Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 57
  1. #31 Riser Mounting 
    Founder | Spruce Longboards & Bindings jsinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Central NH
    Age
    80
    Posts
    231
    Rep Power
    16
    Risers (and non-release skiboard bindings) are attached to skiboards using the same inserts that snowboards use for binding mounting. These inserts are machine threaded steel and installed in the core of the board at the time the boards are manufactured. They look a bit like an upside down mushroom with a short stem sticking up. I've never seen the pull-out strength for these published, but my guess is that it's north of 500 lbs. each, so four of them equally tensioned would be a ton or more. I've never heard of an insert pulling out.

    Ski bindings are all mounted with screws that are a sheet metal thread (12AB) and they provide 8 millimeter penetration into the board in the adult length (6mm in the junior length). That length means that the point of the mounting drill for these screws goes 9mm into the ski. Most skiboards are made with a thin layer of top glass and a soft wood core, so a screw such as a binding screw can be pulled out on a hard heel-first landing off a jump, etc. For safety, these screws need to be mounted on a board where the thickness is at least 10mm and the board has a reinforcement layer where the screw penetrates.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #32  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Age
    60
    Posts
    1,548
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by jsinger View Post
    These inserts are machine threaded steel and installed in the core of the board at the time the boards are manufactured. They look a bit like an upside down mushroom with a short stem sticking up.
    Here's the cross-section view of a factory insert from a RVL8 DLP skiboard. (The bulge at the base is from the heat generated by sawing it in half.)

    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #33  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Bad Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Maricopa, Arizona
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,452
    Rep Power
    13
    There was a thread on Epic Ski this month promoting the use of 157 cm SL skis by instructors. Considering the general attitude on Epic, this was remarkable! Clearly the definition of what constitutes the acceptable length of a ski is getting shorter. As the gap between skis and skiboards continues to narrow, I believe we will see more and more skiers join our sport. We have a great selection of boards for these new converts to ride, but I can't help but feel that we still need a better solution to bindings. I don't believe that the general skiing public, who is used to direct fix bindings, will accept either non release bindings, nor risers, as an acceptable alternative to direct fix. People who are used to their local shop attaching $70 bindings to their skis for free, are going to balk at $300 risers with limited bindings options. For a sport promoted as more economical than skiing, we actually risk pricing ourselves out of the market. I understand how the footprint of non release bindings and risers has allowed us to design light, strong and flexible skiboards, but if we are to grow as a sport, we need a new alternative. I don't think I'm saying anything new here, the forum gets asked this same question by almost every new member looking to get into the sport. After my blades, the first skiboards I bought were Summit 110cm Customs with direct fix demo bindings from Doc. Once I learned about 4x4 binding options I moved on from the Summits, but at the time, the price was hard to beat.
    Just these, nothing else !

    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #34  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Wookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,484
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill View Post
    For those who believe "because big companies do it, it must be right"... good luck with that.
    Right. Those that think big companies only consider what is best for the consumer are kidding themselves. It's mostly about sales and profits. A binding system that requires a set for every ski is much more profitable than inserts and interchangeable bindings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Wolf View Post
    .... As the gap between skis and skiboards continues to narrow, I believe we will see more and more skiers join our sport....
    I love the optimism but I fear we are a dying breed. I see less and less blades/skiboards on the hill every season. This season, other than planned meet-ups, I doubt I came across more than a dozen shorty riders and this was during about 30 days of riding spread over 7 resorts (East and West locations). It's funny that even attitudes have changed and people ask me if my skiboards are "some new invention" rather than asking why am I "riding old school blades".

