Alpine Snowboard Plate Systems

[~tb]

Welcome Calle.

First of all, I am sure Fin will have this all covered upon his return. His customer service is always great

Second, you are a BIG rider.

Third, based on the wear marks where the core raises up in the bottom of the plate, I am cruious if you might have the 4X4 hardware in the wrong position. This would both limit the travel of the system, but also potentiall cause the smaller set of marks.

Any pictures of the board and plate set up from the side? showing the stack and alignment of everything?

Good luck!

My First post...
Got my Bomber plate about a week ago. It's replacing my Donek plate since it couldn't give enough axle spacing and felt a bit soft (and carbonfiber is carbonfiber).

Has anyone had problems with the plate rubbing against the hardware?

Been thinking about weather I could have caused this when mounting the plate but don't think so?

The Donek plate I had dug holes in the snowboard and plate when different parts came in contact.

Don't know if it is a problem at all. But it feels like it would be better if not.

Am I too heavy? the plate/hardware to soft? to little play in the system? or to soft snowboard?

(Pictures of front slider, have moved the axle forward so it wont rub at the back, also second picture shows harware paint beeing rubbed of)

[ursle]

Looking at the picture, the inserts are set into some sort of board stiffener thingie, sorta like what Virus puts on some of it's boards, (gladiator) that's 1/4-3/8th's" higher then the board, then the mounting hardware for the plate is mounted on the board, 1/4-3/8th's" lower then the inserts, am I correct?
I'd put a shim under the plate mounting hardware to make it even with the 4x4 inserts, you may want your plate as low as possible but reality dictates that you work with what you ride, the plate must be having a hard time with all the friction involved.

[digger jr]

Thanks Sean and Tom for the info and pics for the BP Lower System. I'm also getting a little rubbing on the BP similar to Pokkis, May be the screws which are slightly higher than the rest of the slider,but it doesn't look like a problem yet. Was also wondering what different axel spacing people have tried. So far I have just ridden with the 63cm spacing with a 21'' binding stance. Wondering how narrower axel spacing feels/works. I have a 4mm plate and am about 210lbs

Ron

[jp1]

ursle wrote, " Looking at the picture, the inserts are set into some sort of board stiffener thingie, sorta like what Virus puts on some of it's boards, (gladiator) that's 1/4-3/8th's" higher then the board, then the mounting hardware for the plate is mounted on the board, 1/4-3/8th's" lower then the inserts, am I correct? "

ursle, what you are seeing in that picture is the bottom of the Boiler Plate, not the board.

[ursle]

ursle wrote, " Looking at the picture, the inserts are set into some sort of board stiffener thingie, sorta like what Virus puts on some of it's boards, (gladiator) that's 1/4-3/8th's" higher then the board, then the mounting hardware for the plate is mounted on the board, 1/4-3/8th's" lower then the inserts, am I correct? "

ursle, what you are seeing in that picture is the bottom of the Boiler Plate, not the board.

Ah, with the proper orientation...
same-same, 1-2-3mm of spacer below the hardware for a clearance cushion or let it ride.

[Calle]

Welcome Calle.

First of all, I am sure Fin will have this all covered upon his return. His customer service is always great

Second, you are a BIG rider.

Third, based on the wear marks where the core raises up in the bottom of the plate, I am cruious if you might have the 4X4 hardware in the wrong position. This would both limit the travel of the system, but also potentiall cause the smaller set of marks.

Any pictures of the board and plate set up from the side? showing the stack and alignment of everything?

Good luck!

What happens when you run out of travel?
Both the board and the plate would have to bend?
The result should be the same whereever one sets the axle in the slider, however it would happen sooner if axle were set with smaller travel ( strange things could probably happen).

I wouldn't want to limit the travel in the system and don't think I have. It is also marked in the harware where the axles should be, to minimize the confusion.

[Calle]

Ah, with the proper orientation...
same-same, 1-2-3mm of spacer below the hardware for a clearance cushion or let it ride.

I am not after any cluttering solutions with spacers and stuff.
The question was/is more in line with how usual is this and how much wear on the plate is healthy? Will it hold forever or will it explode next season?

Had similar results with Doneks plate but I thought it would be better when paying twice the amount

[fin]

Calle,

These guys have done a great job of explaining, let me try as well.

First, it is VERY important you have the lower assemblies in the right spot as described in the directions. Really, the only critical adjustment is to make sure the sliding bearing is between the two marks on the front assembly. Shown in the attached picture below. You will notice this spot gives you maximum travel in the forward direction and a small amount in the rearward direction. This is one of the reasons we like to use the Wunderbar for setting these up as it nails this spot with no fuss. However, can always be done without.

FYI: the reason for a small amount of rearward travel is of interest. When people mount the BP on their deck the board is in a relaxed state and has slight camber/bends upward. If you mounted the slider bearing right up against the back of the assembly (no travel) then when you stand on the board and flatten it, those bearing would have no where to go and things might be stressed. Honestly, there is enough give in the entire system where this would not be full blown issue, but by just adding 1mm of travel in that direction it is a non-issue.

