Hello and welcome to my Union Atlas FC snowboard bindings review.
In this review I will take a look at the Atlas FCs as freeride snowboard bindings.
As per tradition here at SnowboardingProfiles.com I will give the Atlas FCs a score out of 100 (based on several factors) and see how they compare with other Freeride bindings.
NOTE: This review has only been updated to the 2024 model. While they don't appear to have been officially discontinued, as there is still availability on Union's website, it appears they are on their way out and I haven't seen a 2025 model anywhere outside of Union's website. They didn't even have the Atlas FC in their 2025 catalog, so it certainly appears as though, they are in the process of selling off remaining stock, before officially discontinuing them.
Overall Rating
Bindings: Union Atlas FC 2024
Price: $569 (USD recommended retail)
Style: Freeride
Other Uses: Aggressive All-Mountain
Flex Rating: Stiff (10/10)
Flex Feel: Stiff (9/10)
Compared to other Men’s Freeride Bindings
Out of the 13 Men’s Freeride bindings that I rated:
Overview of the Atlas FC’s Specs
Check out the tables for the Atlas FC ’s specs and available sizes.
Specs
STYLE:
FREERIDE
PRICE:
$569 - BUYING OPTIONS
$569 - BUYING OPTIONS
Ability Level:
flex:
weight:
Felt normal
Mounts to:
2x4 | 4x4 | Channel
Sizing
SIZE | US BOOT SIZE | EURO BOOT SIZE | UK BOOT SIZE |
|---|---|---|---|
S | 5.5-7.5 | 37-40.5 | 4.5-6.5 |
M | 8-10 | 41-43 | 7-9 |
L | 10.5-13 | 43.5-46 | 9.5-12 |
Who are the Atlas FC Most Suited To?
The Atlas FC is best suited to advanced to expert riders who like to ride fast, carve hard and need bindings that will take whatever they can throw at them. Make no mistake these bindings are stiff.
Best matched to stiffer flexing boards - that 7/10 to 10/10 flex range.
The Atlas FC in More Detail
O.k. let’s take a more detailed look at what the Atlas FC are capable of.
Demo Info
Binding: Union Atlas FC 2024, M
Date: March 16, 2023
Conditions
Sunny, barely a cloud in the sky. Perfect visibility.
Temperature was -1°C (30°F) and -6°C (21°F) with wind, in the morning and 2°C (36°F), which was -2°C (28°F) with wind, in the afternoon. NW winds 5kph (3mph) morning and afternoon.
24 hour snow: 0" (0cm)
48 hour snow: 2" (5cm)
7 day snow: 16" (41cm)
On groomer: Hard pack but not icy. Overall really quite nice. And fast.
Off groomer: Doable but not ideal. Hard and crunchy.
Set Up
Bindings angles: +15/-15
Stance width: 555mm (22″)
Board tested with: Lib Tech Terrain Wrecker 157
Boots tested with: Adidas Response ADV, size US9.5
Footbed length: 24.5cm (9.7”)
Footbed Length Fully Extended: 25.5cm (10”)
Baseplate Length (underside): 23cm (9.1")
Highback Height: 21cm (8.3”)
Weight: 960 grams (2lbs, 2oz)
* for one binding, including screws and disc. The average weight of a small sample size of around 80 bindings (2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 & 2024 models) I have weighed is 920 grams (2lbs). So the Atlas FC is close to average and felt normal on snow too.
Flex
I had the Atlas FC, Atlas Pro, Force, Force Classic and Strata with me to test, so I was able to compare against all of them, plus the Burton Malavita (my control bindings).
In Hand: The highback on these bindings is ultra stiff. And I can definitely see why they get a 10/10 stiffness rating. They barely budge at all when really trying to twist it. And forget about trying to pull back on it, there's no movement whatsoever, so I'm in complete agreement that the highback flex on these things is 10/10 stiffness! Definitely the stiffest highback of all the other bindings I compared them to.
Ankle strap flex is a little flexier - it was somewhere in between the others I tested. Flexier than the new Force and the Strata, about the same as the Atlas Pro, Force Classic and Malavita and a little stiffer than the Atlas.
The toe strap's flex was one of the flexier of all the toe straps. Same as the Atlas Pro, similar to the new Force, but flexier than the Force Classic, Strata and Atlas.