    I do agree we need a better binding system but the riser is simple and works. More than a better binding system we really need a line of youth skiboards to grow the sport with young riders.
    Boards:
    2016 Spruce tuned Head Jr. Caddys - 131cm
    2013 Spruce "CTS" 120s
    2010 Spruce "Yellow/Red" 120s
    2018 Spruce "CTS" Crossbows - 115cm
    2016 RVL8 Spliffs - 109cm
    2008 RVL8 Revolt "City" - 105cm
    2017 RVL8 Sticky Icky Icky - 104cm
    2011 Defiance Blades - 101cm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #35  
    Hardcore Skiboarder valmorel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    3,360
    Rep Power
    21
    If risers offered better performance, then all ski companies would be using them and not direct mounting


    Actually, this is not quite correct. Risers are to all intents banned in competition PRECISELY because they can offer performance benefits. As most skiers want to look like racers and use similar kit, risers are not usually fitted to recreational skis now.

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    Sticky Icky Icky (go to dream board)
    Most everything else over time.
    Go Android
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #36  
    Hardcore Skiboarder
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Maryland
    Age
    49
    Posts
    858
    Rep Power
    5
    On some boards direct-mounted bindings work pretty good. Or variations of it, like the Tyrolia PR system that Jeff at Spruce Mountain uses. He had to add reinforcing aluminum plates to mount the rail, which keeps the rest of board light and flexible. This system works really well on longer boards, where it does not interfere with the flex. And I prefer it to the Riser, as it is lower to the board, which I like better, and it is lighter than the Riser, which I like better too. I have the PR on my Ospreys and love it. I installed the PR on the 94cm Head skiboards, which originally came with direct-mounted bindings, and have tougher construction than the typical Rvl8 board (they have a thicker core and aluminum layer for binding retention). Seems to work very well for these boards too. Yes, flex is reduced vs. non-release or Riser on inserts, but these boards seem to do OK with it and my daughter loves them. I will probably install Jeff's aluminum plates and a PR rail on my Stickies for next season too. I think they will work well with it too.

    If Rvl8 offered an option with added metal reinforcements in the binding locations, I think that would be helpful in allowing direct-mounting option for those who want it. Those added metal plates will not increase the weight or affect the flex much if not used, and I think should work well on most boards, especially on longer ones and for people with small boot sizes - the flex pattern of the boards will be good enough with direct-mounted options.

    As for attitudes, not that I care much, but this year remarks have been mostly positive and with genuine interest. The instructor on the off-trail workshop was impressed with the Ospreys and also the fact the had proper release bindings, something I appreciated when they released when I fell (he talked about the spiral fractures due to non-releases, since someone else brought-up the topic of having owned the old snowblades with non-release that they had lots of fun on them back in the day)

    As for length considerations, for well-groomed slopes short is better and easier for beginners to learn on. For advanced skiers, length has its benefits and you can't substitute width for it. That said, I didn't encounter any situation that my Ospreys could not handle well enough this year - off trail, on the groomers, and in between. I did not want more length on the groomers and really enjoyed the agility and shorter turn radius there. Off-piste they were great and handled to my satisfaction everything except the deepest snow with choppy refrozen tracks and bumps underneath it. There I wished for a bit more flotation and more length with softer and longer and more gradually up-turned tips to smooth the ride over and give more fore-aft stability. Shorter boards would not have handled these conditions nearly as well as the Ospreys did - yup, one could slide down on shorter boards in the deep snow too, but in the conditions where even the Ospreys stumbled you would need to be riding really slow, not making big wide fast turns like you can on large skis. Which may be OK and desirable for some, it's just different. In fact, I really appreciated the short length of the Ospreys on the steep and difficult trails and especially in the trees. I admit that short length initially compensated for my lack of skill in deep snow. But once I got it, I was no longer using it as a crutch. An even shorter board allows even more "cheating" (or is it effortless skiing?), which can feel really liberating, an different from gliding on and coercing a longer board to turn effortlessly vs. twitching about quick pivot turns on a short one. Disclaimer: I keep the right to reverse my opinion next season, once I ride the 190cm powder skis back to back with the Ospreys in deep powder, if I find it was not the length that was causing issues this season
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #37  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Bad Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Maricopa, Arizona
    Age
    56
    Posts
    3,452
    Rep Power
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Wookie View Post
    I love the optimism but I fear we are a dying breed. I see less and less blades/skiboards on the hill every season. This season, other than planned meet-ups, I doubt I came across more than a dozen shorty riders and this was during about 30 days of riding spread over 7 resorts (East and West locations). It's funny that even attitudes have changed and people ask me if my skiboards are "some new invention" rather than asking why am I "riding old school blades".
    .
    There are so few of us in such a big pond, I think it's hard to gauge how popular the sport is based of real life sightings. When I do see other folks on shorties, it is usually blades, not skiboards and not longboards. And not good skiers goofing off on blades on gapper day, but people riding them as a primary choice for fun.

