually a hint that you didn't find your optimum setup.



Jack,
You seem to be very knowledgeable on all levels of the carve. I called Bomber and they are out for the week as I am sure most of you are for the event. I would like to ask you some questions off line if that is possible.

Thanks Scott

[zoltan]

Jack,
You seem to be very knowledgeable on all levels of the carve. I called Bomber and they are out for the week as I am sure most of you are for the event. I would like to ask you some questions off line if that is possible.

Thanks Scott
I'd encourage you to ask your questions in the forum, so that way someone else might benefit from it as well.

[Scott Petrie]

Background- softbooing since 1991-current, East Coast slopes and icy narrows.
I do not not ride the park and just love to ride. I ride an aggresive stance. I am 6'4 and 250 poundish. My current ride is a Burton Canyon 168. I have graced the forum here for about 3 years and am ready to jump in. The problems I see is my size factor. I want to start pieceing together but already seeing problems to start. I spoke to the guys at Prior to have a board done but of course the best start will be boots. I have seen a few threads about a few things but no real answers.
My dogs are a 13.5-14. I have tried the sizing chart, which would be a 31. The only boot that would be close is the Head Stratos and it comes in a 31.5 which may work. My concern is are they strong enough. I tried 31 at the local ski shop but are very snug but it is a ski boot. Similar? Looking at the TD3's, same thing, will they house the the boot. It says contact Bomber for possible options for over 30 Mondo. All in all I am not feeling the warm and fuzzy going into this. So, there it is in a nut shell. I did't mean to single Jack out but he seems to have good responses and looks like he has written a few actilces and could answer the above qestions.

Thanks again for reading.
Head Stratos Pro (http://bomberonline.com/store/boots/head_stratos.cfm)

[BlueB]

Welcome.
Skip the sizing charts and measure your foot in cm = propper Mondo.
When trying in ski shop, it should fit not just "very snug" but rather "too snug". Try pretty much any Head shell or Dalbello of non-Krypton shape, for similar fit.
To the best of my knowledge, TD3 should hold 31 boot, but Fin or Michelle should know better.
Read the boot sizing articles for more info.

[zoltan]

Background- softbooing since 1991-current, East Coast slopes and icy narrows.
I do not not ride the park and just love to ride. I ride an aggresive stance. I am 6'4 and 250 poundish. My current ride is a Burton Canyon 168. I have graced the forum here for about 3 years and am ready to jump in. The problems I see is my size factor. I want to start pieceing together but already seeing problems to start. I spoke to the guys at Prior to have a board done but of course the best start will be boots. I have seen a few threads about a few things but no real answers.
My dogs are a 13.5-14. I have tried the sizing chart, which would be a 31. The only boot that would be close is the Head Stratos and it comes in a 31.5 which may work. My concern is are they strong enough. I tried 31 at the local ski shop but are very snug but it is a ski boot. Similar? Looking at the TD3's, same thing, will they house the the boot. It says contact Bomber for possible options for over 30 Mondo. All in all I am not feeling the warm and fuzzy going into this. So, there it is in a nut shell. I did't mean to single Jack out but he seems to have good responses and looks like he has written a few actilces and could answer the above qestions.

Thanks again for reading.
Head Stratos Pro (http://bomberonline.com/store/boots/head_stratos.cfm)
As has been already mentioned, you first need to measure your feet in cm (mondo). You simply cannot go off of shoe size, since it's just too inaccurate. Once you have your real size, then you have a starting point.

Yes, the boots will be strong enough.

While I'm pretty sure the TD3 can hold a size 31, I know the SnowPro and F2 Titanium bindings will definitely hold a size 31.

[Petrol]

Jack,
....I would like to ask you some questions off line if that is possible.

Thanks Scott
Hi Scott, I hit mass-o-nuttin, wintergreen, snowshoe, wintergreen & seven springs. not many hardbooter around these parts. maybe we can ride sometime. :cool:

[BlueB]

I know the SnowPro and F2 Titanium bindings will definitely hold a size 31.
Nope. Commonly found Snowpro Race will bearly hold 29. Rare Snowpro "large" can go bigger.

[piusthedrcarve]

As has been already mentioned, you first need to measure your feet in cm (mondo). You simply cannot go off of shoe size, since it's just too inaccurate. Once you have your real size, then you have a starting point.

Yup. that's the starting point. I'm on mp29 boots so if your measurement came less then 30cm, you can try my boots (Deeluxe 700T with BTS) if you come up to Whitetail. I post next riding day at other thread, "Riding at Whitetail (http://www.bomberonline.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=32922)"

[Jack Michaud]

Background- softbooing since 1991-current, East Coast slopes and icy narrows.
I do not not ride the park and just love to ride. I ride an aggresive stance. I am 6'4 and 250 poundish. My current ride is a Burton Canyon 168. I have graced the forum here for about 3 years and am ready to jump in. The problems I see is my size factor. I want to start pieceing together but already seeing problems to start. I spoke to the guys at Prior to have a board done but of course the best start will be boots. I have seen a few threads about a few things but no real answers.
My dogs are a 13.5-14. I have tried the sizing chart, which would be a 31. The only boot that would be close is the Head Stratos and it comes in a 31.5 which may work. My concern is are they strong enough. I tried 31 at the local ski shop but are very snug but it is a ski boot. Similar? Looking at the TD3's, same thing, will they house the the boot. It says contact Bomber for possible options for over 30 Mondo. All in all I am not feeling the warm and fuzzy going into this. So, there it is in a nut shell. I did't mean to single Jack out but he seems to have good responses and looks like he has written a few actilces and could answer the above qestions.[/URL][/B]

Thanks for the nod. The first step towards carving in hardboots is carving in softboots. You can practice The Norm on your current gear and get to the point where you are linking carved turns on green circle slopes - that is, changing edges before the board points downhill and carving the downhill edge around until it becomes the uphill edge. Then you can take that experience into hardboots.

Bomber has a good policy about sizing boots and being able to return them (unridden of course) after trying them on at home. So I say try the Heads. Failing that, look for an all-mtn ski boot and seek help from good retail shops. As for bindings, yes, contact Bomber. They are away at the SES until the 14th, so you should wait and call them on the phone after that (do not email, they will be swamped with email backlog). Standard Bomber TD3s go to Mondo 30. Step-in TD3s go to Mondo 31, but call to confirm. Catek Longplates go to Mondo 31.5, but ordering anything new from Catek has been problematic for several people on here for the past couple seasons - they are having issues. You can check the classifieds here for a used set, but Bomber's suspension system makes for a more comfortable ride, imo.

For boards, going custom is a good idea, or if you're on a budget I would look for a used Swoard 175 XH or H, or a Donek Blade 180. They are wide. Or heck, a new Donek Blade 180 ($700 - will save you quite a bit over a custom). Basically you want a board that is wide enough for you to mount your bindings no steeper than 60 degrees with no boot overhang.

Hope this helps, good luck!