EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › binding for powder skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

binding for powder skis

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 

so just got myself a pair of coreUPT slashers 131/112/128, been looking around for a pair of fat pow skis and found these for 99 euros brand new, what bindings does every one suggest? and can anyone brief me up on bindings, ive seen these new style ones with really small toe pieces and ive heard about plum guides they look strange,

cheers all

post #2 of 23

I don't know if I'd consider those fat pow skis, but enough girth that there are issues to address when finding bindings. Really the only issue is brake width. You just have to make sure the binding you get has a break at leats 110-115 mm or that they are available to buy (ex. Rossignol FKS do not sell brakes to swap out).

 

As far as binding alpine binding recommendations I feel there are really only two options. Rossignol/Look or Salomon, if you can get some FKS/Pivot style in an appropriate DIN range or Salomon STH or if you're looking to step down maybe the Rossignol Axial or Z series from Salomon. Some might tell you Markers but after seeing all the broken Markers coming in for warranty and replacement (including newer models) I just wouldn't trust them.

post #3 of 23

Me: 195lbs, 5'11" - advanced/aggressive

Powder skis: Head Jimi110 (171cm)

Bindings: Head Mojo15, DIN8 (front and back)

 

I bought them with the Mojo15 mounted. Had a slight problem with them pre-releasing but that was my fault - I did not check them before hitting the sloes this year and the tails were set to DIN 5, fronts were mismatched - one DIN 6 the other was DIN 7. They did come off when I needed them to however - my tip got trapped in a hole skiing the glades in Symphony Bowl (I'll post that story later in a "lessons learned this season" thread).

 

After resetting hem to DIN 8 all-around I had no problems, skied Sapphire Bowl, the Couloir and the Blowhole on Blackcomb and they never came off once. 

 

Can't say much about the weight but the entire package is much lighter than my carvers - Head Peak78s (177cm) with Head RFD 12 bindings on DIN 10. The Peaks are a MUCH heavier ski (lots more metal, longer, stiffer) and account for most of the weight difference.

 

FYI: I am researching AT bindings now and have narrowed my choices to Marker Duke 16s (Dawgcatchin's sold out of them, damn!) or the Fritschi Freeride Pro. These'll be for sidecountry with a bit of backcountry thrown in. I am considering only these two so I will be able to use my alpine boots - I'd need to get a new boot for a Dynafits. Also they support a brake size wide enough for the new skis I want (Tyfoons, 175cm) without mods.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinom View Post

... Some might tell you Markers but after seeing all the broken Markers coming in for warranty and replacement (including newer models) I just wouldn't trust them.

 

Does that include the Duke 16s too skinom? 

 

 

post #4 of 23

Just noticed you mentioned plum guides initially so maybe you are looking for touring bindings. If so disregard my first post. I've heard good things about Plums and Dynafit has been a major player in that category for awhile. La Sportiva is another option for tech bindings.

 

Now if you want a touring binding that has more of a alpine feel and functon to it you are pretty much stuck with Marker until next year. Look at the Baron or Duke (basically the same thing different DIN) or wait for the Salomon Guardian/ Atomic Tracker next year. I'd stay away from Fritchi.

post #5 of 23
Thread Starter 
It's not a touring binding I want, my only experience has been with racing bindings so not clued up on free ride binding,
What ate the jesters
post #6 of 23

I wouldn't put Fritschi Freerides on those skis. I had a pair on a similar sized ski (I'm your size and skill level). Bent the toe piece on one first time I skied some boilerplate.

 

Dukes are heavy but if you want a solid AT binding that works nearly as well as an Alpine binding, it is pretty much those or the soon-to-be-released Salomon/Atomic AT option (called Guardian/Tracker).

 

Plums and Dynafits are for those of us with Dynafit compatible (aka Tech) soled AT boots.

 

There's a lot of discussion about all these options over on the TGR forums.

