# Critique my newb setup?...



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

*No comments?*

44 views and no comments? Guess I did OK? So much of it is personal preference, I guess it's tough to comment on someone else's setup?

I was most curious about the forward lean.


----------



## JBthe3rd (Jan 31, 2012)

I think everybody is looking for pics..


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

OldDog said:


> 44 views and no comments? Guess I did OK? So much of it is personal preference, I guess it's tough to comment on someone else's setup?
> 
> I was most curious about the forward lean.


Everything you did sounds fine - including the forward lean.

I agree that 0 degree forward lean makes heelside turns less than ideal... but a lot of wannabe park rats want to be back to the old no-back days - pay them no heed.

I have narrow hips and so my stance is also a bit narrow (20.5"-21") - I've tried wide but my knees and ankles just don't like it (even with canted footbeds). I typically ride 15/-15 or 15/-12... but that's because I ride switch 40% of the time. I think anything from 15/0 to 15/-9 is well in the range of normal preferences.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

OldDog said:


> 44 views and no comments? Guess I did OK? So much of it is personal preference, I guess it's tough to comment on someone else's setup?
> 
> I was most curious about the forward lean.


Yeah it all seems pretty good to me. We got none of YOUR stats though so a little hard to guess.

FWIW I'm 5'7" and ride with 21.25" stance width, -9/+9 stance.

Stance width is measured from the centre of the mounting discs.

Forward lean is good. My GF started with very little forward lean, got used to her board but was having trouble shifting from sliding to carving. We gave her a fair bit more lean and she's carving a lot better now.

Main thing is you gotta get out on it and try it! We can tell you all we know but it still might not be right for you.


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

OldDog said:


> PS: I tinkered with this shit for over 2 hours. I think the wife is convinced I'm insane...


Only two hours? Pffft. Piker.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

*Thanks*

Thanks for the input. I'll post some pics when I get home if that helps.

OD



lonerider said:


> Everything you did sounds fine - including the forward lean.
> 
> I agree that 0 degree forward lean makes heelside turns less than ideal... but a lot of wannabe park rats want to be back to the old no-back days - pay them no heed.
> 
> I have narrow hips and so my stance is also a bit narrow (20.5"-21") - I've tried wide but my knees and ankles just don't like it (even with canted footbeds). I typically ride 15/-15 or 15/-12... but that's because I ride switch 40% of the time. I think anything from 15/0 to 15/-9 is well in the range of normal preferences.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

That's it, no cookie for you!



Donutz said:


> Only two hours? Pffft. Piker.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

What you didn't memorize my stats from my intro thread? 

5' 9.5"
195

I'll re-measure width and post it.

I would love to get out and try it, but no snow... 

I think my wife is going to kill me if I keep trying to Ollie in the living room. 




poutanen said:


> Yeah it all seems pretty good to me. We got none of YOUR stats though so a little hard to guess.
> 
> FWIW I'm 5'7" and ride with 21.25" stance width, -9/+9 stance.
> 
> ...


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

OldDog said:


> I think my wife is going to kill me if I keep trying to Ollie in the living room.


Yep. Plus it's hard on the carpet and it makes the dog crazy. :laugh: Tylerkat posted a pic of a 4x4 balance beam in another thread. I had made one last year as did slyder, and they're really good for getting the feel of the board. Also great exercise. Also an excuse to put the equipment on when there's no snow.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Sweet, I found the pic. I may try that.

Thanks!



Donutz said:


> Yep. Plus it's hard on the carpet and it makes the dog crazy. :laugh: Tylerkat posted a pic of a 4x4 balance beam in another thread. I had made one last year as did slyder, and they're really good for getting the feel of the board. Also great exercise. Also an excuse to put the equipment on when there's no snow.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

*Stance width measure...*

OK, from disk center to center my stance width is 21 3/4"

I have about a 7/8" setback as the crow flies from tip to disk center.

Here is a pic of my setup, I'll post more in other replies for different views.

From the nose...


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Highbacks


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Strapped in...


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Heel & toe overhang from the bottom...

Toe



Heel


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

The whole tamale...

Weird angle makes the tip look way bigger than it is in relation to the tail. It's a little bigger maybe with a bit more rocker. But, it's nothing like it looks is this pic.


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

Too much toe... balance the toe and heel overhang. The boot should be centered, not the boot + binding.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Can't, that's all the adjustment there is... The only thing I could do is go back to 0 highback angle to seat the heel a little deeper. What you see is what you get.



lonerider said:


> Too much toe... balance the toe and heel overhang. The boot should be centered, not the boot + binding.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

OldDog said:


> Can't, that's all the adjustment there is...


