# Union Charger High Back question



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

Hate to bump my own post, but has anyone ridden these or own them. Also, does that high back really stay fixed? Wish I had some around me to check out.


----------



## UNION INHOUSE (Nov 13, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Hate to bump my own post, but has anyone ridden these or own them. Also, does that high back really stay fixed? Wish I had some around me to check out.


You are correct, the highbacks do not rotate on the Charger. 

There is only one hole on each side, because if we were to drill 3 holes through carbon, it wouldn't be strong enough. 

If you want a comparable binding with the rotation option, try the SL. The highback is very stiff.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

UNION INHOUSE said:


> You are correct, the highbacks do not rotate on the Charger.
> 
> There is only one hole on each side, because if we were to drill 3 holes through carbon, it wouldn't be strong enough.
> 
> If you want a comparable binding with the rotation option, try the SL. The highback is very stiff.


Thanks! In regards to the SL. How does the highback compare to the Atlas. That is the binding I have now. I have the 2012 version Atlas. Is there also any other notable differences?


----------



## UNION INHOUSE (Nov 13, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Thanks! In regards to the SL. How does the highback compare to the Atlas. That is the binding I have now. I have the 2012 version Atlas. Is there also any other notable differences?


It's quite a bit more stiff. Otherwise, not a gigantic difference.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

UNION INHOUSE said:


> It's quite a bit more stiff. Otherwise, not a gigantic difference.


Thanks again. Sorry, one last question, I know you mentioned the SL is comparable to the Charger, but given that there's very little torsional flex on the Charger, is it correct to assume that it would still be the more responsive binding for freeriding, even without the highback rotation.


----------



## UNION INHOUSE (Nov 13, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Thanks again. Sorry, one last question, I know you mentioned the SL is comparable to the Charger, but given that there's very little torsional flex on the Charger, is it correct to assume that it would still be the more responsive binding for freeriding, even without the highback rotation.


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. 

We designed the Charger for Temple Cummins, to be the most responsive binding possible and win the LBS again. It worked, he did, and riders like him love the binding (all mountain rippers).


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

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.
> 
> We designed the Charger for Temple Cummins, to be the most responsive binding possible and win the LBS again. It worked, he did, and riders like him love the binding (all mountain rippers).


Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions! This really helped my decision making process.


----------



## tbymto (Feb 15, 2013)

so what did you decide to go with mel


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

I went with the SL because the Charger in M/L is largely MIA except for a few online retailers, but I'm only comfortable ordering from a few such as EVO. I really wanted a stiff binding as possible to complement my Raptor and Salomon Synapse setup.

There was also a considerable discount, ~10%-15% I believe, due to end of season sales, so I jumped on it. I do not know of a single local store in PA/NJ that carries the Charger.

My situation is unique because a friend of mine was looking for a binding, but can't quite afford a decent one right now for financial reasons. I told him I'll try out this binding and if I don't like it, I'll sell it to him for an even hundred bucks and keep an eye out for the Chargers next year. My first day on the mountain with my new setup is tomorrow, so I can leave my impressions here if you want.

I'm not sure if it was a limited production run or the Chargers sold out like crazy super quick, because they were even hard to find in the beginning of the season. I hope Union makes more available for the following year.


----------



## tbymto (Feb 15, 2013)

let me know how it is after you ride them tomorrow. thank you


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

I found a pair today , at mt bachelor Oregon gear shop, they're fucking stiff as shit. And I'm coming from diodes.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

tbymto said:


> let me know how it is after you ride them tomorrow. thank you


Sorry, I forgot this about this thread. Overall I like them, but I feel the Raptor could use a little more response. I wouldn't consider myself an advanced rider, more like a solid intermediate, but when going into higher speed carves, I feel some of my ankle movements don't fully transfer to the board. This could very well be a technique issue, but I'm hoping that a stiffer binding can make my high speed edge transitions smoother. 

I really want to try a Union Charger to compare to. 






pdxrealtor said:


> I found a pair today , at mt bachelor Oregon gear shop, they're fucking stiff as shit. And I'm coming from diodes.


Nice! Can't wait to try out the 2014's next year.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> I found a pair today , at mt bachelor Oregon gear shop, they're fucking stiff as shit. And I'm coming from diodes.


Should have asked this the first time, but are they significantly more responsive than the diodes?


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Should have asked this the first time, but are they significantly more responsive than the diodes?


