# Is there such thing as too much cant?



## sdm74 (Jan 7, 2014)

SoldierMed68W said:


> Hey guys,
> Just got a new pair of rome 390 boss bindings, first time I've had canted bindings, and I had a weird thing happen after the first few runs. It's almost as if my leading knee locks up when I pick up speed, it's very hard to control. I don't really know if I was just leaning back to far because there was a lot of powder and just got off balance, or the cant, if it can even cause a problem like that? I have no idea, kinda why I'm asking. I run my stance a little on the wide side because my legs are huge, I'm 6'8", and I have the 3.5° foot beds in. Thanks in advance for all your help!


I was wondering the same thing. I recently bought the 390 bosses and had the 3.5 in. I also have Burton ruler boots which also feel somewhat canted. I am going to try the 2.0 next to see if I feel any difference.


----------



## cav0011 (Jan 4, 2009)

Yes there can be to much canting. The goal is to align your knees, when the angles are too much it makes them go out of alignment again


----------



## sdm74 (Jan 7, 2014)

cav0011 said:


> Yes there can be to much canting. The goal is to align your knees, when the angles are too much it makes them go out of alignment again


What do I want to align my knees with?


----------



## SuCoSlayer (Jan 5, 2014)

From an anatomical geometry standpoint, it is ideal that the footbed be at a 90deg angle to your leg, laterally. When a stance wider than the hips is used, then the angle isn't 90 degrees anymore. Canting seeks to make up for the difference in angle. This assumes the board is flat. A rocker board would partially make up the difference, lessening the need for canted bindings, if not eliminating it altogether. A cambered board would need a binding with more canting to make up the difference, when compared to a flat board.

All that being said, I rode a cambered board for several years without canted bindings and never felt the need for canted bindings. This was before the days of rocker. Or canted bindings for that matter.

If I had to choose between no cant or too much cant, I'd go for none. Not saying canted bindings aren't good. They are. But if you get the feeling it's too much, then it probably is.


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)

those look sweet...is it possible to stack more than 1 cant pad?


----------



## sdm74 (Jan 7, 2014)

SuCoSlayer said:


> From an anatomical geometry standpoint, it is ideal that the footbed be at a 90deg angle to your leg, laterally. When a stance wider than the hips is used, then the angle isn't 90 degrees anymore. Canting seeks to make up for the difference in angle. This assumes the board is flat. A rocker board would partially make up the difference, lessening the need for canted bindings, if not eliminating it altogether. A cambered board would need a binding with more canting to make up the difference, when compared to a flat board.
> 
> All that being said, I rode a cambered board for several years without canted bindings and never felt the need for canted bindings. This was before the days of rocker. Or canted bindings for that matter.
> 
> If I had to choose between no cant or too much cant, I'd go for none. Not saying canted bindings aren't good. They are. But if you get the feeling it's too much, then it probably is.


Thanks for that tip


----------



## sb60 (Oct 5, 2010)

Last year I got canted (Salomon women's Absolute Premium) bindings. My back leg hurt riding them so I swapped out the canted foot plates for flat ones from old bindings.


----------



## East§ide (Mar 14, 2011)

FWIW, my fiance got canted bindings on her NS Pandora, going from Burtons - the cant made a huge different for her (she's arthritic) and really alleviated alot of knee pain.
I also have canted bindings, however mine is Burton Cartel Re:Flex with Autocant footbeds.. similar concept but a different approach.. The footbeds sort of mold to the angle of your boot to give you a cant without a predetermined angular degree... basically the foam is harder on the outside than the inside, allowing your boot to squish into it as much as is needed, rather than having the footbed impose a degree of canting on you.


----------



## lab49232 (Sep 13, 2011)

East§ide said:


> I also have canted bindings, however mine is Burton Cartel Re:Flex with Autocant footbeds.. similar concept but a different approach.. The footbeds sort of mold to the angle of your boot to give you a cant without a predetermined angular degree... basically the foam is harder on the outside than the inside, allowing your boot to squish into it as much as is needed, rather than having the footbed impose a degree of canting on you.


Yup, Flux also has that tech in a lot of their footbeds. Haven't been able to decide if I like it or the pre setup cant more. The pre mold feels more consistent but if you have the right weight distribution on the "autocant" style they seem to dial in a little more precise, at least from my experience.


----------



## cav0011 (Jan 4, 2009)

Correct sir.


----------



## Singu1arity (Jan 2, 2014)

SGboarder said:


> Actually, I believe it is the other way around - i.e., canting has more of a benefit on rocker than camber.


I tend to agree here. 

I still run the cant pads on both my rocker and camber boards. I feel the benefit in the rocker much more. On the camber I really can't tell much of a difference but I know my knees don't hurt after a long day and that's a plus.


----------

