binding help?????

[2Extreme]

Hey all, hoping someone can tell me what's up-
I am going to buy a brand new pair of bindings. Trying to decide between the Catek Olympics and the TD2's. I've never had either and am fairly new to the carving scene. If I have it right the Cateks you can adjust the cant and lift easily and with no extra parts but the TD2's you need different cant disks?

Thanks in advance-
Jeff

[nekdut]

You are correct on the adjustment differences. Details here:

http://alpinecarving.com/binding_model.html

[Randy S.]

To me the differences boil down to:

Cateks: Unlimited adjustability but you need two wrenches with you at all times

Bomber: One wrench and set-it-forget-it simplicity. Yes you need to replace your cant disk to make major cant changes, but you can tweak pretty well with the new ones.

I'm a set-it-forget-it guy.

[2Extreme]

Thank you all for your input. If I did go with the TD2's, what cant would you start with? Just guess? Buy all the discs with the initial purchase so I can try them all? Makes it a little more expensive that way.

Thanks

[dudleydudley]

I just bought my first set of TD2s and this is my first alpine setup. As it is recommended on their site, I bought a 0* cant disk and a 3* cant disk. Lots of good info about newbie setup on there. And the Carver's Almanac.

[Jeffrey Day]

I'm by no means an expert, but I think alot of people will agree that getting two 3* discs is a nice neutral place to start. Then if you need to change something, you could go with a 6* disc. I run a 3* in the front and a 6* in the rear, but I'm thinking about switching things around this season... putting the 6* up front & the 3* in the rear. For me, I tend to weight my front foot too much making my tail wag. So in theory, with my mechanics anyway, by putting the 6* up front, I might shift my weight bias rearward. Just a theory that I'm working on.
That's just my two cents!

Happy trails!

[Randy S.]

You might consider buying a 6/3 set up plus an extra board kit with a 3/0 set up. Try them out on the carpet in the living room. Then call Fin or Michelle and ask to exchange the two disks you don't want. As long as you haven't scratched them up, that may be OK with them (I'd double check first).

Also FWIW, I suspect you wouldn't have much trouble swapping disks with someone here on the site. I did that last season with someone. It took me about 24 hours to find a taker for an even swap.

[Jack Michaud]

Originally posted by nekdut
You are correct on the adjustment differences. Details here:

http://alpinecarving.com/binding_model.html

I must take exception to one bullet item there. The Carver's Almanac states:

"The [Catek's] True Flex Disc isolates the rider from shock and vibration, and protects the board. Catek claims that it also 'decouples acute rider transmitted forces from making it to the board edge.'"

The TD2 provides a true suspension and is the only binding on the market that currently does so. Regardless of quotes to the contrary for any other binding.

[2Extreme]

Seems like a lot of bias towards the TD2's. Is this because this is a Bomber forum? Just curious, Everyone is teaching me a lot about the bindings right now. Anyone here using or has used the Cateks? There are obviously a lot of you with the TD2's and are very happy with them, that's really good to hear.

[Jeffrey Day]

Jeff,

I do use both the TD2 & Catek Olympic step ins! I do like the TD2 bindings...but my favorite is still my Cateks!
This will be my 5th season on plates and last year was my first year using a binding other than Catek. I don't think that I am sensitive enough to notice the sudulties between the Catek e-ring and the TD2 suspension ring or the differences between the step-ins and the conventional bindings! All I know is that I ride just a little bit better with my Cateks.
I know that I'm going to get a bunch o' s@#t for my comments...so let 'em rip :-)
I do like the fact that the TD2s are more adjustable than the TD1s...and I like the adjustability of my Cateks!
Anyways, again my un-educated 2 cents.

[CarvCanada]

They're both extremely awesome. If you already know around what type of cant/lift you want (and most beginners do start with like FRONT: 0-1 toe lift, 0-2 inward cant REAR: 2-3 heel lift, 1-2 inward cant) which can pretty much be accomplished by rotating the e-rings on the TD2. The Catek is a bit more complicated and harder to switch boards etc. but equally an awesome binding, i prefer the cateks.

[Jeffrey Day]

Now Bob,

Be nice :-) How do you know that Jeff aka 2extreme won't think you're talking to him!
You see Jeff, Bobs' a little upset with me as we are friends, he helped Fin design the TD2s and I still ride with my Cateks!
Just kiddin' Bob! Actually, that's the beauty of this web-site and market! From what I have seen, all the major players are more interested in promoting this market than what people ride!
Peace be the Journey!

Happy trails!

[Mike T]

I personally think the TD2's kick a little more @$$. Just a little.

I do notice the difference between the suspension on the TD2 and the Catek rubber gasket, but only on my less-damp boards. But that's exactly where I need it.

I find the TD2's just a tad easier to set up and tear down, even though my small boots require me to loosen the toe and heel blocks.

On the other hand the continuous can/lift adjustmnet is very cool, and Catek SI's are easier to step into while moving.

In the end, I sold my Olympics and bought another pair of TD2s, and a couple second board kits to mount my quiver and just move the top plates around...

