Running board design

[pinkpantherusmincus]

Hey folks I am making some running boards for my 05 rev. I am wanting to do some thing similar to jt no snow running boards (see pic below)... I was thinking about making the aluminium rods that you stand on slightly concave instead of strait. Wanted you feedback if you think it's better to have them strait or bent?

 

[lilduke]

id go with straight

 

[QuintinG]

Im a welder and I haven't seen running boards that look EXACTLY the way I want so I have considered doing the same thing. Those JT's are nice and I also like the skinz but theres small differences that id like to make.

 

[pinkpantherusmincus]

hey quintin, if my wife didn't lose it at me for spending too much money on sled parts, i would be building a set similar to skinz. The plate aluminium insert style was a hell of a lot cheaper as i have most of the stuff to fab them up, though i don't have a tig welder so i have to outsource that.... and it would be a hell of a lot more cash to get a skinz style board welded than the JT ones. so i had to go for the cheaper option :-(

 

[pinkpantherusmincus]

quintin what changes would you make to a set of JT or skinz?

 

[QuintinG]

Well I like the full tube design of the skinz but I have a freeride which has wide boards and the skins taper near the back like the normal xp boards. The jt boards are more square it appears (never seen em in person yet) and id prefer the shape and size of the jt's but with a tube design like the skinz.

 

[Modman]

Well I like the full tube design of the skinz but I have a freeride which has wide boards and the skins taper near the back like the normal xp boards. The jt boards are more square it appears (never seen em in person yet) and id prefer the shape and size of the jt's but with a tube design like the skinz.

If you are comparing the skinz ones to the JT's they are two different things right? The JT ones look like inserts, the Skinz ones require that you cut the outer edge completely off (JT's dont?). The outer rolled edge/extrusions add significant support and a foot lock to keep your feet on the boards also. If you are building skinz style ones, you might want to consider using a larger diameter outer tube to give you that ridge, and to be stronger. Then inset the cross bars below the top of the outer tube so there is some kind of guide/lock for your foot on the running board. This is more important than most would think. At the back end, I would ensure its tied into the tunnel with a flange or added support behind and IMO bolted using something like 1/4" bolts, otherwise rivets just pop.

 

[maxwell]

Skinz are designed like factory taper summits to aid with sidehilling. Constant width boards or free ride boards hinder steep sidehilling ability. Really depends on your riding style I guess. Jumps drops and climbs stick with constant width wide boards. Boondocking and tree riding go with the taper design.

 

[pinkpantherusmincus]

Building ones like jt inserts, not skinz. The question I am asking is should I do the cross supports strait (as pictured) or with a concave arc in them?

 

[scrfce]

Skinz are designed like factory taper summits to aid with sidehilling. Constant width boards or free ride boards hinder steep sidehilling ability. Really depends on your riding style I guess. Jumps drops and climbs stick with constant width wide boards. Boondocking and tree riding go with the taper design.

Wrong. The tapered design definately negatively affects steep sidehilling, encouraging the tail end to wash out and making it more unpredictable while trying to hold a line

 

[maxwell]

That's your opinion I guess lol

 

[neilsleder]

Are you thinking of the bend going up or down? If I where you I would make the strait the way the boards are angled will keep your foot and leg strait. If you put a concave in them your foot and leg won't be strait and might put your self a risk of hurting an ankle easier! I have built a few sets of skins style running boards now for a few different sleds and you will not regret doing it. I would recommend skins style. I rode M-series sleds with inserts and ones that I built the skins style boards for and hands down skins style are better!

 

[neilsleder]

Wrong. The tapered design definately negatively affects steep sidehilling, encouraging the tail end to wash out and making it more unpredictable while trying to hold a line

Really? I got to agree with Maxwell on this. Wide boards just hang up and float the back end.

 

[QuintinG]

Yeah max im still a new rider so steep sidehills are out of my reach for the time. I get what you're saying though about the tapered boards. But yeah its just a project id be interested to do one day, who knows if it will ever happen. Its the type of thing that takes lots of research and can be very customized any way the builder needs which makes it a very interesting project with endless possibilities.

 

[pinkpantherusmincus]

if i was to make them concave, they would be perpendicular to the tunnel and they would curve down not up

 

[stormtrooper]

Wrong. The tapered design definately negatively affects steep sidehilling, encouraging the tail end to wash out and making it more unpredictable while trying to hold a line

I know its off topic...... But .... Wtf? Ok I'll bite. What am I missing? You are saying wider boards toward tail end help prevent washout?

 

[Joholio]

Make em straight, them jump your sled fifty times, the concave look will come naturally.

 

[scrfce]

I know its off topic...... But .... Wtf? Ok I'll bite. What am I missing? You are saying wider boards toward tail end help prevent washout?

Yeeeup. Xp's and xm's have always had problems with the tail end washing out on steep sidehills and my thoughts are its because of the wide body panels and footwells will hold onto ur desired line but since they taper to nothing in the back of the running boards it doesnt hold-washout/skiis pointing uphill.
You dont see it happen near as often with running boards that are the same width all the way back

 

[Modman]

Yeeeup. Xp's and xm's have always had problems with the tail end washing out on steep sidehills and my thoughts are its because of the wide body panels and footwells will hold onto ur desired line but since they taper to nothing in the back of the running boards it doesnt hold-washout/skiis pointing uphill.
You dont see it happen near as often with running boards that are the same width all the way back

I think there is more to washout than just running board design IMPO, I also think its due to more rider forward positioning as well as chassis flex and stiffness, and less on running board design. I've built a couple custom chassis' and noticed more slide out on the standard sheet tunnel vs a tube chassis, as you just have more rider influence on a tube sled vs a standard tunnel. Rider forward puts more weight over the skis and forces the rider "forward" (duh obviously) therefore less on the very back half of the sled. Only natural that it will slide out easier on the back end with no weight to make it bite.