Burtons EST
Just wondering what peoples experiences are: the great, the good, the bad, the ugly
Nothing but good things to say….and i will….. Later.
I have tested a few of the EST bindings (Triads, Cartels, CO2s), and I also own the original EST.
Honestly, the bindings are just awesome.
I am a big fan of the EST and Channel system for a few reasons…
I will talk about how they ride first. It is 100% true when Burton says they improve the feel under your feet. It does just that. Just look at the bindings and you will see how. Instead of a big plastic barrier between your feet and your board, you have a soft and plyable cushion under your feet. You are closer to your board, with more movement and feel. That can only be a good thing.
The EST bindings have to attach to a Burton board with the Channel system. So let’s talk about how the Channel boards ride (I have tested many of these also and own an Uninc). Burton claims the boards flex more naturally. From my experience on the Channel boards (and feedback from other riders), this statement is absolutely correct. The flex of the board is super smooth, I have no reason to disagree with this statement. I actually bought my Uninc after I tested the Channel boards, because I was so impressed with the system.
The main thing that sold me on the EST/Channel system is how I can completely customise my stance. I must admit I am a bit of a tech nerd, and I am very particular about my stance. I know what works well for me and I refuse to compromise my ideal stance for any board. There have been times I did not buy a board, purely because I could not be centred with a certain width, regardless of how much I liked the board. The EST/Channel system not only eliminates this problem, but takes it completely to a another level. I can have my stance 22.75 inches and perfectly centred. I can set binding angles to 19 degress and negative 14, literally 1 degree at a time. I can move my bindings up and down by the millimetre to get my boots perfectly centred on the the board with equal heel and toe overhang. The options are just endless. You can try so many differrent stances and find exactly what works for you. Having these options, again can only be a good thing.
I have had customers ask me if the bindings slip at all. From my own experience I have never seen this happen - to me, a customer, or anyone I ride with. In my opinion it’s just a fantastic system.
I rode the Burton Fix (ICS) with EST bindings.
Yes, close to the board feel as Jez has described.
One thing I find interesting is how skiers have always tried to get higher off the ski, not closer to it.
I think this has a lot to do with angulation and some basic laws of physics about how the leg moves and how that controls the ski… the skiing governing body over contests (some ski racing federation, I think) has placed limitations on the height that the boot can fit above the ski. see they have the ski, then a riser then the binding…
How does this relate to snowboarding?
Well, Palmer plates were popular for various reasons, but the idea of being lifted ogg the board a bit more, I think would have the same physics as it does with skiing, a faster response edge to edge?
Of course with the many different styles of snowboarding there’s bound to be many different preferences. so, raised off the board for stronger edge hold and possibly a faster edge to edge transition? (boardercross or GS racing?) but then close to the board for enhanced feel, for freestyle?
It is an interesting discussion indeed.
The lift you get from palmer plates give a little more clearance for those with big boot sizes. This suggests that EST would NOT be advantageous for the sasquatch!
The sasquatch fears the EST.
I can see how it would make you quicker edge to edge, it would have benefits in slalom. But personally I would never sacrifice board feel for edge to edge quickness. Board feel means everything to me - the closer to your board the better, and with good technique edge to edge response should not be an issue. Maybe if I was racing through gates it would be a different story. 99.9% of snowboarders don’t fall into that category though. It’s a much better call getting a wide board to accomodate large feet than riser plates.
Skiing is different also. With those big clunky boots and big step in bindings, I hardly think ‘ski feel’ means much to them. When racing it’s all about getting from one edge to the other as quickly as possible. Leverage would help that. For me, the feel under my feet is super important for snowboarding.
So is there an adapter between EST bindings and the standard screw plates, you know, to adapt an EST binding for a non-Burton board?
Conversely, have other board companies picked up on EST fittings for their boards?
Sounds like a money-making scheme from Burton to me, unless I’m really missing something. I read the arguments about edge-to-edge feel and so on, but frankly I’ve never really felt a difference based on my limited experience demo-ing EST bindings and such.
There is no adapter for EST bindings. EST bindings can only fit on a Burton board with the channel system. However any binding can fit on a board with the channel system (the boards come with baseplates that attach to the channel).
Burton has created an innovative system, that works very well in my opinion. Even if the only advantage is the endless stance options, isn’t this something we should welcome into the market? I am not saying this to defend Burton, I would say the exact same about any company pushing the development of new products for our benefit. I’m sure researching and creating the EST/Channel system came at a great expense. Buyers have the option to buy any binding on the market. If they buy the EST it would be for a particular reason - board feel or stance options. If that’s not important to the buyer, well the whole market is flooded with other boards and bindings to choose from.
I can see how it would make you quicker edge to edge, it would have benefits in slalom. But personally I would never sacrifice board feel for edge to edge quickness. Board feel means everything to me - the closer to your board the better, and with good technique edge to edge response should not be an issue. Maybe if I was racing through gates it would be a different story. 99.9% of snowboarders don’t fall into that category though. It’s a much better call getting a wide board to accomodate large feet than riser plates.
Skiing is different also. With those big clunky boots and big step in bindings, I hardly think ‘ski feel’ means much to them. When racing it’s all about getting from one edge to the other as quickly as possible. Leverage would help that. For me, the feel under my feet is super important for snowboarding.
Interesting how you equate board feel to ski feel. I agree I dont think skiers know what ski feel is, like a boarder would know what board feel is.