Have you moved to another hole on the binding disks?


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

OldDog said:


> Can't, that's all the adjustment there is...


Turn the disk plates 90 degrees.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

OldDog said:


> Went with recommended stance width/binding position then slid the bindings as close together as they would go in those holes.


I am not sure what you are saying here. What do you mean by "in those holes"?


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

I can't help but feel while reading this thread that Burton is not so out to lunch with the EST/ICS system. It's nice to have a virtually infinite mounting range! 

That said, I think I'd sacrifice ideal stance width to attain ideal centred overhangs.

Hard to tell from the pics, but here's how I setup my board(s): Put the board (with a towel under it if you want) up on your kitchen counter, and then tilt the board up on either edge, while pressing the edge into the counter. Tilt up until the boot/binding makes contact with the counter, and check the angle. My Nokia has an angle meter so that helps, but you can eyeball it or use a piece of paper and fold it to match the angle.

Then do the same thing on the other edge. If they're not almost identical, adjust until you get it as close to identical as possible.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

hktrdr said:


> I am not sure what you are saying here. What do you mean by "in those holes"?


He turned the discs 90 degrees so instead of heel/toe adjustment he's got stance width adjustment.


----------



## hktrdr (Apr 3, 2012)

poutanen said:


> He turned the discs 90 degrees so instead of heel/toe adjustment he's got stance width adjustment.


I suspected as much, but did not want to speculate (especially with a newb who might get confused if we are making to many assumptions - better to spell it all out).


----------



## atr3yu (Feb 15, 2012)

poutanen said:


> He turned the discs 90 degrees so instead of heel/toe adjustment he's got stance width adjustment.


Lol, never even thought of doing that. Will have to play around with it when I pick up my new stuff!


----------



## Lamps (Sep 3, 2011)

poutanen said:


> I can't help but feel while reading this thread that Burton is not so out to lunch with the EST/ICS system. It's nice to have a virtually infinite mounting range!
> 
> That said, I think I'd sacrifice ideal stance width to attain ideal centred overhangs.
> 
> .


thank you, as I got to the photos I said to myself, this is easily solved with the est/channel system. burton haters flame on...


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Rotated the disks but it makes no difference. With the offset disks (came with 2 sets) the offset and the 90 degree rotation slid all the way to the heel edge are exactly the same.

I'm uploading pics now that I'll post to show you what I mean. That overhang is just the way it is.



lonerider said:


> Turn the disk plates 90 degrees.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Off-set disk vs. 90 degree rotation of standard disk.

Off-set disk and toe overhang





Rotated disk and toe overhang





Any more bright ideas...? :dunno:


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

Can you slide the heelcup back? your boot doesn't look like it is tucked back into the binding as far back as it could be. 

The binding looks decently centered... I don't see what the boot should be shifted that far to the toeside.


----------



## poutanen (Dec 22, 2011)

atr3yu said:


> Lol, never even thought of doing that. Will have to play around with it when I pick up my new stuff!


Yeah I used to do it all the time! As long as your bindings are naturally centred it works well. And I've only got size 8 feet so overhang isn't usually an issue even on narrow boards.



Lamps said:


> thank you, as I got to the photos I said to myself, this is easily solved with the est/channel system. burton haters flame on...


Yep... EST that binding could be anywhere he wanted. I've been happy with the system on my board so far. No loose hardware yet. Although the channel clearly has pushed down on the base a bit. 



OldDog said:


> Rotated the disks but it makes no difference. With the offset disks (came with 2 sets) the offset and the 90 degree rotation slid all the way to the heel edge are exactly the same.
> 
> I'm uploading pics now that I'll post to show you what I mean. That overhang is just the way it is.


Yeah I didn't know you had offset discs. Well it is what it is. Doesn't look like the end of the world...


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

There is no heel cup adjustment. It may not have been super tight against the highback when I took the pics from the base side as I just strapped in the empty boots rather than stepping in.

However, when I was strapped in it was still a pretty good overhang.



lonerider said:


> Can you slide the heelcup back? your boot doesn't look like it is tucked back into the binding as far back as it could be.
> 
> The binding looks decently centered... I don't see what the boot should be shifted that far to the toeside.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Yeah, is what it is. Thanks for all the feedback.



poutanen said:


> Yeah I didn't know you had offset discs. Well it is what it is. Doesn't look like the end of the world...


