Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spruce Riser Solution vs. Drilling Bindings Directly into Skiboards

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greco
    replied
    Thanks for your comments

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • solaceiam
    replied
    Originally posted by Greco View Post
    You're welcome. I would like to have riders who own the Spruce riser/bindings reply with their impressions. Any problems or issues?
    I Love love love love love the risers! I use to have the Non-releasable ones, and I always found it hard to clip on and attach the straps because of my big midsection. With the risers, I just step in and go. No straps. At first, I found it a bit heavy but after a few runs, I've gotten use to the weight. Been skiing on them for 2 seasons now. I don't think i'll ever switch back to non release.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fun Machine
    replied
    Originally posted by Bad Wolf View Post
    That is what we are competing with when people try to get into the sport, $60 v $338.
    The main problem is accessibility of skiboards, or lack thereof. There are plenty of people who can afford that $338. But very few will commit to buying it without first trying it or something similar to it. That's too bad because people do get very interested when they see them, at least in my experience.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bad Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by Gromit View Post
    Hi Pete

    The thread , The Riser That Changes Everything, is about the Spruce Risers with Attack 13s.
    I personally, would never go back to a release binding with a toe binding with a longitudinal spring in it.
    The Attack 13 is a great binding. I like how the wide footprint allows for easier edging and how the adjustable toe piece gives a more secure connection. I have several pairs and used them exclusively on all my skis and skiboards. But...........

    ............The Attack 13s were available for $60 this summer through a couple of different online retailers. I bought two pair. I mounted one pair on my skis myself and used the other pair on my custom risers. So, for $60 I have a nice pair of new Attack 13 bindings on my skis. However, to put these on a skiboard requires the riser system. You can't direct fix them and the risers are not sold as blanks. If you buy the riser, the cost is $338, before shipping. That is what we are competing with when people try to get into the sport, $60 v $338.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kocho
    replied
    The Attack 13 are a very solid binding. Not as safe as the PR or PRD for example (no diagonal release, or twist), but I think offers a stiffer interface with the riser. And, if mounted on a wider 3" platform like my DIY riser (the Spruce version is 2.5"), it is as solid as it gets

    https://goo.gl/photos/FvykfcLvbmP1CWdK6

    Oh, and as you can see on the photo from the side, the brakes have a lot of length below the board, so they work perfectly.

    Originally posted by Gromit View Post
    Hi Pete

    The thread , The Riser That Changes Everything, is about the Spruce Risers with Attack 13s.
    I personally, would never go back to a release binding with a toe binding with a longitudinal spring in it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gromit
    replied
    Originally posted by MadeInMachines View Post
    Unfortunately they only have the Pro Plus Prime risers in but not the more premium one using the Tyrolia Attack 13. I was thinking since I'm getting a premium setup I may as well pay the extra $38 and get the better ones. So what do you think about the difference between the Attack 13 and the Tyrolia RX 12 version. Is there going to be much difference? Should I wait and get the better one or will they offer the same performance anyway?

    Thanks,
    Pete
    Hi Pete

    The thread , The Riser That Changes Everything, is about the Spruce Risers with Attack 13s.
    I personally, would never go back to a release binding with a toe binding with a longitudinal spring in it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bad Wolf
    replied
    This was my "attempt" to direct fix bindings. I used a thin HDPE plastic strip to add depth to the board in order to use the Binding Freedom inserts. It added very little weight, does flex with the board and did seem to provide a secure platform to accept a direct fix binding. Once the Ickys turned up I stopped field testing, so I have little idea about durability. I guess the issue will always be, that if we have to add reinforcement plates to the top of the board, we will always affect flex and weight to some extent. This is true to pure direct fix and rail systems. So why not just integrate the reinforcement layer layer into the board like Summit does? I guess this may be the ultimate skiboard dilemma, that which allows us to be different will also restrict us from acceptance by the masses.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom91381
    replied
    Originally posted by Wookie View Post
    I am not sure why you would thicken up just the center of the board (5"). If you talking about beefing up the board for direct mount bindings you would need to change about 18" of the board to create an area to drill a binding into that would support riders up to those with large men's boots. And softwoods are not going to hold binding screws so, based on what they use fur direct mount skis, you are looking to add a block of hardwood or a metal plate. All the direct mount capable boards I have ridden have been quite stiff

    As for building a carbon fiber riser, if you can pull it off great! Just don't expect an ultra light setup unless you buy an ultralight binding to go with it. The basic Spruce riser binding combo weighs about 3 lbs per ski. A little less than half that weight is the binding which means you are only cutting weight from 1.5-1.8lbs of riser. You would be lucky to cut the weight in half and carbon fiber does not hold screws like aluminum. You would be better off using a custom plastic riser as Bad Wolf has done to try to drop weight.

