Northwave race modifications..

[pokkis]

I believe it is good, and i have recommended it on our site to all folks not using suspension kit or sflex.
I might make few of them also for myself when template soon is available.

[Hans]

Well, if you want to put that spacer on your Prior and the edge of the spacer won't cover that folding/delampoint, I think it's not a very good idea then. If the delampoint is just at the edge of the spacer or some couple of centimetres before the edge, you get an extra folding/pressurepoint overthere. So the stress will be bigger at that delampoint. That's how I see it.

By the way, I read the Priorsite. It's not a coincidence that they enforced their Metals this season by using more titanal layers and using an other core with some better overall flex. So with other words: more better controlled flex throughout/over the whole board to divide the tensions/stress better and to put some strength in it due to use thicker titanal.

This what their site says about their new WCR metal this year:

Flex: Titanium/carbon/rubber technology produces superior torsional rigidity together with a more forgiving longitudinal flex resulting in superior edge hold, stability and incredible dampness. Carbon also adds pop to give the board increased energy during edge to edge transition. The 2008 WCR metal has a new aspen/maple core lamination which creates a more even overall flex.

Strength: Titanal thickness has been increased by 33% for added durability and performance and the new aspen/maple core improves internal strength.

[pokkis]

Idea and how these Bordy spacers work is that they are quite flexible material, plus edges of them are rounded, so there is not pinpoint load as such. And cause they are larger size than binding they nicely spread force for larger ammount of area.
As said i had no issues last year with either of boards and they were used mainly without suspension kit cause i've got it very late
But it does not mean that one should be carefull with these buyties

[Hans]

Idea and how these Bordy spacers work is that they are quite flexible material, plus edges of them are rounded, so there is not pinpoint load as such. And cause they are larger size than binding they nicely spread force for larger ammount of area.
As said i had no issues last year with either of boards and they were used mainly without suspension kit cause i've got it very late
But it does not mean that one should be carefull with these buyties

You are completely right Pokkis. But in the case of Aris' board which already has been delamed a bit??? I find this case of Aris' board a very tricky one if you ask me.... This is one for a thorough solution and examination by an expert. And that's not me...

[pokkis]

Ok got point. I was refering to any board.
But even with that one, dividing force to wider area is helpfull anyway.
If it is delammed, then best would be laminating it back, now after summer it should be dry anyway. But who and where can do it is another issue.
So perhaps we should discussion go here as per topic and not anymore hijack this one

[nils]

Since everyone is now making less stiff boards, we are likely to see more and more breakage happen anyway.. Titanal or not: the core thickness manages a good part of the flex. When you look at a Tinkler in front of the front binding, you KNOW it is not going to break. When you look at a Kessler, a Swoard or any board with soft flex pattern, the thickness in front of the binding is at least 2/3ds thinner than that of the Tinkler... This + the way racers or people in EC ride ( aka strong bending of the board in short arcs) means there is always a risk for breakage in case the overpressure is too much... In EC case it comes mostly from unproper use of EC on wrong kind of snow ( aka: too much hard carving in too soft snow that leads to digging with the nose and overpressure it) In racing it must be because of overpressuring the nose after the edge change during turn entry ( but i have no clue)... I'm not sure its the titanal itself that causes the many snaps of the kesslers... i'm sure it mostly comes from the thinner cores and flexier, good ice grippy boards... result is one has to find ways to distribute the bending effort along a wider ( lengthwise) area, or the boards break in front of the front foot.... The core breaks ( bottom parts of the fibers crack), then the topsheet ( fiberglass/titanal etc) is pressured and creates a bump that delams it and in worst cases breaks it.

I think the lexan plates is a good way to work with indeed.. I'm wondering if a teflon layer would be helping the cause by allowing better gliding in between the topsheet and the lexan/plastic..? any one has a clue?

Nils

[The Blitz]

Seems matthieu uses another upper part

Last year, Matthieu told me he used a XX-Stiff version of NW : Point 1250

[pokkis]

I think the lexan plates is a good way to work with indeed.. I'm wondering if a teflon layer would be helping the cause by allowing better gliding in between the topsheet and the lexan/plastic..? any one has a clue?

Yes, i believe that in theory thin layer of teflon could add more glide, or one could do raiser from teflon too.
But both proposed materials as such are quite gliding too.

[István]

I had one question in my mind after watching that video from Bordy. In case one has a binding that has a simmetrical footprint (e.g. TD2, Catek) then why would anyone want an assym plate? Wouldn't the symmetrical shape of the Catek plates be more suitable?

Thanks

[pokkis]

From binding point asymmetrical is symmetrical
Bindings are in angle and when you placed them above these asymmetrical ones, binding overlaps spacer more even than with symmetrical spacer.
But if one rides with angles 70+ then symmetrical makes perhaps more sense.

[kurtsk8]

hope you see this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzvqE9ual-Q

[Freecarver]

I had one question in my mind after watching that video from Bordy. In case one has a binding that has a simmetrical footprint (e.g. TD2, Catek) then why would anyone want an assym plate? Wouldn't the symmetrical shape of the Catek plates be more suitable?

Thanks

I'll try to post some photos later where my board had this delamm.
But I think that if I had Bordy's asym spacers the area would be covered rather than symmetrical cateks and fortunately I would avoid the damage.
It's small I don't think that effects the board but it's still there.

I'm thinking of making 2 spacers one of 5mm and one thinner to minimize the change of flex of my board.

Also I think that if I have another incident like this without spacers the damage will be bigger and unrepairable disaster for my board.

[István]

Pokkis, I think you misunderstood me as I was not specific enough.

I know that most of the bindings have a (symmetrical) footprint that is placed onto the board in a way that it is NOT symmetrical to the boards longitudinal axis. (E.g. F2 Race Titanium) For these bindings an assym plate is ok.

As opposed to many other bindings the TD2s have a footprint that is symmetrical to the longitudinal axis of the board (forget now for a second rotated cant discs). For such a binding wouldn't you want a plate that is also symmetrical?


Cheers

[pokkis]

Yep, you are right with that one, specially if TD canting is zero but if there is canting involved ie rotating base plate then they can be again asym
But my refrence here was mainly to more common bindings like F2s.

[István]

Continuing with this logic it would also be interesting to hear some opinions on the optimal shape of a symmetrical plate. Should it be convex or concave (looking from the tip/tail)?

The Catek is convex, but if you recall the shape of the F2 Conshox (I know, it was for different purposes, but also served as a distributor of forces) it had a concave shape.

Any views?