PDA

View Full Version : Why set back bindings?



valmorel
09-06-2007, 04:16 AM
Good question, and one I am often asked. If you intend to use your boards pretty much park only, there is no need to set bindings back, but if you want to use them "all mountain", then the situation is quite different.
For all mountain riding, think of your boards this way: the front half is your suspension, and the rear half is your support. For all mountain riding, it is usually beneficial to improve suspension, even at the expense of support. Let me explain. When you hit a bump of any size, some of the resistance will be absorbed by the front half of te board flexing upward, whilst the remainder is transmitted to the rider, causing slowing and a forward pitch. Up to a point, the softer the front half of the board, the more resistance is absorbed, and the less transmitted to the rider, giving a comfortable, and in some ways less tiring ride. Moving the binding back has the effect of lengthening the front of the board, which makes it feel softer, simply by virtue of being a longer lever. Thus the board rides like a longer pair would. BUT, of course the tail is effectively shortened by this exercise, reducing support. Well, not quite as much as you might think, because this shorter tail is effectively stiffened, by virtue of being a shorter lever. Thus, when landing jumps etc., there still feels like good support.
Up till now, it has been quite difficult to set bindings back, but the introduction by Revel8 this season of the KTP changes everything. Now you can mount bindings centre to ride park, giving the classic 100cm length park board, or mount 40 back for all mountain, giving a ride pretty much the equivalent of a 110, but in 100cm format. Add to that the extra width this board has for flotation on powder days, and this begins to look like the very best 100cm EVER! Three boards in one. Park/centre, all mountain/40 back, powder/40 back. Add to that the sidewall construction and great graphics, and a Pro signature too.......how could you not want a pair??????

jjue
09-06-2007, 08:24 AM
Thanks Valmorel !, very nice explanation of the tip suspension and tail support idea ... I never really thought of it like that but it sure makes alot of sense as to what happens to ride comfort as bindings are set back ....

Greco
09-06-2007, 04:33 PM
great post dave!

thisisjon
09-07-2007, 01:01 PM
Ive thought about doing inserts like that. Ive been messing around with making custom skiboards and putting in an extra set of inserts seemed like a great idea. i always set back my bindings, but Im from a skiing background and dont do a lot of park riding, so it makes sense to me.

thisisjon
09-07-2007, 01:02 PM
are the ktps 105cm or 101cm the Rlv8 website says both...

dcox20
09-07-2007, 05:37 PM
KTPs are 101cm

Jatmcm72
09-08-2007, 01:24 PM
so when setting back the bindings are you basically just putting the bindings on just the back two screws?

valmorel
09-08-2007, 01:35 PM
Not really just putting the bindings on just the back two screws, as I have doubts about how robust that might be. In the case of the KTP, there is an extra set of inserts 40 back, which allows you to mount your bindings 40m back, but still have 4 fixing screws, which is what makes this board so exciting. Mounting on the back 4 inserts should make the board ride like a 110, but in 100 format.

valmorel
09-09-2007, 02:45 AM
If you are lucky with boot size, and binding length plate, you can often experiment with set-back by moving the heel and toe pieces back along the binding base plate. Here is a photo of my FF Cam bindings, showing centre mount, and then 35mm back, which is the max I can get. I quite like this set-up, as it allows tool free adjustment on the hill. With these, I can move the boot back on the board in 4mm increments, though I have found by experience that they dont eally feel any different till I get pretty much all the way back.

http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee38/valmorel2/setback2.jpg

The lower board is set up with the boot position centred.

jjue
09-13-2007, 11:47 PM
Valmorel , I was playing with my Snowjam extreme 2's with my size 10 1/2 boot , I can get 2cm back from center by adjusting the binding , thus with the new KTP 101 I can get 4 possible set back positions , center , 2cm back , 4cm back and 6cm back ,
I love playing with set backs ,

hmm.... ultra wide body (about the same width as that big boy Sherpa 130) , , maximum float for a 101cm board ,yet close to the standard 99cm traditional skiboard length , therefore got to be ultra manuverable , ,,,

Greco , says nice and stiff like the Revolt ..
'
I just might have to pony up the dough for this one !

ps. I wanted to get an idea of how much available set back there was , so here is the experiment on my Alp ... the boot is center mount in the front skiboard and the back skiboard is a full 6cm back , front screws of the snowjam binding in the back two holes of the Alp board and the binding set back as far as it would go ... pretty significant set back especially on a 101 board and with 2 possible positions in between these two extremes AND that 101 has almost exactly as much surface area flotation as my 110 ,,,
sweet !

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l88/jjue/DSCN1092.jpg

Manlenium
09-24-2007, 05:27 AM
Whoever gets a pair of KTPs first ......
Can we get a picture of one binding forward set and one back set to campare....?