# Rotating Highbacks



## 360FacePlant

If there's already a thread on this could somebody link me to it?

I have never adjusted the highback rotation before, I've always kept it at the same angle as my foot is facing. (I ride slightly duck-footed)
Will it make a big difference to change them so that they are parallel to the edge of the board?
Won't the highback be digging into the side of my leg?
(Sorry for the noob question, have never had adjustable bindings like this before)


----------



## Extremo

Change it. Thats what bindings were designed to do. It will help your riding by putting the highback in its propper position, running parallel to your edge.


----------



## arsenic0

I too am confused how this works, say i was mounting my bindings duck footed..you would move the highbacks to be parallel with the board edge? I dont quite understand how that is even possible?


----------



## ShortAssassin

Most bindings have some mechanism for rotating the highback. I just rotated my Ride RX highbacks. It was a pain in the ass, lol. Seemed unnecessarily tedious.


----------



## Guest

you just unscrew the part where the highback is connected to the binding. in that same spot (dunno how it is on your bindings) should be about 3 different positions of where to screw the highback in. so for example, im regular stance duck, on my right binding i unscrew the left screw and realign the highback 1 notch backward so that its more parallel with the board. if necessary you can unscrew the right side screw and move it 1 notch forward to further align the binding. hope that helps


----------



## mtmgiants

Olenderc or anyone, can you put up pictures or a link to somewhere with pictures of what your talking about because it's hard to visualize thanks


----------



## legallyillegal

Rotating your highback is the most personal of personal preference.


----------



## Guest

http://www.boardfun.nl/shop/images/Rome2009/Rome390neon.jpg

that is the link to my bindings..notice the little yellow square with the screw in the middle..its where my highback connects to the frame..you unscrew that..and if you can see in the picture, kinda hard, but theres a hole infront and one in back..you re-screw the highback in the most appropriate place that will align the highbackk parallel..same with the other side..hope that helps


----------



## mtmgiants

Thanks I have 2007 burton missions and 2008 ride delta mvmnts going to see if I can rotate the highbacks on them tomorrow


----------



## arsenic0

mtmgiants said:


> Thanks I have 2007 burton missions and 2008 ride delta mvmnts going to see if I can rotate the highbacks on them tomorrow


My 07 Mission's have something that maybe what they are talking about, its basically where the binding meets the highback there are screws on both sides that can slide forward or backwards..im assuming you can move one more forward than the other to turn the highback...


----------



## In search for I

mtmgiants said:


> Olenderc or anyone, can you put up pictures or a link to somewhere with pictures of what your talking about because it's hard to visualize thanks


Here are a couple pics of one of my boards with the highbacks running parallel w/ the board. This is why I love my Drake Matrix, the most adjustable binding I have ever seen. You can actually adjust the top of the highback independantly from the lower and rotate it in the heel as well.

See how the highbacks overlap the base towards the center of the board.









Here is a shot of them up so you can see how they run parallel with the edge of the board.


----------



## Glade Ripper

i am pure duck. 15/-15. why would i want to do this? doesn't it make your highback go more to the side on your boot rather than the back of it?

i have ride nrc bindings


----------



## arsenic0

Also, turns out you cant do it on 07 missions. Well I suppose you could, but only if you had a small angle. Im at duck stance(12 not 15 tho) and i cant get it to turn enough, i can get it to be close to parallel but then the highback grinds against the binding itself and doesnt go up/down very well if at all.


----------



## In search for I

cubllsu8338 said:


> i am pure duck. 15/-15. why would i want to do this? doesn't it make your highback go more to the side on your boot rather than the back of it?
> 
> i have ride nrc bindings


Its all preference, I run duck as well 15/-14. It just helps me on hard landings that I really have to squat out . It also feels like my knees are in a more natural potition with them parallel.


----------



## jmacphee9

i could never notice a difference one way or another


----------



## Extremo

Depends on how stiff your highbacks are. I guess some people can get away without doing it. I ride a wide stance and do a lot of jumping and rails that require a lot of torsional flex so I notice a huge difference in the limitations of not rotating my highbacks.


----------



## mtmgiants

thanks for those pictures i understand now i looked at my ride delta mvmnts and noticed i could rotate them so im happy


----------



## NYCboarder

In search for I said:


> Here are a couple pics of one of my boards with the highbacks running parallel w/ the board. This is why I love my Drake Matrix, the most adjustable binding I have ever seen. You can actually adjust the top of the highback independantly from the lower and rotate it in the heel as well.
> 
> Here is a shot of them up so you can see how they run parallel with the edge of the board.




The highbacks dont run flush with the heel cup right?


----------



## NYCboarder

anyone ??? 
when your highbacks are up does the heel cup and the bottom of the highback touch or is there a little space not touching the heel cup?


----------



## Extremo

NYCboarder said:


> anyone ???
> when your highbacks are up does the heel cup and the bottom of the highback touch or is there a little space not touching the heel cup?


Depends on the binding. My Union run flush but I know drake and some old technines werent designed very well for highback rotation and they didnt sit flush (or even close) when they were rotated.


----------



## scottland

It's so your boots can move side to side without getting caught up on the highback. Ideally the highback will be parallel with the board edge.


