# Rome Targa vs Burton Cartel?



## Spyrothedragon9 (Oct 15, 2012)

I'm getting Burton Ion boots and either a Never Summer heritage or a Lib Tech Travis Rice Pro. Which bindings will be a better choice? I mostly ride groomers and take the occasional jump. I've not very familiar with the terms like free riding and freestyle, etc. There is a lot of hard pack so I carve a lot. 

Thanks


----------



## turbospartan (Oct 27, 2010)

Can't really go wrong with either. 

Freeride = I like to go fast and carve down the mountain. You want stiff bindings for this. 

Freestyle = I like to hit jumps and spend time in the park. You want softer bindings for this. 


Targas are very customizable in that you can change out the inserts in the ankle strap to make it soft, medium, or stiff. 

Cartels are obviously good too, or else T.Rice wouldn't ride them on his Lib.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

turbospartan said:


> Cartels are obviously good too, or else T.Rice wouldn't ride them on his Lib.



I also like Cartels but I wouldn't be suprised if T.Rice used rubberbands and scotchtape it would probably look like he was fused to his board compared to the rest of us.


----------



## david_z (Dec 14, 2009)

turbospartan said:


> Can't really go wrong with either.
> 
> Freeride = I like to go fast and carve down the mountain. You want stiff bindings for this.
> 
> ...


T-Rice is riding Union now :cheeky4:

But yeah, before that he rode Cartels for a long time. They're solid bindings. I think I would give an edge to the Targas though, more customizeable.


----------



## BigmountainVMD (Oct 9, 2011)

2013 Cartels are supposedly softer than in years past, the it still has its "7" flex rating as it always has. 

If you KNOW you are carving a lot now and will focus on only that --> get a stiff binding, 7 or higher on the 1-9 flex scale. If you want to do anything else and keep on working on jumps/try to diversify your riding style, get something on the mid-stiff side, like the Genesis (6). Problem with super stiff bindings on jumps is the slightest miscalculation in posture/body movement can make your take-off all wonky since the bindings are so responsive. Same goes for stiff boots.

I ride Ions with my Lib T. Rice pro and I have Burton Prophecy bindings, which have been discontinued for the Genesis bindings. Perfect blend of jumping and carving ability IMO. Not so hot for boxes and rails.


----------



## Snow Hound (Jul 21, 2012)

I had both last season, tried the Targas and then sold them when I got the Cartels. I'm not too into the customisation that the Targas offered. I'd rather board than tinker.

If the latest model are softer as reports seem to indicate I may have stuck with the Targas. 

I really like the big stiff high back on my Cartels.

Metal V Plastic if you have a preference?

*Just to add there wasn't much in it, colour even played a part in my final choice.


----------



## Spyrothedragon9 (Oct 15, 2012)

BigmountainVMD said:


> 2013 Cartels are supposedly softer than in years past, the it still has its "7" flex rating as it always has.
> 
> If you KNOW you are carving a lot now and will focus on only that --> get a stiff binding, 7 or higher on the 1-9 flex scale. If you want to do anything else and keep on working on jumps/try to diversify your riding style, get something on the mid-stiff side, like the Genesis (6). Problem with super stiff bindings on jumps is the slightest miscalculation in posture/body movement can make your take-off all wonky since the bindings are so responsive. Same goes for stiff boots.
> 
> ...


----------



## BigmountainVMD (Oct 9, 2011)

I have not tried the NS Heritage. I own a NS Proto CT and that's what I do most of my riding on since, due to the crap last season, I've been in the park a bunch more. I only ride the T. Rice on days where there is no park and I know I'll be riding groomers ALL DAY or when there is a big dump and I want to shred pow or hit some cliffs or steeps.

The Proto carves pretty good for a blunt tipped park (jump) oriented board. If you think you may be getting more in to jumps, I would recommend the NS SL over the Heritage. The Heritage and T. Rice are good for bigger jumps, and are designed with big backcountry booters in mind, but if you are just getting in to jumps, the SL will make takeoffs and landings easier/smoother and will keep you just as happy in the carving department. 

