 Poster: A snowHead
|
After the succes of the Duke bindings, Marker make a new model called Baron and they presented it in the ISPO.
I read that the difference will be the DIN setting, so maybe it will be a bit lighter and a bit cheaper 
Someone have seen it?? Or tested it???
I'm in course to buy next year quiver, and The Duke was in my mind, so if the baron is in the same way can be an option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I believe the Baron has DIN up to 12 and some of the metal parts in the the Duke have been replaced with plastic. So it sounds as though if you'd choose a Salomon 916 over a 912, go for the Duke; otherwise the Baron will be fine
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
AlTom, As Arno said, it will have a maximum DIN of 12 and in the workds of our Marker rep 'will probably be lighter, I imagine'. Cracking product knowledge. It will definitely be cheaper, I don't remember the exact price he quoted but it's at least 299 Euros and perhaps even 250 (this is for the French market where the Duke retails at 359).
I've been using the Duke's this season and they're awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I always ski with tyrolia bindings (It's because all my skis where from Head and specially Fischer), and for the freeride skis actulally I'm mounting them between 10-11 at max..... So maybe the baron can be fine. And how about durability??
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Fri 29-02-08 13:12; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Any news on ski crampons for the Duke yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DB, Yep. 92mm and 113mm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AlTom, If you're riding at 10-11 then you had best go for a Duke. Bindings shouldn't really be ridden within the last 2 or 3 settings of their limit - it will fatigue the spring too much.
As for durability, we've sold out twice and had none back. As testing grounds go Chamonix and its skiers will break most things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| NAKEDZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| DB, Yep. 92mm and 113mm. |
Thanks a number of us have been waiting on SZK to come through with this breaking news but SZK seems to be otherwise occupied with falling over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113824&highlight=Baron
| NAKEDZOOKEEPER wrote: |
.......Bindings shouldn't really be ridden within the last 2 or 3 settings of their limit - it will fatigue the spring too much
|
. This belief is a legacy from the 'old days'. Modern bindings are tested throughout their range have have the same degree of accuracy & consistency wherever they are set - they have to to achieve the DIN standard & to stop the manufacturers getting sued. The internal 'stops' on the adjustment range in a binding ensure that the springs have either sufficient tension in them (if set to the low end) or aren't over compressed (at the high end) to perform correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Another question about dukes/baron is the size. The S size is 265-320mm; and the L size 305-370mm.
My actual boot (it can change depending on models/brands) is 314mm (are tecnicas diablo)......So which model I've to take! It seems ok that the L size will run for me, but also the S size......
I have in mind to buy AT stiff boots (someday......  ) like scarpa tornado, or garmont stiff models, etc...depending in how they fit to me..... and I like that they can run with the Duke that I choose.......Are AT boots normally longer than the alpine ones??? or are they shorter????
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| AlTom wrote: |
| I have in mind to buy AT stiff boots (someday...... ) like scarpa tornado, or garmont stiff models, etc...depending in how they fit to me..... and I like that they can run with the Duke that I choose.......Are AT boots normally longer than the alpine ones??? or are they shorter???? |
In my experience, AT boots run considerably shorter. My alpine boots are 317mm (same size for my last 2 pairs); my AT boots something like 295mm. AT boots are Scarpa Spirit 4s
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Arno wrote: |
| AlTom wrote: |
| I have in mind to buy AT stiff boots (someday...... ) like scarpa tornado, or garmont stiff models, etc...depending in how they fit to me..... and I like that they can run with the Duke that I choose.......Are AT boots normally longer than the alpine ones??? or are they shorter???? |
In my experience, AT boots run considerably shorter. My alpine boots are 317mm (same size for my last 2 pairs); my AT boots something like 295mm. AT boots are Scarpa Spirit 4s |
My AT and Alpine boots are within 5mm of each other. The foot length is the same why should the shell length differ so much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
DB, beats me but even my old AT boots which were far too big had a shorter BSL than my alpine boots which fit me very well. Alpine boots were Atomic and Garmont; both sets of AT boots Scarpa. Maybe it's something to do with the rockered sole of AT boots?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
A quick check of a couple of Alpine and a couple of Randonee boots shows that in size 26, ski touring boots are roughly between 3 and 8mm shorter than alpine boots. This length difference is likely due to the difference in plastics and shell thickness. Randonee boots use Pebax, a lighter and less dense plastic than the polyether or polyester used in Alpine boots. In order to reduce weight the shells of randonee boots are thinner than Alpine, thus reducing the overall length of the boots.
Arno, With those measurements your Rando boots are a size smaller than your Alpine. A 296mm Spirit 4 is a size 26 whilst an Alpine boot in 317 is almost definitely a 27 (a Lange W/C FR or Rossignol B Squad at a guess).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
NAKEDZOOKEEPER, you could well be right about the sizing, given the "boxy" shape of the Scarpas. The Alpine boots are Garmont Shamans - weren't you around when the SMALL one was fitting me with G1s because the Shamans hadn't turned up in time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Arno wrote: |
| DB, beats me but even my old AT boots which were far too big had a shorter BSL than my alpine boots which fit me very well. Alpine boots were Atomic and Garmont; both sets of AT boots Scarpa. Maybe it's something to do with the rockered sole of AT boots? |
I'm no bootfitter but suspect your feet fit a Scarpa boot better (which is probably a higher volume boot than the others) and in order to get your feet into the Garmonts/Atomics they hand to go for a larger size.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
DB, not sure about that, TBH. i think if I do the standard size test (ie take liners out of shells etc) there will be a similar amount of room in both
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Arno, Probably was around, my memory is shocking at the moment. I failed to notice noticed the Shamans had the same sole lengths as the Lange mould. With those measurements you've got a 27 Shaman and a 26 Spirit.
The volume difference between a Shaman and a Spirit 4 is massive so it's not surpirsing there's a size difference.
AlTom, In terms of sizing for the Duke/Baron, you are unlikely to go up a size in Alpine boots and as we've mentioned Randonee boots are generally shorter so it would seem sensible to go with the small bindings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Arno wrote: |
| DB, not sure about that, TBH. i think if I do the standard size test (ie take liners out of shells etc) there will be a similar amount of room in both |
I don't understand it either, that extra 22mm must be going somewhere and I find it hard to believe any more than 8mm is taken up by the shell differences. Maybe your toes don't go as far forward in the alpine boots so the space behind the heel remains much the same during a shell test. I have an old pair of Alpine boots that are around 25mm longer than my current boots, they were basically the wrong volume for my foot (too low a volume forcing me to go for the next size up).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
DB, well they both feel good so I am not going to lose much sleep over it. expect that my feet are between sizes and the extra volume in the scarpas makes it a good idea to go down a size and up a size for the garmonts. and i have been told that i have a normal sized foot but very short toes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My boot is a 27 and my feet medium volume in the forefoot with narrow heel (I think.....)...... So if AT boots will be shorter I go with the small ones....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