----------



## jeri534

I have my highbacks parallel to my board now, when I didnt have my highbacks rotated and I put my bindings at 22" apart it did not feel that comfortable it feeled like they were pushing against the inside of my calves which forced me to ride 21" wide, now with them parallel I can run 22" and it feels as comfortable as 21"


----------



## phile00

Rotating the high backs to be parallel with your board is a pain in the ass. If your bindings are adjustable enough, you can still get the high back to fit nicely in the heel cup. Here's my process (I have a pair of k2 auto bindings- very high quality, very light bindings):

1) *Pick your stance angle* Pick your stance angle and DON'T tighten your baseplates to your board. This is because you will need to adjusting your high back and test the boot before you can center your binding in between your heel and toe edge. Ideally you want your binding in the center of your board (heel side to toe side), and your boot centered over the binding. If you center your bindings first before adjusting your high backs, by the time you get your boot in the binding, your heel might be too far back and hence make your boot/binding off center. 

2) *Choose your forward lean.* If you want to get the high back to fit nicely in the heel cup, FIRST adjust your forward lean. In adjusting your forward lean first, you're going to lose some of that "on-the-fly" adjustment that some of you may use when you're free-riding and want to change it up and hit the pipe for example. This is because the high back is going to have to be angled more in order to be flush with your heel cup. So you'll see if you adjust your forward lean after it's flush, the high back will already be leaning forward and won't push down any more. All you can really do is add more forward lean-but then your high back won't be flush with your heel cup again ;-) Anyhow, adjusting your forward lean first will ensure your high back will fit nicely (if almost perfectly) into your heel cup, which allows you to see where your boot is centered in your bindings, which then allows you to center your bindings over your board.

3) *Rotate your high backs to be parallel with your toe edge.* Loosen the screws on each side of your binding and start rotating your bindings. You might have to remove the screws and put them in another hole and rotate from there. As you rotate your high backs to be parallel with your toe-edge, and have already set your forward lean in step 2, make sure the high back sits flush with the heel cup of your binding. After you do this, plop in your boot and tighten down your bindings. Make sure the boot sits all the way back into the high back/heel cup.

4) *Center your binding over your board* You should have equal amounts of toe hang and heel hang with your boot off the sides of the board when you center the bindings. Too much toe/heel hang means you probably need a wider board if you're a sasquatch. I had to use a baseplate that pushed my binding more toward my toe edge, because my heels hung off the board too much. It still centered the binding nicely even though it was biased toward the toe edge, and also centered my boot perfectly overtop of my board. You might have to go back-and-forth between step 4 and 5 to get it perfect. Keep in mind *You never want the base of your binding to be over the top board edge on your heel or toe side.* 

5) *Center your boot over board.* Put the boot all the way back into the high back and look where your toe is. If your toe hangs way over, hopefully you have an adjustable toe pedal. Ideally if your heel is 2 cm off the back of the base of your binding, your toe should be 2 cm off the front. Same goes with toe/heel hang over your board. So set your toe pedal if need be. If your high back is set flush with your heel cup, and your boot is all the way back and you have space in front of your boot on your binding on the toe edge, your bindings are too big ;-). This usually doesn't happen though. You might have to go back to step 4 and re-center your bindings depending on how everything pans out. Keep in mind, in the end your boots should be centered over the board as perfectly as possible for better, more even balance. Now you can screw down your baseplates in your bindings. 

Following the steps above, given that you have adjustable bindings, will ensure that when your boots are not only centered over your board, but that your high back will be more flush with your heel cup. Going out of order messes things up. 

For example if you change the stance angle at the end, then you're going to have to readjust the rotation of the high back, which will cause it to not be flush with the heel cup, which may push your boots forward and make them off center. There's always tinkering in between these steps for optimal setup, but I've put a lot of though into this. If anyone finds this highly useful, I'll rewrite more coherently.


----------



## Derp

Yes I am about to necro this thread.

Is it still customary to rotate your highbacks with todays bindings? I've never done it in the 2.5 years I have been riding and just now learned of this.

Just threw a new pair of Union Atlas on and curious if I should look at putting the highbacks parallel with my board. Currently running 12/-12.


----------



## TLN

Yes, why do you think it's not needed anymore? 
Actually it's needed when you're have big angles, say 30+. Then it become nessesary and noticeable, especially if yout technique is good. With 12/-12 it's not that nessesary, but it should work positively, it you turn your highbacks a bit.


----------



## BigmountainVMD

At least it's a good necro.

Many claim it is personal preference, and it certainly is, however there IS a benefit to rotating your highbacks to be parallel to your edge, that being more effective force transfer to your board.

With any sort of angled binding stance (read: every stance ever), the force placed on the highbacks when making a heel turn will be at OBLIQUE angles to the board edge. All this means is that if you put X amount of force on the ANGLED highback to tilt the board on its heel edge, LESS than X will be applied perpendicular to the board... so essentially it takes more effort (could be a little, could be a lot) to tilt the board on heel edge with highbacks that are not parallel to the edge.

With parallel highbacks relative to the edge, all force applied is perpendicular to the edge, so all force is transmitted to the board and it is easier to get the board on its heel edge.

Most people will claim they don't notice a difference, but if you measured it analytically, it would indeed be of some sort of benefit. I'm sure some will have reasons not to... maybe tweaking grabs, butters, jibs.... but I'm no jib king and am not sure how it would affect board response in that respect.

For carving --> match the highbacks with the edge.


