# Is this normal for Union Atlas



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Can't comment on the finish of the buckles as I can't honestly say I've ever noticed or paid attention to the finish of the buckles on my bindings. Is it uniform or is it inconsistent? If it's uniform then it's probably normal. 

The highback pressing into the boots probably will 'dent' your boots and might do even more than that, depending on the boots, how much they move in the binding when you ride, and whether or not you rotate the highbacks away from the centred position. 

I currently have several sets of Union bindings (Flite Pro, Contact, Force) and have noticed the same with the highback. I *do* rotate all of my highbacks, and my Vans *do* have very small wear marks on the lateral side exactly where the there is digging in from the highback because of the rotation. My Vans have seen a ton of use, though (>80 days) and the wear from that digging in is minimal, but it's definitely there. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## ekb18c (Mar 11, 2013)

The plastic part where it looks rough is normal or at least i hope because it's all like that on my unions.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

ekb18c said:


> The plastic part where it looks rough is normal or at least i hope because it's all like that on my unions.


I just had a quick look at mine. It's the same on all of them.


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

LALUNE said:


> Just got this pair of size M atlas from a store sale which is my first pair of Union. Apparently it's last pair the store so the price is nice.
> But when I tried them with my boots (size 9 burton photon) I cannot help noticing two things, one be the rough finish of the buckle parts which I thought would be smooth like my cartel, and two be that the sides of heel seems to pretty narrow and it takes some effort to squeeze the back of boots in there. I am worried that the screws on the lateral sides of heel will dent into the boots while riding, or it may be good for a faster heel response?
> 
> Are they normal? Do all the Union bindings constructed the same way on their back with screws touching the boots?
> ...


The rough plastic parts are normal for Union. Not very aesthetically pleasing but does not really affect functionality.

Basically all Union bindings have the same design/construction for the highback/heel connection. It is not very elegant/kind of clunky but generally works ok. Few boots are too wide for the heel cup - size 9 Burtons should not be a problem at all on M bindings. 
The real engineering problem is that Union also attaches the ankle stap with the same bolt, but that is a separate issue...


----------



## LALUNE (Feb 23, 2017)

SGboarder said:


> Basically all Union bindings have the same design/construction for the highback/heel connection. It is not very elegant/kind of clunky but generally works ok. Few boots are too wide for the heel cup - size 9 Burtons should not be a problem at all on M bindings.
> The real engineering problem is that Union also attaches the ankle stap with the same bolt, but that is a separate issue...


Hmmm, I feel I have to literally push my boot backwards to reach heel cup. For me it feels that the screw on the inside of the highback/heel connection is kind of in the way which I am not sure if that will eat my boots when charging hard.

But the quality of the binding itself is pretty impressive. I like it a lot.


----------



## LALUNE (Feb 23, 2017)

zc1 said:


> I currently have several sets of Union bindings (Flite Pro, Contact, Force) and have noticed the same with the highback. I *do* rotate all of my highbacks, and my Vans *do* have very small wear marks on the lateral side exactly where the there is digging in from the highback because of the rotation. My Vans have seen a ton of use, though (>80 days) and the wear from that digging in is minimal, but it's definitely there. Your mileage may vary.


Yes, my boots work well with the Cartel and I didn't see even slightest sign of wear after this season. Compared with Cartel, the union's heel cup hold the heel of the boots more tight, which supposedly should be good for a better responsiveness. Just don't know how much the screw will damage the boots.

Maybe burton boots just work with burton bindings better?


----------



## ekb18c (Mar 11, 2013)

I think you are over thinking this and you should be fine. The only thing that may screw up your boots is if you rotated the high back then that may eat up you heel on the boots. 

If you left it as is then you are fine. I've worn size 9's burtons on M union bindings and it's fine.


----------



## LALUNE (Feb 23, 2017)

ekb18c said:


> I think you are over thinking this and you should be fine. The only thing that may screw up your boots is if you rotated the high back then that may eat up you heel on the boots.
> 
> If you left it as is then you are fine. I've worn size 9's burtons on M union bindings and it's fine.


I do rotate highback on my duck stance as I was told the it will be the best if the highback is parallel to the heel edge. Or this is just unnecessary?


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Rotating highbacks is a matter of personal preference. The way the Union highbacks are designed, though, if you do rotate them then there is increased probability that they will dig into your boots.


----------



## ekb18c (Mar 11, 2013)

zc1 said:


> Rotating highbacks is a matter of personal preference. The way the Union highbacks are designed, though, if you do rotate them then there is increased probability that they will dig into your boots.