They are significantly stiffer, and more planted to the board. I think some of this has to do with Burton's re:flex disc vs unions tech along with Burton's more flexible base plate vs the chargers stiffer base plate. 

I felt more confident on little jumps and drops than I did in the diodes. Edge to edge at around 40 mph was extremely responsive and super tight dynamic carving was easier. 

I was more comfortable, and it was easier, to be high on edge during long sweeping carves on the chargers vs the diodes. 

The only problem I had was in tight trees needing to toe side turn on a dime. The bindings are just to planted to the board to leverage any baseplate flex to assist in those tight turns where you can't engage the edge to initiate the turn. It might just take some time to get used to , but if you look at the pros who ride these bindings they're hard charging big mnt riders. They're not normally out playing around in tight trees. 

I'm going to give them a couple more days and see what happens. But as of now I like the little bit of flex the diodes have over the chargers.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> They are significantly stiffer, and more planted to the board. I think some of this has to do with Burton's re:flex disc vs unions tech along with Burton's more flexible base plate vs the chargers stiffer base plate.
> 
> I felt more confident on little jumps and drops than I did in the diodes. Edge to edge at around 40 mph was extremely responsive and super tight dynamic carving was easier.
> 
> ...


Thanks pdx. This is exactly the type of feedback I was looking for as the diodes were in my radar to try out for next year. I feel comfortable going on the SL's around 30, but when I get close to 40 or above, especially on sketchy terrain, I feel I could use a bit more response.

This is my hard charging setup, as I have an Never Summer SL w/ Union Atlas's for the more playful stuff, so I don't mind the lack of performance in tight trees, but I appreciate the feedback.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

No problem. 

Here is another example. On one of the runs at the mnt I was at you have to ride a cat track back to the lift, a long ass cat track. 

It's kind of fun because you can get enough speed to be hauling ass (I clocked just over 40) and there's nice dips and rises. You feel like your on a built race course.

Typically I'd slow down so as to not catch air on the rises. But with the chargers felt no such need. Just hauled ass and caught natural air from the sheer speed I was going. 

:thumbsup:


----------



## NWBoarder (Jan 10, 2010)

I rode this year's Chargers on a Capita TFA, and the pairing was great. Pdx is right, while they excel at charging lines, they are not fun to ride at slow speeds. They did feel great on jumps though, and helped me have the confidence to jump the medium set at Stevens last spring. Of course, riding with some of the Capita team and designer probably had a lot to do with that too. Lol! 

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> No problem.
> 
> Here is another example. On one of the runs at the mnt I was at you have to ride a cat track back to the lift, a long ass cat track.
> 
> ...


Nice! Just what I wanted to hear. Looking to do more jumps next year, so I'm anxious on trying the new setup. 







NWBoarder said:


> I rode this year's Chargers on a Capita TFA, and the pairing was great. Pdx is right, while they excel at charging lines, they are not fun to ride at slow speeds. They did feel great on jumps though, and helped me have the confidence to jump the medium set at Stevens last spring. Of course, riding with some of the Capita team and designer probably had a lot to do with that too. Lol!
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


That's a pretty sick setup! Capita TFA's are awesome boards! The Raptor I ride now has very similar characteristics in that it doesn't like slow rides, so I'm thinking the pairing would be ideal too.


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

Trying this setup friday, wasnt planning on doing it since union in house advised against it but figured what the hell, reading all pdx's posts has intrigued me. I have a pair of forces to throw on this board if it sucks. Kinda excited to see how it turns out(im expecting a disaster). :yahoo:


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

What board is that?


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

tj_ras said:


> Trying this setup friday, wasnt planning on doing it since union in house advised against it but figured what the hell, reading all pdx's posts has intrigued me. I have a pair of forces to throw on this board if it sucks. Kinda excited to see how it turns out(im expecting a disaster). :yahoo:


Why did Union advise against it? Sorry in advance if that's a dumb question.....


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

Mel M said:


> What board is that?


2013 dc mega 150.5



pdxrealtor said:


> Why did Union advise against it? Sorry in advance if that's a dumb question.....


Heres the response i got, 


"Now to the Charger. To me honest, I would steer away from that model and go with something like an SL or Atlas. The SL's highback is really stiff. That asym highback is stiff where you need it, and soft in the areas that allow you to bone out a mean method."