----------



## Lamps

legallyillegal said:


> Rotating your highback is the most personal of personal preference.


Fer sure, some say its essential, some say its irrelevant. 

OP, you might as well try it if your binders can do it.


----------



## Derp

I'm guessing that with the Atlas having a asymmetrical/symmetrical highback I shouldn't be worried about this anyways? I always wondered what that meant when I read up on them 

I just stumbled on the whole rotating highback topic today and was intrigued, hence my asking. Good to know though if I ever go with a different pair of bindings. Thanks.


----------



## BigmountainVMD

Derp said:


> I'm guessing that with the Atlas having a asymmetrical/symmetrical highback I shouldn't be worried about this anyways? I always wondered what that meant when I read up on them


Not quite. The shape of the highback is more for tweaking and pressuring the binding from different body positions. You would still want to try to rotate them.

I don't have mine rotated perfectly... but the closer you get them to parallel, the less force is needed to dig in to a heel carve.


----------



## jdang307

Of the bindings I've tried them on, even with medium angles of 18 or 15 the highbacks got so deformed and unsightly I switched them back. Didn't notice a difference but also wasn't that good when I tried it. May take a look again this year.


----------



## hktrdr

BigmountainVMD said:


> With any sort of angled binding stance (read: every stance ever), the force placed on the highbacks when making a heel turn will be at OBLIQUE angles to the board edge. All this means is that if you put X amount of force on the ANGLED highback to tilt the board on its heel edge, LESS than X will be applied perpendicular to the board... so essentially it takes more effort (could be a little, could be a lot) to tilt the board on heel edge with highbacks that are not parallel to the edge.
> 
> With parallel highbacks relative to the edge, all force applied is perpendicular to the edge, so all force is transmitted to the board and it is easier to get the board on its heel edge.


Actually, that is incorrect. Common believe, but in fact wrong. The edge pressure is pretty much the same whatever the highback rotation. Fundamental reason for this: It is not the highback that transfers the force to the board but the baseplate and/or disk.

Highback rotation can some effect on comfort and the ability to tweak, but otherwise it has virtually no performance impact. Most pro riders do not bother to rotate their highback.


----------



## Extremo

You should rotate them simply because you can. Back when binding highbacks were super stiff solid peices of plastic it was a must, because the corner would bite into your lower calf. But with the assymetric flex of bindings these days, and particularly with the Atlas, you may not feel that type of calf bite. I just do it because I've been doing it forever. I think it's more anatomically correct when they're rotated.


----------



## neni

hktrdr said:


> Actually, that is incorrect. Common believe, but in fact wrong. The edge pressure is pretty much the same whatever the highback rotation. Fundamental reason for this: It is not the highback that transfers the force to the board but the baseplate and/or disk.


Hmmm... I don't get your point :icon_scratch: as I understand it, the highback transfers the pressure to the disk... 
The bindings I know have stiff highbacks if pushed straight backwards but give in at the sides. Thus it matters if they are rotated or not. If not rotated, the pressure goes to the side of the highback = response loss due to the give in. If rotated, pressure goes straight = no give in = direct response... not?


----------



## hktrdr

neni said:


> Hmmm... I don't get your point :icon_scratch: as I understand it, the highback transfers the pressure to the disk...
> The bindings I know have stiff highbacks if pushed straight backwards but give in at the sides. Thus it matters if they are rotated or not. If not rotated, the pressure goes to the side of the highback = response loss due to the give in. If rotated, pressure goes straight = no give in = direct response... not?


No, because the toe-hell leaning is going back 'straight' through the boot - otherwise you would be pushing back over the outside of your ankle (inside of your rear leg angle if you ride with a forward stance) which is not efficient at all. Also, the highback does not transfer the force to the disk - instead it transfers it to the baseplate which in turn transfers it to the board indirectly (via the disk) or directly. With a rotated highback the interface and transfer between the highback and the baseplate tends to be much less efficient, outweighing any gain from the way the boot pushes into the highback (which is doubful anyway, because the boot-highback interface has also been compromised).


----------



## trapper

hktrdr said:


> No, because the toe-hell leaning is going back 'straight' through the boot - otherwise you would be pushing back over the outside of your ankle (inside of your rear leg angle if you ride with a forward stance) which is not efficient at all. Also, the highback does not transfer the force to the disk - instead it transfers it to the baseplate which in turn transfers it to the board indirectly (via the disk) or directly. With a rotated highback the interface and transfer between the highback and the baseplate tends to be much less efficient, outweighing any gain from the way the boot pushes into the highback (which is doubful anyway, because the boot-highback interface has also been compromised).


I think I see what you're saying. *If anything* other than the baseplate and disc, it'd be the heelcup's position relative to the board that would impact where the force would be applied to the edge (through the plate and disc of course). And since heelcups are generally static aside from the binding angle adjustment and adjustment for boot length on some models, rotating highbacks would do little to affect effective edge pressure.

Is the right or am I way off here?


----------



## BigmountainVMD

hktrdr said:


> Actually, that is incorrect. Common believe, but in fact wrong. The edge pressure is pretty much the same whatever the highback rotation. Fundamental reason for this: It is not the highback that transfers the force to the board but the baseplate and/or disk.
> 
> Highback rotation can some effect on comfort and the ability to tweak, but otherwise it has virtually no performance impact. Most pro riders do not bother to rotate their highback.


