EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Heavy BINDINGS Can Ruin Your Day: a Cautionary Tale of Marker Barons
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Heavy BINDINGS Can Ruin Your Day: a Cautionary Tale of Marker Barons - Page 2

post #31 of 41

Interesting....

 

I go out of my way to FIND a nice beefy metal binding. Everyones need are different I guess.....

post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

The thread has a pulse again.  Yikes.  Funny thing is I just posted the follow up question separately, but I guess I'll ask it here: I need a binding that's light, low and has at least a little ramp angle.  Was thinking Griffons because they're so light but not sure about the ramp angle.  The truth is I don't really know if I was thrown off balance by the Baron's heavy weight, their high stand height, or flat profile.  Might as well address all 3 issues.

I doubt weight is an issue.  Lets look at approximate weight per binding..

 

Baron = 1.2k

Rossi Axial 14 = 1.3 rossi

Look Pivot = 1.09

 

Solomon sth12 = 1.02 k

 

Marker Griffon = .95

 

Rental Bindings =?

 

My kids have used the Rossi bindings on their race and free skis for a long time.  They weighed less than 125lbs last year and binding weight has never been an issue for skiing.  My son tells me that binding weight can be an issue for do doing air time as it effects swing weight and rotation, but this is not what you are talking about.  Also, you are looking at relatively little weight gain, if any at all, for the Barons over other bindings (a half pound more than the Griffons, a quarter pound less than the Rossi).  I believe that the stand height might have made a difference, but when I used the Dukes for a year, I found this to be a small factor in pow and crud.

 

You also said.....

 

 But on East Coast hardpack that was really no issue. (Mainly ski Supersonics back East anyhow.) And I certainly don't mind carrying heavy skis.  Then I went to Utah a few weeks ago and absolutely hated the Legend 94s. It snowed 13" the first day, a little heavy, then about 3-5" per day the next 3 days. Great conditions but a just little heavy and cruddy at lower elevations, with plenty of chopped up thick powder. The Legend/Baron combo was like steering a heavy tank through the snow, a big effort to turn. At the end of a giant day, 35k vert at Alta, my back went into bigtime spasm, something I've never experienced before. Nearly ruined the trip.

 

Here is clue.... after skiing hard pack conditions at home you skied 13 inches of heavy snow and had a giant day of 35k vert...Not uncommon to experience muscle soreness after such a large switch in conditions and putting in a big day. Not uncommon, even for good and experienced skiers, to have some struggle with such a change.  The other days were not as extreme with new snow depth.

 

Just a thought


Edited by canadianskier - 10/19/12 at 7:26am
post #33 of 41
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadianskier View Post

I doubt weight is an issue.  Lets look at approximate weight per binding..

 

Baron = 1.2k

Rossi Axial 14 = 1.3 rossi

Look Pivot = 1.09

 

Solomon sth12 = 1.02 k

 

Marker Griffon = .95

 

 

Thanks canadianskier.  Do you know the ramp/delta angles of these bindings? 

 

The Salomon STH 12 Driver and Look Pivot 14 are high on my buy list but can't figure out if they have a ramp angle.

post #34 of 41

I really really (note the emphasis on "really") wouldn't worry about ramp angle of bindings.  99.9999 % of people skiing wouldn't notice such, and you are looking at very small differences. It sounds like you had a bad day in Utah and that you have a case of Post-Traumatic Bad Ski Day (PTBSD) smile.gif which is causing you to worry about things that probably don't matter.  Just chalk it up to having a bad day, which happens to all of us.

 

 

Both the Look and Solly are good bindings and are solid, and are happily and efficiently used by lots of excellent skiers.  I have used both on hardpack, bumps and powder.  My bias is that I like the Look Pivot 14 better because it feels very solid, but I would choose the Solly Sth 14 for a dedicated powder ski binding. This is due to convenience issues.  The Look heel can swivel a bit when you come out of the binding.  This sometimes requires rotating it with your hand to get it aligned, which I find to be a minor hassle in Pow after a fall.  I also find the Solly easier to get back into after a fall in powder because of the large toe piece and the way that the heel piece works.   I have the Look on my Bones and MX88s, and the Sth14 on my JJs. 

post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

 

Thanks canadianskier.  Do you know the ramp/delta angles of these bindings? 