The marks that you see on the bottom of you plate are actually from two different events.

The ones in the back of the slider bearing area and on the lower assemblies from the above inserts are from the board bending upwards TOWARDS the plate. Yes, there is a bit of flex downward from the plate but most comes from when you roll over a bump and the middle of the board comes up towards the plate. Is this a big deal? No. Actually, it is a little bit of travel/suspension in the up direction to help smooth the ride a bit more. The marks in the plate do not effect its integrity as what you see is the out layer of weave carbon fiber with the marks. The 4-5mm of super tough uni-directional inside the plate are amazingly tough. I did also make sure in the design the system bumped against itself and NOT the snowboard. Now I would really get some angry e-mails then

The second event is the kiss-marks on the front of the plate where the front of the slider bearing assembly just touches the plate. This occurs right at the end of the maximum travel. Consider this like your trucks suspension, there are some over travel bumps that you hope not to hit often, but you will hit them. Point is a tremendous amount of travel and board bending has occurred before this happens. Maybe consider it a "scar" of pride

The only real solution to the above events is to raise the entire assembly higher off the board. This was something I do not want to do as I believe getting the system as low as possible is important. So a few kiss marks at the extreme ends of the travel of the system to keep the height down was the better option.

Ursle: the plate must be having a hard time with all the friction involved.

Not the case. The actual travel of the system is smooth and unhindered. There is no parts grinding on other parts during the travel of the system. Once again, those marks are from when the board base flat and getting pushed up and the outer limits of the decamber event.

Calle, bottom line what you see are cosmetic results that have no bearing on the function or durability of the board. Just like the chain on your mountain bike hitting the chain-stay tube. Rather it didn't but not much we can do.

[Calle]

Thank you.

So the short answer would be: To be able to have a system as low as possible the plate will contact the hardware at the end of the travel. This will only cause some minor scratch marks in the clear coat.

I became a little worried since i do not really feel i have pushed the board and plate yet due to bad snow conditions. But maybe I have

[SunSurfer]

The issues that Fin describes above with the underside of the plate touching the outer end of the axle bearing mechanisms at extremes of board carving loads is a fundamental design concept constraint when the plate sits above the bearings, as all isocline plates up until now have done.

Thinking recently about how to take the plate lower led me to consider a concept where the plate sits between the axles, not on top of them.
To create such a design would probably require that the outermost UPM inserts be further apart in order to accommodate the whole length of the plate between the axles, but this kind of design would allow clearances between plate and board to reduced significantly, potentially to 0mm, at the apex of the board camber curve.

I am working on a design with the materials available to me, but I do not have access to carbon fibre fabrication to allow me to make very thin stiff plates. I can make only wood core and glass plates but they are somewhat thicker.
I aim to have a working model by this coming Southern Hemisphere winter where the top (woodcore) plate surface is 15mm (1.5cm) above the snowboard top surface and can fit on the current UPM pattern while accommodating my 50cm stance width.

Anyway, the "plate between axles" idea is tossed out here for the plate designers and engineers amongst us to toy with. How low can we go?

SunSurfer

PS: I think the UPM standard pattern could be usefully revised. 4cm gaps between inserts on the sliding bearing end would allow a very useful extra 1cm of travel. Some adjustment might need to be made at the other end to keep the force loading points on the board roughly equidistant from the designed "centre".

[Donek]

The issues that Fin describes above with the underside of the plate touching the outer end of the axle bearing mechanisms at extremes of board carving loads is a fundamental design concept constraint when the plate sits above the bearings, as all isocline plates up until now have done.

Thinking recently about how to take the plate lower led me to consider a concept where the plate sits between the axles, not on top of them.
To create such a design would probably require that the outermost UPM inserts be further apart in order to accommodate the whole length of the plate between the axles, but this kind of design would allow clearances between plate and board to reduced significantly, potentially to 0mm, at the apex of the board camber curve.

I am working on a design with the materials available to me, but I do not have access to carbon fibre fabrication to allow me to make very thin stiff plates. I can make only wood core and glass plates but they are somewhat thicker.
I aim to have a working model by this coming Southern Hemisphere winter where the top (woodcore) plate surface is 15mm (1.5cm) above the snowboard top surface and can fit on the current UPM pattern while accommodating my 50cm stance width.

Anyway, the "plate between axles" idea is tossed out here for the plate designers and engineers amongst us to toy with. How low can we go?

SunSurfer

PS: I think the UPM standard pattern could be usefully revised. 4cm gaps between inserts on the sliding bearing end would allow a very useful extra 1cm of travel. Some adjustment might need to be made at the other end to keep the force loading points on the board roughly equidistant from the designed "centre".

This is something that has been discussed. The fundamental problem is with the axle spacing. It grows very large. Such a design becomes an integrated system that requires the board be designed around the plate. The plate must also get stiffer.

[kieran]

Such a design becomes an integrated system that requires the board be designed around the plate.

maybe the burton channel concept will find a use in alpine snowboarding after all. though not in its original form.

[everts72]

Hello everbody!

