If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
have a look at -
http://www.bataleon.com/technology.html what do you reckon? interesting to see new developments in the shaping of boards ... main thing that stands out to me re gliding on less surface area, is that you sink down into snow so for an equivalent plan shape you could have more surface area in contact with the snow. unless you stick to solid hardpack. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
On 18 May 2004 09:59:53 -0700, chog said (and I quote):
have a look at - http://www.bataleon.com/technology.html what do you reckon? I think it's completely bogus. The whole idea is based around the following misconception: "Snowboards have a strong sidecut, resulting in a number of problems because the edgegrip is too aggressive at the widest parts of the board." This is wrong due to the way it ignores the fact that a board flexes in a turn. It's as if they are imagining an unflexed board tilted on it's edge - of course such a board would have "too much edgegrip at the widest parts of the board". But because boards flex in a turn, the centre of the board gets pushed out towards the snow, thus equalising the pressure along each the length of the edge. So in a turn where the board is deeply flexed, this new design will have very little edge grip as the nose and tail will hardly be touching the snow. It's a hopeless design for carving a turn. And then they say: "The steel edges of the BATALEON board do not dig in as deeply or as hard at the front and rear." In which case I know that this board would be totally unsuitable for me. It *might* be suitable for somebody who likes to skid their board around on top of the snow, or for landing jumps, but for general riding, or even in the pipe (where carving ability is important) it's gonna suck. -- What was I thinking? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
http://www.bataleon.com/technology.html
what do you reckon? interesting to see new developments in the shaping of boards ... It's the anti-Donek! Read the "Advanced sidecut and flex" tidbit on Donek's site: http://www.donek.com/tech.htm# and then go read Bataleon's tech info. They both can't be right -- or, they are trying to solve completely different problems. And I suspect it's more the latter than the former when I look at their spiel. They seem to look at edge engagement as something bad and spend an excessive amount if time thinking about running flatbase. That makes me wonder if they simply ride where it's flat, flat, flat, and think of turning as "changing direction" rather than "what you do when cruising on a snowboard". I know I don't have any problems whatsoever maintaining speed unless I'm on flat ground. (On big alpine boards, I need practice on *dumping speed without skidding* - just the opposite!). Donek claims that *more* grippy tip / tail means less chatter, and Bataleon claims that *less* grippy tip and tail means less chatter. All I know is that when I want to carve, I want as much edge length as I can engaging the snow with good amount of force. That doesn't happen by reducing edge grip at the ends of the board, folks! (I'm also not saying that Donek's way is the only way to accomplish this... a Coiler with a radial sidecut grips the snow just as well as a Donek - albeit with a different ride - Coiler does it by tweaking flex along the length of the board, and with dampening materials placed in the right places.) If they are right about less base contact with snow being faster, then how come longer boards go faster than shorter boards? How come the top finishers at "speed trap" events are usually the biggest people on the biggest boards and not vice-versa? (I missed the one at Mt Hood this year but I am definitely doing it next year, on the longest alpine board that I own!) Less surface area means the rider's same weight is concentrated over a smaller area, meaning more force per square unit (e.g, PSI) which would tend to slow you down, no? In any case I would demo one if the opportunity came up just to see if my intuition about them is correct - that they are designed for use on flatter terrain and that they don't like to be carved aggressively and are not responsive on stepper terrain - but it looks like that would require a trip to Norway so never mind - no offense to Norway but there are a few other places I want to visit first (France, Switzerland, Austria, Chile, Japan, all during their snow seasons of course) Mike T |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
chog wrote:
have a look at - http://www.bataleon.com/technology.html what do you reckon? interesting to see new developments in the shaping of boards ... Let's not confuse "new" with "good". Their design ideas are a steaming load of crap IMNSHO. Neil |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
The nose and tail remind me of the
OSin 4807's "boat hull" nose and tail and so might be decent in powder - but still it seems like it would be really sloppy for freeriding. The 4807 only has a "boat hull" nose... the tail is a flat fish-tail (essentially one step less than a swallowtail). Looking at my 4807 (My wife bought me one off eBay for my birthday - woohoo!) I am guessing the boat hull shape will not make much difference... it's really the length, the rise, and the softness of the nose that will make the most difference. -Mike T |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
Neil Gendzwill wrote in message ...
chog wrote: have a look at - http://www.bataleon.com/technology.html what do you reckon? interesting to see new developments in the shaping of boards ... Let's not confuse "new" with "good". Their design ideas are a steaming load of crap IMNSHO. Neil I dunno, might be good in powder with a more boat hull shape... but it strikes me as a horrible design overall. I imagine the overall effect would be similar to riding an extremely short board (think 90 cm instead of typic 156). Doesn't sound like a good ride to me. Also, try to imagine how something with this convex base is going to flex... Or how sturdy those seams in the base are going to be next time you boink a rock or rail hard. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
If they are right about less base contact with snow being faster, then how
come longer boards go faster than shorter boards? Oh - forgot to add - these guys are silly enough to claim they have the world's fastest snowboard - unless something has changed recently, the highest speed ever clocked on a board was 125 mph, on a Voelkl RT 235cm custom, made explicitly for the purpose of setting the record if I'm not mistaken! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
I think the boards are designed specifically for freestyle taking the
properties of regular freestyle boards to extreme. Designed to run Taking under advisement that I know $#%@-all about freestyle... don't you need some solid edge hold to generate spin off a kick or pipe wall? Not to mention the ability to carve clean accross the pipe transition to keep speed? I'd have doubts about these boards doing well at that. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Batteleon 3D shaped base technology - opinions??
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|