Makes sense since i still want to tweak grabs and the chargers super stiff. Now that i have the chargers in hand tho i think i can muscle some tweaks out of them. Im still getting 2014 atlas's for this board(not a fan of the 2013 colorways) and using these chargers on a more freeride/freestyle board.


----------



## blunted_nose (Apr 26, 2012)

To the Op, you're an idiot. If you cant feel safe in Sl's doing above 40, you obviously cant ride. I rock Burton triads on a bataleon board and i clocked myself the last time on the slope at around 70km/h and it felt just fine. Remember, its 99% you and 1% board, leaving the bindings with like 0.0002%.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

blunted_nose said:


> To the Op, you're an idiot. If you cant feel safe in Sl's doing above 40, you obviously cant ride. I rock Burton triads on a bataleon board and i clocked myself the last time on the slope at around 70km/h and it felt just fine. Remember, its 99% you and 1% board, leaving the bindings with like 0.0002%.


I see you're point but you don't have to say it like a jackass. Calling someone an idiot just discredits the point you're trying to make. 


FYI a stiffer binding can make the difference between ride or fall, jump or not jump, more confidence or less. 

Skills can't push a stiff board or binding beyond its limitation, but skills can take the loosest of loose boards bindings or boots and do anything.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

blunted_nose said:


> To the Op, you're an idiot. If you cant feel safe in Sl's doing above 40, you obviously cant ride. I rock Burton triads on a bataleon board and i clocked myself the last time on the slope at around 70km/h and it felt just fine. Remember, its 99% you and 1% board, leaving the bindings with like 0.0002%.


Wow! Thanks for the attitude asshat!

For one, I never said I felt unsafe or uncomfortable going at those speeds. I just don't feel my ankle movements fully transfer to the board. I feel I have to exaggerate my body movements a bit into the turn. Also, I never claimed to be a badass rider. I've always admitted either in this thread or others, that I could work on my technique. I'm a 30 year old second year rider ready to start a family with my wife. I have modest expectations in regards to my snowboarding progression and I have no illusions in regards to my own ability. The sponsorships will have to fucking wait... (that was sarcasm just in case you were too fucking retarded to catch that)

Second... my 40 was 40mph. 40mp/h is ~65km/h. So CONGRATA-FUCKING-LATIONS on being able to to 5km/h faster than I can. I can fucking walk backwards faster than that.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

Snowolf said:


> Ok I can see this is going south and not gong to end well. Time to stick a fork in it I guess. This is why you don't start out posts with comments like "You're an idiot". You guys have a choice; play nice or the thread is getting locked.


Play nice. This was a grest thread, lets keep it going. I have two more days of data on these binding. Just need to get to computer to post. On iphone now. 

So sick of the disrespect....... 

Glad to see clean up work in progress. :thumbsup:


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

Ill try to pop this back on topic with a quick initial thoughts on the chargers after 10 straight hours on them. 

Conditions = mostly sunny/sunny, close to 45 degrees ferenheit by late afternoon, loose pack of groomed with 1.5" inches new and maybe 2 inches of man made crap. Tracked out by hour 3. 

Binding setup = 18/-18 , forward lean at 0. 24" Centered stance.

Board = 2013 dc mega 150.5, medium/stiff board(7.5 out of 10 on dc's chart), hybrid camber (radius-flat-camber-flat-radius) "lock and load camber"

Boots = 2013 ride FUL traditional lace, medium/slightly stiff(6.5 out of 10)

Started the day out doing low speed runs to get a feel for how everything felt together. could instantly tell how responsive these were, it took the slightest pressure to engage an edge. Only way i could describe it is by the time i thought about it and my body did it it was done, was like zero lag between my brain saying "hey lets do this, and my body saying done". Even at low speed i felt these bindings performed outstanding and never felt out of control.

After a few low speed runs i started to ramp it up and see how they felt at speed, sorry no gps speed tracking thing, if i had to geuss id say i got between 20-30mph easily(but like i said no confirmed data so take that for what its worth). At speed these shined even more. never once did i feel out of control or "sketchy" during a run, even chomping through the speed bumps everybody was leaveing i felt perfectly at ease. Edge engagement was somehow even easer/even more effortless then the previous slower speed runs.

In a nutshell the feel i got out of these bindings was simply heavenly, not during the entirety of the day could i find something bad about them. 

