I'm a Cody fan and his Fifty series is brilliant but that binding video doesn't do him any favours. There's plenty of tech bindings on the market with toe &/or heel elasticity on the market, have independently adjustable lateral/vertical releases and have release values that are din equivalent - it's just that Amer (Salomon/Atomic) don't make one. He could have easily stated that they're available but instead he left the impression that they don't actually exist - as a customer told me the other day who'd seen the video on snowHeads. He's right about the Shift though.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Fri 5-03-21 23:33; edited 2 times in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@spyderjon, what’s your view on equivalents??
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
I'm a Cody fan and his Fifty series is brilliant but that binding video doesn't do him any favours. There's plenty of tech bindings on the market with toe &/or heel elasticity on the market, have independently adjustable lateral/vertical releases and have release values that are din equivalent -.
My question is what meets the above criteria??
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@kitenski, the DIN certification process was developed for alpine bindings and to be certified a binding has to have a number of features like: toe lateral elasticity, heel vertical elasticity, heel longitudinal elasticity (forward pressure), brakes (plus how/when they deploy) plus other things like be non-icing and meeting durability standards etc. But one of the main requirements is to have consistent adjustable release values that corresponded to the Nm release forces for twist (MZ) or forward lean (MY) as specified on the DIN charts - meaning that if the skiers stats dictated a setting of '8' then he/she could confidently set any other make/model of binding to 8 and the actual Nm release values would be the same - to give an industry wide universal standard.
A few years ago a number of tech bindings achieved DIN certification (Beast, Radical 2/Rotation, Ion, Kingpin, Vipec/Evo, Tecton etc) but the features required meant they're all over 600g per ski. To get significantly lighter (ie the sub 400g & 300g categories) means removing a number of required features meaning that these lightweight tech bindings can never achieve the certification. But whilst the early generation lightweight tech bindings did have adjustable release values their settings often didn't match the same release values on alpine bindings and their consistency wasn't as good etc. Plus they didn't have any longitudinal heel elasticity so they had a propensity to pre-release out of the toe etc (hence they were often skied with the toes locked out).
So what I mean by DIN equivalency is that the modern tech bindings (well all the ones I've tested) have release values that do match the alpine DIN chart so you can confidently set the release value(s) to the same as your alpine bindings etc (assuming the same Skier Type/level of motivation etc) plus many of them have longitudinal heel elasticity which effectively eliminates punching out at the toe.
@spyderjon, out of interest do you have any data on the medium and soft u-bows?
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@BobinCH, If you're running DIN 10 then you're fine, wasn't sure if you had them set at 7 or 8 and were expecting the forward release to be similar!
After all it is free
After all it is free
@spyderjon, thanks for the comprehensive answer!
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
KenX wrote:
@spyderjon, out of interest do you have any data on the medium and soft u-bows?
Alpinist hard u-bow: Marker say 9-11, my testing = 11
Alpinist medium u-bow: Marker say 7-9, my testing = 8-9
Alpinist soft u-bow: Marker say 5-7, my testing = 6-7
All testing done on a Wintersteiger Plus torque testing machine using my 305mm Dynafit Mercury boot with a new tech heel insert installed. I tested 3-4 pairs of each strength, all 19-20 production.
The issue with any u-bow type binding is that the vast majority of the users won't know the actual release value and that the manufacturers quoted release values are too vague/wide range.
Then there's the problem of actually getting a matched pair of u-bows as I don't believe for one minute that the manufacturers are individually testing/matching them. My testing shows that a pair of u-bows are likely to vary by a din between them. It is also possible to fine tune a u-bow and lower the release value slightly by grinding a whisker off the rear face of the 'u' with a Dremel but to do this you need access to a testing machine to check as you go.
These variances are actually within the allowed variances in alpine bindings that everyone skis without any worry/concern. But, with a 305mm boot, a 9 din hard u-bow releases at 305Nm and an 11 hard u-bow releases at 380Nm = a calf muscle stretching/tearing or achilles snapping 25% increase!
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@spyderjon, cheers for that My understanding was the U-springs were rated at pretty much the same as the stated upper DIN limit (lateral) for the Alpinist 8/9/12, so I'm glad I changed the medium springs out for the soft
Enjoying the Alp Tracks. 1350g for a 106mm waisted 185cm ski is nuts. They are a joy to tour on. Hopefully some pow coming to test them out on the down.
Pushing the Wally pace in the rain/slush/snowstorm
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Enjoying the Alp Tracks. 1350g for a 106mm waisted 185cm ski is nuts. They are a joy to tour on. Hopefully some pow coming to test them out on the down.
Pushing the Wally pace in the rain/slush/snowstorm
Yikes, you've gone straight into SkiMo racing. 700m / hr. Respect!
I'll be joining you at the top about an hour later.