On Snow: On snow they definitely feel stiff, but not quite a 10. Even though that high back is as stiff as they come, there was just a hint of forgiveness in the overall ride. Don't get me wrong, one of the stiffer bindings I've ridden in, but more 9/10 flex for me.
Responsiveness
At slower speeds took more muscling but could get it moving pretty quickly, just takes a little more effort than a lot of other bindings. And this was no surprise, given their stiffness. Certainly harder to turn at slower speeds vs the Malavita (my control bindings) and more effort vs Atlas. Pretty close vs Atlas Pro at slower speeds, though if I had to make a call, I'd say the Atlas Pro were a little better at slower speeds.
Also expected, due to their flex, was how good they felt on a carve. Made my board feel considerably more carvy than my control bindings and whilst they were again very similar to the Atlas Pro in terms of carving and higher speeds, they were just a touch better.
What surprised me is that they didn't make my board feel too twitchy, which I often find with stiffer bindings on a softer board. These made my board feel more stable at higher speeds and more confident holding an edge on a deeper carve at higher speeds.
Board Feel/Butterability
Really decent board feel, which was rather surprising, given their stiffness and they don't use a mini-disc or anything. Part of that is likely down to quite a hard/minimal footbed. And this good board feel is potentially part of the reason why they didn't make my board feel too twitchy, despite how stiff they are.
It was a little harder to execute ollies, butters etc vs my control bindings but those are really good for it, so still really decent.
Pop/Ollie Power
They took a little more effort to get that pop out of the board, but when putting in that effort they gave at least as much power and I think a little more than my control bindings. Just not as effortless to extract that pop power.
Adjustability
The Atlas FC have really good adjustability. Most things are adjustable on this binding.
Heel Cup: Yes - which is great for boot centering.
Stance Width: Micro adjustments possible - can run disc horizontal and that allows micro stance width adjustments. And given you can use the heel cup for boot centering, you're pretty much always going to be able to run the disc horizontal, as the only advantage of running the disc vertical is to adjust for boot centering.
Highback Lean: Yes and tool-less
Ankle Strap Position: No
Toe Strap Position: Yes - 2 position options
Ankle and toe strap length: Tool-less
Gas pedal/toe ramp extension: Yes - a 1cm range.
Highback Rotation: No (unlike the Atlas Pro and Atlas, which both do have highback rotation).
Compatible with: 2 x 4 | 4 x 4 | Channel
Shock Absorption
Footbed Thickness: 2.1cm toe and 2cm heel (on one side then 2.2cm toe and 2.1cm heel on other side) – some subtle canting there. There’s padding in the toe and heel, but it’s very hard, not cushy at all. That probably helps with board feel, but not shock absorption.
On Snow: They didn't absorb shock absorption as well as my control bindings. Quite noticeably down. Nothing terrible - but a step down. Felt very similar to the Atlas Pro, which in turn felt very similar to the regular Atlas.
Entry/Exit
Ratchets nice and smooth and no issues unstrapping on the move approaching chairlift.
Comfort
Overall really decently comfortable, especially for how stiff they are.
Ankle Strap: Felt good. No pressure points. Felt like you could over crank it and that could lead to pressure points, but you can get it to a position where it's really secure without having to over crank it and at that point there was no pressure.
Toe Strap: The toe strap is really minimal and pretty flexy. I found it conformed to my boots really well and didn't notice it when riding.
Canted Footbed: Yes.
Padded Footbed: Not a lot of padding or cush.
Highback: No padding and hard and stiff. But surprisingly no calf-bite. I did have the forward lean in the most upright position it could go in, but still, with how stiff the high back felt, I was surprised to have no calf bite at all.
Ankle Support
Ankle support was good. I found it felt very similar to what I'm used to.
Score Breakdown and Final Verdict
Check out the breakdown of the score in the table below.
RATING | Contribution to Final Score | |
|---|---|---|
CARVING | 5.0 | 30/30 |
SLOW SPEED RESPONSE | 3.5 | 3.5/5 |
ADJUSTABILITY | 4.5 | 13.5/15 |
ANKLE SUPPORT | 4.0 | 12/15 |
SHOCK ABSORPTION | 3.5 | 7/10 |
COMFORT | 4.0 | 8/10 |
BOARD FEEL | 4.0 | 8/10 |
ENTRY/EXIT | 4.0 | 4/5 |
TOTAL after normalizing | 90.1/100 |
Overall, the Atlas FC are stiff, hardy, take-no-prisoners bindings that enhance a boards carving abilities, response at high speeds and stability at speed.
