A Better Binding

(I know; three bolts are enough…)

I know what I want in a binding.  If I can’t buy it, I’ll make it myself.

—-

I like the cant disc assembly of the TD2/TD3.  Not so crazy about what sits on top of that piece (not talking about the ugly boot…).

The primary concern is the minute boot contact area of the toe and heel pads, and the inherent flexibility of the hollowed out ‘base plate’.

Roughing on the bandsaw.

The original plate is 1/4″.  What I wanted was 5/16″.  What I had available was 3/8″.

Why make only one pair, when for just a little more time, you can make a bunch…?

The unruly  mob convened on the Kearney & Trecker.

Truing the edges with a roughing mill.

Drilling the mounting holes for TD1 toe and heel blocks.  These have a larger contact area than the TD2, and offer a more secure interface.

There was entirely too much screwing around involved with this fixture. An alignment pin in place of the two larger cap screws and a pair of toggle clamps would have saved immense time.

Cutting threads on the Janus gang drill.  Any more than six holes of a type, and I’m using the machine.

Awaiting deburring.  Don’t want to tear that new Arc’teryx shell…

The angle adjustment slots and the edge/end radii were cut using a small rotary table.

These were built for proof of concept, and personal use.  As such, they are not for sale.

(You wouldn’t want them anyway, as ‘stiff’ bindings are ‘BAD‘).

Made a few pair to mount on the CATEK base.  Yes, there are 6 jack screws involved.  I had to make one full revolution of the rotary table to do 4 holes, so why not?

This configuration, with the thicker mid-plate and larger contact area at toe and heel, is the ‘event horizon’ of flexibility.  Flex is drawn inexorably from lesser bindings as they pass in the lift-line.

They are not really stiff; rather, ‘transparent’, in that they do not color the conversation between board and rider.  This interface will inform you very quickly if, in fact, your movements on a board are less than ideal.