# Highbacks Parallel to Board



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Don't worry about it, besides your stance angles are fairly low. The more important factor is the forward lean


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Yeah,.. not sure this is anything to get too concerned about. 

With the +18°/-12° angles I ride on all my Cartels,.. I can't get my front foot binding to rotate completely parallel to the boards edge either. And I ride with a lot of Fwd Lean dialed into my highbacks as well. More so on the front foot than the rear. 

Just Rotate the highbacks as close as you can to parallel and you should be good to go.


----------



## ek9max (Apr 8, 2013)

I wouldn't worry about it. Even their new burton Step-on's don't allow you to adjust highjack rotation. Neither do NOW bindings.


----------



## Mig Fullbag (Apr 15, 2014)

ek9max said:


> I wouldn't worry about it. Even their new burton Step-on's don't allow you to adjust highjack rotation. Neither do NOW bindings.


They probably had to make a compromise on the Step-Ons because the mechanism in the hiback had to align with the "ladder" block on the boots. Adding hiback rotation would have made the design alot more complex and less user friendly. Plus I am guessing they felt their initial target market would not care much about that feature. And on my Now Drives, the hiback is so rounded that the need to rotate it is almost non-existent. Don't know about the other models though.

And indeed, with such low angles there really is no need for hiback rotation.


----------



## ek9max (Apr 8, 2013)

Mig Fullbag said:


> They probably had to make a compromise on the Step-Ons because the mechanism in the hiback had to align with the "ladder" block on the boots. Adding hiback rotation would have made the design alot more complex and less user friendly. Plus I am guessing they felt their initial target market would not care much about that feature. And on my Now Drives, the hiback is so rounded that the need to rotate it is almost non-existent. Don't know about the other models though.



I've always rotated my highbacks when the feature is present. But with Union bindings, the highjack sticks out and will damage your boot. So I stopped doing it with those bindings and didn't notice a difference. 

And with my burton step-on's or any NOW bindings, I have never once thought "man I really wish I could rotate my highbacks" So I kinda just chalked it up to not being important. ha


----------



## Mig Fullbag (Apr 15, 2014)

ek9max said:


> I've always rotated my highbacks when the feature is present. But with Union bindings, the highjack sticks out and will damage your boot. So I stopped doing it with those bindings and didn't notice a difference.
> 
> And with my burton step-on's or any NOW bindings, I have never once thought "man I really wish I could rotate my highbacks" So I kinda just chalked it up to not being important. ha


I always do it because I have a lot of angle on my front foot (24° to 30°). So I can really feel the difference when it is not rotated. But the Now Drives are the only binding I don't feel the need for it because of the hiback shape.


----------



## ek9max (Apr 8, 2013)

Mig Fullbag said:


> I always do it because I have a lot of angle on my front foot (24° to 30°). So I can really feel the difference when it is not rotated. But the Now Drives are the only binding I don't feel the need for it because of the hiback shape.


Ah. That makes more sense. I'm always around 15/-15


----------



## essie52 (Mar 19, 2014)

ek9max said:


> .......I have never once thought "man I really wish I could rotate my highbacks" So I kinda just chalked it up to not being important. ha


That's my big wonderment.... does it make a fundamental difference? Based on the responses the answer is a soft "no".

Best,
E


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

essie52 said:


> That's my big wonderment.... does it make a fundamental difference? Based on the responses the answer is a soft "no".
> 
> Best,
> E


I think it depends on the bindings also. At least a little. As I understand the way my Cartels highbacks are "_supposed_" to work. They are very stiff front to back but have more flexibility side to side. 

This is supposed to allow for maximum transfer of power when going heelside but leave enough playfulness for the park rats to butter, press and for "Boning out Tricks" as it was put. :shrug:

My take on that if this is the case?

...if I do not rotate my hi-backs at least some, I am supposedly loosing some of the ability to transfer input directly to the heel edge. Is this just marketing hype?? Dunno,.. but the Cartels do flex a fair amount laterally and not at all anterior/posteriorly! 

Either way,.. they will only rotate so far and no further,.. so that's where I put 'em. :grin:


----------



## Mig Fullbag (Apr 15, 2014)

essie52 said:


> That's my big wonderment.... does it make a fundamental difference? Based on the responses the answer is a soft "no".


It does make a fundamental difference if you have higher angles. At yours (+9/-3), it won't.


----------



## Chandler789 (Oct 7, 2012)

Mig Fullbag said:


> It does make a fundamental difference if you have higher angles. At yours (+9/-3), it won't.


I semi agree, you're so close to 0 that it really shouldn't matter. BUT - I am confused because I ride ducted out at 15/6 or sometimes 15/3 and I can get my Mission ESTs to be parallel. They have a good bit of lean as well. I will say that they do not sit entirely flush to the base all the way around, but close enough. I had to play with them quite a bit to get the guides to line up on the correct guide lines (ratchet like striations on the base) so that the high back would sit all the way back into the base (or close enough!)


----------



## essie52 (Mar 19, 2014)

Chandler789 said:


> I semi agree, you're so close to 0 that it really shouldn't matter. BUT - I am confused because I ride ducted out at 15/6 or sometimes 15/3 and I can get my Mission ESTs to be parallel. They have a good bit of lean as well. I will say that they do not sit entirely flush to the base all the way around, but close enough. I had to play with them quite a bit to get the guides to line up on the correct guide lines (ratchet like striations on the base) so that the high back would sit all the way back into the base (or close enough!)


I can make them parallel if the highback isn't flush against the base as well. I guess not having it completely flush is not a big deal. :embarrased1:
Best,
E


----------



## Chandler789 (Oct 7, 2012)

essie52 said:


> I can make them parallel if the highback isn't flush against the base as well. I guess not having it completely flush is not a big deal. :embarrased1:
> Best,
> E


It is important as you could potentially sacrifice response. I found a good middle ground with the angles i'm comfortable at. You certainly want them to have a solid contact patch on the base - especially if they are flexible like my Mission ESTs are. I just bought some Mavaitas and am eager to try out something more responsive!


----------