You are still applying force across the disk at an angle, which is less than force being applied perpendicular to the edge. Yes, the baseplate is the source of energy transfer, but the highback does put pressure on the heel cup of the baseplate, and the location of that force changes when you rotate your highback. I'm not saying it's hugely beneficial, but an analytical test (per my previous post) would show a difference, whether insanely small or significant.

As for pros, I'm curious which pros you are talking about. Anything other than anecdotal evidence that suggests that bordercross riders don't rotate?

For anyone who is confused, look at the top right arrows (red) on this diagram.


----------



## BigmountainVMD

trapper said:


> I think I see what you're saying. *If anything* other than the baseplate and disc, it'd be the heelcup's position relative to the board that would impact where the force would be applied to the edge (through the plate and disc of course). And since heelcups are generally static aside from the binding angle adjustment and adjustment for boot length on some models, rotating highbacks would do little to affect effective edge pressure.
> 
> Is the right or am I way off here?


This is how I interpreted it. What I am saying is that force on the heelcup will do different things depending on where the force is put. If you imagine a binding at 0 degrees and the heel cup over the heel edge like the bottom half of a clock (3 to 9), then pushing down on the 3 or 9 o'clock positions will tip the board on edge less than pushing at 6 o'clock. The same would apply if the binding is angled. You would increase leverage on the board by rotating the highback so that pressure would be exerted on the furthermost section of the heel cup, and that happens to mean that the highback would be right around parallel to the edge.

Again, it probably doesn't make a huge difference, but I bet there is a measurable one.


----------



## jeephreak

I think you are all over thinking it. The highbacks wouldnt be able to move if it didnt help. Its about effective edge, comfort and personal preference. I never moved mine (back in the day) and we had a clinic at the mountain a few years ago with a racer who suggested we try it. Perhaps a seed was planted and it was mental, but it felt like I could edge more. I was messing around on Monday with the angle and forward lean and could 100% tell a difference. The board was either dead and awkward or came alive depending on high back and forward lean. Of course I ride at +/- 18 so that might have something to do with it. Just change it and try it. Its only 2 screws and 6 holes. Not THAT hard to do.


----------



## BigmountainVMD

jeephreak said:


> I think you are all over thinking it. *The highbacks wouldnt be able to move if it didnt help.* Its about effective edge, comfort and personal preference. I never moved mine (back in the day) and we had a clinic at the mountain a few years ago with a racer who suggested we try it. Perhaps a seed was planted and it was mental, but it felt like I could edge more. I was messing around on Monday with the angle and forward lean and could 100% tell a difference. The board was either dead and awkward or came alive depending on high back and forward lean. Of course I ride at +/- 18 so that might have something to do with it. Just change it and try it. Its only 2 screws and 6 holes. Not THAT hard to do.


Calling it. Someone will argue it is a marketing ploy to sell bindings.


----------



## hktrdr

BigmountainVMD said:


> You are still applying force across the disk at an angle, which is less than force being applied perpendicular to the edge. Yes, the baseplate is the source of energy transfer, but the highback does put pressure on the heel cup of the baseplate, and the location of that force changes when you rotate your highback. I'm not saying it's hugely beneficial, but an analytical test (per my previous post) would show a difference, whether insanely small or significant.
> 
> As for pros, I'm curious which pros you are talking about. Anything other than anecdotal evidence that suggests that bordercross riders don't rotate?
> 
> For anyone who is confused, look at the top right arrows (red) on this diagram.


Let me refer you to this post by George:


UNION INHOUSE said:


> Yes, the Charger is more responsive. Depending on your stance set up, rotating your highbacks makes for less response.
> 
> Just for reference, I don't know of a single Union pro rider that rotates his/her highbacks.
> [SNIP]


I will try to comment on your diagram when I am not posting from a mobile device.


----------



## Donutz

BigmountainVMD said:


> You are still applying force across the disk at an angle, which is less than force being applied perpendicular to the edge.


In addition there's the biomechanical angle (ba-BOOM boom  ) Whether or not the highback is rotated, the rider is applying pressure perpendicular to the axis of the board (or should be). If you ride 0/0, no problem. But if you ride with an angle and don't rotate the highback, the highback will resist the force at an angle, which will convert part of the applied pressure to a non-perpendicular vector -- effectively wasted energy. Add in neni's point about the flex of highbacks when pressure is applied at an angle, and you have a possibly significant level of wasted energy.

To use an analogy, if you go to push someone and they meet you straight on, _all_ of the energy of your push goes into pushing them straight back. But if they meet you at an angle, you will find yourself stepping sideways -- or having to apply more force to avoid doing so.


----------



## hktrdr

Donutz said:


> In addition there's the biomechanical angle (ba-BOOM boom  ) Whether or not the highback is rotated, the rider is applying pressure perpendicular to the axis of the board (or should be). If you ride 0/0, no problem. But if you ride with an angle and don't rotate the highback, the highback will resist the force at an angle, which will convert part of the applied pressure to a non-perpendicular vector -- effectively wasted energy. Add in neni's point about the flex of highbacks when pressure is applied at an angle, and you have a possibly significant level of wasted energy.


Right concept, wrong conclusion - as explained above, the opposite is the case.