[Kent]

Originally posted by Bob Jenney
I think everyone finds the thing that they like about either system. When you think about it, the TD2 and the Olympic are complimentary bindings. They cover all a rider could want. If you can't get dialed with one or the other, then the problem is not the binding.

Bob, with all due respect.....there is a specific niche for flexier bindings amongst the sport's most elite riders. I'd really like to see this void filled by either Bomber or Catek....

Kent

[Derf]

Originally posted by Kent
Bob, with all due respect.....there is a specific niche for flexier bindings amongst the sport's most elite riders. I'd really like to see this void filled by either Bomber or Catek....

Kent

It's an intersting point you bring here and I am glad to hear it. The most common thought about bindings on this forum is that bindings should be stiff and boots should flex. Personnaly, I am quite happy with my Burton bindings that I've had for 7 years.

Not everyone wants the same level of performance out of their setup. I really like carving, I only ride my alpine board during the winter, it's been a couple of years since I touched my freestyle board, but I am not as motivated as others with tuning and boards and stuff, I just like to ride the best I can and have fun.

[Kent]

Originally posted by yyzcanuck
And I take exception to that statement...

The PHIOKKA Highlander, the F2 Race Titanium, and F2 INTEC Titanium all suspend the rider's weight upon an elastomer ring, in a manner similar to the BOMBER TD2.


And where might someone in the US purchase these?

;)

[philfell]

It's interesting to hear the thoughts about the need for suspension in a binding from Bob. This is the exact reason that many racers I know stay away from Bombers, beacause they don't have enough movement. Stiffer your binding interface is the more direct power and control you have over your snowboard, but this also means the more power the snow has over you. When you hit ruts and chatter and your bindings are too stiff you feel it in your shins. If you have a binding with more give the board can bounce around under your feet and you can maintain balance because the snow isn't pushing your shin all over the place. Just like a fs xc bike you can float over bouncier terrain without getting bounced around so much. Verses a hard tail where you think you are going faster because you are really getting bounced and are barely able to hang on, but that's all that's happening... you're going the same speed or even slower, but getting bounced more.

Like yyzcanuck pointed out the Phiokka's are a very popular binding with racers, not just in Toronto, but across the globe.

Take in consideration I'm talking about racing here, mainly because it was brought up by some other posters. When you are out freeriding you don't encounter the same terrain you do in a race course. Most of the people I know who only freeride and never put their board in a rut prefer to ride in Bombers or Cateks, for the same reasons the racers don't use them. You can really create a lot of energy in your turn with a binding as solid as these.

There was a thread last month called "the right tool for the job", or something like that. Bindings are exactly that, first you need to do some soul searching and figure out what you will be riding most of the time then start narrowing down you binding choices.

[CarvCanada]

The racers need a flexier binding simply because there's a lot of bumps and ugly ruts (low frequency vibration) though don't they? The aren't riding the soft plates because it gets rid of low frequency, but because they absorb some of the beating, right?

Although, being a techie who loves physics and shiny equipment that you can ride, I'd love to see a binding come out that combines both concepts of Catek and TD2, kind of like the Phiokka except... stiff in the right places and soft in the right places, not just soft everywhere.

I'd buy one right away if it combined the machined aluminum bombproof beauty of Cateks & TD2's, took the disk system from the Catek, with a dampening system for high frequency vibrations and a small bit of a flex pattern.

[Jack Michaud]

Originally posted by yyzcanuck
And I take exception to that statement...

The PHIOKKA Highlander, the F2 Race Titanium, and F2 INTEC Titanium all suspend the rider's weight upon an elastomer ring, in a manner similar to the BOMBER TD2.



Well, a quick look at those bindings on the web reveals insufficient details to confirm or deny the existence of such a suspension system, but I am very skeptical. Really I was just trying to nicely say that the statements in the Carver's Almanac about the Catek isolating or decoupling the rider from the board are quite simply false. The mounting plate is rigidly bolted to the board, much like the TD1 was. The circumferential gasket is a better execution of the same concept as the TD1's bumpers, but it is not a fully floating system. But whatever, both the Olympics and the TD2s offer something the other doesn't, and both are excellent choices. Neither binding renders the other obsolete.

Edit: I just read Bob's post. That's what I thought.

[Kent]

Originally posted by Bob Jenney


I’d love to personally interview a range of racers to get a better picture of this.

- I think that all riders can benefit from more suspension in the boot/binding/board interface. Allowing the board to follow the terrain independent or somewhat isolated from the rider feedback has proven to be a good thing with some of the very crude observations I've made and tests I’ve done.


You'll be hard pressed to take away my hardtail in Minnesota..but I did recently buy a full carbon tri bike. Was going to hit up Seven for Ti, but there was a lil rumor about their aero "fairing" rather than aero tubing. I was going to email you offline about that.....until I found a deal on carbon.

Anyhoo, back to bindings.

Yes, let's start the research! There's a Grand Prix in a few weeks at Breck. Expense the travel to Bomber. I'll meet you there and buy the beers. I'm sure Phil and Chuck would chime in their 2 cents as well. I added Fin to the official start list as a pre-season present.....