    Obviously the forum is dwindling. I think that has a lot to do with the inline skaters moving on, and the park aspect of skiboarding becoming less of a driving force. Our current Pro team seem to be less involved each year and there is no one moving up the ranks ready to take their place.

    The Skiboard Connection FB page does prove that there are more of us out there, but the membership seems to have stalled at less then two hundred, so......

    I presume that the lack of new graphics this year is a reflection of slower than expected sales from last season. I'm sure the historically poor winter on the east coast had a lot to do with that, so I don't know if that is statistically relevant. And of course Spruce seems to be out of the longboard manufacturing business now. I don't know how well Summit is doing, but well enough to keep open at least. I do think Doc sells to a slightly different demographic than RVL8. His direct fix boards are clearly aimed at the converted skier market. It would be interesting to know what annual skiboard sales are. And then you have the folks at WSD. They have flooded the internet market with cheap boards, overstocks, buy outs and direct fix skiboards. I don't know how successful they were, but they are still around.

    So, I don't know, as a sport are we healthy, dying a slow death, or changing with the times?
    Just these, nothing else !

    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #38  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Wookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,484
    Rep Power
    12
    The wisdom of Doc Roberts on bindings as posted on Skiboards.com. Enjoy:


    So much here to comment on that I don't think I could cover it all but to touch on this gem that is targeted at the Spruce Riser System:

    Myth 2: It is necessary to use release bindings mounted on a riser plate that fits the 4 hole standard mounting pattern (fits into the 4 inserts) in order to maintain proper flex of the skiboards.

    An example is the Spruce Riser plate and bindings. This is a myth and simply not true. Worse, these can be dangerous. None of the major ski binding manufacturers endorse modifications to how their bindings are mounted to either skiboards or skis. Their comment is that there is no way to tell if these bindings will release when they are supposed to, as the riser introduces a foreign element into the equation. In addition you lose the convenience of step in and go, as you have to still use leashes, as brakes don't work due to the additional height. We will not sell these.


    Where to start? First my brakes work fine with my Spruce risers, there are plenty of direct mounted rail bindings that have the same stack height as bindings on risers and the brakes still engage the snow. Second, no leashes. Third, I don't understand the "lose the convenience of step in and go" comment, I step into my riser bindings like I would on any direct mounted release binding. Lastly, just because there is a lack of endorsement from manufacturers does not equate to an unsafe condition. I understand that manufacturers will not back a binding that has been modified but a riser mount is not a modification of the binding it is just a mounting method (provided by an authorized seller of the bindings). Each season my bindings are tested and adjusted by a binding tech at my local shop so I do know "if these bindings will release when they are supposed to".

