Stance - How to set your gear?

Various topics, technical questions, announcements, events, resorts, ...

Moderators: Arnaud, nils, fivat, rilliet

Stance - How to set your gear?

Postby István » Friday 22 October 2004, 11:17

Guys,

I'd like to raise a topic, that I believe was not discussed in real details, meaning the phisics and the riding consequences of the settings of the binding.

As far as I remember there were many topics on the angulation, the anti-heel lift and canting theory, but not much on the distance between the two bindings, the offset (to the tail or to the tip) and the difference between the front and back angulation.

I think the most scientific advice here was 'do as it is comfortable for you'.

I would be happy to see your opinion and some scientific (math and phisics) calculations on this issue (I know that some of you have engineering background)

Just to start up the converstaion, here are my settings that I find comfortable (on my new board):

- Angulation: F59 B53 (tried F55 B50 but was too low for me, heels and toes were too far from the edge an I felt clumsy)

- Difference between the 2 bindings: 6 degrees, this is what I've found comfortable years back when I started and now I'm used to it.

- Distance: dunno the cm, but almost the largest, due to my height (188 cm)

- Canting, heel lift: no (although I had a huge heel-lift on my Silberpfeil, but theory and now practice convinced me - thx to the Swoard team)

- Longitudinal offset: no, symmetrical setting (back in time I used to set it back to the tail a bit, because someone told me that, but it is no good and I did not do that in the last 3-4 years)


Looking forward to reading your coments, let's see what comes out of the topic!


Cheers,

István
User avatar
István
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Monday 29 September 2003, 12:04
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Postby SITO » Friday 22 October 2004, 11:41

Hi all.

Talking some days with a guy in slopes said me that a rule to calculate your distance bindings is divide your tall between 3.5. :arrow:

So my tall is 170/3.5=48cm in distance between my two bindings, is a comfortable distance for me, the rule work in my case :wink:

so this is other reference point to set up your bindings. :wink:

Sito
Ride hard;100% fun
User avatar
SITO
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Tuesday 20 May 2003, 16:39
Location: Spain

Divide by 3.5

Postby István » Friday 22 October 2004, 11:49

Sounds interesting, I think mine is around 53 cm, so the rule also works for me (188 / 3.5 = 53,71)

Cool!!! 8)

Cheers,

István
User avatar
István
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 894
Joined: Monday 29 September 2003, 12:04
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Excellent rule

Postby fivat » Friday 22 October 2004, 12:02

SITO wrote:Talking some days with a guy in slopes said me that a rule to calculate your distance bindings is divide your tall between 3.5. :arrow:

Excellent rule!

If you check our Settings page, you can make this calculation:
Jacques: 186 / 52.6 = 3.54
Patrice: 177 / 49 = 3.61
So the ratio is indeed close to 3.5 !

Let's say that ratio 3.55 is perfect for extremecarving! 8)

I think we will include this tip somewhere in our Web pages!

Patrice Fivat
User avatar
fivat
Swoard & EC founder
Swoard & EC founder
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thursday 21 March 2002, 13:13
Location: Geneva, Switzerland

Postby pokkis » Friday 22 October 2004, 12:23

Yeah, that is quite good general rule how to setup it as starters.
But i rather see less important factor height of rider than length of feets :D ie meaning length of feet has bigger effect than length of your back 8O
That should be measured when one has flat setting, using lifts is having same effect as shortening stance
btw my ratio is 3.6 and Paula has 3.4 which btw is quite much.
2017:XXXXXXXXXX XRRRRMSMSS MVVVSSMDDD DDMM
User avatar
pokkis
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Monday 1 April 2002, 18:46
Location: Finland

Postby McFussel » Friday 22 October 2004, 12:27

If I would tell my setting - you all would laugh :lol:
Don´t ride the chicken line!

http://www.carving-masters.de
Image
User avatar
McFussel
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 531
Joined: Saturday 23 March 2002, 13:03
Location: Benztown-Baby....

Postby frunobulax » Friday 22 October 2004, 12:42

Thx, Istvan, for reannouncing my question ("nose-diving") on the effect of the longitudinal offset (nice new word) on the behaviour of the board, since nobody seemed to want to give me an answer there.

What I got from Sigi Grabner (www.sigigrabner.com) seems to be quite similar to what I thought before.
Bindings backwards: focus on high speed, board is more stable, but unwilling to turn.
Bindings forward: opposite effect.

Same with higher/lower angles: higher angles add stability on good surface, but may be a disadvantage in bad conditions. You get quite "locked up" when you would need manouvrability and when you have to react on bumps and surface changes. To me, I could see no advantage of lower angles concerning edge grip and laying down completely but that could be because I'm used to high angles for at least ten years.
Could be it also depends on what board you use: Can't imagine angles below 50 on a GS-Raceboard with a sidecut-radius over 14m. On the other side, low angles are quite common on slalom and freecarve-boards.

Difference between the bindings seems to be very much a personal thing as I've seen people with 60F/20R as well as 55F/60R (!) who told me they felt comfy that way.