Perhaps this is better suited in it's own thread, but here goes.

I'd venture a guess that every guy racing USSA has, at least, tried riding either Catek, Rat Trap or Bombers at one point in time. When your race performance dictates whether you'll eat ramen noodles or Old Chicago Pizza (perhaps the van or the Super 8 for lodging) every second counts. Some guys ROCK on stiff bindings, some guys don't. But, there does not appear to be ANY consistency on podium finishes and stiff bindings. (unless Mort is racing and it took him a loooong time to give up those ski boots). It is interesting how cyclical the the changes have occurred....

In general, you hit the nail on the head....too much responsiveness limits absorption (Indy race car vs. off road pickup truck). Racing is a difference animal than freecarving.

At the same time, snowboarding "should" be a foot sport....not a leg sport. (i.e. many people use stiff bindings to cheat for lack of balance). The issues with stiff bindings is less an issue on toe side turns versus heel side. (Toe side = more direct pressure through the boot tongue).

It may sound crazy...but perhaps some sort of hinge mechanism that runs parallel underneath the foot. I guess what I'm saying is that although the board is symetrical, the bindings aren't. They offer totally different purposes on toe and heel turns....

I'm getting a bit off tangent, but I'd do backflips if Fin (or Jeff) came up with a possible solution. The best design I've seen was the Virus Deathlock which appears to be a Phoikka OEM. It's basically an vintage Emery Course on steroids......


On a side note....most racer don't need all the frills, bells & whistles. Toss in some canting/riser shims and we'll customize (not configure) to our situation. The less gadgets, the better. We don't need "on the hill" adjustment...just one more thing to go wrong in the starting gate.


http://tinypic.com/pnm0z

[philfell]

What about the old emery surfs. You'd have to be a plate rider for at least a decade to know what I'm talking about. But these had suspension.

CarvCanada in a race course you get everything ruts, holes, girls ruts, bumps, and a lot of chatter. When I think of suspension I think of the ability to absorb. You can put more rubber in a board and make it dampen more viberation, but that dosen't make it have suspension. You use your legs to absorb movements before it displaces your center of gravity, so you can maitain balance. Your boots have movement in them so they can absorb some of the energy before it gets to your legs. Your binding have movement to absorb energy before it gets to your boots. To me this is all suspension, they are a "system of devices supporting the upper part of a vehicle (from my hips up) on the axle (my board). In my mind all bindings have this suspensioin, the support the upper on it's axle and they have the ability to absorb. Wheather it's through the bails flexing, your boot sole rolling withing the bails or the base plate flexing, it still absorbs. Granted some bindings do better than others.

Remember it goes both ways. The system I talked about above I looked at absorbing energy from the snow. It also absorbs energy from you, you have to move more in order to get the same response out of you board.

[philfell]

I'll probably not be at the SES, unfortunatlly I get paid to take my kids to races, not to go freeriding. But if I could...... But there is a Nor-Am at Loon at the end of Jan. there will be many high level athletes there that you could pick their brain.

[kipstar]

I had a pair of them! They were, if I recall the same model as you, a hard ridge, with rubber on either side, so the suspension was in the boot sole/binding wire interface, rather than the binding itself. It made a difference for a hard sole like a ski boot.

I used to ride the 5 hole nitros with the fritshi bindings that mounted the binding on a single bolt in the centre, and the heel and toe floated on a sliding track. So the suspension was basically absorbing flex of the edge independently from the single centre screw. Did nothing for riding flat over chop ;-)

Surprisingly, it actually worked quite well, so I was heart broken the next year when nitro went to the 4 hole pattern, and I had to toss out all that gear!

Kip

[NateW]

I'm a little concerned that when I tighten the mounting bolts in my TD2s, the base will suck right up the mounting disc and produce suspension no different than that offered by Catek.

Admittedly I haven't mounted them up yet, but it looks like the 'suspension throw' is about equivalent to the 'base suck' that I typically get when mounting bindings (even my TD1s).

And if I don't tighten them enough to suck the board up to the mounting disc, will the mounting screws stay tight?

[2Extreme]

Well, I really didn't expect all this when I started this thread, but I appreciate all the input, even though it went a little off topic. I am absolutely sure that I can't go wrong with either binding. I also understand the racer mentality as for 6 years I raced skiing USSA and went to the 1992 Junior Olympic trials. Not bad for a kid from Ohio. However at the time I was also boarding in my spare time so there you have it. I rode a Burton PJ6 for awhile in my ski boots. Then I got married and fell off the earth. So now, newly divorced (2 years) I need to get my carve on!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks to all!!!!

Jeff

[Jack Michaud]

Originally posted by bola
Jack:

I am not sure that I totally agree with your analysis.

I don't think there's any "analysis" to agree or disagree with, I'm just stating the fact that the Catek is rigidly mounted to the board and therefore the statements in the Carver's Almanac are inaccurate.