I don't rotate my high backs and I ride 15/-15. I've tried rotating them and don't really notice a difference, besides most of the highbacks are asymmetrical so you dont need to rotate it. Your Atlas highbacks are asymmetrical.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Not referring to Atlas, as I don't currently have a set, but I rotate all my highbacks because I like them out of the way unless I'm leaning straight back. I prefer straight/flat highbacks -- the less cupping the better -- but failing that I just rotate them out of the way as much as possible because I don't want to feel them when I lean tip- or tailward. It's just personal preference


----------



## SGboarder (Jun 24, 2012)

LALUNE said:


> I do rotate highback on my duck stance as I was told the it will be the best if the highback is parallel to the heel edge. Or this is just unnecessary?


Basically unnecessary and outdated. Some people still like to do it out of personal preference, but with flat and/or asymmetric highbacks it is not really required/beneficial.


----------



## ItchEtrigR (Jan 1, 2012)

SGboarder said:


> Basically unnecessary and outdated. Some people still like to do it out of personal preference, but with flat and/or asymmetric highbacks it is not really required/beneficial.


I find this to be true, well not exactly sure but rotating more in line with the edge just feels weird to me, almost like it's not meant to be rotated. Is this the purpose of it's design?

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

Not exactly sure what you're asking, but the highback rotation is typically used to get the highbacks parallel to the edge of the board. If you don't usually do it then it's no surprise that it feels strange to you. If you don't normally dial in any forward lean then doing so would probably feel strange to you as well. If you don't normally ride duck stance then that will feel strange as well. Does that make it unnecessary or outdated? No, it just means that it's not your cup of tea...not the right fit for you.

I disagree with the outdated sentiment. Everything you do to set up your board, you do to get the feel and performance that you want. There's no one correct stance width, angle, forward lean, etc. There's not one correct highback position. 

I find the opposition to highback rotation interesting (and off topic). It's there so you can customize your bindings to your preference -- just like every other adjustment that you can make to your bindings. No, it's not to everyone's liking, and if you don't normally do it then it might feel strange. None of this is news. 

The feel of the highback depends on its shape (height, cupped/winged vs flat, symmetry), flex, the characteristics of your boot (size, height, stiffness), your stance (width, angles), style of riding, etc. I used to ride differently than I do now, and used to leave my highbacks centred. With my current preferred stance, gear, and style of riding I find myself needing to rotate highbacks to varying degrees to get as close as possible to the feel that I like. On some bindings I can do just fine with little-to-no highback rotation, but with others I need to rotate the highbacks a bunch.

You do what you need to do in order to get your stance to where it's comfortable for you and how you ride, and try not to extrapolate that to others. I'm really surprised by the amount of "My way is the proper way to snowboard and your way is strange/outdated" in this thread.

When Union decide that user-adjustable highback rotation is not useful with their bindings (or that they can't figure out a good solution) then they can follow NOW's lead and remove that functionality altogether. Until then, if they are going to make their highbacks rotatable then it would be nice if they would consider improving the function so that it doesn't compromise the user's equipment -- other manufacturers have figured out better ways of doing it. A "bindings only" company should be able to do the same.


----------



## zc1 (Feb 20, 2017)

To summarize thus far:

-The highback rotation is neither here nor there. It's just another setting to allow you to dial in the right 'feel' *for you* -- which is different from person to person and affected by a number of variables, including your age/fitness/flexibility, bindings, stance (width, angles, forward lean), boots and riding style. 

-Use it if you want to do so; leave it if it does nothing for you. There's no "right" answer.

-Manufacturers manage rotation differently. Some, like NOW, don't offer any adjustability. Others allow varying degrees of adjustability and various mechanisms for adjustment

-Union's implementation of highback rotation can result in the highbacks digging into your boots and, potentially, damage to your boots. It would be nice if they would revisit this and come up with a better alternative, but that's unlikely as nothing has changed on that front in years.


----------



## LALUNE (Feb 23, 2017)

zc1 said:


> To summarize thus far:
> 
> -The highback rotation is neither here nor there. It's just another setting to allow you to dial in the right 'feel' *for you* -- which is different from person to person and affected by a number of variables, including your age/fitness/flexibility, bindings, stance (width, angles, forward lean), boots and riding style.
> 
> ...


Great summary here. With that being said, I would prefer Burton ones because my preference of rotating highback. But still, the quality of Union bindings is impressive. Will stay tuned to see if they'd modify the design of heelcup.

And appreciate for the valuable input and sharing your experience!


----------