----------



## SnowOwl

Donutz said:


> In addition there's the biomechanical angle (ba-BOOM boom  ) Whether or not the highback is rotated, the rider is applying pressure perpendicular to the axis of the board (or should be). If you ride 0/0, no problem. But if you ride with an angle and don't rotate the highback, the highback will resist the force at an angle, which will convert part of the applied pressure to a non-perpendicular vector -- effectively wasted energy. Add in neni's point about the flex of highbacks when pressure is applied at an angle, and you have a possibly significant level of wasted energy.
> 
> To use an analogy, if you go to push someone and they meet you straight on, _all_ of the energy of your push goes into pushing them straight back. But if they meet you at an angle, you will find yourself stepping sideways -- or having to apply more force to avoid doing so.


So if you ride park, is all of the above irrelevant considering the fact that that's the main reason people aim for a binding with more flex in a park set up - less response?


----------



## Donutz

hktrdr said:


> Right concept, wrong conclusion - as explained above, the opposite is the case.


And as usual, nothing in the rebuttal except an imperative statement that you're right and everyone else is wrong.

Since rational argument obviously isn't going to cut it, let me descend to your level by way of rebuttal:

No it ain't neither. You're wrong, I'm right. Bleah!


----------



## Donutz

SnowOwl said:


> So if you ride park, is all of the above irrelevant considering the fact that that's the main reason people aim for a binding with more flex in a park set up - less response?


Not much of a park rat myself, but I think the desire for a "softer" response in park has more to do with absorbing shocks rather than transferring them to the rider, and not so much about "less response" (although that would be one of the results, I guess)


----------



## MrKrinkle

What about bindings with no highback at all for example the NOW SELECTS with heel cup and FLOWS now have a model with no highback for 2014 it seems that this style of binding is essentially showing that a highback doesn't really have a purpose aside from being part of a traditional binding design...


----------



## Donutz

MrKrinkle said:


> What about bindings with no highback at all for example the NOW SELECTS with heel cup and FLOWS now have a model with no highback for 2014 it seems that this style of binding is essentially showing that a highback doesn't really have a purpose aside from being part of a traditional binding design...


Hell, you might be right. I'd like to try those just to find out. Or it might be that highbacks help but aren't _essential._ The backless ones probably give you tradeoffs -- less heelside oomph but more ability to dig in toeside using ankles (just speculating).


----------



## MrKrinkle

Donutz said:


> Hell, you might be right. I'd like to try those just to find out. Or it might be that highbacks help but aren't _essential._ The backless ones probably give you tradeoffs -- less heelside oomph but more ability to dig in toeside using ankles (just speculating).


I'm so excited to try them out...Hoping to demo them this season... Also if you remember the early days of stepin bindings had no highbacks either just a plate on the board you stepped into that connected to that bar in the middle of the boot...


----------



## Donutz

It occurred to me afterwards (bit of staircase wit going here) that some reductio ad absurdum would help out here. For a thought experiment, rotate the bindings to 89 degrees / -89 degrees. Or at least the highbacks  Now, can you visualize ability to lean heelside not being impacted _at all?_ Sure in a system with no flexibility at all, any lean would be translated down to the toes with no loss. But unless you're in hardboots (and maybe not even then) you've got flexibility. If I lean back so that the back of my calves are pushing against the highbacks, but don't keep my ankles rigid, the toes _will not_ be applying the same level of force. And if the highback is at an angle and the boots aren't completely rigid, there _will be_ some side slippage, which translates to wasted energy. This is a pretty simple physical system and more importantly it's not an ideal system, so there are avenues for wasted energy. Highback rotation is an attempt to plug one of those holes. Whether it's significant or not depends on the rest of your equipment.


----------



## Mystery2many

From my experience. Rotating the highback did not change the response to the heel edge. It just freed up the boot tip to tail for presses, butters and tweeks. If the highback is aligned with the heel edge it will not resist your boot/leg as much when in a press. It opens up the area between the bindings.


----------



## binarypie

The only time I've rotated my high backs was to ensure they match my boots and don't have any weird pressure points. That is it. But I also ride with a fair bit of forward lean.

To each their own in my opinion. For some it helps. For others perhaps not. End of the day just have fun.


----------



## hktrdr

Mystery2many said:


> From my experience. Rotating the highback did not change the response to the heel edge. It just freed up the boot tip to tail for presses, butters and tweeks. If the highback is aligned with the heel edge it will not resist your boot/leg as much when in a press. It opens up the area between the bindings.


Agreed. As I said, it can help with comfort and for/aft movements for tweaking etc. But no impact on heelside edge pressure.


----------



## Derp

Rotated them last night. Parallel with edge now and ready to try out. Not honestly sure if I will notice much a difference at my skill level, but it only took a minute to do so I didn't mind.


----------



## SnowOwl

I'll be tryin em out in the park, and I'll let you know what difference I see. I have a couple of different types of set ups, so i'll have a good general idea :thumbsup:


----------



## 24WERD

All the kids will laugh at you if you don't rotate the highbacks.


----------



## neni

hktrdr said:


> No, because the toe-hell leaning is going back 'straight' through the boot - otherwise you would be pushing back over the outside of your ankle (inside of your rear leg angle if you ride with a forward stance) which is not efficient at all.