Cant/heel lift: I'm still using some but will have a try without it this year because I believe what J&P say about it.
User avatar
frunobulax
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Wednesday 8 September 2004, 11:50
Location: Gmunden, Upper Austria

Postby harald » Friday 22 October 2004, 12:48

I fell most comfortable with 48 cm wich gives a ratio of 3,71 since my height is 178 cm. Since I am not among the fastest on the slopes I prefer 54(f) and 47/48 (b) on my Swoard, 55/50 on F2 Speedster GS which is narrower.
harald
User avatar
harald
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Tuesday 22 April 2003, 13:39
Location: Oslo, Norway

Postby tigger » Friday 22 October 2004, 13:24

hy there :lol:
in my opinion it is important to find your setting on the slopes and use the tools at the liftstations, because my setting feels a bit strange when testing in my room, but its perfect on the slopes.
i ride 58° 52° and 52 cm stance on my pogo
....makes a ratio of 3.42 for me
tigger
Rank 4
Rank 4
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wednesday 5 November 2003, 19:31
Location: hessen germany

Test on the slopes... not in your room

Postby fivat » Friday 22 October 2004, 13:52

tigger wrote:in my opinion it is important to find your setting on the slopes and use the tools at the liftstations, because my setting feels a bit strange when testing in my room, but its perfect on the slopes.

Yes!

For example:
With flat bindings you feel bad in your room. But on the slopes when you are making carved turns, the board bends... what gives natural canting and comfort.

Patrice Fivat
User avatar
fivat
Swoard & EC founder
Swoard & EC founder
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: Thursday 21 March 2002, 13:13
Location: Geneva, Switzerland

Postby ablazespy » Friday 22 October 2004, 14:19

I think the lengt of the body is not really the best way to messure, rather I would use the lengt of the legs. Messured from kneepit to heel, while sitting a chair with knees bend 90 degrees. With me that messures 50 cm. Whilst with the rule presented above I have to ride 53 cm. That means, because I have a longer neck my feet would be more apart.

In m.h.o. the length of the legs are more important that the whole body!

Greetz Dènis
User avatar
ablazespy
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Wednesday 21 August 2002, 16:53

Postby Silber » Friday 22 October 2004, 14:47

Guys,

I noticed during my efforts to find the perfect stance for each of my boards (in particular for my silberpfeil) that the distance between the bindings should change depending on the angles chosen. Lower angles shorter distance. For instance, on my old PJ 5.6 which I still ride with low angles the stance is much narrower that on the other boards. A narrower stance also seems to help pushing the weight on the front of the board with better grip on ice and to obtain a much nicer style while laid down on a carve with extended legs.

Any comments?
Francesco Swoard (1G175M 3G175M020 e 168H054),Wingergun205,Shaman193,TTubeS1/174GS,F2 (RS183'08 e'06/Lancelot/Slbpfl),Virus (Hurric./Dragon),Pogo (Hardc./Imp.),Burton (FP/Speed/PJ/CustomX),WildDuckFantasy, Duret168, OxygenProton168GS
User avatar
Silber
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1948
Joined: Tuesday 6 April 2004, 11:40
Location: Milan, Italy

Postby SITO » Friday 22 October 2004, 14:57

I think, that you get your comfortable distance bindings, in the point in which your gravity center are in perfect equilibrium.

If you have a short distance between your bindings, your gravity center is up, then you have less stability.

And if you put too much distance between your bindings, you 'll haven't a fine movility , because your gravity center is down, so you will be uncomfortable.

The total lenght of the body is important to obtain your body center mass in a perfect equilibrium.

Sito
Ride hard;100% fun
User avatar
SITO
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Tuesday 20 May 2003, 16:39
Location: Spain

Postby pokkis » Friday 22 October 2004, 16:38

Silber got point here.
Angles have effect to stance. I'm also riding smaller stance on smaller boards even angles stays same. Same goes when it gets more harder/icy i will shorten my stance little ans vice versa when it get dream surface, like last year in Zinal, then i might add slightly my stance.
2017:XXXXXXXXXX XRRRRMSMSS MVVVSSMDDD DDMM
User avatar
pokkis
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 1667
Joined: Monday 1 April 2002, 18:46
Location: Finland

Stance Width

Postby rcrobar » Friday 22 October 2004, 19:20

Hello

3.5 of your height, yet another great tip!

.6 x your leg length was also a tip I picked up here, it works as well.


I think Ablazespy makes a good point about leg length vs how tall you are. Some guys have short legs and a long torso, some have the reverse. Perhaps a compromise is needed, maybe the average of these two tips?


I am roughly 5 feet 11 inches tall (convertedx2.54) = 180.34cm tall

180.34/3.5 = 51.5 cm Stance Width recommended

My leg length is roughly 32.5 inches (convertedx2.54) = 82.55 cm leg

82.55X.6 = 49.5 cm Stance Width recommended


Average Stance width = 50.5 cm (convertedx.3937 = 19.88 inches)


I’ll have to go back and actually measure my bindings, but this is very close to what I ended up with as well.

Rob
User avatar
rcrobar
Rank 5
Rank 5
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Sunday 24 March 2002, 1:09
Location: BC, Canada

Next

Return to Miscellaneous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron