# I own Union Force.. Should I go for Contact Pro, or SL next?



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Hey

I got an Endeavor Color board a little while back (with Ltd. Edition Addict camo, not that silly cartoon graphic!) which is 159cm reverse camber, which I paired with Union Force 2011/12 bindings.

I've been hitting our local indoor snow park in preparation for the coming season (first trip of three booked already!), with an emphasis on jumps, 180s etc.

My conclusion so far, is that this setup is a fun ride, but struggles to 'bite' on ice (probably due to the RC) and it's a little on the large side for quick 180s. I think due to the size and shape it should ride real nice in powder though.

Hence, I'm now buying a regular camber board (found a great deal on an Endeavor Live 153 camber) for jumps, spins and general on-piste use. I've also been advised to go smaller (I am 5'9" and weigh 200lb/84kg) for maneuverability.

So I need to buy a second set of bindings. Do I get a softer pair for powder (the Contact Pro) or a stiffer, more responsive pair for on-pister (the SL)?

*Option One:*
159cm RC Endeavor Color with Union Force bindings for powder
153cm Reg Camber Endeavor Live with Union SL bindings for on-piste, jumps and spins

*Option Two:*
159cm RC Endeavor Color with Union Contact Pro bindings for powder
153cm Reg Camber Endeavor Live with Union Force bindings for on-piste, jumps and spins

Thanks


----------



## TLN (Sep 7, 2010)

Hey man.

i'm with 220-230 lbs and 6"5 able to do 360 on my 174 (!!!) rockered board. (i fail 3 out of 5 jumps, but anyways)
I can easily do 180, and i do not catching edge anywhere. 

"struggles to 'bite' on ice (probably due to the RC)"
Detune your board, if you think so. But i think it is all about the skills.

Usually people buy softer binders for park, and stiffer for freeride (powder goes this category). 
My opinion: Force for powder, contact pro for park.


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

You really don't need a different pair than the union force. they're nearly perfect for anything. If I were you I would put the forces on the new shorter board to use for jumps. Then for the bigger board you have now, you could either get another pair of forces or change it to the contact pro or SL depending on how stiff/soft you want the bindings to be. That's pretty much up to personal preference


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

TLN said:


> "struggles to 'bite' on ice (probably due to the RC)"
> Detune your board, if you think so. But i think it is all about the skills.


detuning the board would give it even less of a "bite" so don't do that. it might partially be due to the RC but different RC boards will have good grip. A lot of it depends on the side cut. Magnetraction on lib tech and gnu boards for example grip very well on ice and so do a bunch of other boards I know. Camber may help a bit but that's not the main thing that's wrong


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Thanks guys. Actually my intuitive response would be to put the Force bindings on the 153 regular camber.. Perhaps I over-thought this initially. So we're agreed that would be a neat setup for piste/park/jumps?

Then the question remains, an SL or a Contact Pro for my 159cm RC board with the general intention of powder use? I'd have softer would be best, but actually you recommend stiffer (the SL) for powder/off-piste?

I'm buying a second set mainly because I don't want to change bindings regularly on my trips; and two pairs is good in case something happens to a pair whilst I'm away.. I considered a second pair of Forces, but seems a good opportunity to try something new!

Regarding technique, I'm a fairly short, powerful rider. I think my technique on stopping is pretty solid; and the principle of RC cambered boards having less grip on ice is fairly well established, no?

Ollieing isn't my strongest point currently (I'm more strength/power than agility), hence the shorter board and 'pop' of camber is appealing!


----------



## TLN (Sep 7, 2010)

Rookie09 said:


> detuning the board would give it even less of a "bite" so don't do that. it might partially be due to the RC but different RC boards will have good grip. A lot of it depends on the side cut. Magnetraction on lib tech and gnu boards for example grip very well on ice and so do a bunch of other boards I know. Camber may help a bit but that's not the main thing that's wrong


oh, man... english aint my native so i understood as he catching edge and crashes down. 

If he meant like he got less of a grip that he want to then... tune your board and sharpen your edges (cap oblivious =)). check that you don't have a toedrag and you board is wide enough. 

Personally i don't think that camer-rocker or magnetraction makes a lot of sense for experienced riders. Check out snowboard racing: race board are cambered and no mangetraction or something similar =) and racers are first in line for an extra grip.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

So we're down for 153cm regular camber + my Forces for piste?