Also begining to realise my RipsStick 106 + Tectons are brilliant for the down but a little heavy for the up and my MTN 88s are fine on the up but a challenge on the down in paving slab style crust.
But those new fangled things are not cheap............
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Ed_sec wrote:
Also begining to realise my RipsStick 106 + Tectons are brilliant for the down but a little heavy for the up and my MTN 88s are fine on the up but a challenge on the down in paving slab style crust.
But those new fangled things are not cheap............
To be fair according to Blister the MTN 88’s aren’t the ideal crust skis
I’m not sure it’s necessary to go as light as the Alp Tracks, even if it is a delight on the up. I think the RipSticks are pretty light - Maybe consider sticking some 280g Alpinists or ATK’s on them if they are primarily a touring ski?
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
BobinCH wrote:
Ed_sec wrote:
Also begining to realise my RipsStick 106 + Tectons are brilliant for the down but a little heavy for the up and my MTN 88s are fine on the up but a challenge on the down in paving slab style crust.
But those new fangled things are not cheap............
To be fair according to Blister the MTN 88’s aren’t the ideal crust skis
I’m not sure it’s necessary to go as light as the Alp Tracks, even if it is a delight on the up. I think the RipSticks are pretty light - Maybe consider sticking some 280g Alpinists or ATK’s on them if they are primarily a touring ski?
Interesting list, thanks. I don't feel quite so bad about struggling in the crust on the 88s. Luckily there was plenty of space so I just made huge wide turns on the outside ski, waiting patiently for the ski to come round which it gradually did. Workable but not the most pleasurable (unless you're into telemark ). Heavy slush has not been such a problem as it does at least deform a bit if you put enough umph into it and maybe the snow hasn't reached full spring weight yet.
The Ripsticks are such a versatile ski and great fun on any snow but 500g heavier per ski all told. The idea was for lift served OP with the odd skin. The sort of thing you get on say the SOPiB.
I feel a new ski beckoning around 1500g, 95 to 100 uder foot, with an ALpinist / MTN type binding. The MTN 95 or Camox Freebird, or similar. Will wait for a good deal though. I managed to get the 88s for €200 so can't complain.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@BobinCH - It's pretty clear form the list that wider skis are easier in crappy snow. What I've always experienced but never seen to clearly in an actual list.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@BobinCH, those Blister pecking orders are interesting. As you bought the Movement Alp Tracks I can only assume that they top the charts in fresh snow/powder and chopped up fresh?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
@BobinCH - "I think the RipSticks are pretty light - Maybe consider sticking some 280g Alpinists or ATK’s on them if they are primarily a touring ski?"
Well when the lifts are running they're not primarily a touring ski, but it's an interesting idea which has I think given me the solution. Thanks very much.
I have a trusty pair of Cham 97 2.0 which have served well but still have some life in them.
Strikes me in many ways the are very similar to the Camox Freebird if not quite so light (side cut nearly identical for example). If I stick some micro bindings on those I'll save 1.35 Kg (pair) over the ripsticks and even 400g over the MTN 88s which have Radical 2.0.
So no need for another (expensive) ski. Just have to figure out the differences between the rival micro bindings.
If you have views on those I'm sure they'd be worth hearing too.
Cheers, Ed.
@Ed_sec, cham 97 2 , will make a good tool , used to ski the mythic which was light weight version of same ski and now ski the camox free and its soo good , after toying with various light weight bindings have finally settled on the mtn fox Solomon a very simple robust design and build , that's proving to be a good choice
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Dabber wrote:
@Ed_sec, cham 97 2 , will make a good tool , used to ski the mythic which was light weight version of same ski and now ski the camox free and its soo good , after toying with various light weight bindings have finally settled on the mtn fox Solomon a very simple robust design and build , that's proving to be a good choice
Very interesting, thanks. Seems to me there's now a sweet spot for a multi purpose ski with lots of suppliers making variants of a similar theme. I know each ski may feel a bit different under foot but on paper everyone has a camox FB-style ski and the race for the lightest weight is coming to it's senses, hence Camox FB not the lightest of the light. My pair of Chams is only slightly heavier. Had a quick outing today on the Ripsticks which reminded me the real weight often includes the snow on top as well. A lot today as a big dump of snow is melting fast lower down. If it starts clumping under the skins it doesn't matter how light your ski is! How robust was your Mythic? I've heard some complaints. Will do a little more binding research but MTN sounds good.