[NateW]

Yes YYZ that's what I'm talking about. However on second thought I think it's by design. Bob, correct me if I'm wrong here:

When mounting TD2s, the mounting disc is supposed to be clamped securely to the topsheet. This compresses the e-ring a bit. "Suspension" means that a downward force on the top of the binding (and an upward force on the board) causes the ring to compress which causes the cant "disc" to get closer to the board.

How many pounds of preload does it take to bring the mounting disc into contact with the topsheet?

[Gtanner]

I hate to throw a wrench in the spokes here, but I feel like I should put in my two cents about racers and stiff bindings.

I have been racing now for about 8 years (started on a Burton Safari…shudder) and have primarily ridden on Burton equipment due to supply and sponsorship deals. I have competed at 6 or 7 national championships and have traveled overseas to compete for Canada at the World University Games.

Up until last year, I used the explosive Burton raceplates and certainly had my series of problems. I remember taking a look at the bindings last year and realized that I only had one heal bail remaining from the original binding, I had broken/replaced everything several times. I have always noticed the ridiculous amount of play in these bindings and therefore rode stiffer boots and boards to increase the overall system response.

Last year, my coach offered me his TD1’s to use for the rest of the season (I had blown another bail on the brtns). What a difference! Now granted I weigh about 210-215lbs (depending on beer intake) but the response and accuracy that I suddenly had was unreal. So I started using them on my 185 speed and won a handful of PGS races and BX as well.

So for me, the stiffer binding has worked better (and I ride mostly on east coast ice). I find that the stiffer binding allows me to make subtle adjustments to body position and/or modify my pressure phase of the turn to gain more speed out of each turn which I couldn't do before. Now the board is what is bending, and there is no more loss to the bindings.

I just ordered a set of Catek’s and am really excited to try them out!

[BRAD PETER]

Has anyone used f2 titanflex binding and say td2 stndard with yellow ering. I am curious as to wich has more flex or is more comfortible to ride. I now ride buton race and like the feel of them but want step up to bindings with more lift/cant optoins and still have the feel of the burton race.

[Randy S.]

KenW: Great write-up. Thanks. I just got a set of Standard bails for my TD2s and now I'm even more psyched to try them out. I race in SI TD2s and it works well for me. Plus I love the convenience of step-in.

Brad: I replaced my F2 Titanflex SIs with TD2s last year. The TDs have it all over the F2s. First of all, you can actually get parts for TDs if you need them. Forget about getting parts for F2s in the US. F2 will just ignore your emails. Second, the TDs are way more durable. The important plastic parts on the F2 hold up, but there are little pieces that go missing. I lost a center disk (the plastic cover part - not integral to the function of the binding) and one of the toe/heel pads (which are important to the function of the binding). Those parts just fell off one time I was changing bindings/boards and I never found them again. Third is adjustability. F2 provides a combination of lift/cant shims. I found a pretty good set-up with those standards, but if you don't like what it comes with, you are outta luck. The TDs don't have the adjustability of the Cateks, but still have plenty for me and way more than the F2. I originally bought the F2 bindings because I thought it was a great deal. I could get 2 pair for about the same cost as one pair of TDs. Two pair of bindngs that last one season are not a better deal than one pair that last 3 seasons+. In retrospect it worked out. Had I bought TDs when I bought the F2s, I'd have ended up with TD1s. This way I got the 2nd gen TDs and I'm really happy. I now have two full pair, plus a 2nd board kit plus a set of standard bails and some extra screws and e-rings. In fact that reminds me I need to go get a tool box to keep all my Bomber spare parts in. My F2 bindings are now part of the Tahoecarvers demo fleet and stay on my powder board most of the time.

So, to answer your question. I haven't used Titanflex and TD2 Standard, just step-in. Overall, the TD is way more comfortable, better built, more adjustable, and, I think equally flexible (comparing SI to SI - presumably bails would be similar comparison). Buy the US made product.

[Mike T]

Originally posted by Randy S.
In fact that reminds me I need to go get a tool box to keep all my Bomber spare parts in.

Heh - just did that myself! (Two complete TD2SI, 2 2nd board kits, a couple extra cant disks. Pays to watch eBay and classifieds!)

I plan to enter a GS or two "just for fun", I'll use what I've got ( TD2SI) should I put the soft tongues in my Raichles to add a little more give to the system?

I'm curious why racers seem to like super stiff boots and get all the give from the bindings rather than the other way around (softer boot, stiff binding)... would someone mind explaining it for the benefit of a non-racer such as myself? (I understand why you need some play in the system... what I don't understand is, why not let it come from the boot instead of the binding? That certainly seems to help me while freecarving on uneven snow)

[Kent]

Originally posted by Mike T
I'm curious why racers seem to like super stiff boots and get all the give from the bindings rather than the other way around (softer boot, stiff binding)... would someone mind explaining it for the benefit of a non-racer such as myself? (I understand why you need some play in the system... what I don't understand is, why not let it come from the boot instead of the binding? That certainly seems to help me while freecarving on uneven snow)

First off, it would be inaccurate to say that racers that use "weaker" bails use stiffer boots......and that Bomber/Catek racers use softer boots. There is no best practice.