    Side question: Is you daughter in law a petite person? If so, and you want to get her into skiboards with something light, you might be better off with a direct mounted binding on something like the Defiance Blades. They are stiff but really light.
    I come from a speed skating background, and recently they have upped the wheel size. We now race on 125mm wheels, about 5". To accommodate the height they have added either a aluminum block that is threaded and sits pretty far below that actual bottom of the boot.. If you can see the carbon build up, something Similar might work? I'm just thinking outside of the box.
    My daughter in law is short but not petite. I think she was on a board way to stiff for her liking, she's on tanshos and she claims they wear out her legs. Gonna have her try out some blunts. Hope she does well in those or I might have to get her non release ?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Wookie
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom91381 View Post
    With many different woods , a mixture of a softer wood might work with some of the layers? From what I see most of the flex is in the ends not as much where that 5" in the center is located. Or the area the riser sits on.

    I have the release set up and that's because my son broke his tibia and fibula on ski blades back before 2000.
    I don't mind the extra weight, I don't even notice it, but m in a little shape in comparison to the daughter in law.

    What is the rail system your talking about?
    I want to have someone build me a carbon fiber set
    I am not sure why you would thicken up just the center of the board (5"). If you talking about beefing up the board for direct mount bindings you would need to change about 18" of the board to create an area to drill a binding into that would support riders up to those with large men's boots. And softwoods are not going to hold binding screws so, based on what they use fur direct mount skis, you are looking to add a block of hardwood or a metal plate. All the direct mount capable boards I have ridden have been quite stiff due to this construction.

    The rail system we are referring to is the Tyrolia Power Rail binding system. Spruce Skiboards has been adapting thin junior skis that would not normally hold an adult binding to take them by adding a plate to the top of the ski. It is a versatile system but is not a light one. My wife's modified 131cm Jr Caddies with this system are heavy when compared to both my daughters' 133cm and 156cm long skis with direct mount fixed bindings.

    As for building a carbon fiber riser, if you can pull it off great! Just don't expect an ultra light setup unless you buy an ultralight binding to go with it. The basic Spruce riser binding combo weighs about 3 lbs per ski. A little less than half that weight is the binding which means you are only cutting weight from 1.5-1.8lbs of riser. You would be lucky to cut the weight in half and carbon fiber does not hold screws like aluminum. You would be better off using a custom plastic riser as Bad Wolf has done to try to drop weight.

    Side question: Is you daughter in law a petite person? If so, and you want to get her into skiboards with something light, you might be better off with a direct mounted binding on something like the Defiance Blades. They are stiff but really light. My daughter used these as her first skiboards. They are currently sold out at Level9 sports but should be back next season.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom91381
    replied
    Originally posted by Wookie View Post
    Building up the center of the skiboard (if I understand what you are suggesting) might likely add as much weight as the Riser and would certainly change the flex of most skiboards.

    One other thought, and also in response to the comments on the PR rail binding, the Spruce riser/binding combo
    With many different woods , a mixture of a softer wood might work with some of the layers? From what I see most of the flex is in the ends not as much where that 5" in the center is located. Or the area the riser sits on.

    I have the release set up and that's because my son broke his tibia and fibula on ski blades back before 2000.
    I don't mind the extra weight, I don't even notice it, but m in a little shape in comparison to the daughter in law.

    What is the rail system your talking about?
    I want to have someone build me a carbon fiber set up.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Wookie
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom91381 View Post
    What gets me is why hasn't Rvl8 made a built in riser where the bolting system is ? A longer T bolt style and a gradual build up of the layered poplar wood to achieve that ! They might be able to raise it up another 3/8's of a inch and have a 2 " by " thick top layer with threaded insert holes for attachment of the bindings .
    My feeling is that the riser weight with the bindings attached seems to turn a few people away , namely my daughter in law . It turned our ski vacation into a drinking vacation for her.
    Building up the center of the skiboard (if I understand what you are suggesting) might likely add as much weight as the Riser and would certainly change the flex of most skiboards. If you note in one of Jeff's posts above the insert mounted binding (release or non-release) gives the skiboard designer freedom to design a board with any desired flex profile without having to worry about a beefy center that will hold the bindings.