----------



## Tech420 (Jul 1, 2011)

Lace up your boots up and then throw them in the bindings. Check it again after you do that.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

There were laced...



Tech420 said:


> Lace up your boots up and then throw them in the bindings. Check it again after you do that.


----------



## Tech420 (Jul 1, 2011)

You had them tied tight and strapped down when you took the pics from the bottom?


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Yup, I pulled the laces tight and strapped them in. The only thing is the heel is quite tight and they don't sit all the way down and back without considerable force, e.g. standing in them. Like I said before, when I step in they are a little farther back. I might be able to step in, strap down and then get my foot out if I don't lace up, but I doubt it. If I can I'll take another pic to show you what I mean.



Tech420 said:


> You had them tied tight and strapped down when you took the pics from the bottom?


----------



## lonerider (Apr 10, 2009)

OldDog said:


> Yup, I pulled the laces tight and strapped them in. The only thing is the heel is quite tight and they don't sit all the way down and back without considerable force, e.g. standing in them.


I think when you are on the snow and have the board tilted, you should be able to tuck your heels into the heelcup more snuggly. I've noticed many times that it's harder to get the boots all the way back into the heelcup in my living room.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

I stomped in as tight as I could and strapped down and then pulled my foot out of my unlaced boot. There is a gap right at the heel, but the highback angle just won't let it go back any further. The boot is right against the highback a couple inches above the heel.

Looks like to me it is about 1/4" off-set to the toe side. 1/8" further back would be center. The only way I can see to even this out any more would be to decrease the highback angle so I can push back a bit more. I may try taking it down to 10 degrees rather than 15.

Toe side



Heel side


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

Might just be the pix, but it looks like you've got a helluva sharp angle on your highbacks. If they're steeper than the natural angle of the boot, it will make it harder to get the heel all the way back.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

It's not just the pics, they've got a pretty good angle on them. They go from 0-25 and I've got them set at 15 degrees. With them at zero it was pretty hard to rock back on my heel edge. After watching the SA setup vid I figured I'd be better off with some angle. I could try a little less.

What's more important, boot perfectly centered, or balanced force for engaging both toe and heel edges? :dunno:

OK, so I went to 10 degrees on the highbacks and rotated them back inline with the binding rather than the heel edge. Now my boot goes all the way in and the overhang is equal at ~1" heel and toe.

If I rotate my highbacks to line up with the heel edge, the outside edge contacts my boot first and keeps it from going all the way to the back of the heel cup. So, I know highback rotation is a contested subject. That said, centered boots with highbacks aligned with bindings or 1/4" off-set (toe side) with highbacks rotated inline with the heel edge?



Donutz said:


> Might just be the pix, but it looks like you've got a helluva sharp angle on your highbacks. If they're steeper than the natural angle of the boot, it will make it harder to get the heel all the way back.


----------



## biocmp (Sep 15, 2012)

Donutz said:


> Yep. Plus it's hard on the carpet and it makes the dog crazy. :laugh: Tylerkat posted a pic of a 4x4 balance beam in another thread. I had made one last year as did slyder, and they're really good for getting the feel of the board. Also great exercise. Also an excuse to put the equipment on when there's no snow.


Anyone care to post a link to that? I did a search for it but came up empty. I'd like to see this 4x4 balance beam


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

I don't know about specific angles, but I've got my highbacks at just slightly more angle than my boots. My personal opinion -- and I'm no expert -- would be that a little less heel overhang is better than a little less toe overhang because the torque you can apply with the highbacks more than makes up for the lack of leverage at the heel. You still have the "weight not centered" problem, but given that we naturally adjust our balance anyway, that's probably not going to be a killer.

If it's a choice between using the disk holes to get just the perfect stance width or using the disks to get just the perfect centering though, I'd go with centering.

Everything's compromise though. You'll never get it perfect. Plus you're not stuck with your first choice. I've re-mounted my bindings while on the mountain before because i just didn't like what I started with. Just don't drop one of the bolts.


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

biocmp said:


> Anyone care to post a link to that? I did a search for it but came up empty. I'd like to see this 4x4 balance beam


http://www.snowboardingforum.com/tips-tricks-instructors/3312-backyard-rail.html#post525839


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Has nothing to do with disks. Go back a couple pages and look at the offset disk vs the 90 degree rotation slid all the way back to the heel. I edited my last post. It's all in the highbacks. The rotation seems to be more of an issue than anything. :dunno:



Donutz said:


> If it's a choice between using the disk holes to get just the perfect stance width or using the disks to get just the perfect centering though, I'd go with centering.