NS has great damping in its boards, so I find you can generally go a bit softer flex wise with their line. This meaning that if you want something in the 7ish flex range (like the T. Rice) you want a stable board for speed/carving. The NS damping is great at speed, so if you want to jump more, then go with something a bit more flexible, like the SL.

In addition, I really dislike the T. Rice in the trees. Since it is so stiff and longer than my Proto by 4.5 cm, it can be a pain to turn in the trees/moguls. The least couple cm love to catch on everything. The shorter and more flexible Proto is much easier to ride in the trees, another reason I tend to ride that board more.


----------



## Supra (Jan 11, 2012)

BigmountainVMD said:


> 2013 Cartels are supposedly softer than in years past, the it still has its "7" flex rating as it always has.
> 
> I ride Ions with my Lib T. Rice pro and I have Burton Prophecy bindings, which have been discontinued for the Genesis bindings. Perfect blend of jumping and carving ability IMO. Not so hot for boxes and rails.


Actually, the highback on the cartels stiffened considerably in 2012. From 2011 and back for 5 or 6 years (i forget exactly) it was the same stiffness.
In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.

and dude, how on earth can a binding be good for jumping and carving but not good for boxes and rails??? What exactly happens on a box? You ollie on and flex a press and ollie off. What's with the prophecy's that is deficient for this???:dunno:


----------



## extra0 (Jan 16, 2010)

I owned and ridden both in freeride situations (no park). I like them both, but the targas were so heavy in comparison to the cartels, I sold them.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

Supra said:


> In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but *has 3% more torsional flex* than 2012.


You cannot be serious!?


----------



## Supra (Jan 11, 2012)

i sure am! On EL there's a guy who pops in every now and then who has very close ties to the bindings division at B, so we get all those juicy stats


----------



## BigmountainVMD (Oct 9, 2011)

Supra said:


> In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.
> 
> and dude, how on earth can a binding be good for jumping and carving but not good for boxes and rails??? What exactly happens on a box? You ollie on and flex a press and ollie off. What's with the prophecy's that is deficient for this???:dunno:


I should have noted that from what I heard, the Cartel highback is softer than last years model, but by how much I had no idea.

How can a binding be good for carving but not for boxes and rails? You should think that out a bit more. On the scale from flexible to stiff, a more flexible binding is better for rails/boxes, an intermediate flex is better for jumps and a stiff binding is better for carving. The Prophecy, in the year that I purchased them, had some lateral flex (longitudinal on the board axis) but less flex than the Malavitas. It was also relatively stiff heel to toe, which is why it was a good carving binding, and also good for jumps, but didn't have the OPTIMUM flexibility for rails. If it makes you feel better you can replace "not so hot for boxes and rails" with "not optimum for boxes and rails."


----------



## Triple8Sol (Nov 24, 2008)

Either one will pair very well with that board.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

Supra said:


> i sure am! On EL there's a guy who pops in every now and then who has very close ties to the bindings division at B, so we get all those juicy stats


I am still calling bullshit on the 3%. There is just no way to quantify the different dimensions of flex that way. It makes no sense.


----------



## havin_a_ball (Oct 18, 2012)

I got the wife (5'11") a new (last seasons sale) setup this year, which included switching from 2010 Burton Lexa's (LG) to 2012 Cartels (SM)

I was really hoping that the Cartels would offer a higher and stiffer back to match the relative stiffness of the new board (2012 Rossignol Diva 156).

Glad to hear all the positive comments about them!


----------



## Supra (Jan 11, 2012)

hktrdr said:


> I am still calling bullshit on the 3%. There is just no way to quantify the different dimensions of flex that way. It makes no sense.