Lastly i took them off a little 10 foot kicker in the park. tweaking out grabs, though not as easy as youd find on something with a soft highback(obviously), i found it not that difficult to do. I only did 4 jumps/grabs on these as the park tow rope wasnt working and i had to walk the hill or take a main lift and waste my day cruising greens to the park. Grabs included, tuck knee, stalefish, tailgrab, and a method i tried to tweak out as far as i could resulting in me filling my jacket with snow. Landings felt great, i sort of expected it to be a "twitchy" landing since i was getting so much response just doing normal runs, but they actualy felt pretty forgiving on landings. 


Well thats about all i got for now, i was hoping to try these out one last time in deeper stuff but it doesnt look to good for that. Im not going to give a 0-10 scale just yet as id really like to try these on a bigger mountain were i can get going faster and be in much deeper snow. Id also like to hit a few boxes/rails. One thing is for certain tho, these bindings arent leaveing this board, and im so glad i tried them out.

If you have any questions feel free to ask, i wrote this half asleep on my iphone so its really brief and missing a ton of details.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

Snowolf said:


> Ok I can see this is going south and not gong to end well. Time to stick a fork in it I guess. This is why you don't start out posts with comments like "You're an idiot". You guys have a choice; play nice or the thread is getting locked.


My apologies for the retaliation. I'm usually more level head against thread trolls, but I saw the post on a particularly bad day, so he got the better of me. I would definitely like this tread to continue since the Chargers are a binding I don't see a lot of feedback on and this thread seems to be getting great responses in regards to that.

On that note...



tj_ras said:


> Started the day out doing low speed runs to get a feel for how everything felt together. could instantly tell how responsive these were, it took the slightest pressure to engage an edge. Only way i could describe it is by the time i thought about it and my body did it it was done, was like zero lag between my brain saying "hey lets do this, and my body saying done". Even at low speed i felt these bindings performed outstanding and never felt out of control.
> 
> After a few low speed runs i started to ramp it up and see how they felt at speed, sorry no gps speed tracking thing, if i had to geuss id say i got between 20-30mph easily(but like i said no confirmed data so take that for what its worth). At speed these shined even more. never once did i feel out of control or "sketchy" during a run, even chomping through the speed bumps everybody was leaveing i felt perfectly at ease. Edge engagement was somehow even easer/even more effortless then the previous slower speed runs.
> 
> ...


Appreciate the feedback! Seems to be on par with other reviews written, great at speed and stable on jumps. Do you feel difficulty on slower, tighter turns, such as through trees that's it's a bit harder to turn?



Snowolf said:


> I took a spin on Pdx`s board since we both have Gnu Billy Goats. I definitely felt what you both report. The board was incredible at carving and had good response and stability. But, compared to my Rome Targa`s on the Goat, these felt to me like there was a "dead spot" in turn initiation; more so going to toeside. Ultimately, I had not trouble in tight trees, but definitely felt it. Its like there is a split second where the board "hangs" before actually committing to the turn.
> 
> I have the Forces`s on the NS F1 Premier I am testing and they are a great match. In addition, I put the stiff Rome Arsenals on the 2014 Raptor and they are a great match.


It's great you were able to compare the Targa w/ the Chargers since the they were on my radar, particularly because of the canting and rotatable highbacks. In your opinion, if this board were to be used specifically for charging fast through wide open, steeper runs and not tight trees, is it that much more responsive to choose it over the Targa?


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

Mel M said:


> Appreciate the feedback! Seems to be on par with other reviews written, great at speed and stable on jumps. Do you feel difficulty on slower, tighter turns, such as through trees that's it's a bit harder to turn?



Sadly i didnt have the opportunity to do tree runs since the mtn i was at was laking snow in the trees. So sorry i cant give you any feedback on that. :thumbsdown:


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

tj_ras said:


> Sadly i didnt have the opportunity to do tree runs since the mtn i was at was laking snow in the trees. So sorry i cant give you any feedback on that. :thumbsdown:


Oh, no problem. Thanks anyway. It was merely out of curiosity, since I don't do many to begin with. Besides, I have my SL for that anyway.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

Snowolf said:


> Yes. The Chargers made his BG much better at hard carving than mine with the Targas. Now to be fair, what we need to do is actually switch bindings so I am riding my BG with the stance and angles I like and he tries the Targas on his. When I get back from Arizona, we are going to try this.
> 
> I have the Union Forces on my Premier and I let Pdx ride it and he noticed how the softer bindings (like his old Diodes) gave him back his agility in tight trees. I felt like I was driving a school bus through them on hid BG. This could have been a combination of longer board and his stance angles dont work for me.
> 
> ...