Ok now. Lets stand up, put our feet on the ground, foreward angles, bend knees and simulate pressure on the heel edge (I'm doing this right now and earn bewildered glaces from coworkers)
If you want to simulate this back straight through the boot as you mention, one would have to shift ones center back-sideways in the same vector as the angles of the bindings, which in my opinion is ineffective. And yes, I do push back slightly over the outside of the calves (the steeper the angle, the more) exactly since I don't want to shift my center to the tail.
And yes, sure, it would be more effective to pressure back straight trough the boot, if only this variable is considered. Most effective to pressure heel edge would be 0/0 angles. But we ride in a direction, there's a movement added into the equitation, thus no one rides 0/0 angles. It's a trade off. And one of these trade offs is having angles, thus the pressure is no longer parallel to the edge if pushing back straight, thus I adjust the pressure to the edge and thus I also adjust the highback to the edge. But that's how it makes physically and anatomically sense for me. Now I haven't had lessons and I haven't learned in theory how to ride. Could be, that a different trade-off is a better solution, but shifting the weight backwards to keep the back straight through the boot sounds not as a good solution for me...


----------



## tradnwaves4snow

neni said:


> I'm doing this right now and earn bewildered glaces from coworkers)


+1 for being on a snowboarding forum at work.

having studied a considerable amount of physics, I can see where both arguments are coming from.

To simplify, if you stand up on your board regardless of what angle your feet are at when you lean heel side your calves are moving perpendicular to the board. If the highback is rotated so that it is perpendicular to the board we can all agree that maximum force is transfered efficiently through the highback to the point of contact with the heelcup of the binding.

Now this is where it gets interesting, lets not see it as the highback rotated but rather the heelcup and baseplate rotated relatively to the highback/edge. If you are at 0,0 angle the highbacks will transfer all this energy through the heelcup, then the baseplate to your board. But if you are in a duckstance the highback with torsionally apply this pressure through the heelcup and baseplate at an angle. 

So the arguement to rotate based on more efficient transfer of energy to the highback leads to less efficient transfer through the heelcup and baseplate in theory.
But to not rotate the highback your calves will move at an angle and cause less efficient transfer of energy to highback which is set up in its most efficient configuration to transfer energy to the heelcup/baseplate.

So to rotate or not rotate, you will lose energy either way through vector loss or torsional loss. So perhaps its more a comfort / personal prefference thing.

I just got myself a new set of union altas bindings and its really easy to rotate the highback. And as all scientists know the best way to find out something is to test it for yourself!!! and find out what feel better for you.


----------



## SnowOwl

tradnwaves4snow said:


> +1 for being on a snowboarding forum at work.
> 
> having studied a considerable amount of physics, I can see where both arguments are coming from.
> 
> To simplify, if you stand up on your board regardless of what angle your feet are at when you lean heel side your calves are moving perpendicular to the board. If the highback is rotated so that it is perpendicular to the board we can all agree that maximum force is transfered efficiently through the highback to the point of contact with the heelcup of the binding.
> 
> Now this is where it gets interesting, lets not see it as the highback rotated but rather the heelcup and baseplate rotated relatively to the highback/edge. If you are at 0,0 angle the highbacks will transfer all this energy through the heelcup, then the baseplate to your board. But if you are in a duckstance the highback with torsionally apply this pressure through the heelcup and baseplate at an angle.
> 
> So the arguement to rotate based on more efficient transfer of energy to the highback leads to less efficient transfer through the heelcup and baseplate in theory.
> But to not rotate the highback your calves will move at an angle and cause less efficient transfer of energy to highback which is set up in its most efficient configuration to transfer energy to the heelcup/baseplate.
> 
> So to rotate or not rotate, you will lose energy either way through vector loss or torsional loss. So perhaps its more a comfort / personal prefference thing.
> 
> I just got myself a new set of union altas bindings and its really easy to rotate the highback. And as all scientists know the best way to find out something is to test it for yourself!!! and find out what feel better for you.


Who doesn't love a squint:eusa_clap:


----------



## Lamps

hktrdr said:


> Agreed. As I said, it can help with comfort and for/aft movements for tweaking etc. But no impact on heelside edge pressure.


I agree with this as long as the highback isn't flexy, if the flex differs a Across the back then it matters how it engages. My kids burton stilettos have soft corners in the backs.


----------



## kaborkian

Lamps said:


> I agree with this as long as the highback isn't flexy, if the flex differs a Across the back then it matters how it engages. My kids burton stilettos have soft corners in the backs.


Agreed. Lots of highbacks are very stiff when pushed straight back, but have a lot of torsional looseness. If you try to push back on one corner, it just twists out of the way and does little for energy transfer.

Potatoes gonna potate. I rotate.


----------



## SilverSurfer

hktrdr said:


> Agreed. As I said, it can help with comfort and for/aft movements for tweaking etc. But no impact on heelside edge pressure.


Here goes the plagiarism again. This guy doesn’t have an original thought, he just copies and pastes things other people say and claims it as his own. 

Check out page 7 of this thread. He turns this into a highback rotation argument, but unlike here, people over there call him a fucking idiot. Funny stuff.

EasyLoungin | The Mervin Mfg. Thread


----------



## shelbybeck

Mystery2many said:


> From my experience. Rotating the highback did not change the response to the heel edge. It just freed up the boot tip to tail for presses, butters and tweeks. If the highback is aligned with the heel edge it will not resist your boot/leg as much when in a press. It opens up the area between the bindings.


exactly:thumbsup:


----------



## neni

SilverSurfer said:


> He turns this into a highback rotation argument, but unlike here, people over there call him a fucking idiot. Funny stuff.