For my powder board, I haven't ruled out getting a second pair of Union Forces..

The 2013 model is £180; 2012 (which I already own) is £140..

Are there any benefits to the 2013 model?


----------



## LuckyRVA (Jan 18, 2011)

Going to a 153 at 200lbs will not fix your ice "bite" issues.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Not the length, going to a regular camber. Stopping's not a major issue, just not as much grip as I'd like; or have had with camber.

Anyway. Back on topic.

SL for powder, or not?


----------



## TLN (Sep 7, 2010)

softer binders for park, rest is for powder.
contact pro is softer then force, i suppose.

then tune your "powder" board, for 88 degree (sharper then 90) and get fun.

ps: do you really need second board? 
You can do whatver you want on your 159 board. tune it and you'll get extra grip. this will save you lots of money.


----------



## rob7289 (Nov 14, 2010)

any reason youre so set on unions? a lot of other companys would be better in my opinion.
ie. some rome 390 bosses? the raiden line?


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

In answer to both your queries, it's probably good to emphasise that I really like my current setup. I really enjoy riding it and approaching my next purchase from wanting to build on this; rather than thinking anything is 'wrong'.

Hence I'm looking at more Union bindings and another Endeavor board!

I just want more manoeuvrability and a little more 'bite', which more experienced friends assure me I'll find in a shorter, cambered board.

I'd like two to take away with me and am definitely ordering this 153cm.. Just need to decide which bindings for powder!


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Hmm.. This brief piece advocates super-light, stiff, high-back bindings for powder..

Powder Snowboard Bindings | Powder Snowboard

The Union SL would fit the bill perfectly here.. And I've got a dude trying to sell me a pair from last season, used once, right now..

So 159cm RC board with Union SL.. Looking like it makes sense on paper?


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

You will out bend the hell out of a 153.

I say a Live Reverse 159 if you still want Endeavor or a YES Greats 160 with something other than Union. You already have Forces. Branch out. Try some NX2-AT's, Formulas, Rodeo's, DMCC Lights, Phantoms, or Cartels.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Out-bend? You're saying I'm too heavy for a 153?

Hmm.. My assumption until a couple of months ago was that I was too big for sub-159, but quite a few guys - some of whom weigh similar - are assuring me I can do it; and that it's a good move..

What do you think?

And I already have RC; and a massive (161cm) stiff cambered board..

Something small and cambered really is appealing.


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

I'll say it again. I think the lengths of the boards are good for what you want. a shorter camber board for quicker spins of jumps and better grip through ice. a longer reverse camber (rocker) board for float and stability in powder. As for the bindings, either use your forces on the 159 and get contact pro for the 153 or put the forces on the 153 and get the SLs on the 159. Or just getting another pair of forces wouldn't be a bad option either as they are great all around bindings and you can do anything on them unless you're really technical or something and are going to be pushing the limits. I've owned a couple pairs of unions and they're excellent bindings. The only downfalls to them are as of now they don't have canting options for the footbeds and the toe strap doesn't fit well with all kinds of boots. If you don't mind the regular footbeds and if the toe strap fits your boots, I say stick with Union. If you can't make up your mind, you could also try demoing a pair early in the season to see which ones you like better.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Thanks for your reply Rookie. It's good to hear someone else click with my rationale! I feel like a 153cm camber really will complete my collection and be a great contrast.

As I mentioned, board no.3 is a 161cm stiff camber I managed to find on eBay in mint cond. for £50! I haven't had the chance to use it much yet, but anticipate it being good for piste-charging..

I love the Force, so keeping it on my new smaller camber board which will see a lot of use at park night makes sense..

And reading around, stiff, light and responsive bindings seem to be favoured for powder.. Well that would be the SL to a 'T', I think!

Plus, if anything moving to stiffer, more responsive equipment would favour both me starting to progress more; and being a heavy, powerful rider.

That makes enough sense to me to pick both those items up next week anyway - and I'll have two bindings/three boards to rotate and learn from in the Alps in December!


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Hmm.. Someone'e just pointed out board width..

I wear a UK size 12 (US 13) boot. That works fine with my 159cm (I have a fairly standard 15 degree tilt and set my heels back)..

Do you guys think a 153cm would be doable?


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Ok.. Endeavor have got back to me and said I should be fine for both weight and width.. Actually the difference between their 163 and 151 boards is less than a cm!