To answer your question though....depending on style a softer binding racer might want to laterally move their foot without moving the binding. This allows you to keep your edge a fraction of a second longer while your foot starts the next turn.

In the case of stiffer boots, racers generally use more power. The goal is the proper mix of strength vs. flexibility.

[$trider]

Originally posted by Mike T
I'm curious why racers seem to like super stiff boots and get all the give from the bindings rather than the other way around (softer boot, stiff binding)... would someone mind explaining it for the benefit of a non-racer such as myself? (I understand why you need some play in the system... what I don't understand is, why not let it come from the boot instead of the binding? That certainly seems to help me while freecarving on uneven snow)

I am no where near a pro level racer so this is only what I noticed in my racing in USASA and local leagues for the last 6 years. I actually do prefer the softer boot, TD2 combo. I started out using my ultra stiff Lange race series ski boots way back in the day and often over-powered my bindings and bent the bails(no failures though). I then got raichle 223's and added a fourth buckle. At first they were sooooooo much softer than my ski boots that I was really sloppy. Once I figured out the different flex pattern and adjusted my riding style accordingly I found that the whole system had too much play for my tastes. I got a pair of TD 1's and all of a sudden I had too much response, but prefered it over the Burton's I was using. Rode those for 3 years and now that I''ve had a season in the TD2's and played around with the different elastomers I really love the feel of the soft ring. I like to feel a solid interface between me an my board, and I like to let my ankles/boots take up the bouncing. I can flex the boots an unbelievable amount, but that doesn't bother me because that is the feel that I like. So, I really like the solid feel of the binding, but the e-ring does a good job of not transferring too much to my legs with the exception of the bone jarring ruts, damn skiers taking the wrong line in the local league :) , which mostly need to be taken up with the legs anyway. Most of the other racers I race with get the stiffest boots they can. I've tried them (only for periods of a day at a time) and I haven't found the need to get a stiffer boot, but maybe it would be better. What I think it probably boils to, is what each person gets comfortable with. Who knows...maybe in 5 years more racers will be on Bombers or Cateks, and maybe not. All I know is that for my riding style they work fine for me and I haven't run into many amateur racers who I can't hang with. I have no doubt that the pros would spank me though.

[Jack Michaud]

used older/softer Burton boots, the Furnace, in the SLC Olympics. I don't know what he's on now, but he likes the soft/soft combo.

[Mike T]

Originally posted by Kent
To answer your question though....depending on style a softer binding racer might want to laterally move their foot without moving the binding. This allows you to keep your edge a fraction of a second longer while your foot starts the next turn.

In the case of stiffer boots, races generally use more power. The goal is the proper mix of strength vs. flexibility.

Interesting! I can see how SI's or even stiff bail bindings would limit the ability to move the *foot* as opposed to the *ankle and lower leg*, which is more what I like to do and what softer boots like Raichle SB series allow me to do.

I had a horrible day out freeriding/carving in a pair of stiffer Heads w/ my TD2 SIs... I felt like I couldn't move my legs and knees. What's interesting is that taking a few runs on some Burton bindings was no help! Back to Raichle SB series boots for me, sold the Heads. Didn't feel like spending a season gettiong the knack for stiffer boots!

[terekhov]

Originally posted by Jack Michaud
used older/softer Burton boots, the Furnace, in the SLC Olympics. I don't know what he's on now, but he likes the soft/soft combo.
furnace is much stiffer boot than indy.
have ridden both of them.

[2Extreme]

Well, just thought since I started this thread I'd let everyone know what I did, I went with the TD2's. Placed my order Tuesday. It seems that I couldn't go wrong with the Cateks or the TD2's. I figured I would start with a 0/3 and see what happens. Didn't know what ring to use, so I went with the medium. We'll see!!!!!!

Thanks to everyone who has responded to this thread, it appears that no matter who likes what, this is a close community of carvers and all respect each others' opinions. Hope to see y'all on the hill- (that's about the size of it in Ohio).

I'll be in Salt Lake in February if anyone wants to hook up!

Jeff

[Derf]

Originally posted by terekhov
furnace is much stiffer boot than indy.
have ridden both of them.

The Furnace are that stiff? I ride those (black 1997) and fid them not that stiff, probably because of the way I adjusted the spring. When I tried Indy's in store, they were much stiffer than my Furnace boots. Maybe it was because I was not riding or just the way they were adjusted.

[philfell]

To answer a question posted above about getting flex out of the boot insead of the binding, picture this. You go into a turn that has some bumps and chatter in it when your board hits this it gets bumped around. Thus your bindings get bumped around, thus so do your boots. You can soften your boots, but your feet are getting bumped around. All the softer boot is doing is giving your ankle move ability to absorb some of the energy. With a slightly softer binding some of this energy is absorbed before it even gets to you body.

As far as racers using stiff boots.... Snowboard boots aren't that stiff in the grand scale. If they really wanted stiff boots they would all be on ski boots. My fires really aren't that stiff, and Thordike rides in winds (they are heavily modified though).

