 Poster: A snowHead
|
Been away for a while, good to be back!!
So.. after 10 years away, skiing is back on the table, 2024 holiday about to be booked and Snozone membership procured so at least twice a month on snow incoming!
Anyhoo.. my old skis went back in 2010 so I'm in the market for some new ones, and what better time to sort than when last years colours are all being sold off at half price! lol.
From past experience and past wishes, I already know I want something frontside focused that can tour (in limited quantities and if necessary.. It is with bitter experience of poling for almost a mile in the Rockies that this was always a desire and something that can now be realised with current technology!) On that note, I have already decided on Marker Duke PTs riding on Volkl Mantra 6s (slightly wavering in favour of Fisher Ranger 96s but keep coming back to the Mantras.) Not after a critique of my choices or alternatives, am happy with where I have landed. Raced on P9 SLs as a young man and am a bit of a Volkl tart so the Mantras could run like a pair of scaffolding planks and I'd still love them!
So... to the question... my old bindings were always set at 8. Cant remember what they were cranked up to when I was competing but that was a lifetime ago! The DIN calculators are coming up with 6 or 7 based on, Advanced, 'sometimes' aggressive skier, 275mm boot, 5'9" and >50 (closer to 60 if truth be told but don't think I ever got past 16 in my head).. my concern is my weight. I was ready to push the button on the Duke PT12s, I'm quite fit but also now quite a big lad and 40lbs heavier than I was 10 years ago @ 240lb. Combine that with the occasions when I will be going for it and don't know if the 16s would be a better option? or... save the £100 and stick with the 12s.
Any input gratefully received.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sat 24-06-23 14:32; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Put one ski at 6 and one at 7, one of them will come off for sure in a fall. As you are not racing, there is no need for DIN level 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@Bigtipper, good call but the question was really which model to go for.. the PT 12 goes from 4-12 so more than enough if I'm running 7. The 16 goes from 6-16.. Now I realise, I'm never going to crank it up anywhere near 12, let alone 16 but the 16 is a bigger, beefier, heavier construction with more magnesium employed. I can still run it at 7 and wondering if the more substantial construction would be better for a heavier aggressive skier?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@vipa66,
| Quote: |
I can still run it at 7 and wondering if the more substantial construction would be better for a heavier aggressive skier?
|
They are both tested and certified so a release value of 7 on each will be the same...so (IMV) why go with the extra weight if you don't need it? I skied La Grave for several years on Marker Squires set at DIN 7 and never suffered any binding-related problems. I am a bit lighter than you, but a similar age, and still race (or at least train) regularly. Mantras a really good ski 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@vipa66, the Marker website states that the PT12 is intended for skiers up to a maximum weight of 250 lbs. So you are pretty close to the limit.
Of course you fully intend to be much leaner and sleeker. But that doesn't always happen.
At your current weight I personally would not be happy in consequential terrain with such a small margin.
So go big or wait until you are once again svelte before buying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| HammondR wrote: |
the Marker website states that the PT12 is intended for skiers up to a maximum weight of 250 lbs. So you are pretty close to the limit.
|
If I read it correctly, @vipa66 has weighed himself in at 280lbs, so a good 30lbs (sorry had to convert that to 13.6kg to understand how much I'm talking about here!) over the intended limit, if your research is correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| vipa66 wrote: |
| ........the question was really which model to go for.. the PT 12 goes from 4-12 so more than enough if I'm running 7. The 16 goes from 6-16.. Now I realise, I'm never going to crank it up anywhere near 12, let alone 16 but the 16 is a bigger, beefier, heavier construction with more magnesium employed. I can still run it at 7 and wondering if the more substantial construction would be better for a heavier aggressive skier? |
@vipa66, The PT12 and the PT16 have the same toe with the magnesium toe wings on the 16 adding no benefit whatsoever - just like the difference between the Griffon and Jester toe designs.
However, the heels are different. The PT12 has what is essentially a remodelled Squire heel whilst the PT16 has the stronger, more powerful and torsionally stiffer Griffon/Jester heel. So yes, the 16 is the better choice for the heavier aggressive skier, irrespective of the din range.
And and if I were setting your bindings for your stats (with a very short bsl for your height) and ex-racer level I'd put you on a min of 8.5 din and you can adjust from there (probably upward) if necessary.
And I'd put you on the Mantra's as well 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| spyderjon wrote: |
| (with a very short bsl for your height) |
I hadn't spotted that. Could be an error – I have a 286mm boot and I'm a tiny female with little feet...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
16s ordered... now just need to decide what length of Mantra to go for.. @ just shy of 177cm tall, gut is telling me 170s but should I look at 177s from a weight perspective?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| vipa66 wrote: |
| 16s ordered... now just need to decide what length of Mantra to go for.. @ just shy of 177cm tall, gut is telling me 170s but should I look at 177s from a weight perspective? |
Your weight counts much more than your height. IMO 170 is way too short. 184 is probably better for Piste only, for an aggressive skier. If going away from the Piste, then 191.
I am working on the assumption that you are a decent skier, that skis aggressively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Defo the 184cm Mantra.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
I've got the 191s. Marvellous skis. Sorry to put difficulties in your way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
orry.. 275 is mondo.. BSL is 3
|
That had me confused too! I'm 5'6" and a fair but lighter (130lbs) -- my Mantras were mounted for Telemark and were 170. I would go with @spyderjon, and 184 for you. You will have skied soft snow with your P9s back in the day, so should not need a bigger ski for off piste --- just go faster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Yes every intention to shed some lard but life often gets in the way, so, lets assume everything stays static. Other than the cost of a bit of weight and a bit of dosh, the 16 is looking favourite at this point. Thanks for the responses thus far.. glad the Mantras are getting the thumbs up. 