But for how stiff they are, they were surprisingly comfortable and had better board feel than I would have predicted.
More Info, Current Prices and Where to Buy Online
If you’re interested in learning more about the Atlas FC or want to research prices and availability check out the links below.
If you want to check out some other freeride bindings or want to see how the Atlas FC compare to other freeride bindings, check out the next link.
Hi Nate,
You’ve already helped me a great deal with binding choice (recently discussed under the Union Falcor thread) and I wondered if I dare to bother you with the same topic still… but since there aren’t any comments under this Atlas FC review, maybe we should get the conversation started 😉
Based on your advice and current availability I’ve already narrowed my options into a stiff freeride binding in size L, with the Union Atlas FC and the Burton X EST as the top candidates.
I received the Customer X 162W and set it up with my Spark Surge Pro split bindings (temporary solution, but seems to work well with the solid conversion kit), put on my US 11 Burton Imperial boots and took it out for the first ride. As a background to the binding choice, here are my impressions:
– Easy to ride, not at all catchy – though I was trying to be more careful on this first ride and focus on keeping the board on edge.
– The base is really fast, even with the factory wax on. I think I broke my “speed record” yesterday, though that definitely wasn’t the intention.
– No question it carves well, but I was nowhere near the board’s capabilities yet. Got to get used to the twin shape, different sidecut etc. and build confidence.
– Pretty good to ride switch, even with a forward stance. Think I’ll learn to carve switch better and at some point later on set this up duck and carve both directions.
– Tried some small tables, pops nicely and the landings are stable, so I’ll probably use this for jumps, too (though that wasn’t the main intention, originally).
– It even butters well (I don’t butter well on any board, but in comparison…).
All in all, my first impression was that it is actually quite a versatile ride and I might use it to more than just carving morning groomers. That said, since it really is fast, finding a setup that enables holding an edge at speed will still be a priority.
With these thoughts, I tried to make sense of what I’ve read about the Atlas FC and the X EST:
– The Atlas FC might be stiffer and more responsive? Would it be a better match for carving with the Custom X? Or does the SpringBED add so much in response that it beats the Atlas FC for a Channel board?
– Perhaps the X EST has a better board feel and forgiveness, would it make it a better binding for buttering? Some say, though, that the SpringBED on the X ruins the board feel…
– Considering jumps and chatter, I wonder whether the Atlas FC’s “regular” shock absorption or the SpringBED would be better?
– It’s probably mainly due to my old boots (and perhaps also the splitboard binding), but the heel hold / ankle support could be better. The Atlas FC and the X EST both seem to be pretty good at this, would you see any difference?
Both bindings are available at a discount and very similar price, so that isn’t really a factor. The ability to use the Atlas FC on non-channel boards naturally is, but on the other hand I don’t have other boards at the moment that would require a binding this stiff. So I’m thinking that if the X EST offers some unique benefits over the other options, this could be the time to get one. On the other hand, if the Atlas FC is still a better binding for what I intend to do on the CX, I’ll go for that for sure.
I’m also still considering the X-base, but if I understand right, the Re:Flex version has more give than the two above and might not make as good a carver with the CX? The EST version, on the other hand, apparently lacks the SpringBED and would lose in shock absorption to both of my top options?
Not sure if it makes much of a difference in the choice between these bindings, but at some point I plan to replace my Size US 11 Imperials with a more responsive boot. Probably one from your “top 5 freeride boots” list. Also the Ride Trident seems like a great boot, if it isn’t too flexy for the rest of the setup.
Which binding would you go for in my case? Or yet another one, after all?
Hi Jussi
Thanks for the follow up and extra info.
I haven’t ridden the X EST, so I couldn’t say for sure how it compares. I rode the old X Base Re:Flex a while bask, but don’t think it had the Spingbed, so I’m not sure how that affects things. The X Base is almost as responsive I would say as the Atlas FC, or maybe just a touch under, but still very responsive. I find that EST bindings tend to provide better response and better board feel – at the cost of shock absorption usually. I would say that the X EST probably doesn’t absorb shock as well as the Atlas FC, but would provide as good a response and better board feel. But perhaps that springbed evens out the board feel and shock absorption a little? But I’m not sure.