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

I have small feet so I don't have experience about when to get a wide board but from what I've heard a lot of people say, if you wear US 11.5 or bigger you should at least check it out. If your boot has a low profile or your board is naturally wider you might be ok, but i know normally you'd probably want a wide board with US 13 boots. Also consider your style, if you're going to be going fast and carving hard or are going to be in deeper snow, you're going to want the board a little wider to keep the boots from digging into the snow. 153 might work regular since it's not your charging board but it might still be cutting it close. the 15 degree angles help too. just some stuff to think about.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Thanks for your thoughts. As I mentioned, I seem to be ok with the Color so far - which is under a cm shorter.

I used the mounting option with the Forces that allows horizontal (travel across the board width) movement; and pushed them back so the heel is at the rear edge; and turned them at 15 degrees, which feels good anyway.

Basically the boots take the whole width and really dominate the board, but don't seem to dig in.

The difference in width between the top and bottom boards is less than a cm anyway.. The only way to add more would be a with a wide board; and the smallest one is 157.. Which kinda defeats the point in going small; and only adds 1.5cm.

So, for £200, I think I'll chance it!


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

Who the hell is telling you a smaller shorter board is going to have more grip? That's positively ridiculous and utterly wrong.

I ride a 153 and weigh 150lbs. How does it make sense that you are going to get similar edge performance as me when your pushing 50 more pounds into the board? 

You don't need to go shorter and get camber, stay the same and get something stiffer with better edge hold. The Endeavor Live Reverse is a solid all mountain freestyle board that will be super fun to jump too. The YES Greats like I said is also a great option. 

If you really just have to have camber and smaller, Get a Ride DH 155, Nitro Factory Rook 156, Burton Aftermath 155, Flow Quantum 155, Arbor Relapse 155, or a Salomon Sabotage 156.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Noone has said that? It's the regular camber that provides more grip and stability, because it 'bites' into the snow better than RC.

Wanting to go smaller is entirely different. I would like some more manoeuvrability; and friends of mine on small boards say I'll have a lot of fun being able to whip it round more easily.

I've got a stiff 161cm cambered as well and combining my experience so far; the things I enjoy doing and talking to a number of different people, I think there's a nice space in my quiver for a small cambered board.

I've got two Endeavors already and like them; I've had my eye on a Live for some time; it gets great reviews; and I've found one at a great price.


----------



## TLN (Sep 7, 2010)

Rookie09 said:


> a shorter camber board for quicker spins of jumps and better grip through ice. a longer reverse camber (rocker) board for float and stability in powder.


Not true =) 
Shorter board - less grip. 
Longer board for powder AND stability AND ice.
Shorter board for fun. (I got no short board, so i'm fking serious guy )



P-Ride said:


> Hmm.. Someone'e just pointed out board width..
> 
> I wear a UK size 12 (US 13) boot. That works fine with my 159cm (I have a fairly standard 15 degree tilt and set my heels back)..
> 
> Do you guys think a 153cm would be doable?


It must be me.

Check out your board width.
With US13 ( i got that too) you better keey board's waist close to 27cm.
Also: check out your stance, you'll notice that with 15 angle you have more overhang, then with 6. So you either go 0-3-6 angle or 21+, because th e diagonal is always longer then side.

This can actualy be as isuue, and if you getting low on stopping or carves this can be your problem. I've solved it in a way, i wouldn't advise to you guys =)



P-Ride said:


> Noone has said that? It's the regular camber that provides more grip and stability, because it 'bites' into the snow better than RC.


It gives you extra grip - not true. 
It gives your more energy - yes.
You bend out the board with your 200 lbs to pretty the same arch, no matter rc or camber. And you grip with the edge on the snow in either rc or camber.


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

P-Ride said:


> Noone has said that? It's the regular camber that provides more grip and stability, because it 'bites' into the snow better than RC.


If you take two boards that are exactly the same but one has rocker and one has camber, then yes. The cambered one, even in a single size down, will have more edge hold. When you go from a 159 to a 153, even with camber you will get LESS edge hold. The board is not designed to manage your weight. You WILL out torsion the tips and you WILL wash out.



P-Ride said:


> Wanting to go smaller is entirely different. I would like some more manoeuvrability; and friends of mine on small boards say I'll have a lot of fun being able to whip it round more easily.