As Gtanner states though not all racers like a softer binding. That's what's great about snowboard racing, there are so many styles and thoughts out there, it is so varied. Mort is closer to 50 than I am to 30 and he has the ability to go head to head with anyone in North America and he loves his TD step-in with the purple ring. Then you have on the other side Adam Smith, he's easily over 200 pounds and won a world cup SL on Burton race plates. Find out what works for you. Don't get too caught up in hype.

[Randy S.]

Watch it Phil. Mort and I just turned 40 this year. He'll always be faster than me, so thank goodness we don't race in the same class at USASA races.

[Mike T]

Originally posted by philfell
To answer a question posted above about getting flex out of the boot insead of the binding, picture this. You go into a turn that has some bumps and chatter in it when your board hits this it gets bumped around. Thus your bindings get bumped around, thus so do your boots. You can soften your boots, but your feet are getting bumped around. All the softer boot is doing is giving your ankle move ability to absorb some of the energy. With a slightly softer binding some of this energy is absorbed before it even gets to you body.

Thanks Phil! Now I get it. :)

[Ray]

My $0.002.

The entire last season and the last 5 weeks I experimented a lot with some different combination possibilities.
I tried:

TD2 Step-in w/ Indy and UPZ
TD2 Regular w/ Indy
TD2 Regular w/ Burton Fire, Ice and Indy
Catek Step-in w/ Burton Fire, Ice and Indy
F2 Titanium Step-in w/ Burton Fire, Ice, Indy and UPZ’s
F2 Titanium Regular w/ Burton Fire, Ice, Indy, UPZ’s and Northwave .900

And to make a long story short, "I" liked the softer bindings with the medium-stiff boot the most.
So basically a bail binding with the Indy.

I found the step-ins to stiff for "me", especially in terms of lateral stiffness.
I believe that this had also to do with my body-structure/weight. I think it just makes sense,
that a guy with 180lbs. or more bends the bindings easier than a guy with 170lbs. or less.
Now the question is, do you want, or like the bindings to bend and if so, by how much.
This is what I believe. The harder you ride (especially under not so perfect conditions) and the
lower you lay it down, the more flex you want/need to get from your bindings. I believe that
people who are not in the 180lbs+ range should give it a try and directly compare/ride step-ins
and regular bail bindings under the same exact conditions.
Off course, it also plays a big role what your riding style is. When I was just cruising, I had no
issues at all with the stiff to very stiff set-up. But as soon as I started to really bend that board and
squeezed it and layed it down to the max, the softer bail binding was way more comfortable to ride but
even more important delivered much better edge hold.
This probably due to the fact that most of the energy gets absorbed in the bindings and not in the boot/legs... back to Phil's theory.
But again, I am also not the tallest and heaviest guy (5'7 / 170) and this is just "my" experience I like to share.

[BRAD PETER]

Ray so which set up did you end up with?

[Ray]

Originally posted by yyzcanuck
I just can't resist... That $0.002usd is NOW almost equal to $0.02cdn since the exchange rate has started to head North! heheheh

isn't $0.002usd (two zeros) waaaaay less than $0.02cdn (one zero) anyway :confused:

If the USD should fall to such an exchange rate we all have a problem :eek:

[Ray]

Originally posted by BRAD PETER
Ray so which set up did you end up with?

Brad. Bail bindings with DeeLuxe Indy boots

[Kent]

I think we all agree that Fin and Bob need to start R&D NOW on complimentary binding to the TD......

I vote they knock off the Virus Deathlock. Very minimal machining.....

I'll place my order for 5 pair right now.....

K

[DrCR]

Originally posted by Ray
Brad. Bail bindings with DeeLuxe Indy boots

Glad to hear it. I just made a deal on a pair of Indys to go with the F2 Race Titaniums I bought from you. I was a bit intimidated in going for the Indy, but I am planning on doing a EC.com inspired spring mod.

What board are you riding?

[AlpentalRider]

Originally posted by Kent
I think we all agree that Fin and Bob need to start R&D NOW on complimentary binding to the TD......

I vote they knock off the Virus Deathlock. Very minimal machining.....

I'll place my order for 5 pair right now.....

K

I'm in the same boat. I'm gonna keep riding my Burton Race Plates until they break and hopefully by then Fin and Bob will have a softer alternative to the TD2. If not, then I guess i'll be going TD2 Bails with the Yellow Ring.

[jp1]

2Extreme, thanks for this post !
When starting I was really confused about soft boots / hard boots, bindings that have flex as opposed to ones that do not, etc., etc.
Now it is clear as 'mud' !

Great Thread though. Just like 'suspension' on anything else, road bike, mtn. bike, motorcycle,street car, race car, monster truck, whatever. It's all about putting the 'forces' to the surface.

[terekhov]

Originally posted by Derf
The Furnace are that stiff? I ride those (black 1997) and fid them not that stiff, probably because of the way I adjusted the spring. When I tried Indy's in store, they were much stiffer than my Furnace boots. Maybe it was because I was not riding or just the way they were adjusted.
possibly. i mean shell/lateral stiffness, not a stiffness that depend on springs. yes, indy has almost unneeded incredibly stiff spring. and furnace - too soft spring to my liking.