Some here did as well, but in a polite way


----------



## Donutz

neni said:


> Some here did as well, but in a polite way


And some less polite. Interesting read. Regardless of the right or wrong of the argument, hk seems to have a very dismissive tone in his posts, (like constant use of the word 'nonsense'), which doesn't help.


----------



## Extremo

tradnwaves4snow said:


> +1 for being on a snowboarding forum at work.
> 
> having studied a considerable amount of physics, I can see where both arguments are coming from.
> 
> To simplify, if you stand up on your board regardless of what angle your feet are at when you lean heel side your calves are moving perpendicular to the board. If the highback is rotated so that it is perpendicular to the board we can all agree that maximum force is transfered efficiently through the highback to the point of contact with the heelcup of the binding.
> 
> Now this is where it gets interesting, lets not see it as the highback rotated but rather the heelcup and baseplate rotated relatively to the highback/edge. If you are at 0,0 angle the highbacks will transfer all this energy through the heelcup, then the baseplate to your board. But if you are in a duckstance the highback with torsionally apply this pressure through the heelcup and baseplate at an angle.
> 
> So the arguement to rotate based on more efficient transfer of energy to the highback leads to less efficient transfer through the heelcup and baseplate in theory.
> But to not rotate the highback your calves will move at an angle and cause less efficient transfer of energy to highback which is set up in its most efficient configuration to transfer energy to the heelcup/baseplate.
> 
> So to rotate or not rotate, you will lose energy either way through vector loss or torsional loss. So perhaps its more a comfort / personal prefference thing.
> 
> I just got myself a new set of union altas bindings and its really easy to rotate the highback. And as all scientists know the best way to find out something is to test it for yourself!!! and find out what feel better for you.


This FTW :thumbsup:


----------



## hktrdr

SilverSurfer said:


> Here goes the plagiarism again. This guy doesn’t have an original thought, he just copies and pastes things other people say and claims it as his own.
> 
> Check out page 7 of this thread. He turns this into a highback rotation argument, but unlike here, people over there call him a fucking idiot. Funny stuff.
> 
> EasyLoungin | The Mervin Mfg. Thread


Where is the plagiarism that you are accusing me off?


----------



## tonicusa

Anyone who even needs to ask, doesn't need to know. Once you ride enough all of these silly questions become obvious. Rotating highbacks does make a difference but only to guys who ride enough to notice or care about the subtleties. Anyone can ride without rotating their highbacks. If you ride 4-6 days a week you will probably begin to make the little tweeks to your rig that make life more comfortable. None of this stuff will make you a better rider or your ollies higher.

You want to make a noticeable difference in your riding? Take a lesson. Forums are full of guys looking for the secret gear who are too cheap to take a lesson. Support the sport.


----------



## C4mtb

Snowboard Binding Setup: Part 9- Highback Rotation - YouTube

this link is how to adjust the high back for burton bindings.


i found this form because i have had serious knee pain when riding over the past few years, and i think this is my solution 

thanks all


----------



## Mystery2many

C4mtb said:


> Snowboard Binding Setup: Part 9- Highback Rotation - YouTube
> 
> this link is how to adjust the high back for burton bindings.
> 
> 
> i found this form because i have had serious knee pain when riding over the past few years, and i think this is my solution
> 
> thanks all


Hey, I also had knee pain and I'll share what I experimented with and what helped me.

I tried canted beds, rotating the highback, binding angles and stance width. And to be honest I think they all play a roll. Mostly because everyone's bodies are built differently and require different specs and positions.

In order from most helpful to least helpful were these.

Binding angle
Stance width
canted beds
highback rotation

Binding angle I have found is most critical for me. 1 notch too wide/duck and it will cause pain on the inside of my knee. I can still ride all day with it in the wrong position but my knees will be sore. It will also make my foot hurt on the outside around the pinky toe/palm area.

Stance width is a little different but adds to the pain in my knee and foot but that's only when bombing long runs and hooking turns at high speed. I like my stance wider if I'm riding park but honestly I think I'm done with any stance that can't do it all.

I rode canted beds all last season and found them a little helpful but not necessary if my boots aren't too stiff but I still like them. Canted beds are more person specific than a must have for everyone.

Highback rotation helped free my boot up tip to tail which made pressing and buttering a lot more comfortable and took a lot of tension off my knee. And I do a lot of butters, presses and spins. But it didn't make a difference on just carving that I noticed.

I recommend everyone to really play with their stance width and binding angles till they find exactly what fits them and feels good. And DO NOT rush the process, take your time trying different set ups. Take no less than 3 runs before changing it unless you know for sure that its not right.

This was just my experience over the years and I hope it can help someone faster than it took me to figure it out.