If you want more maneuverability than your soft, appropriately sized, center rocker park board, ride better. At the very most drop down one size and get something stiffer. Center rocker is already the most maneuverable camber style out there. If you take my advice and only drop down to that 155-156 size range and get camber, it will still be a little slower to move around compared to your Color.



P-Ride said:


> I've got a stiff 161cm cambered as well and combining my experience so far; the things I enjoy doing and talking to a number of different people, I think there's a nice space in my quiver for a small cambered board.


That's fine. I really think you would have a lot more fun on a Live Reverse 156 or a 2013 YES Greats 156, but if you just have your head decided on the Live Camber, just don't get the 153. Even as stiffer board it will not ride as designed under your weight.


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

I'm 5'9 155 lbs and ride a 152 and feel like i could even go shorter and be fine if i wanted to. a 153 isn't going to be unrideable.

And I wasn't saying that shorter boards have more grip, I know they have less. I was saying camber boards have more grip than RC boards and therefore if he's going to go shorter he should get a camber. Either that or invest in a specialized board for going through ice like the magnetraction on lib tech and gnu boards.


----------



## ippy (Mar 11, 2010)

Im not gonna say its an awful idea. Anyone can ride whatever the hell size of board they like, but its just a bit of a risk in truth. Effective edge is likely going to be too short for your weight (im around the same weight), so you will likely end up stuck in the park or washing. Performance wise youre also going to "bend the fuck out of it". This will mean LIKELY (since i have no idea about the flex of the board - but assuming youre going for a softer or medium soft set up), youre going to have little snap out of it and youre going to find it a touch squirly on landings. Hell, youll probably snap it though before you get sick of it so why the hell not? 

But when you do snap it on a shit landing, just remember youre too heavy for it before you start screaming about poor manufacturing  

The other problem, which might not be a problem at all, is that youre likely going to find yourself pretty much only pulling it out on park days. I dont know how close you live to the resort, but if you tend to day trip from a 100-200kms away, chances are youre bringing one board based on conditions that you arent ever entirely sure about until you get there. And having a quiver, nothing sucks more than guessing wrong and being stuck on your niche ride instaed of your kill it all ride. If you live even further away and do week trips, you will simply HAVE to bring another ride because it is going to be such a niche board for you. Nothing wrong in that, i stress this, ride what you want, but accept that this board is not going to be your go-to ride and it will be the supplement to your main ride because if theres any powder and you want to play in the powder, that day is going to fucking suck for you on that deck  

What i would advise though is that you maybe demo a shorter board early season (or borrow one of your mates rides - if theyll let you, theyll probably think youre gonna snap it ), and see how it feels. We all like different things so maybe you find its the solution to improving in the area you wanna go so why the hell not... but honestly at 170lbs, i cant go lower than a 155 without feeling like i have a kids board strapped to my feet, and even then id rather have a longer ride. Then again, i cant go higher than a 160 without feeling like its a canoe, so plenty of mind games at work.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Ok, some strong opinions! Thanks though.

Do you guys think the 156cm (they have one) is going to be a better choice and more versatile then? That's only an inch shorter than the 159 that seems standard for my height.. Likewise it's only an inch longer than the 153 that you say is going to struggle with me!

It's a medium flex (6/10) for the record. The Live has a great reputation; it IS an all-rounder board; and I'm talking about dropping two (with the 156, one) inches off the standard for my size. Surely at least the 156cm should be a versatile ride?

Regarding my riding, I drive 40 minutes to the indoor snowpark once a week. I have booked my first week in the Alps of the season (December) and plan a total of three.


----------



## ippy (Mar 11, 2010)

Dude, go check out riding a 153 before you commit to anything if you can. It really might be the exact board you want, and at worst youre out a few quid on a rental. I aint you. Since you have access to a place to ride, have a punt and see how it goes.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Cheers. Unfortunately most of my board-riding friends are scattered over the world (doing guess what!). We have different board sizes to rent at the park.. But they're proper Rossignal rentals.. You know, half an inch of lino! Not sure how much they'd reflect what I'm buying!

I'd love to be able to try these boards, but I don't live in Canada - yet!


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

P-Ride said:


> Ok, some strong opinions! Thanks though.
> 
> Do you guys think the 156cm (they have one) is going to be a better choice and more versatile then? That's only an inch shorter than the 159 that seems standard for my height.. Likewise it's only an inch longer than the 153 that you say is going to struggle with me!
> 
> ...