Great info..... 

I did move in the heel cup on one of the bindings to 0 and it off centers the boot considerably. I left it there to compare to the Diodes once I get them back and can mount one. 

I also emailed Union to see if this might be an expected limitation of this binding or if it was worth my time to try and move to a more positive front angle or adjust somewhere else. As of now, no response. 

It would be interesting to put them on your stiffer NS board also.


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

Just out of curioisity what boots are you's both using? I wish i had the time off of work to travel somewere to try some real tree riding to see if i have the same experience with my board.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

I wear DC Status 2013- super stiff.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> Great info.....
> 
> I did move in the heel cup on one of the bindings to 0 and it off centers the boot considerably. I left it there to compare to the Diodes once I get them back and can mount one.
> 
> ...


Out of curiosity, what angles and width do you ride?


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Out of curiosity, what angles and width do you ride?


+15 -3 is my norm, but I've spent equal time on the chargers at -6 

Stance width is 22 1/8" 

I plan on trying a +18 in the front to see if that helps with the toe side turn problem I'm experiencing.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> +15 -3 is my norm, but I've spent equal time on the chargers at -6
> 
> Stance width is 22 1/8"
> 
> I plan on trying a +18 in the front to see if that helps with the toe side turn problem I'm experiencing.


Interesting, let me know how that goes. Seems counterintuitive since I would have thought a greater stance angle would mean less leverage on your edge.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

Mel M said:


> Interesting, let me know how that goes. Seems counterintuitive since I would have thought a greater stance angle would mean less leverage on your edge.


As of now I've been conversing with Union. 

They suggested I leave the heel cup at zero and rotate the mounting discs so I can move the binding from toe to heel edge on the board and center the boot that way. 

Great- now I have an off center binding though. Union's reply- move the gas pedal out to center up the binding. Ok- I did that, it took one notch..... so I'm at the middle setting on gas pedal extension. 

As I'm done and looking at the boot/binding nice and centered I realize that I've got almost the exact same setup as using the heel cup at 1. A nice centered boot and binding. 

The only difference is the base of the binding now sits closer to my heel edge, and farther away from the toe edge. The only thing evening things out making the binding centered is the gas pedal being extended. 

I don't see how this is going to increase toe side response. Do any of you? :icon_scratch:

The thought, at least for me, in moving the forward angle out a tad is it would enable pressure higher up towards the nose on the toe edge. The higher up there is pressure the more edge you're digging in to help with turn initiation as the board widens out towards the nose. 

On these hair pin turns that sometimes requires some pivot movements it would make perfect sense.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

Snowolf said:


> Yes. The Chargers made his BG much better at hard carving than mine with the Targas. Now to be fair, what we need to do is actually switch bindings so I am riding my BG with the stance and angles I like and he tries the Targas on his. When I get back from Arizona, we are going to try this.
> 
> I have the Union Forces on my Premier and I let Pdx ride it and he noticed how the softer bindings (like his old Diodes) gave him back his agility in tight trees. I felt like I was driving a school bus through them on hid BG. This could have been a combination of longer board and his stance angles dont work for me.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply! That's what I pretty much figured in regards to response, but it's nice to hear feedback from people who rode a variety of bindings to compare with, instead of making guesses from a variety of online reviews.

That's interesting about the increased angle in the front. Pdx mentioned that may help him as well. Definitely interested in hearing what you think when you try them out again.


----------



## tj_ras (Feb 13, 2011)

pdxrealtor said:


> As of now I've been conversing with Union.
> 
> They suggested I leave the heel cup at zero and rotate the mounting discs so I can move the binding from toe to heel edge on the board and center the boot that way.
> 
> ...



I have somewhat of the same problem so your not alone. My boots favor my heel side of the binding base by around an 1/8"( give or take 1/64"). However on the board the boots are dead nuts center(3/4" over hang both edges). Also the bindings base is dead nuts center on the board(1/2" from the edges).

I extended my toe ramp to match were my boots sole starts to curve(middle notch/hole). This makes the heel look way more over hung, but in reality according to the base its only the 1/8".