@Ed_sec, first couple of iterations of the mythic defo had issues , mine had a camber issue , I had a set replaced foc direct from the factory and they were then sound , coped really well with most conditions and were a nice ski for Chamonix steeps and touring in general , I just think things have moved on now and there are a very good choice of light weight free tour skis that will all do well , I went for the camox for the exact reason you state , not the lightest but defiantly very versatile for the coastal snow we get in bc .
have a look at the skin tips article above to help with the clumpy snow , a stop and full clean of skins and bases makes for a much better day
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Voelkl rise above 88's. The only touring ski you will ever need. 1200 gms in the 177. They work in everything. Ice, powder, crud, slush. I have a number of touring skis and since I bought these at the beginning of the season I haven't even thought about taking anything else out. I don't read about them much on this forum but if you do some research.....
After all it is free
After all it is free
@Dabber Will read that article now. Was on my list....... worst of all is when you get a brick of ice/snow attached to the base of your ski on the way down. I carry a stick of wax among my bits + bobs now and at any sign of stickiness on the way up take the extra time at the top to wax the bases before heading down.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@zzz Thanks for the lead. The new Volkl Rise range sounds like great gear and ridiculously light. But my old Chams have the critical advantage of already being in my cellar!
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@BobinCH
@Dabber
So, following your advice (always nice to have someone to blame if something goes wrong…) I went mad and bought the best 300g to 350g binding I could find at the last minute. Last minute because I’m doing 5 days guided touring next week and had left it too late to wait for internet deliveries. As it turned out I managed to get the one I wanted in Chambery which is not too far for me.
Anyway I’ll stick a couple of pics on here as others may be contemplating these. They look beautiful and seem high precision so I feel I need to be careful of them (if you look at these skis you’ll see I’m not that careful generally). These old Chams had Salomon Guardians on before so they are now magically 2.3@ kilos lighter.
No idea how they work in practice yet so will get out on Saturday and find out.
Voila, thanks for the input and if anybody has questions about these just say.
ATK C-Raider
ATK C-Raider
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Ed_sec, very nice! Looking forward to my first set of ATK’s one of these days!
Very classy. Not sure about that radioactive snow just at the end though............
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@Ed_sec,
That’s a really good binding.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@Ed_sec, And whoever mounted them remembered to fit the crampon hooks
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@KenX I did point them out to them as the hooks come loose in the box and are easy to overlook. In the context I thought €450 for 305g Inc brakes with all these features is pretty reasonable. The skis let them down a bit but can upgrade those some other season. Just glanced at the bases and they're going straight to the workshop!
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@KenX Wanted to try the "Freeride spacer" but will have to get it separately from internet. Seems like all pin bindings should have that for better heel control. Do you know if it raises the angle of the flat walk mode? You'd think it must do....
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
New sledging boots
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Looks like they're finally getting the hang of this social distancing malarkey
@KenX Wanted to try the "Freeride spacer" but will have to get it separately from internet. Seems like all pin bindings should have that for better heel control. Do you know if it raises the angle of the flat walk mode? You'd think it must do....
Looks like it will raise the heel about 2/3 mm, so probably not really noticeable, good for landing 20' hucks though, so I guess you should get some
Realistically for touring in powder, you're not going to get any real-world benefits imo......
Supposedly adjustable so the height difference may vary according to how high they need to be set to contact the sole of the boot
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@KenX Thanks. Any hucking I do is strictly small and accidental as you know!
I agree about the not noticeable change to the flat walk angle, you're meant to be going at least a little up hill after all....
Also agree anything works in perfect powder but in real life I am often skiing lumpy ice, thick, breaking crust, heavy warm slush, chopped up slush that is re-freezing etc. I know one is supposed to get up early enough and have impeccable snow finding skills so this doesn't happen but if I could manage either of those I'd just join the Trab Matchstick brigade. I'll try it when I can hold of one and let you know what I find.
After all it is free
After all it is free
Ed_sec wrote:
BobinCH wrote:
@Ed_sec, very nice! Looking forward to my first set of ATK’s one of these days!
Very classy. Not sure about that radioactive snow just at the end though............
Thought it was s fart.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@adithorp - Sounded like a geiger counter to me but you may know things about Bob that I don't!
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Can't believe I'm seriously contemplating this but do think an e-bike (MTB) is the next bit of touring gear to consider, though think renting might be more economically viable.
Yesterday drove the van up a gnarly trail and parked up at 1,650 and then hiked for another hour to get to put the skins on 2,000m (South facing side of the valley) - up near the Granon road, usually, we can drive up it but currently, it's blocked at 1,500 with snow-plough debris.
Or we spend two or three hours digging out the snow?
And the OH's nice new DPS Pagoda 106 Touring skis I was not too happy with the fit of the skins DPS supplied and she had a real night-mare a couple of days ago (having left the crampons in the van) slipping and sliding all over the place, in the end I put the skins on close to the edge and made sure when traversing we did it in one direction!
Back home we dug the box out the skins came in and they were 100's !!!
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
). Heavy slush has not been such a problem as it does at least deform a bit if you put enough umph into it and maybe the snow hasn't reached full spring weight yet.