    Honestly, Doc's binding information (that looks like it was put together in an elementary school web development class) is not great for our sport. It draws some erroneous conclusions and is contradictory with what Doc has and does sell on his shop. I know that Summit boards are a quality built board but I would rather support RVL8, TWOOWT, SPRUCE and others that have not wavered on:

    A: 4x4 and 4x10 inserts for customer convenience and maximum design flexibility
    B: high quality bindings -- release and non-release -- no cheap plastic crap
    C: No non-release bindings on boards over 110cm (or where setback gets you over 55cm back from the toe)
    D: Commonsense softboot set-ups supported by community field research
    Boards:
    2016 Spruce tuned Head Jr. Caddys - 131cm
    2013 Spruce "CTS" 120s
    2010 Spruce "Yellow/Red" 120s
    2018 Spruce "CTS" Crossbows - 115cm
    2016 RVL8 Spliffs - 109cm
    2008 RVL8 Revolt "City" - 105cm
    2017 RVL8 Sticky Icky Icky - 104cm
    2011 Defiance Blades - 101cm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #39  
    Hardcore Skiboarder Wookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,484
    Rep Power
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Wolf View Post
    .....So, I don't know, as a sport are we healthy, dying a slow death, or changing with the times?
    Skiers to the left of me,
    Snowboarders to the right, here I am,
    Stuck in the middle with you.


    And now a little Stealers Wheel for your enjoyment:



    and BTW I understand this is from 1972 and may underscore that we are aging and potentially not "changing with the times". I just figured I would throw it in since this thread has included comments mostly from the "elder statesmen" of skiboarding that might remember this song (and not from a TV Commercial for Fruit of the Loom underwear).
    Boards:
    2016 Spruce tuned Head Jr. Caddys - 131cm
    2013 Spruce "CTS" 120s
    2010 Spruce "Yellow/Red" 120s
    2018 Spruce "CTS" Crossbows - 115cm
    2016 RVL8 Spliffs - 109cm
    2008 RVL8 Revolt "City" - 105cm
    2017 RVL8 Sticky Icky Icky - 104cm
    2011 Defiance Blades - 101cm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #40  
    Hardcore Skiboarder macrophotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Clarks Summit, PA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,072
    Rep Power
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Bad Wolf View Post
    I don't believe that the general skiing public, who is used to direct fix bindings, will accept either non release bindings, nor risers, as an acceptable alternative to direct fix. People who are used to their local shop attaching $70 bindings to their skis for free, are going to balk at $300 risers with limited bindings options. For a sport promoted as more economical than skiing, we actually risk pricing ourselves out of the market. I understand how the footprint of non release bindings and risers has allowed us to design light, strong and flexible skiboards, but if we are to grow as a sport, we need a new alternative. I don't think I'm saying anything new here, the forum gets asked this same question by almost every new member looking to get into the sport.
    I honestly believe the answer to this is the Power Rail system that Spruce introduced me to and now I use on the majority of my snow-sliding instruments. My friends will not try skiboards with non-release, and there is no commercially available "demo/rental" bindings for RVL8 skiboards. So how do we introduce friends to the sport who have a different size boot? We need to change the product like Spruce started to do by adding the PR bindings to the Ospreys and Sherpas. Whether we add 8 inserts for mounting the PR rails, use Spruce Dyna-Plates, or add a thin layer of metal to the skiboards manufacturing process to allow direct mount of the PR system which allows for flex of the boards - any three of those options on RVL8 boards will be a huge win in the potential increase in market. Even then it still may be niche market. But is it to be an aging niche market because of a binding issue, or a continually expanding and re-generating one that brings in people of all ages?
    Boards / Skis
    RVL8 - Blunt XL 100
    Spruce - Crossbow 115
    Head - Ethan Too 141 & 151, SuperShape i.Titan 156
    Armada - Triple J 155
    Faction - Candide 2.0 166
    (previous: RVL8 - Revolt, KTP, DLP, Blunt, Rockered Condor, and BWP. Spruce - 120 and Osprey. Head Salamander 94, Caddy 131 & 151, and Ethan Too 161. Atomic - 1:20, Access 151, and Punx III 140. Summit Invertigo, Hagan OffLimit)
    Bindings
    Tyrolia PRD 12, Spruce Pro Risers w/ Tyrolia Attack 13
    Boots
    Atomic Overload Reactor 100
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #41  
    Junior Skiboarder
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    England
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1
    Rep Power
    0
    Hello guys, this thread was resurrected party for my benefit so thanks for sharing your experience and knowledge here. I'm new to the sport and have been asking questions and doing research about skiboards and was asking Greco about what Doc was saying to me. It was a bit off-putting to be honest being new to the sport and not knowledgeable about the sport and being stuck in between two conflicting views. Definitely not good for the sport but it can't be helped if one seller decides to start negative marketing. Anyway, I found Greco and incredibly helpful and knowledgeable guy who tried to remain as impartial as possible when exploring my options.