How about if they have a machine which flexes the highback with a constant pressure until it snaps? You can then compare highback stiffness. 
and yeah, there is 3% more torsional flex this year.

I know, I know, 3% sounds silly but seriously, if I was making it up, don't you think I'd use a bigger number?


----------



## phony_stark (Jul 2, 2011)

Supra said:


> Actually, the highback on the cartels stiffened considerably in 2012. From 2011 and back for 5 or 6 years (i forget exactly) it was the same stiffness.
> In 2013 the highback is essentially the same but has 3% more torsional flex than 2012.
> 
> and dude, how on earth can a binding be good for jumping and carving but not good for boxes and rails??? What exactly happens on a box? You ollie on and flex a press and ollie off. What's with the prophecy's that is deficient for this???:dunno:


+1 The prophecies are actually supposed to be the best of both worlds. The lower half of the binding is softer, so you should be able to get some nice lateral flex out of them

Could be the high back though, I think it predates zero forward lean.
I like a little forward lean though.


----------



## havin_a_ball (Oct 18, 2012)

Supra said:


> How about if they have a machine which flexes the highback with a constant pressure until it snaps? You can then compare highback stiffness.
> and yeah, there is 3% more torsional flex this year.


If the material composition of the highback was altered slightly, and tests were done as described above, then the 3% sounds like it could just be a number the marketing team got ahold of. 

Unless, combined with other changes in re:flex or whatnot, the sum of the small changes would be somehow noticeable.

I bet the margin of error for the stiffness of run of mass produced highback pieces is at least 1.5%.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

havin_a_ball said:


> If the material composition of the highback was altered slightly, and tests were done as described above, then the 3% sounds like it could just be a number the marketing team got ahold of.
> 
> Unless, combined with other changes in re:flex or whatnot, the sum of the small changes would be somehow noticeable.
> 
> I bet the margin of error for the stiffness of run of mass produced highback pieces is at least 1.5%.


Exactly. The 3% number is complete bullshit. What specific aspect was measured that changed by 3% percent?
The force required to break the highback? Which would be completely useless information...
Or the force to deflect/twist the highback by a certain degree/extent? In that case how about a different degree/extent - I guarantee you it will not be 3% and could be 10% more or even 10% less.
It is bad enough that the industry is trying to rate flex for boards and bindings on a single number scale, but at least those numbers can offer some guidance. Stating that a highback is 3% stiffer is just complete and utter lunacy and completely meaningless (as pointed out by others already, even the manufacturing tolerances are more than that).


----------



## Supra (Jan 11, 2012)

umm, how can you guarantee me anything when you are basing your reply on assumptions? What specifics do you have other than what I have told you. That's not very much is it? Again, I ask, is it the number 3 that bothers you? Should I have said 10%? Would that have been more believable?

3% is not something from the marketing department - have a look around, you won't find it anywhere. I have it from a guy who works in the bindings design dept at B. I'm no engineer and do not know what machines they used to get that number, but when that guy tells me it's 3%, I know its legit.

oh, and what do you think about the 2014 Cartels?:laugh: Didn't think Burton could release 2014's in 2012! :laugh::laugh::laugh:


----------



## phony_stark (Jul 2, 2011)

This.

You probably won't be able to tell the difference, but it's there. You guys may not work in science, but they do take time to measure stuff like this. 

It may sound unbelievable, but companies often compare/contrast the current design with its predecessor. 

Stoked on those regional love cartels....I wish they'd have a NikeID type of situation for 2014 where you can make your own.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

Supra said:


> umm, how can you guarantee me anything when you are basing your reply on assumptions? What specifics do you have other than what I have told you. That's not very much is it? Again, I ask, is it the number 3 that bothers you? Should I have said 10%? Would that have been more believable?
> 
> 3% is not something from the marketing department - have a look around, you won't find it anywhere. I have it from a guy who works in the bindings design dept at B. I'm no engineer and do not know what machines they used to get that number, but when that guy tells me it's 3%, I know its legit.
> 
> oh, and what do you think about the 2014 Cartels?:laugh: Didn't think Burton could release 2014's in 2012! :laugh::laugh::laugh:


What bothers me is the claim that the flex/stiffness of the binding or highback can be accurately measured or expressed in one number.
Is there one aspect in which the new Cartel highback is 3% stiffer than last year's one?
Are there others where it is more or less flexing than 3% the difference? Almost certainly...