[philw]

[...] Just like 'suspension' on anything else, road bike, mtn. bike, motorcycle,street car, race car, monster truck, whatever. It's all about putting the 'forces' to the surface. [/B]

True, but there's not exactly much suspension on my road cycle, and my "sports" car is pretty stiff, as are my windsurfer sails... All these things flex of course, but it's about having the right type of flexibility in the right places.

It's good that there's a choice in stuff like this. I tried some of the Intec Proflex (now F2) bindings with the suspension things a few years back and ended up dumping the dampers - they are removable and what you're left with is essentially the same as the undamped Proflex race plates.

[BRAD PETER]

Fin/Bob Seems like there is a market for Bomber lights say td standards with 5.5 mm bales and high quality plastic toe piece. The design of your binding is the best and this would be an easy change that would pick up lighter riders,beginers ,racers ect. l

[Jack Michaud]

not speaking for fin or bob, but i'm sure this could be accomplished with the existing e-ring system, and just making it cushier, perhaps also with more travel. no need to compromise safety with weak components.

bombers are engineered bindings. if you're not engineering, you're guessing.

[Jack Michaud]

Originally posted by Kent
But why over-engineer a problem that doesn't exist? Don't engineers understand the KISS principal?

Oh, I'm sorry, do Burton bails <i>not</i> break all the time? :p



I'm no engineer, but I play one on TV. If you took the TD1 binding and made the top of the toe/heel blocks "rounded" (rather than flat) you give yourself a wee bit of wiggle room and lateral movement.
Unnecessary. Then you'd be getting boot wear and/or unpredictable play. Why not make the closure system unbreakable, and engineer the flex in somewhere else?



Coupled with a (replaceable) plastic (ryton) toe clip and you might be there.....

Now that's just crazy talk. Plastic toe clips. peushaw.


Just a thought. The other is price.

The price of this sport is creeping up way too fast........

Compared to what? Skiing? No. Softboot snowboarding? No. (Burton's topshelf 2-strap binding is $350)

[Mike T]

Originally posted by Kent
Care to give us your idea on where a binding should flex? It seems that material flex is easier to accomplish than mechanical flex.

I'm a software engineer not a mechanical engineer but I'm giving my $0.02 anyway:

It should flex somewhere, such that when "flex" becomes "fail", the risk of injury to the rider is minimized. When that part is the bails, there is a great risk of injury.

I understand how much engineers hate hearing something like that last paragraph, where someone doesn't know what they want but they sure know what they don't want. I deal with that all the time at work.

[RCrobar]

Hi Fin

When the TD2 was first released I remember Fin (or Bob?) discussing different E-Ring prototypes, both thicker and thinner E-Rings were tested.

It was explained that the thin E-Rings shredded or wore out too quickly. The thicker E-Rings were said to have too much movement, pitch and roll but not yaw.

From a layman’s point of view it seems that the thicker E-Ring used with the TD2 prototype could create what some riders are after, more flex from the bindings without compromising binding strength or design.


Fin/Bob, could you tell us more about the different E-Ring (thick vs thin) prototype testing results?

In theory could the thicker E-Ring be a viable possibility/solution to the flex question?

Thanks for your time.
Rob

[fin]

Rob,

When Bob and I came up with the design for the suspension system for the TD2 the thickness of the E-Ring was a HUGE debate with us as to what would work the best. The issues are:

- Go too thin and you reduce the ability for the system to absorb as well as reduce your movement or rather "float" which gives you some of that needed lateral (relative to boot, side to side) movement. Also, the E-ring is prone to ripping at the thinner thicknesses.

- Go too big and you now have maybe gained more absorption but you also have a lot more forward and rearward (toe and heel) movement that severally reduces your ability for edge hold. Also, the increase in movement will move the parts of the lower assembly past what might be acceptable for reliability and wear.

So we had to find a good middle ground for the thickness. But to answer your question, as I mentioned up top, during testing we found the really soft and really thick E-Rings did add some more flex to the system but severally reduced edge control. Example: Make a car with really soft suspension and it rides very smooth but corners like crap. However, when it comes to suspension there are ways to have most of what you want or need. The TD2 system is a good start and (in our opinion) as good as it gets right now.

[skategoat]

Fin - why does the e-ring have to be consistent through it's entire circumference? Why not make the toe and heel sides of the ring out of firmer materials to reduce the fore-aft flex?

I can even picture a two piece ring that mates together to form a complete ring.

[Derf]

Originally posted by skategoat
Fin - why does the e-ring have to be consistent through it's entire circumference? Why not make the toe and heel sides of the ring out of firmer materials to reduce the fore-aft flex?

I can even picture a two piece ring that mates together to form a complete ring.

Then you would lose the ability to adjust the direction of the lift/cant, which is a major selling part of the TD2. See the pictures at the online store and you'll understand.

