Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

releasable vs. non releasable bindings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • releasable vs. non releasable bindings

    which are better? I've noticed spruces ONLY come with the releasable on risers, but there are a lot of nice non releasable bindings out there... pros and cons to both? thanks

  • #2
    pros of releasable bindings:

    they release

    cons of releasable bindings:

    they release

    some people would rather not have releasable bindings because they cost a lot plus theres no real need for a releasable bindings for a board under 100 cm.

    they spruce 120s can only have releasable bindgins for liability reasons.

    same reason why line's new Quick Mount system is not 4x4, so people dont sue them from breaking their legs by putting non-releasable bindings on the skiis.
    Fox-Trotting - Thrifty Wanderlust & Adventures

    Skiboard Magazine

    Comment


    • #3
      So it mainly just has to do with whether you think you're good enough to avoid busting your ankles? LOL Based of course on board length and rider skill?

      Comment


      • #4
        basically, if your worried about your ankles breaking, get them

        if your not like most skiboarders then there is no need.

        ask most skiboarders on ehre and they will say they've taken tons of falls and spills withouts breaking their legs.
        Fox-Trotting - Thrifty Wanderlust & Adventures

        Skiboard Magazine

        Comment


        • #5
          can you wear any boot with nonreleasable bindings? Like telemark boots or snowboard boots?

          Comment

          Working...
          X