The length alone is not what really changes the ride. Bigger boards are built thicker and stronger. So yeah, only 2 inches between the 59 and 53, but 59's are generally designed for 170-210 ish lbs and 53's 130-160 ish lbs. Out weighing a board means it wont do what it's designed to do.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Thanks; understanding that with a longer board length comes a thicker construction isn't information I'd run into before, despite reading around a lot!

I'm a pretty solid rider, but haven't had the pleasure of riding many different boards yet. Coming from the UK, options for trying new boards aren't as numerous as you guys in Canada and the US likely enjoy.

Reading around more today, a number of people  (including you!) have suggested that around 156cm is appropriate for someone weighing 180lb. And the dude in this link mentions jumps too.

Ultimately, without great options for trying many boards I understand any mail-order purchase is a bit of a gamble.. But engaging in the science and bugging you guys for your experience helps narrow it down.

Sounds I've got far more to lose by trying to go to short, than I do in not going short enough. From that perspective and the number of discussions I've read today, 156cm cambered sounds like a reasonably solid choice?


----------



## SnowOwl (Jun 11, 2012)

I weigh 170ish and I just got an Attack Banana 156, and quite frankly I'm worried *that* might be too small, but luckily i'll be using it for park emphasis. You weigh 200lbs and you want a 153? Email customer service, and they'll gladly give you the complete specs on the board and what appropriate size you'd need if you give them *your* specs. Since you're 5'9, 200lbs is a bit over the normal weight expectacy for that height, so again you wont get optimal performance out of a board that is too small.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Sorry if I haven't been clear, but I now weigh *180lb (13 stone)*.

I *DID *weigh 200lb (14 stone) but shred my BF nicely in the last few months..

Endeavor say they reckon both 153 and 156 are fine for my weight..

What do you think?

Most forumites I've encountered in other discussions seem to think 156cm is decent for a park/jump orientated camber board for someone at 180lb.


----------



## SnowOwl (Jun 11, 2012)

P-Ride said:


> Sorry if I haven't been clear, but I now weigh *180lb (13 stone)*.
> 
> 
> Most forumites I've encountered in other discussions seem to think 156cm is decent for a park/jump orientated camber board for someone at 180lb.


Sounds decent to me since we are similar in weight  I emailed mervin and they replied fast with their recommendations and why. Good luck, have a good season.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Haha thanks buddy. I think I'm at the bottom of this now.. So here we go!

*180lb*

- Endeavor Live 156cm camber with Union Force bindings for park/all mountain
- Endeavor Color 159cm RC with Union SL bindings for powder

- And I have a rigid 161cm Endeavor 'Paavo Tikkanen' cambered board that I'll try with both! I'm thinking the SL's and FAST down some groomed slope!

That said, I'll try all sorts of combinations whilst I'm away!

First trip just booked is a week in La Plagne, France in December.. A week ago I was planning to go on my own (my board buddies have dispersed globally) then ran into someone out drinking who I hit it off with; and now I'm part of a 20-man crew latching onto a university trip for orthopaedic students.. Mainly girls! Woohoo!


----------



## Rookie09 (Sep 5, 2012)

P-Ride said:


> Haha thanks buddy. I think I'm at the bottom of this now.. So here we go!
> 
> *180lb*
> 
> ...


sounds like a plan. have fun with it!


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Hey guys, just to say - I took my 156 cambered Live for its first spin yesterday!

Love it! Firstly, I can definitely see what you mean about the loss of 'stopping power' compared to a longer board.. If I was going down a particularly steep/treacherous run, I'd be more trusting of my 161cm camber to hold an edge..

But this board is very manoeuvrable and so springy/responsive! Ollieing is much more dramatic than with my reverse camber board. On one run I kinda scared myself on a kicker, jumping much higher than I have on my other board to date - managed to land good though!

Speculatively, 153 may well have been too short; and this has delivered in every way I wanted - so thanks for clarifying how and why the difference may have mattered!

I'm going into the new season with what feels like a great quiver. Picking up a pair of Union SLs so will enjoy mixing/matching them and the Forces with all three boards and learning more!


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

P-Ride said:


> Hey guys, just to say - I took my 156 cambered Live for its first spin yesterday!
> 
> Love it! Firstly, I can definitely see what you mean about the loss of 'stopping power' compared to a longer board.. If I was going down a particularly steep/treacherous run, I'd be more trusting of my 161cm camber to hold an edge..
> 
> ...