That element doesnt fit in their sport, I dont believe, and it is because of their equipment.
It would be interested to know, that over the years as freestyle skiing has exploded (which they can thank snowboarding for, for the most part) if freestyle boot and bindings have changed greatly.
I’d think that if not yet, then soon there may be a progression toward getting closer to the ski for freestyle skiing, and that would enter in the element of ski feel for them. whereas so many years it has been all about the turn for skiing and racing has helped define the sport..
Snowboarding doesnt and neverwill have those limitations. Infact it is the opposite. the free spirit of the sport has placed it’s roots in a completely different area all together.
Pretty amazing isnt it?
I get into this stuff.
Skiing is different also. With those big clunky boots and big step in bindings, I hardly think ‘ski feel’ means much to them. When racing it’s all about getting from one edge to the other as quickly as possible.
I would have to say that’s completely untrue. There is a lot based on “ski feel” It changes depending on the type of skiing you plan on doing. Yes racing goes from edge to edge but you need a ski that has a quick spring to the base so the skis can come under the body quicker. You would be surprised how similar skiing and snowboarding is, especially this “ski/board feel”.
Interesting how you equate board feel to ski feel. I agree I dont think skiers know what ski feel is, like a boarder would know what board feel is.
That element doesnt fit in their sport, I dont believe, and it is because of their equipment.
It would be interested to know, that over the years as freestyle skiing has exploded (which they can thank snowboarding for, for the most part) if freestyle boot and bindings have changed greatly.
I’d think that if not yet, then soon there may be a progression toward getting closer to the ski for freestyle skiing, and that would enter in the element of ski feel for them. whereas so many years it has been all about the turn for skiing and racing has helped define the sport..
Snowboarding doesnt and neverwill have those limitations. Infact it is the opposite. the free spirit of the sport has placed it’s roots in a completely different area all together.Pretty amazing isnt it?
I get into this stuff.
Freestyle has a been influenced a bit by snowboarding but the boots and bindings haven’t changed that much.. I mean we don’t really have specific boots or bindings for freestyle. We do have stiffer boots for those who ski harder and softer boots that a lot of park guys own. Again I will say, talk to any good skier and they know what “ski feel” is. I know I can tell that my powder skis are much stiffer and don’t have that give that my other all mountain skis do. But I you go and talk to any old skier then they might not know what “ski feel” is but the same can be said for snowboarders.
That’s my rant for skiing. 
I think you misunderstand what I mean by board and ski feel. It actually has nothing to do with how the board or ski flexes. It’s the feeling directly underneath your feet. With snowboarding you go from your heel to toe edge, in skiing you go from side to side, it becomes much more important to use/feel your whole foot when snowboarding. With those big heavy boots that don’t flex underfoot, elevated off the ski, I find it very hard to see how skiers have ski feel (what your feet feel) in the same way snowboarders have board feel.
I think rider26 hit the main point I was thinking…
But I may say it differently…
What each person says ‘feel’ is to them, may mean a different thing.
It may surely mean a different thing from a skier to a boarder, but it may also mean a different thing from one skier to another, and one boarder to another.
I agree that flex is not feel,
The idea of having more feel when the boot is on the board vs. when the boot is elevated from the board, is a very different aspect of feel.
I admit I know only a little about skiing.
I see many similarities between the 2 sports, and I think we should be more thankful to have one another, because we would not be where we are, for either of us if there were not 2 sports. we can thank one another for a lot of things.
I still think it would be an interesting trend if skiing started placing their boots closer to the ski, with no riser…
I mean for a pure freestyle set up, you dont need the same performance as you would to ride fast downhill, or carve nice turns.
We see this, and know this from snowboarding - you just cant carve nice turns on a super soft freestyle board, as you can with a stiffer set up that you would like to use.
The odd thing, is that since freestyle boarding is the more popular and more marketed aspect of snowboarding. It is this type of product that sells more of, and saturates the market, while more carving and freeriding oriented boards become less.
Feel is important in boarding for freestyle, can it be said that it is equally important or beneficial for ... say powder turns?
should we see an EST / ICS fish burton fish?
The Fish already has the channel (it’s not called ICS anymore). Regardless of feel, the unlimited stance options makes it worth having. In my opinion board feel is important no matter what riding you are doing, take carving for example.
the unlimited stance options makes it worth having..
I think that`s the main reason for the whole deal
There is no adapter for EST bindings. EST bindings can only fit on a Burton board with the channel system. However any binding can fit on a board with the channel system (the boards come with baseplates that attach to the channel).
Woah, just define that a little further - any BURTON binding can fit on a board with the channel system. Some other companies are apparently making discs that work, other companies aren’t.
Hah, one of the trendy retail dudes at the Burton HQ store in Vermont tried to tell my friend that if she bought a feelgood her Ride bindings would definitely fit on it. Wrong. Good thing I stepped in before she was conned :)
this discussion is rendered null and void, as Burton EST bindings can’t attach to Libtech boards. If you can’t ride the binding on a lib, why make the binding?
I’ve heard terrible things about EST bindings sliding around, the boards breaking due to pressure cracks along the channels etc, all from riders who put them through 50-100 days a year.
Jer - I know you love them ,but I hate Burton’s exclusive system, their commitment to my friggin Ion boots breaking, and their commitment to suck. Only good thing is - you break a Burton binding, usually get it back within a week fixed. Go corporate monstrosity warranty system.