----------



## kaborkian

Mystery2many said:


> Hey, I also had knee pain and I'll share what I experimented with and what helped me.
> 
> I tried canted beds, rotating the highback, binding angles and stance width. And to be honest I think they all play a roll. Mostly because everyone's bodies are built differently and require different specs and positions.
> 
> In order from most helpful to least helpful were these.
> 
> Binding angle
> Stance width
> canted beds
> highback rotation
> 
> Binding angle I have found is most critical for me. 1 notch too wide/duck and it will cause pain on the inside of my knee. I can still ride all day with it in the wrong position but my knees will be sore. It will also make my foot hurt on the outside around the pinky toe/palm area.
> 
> Stance width is a little different but adds to the pain in my knee and foot but that's only when bombing long runs and hooking turns at high speed. I like my stance wider if I'm riding park but honestly I think I'm done with any stance that can't do it all.
> 
> I rode canted beds all last season and found them a little helpful but not necessary if my boots aren't too stiff but I still like them. Canted beds are more person specific than a must have for everyone.
> 
> Highback rotation helped free my boot up tip to tail which made pressing and buttering a lot more comfortable and took a lot of tension off my knee. And I do a lot of butters, presses and spins. But it didn't make a difference on just carving that I noticed.
> 
> I recommend everyone to really play with their stance width and binding angles till they find exactly what fits them and feels good. And DO NOT rush the process, take your time trying different set ups. Take no less than 3 runs before changing it unless you know for sure that its not right.
> 
> This was just my experience over the years and I hope it can help someone faster than it took me to figure it out.


QFFT, Well stated


----------



## C4mtb

Mystery2many said:


> Hey, I also had knee pain and I'll share what I experimented with and what helped me.
> 
> I tried canted beds, rotating the highback, binding angles and stance width. And to be honest I think they all play a roll. Mostly because everyone's bodies are built differently and require different specs and positions.
> 
> In order from most helpful to least helpful were these.
> 
> Binding angle
> Stance width
> canted beds
> highback rotation
> 
> Binding angle I have found is most critical for me. 1 notch too wide/duck and it will cause pain on the inside of my knee. I can still ride all day with it in the wrong position but my knees will be sore. It will also make my foot hurt on the outside around the pinky toe/palm area.
> 
> Stance width is a little different but adds to the pain in my knee and foot but that's only when bombing long runs and hooking turns at high speed. I like my stance wider if I'm riding park but honestly I think I'm done with any stance that can't do it all.
> 
> I rode canted beds all last season and found them a little helpful but not necessary if my boots aren't too stiff but I still like them. Canted beds are more person specific than a must have for everyone.
> 
> Highback rotation helped free my boot up tip to tail which made pressing and buttering a lot more comfortable and took a lot of tension off my knee. And I do a lot of butters, presses and spins. But it didn't make a difference on just carving that I noticed.
> 
> I recommend everyone to really play with their stance width and binding angles till they find exactly what fits them and feels good. And DO NOT rush the process, take your time trying different set ups. Take no less than 3 runs before changing it unless you know for sure that its not right.
> 
> This was just my experience over the years and I hope it can help someone faster than it took me to figure it out.



thanks man, i will try all this tomorrow and let you guys know how it goes.


----------



## C4mtb

okay so i adjusted my bindings from 12 -12 to 15 -9 and i am riding much better but my back knee still kills :dunno:  i might try a cheep knee brace, anyone know if the 20$ Walmart ones work?


----------



## kaborkian

C4mtb said:


> okay so i adjusted my bindings from 12 -12 to 15 -9 and i am riding much better but my back knee still kills :dunno:  i might try a cheep knee brace, anyone know if the 20$ Walmart ones work?


Strap in on carpet. Squat. If something hurts, move one binding one notch. Repeat until it's comfy.

Not sure about knee braces.


----------



## hardasacatshead

C4mtb said:


> anyone know if the 20$ Walmart ones work?


No. You get what you pay for. You'll get $20 worth of fuck all. 

Read this so I don't have to type it all out again 

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/outerwear-accessories/115289-knee-brace.html#post1383769


----------



## C4mtb

ahaha thanks


----------



## Jdrizzy

I have an old pair of salomons relay xlt, and i'm not even sure if the highbacks are adjustable. two of the side screws are jammed, any ideas on how to loosen them up?


----------



## speedjason

Jdrizzy said:


> I have an old pair of salomons relay xlt, and i'm not even sure if the highbacks are adjustable. two of the side screws are jammed, any ideas on how to loosen them up?


wd40 unless its rusty


----------



## bseracka

Jdrizzy said:


> I have an old pair of salomons relay xlt, and i'm not even sure if the highbacks are adjustable. two of the side screws are jammed, any ideas on how to loosen them up?


They have a bit of adjustment. You'll have to pull the bindings and pry the black tabs under the base


----------



## Sii315

Not tryna bomb this thread, but I'm having a similar problem. Started riding park a lot this year and was wondering if rotating my high back (rome 390 boss) would be an ideal move to do considering I'm going to be in the park most of the season.....also would it help me with my spins jibs rails jumps and boxes

Thanks


----------



## C4mtb

Sii315 said:


> Not tryna bomb this thread, but I'm having a similar problem. Started riding park a lot this year and was wondering if rotating my high back (rome 390 boss) would be an ideal move to do considering I'm going to be in the park most of the season.....also would it help me with my spins jibs rails jumps and boxes
> 
> Thanks


just rotated my high back on my geniuses... well worth the effort, also helps with knee pain.


----------



## Sii315

C4mtb said:


> just rotated my high back on my geniuses... well worth the effort, also helps with knee pain.


Oh okay cool thanks bro...I'm guessing u ride park as well??


----------



## C4mtb

Sii315 said:


> Oh okay cool thanks bro...I'm guessing u ride park as well??


yeah i recently started to actually practice and try harder now that i am on a team (school team) but i am by no means amazing


----------