Do you really believe that the highback is 3% stiffer torsionally as well as laterally...as well as in shock loading vs. gradual loading...as well as in breaking strength...etc.?
It just makes no sense.

And we have had the discussion on model year numbers before.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

phony_stark said:


> This.
> 
> You probably won't be able to tell the difference, but it's there. You guys may not work in science, but they do take time to measure stuff like this.


So again, what did they measure?



phony_stark said:


> It may sound unbelievable, but companies often compare/contrast the current design with its predecessor.


Not unbelievable at all. Most companies obviously do that. But they generally do not make claims like the one that "the newer model is 3 percent stiffer" - for good reason, because it makes no sense.


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

reading this discussion is making me 3% dumber - which i don't need to tell you: is a pretty scary premise.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

Burton probably has machines that test things down to those measurements. That's how engineers roll. They are stat monkeys. So I don't doubt in a lab someone may have measured a 3% difference in one measurement. 

However as any factory worker will tell you, a lot of times those measurements don't mean much in real world applications. That's why a perfectly engineered product may fail in the field. Nothing replicates thousands of people using your product in the field.

So don't focus on the 3%. The message is, the flex according to the engineer SHOULD be similar. 

Someone who has both in their hands can tell us.


----------



## scotty100 (Apr 3, 2012)

I would assume measuring torsional flex is pretty standard when stress-testing new binding designs. Hence, no reason not to believe that this year's model has 3% more flex in the high back than last year's. Better riders will no doubt pick up on that immediately.


----------



## qwezxc12 (Oct 24, 2010)

jdang307 said:


> So don't focus on the 3%. The message is, the flex according to the engineer SHOULD be similar.
> 
> Someone who has both in their hands can tell us.


My $.02... The torsional (twisting) flex feels similar between 2012 and 2014 despite the highback design difference. They both are hella stiff perpendicular to the board centerline - as in supporting a hard heel-side carve.










Disclaimer: my twisting and bending was not performed under rigorous scientifically controlled repeatable conditions, nor was my analysis peer-reviewed. My estimated margin of error is.... wait for it... 3% :laugh:


----------



## phony_stark (Jul 2, 2011)

Well played, qwez...well played.


----------



## jdang307 (Feb 6, 2011)

qwezxc12 said:


> My $.02... The torsional (twisting) flex feels similar between 2012 and 2014 despite the highback design difference. They both are hella stiff perpendicular to the board centerline - as in supporting a hard heel-side carve.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


any other differences? Is it lighter? the highback is noticeably shorter


----------



## qwezxc12 (Oct 24, 2010)

jdang307 said:


> any other differences? Is it lighter? the highback is noticeably shorter


Other than the hinge? They are quite a bit lighter but have more material in the EST slots. Supra stated that they share the same baseplate as the Genesis and 'Vitas. I'll be riding them next week in CO, but won't have a back-to-back comparo until I'm home and can ride up at Gore and swap binders. Maybe the week after Thanksgiving...

1st impressions and a few more pics in this post


----------



## Supra (Jan 11, 2012)

How are the straps on those est's? I know the reflex version has the leather react straps of the genesis and past diodes but just from pics it looks like the est binders have a similar strap to the regular 2013 cartels - is that so? or are your straps beefy leather ones? (ankle straps that is)


----------



## qwezxc12 (Oct 24, 2010)

I'm on the road for work atm. I'll post some more pics of the straps when I get back home later this week.


----------

