 Poster: A snowHead
|
I've got a pair of skis in the garage I bought new in 2012 ... and I have not used them for a long while.
They are a pair of Salomon Enduro xt800 with titanium and bamboo. Not everyone's cup of tea but ...
I liked them a lot and the bases are in superb condition still but ...
do they just degrade and lose bounce over time?
I know back in the day we would expect old skis to just become ornaments after a few years.
Its something I have never got around to asking before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I don't envisage a problem.
They may lose a bit of life over time.....but the deterioration of the bindings may be a bigger issue.
Generally, if the plastic in the bindings becomes brittle....then that is the time to replace the skis.
Re the bindings....generally when the manufacturer no longer indemnifies them, then that may indicate time for a change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 had not thought about the bindings 
I've looked after them and not left them on the roof driving down a salty autobahn.
Anyhow its pleasing news, Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| DrLawn wrote: |
I had not thought about the bindings
I've looked after them and not left them on the roof driving down a salty autobahn.
Anyhow its pleasing news, Thanks. |
This is even more relevant to me, which is why I know a little about it. I still own skis that were bought in 2005 (Atomic SL 11) and are absolutely mint, only having been used for about 4 weeks skiing...but the bindings are no longer indemnified and even though they look fine, I have no way of knowing for sure.
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Thu 23-05-19 20:25; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Not as much/ as fast as the pilot
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@DrLawn, no, not really.
@Old Fartbag, not indemnified means you won’t be able to get them adjusted in the US sue as in the US the retailer/workshop would not be indemnified against losses by the manufacturer if there’s an issue. To the extent that I can determine, that’s not a problem in France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr Lawn , The skis will be fine. Z series bindings from then will still have a good few years in them before indemnity will be an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think I'll drive down to the EoSB next year and take some old skis with me.
Cheers @spyderjon, I'm pleased you popped in and gave me a comment on these.
And @Old Fartbag I've still got a pair of Volkl "Snow Rangers" from 1996 in the garage as well, they may not be mint anymore .. I used to have them serviced every week, there might not be much left of them.
As they are "pre parabolix" I dont know if I can still drive them. (These were classed as "Fat Boys" back in the day 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Old Fartbag, 2005 SL11's should have the Neox bindings in which case you're still good to go (they were renamed the X series and are in the 18/19 Tech Manual). If for some reason they're the older C series/Race bindings then definately don't use them it's not a case of if they'll break but when. However, IIRC the SL 11 skis had some kind of composite content within (like the Metron range) which did breakdown with age.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Thu 23-05-19 21:19; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| spyderjon wrote: |
| Old Fartbag, 2005 SL11's should have the Neox bindings in which case you're still good to go (they were renamed the X series and are in the 18/19 Tech Manual). If for some reason they're the older C series/Race bindings then definately don't use them it's not a case of if they'll break but when. |
They have the CR 412 bindings....that had the heel pieces replaced after the recall.
Actually, even though I got them in 05, I think they are the 04 model: https://www.ski-review.com/ski_reviews/review/atomic_sl11_sl11_2004/
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Thu 23-05-19 21:22; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| ....They have the CR 412 bindings....that had the heel pieces replaced after the recall. |
That's a shame. After seeing a couple go ping on my torque tester I certainly wouldn't use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| spyderjon wrote: |
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| ....They have the CR 412 bindings....that had the heel pieces replaced after the recall. |
That's a shame. After seeing a couple go ping on my torque tester I certainly wouldn't use them. |
If they pass a torque test, are they still unsafe?
Do S&R, or alpine shops generally have torque testers? As I'm in NI, I could bring them to S&R Dublin.
Did the ones that went pop, have the older defective heel pieces?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| If they pass a torque test, are they still unsafe? |
Yep. Just 'cause they pass the test there and then doesn't make them safe. The manufacturers continually test their bindings (I believe it's as part of the TUV certification requirements) and they don't withdraw the indemnification for fun. Many bindings have been on the indemnified list for donkeys years so it's certainly not a commercial scam etc. Just because French shops ignore the system doesn't mean it's ok.
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| Do S&R, or alpine shops generally have torque testers? As I'm in NI, I could bring them to S&R Dublin |
Very few shops have them. I think there's only 4/5 in the UK and none of the S&R stores have them.
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| Did the ones that went pop, have the older defective heel pieces? |
They were both toe binding base plate failures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| spyderjon wrote: |
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| If they pass a torque test, are they still unsafe? |
Yep. Just 'cause they pass the test there and then doesn't make them safe. The manufacturers continually test their bindings (I believe it's as part of the TUV certification requirements) and they don't withdraw the indemnification for fun. Many bindings have been on the indemnified list for donkeys years so it's certainly not a commercial scam etc. Just because French shops ignore the system doesn't mean it's ok.
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| Do S&R, or alpine shops generally have torque testers? As I'm in NI, I could bring them to S&R Dublin |
Very few shops have them. I think there's only 4/5 in the UK and none of the S&R stores have them.
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| Did the ones that went pop, have the older defective heel pieces? |
They were both toe binding base plate failures. |
Thank you Sir.
I love the skis.....but reluctantly, I think it wise to take your advice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@spyderjon, I have some 2004/5 Dynastar Skicross 10 skis with matching Look bindings. Are these likely to be indemnified still?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Alastair wrote: |
| @spyderjon, I have some 2004/5 Dynastar Skicross 10 skis with matching Look bindings. Are these likely to be indemnified still? |
Now look what I've started!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Alastair wrote: |
| @spyderjon, I have some 2004/5 Dynastar Skicross 10 skis with matching Look bindings. Are these likely to be indemnified still? |
Indemification is model specific so I'd need to know the exact binding model details to check. Dynastar binding are rebadged Looks (same parent group) but they have their own model numbers/names.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@spyderjon, Thanks - I thought you might say that. Sadly I have no idea. I shall ask in a ski shop in resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Alastair wrote: |
| @spyderjon, Thanks - I thought you might say that. Sadly I have no idea. I shall ask in a ski shop in resort. |
Post pics of the toe & heel
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@Old Fartbag, SL11s were once the ski you saw everywhere. There was nothing better on a dry slope or carving down a really firm piste. I loved my pair but stopped using them when the bases were more araldite than polyethylene.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| johnE wrote: |
| @Old Fartbag, SL11s were once the ski you saw everywhere. There was nothing better on a dry slope or carving down a really firm piste. I loved my pair but stopped using them when the bases were more araldite than polyethylene. |
They seem to have 2 invisible settings. They have a comfortable, cruising about setting.....but put the work in and they became a hugely powerful, reactive slalom ski....which could easily put you on your ar$e, if your weight went onto the tails.
The skis, bases (and bindings) look almost new. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newer = better.
Those planks are nearly a decade old.
Practically a museum piece.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
