binding angle question-II

[mirekd]

Hi !

I would like to briefly go back to an interesting Arnaud analysis (2007) of the setting angles bindings:
binding angle question

This subject interests me because the my shoes 'are hidden' in the light of the boards of about 10 mm
- the length of my shoes is 267mm
- bindings angles of 54/48
- waist width of the board: 210 mm (possible that it will 220 ​​mm)

Therefore, I ask a question:
When the ride will be easier (comfort) and effectiveness (full Laid Turn / ice, hard-soft snow)?
1. Boots on the width of the board - front / rear shoe - 0 mm (?)
2. The ends of the shoes at a distance from the edge of the board: 5 mm, 10 mm, ... more (?)

Whether it is better to leave in this case the angles of 54/48 (x=-10), or reduce the angle to the "x = 0 "? (see photo)

Please, treat these questions in the category of "other considerations"
I hope you understand my intentions ...

mirek

Ps. For the moderator: thanks for the separation of topic

[crack676]

I highly recommend Fuego Test developed by the finnish team.

Angles doesn't matter, the only thing which is important is to have no boot-out.

[Zanci]

Just set it the way you feel natural.
The only thing that matters is boot overhang.

[rcrobar]

Hello Mirekd

I can appreciate the process you are going through with regards to learning to EC, so I will try to help out a bit. Jacques, Pat, please jump in if I misguide Mirekd in any way.

When Jacques and Pat were teaching themselves to EC they were also building EC board prototypes. As a result the development of the EC technique and the development of the EC boards progressed together. The stance angles they used and the board width they built were/are married to each other.

Several years ago I asked Jacques why he didn't just make the Extremecarver a few mm wider, at the time this was to compensate for a TD toe lever that added a lot of length to the boot binding combination. Jacques explained that lower stance angles, bigger feet, and wider boards place a huge amount of force or leverage on the ankle. In an attempt to minimize the leverage placed on the ankle and at the same time not permitting boot out to occur during an EC turn he estimated or discovered that a board could be tipped over to approximately 84 degrees, any further and the edge would no longer be able to carve in the snow-ice.

You will notice that the toe and heel of the boots for J&P are slightly past the edge of the board, this is to minimize edge pressure and at the same time NOT causing the boot to knock the edge out of a carve.

Also remember that J&P found their ideal stance angles for the technique they prefer, then worked backwards to determine the correct board width for each of their boot sizes; with the goal of minimizing the leverage placed on the ankle by using the narrowest board possible without causing boot out.

The key word here is that J&P tried to find the prefect, ideal or optimal board width for their feet and desired stance angles. A little bit of boot under hang or over hang will work perfectly fine .... just not optimized to the fullest.

So, my advice. Find the perfect stance angle for your developing EC technique, then worry about boot over and under hang second. If your dream stance angles cause the board to 'boot out' it is time to save your money for a wider board.

Take this advice with a grain of salt.
Rob

[mirekd]

Hi all !

Rob! Thank you for your comprehensive answer.
I'm happy and I appreciate that, "Big Rob has not forgotten how Rob was a small".

I highly recommend Fuego Test developed by the finnish team.
Angles doesn't matter, the only thing which is important is to have no boot-out. Smile

Just set it the way you feel natural.
The only thing that matters is boot overhang.

All of you are right!
Test Fuego, and an indication Arnaud (min 85 degrees) are brilliant and contain "all in one"

mirek

[rcrobar]

Hello Mirekd

Rob! Thank you for your comprehensive answer.

My pleasure, best of luck in your ExtremeCarving Quest.

I'm happy and I appreciate that, "Big Rob has not forgotten how Rob was a small".

I am still a small Rob that is just getting older

Cheers
Rob

[mirekd]

Hi!

Can I ask you to provide the following dimensions?

What is the minimum stance for Swoard 161 and Swoard 168 ?
What is the distance between inserts ?

Thanks!

mirek

[mirekd]

Hi !

These dimensions are, respectively: 420 mm (161), 450 mm (168), 20 mm (insert).

If I made ​​a mistake, please correct.

mirek