 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi, Ive got some head 78 monsters and wanted to get some touring bindings and skins for them. Im primarily a boarder so excuse my ignorance - firstly are the bindings interchangable like snowboard bindings if i want to swap between downhill and touring bindings. Secondly does the skin width matter? Ive seen some second hand skins which are 60mm wide. Is this too narrow?
Cheers, Si
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
si_eats_pie, pleased to see you are coming to your senses.
Bindings are not can't be swapped like a snowboard, there are no inserts on alpine skis. The bindings are drilled and screwed in, which means that you don't get more then three chances to mount the skis. Swapping bindings is a bad idea as the holes will be a different pattern and you'll weaken the integrity of the holes by multiple removal / fitting - not to mention you shouldn't leave any holes unfilled on the ski.
Touring bindings can be skied perfectly adequately all of the time. So swapping isn't really necassary.
Have you bought bindings and boots yet? If you are doing more skiing than touring get Marker Barons, if you are doing close to 50/50 or even more touring then get Fritshis or Naxos (which are being discontinued so can be had for cheap but will have less spares in the future). If you haven't bought your boots yet OR you can just afford it get some Dynafits. Dynafits ski downhill better than ALL of the other touring bindings, and lots of cheaper consumer bindings, and are easily the best choice for going up.
Skins sound a little skinny to me. I'm guessing the tips and the tails on the Monsters will be around 120/110 so 60mm doesn't give you much coverage. It depends on what type of touring you are doing and what type of snow - as I doubt you'll be able to predict that perfectly I would be looking for minimum 80mm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
si_eats_pie - it's pretty important that your skins cover virtually the full width of the ski, since once you're traversing steeper slopes you'll find that if there's exposed base material, you'll be losing traction & slipping all the time.
The technique relies on you rolling your knees out of the slope (rather than in and trying to hold an edge) so that you can keep the skin in contact & gripping all the time. Shallower slopes where you're heading straight up aren't such an issue but I'd go for as wide as poss, covering the base but not the edges.
Here's an url to the G3 site on trimming skins which may help http://www.genuineguidegear.com/service/g3-learning-centre/skins
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
i also wouldn't buy second hand skins
completeoutdoors.co.uk do black diamond ones for a good price and they do the job fairly well.
the skins should be cut to about 3-5 mm either side of the edge of your ski. if your next set of skiis is alot bigger then you may struggle, but if they are just a little bit too thin you mau get away with it, depends how much icy traversing you will be doing. any 5am starts?
though if the next set of skis is smaller then you can always trim them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I would have thought .....
78 Monsters = 78mm waist = ca 70mm skins (or shaped skins to match the ski shape with 3-5mm clearance from the ski edge)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| depends how much icy traversing you will be doing. any 5am starts? |
this quote, read in conjunction with my
| Quote: |
the technique relies on you rolling your knees out of the slope
|
is the reason for using harsheisen (fr=couteau ::: ski crampons) when traversing on icy / hard-packed snow etc.
Since you're not using your edges to bite into the snow, and need the skin flat on the slope to grip:- when it gets steep you need something to cut in to prevent sideways slippage - hence the use of harscheisen (which are not intended as aid in foreward traction/grip)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
parlor, do dynafits really ski downhill better than say the dukes for example? I find that hard to believe but have no experience in the matter. Surely if they did then there would really be no point in getting anything else apart from the boot issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
el nombre, researching the same question I was led to believe that Dynafits are fiddlier to click in to, less durable and may not release as easily in a fall. The boot issue is probably the biggest one but getting less so with the wider choice of Dynafit compatible boots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| el nombre wrote: |
| parlor, do dynafits really ski downhill better than say the dukes for example? I find that hard to believe but have no experience in the matter. Surely if they did then there would really be no point in getting anything else apart from the boot issue. |
To be fair I have only got half a day on a pair of Barons. I have quite a few days on my Dynafits. They seriously ski better than lots of normal downhill bindings... they have very little slop, have a very low stack height and really do engage brilliantly with the ski. I suspect that for the stack height and the slop alone they 'technically' ski better than a pair of Dukes...
I should say though the release values are no where near as consistent with the Dynafits as other bindings, this is theory for me - I have never come out of my Dynafits with DIN set to 10 (Comforts max) with the toes locked down. What does that mean? I don't huck on Dynafits but I probably would on Dukes, I've hit mandatory 5-8' on the Dynafits and been happy that the skis have held on. I like drops but until this coming season all of my touring has been 'Euro' style, much less skining for powder / slack country style that the Dukes are so good for.
The toes don't have normal DIN retention values, but you can lock them out. The heals have pretty good retention though.
There is no touring panacea. If you are doing any hucking, over 10' anyway then Dukes are a good option still. Ideally a quiver comes in to effect, you need both Dukes & Dynafits - I'm probably adding Dukes to the quiver for this year (but if I needed to I would just tour on my tele gear so I don't even have to worry about release values).
As you correctly say boots are still the biggest issue. Radiums, Factors, Zzeus & Titans are all closing the gap.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the two competitors to the 'tech binding' system we are seeing in the next couple of seasons...
bobinch, I don't find them difficult to get in to at all. My Dynafit boots are from Dynafit and have the small wings and toe markers, I step in easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
parlor, plus Salomon and Dalbello releasing Dyna compatible boots this season by all accounts. I'm going down the Dynafit route this season so hope you are right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
^ As parlor said.
Dynafit for real touring, Dukes for resort skiing.
The wild snow test doesnt include stack height - but just measures 'slop' BTW.
| Quote: |
| it's pretty important that your skins cover virtually the full width of the ski, |
This used to be the case... Certainly with a narrower ski (70-90mm) you want a skin that will fit full width under the foot - and also a snug fit at tip and tail. Which usually requires trimming to account for the side cut.
With wider skis however you have more surface area and grip.
So a skin covering the full width for entire length of the ski isnt so important - so long as it fits well under foot.
For example on a set of 133-102-122 skis I just used 100mm wide untrimmed skins.
They work great - even though there isnt a perfect fit at the tips and tails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Haggis_Trap wrote: |
With wider skis however you have more surface area and grip.
So a skin covering the full width for entire length of the ski isnt so important - so long as it fits well under foot.
For example on a set of 133-102-122 skis I just used 100mm wide untrimmed skins.
They work great - even though there isnt a perfect fit at the tips and tails. |
This is right for winder skis. Last year I did a few short tours on 108mm waisted skis with some 98mm underfoot skins, it didn't go very smoothly but you *can* cope.
So as before, it all comes down to the type of skining you'd be doing...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
si_eats_pie, of course you could buy the old set of 60s and then using a razor blade followed by a lighter split them down the middle from about 20cm from tip to 20cm from tail. That way you can make them fit close to the edge of several pairs of skis...
Mind you 60mm is v.skinny! If you're planning to do a fair bit of touring splash out and get some skins that fit properly - base your skin width on the tip width of the ski.. Skinnier will work, but for comfort & security skinning on steeper slopes a well-fitted skin is worth the cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
offpisteskiing, what do you use the lighter for - "sealing" the edges?
I did that split thing myself and it has been pretty successful for daytours
wouldn't want to risk it for something longer but they are handy as a spare set to be carried as group kit because they will fit everyone's skis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