 

The Salomon STH 12 Driver and Look Pivot 14 are high on my buy list but can't figure out if they have a ramp angle.

 

STH, about 4mm. Look pivot, almost none.

post #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by canadianskier View Post

I really really (note the emphasis on "really") wouldn't worry about ramp angle of bindings.  99.9999 % of people skiing wouldn't notice such, and you are looking at very small differences. It sounds like you had a bad day in Utah and that you have a case of Post-Traumatic Bad Ski Day (PTBSD) smile.gif which is causing you to worry about things that probably don't matter.  Just chalk it up to having a bad day, which happens to all of us.

 

 

Both the Look and Solly are good bindings and are solid, and are happily and efficiently used by lots of excellent skiers.  I have used both on hardpack, bumps and powder.  My bias is that I like the Look Pivot 14 better because it feels very solid, but I would choose the Solly Sth 14 for a dedicated powder ski binding. This is due to convenience issues.  The Look heel can swivel a bit when you come out of the binding.  This sometimes requires rotating it with your hand to get it aligned, which I find to be a minor hassle in Pow after a fall.  I also find the Solly easier to get back into after a fall in powder because of the large toe piece and the way that the heel piece works.   I have the Look on my Bones and MX88s, and the Sth14 on my JJs. 

 

All good points on the Drivers and Pivots

 

 

Remember, as Boris the Blade said in Snatch...With weight comes reliability. I think what the OP was feeling the short coming of his original concern was not so much the weight of the binding but the height and inefficiency of the Baron compared to a traditional bindings. 

post #37 of 41

interesting resurection and timely too.  As a newb to this, I wonder if you should be considering the intended use; of course "up" in Tech's is the hands down winner, but for meadow skipping and powder or broken does a baron/duke really have any disadvantage.

post #38 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

The thread has a pulse again.  Yikes.  Funny thing is I just posted the follow up question separately, but I guess I'll ask it here: I need a binding that's light, low and has at least a little ramp angle.  Was thinking Griffons because they're so light but not sure about the ramp angle.  The truth is I don't really know if I was thrown off balance by the Baron's heavy weight, their high stand height, or flat profile.  Might as well address all 3 issues.

Based on SkiBootJedi's response and watching your ski vid it is hard to avoid recommending Dynafit bindings. Unless you're hucking regularly, these bindings should provide a ramp angle you're more familiar with AND drop about 2 pounds per foot in weight. Plus they're a LOT easier to bear on the skin track when you're earning your turns. About the only downside is they do not have the sort of elasticity that race-caliber alpine bindings have. It doesn't appear or sound like you need that level of return to center elasticity.

I'd look seriously at the Dynafit Radical FT if I were you. Or the Vertical FT. The Radical may not be as low (close to the ski) as you like.

The main take away from this sounds like you need to dial in and confirm the ramp angle that is optimal for you. Good luck.
post #39 of 41
Thread Starter 

Thanks everyone for the input. Just measured a friend's Griffons.  Toe is 19 mm above the ski, heel is 23 mm.  Just eyeball them and there's clearly a difference.  So they meet all 3 criteria: light, relatively low, and positive ramp angle...I'm a buyer.  Skinning is on the back burner for now, so I'll pass on the Dynafits.

 

Interesting all the threads I read here and on TGR refer to Jester/Griffons as flat bindings, ie no ramp angle.  This is only true of Dukes and Barons as far as I can tell.

 

And why industry doesn't publish specs?


Edited by hirustler - 10/20/12 at 6:07pm
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

 

And why industry doesn't publish specs?

So you can't actually compare products.  It's cheaper to let their advertising sell the product than their engineering.

post #41 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post

 

And why industry doesn't publish specs?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post

So you can't actually compare products.  It's cheaper to let their advertising sell the product than their engineering.

 

The manufactuers used to have cut-away binding and skis, exploded views of constuction details, weights, flexs, specs, etc

 

I do believe oldgoat is correct here...why confuse the buyer with facts and engineering when you can simply baffle them with bullshit nonono2.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Heavy BINDINGS Can Ruin Your Day: a Cautionary Tale of Marker Barons