    I did hear from the Skiboards EU guy that they are "working on another method - release bindings in inserts - hope that it will be ready next season". I'm not sure about that but I can see that Spruce risers have a proven track record of performance and reliability and will provide the safety and give me the confidence to develop. Sure, they make my introduction to the sport way more expensive than I wanted it to be but at least i'll have a quality, safe and fun performance setup.

    I would be interested to hear more about their usage in the park and DIN settings as I would worry about them releasing during hitting rails and landing jumps. I see that quite a lot of park riders seem to like the non-release. Could anyone share their park experiences with spruce risers?

    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #42  
    Hardcore Skiboarder macrophotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Clarks Summit, PA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,072
    Rep Power
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by MadeInMachines View Post
    . . .I can see that Spruce risers have a proven track record of performance and reliability and will provide the safety and give me the confidence to develop. Sure, they make my introduction to the sport way more expensive than I wanted it to be but at least i'll have a quality, safe and fun performance setup.
    The Spruce Riser set-up is indeed an excellent, proven, and reliable set-up. I do limited riding in the park, but set my DIN settings to recommended settings using a standard DIN chart. The Spruce set-up releases when I would expect it to and never releases when I wouldn't expect it to. Spruce really stands behind their product - Jeff, the owner, is a regular on this forum and is a pleasure to work with. So buying the package that Greco is suggesting to you is going to be a high quality marriage of RVL8 boards and Spruce Riser/Binding.

    Welcome to the fun!
    Boards / Skis
    RVL8 - Blunt XL 100
    Spruce - Crossbow 115
    Head - Ethan Too 141 & 151, SuperShape i.Titan 156
    Armada - Triple J 155
    Faction - Candide 2.0 166
    (previous: RVL8 - Revolt, KTP, DLP, Blunt, Rockered Condor, and BWP. Spruce - 120 and Osprey. Head Salamander 94, Caddy 131 & 151, and Ethan Too 161. Atomic - 1:20, Access 151, and Punx III 140. Summit Invertigo, Hagan OffLimit)
    Bindings
    Tyrolia PRD 12, Spruce Pro Risers w/ Tyrolia Attack 13
    Boots
    Atomic Overload Reactor 100
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #43  
    Hardcore Skiboarder
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Maryland
    Age
    49
    Posts
    858
    Rep Power
    5
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #44  
    SBOLTeamIII Tom91381's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Stevenson Ranch Ca
    Age
    55
    Posts
    296
    Rep Power
    3
    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 ½" by ¼ " 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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #45  
    Hardcore Skiboarder macrophotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Clarks Summit, PA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,072
    Rep Power
    8
    Quote 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.
    Boards / Skis
    RVL8 - Blunt XL 100
    Spruce - Crossbow 115
    Head - Ethan Too 141 & 151, SuperShape i.Titan 156
    Armada - Triple J 155
    Faction - Candide 2.0 166
    (previous: RVL8 - Revolt, KTP, DLP, Blunt, Rockered Condor, and BWP. Spruce - 120 and Osprey. Head Salamander 94, Caddy 131 & 151, and Ethan Too 161. Atomic - 1:20, Access 151, and Punx III 140. Summit Invertigo, Hagan OffLimit)
    Bindings
    Tyrolia PRD 12, Spruce Pro Risers w/ Tyrolia Attack 13
    Boots
    Atomic Overload Reactor 100
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Tabs System by vbSoporte - vBulletin en Español