If you're going to go Union, get Atlas. The SL's will provide almost no heel dampening. Its a frame shape thing. The Atlas frame does more for dampening. Then personally I'd franken them with some Burton or Ride toe straps and buckles.


----------



## cav0011 (Jan 4, 2009)

P-Ride, I know it is too late now but it might not be too late for the bindings. If you go to sno-zone in milton keynes there is a snowboard shop in there that lets you demo stuff to include bindings, for free. If you buy any of it you can take the cost of the indoor session you paid for off the price of the item. 

I havnt lived in the UK for a few years but it is super easy to get a trial. You couldve just tested any cambered board in the 150-160 range and seen how it held an edge and if you enjoyed how playful it was.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Yup, I'm aware! That's where I go most weeks.

Not keen on their range of boards though. You're right, I could have tried one similar though - although managed to get this purchase right I think.

They do, however, carry a reasonable range of Union bindings. Fairly confident in the SL being a great purchase though. The Force is awesome and I hear even better things about SL; and a stiffer pair makes sense for powder!


----------



## Nivek (Jan 24, 2008)

P-Ride said:


> Yup, I'm aware! That's where I go most weeks.
> 
> Not keen on their range of boards though. You're right, I could have tried one similar though - although managed to get this purchase right I think.
> 
> They do, however, carry a reasonable range of Union bindings. Fairly confident in the SL being a great purchase though. The Force is awesome and I hear even better things about SL; and a stiffer pair makes sense for powder!


From the Union guy here, SL's are not stiffer than the Force.



Nose Dradamous said:


> SL's (Super Light) are MC's built with normal Union materials and aren't $400.
> 
> The Force is built on our original baseplate, which is a little beefier than what the above are built on, the Atlas baseplate. When we built the Atlas, goal was to update the Force with increased mobility and to lighten it up. By taking away some of the weight out of the Atlas, it loosed it up a tad and the Force baseplate is still our most responsive.
> 
> Hoped that helped Kevin.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Ok, so the SL is lighter and looser than the Force? Interesting. Some say the base-plate is stiffer than the Force, although the high-back looser?

Either way, most seem to agree that it is responsive - which is what I'm looking to put into this setup.


----------



## phony_stark (Jul 2, 2011)

P-Ride said:


> Ok, so the SL is lighter and looser than the Force? Interesting. Some say the base-plate is stiffer than the Force, although the high-back looser?
> 
> Either way, most seem to agree that it is responsive - which is what I'm looking to put into this setup.


SL Baseplate is stiffer than the Atlas but still softer than the Force. The Atlas is my favorite binding ever, I'm thinking the SL is a good difference split between weight/response/versatility in the Union line.

I've never ridden the SL, but the Atlas is my favorite binding ever.

Also, this season and last season's SL is based on the Atlas, so you'll get the same heel dampening as the baseplates have the same design.


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

Ok. Of all the interests I've developed, snowboarding gear is by far the most complex. There are so many variables to consider!

Well I'm struggling to find a bad word said about the SLs, so now's not a bad time to announce that a pair are in the post to me now! It's a bonus that the gunmetal grey will fit in perfect with both my boards!

I'm still slightly perplexed as to which roles the Force and SL will each be better at, but have little doubt that finding out - in conjunction with my three boards - will be great fun!

If anyone fancies contrasting their experiences of Force and SL; and what they think the SL will be better/worst at, I'd be interested to hear!


----------



## SnowOwl (Jun 11, 2012)

P-Ride said:


> Ok. Of all the interests I've developed, snowboarding gear is by far the most complex. There are so many variables to consider!
> 
> Well I'm struggling to find a bad word said about the SLs, so now's not a bad time to announce that a pair are in the post to me now! It's a bonus that the gunmetal grey will fit in perfect with both my boards!
> 
> ...


dude...get what ever the fuck tickles your fancy. Someone will always have a negative remark. it comes down to personal preference. You have to make some choices like these on your own because you're not going to know what suits you personally until you learn and make choices on your own. Letting someone else chose for you, you're never going to be able to maximize what's right for you


----------



## P-Ride (Jan 29, 2012)

I have - it's in the post! Just curious as to how others think the SL may differ from my Force.. I hear mixed things - all good though!


----------