 

If you don't want a touring binding, just get whatever binding you like and buy it with the appropriately sized brake (or bend brakes that are slightly too narrow). Racing bindings will be fine too, just a bit heavier than needed if you're going to be doing much hiking with your skis on your shoulder.

post #7 of 23
Thread Starter 
That's good to know I can use any binding, I thought maybe they'd differ from normal carving/racing skis due to width other than the brakes,
What sort of weight difference are we talking between the different bindings
post #8 of 23

A bunch of manufacturers have been touting their wider footprint on bindings of late. I'm not convinced this is anything other than marketing mumbo-jumbo. Sure, a wider footprint binding might give you slightly better leverage, but since the width (footprint) of our boots hasn't really changed, and the bindings are all rigidly screwed to our skis (even if they slide fore-aft, they don't slide left-right), leverage shouldn't change appreciably. So the only real difference, width-wise, is the brakes. And you can either swap brakes, or bend brakes on all (almost all?) bindings.

 

As for weight differences, pick up a few pair in a shop and you'll see/feel some differences.

 

I've settled on the Marker royal line of bindings for a very specific reason. I prefer to keep the tech soles (dynafit compatible, vibram-soled) on my boots almost all the time. The only time I'll swap them for the DIN soles is if I need to use demo/rental bindings or if I want to borrow my son's skis). So on my non-touring skis, I need a binding that can accommodate the thicker sole and the higher friction that comes with the rubber sole. Salomon bindings allow you to adjust the toe height on the binding, but still have a fixed AFD. Starting with the Duke a few years ago, then moving to the Tour and Squire models last year, and finally the rest of the royal family (Griffon, Jester) this past season, Marker has had a moving (side-to-side), height-adjustable AFD on their bindings. This allows me to put a binding that is lighter, cheaper and has a lower stack height on my skis that I don't tour on. I have two pair of skis with Squires and two with touring bindings (one set of Marker Tours, one set of Plum Guides on the really light ones).

post #9 of 23

light is nice but not too light--wider skis put a lot of lateral stress on bindings.  Salomon Z12 Ti's--a particularly light binding is famous for breaking heel tracks (ask me how I know). You don't need any riser on wider skis--that helps a little with weight.  Stay away from Marker Dukes and Barons unless you really intend to skin with them--I think a lot of people buy them and never leave the resort and they're very heavy and can break in ways other bindings can't--more parts (kind of like driving a 4 wheel drive SUV only in the city.) Marker claims that its Royal line bindings are wider and have a wider screw pattern so they ski better on wide skis by applying better leverage for edging--which is rubbish, since the screw pattern width would only matter if the binding flexed from side to side. The only width that matters is the contact width with the ski boot, which should be the same for all bindings I believe. Screw pattern width would matter as far as the risk of the screws pulling out but I don't think there's actually much if any difference between Marker Royals and other bindings. I think binding choice matters a lot more for people who ski at very high speed, with a lot of big air, or in no fall zones--where bindings are seriously stressed and where prerelease would be very serious.  If you currently ski with bindings set at the recommended DIN you're fine with most bindings that put your DIN not too close to the top end (you would rather not set a DIN of 12 on a binding that only goes up to 12.) As long as the brake is wide enough. And if you're the kind of skier who cranks their bindings 4 or 5 above recommended you wouldn't be asking us for advice.  

post #10 of 23

Thanks Sinecure. I'm off Fritschi and now considering these three:

 

1. Tyrolia/Gead Adrenaline

2. Salomon/Atomic Guardian

3. Marker Duke (new for 2013)

 

We have a thread going on this (new AT bindings). Slight edge to Tyrolia/Head since I'm on Head boots now and they have some neat features. But we're just getting down to a full geek discussion about relative merits/drawbacks of each.

 

Jump in at any time. With your AT experience we'd be very interested in your feedback. Thanks again!

 

post #11 of 23

Not sure if it's been mentioned. I've been told by those who know that the closer your boot is to the ski the better it will perform.
 

post #12 of 23

Struth. We've been hashing this out in the Marker vs Tyrolia Adrenaline thread. 

 

Me, geek that i am, I have it down to this - all else being equal, could one notice the difference between a 26mm (Salomon/Atomic) versus a 36mm (Tyrolia/Head) stand height? I will give up some stability versus my current PNW rig which has a 17mm stand height.