    One other thought, and also in response to the comments on the PR rail binding, the Spruce riser/binding combo is comparable in weight to most demo ski bindings. Adjustable bindings are bulky and heavy with some rare (expensive) exceptions. The weight of the aluminum Spruce riser is not a lot in the scheme of ski bindings. My 120lb daughter does not feel they ride heavier than long skis with direct bindings. As proof of this she feels the Jr Caddies with PR bindings are "much heavier" then the SIIs with Spruce risers.

    I may be in the minority but I like the 4x10 / 4x4 insert system with the Spruce riser binding. Do we need a demo option? Sure but not at the risk of adding bulky bindings, built up boards, or weird insert patterns since most riders set their bindings and go.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bad Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by MadeInMachines View Post

    I think it's likely I'll go with what Greco recommended and get the KTP with Spruce Risers.

    Unfortunately they only have the Pro Plus Prime risers in but not the more premium one using the Tyrolia Attack 13. I was thinking since I'm getting a premium setup I may as well pay the extra $38 and get the better ones. So what do you think about the difference between the Attack 13 and the Tyrolia RX 12 version. Is there going to be much difference? Should I wait and get the better one or will they offer the same performance anyway?

    Thanks,
    Pete
    The KTPs are a great choice, for the park and on and off piste. They also have an extra set of inserts for set back on powder days. I would reconsider non release bindings as an option on them. Their lower profile, solid connection and less weight all make non release bindings the first choice for most park riders. The safety issue is always a personal choice, but the KTPs are short enough to make non release a viable option. I rode the KTPs for an entire season with Spruce Risers and never had the bindings release, even with a few spectacular crashes. The lever just isn't long enough. If you are on a budget you can even look for old Line bindings on eBay. The bomb proof Line FF Pro bindings can still be found for under $100.

    Leave a comment:


  • macrophotog
    replied
    Originally posted by Kocho View Post
    Macro, given your son's experience with the riser in the park, would you still recommend it for that? I think his is a unique situation, with very large boots that put the bindings at the very ends of the riser, combined with hard landings, that could stress the riser. I think for normally sized boots the weight would be well centered, but for huge ones and a heavy rider jumping high and hard it could be an issue, potentially.

    I've done really small jumps on my risers, just a couple of feet, and even with my huge boots and 200lb net weight, no issues at all. I've had three or four releases *after* a fall where I would expect a ski binding to release, never a pre-release, so I suppose the bindings are working as intended. These days I have my DIY riser on a longer and sturdier aluminum rail for my huge boots. But on long boards, and I think especially for park use even for shorter boards, where perfect arching and subtle flex are not needed, I think the PR would be great - light, low, adjustable, safer. As Macro said, it can be retrofitted or better yet engineered from the start.
    I would have no hesitations with the Spruce Riser set-up in the park. You can verify it with Jeff, but my understanding is that there are a lot of serious park riders using the Spruce Riser with release bindings. And, yes my son's experience (bent riser) was a very unique one - due to the the extremely large size of his boot, customized drilling/mounting of the bindings on the extreme ends of the riser (outside of the standard holes), and his use of them in the park for large jumps, etc. Outside of this situation, I believe Jeff has only had one other riser bend and if my memory serves me right, that was the result of a significant jump (maybe 40'?) and subsequent bad accident/landing that resulted in broken boards and all. . . Any equipment has the potential come out broken/bent in bad accidents that involve falling out of the sky.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom91381
    replied
    What gets me is why hasn't Rvl8 made a built in riser where the bolting system is ? A longer T bolt style and a gradual build up of the layered poplar wood to achieve that ! They might be able to raise it up another 3/8's of a inch and have a 2 " by " thick top layer with threaded insert holes for attachment of the bindings .
    My feeling is that the riser weight with the bindings attached seems to turn a few people away , namely my daughter in law . It turned our ski vacation into a drinking vacation for her.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • Kocho
    replied
    Macro, given your son's experience with the riser in the park, would you still recommend it for that? I think his is a unique situation, with very large boots that put the bindings at the very ends of the riser, combined with hard landings, that could stress the riser. I think for normally sized boots the weight would be well centered, but for huge ones and a heavy rider jumping high and hard it could be an issue, potentially.

    I've done really small jumps on my risers, just a couple of feet, and even with my huge boots and 200lb net weight, no issues at all. I've had three or four releases *after* a fall where I would expect a ski binding to release, never a pre-release, so I suppose the bindings are working as intended. These days I have my DIY riser on a longer and sturdier aluminum rail for my huge boots. But on long boards, and I think especially for park use even for shorter boards, where perfect arching and subtle flex are not needed, I think the PR would be great - light, low, adjustable, safer. As Macro said, it can be retrofitted or better yet engineered from the start.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X