# Lightest binding?



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

I have searched the internet and on here and either my searching skills are lacking or the answer isn't out there yet. I am wondering what the lightest binding in the 2010 line up is? 

I would assume Ride with their aluminum footbed would be on the heavier side. Seems like the alpha mvmnt would be the lightest in their line. I was thinking maybe k2 auto ever or Union contact?

I have a k2 zero and seeing how its such a light board I would like light bindings rather than the heavy NRCs I currently have on it. 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## laz167 (Nov 27, 2007)

Union Bindings


----------



## FLuiD (Jul 6, 2009)

The Ride Contraband is the lightest binder I have seen. Don't know hard weight but by the hand scale they were super light!


----------



## bubbachubba340 (Feb 10, 2009)

cubllsu8338 said:


> I have searched the internet and on here and either my searching skills are lacking or the answer isn't out there yet. I am wondering what the lightest binding in the 2010 line up is?
> 
> I would assume Ride with their aluminum footbed would be on the heavier side. Seems like the alpha mvmnt would be the lightest in their line. I was thinking maybe k2 auto ever or Union contact?
> 
> ...


For a k2 zero you wouldnt want contacts. They are light, but theyre more of a jib/park binding than anything else. Maybe union force/force mc or data


----------



## crazyface (Mar 1, 2008)

i think the union force mc. they say its the lightext binding theyve ever made.

the ride contraband is probably lighter but you cnat really use those for more than rails.


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

Auto Evers or Force MC's


----------



## ckang008 (May 18, 2009)

Nivek said:


> Auto Evers or Force MC's


I held the Force MC before and they felt noticeable lighter than other bindings in the shop i was browsing at that time (has Auto Ever, Force, Rome 390). But the difference is quite minimal between bindings nowadays. Even the Rome Targa is only quarter pound heavier than a Ride Contraband.


----------



## ATOTony76 (May 26, 2009)

check out Union Contacts, they are super super light as well, and def the Force MC


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

I'd say the Force MC as well...


----------



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

Thank you all for your input.



ckang008 said:


> But the difference is quite minimal between bindings nowadays. Even the Rome Targa is only quarter pound heavier than a Ride Contraband.


Yeah the more I thought about this question the more I realized that that was probably the case. I dug out my bindings to my boards and there really isn't that much weight difference.


----------



## arsenic0 (Nov 11, 2008)

Ducttape your feet to your board.

Lightest bindings = No bindings!

Or get some of those oldschool ones with no highbacks...


----------



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

I have decided on just super gluing my boots to the board. It is the lightest way I could think of. Works well :thumbsup:


----------



## ATOTony76 (May 26, 2009)

who ever said we needed bindings in the first place?


----------



## Milo303 (Apr 6, 2009)

I'm curious why it's nearly impossible to find info on binding weight..... I havn't done a ton of digging but I can't seem to find any weight specs for bindings. Kinda weird I think

Or boards even for that matter...


----------



## Extremo (Nov 6, 2008)

Milo303 said:


> I'm curious why it's nearly impossible to find info on binding weight..... I havn't done a ton of digging but I can't seem to find any weight specs for bindings. Kinda weird I think
> 
> Or boards even for that matter...


Yeah I've always wondered this too. But it's probably a number companies would chase at the expense of quality. I know Eastbay lists it with their shoes but even in sports where you would assume the lightest shoes would be most beneficial, say cleats for stealing bases, the high level shoes shoes are almost always a few ounces heavier. So really what is an ounce or two? Especially when you consider measuring in pounds for snowboards.


----------



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

mpdsnowman said:


> I gotta tell ya the ride delta movements are very light construction but very very strong. Both me and my son have them. He weights 255, size 11, me a whopping 135 size 9. In both cases(heavy and light individual) these bindings hold up real well and have great support when you ride. If they dont make them anymore im sure ride has the next version.


Yeah I have the Ride Alpha Movements on my park board; they are light and durable.


----------



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

Milo303 said:


> I'm curious why it's nearly impossible to find info on binding weight..... I havn't done a ton of digging but I can't seem to find any weight specs for bindings. Kinda weird I think
> 
> Or boards even for that matter...


This was my exact reaction when I searched and figured I would make a thread to see if anyone else had better luck. Apparently not


----------



## GoggleTan (Aug 7, 2009)

cubllsu8338 said:


> This was my exact reaction when I searched and figured I would make a thread to see if anyone else had better luck. Apparently not


Burton Snowboards Community - plastic vs aluminum bindings
Further down the page you should find what you are looking for. Don't know why everyone automatically assumes Ride bindings are heavier.


----------



## Glade Ripper (Nov 12, 2008)

Dirkeverett said:


> Burton Snowboards Community - plastic vs aluminum bindings
> Further down the page you should find what you are looking for. Don't know why everyone automatically assumes Ride bindings are heavier.