I’ve certainly always preferred Burton EST over Burton Re:Flex on a Channel board. The trade off of less shock absorption for better response and board feel is well worth it to me. So if you were to go Burton, I would go EST, if you’re not likely to have these bindings on a non-channel Burton in the future. But that is of course the biggest downside of EST. I would probably (having not ridden the X EST, but based on other EST bindings and previous X Base) go X EST, because it’s a channel board. If it was between the X Base Re:Flex and the Atlas FC, I would go Atlas FC. Between the Atlas FC and X Base I think you’ll really like both, so there’s not a wrong decision. I think the biggest thing is to decide if you think you’ll ever want to use them on a non-channel board in the future. If you think that’s unlikely I would be leaning X EST (again with the proviso that I haven’t tested those specific bindings), but if you think there’s a reasonable chance then I’d go Atlas FC, and I don’t think you would be disappointed with either choice.
Thanks again Nate!
Great points that you made. Since I really don’t have another board at the moment to pair a very responsive binding with (and might not need another for a while), I decided to “optimize” for Custom X and went for the X EST in size L.
Also noticed that my faithful Imperials are really starting to come apart (just counted approx. 160 days of riding with them on), so I also ordered the K2 Thraxis boots on the same go. I read your review of it once more and concluded that apart from the not-so-reduced footprint there really aren’t any downsides. For the size L binding and 162W board that shouldn’t be any issue anyway. With pretty good shock absorption it probably counters what I might lose with the X EST, while also the board feel appears to be better than on Ride Insano. The real deal makers for me, though, are response and heel hold.
The only two concerns I have… some seem to complain about the inner boa skeleton being very painful – I hope that’s not the case for me. Also sized down from US 11 Imperial to US 10,5 on this one. However, I measured my feet again and the larger one is 278 mm, so (given I measured right), there should be 7 mm difference to the mondo size 285.
I went for another ride on the CX today and it really is a fun board. Really looking forward to riding it with its “final” setup 🙂
Hi Jussi
I think that’s sound reasoning. I had no issues with the inner BOA skeleton, but everyone’s feet are different. And yeah not being low profile shouldn’t be an issue at all if you’re in 10.5s on the 162W.
Look forward to hearing how you get on, once you’ve got the full set up going.
Hi Nate,
Now that I have a few days’ experience with the new setup, perhaps it’s time to report back a bit of first impressions…
Overall, the setup feels really solid. Easy and fun to ride both early morning hardpack and the afternoon slush. That said, I don’t think I’ve had the courage and skill to make the most of this energetic and responsive combo yet. So I’m hoping it’ll force me onto a learning curve for the remainder of the season and the next one.
Sizewise, the Large X Est could not be any larger. The ankle strap has plenty of range left, but the toe strap is adjusted to its smallest and still doesn’t feel like it gets very tight. I haven’t noticed it being loose while riding, though, so maybe that’s just how it is.
On the deeper heelside carves I’ve also booted out quite a few times (i.e. the heelcup of the binding has caught up with the snow, not sure I’m using the correct terminology here…). I’ve tried to mitigate the problem by moving the bindings towards the toeside and also by using bigger stance angles, but with EST there seems to be a limit on how far you can adjust (= the bigger the angles, the less heel-toe adjustability there is). Additionally, even if I could move the bindings further to the toeside, I’m close to starting to have binding overhang, so there’s another limit. It works as is, though, so maybe I’ll just continue to learn on it and tweak the angles etc. as I go.
The K2 Thraxis boots have been a really good addition to the board and bindings. Stiff, but comfortable from day 1! Sizing down for US11 Burton to US10,5 wasn’t too much – over time the liners might even pack enough that I could’ve had a size 10. But for now it feels just right.
Without question the Custom X – X EST – Thraxis combo is the best all-mountain setup I’ve had so far. I also haven’t managed to ride a day long enough yet that any part of it would’ve started to develop serious pressure points or be otherwise uncomfortable. So I think they’ll see a plenty of use during the coming seasons 🙂
Thanks again for you advice!
Hi Jussi
Thanks for the update. Really appreciate the feedback and insights into your new setup.