If i move my heel cup in(1 on the m/l cup) it makes my toes overhang the base of the binding more(boots will favor toeside) and it makes the boot overhang the board more on the toeside. 

This is with m/l bindings and size 10 boots(recomended by union) 


Now out of curiousity i took my new pair of l/xl forces out of the box and began centering. And wouldnt you know, everything centers right up.



However, i do prefer the fit of the m/l better then the l/xl.....and i dont think the 1/8" difference i have with the m/l is going to affect my riding all that much.



Sidenote: my discs are in the stance width fine adjustment direction, NOT the boot centering direction.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

tj_ras said:


> I have somewhat of the same problem so your not alone. My boots favor my heel side of the binding base by around an 1/8"( give or take 1/64"). However on the board the boots are dead nuts center(3/4" over hang both edges). Also the bindings base is dead nuts center on the board(1/2" from the edges).
> 
> I extended my toe ramp to match were my boots sole starts to curve(middle notch/hole). This makes the heel look way more over hung, but in reality according to the base its only the 1/8".
> 
> ...


So you have a boot centering in binding 'problem' so to speak. Meaning your boot is off center one way or another depending on heel cup adjustment. This with your m/l. 

In the 1 position I'm pretty centered up binding on board and boot in binding. (By eyes, I'm gonna go measure now with a tape in 0* position. 

Its when I move to a zero setting I have to rotate the discs to center the boot on the board. Then I'm left with an off centered binding, corrected by gas pedal extension. 

As pointed out to me by union,, pushing the heel cup in will move weight forward towards toe edge, giving more response. Even though without the gas pedal the binding has to be off centered on the board to get the boot centered on the board. 

It sounds to me if you utilize your discs to center things up you could lose that 1/8" overhang, should you feel the need. 

This heel cup adjustment thing is new to me. I'd never have thought twice about it if I wasn't having this one small issue. 

Another thing Union reminded of, and they're right, is that new equipment may mean new adjustments. So Friday I hope to make changes one by one to eliminate the issue. If that happens on the + side then ill be stoked. 

Kind of feels like I'm making adjustments to fix a binding issue, since in the 1 position everything naturally centers. But then I think-- hey if it works without any performance trade off what's it matter? 

Hoping to also have Diodes for a back to back comparison, although I'm pretty confident the charger is the more responsive, stiffer, more planted to the board binding. I've ridden the diodes over 50 days so I'm pretty familiar with them. 

This could be due to RE:flex tech or a combination of other design factors as well.

One thing I didn't like losing was the stance width adjustment I had with the disc slot lined up parallel to the board..... I actually special ordered burton discs that allowed the reflex disc to lay with holes parallel to the board for the micro adjustment, got 3/8" out of it which believe it or not I could tell a difference when turning. But I've refined my skills a bit since then and was thinking of widening up a bit for better balance.


----------



## pdxrealtor (Jan 23, 2012)

SO...... I'm an Idiot 

Thanks TJ for mentioning the fact that you measured your setup. I eyeballed it since the first day I owned the bindings, and for that matter ever since I've snowboarded. 

Turns out with a straight edge and tape measure that in the zero heel cup position and 0* stance I'm centered with 1/2 inch over hang on toe and heel of boot. Binding is centered and disc is back to micro stance adjustment position. 

When in the one heel cup position I had hardly any toe over hang, and 3/4" of heel over hang. 

That's what I get for trying to eyeball shit with stance angles set and board sitting on the shops counter and in the snow. They did *LOOK * centered though. It wasn't just me, I asked others and they agreed. 

SO.... sorry Union for wasting your time with all of my questions. I can't believe how even, and un-even, they looked when set up in both one and zero positions. 

I still don't know if the problem I'm having is going to be corrected but I have a good feeling. 

God damn I feel dumb for not pulling out that tape measure. Looks can be deceiving I guess.


----------



## Mel M (Feb 2, 2012)

pdxrealtor said:


> SO...... I'm an Idiot
> 
> Thanks TJ for mentioning the fact that you measured your setup. I eyeballed it since the first day I owned the bindings, and for that matter ever since I've snowboarded.
> 
> ...


Did the exact same thing and had to readjust mine. Trust me, I'm pretty sure we're far from being the only ones. Too much opportunity for parallax error. Still, good to know about the heelcup adjustment giving more toeside response. Will keep that in mind if I end up having any issues with mine.


----------