 

And of course we'll wait for confirm from the on snow reports - hoping they'll be testing these in the Southern Hemisphere soon.

post #13 of 23

+1 for Rossignol/Look/Coreupt, preferably the pivot model. I have coreupt px15's (not the pivot) on my Coreupt Candide pow's and they are one stout binding. They are pretty heavy, but I dont think I will ever break them. The brake on mine is only 100 mm wide but im pretty sure you can find a wider brake. They are affordable bindings and I'm incredibly happy with them. Good solid hold and they have released every time I have needed them to.

    

     Let me know how you like the slashers when you take em out to play. I love my pow's, the topsheet chips pretty bad but they are still a fun ski, they handle almost all conditions well except for ice, for the price I think it would be hard to find a better hardpack ski.

post #14 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinecure View Post

A bunch of manufacturers have been touting their wider footprint on bindings of late. I'm not convinced this is anything other than marketing mumbo-jumbo. Sure, a wider footprint binding might give you slightly better leverage, but since the width (footprint) of our boots hasn't really changed, and the bindings are all rigidly screwed to our skis (even if they slide fore-aft, they don't slide left-right), leverage shouldn't change appreciably. So the only real difference, width-wise, is the brakes. And you can either swap brakes, or bend brakes on all (almost all?) bindings.

 

As for weight differences, pick up a few pair in a shop and you'll see/feel some differences.

 

I've settled on the Marker royal line of bindings for a very specific reason. I prefer to keep the tech soles (dynafit compatible, vibram-soled) on my boots almost all the time. The only time I'll swap them for the DIN soles is if I need to use demo/rental bindings or if I want to borrow my son's skis). So on my non-touring skis, I need a binding that can accommodate the thicker sole and the higher friction that comes with the rubber sole. Salomon bindings allow you to adjust the toe height on the binding, but still have a fixed AFD. Starting with the Duke a few years ago, then moving to the Tour and Squire models last year, and finally the rest of the royal family (Griffon, Jester) this past season, Marker has had a moving (side-to-side), height-adjustable AFD on their bindings. This allows me to put a binding that is lighter, cheaper and has a lower stack height on my skis that I don't tour on. I have two pair of skis with Squires and two with touring bindings (one set of Marker Tours, one set of Plum Guides on the really light ones).

 

I've always hated the fit with my barons and BD factors. The AT sole has a rocker and doesn't sit flat on the AFD. Also was under the impression this was an unacceptable practice. I've done it enough to know that it works just fine. The ski doesn't fall off, except in a crash. For me, I haven't been able to get over it, and it really destroys my confidence. The last thing you want on your mind is concerns that your binder isn't going to hold. I ski on a FKS 14 inbounds and love that binder. I've switched my toe/heel out more times than I'd like to admit though.

 

IMHO, if you are on an alpine boot the FKS/pivot is the way to go. If you are touring, the only reason to go with a duke/baron, is so that when you upgrade to dynafits you will appreciate it more. 

post #15 of 23

I love any of the look/rossi pivot style bindings, or if you want to go cheaper the PX/Axial series have served me well also.

post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossymcg View Post

It's not a touring binding I want, my only experience has been with racing bindings so not clued up on free ride binding,
What ate the jesters

 

To me a "free ride" binding is just a race binding with a wide brake.

 

I have Salomon 916s on K2 Pontoons, Elan Boomerangs, Faction 3.Zeros, and Elan m777s.  I'm looking at picking up a pair of Slashers as a tree ski, and I'll be putting 916s on them too.

 

I have Dukes on a pair of 4frnt Turbos, and I have no issues with them.  I just prefer the 916.

post #17 of 23

^^^^ There's intelligence here. I've mounted Tyrolia Freeflex's on fat skis and like the results. Mojo 15's are $$. Look Pivots are $$$$. If I mached or took air, I'd want Pivot 18's for the engineering and elasticity.