Gooood looks! Thanks :thumbsup:


----------



## $Lindz$ (Feb 18, 2009)

Cool info! Obviously you can tell right away that a Contraband is lighter than a 390, but Alpha vs. _______ etc starts to get a little obscure. This is really cool.

As far as the "They are all about equal ~.5 lbs difference. No big deal." Well you have 2 bindings, so a .5 lbs becomes 1 lbs. WITH bindings on a board, it seems like the average weight is about 12 lbs (the internet told me). What that means is that roughly 10% of the board's weight can be cut but getting a pair of light bindings.

In the grand scheme of things, ~1lbs of added weight isn't really going to be a huge deal. But it's not insignificant at all. There is a reason that companies push for lighter/stronger/better products. How many short years ago was it that bindings probably weighed 3lbs+ each? Know what I mean?


----------



## GoggleTan (Aug 7, 2009)

$Lindz$ said:


> Cool info! Obviously you can tell right away that a Contraband is lighter than a 390, but Alpha vs. _______ etc starts to get a little obscure. This is really cool.
> 
> As far as the "They are all about equal ~.5 lbs difference. No big deal." Well you have 2 bindings, so a .5 lbs becomes 1 lbs. WITH bindings on a board, it seems like the average weight is about 12 lbs (the internet told me). What that means is that roughly 10% of the board's weight can be cut but getting a pair of light bindings.
> 
> In the grand scheme of things, ~1lbs of added weight isn't really going to be a huge deal. But it's not insignificant at all. There is a reason that companies push for lighter/stronger/better products. How many short years ago was it that bindings probably weighed 3lbs+ each? Know what I mean?


I agree with you on the progression of lighter bindings being a good thing for sure. I need a wide and can use all the weight savings I can get. But..... I think what they are trying to say in the thread is that most of the bindings are very close in weight and it shouldn't be the main feature you look for in a binding. I personally am more concerned with comfort, fit, and flex pattern than minor weight differences.


----------



## AWNOW (Sep 12, 2009)

Well, if anything the bindings today are heavier than those in the 1990s. Just made out of cheap plastic.


----------



## $Lindz$ (Feb 18, 2009)

Dirkeverett said:


> I agree with you on the progression of lighter bindings being a good thing for sure. I need a wide and can use all the weight savings I can get. But..... I think what they are trying to say in the thread is that most of the bindings are very close in weight and it shouldn't be the main feature you look for in a binding. I personally am more concerned with comfort, fit, and flex pattern than minor weight differences.


I agree that it shouldn't be the only reason for getting something, but it's understandable to say it matters to some people. Coupled with a light board, light bindings will easily save a combined 2 or 3 lbs off of a "typical board setup" which would be very noticeable.


----------



## $Lindz$ (Feb 18, 2009)

AWNOW said:


> Well, if anything the bindings today are heavier than those in the 1990s. Just made out of cheap plastic.


So "cheap" plastic is heavier than aluminum and/or expensive plastic engineered for more strength and weight savings?


----------



## Matuuh (Dec 26, 2008)

Union contacts are really light too.


----------



## stoepstyle (Sep 15, 2008)

Bent metal step ins lolol dont be a weight weenie


----------



## earl_je (Oct 20, 2009)

i wonder what the lightest bindings will be TWO YEARS FROM NOW.. holy necromancing thread diggers, lol. :laugh::cheeky4:


----------



## ecks (Oct 6, 2010)

Milo303 said:


> I'm curious why it's nearly impossible to find info on binding weight..... I havn't done a ton of digging but I can't seem to find any weight specs for bindings. Kinda weird I think
> 
> Or boards even for that matter...


Thats a good point, we should start a thread to list all the binding weight since I'm sure we can get the majority of bindings on the market if we can get people to weigh their bindings. 

I would also argue the DMCC lights are a very light binding, they even put the word light in the name so that must mean something. I'll weigh mine when I get home and if someone has the Union MC and could weigh them it would be a good comparison.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

Flux DMCC Light.

Got to tie a weight to 'em to keep them down on the shelves


----------



## bobthegood (Sep 14, 2011)

Auto's then Union's for weight.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

Wiredsport said:


> Flux DMCC Light.
> 
> Got to tie a weight to 'em to keep them down on the shelves



They're pretty light. But when I compare them to my K2 Uprises, I don't really notice a huge difference. Now, there is probably a difference on a scale, but I'm not sure so much in practice.
They are lighter though.


----------



## WHOisDAN (Jan 16, 2011)

Wiredsport said:


> Flux DMCC Light.
> 
> Got to tie a weight to 'em to keep them down on the shelves


Lighter than Union MC's?


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

WHOisDAN said:


> Lighter than Union MC's?


Yes, they do feel that way. I have not weighed an MC but the DMCC eliminates the whole forward lean adjuster (forward lean is adjusted at the contact points, but uses no extra hardware), cores out the baseplate sidewalls, cores out the straps, reduces the ratchets down to only the essential outer and the things are still strong and supportive. You have to go to your local Flux dealer and pick a pair up. It is surprising.


----------