[Jeff Caron]

Jack,

To date I have not publicly commented on the TD2 “Suspension” system vs the CATEK True Flex Disc. However there are distinct differences and your claims have prompted me to enter this spirited debate. I have responded to your statements on the CATEK Forum: http://www.catek.com/forum/list.php?f=1

Jeff Caron
CATEK

[Kent]

Perhaps the best response to a Bomber post ever

I don't understand most of it, but sure do like seeing good ole fashioned US capitalism and innovation at work.

Although, I'd still like to see a flexier binding that doesn't break.

K

[Jon Dahl]

After reading Jeff's short article, I note that his observations are somewhat correct, but his diagrams are somewhat skewed in the area of board deflection, making the Catek look better than the TD2. Force transmission will be more linear than his diagram suggests. There will always be a bending moment at the binding edge (metal area) it just is damped differently.

[Randy S.]

Where else is there a forum where you can correspond directly with some of the best minds in the business and get direct feedback from product designers/mfgs/users? This thread has prompted me to try new things (and buy something new) and gain a much better understanding of the products I use. Kudos to Fin, Jeff, Phil, etc. for contributing to one of the most informative threads. Keep up the great stuff guys.

Many Thanks,
Randy

[DrCR]

Originally posted by Jon Dahl
After reading Jeff's short article, I note that his observations are somewhat correct, but his diagrams are somewhat skewed in the area of board deflection, making the Catek look better than the TD2. Force transmission will be more linear than his diagram suggests. There will always be a bending moment at the binding edge (metal area) it just is damped differently.

So perhaps the the Catek looking better than the TD2 is unrepresentitive, but then were do the Catek's really stand. Perhaps not better, but equal? Only somehwhat inferior? (In this regard, not as a whole)

I know I'm asking this in a naturally very much TD2 biased forum, but I'm curious on what you consider , given your acknowledgement to at aleast some legitimacy of Jeff's thoughts, where the Catek's actually stand in this regard.

Thanks,
DrCR

________

[D-Sub]

thing is, if Jack, Bob, Fin, etc, thought that Catek was "better" they wouldnt have designed the TD2 the way it is designed! They would have found a way to mimic the Catek formula while staying unique

same goes for Caron...Im not sure who has been doing plates for longer, but...if they werent certain their design was the best, they'd have done it differently.

asking one or the other to say ours is best is kinda futile, dont you think?

Id call them equals with different purposes

[Randy S.]

Originally posted by DrCR
So perhaps the the Catek looking better than the TD2 is unrepresentitive, but then were do the Catek's really stand. Perhaps not better, but equal? Only somehwhat inferior? (In this regard, not as a whole)

I know I'm asking this in a naturally very much TD2 biased forum, but I'm curious on what you consider , given your acknowledgement to at aleast some legitimacy of Jeff's thoughts, where the Catek's actually stand in this regard.

Thanks,
DrCR

________

I think you'll actually get a pretty un-biased opinion here. Fact is, this is the definitive forum for Carving discussion. Cateks is good too (especially if you miss CMC :p ), but there are way more people who post here.

I think its almost a Coke/Pepsi discussion. Except that here you can argue on technical merit 'til you are blue in the face. Both are great bindings. Neither is likely to dissapoint or fail. To me it comes down to Cateks have almost unlimited adjustability and Bombers are more set-and-forget, but within certain limits, based on base disks. I do like the suspension on the new TDs, but Cateks suspension isn't half-bad. You have to ride them back-to-back to see/notice any difference and even then I think it would be a close call as far as ride/suspension is concerned.

I have 2.5 sets of TD2 SI's.

Oh, if you wanted freeride bindings also, that might tilt you toward catek so you could interchange parts (is that right - can you interchange base plates and some other parts?).

[Mike T]

Originally posted by Randy S.
I do like the suspension on the new TDs, but Cateks suspension isn't half-bad. You have to ride them back-to-back to see/notice any difference and even then I think it would be a close call as far as ride/suspension is concerned.

I have 2.5 sets of TD2 SI's.

Oh, if you wanted freeride bindings also, that might tilt you toward catek so you could interchange parts (is that right - can you interchange base plates and some other parts?).

I've done the back-to back test, on two different boards...

On a Coiler SuperBoard (SuperDamp) PR 184 I couldn't tell the difference, even on frozen cord. The bindings felt the same. (I set the cant/lift as close as I could get it)

On a Donek Axis 172, I can tell the difference immediately. Advantage, TD2. Less knee-jarring*

I believe the disks on the Catek Oly and FR are the same, and so is the kingpin... you can swap out top halves as long as you use the same stance width.


*That is a comparison of *just the dameping qualities* using a soft e-ring. I think Catek's cant/lift system is a valuable feature.

[DrCR]

Cool, thanks guys.

[kipstar]

>>Where else is there a forum where you can correspond directly with some of the best minds in the business and get direct feedback from product designers/mfgs/users?

If you like this sort of conversation, you should take up formula windsurfing and go on these websites:
www.star-board.com
www.gaastra.com
www.mytrims.com

Friggin 'eck, you get to speak with the world champs (Pritchard, Wojtek etc) and the brand owners as well...unbelievable. I guess it is the beauty of being involved in sports without excessive media attention.

Kip