 

Now the diatribe. Obligatory it's-a-free-country/different strokes PC pause. Then: IMO, very few folks who are all hot and bothered about "AT" stop to think that the only point is for skinning, which means terrain worth skinning in, and the skill sets to put on/take off/maintain skins. Oh, and then some backcountry safety training, since most terrain worth skinning in = backcountry + avalanches. Face it: Most people who use AT "sidebounds" are simply hiking to terrain that will eventually empty back into a lift served area. So why bother with an AT, which has more things to go sloppy or break, and gives you more lift than you probably want, if you aren't going to skin? Oh yeah, and can actually be a giant pain if you're covering the same route as a slew of postholers. I know: It's cool to think that maybe you could. rolleyes.gif

post #18 of 23
FWIW I have 3 pair of skis and 1 pair of bindings withe 3 different brake sizes.
Tyrolia HD14 railflex, 78mm brakes for my monster 77's, 95mm brakes for my Mantras and 115mm for my Ninthward THA's.

Very versatile binding as they can easily slide on/off for travel and can be moved for and aft for different conditions. E.g. On my mot versatile sks the mantras, I have them on the line for hard snow , -1.5 for variable/crud, and -3 for the good stuff.

Slightly heavier and higher than fixed bindings but the pros outweigh the cons form s a travelling skiier.
Cheers
post #19 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowyphil65 View Post

+1 for Rossignol/Look/Coreupt, preferably the pivot model. I have coreupt px15's (not the pivot) on my Coreupt Candide pow's and they are one stout binding. They are pretty heavy, but I dont think I will ever break them. The brake on mine is only 100 mm wide but im pretty sure you can find a wider brake. They are affordable bindings and I'm incredibly happy with them. Good solid hold and they have released every time I have needed them to.
    
     Let me know how you like the slashers when you take em out to play. I love my pow's, the topsheet chips pretty bad but they are still a fun ski, they handle almost all conditions well except for ice, for the price I think it would be hard to find a better hardpack ski.

Got some marker griffons in the end, fitting quiver killers to the skis and sharing the bindings about,
You say your candide pows are good on hard pack?
I'm well out of the loop on these fat skis, if I'm skiing hard pack I can't see myself going over a 78 waist, I'll only be using my slashers for pow skiing and see what they handle like in crud and maybe that too,,
post #20 of 23
Thread Starter 

sorry snowyphil, just looked at the spec on the pows and theyre fully cambered and 100mm waist so nothing like the slashers

post #21 of 23

picking up on that, I am seriously considering going the route of DynaLook plates http://bindingfreedom.com/DynaLook-Swap-Plates-1003.htm and then radical FT's & FKS with Cochise Pro boots (subject to fit). This would pretty much set me up for anything.  I have my sites on some good terrain here and met a bunch of folks who have said they would help get me going. I want to get into skinning, to me its a little like climbing on your bike. I am not a great climber but I love it.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuk1w1 View Post

Thanks Sinecure. I'm off Fritschi and now considering these three:

 

1. Tyrolia/Gead Adrenaline

2. Salomon/Atomic Guardian

3. Marker Duke (new for 2013)

 

We have a thread going on this (new AT bindings). Slight edge to Tyrolia/Head since I'm on Head boots now and they have some neat features. But we're just getting down to a full geek discussion about relative merits/drawbacks of each.

 

Jump in at any time. With your AT experience we'd be very interested in your feedback. Thanks again!

 

post #22 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post

picking up on that, I am seriously considering going the route of DynaLook plates http://bindingfreedom.com/DynaLook-Swap-Plates-1003.htm and then radical FT's & FKS with Cochise Pro boots (subject to fit). This would pretty much set me up for anything.  I have my sites on some good terrain here and met a bunch of folks who have said they would help get me going. I want to get into skinning, to me its a little like climbing on your bike. I am not a great climber but I love it.  

 

You're a step or two ahead of me! If I moved out West then I reckon I'd get dedicated AT boots and go the same route or Dynafits. A good friend of mine has gone almost completely over to AT - he'll ski inbounds with his family and do a few turns with me when I am in BC, but we're always doing sidecountry when we ski these days and he's almost got me talked into some mild touring for next season. He calls it "earning your turns!".

post #23 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
  I have my sites on some good terrain here and met a bunch of folks who have said they would help get me going. 

 

You should hook up with George Krawzoff, director of Transportation in Steamboat.  He's a good skier and a really nice guy.

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 › binding for powder skis