----------



## Efilnikufesin (Oct 8, 2011)

As long as you are close with the heel/toe overhang, I wouldn't kill yourself about it till you break the gear in a few days or you have a problem engaging one edge or the other. Riding in them will change how your boots sit in the bindings after a few days on the mountain. 

But I would also elect for slightly more toe edge overhang than heel. Just not by too much.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Yeah, I'm probably about as "dialed in" as I'm going to get without actually riding.

Thanks all!...



Efilnikufesin said:


> As long as you are close with the heel/toe overhang, I wouldn't kill yourself about it till you break the gear in a few days or you have a problem engaging one edge or the other. Riding in them will change how your boots sit in the bindings after a few days on the mountain.
> 
> But I would also elect for slightly more toe edge overhang than heel. Just not by too much.


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

OldDog said:


> Yeah, I'm probably about as "dialed in" as I'm going to get without actually riding.
> 
> Thanks all!...


Or so I thought!... The boots I bought were shit. Why didn't anyone tell me? 

In any event I bought them from a local shop (40 minutes away is local as it gets for me) and the kid that sold them to me didn't know shit. By the time I read Wired's response to Atr3yu about his boots I was like "fuck!".

When I figured out how they should fit and wore them enough that they packed-out they were a full size too big!

That, and that boot (Salomon Dialogue Wide) is a heavy, bulky, over-sized, old-skool, moon boot looking piece of shit! I didn't have the box anymore and I had removed all the tags and was past the 30 day return policy. Not to mention that I bought them on clearance and they were a little scuffed and dirty from fucking around on my 4x4 in the back yard.

Fortunately I went back to the local and the gave took them back in exchange for the Salomon F2.0. Again, a full size smaller. That, and they are super compact, much lighter, and much smoother and even in terms of flex even though they are a med to stiff boot with the same rating as the Dialogue.

So yeah, I'm pumped. Had to shell out like an extra $130 because they were not on clearance, but stoked they took them back.

Now the only problem is I had to completely redo my binding setup. These boots are tiny compared to what I had. I really should have had a medium binding now instead of a large. I had to shorten the straps, pull the gas pedal all the way back, and shift the bindings all the way forward instead of all the way back. That, and the angles felt a little off too so I ended up going 15/-12. Really close to duck. Feels good strapped in though.

Anyway, crisis averted and +1 for the local and the tech that helped me with my boots. Super nice dude, even if he was skier! :cheeky4:

The only question I have is in regard to baking my liners to heat form them. The tech said to take them home, strap in and wear them around for 3 days to make sure there was no numbness and that they packed-out just right then bring them back so they can bake them for me. However, nothing I read on the Salomon site or anyway else leads me to believe that the Fusion Liner should be baked. It just says that it forms to your foot over time with body heat. Should I take them in and have them heat molded?

PS: Been wearing them all day!


----------



## Alex B (Nov 12, 2012)

Out of interest what year are you bindings?

I thought all snowboard boots needed to be heated? My girlfriends Vans were done in the shop, my 32 I did by wearing them, took about a day before I could feel them get more comfortable?

Alex B


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Alex B said:


> Out of interest what year are you bindings?
> 
> I thought all snowboard boots needed to be heated? My girlfriends Vans were done in the shop, my 32 I did by wearing them, took about a day before I could feel them get more comfortable?
> 
> Alex B


My formulas are 2012's. I actually took the F20's back and tried Burtons before I settled on 32's. 

As for thermal forming boots, the owner of my local says it's good if you have a specific fit problem. Otherwise it just breaks down your boots sooner.


----------



## Alex B (Nov 12, 2012)

OldDog said:


> My formulas are 2012's. I actually took the F20's back and tried Burtons before I settled on 32's.
> 
> As for thermal forming boots, the owner of my local says it's good if you have a specific fit problem. Otherwise it just breaks down your boots sooner.


I thought they looked like 2012, but all the advertising pictures I've seen show them to have a black and grey pattern on them, yours just look black?

Alex B


----------



## OldDog (Oct 7, 2012)

Alex B said:


> I thought they looked like 2012, but all the advertising pictures I've seen show them to have a black and grey pattern on them, yours just look black?
> 
> Alex B


There's a light gray pattern on them, hard to see in these pics.


----------