I tested MK SNOWBOARD PLATES and here are my thoughts:

So I've been testing my new MK snowobard plate 8 days now and I must say it's big difference riding board with or without plate.

I've test the plate on blue, red and black slopes, on good snow, hard snow and even on icy parts.

Setup: Kessler 185 (66°,60°), f2 intec titanium, MK SNOWBOARD PLATE, deeluxe indy+bts



On short:
Plates gives you better stability, speed, control and balance on board. Your speed increases a lot, really a lot! Muuuch better grip in turns. Very light.

On long:
First feeling: wow! This is whole plate? Where is other weight? It's so light! When you mount plate on board everything is so soft, plate breathing with board. I thought that plate should be hard like rock. But seems I was wrong. First turns are little bit different if you never tried plate before. But after few runs I get used on this setup so carving with ears to the snow was not problem any more.
If there are bunches problem is solved when is plate on board.

So I recomend you MK plates also for freecarving, not only for racing!

And proof I'm telling truth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXZjk...a2AUAAAAAAADAA (hd+full screen recomended me, with plates in black jacket

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Really nice video!!

Almost "Artsy" quality.

Great example of EC riding on a plated Kessler.

Details of the KM? Photos, details, options? Did I miss that somewhere?

MK is short for??

[jacopodotti]

www ?
Found only on FB

[everts72]

Thank you!
Quality is full hd (go pro and two clips with canon eos 7d) but because of vibration I must put video on slow motion.
It's true, I/we made this video because of that I could proof to snowboaring community that plates are not made only for racers, but also for freecarvers like we are.

MK plates are new on market, so not well known yet. Jure Hafner riding plates in WC. Not some impressive results for now in seniors category, but he is very talented and young. He was also Junior World Champion in GS!
All plates are made from high tech composite material and stiffness depends of user.

MK is short for Mihej Koblar- inventor of MK plates.
You have description also in Carvingmag,page 96, there are also photos.

Sorry, but only facebook page for now. Web page is under construction.
You could also contact Mihej on email: mk.snowboardplates at gmail.com and he will explained you everything.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Thanks for the photos of the MK plate.

About the video. Have you looked into the "Deshaker" type software?
Some of these softwares work really well. Just a thought? It would be
fun to see you at full speed too. Thanks again, Bryan

[everts72]

We had Slovenian Carving Session yesterday and many people tested plates and all were satisfied with it.


@Bryan:

I use Vegas pro10 for editing movies. I will look if there is that function, thank you.

Here is a clip without slowmotion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR5CY...90AUAAAAAAABAA


Friend's new MK snowboard plate on photo:

[Titan]

That's looks like a clean,straightforward plate.What's its' construction?Whatever it is.....it works for you,nice carves!Cheers.

[everts72]

Update:

[leeho730]

Interesting. Weight, height, upm or 4x4? Flex customisable?

[jacopodotti]

Hi
Which is the material of the plate?
And of the supports?

[everts72]

Material: hi tech composite
Supports are made from combination of Aluminuim and INOX
Weight: 2 kilos, but on snow you don't feel this 2 kilos at all.
Height: 26mm
Flex customisable: yes, depends on each rider
Mounting is 4x4

[leeho730]

Material: hi tech composite
Supports are made from combination of Aluminuim and INOX
Weight: 2 kilos, but on snow you don't feel this 2 kilos at all.
Height: 26mm
Flex customisable: yes, depends on each rider
Mounting is 4x4

Thanks!

Price? Flex customisable? I am looking for rather soft flex, like SG plate medium flex.

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

Material: hi tech composite
Supports are made from combination of Aluminuim and INOX
Weight: 2 kilos, but on snow you don't feel this 2 kilos at all.
Height: 26mm
Flex customisable: yes, depends on each rider
Mounting is 4x4

Stainless Steel

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inox

[descent3]

This is something that has been discussed. The fundamental problem is with the axle spacing. It grows very large. Such a design becomes an integrated system that requires the board be designed around the plate. The plate must also get stiffer.

What about the APEX V2 plate ? ....they have acheived the best configuration....very low profile plate....with minimum hardware.........any comments
.

[norm]

spotted...... new plate system under testing.

topsheet under plain camo, hardware seems to be red adonized

[SunSurfer]

spotted...... new plate system under testing.

topsheet under plain camo, hardware seems to be red adonized

Talking to Fin at SES, when I picked up a 4mm UPM Boiler plate, he will be selling just the plate mechanicals soon so you, or I, can put anything you like on top.
Bruce Varsava is making his own plates with different flex characteristics from the Bomber plate and is likely to be using Bomber mechanics. Suspect the rider in your photo is BV.

SunSurfer

[lowrider]

Stewart is that your plate that went missing after Bruce left??

[leeho730]

Talking to Fin at SES, when I picked up a 4mm UPM Boiler plate, he will be selling just the plate mechanicals soon so you, or I, can put anything you like on top.
Bruce Varsava is making his own plates with different flex characteristics from the Bomber plate and is likely to be using Bomber mechanics. Suspect the rider in your photo is BV.

SunSurfer

Hi,

Was 4mm carbon plate pretty bendy or stiff?