New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

good fat ski binding

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

I have the moment ghost chant. It has a 124 waist and I am having trouble finding a cheap binding with a wide enough brake. 

post #2 of 17

Define "cheap." Several companies offer 130 mm brakes. But it's likely to be a $40 add on. Can't think of any bindings that come with one that wide, perhaps Look? The funny thing is that the cost of making a 78 mm brake can't be much different than making a 130 mm. But binding companies are putting a hefty surcharge on the wider models, calling them "XXL's" and so on. Like a report on the radio last night about how printers are dirt cheap because companies make their profits on the ink cartridges. Which are silly expensive, but you got to have 'em...

post #3 of 17

A Look/Rossi/Dynastar PX series binding with the 120 brake will work fine on your ski. My PX 14s with 100 brakes work great on my Cochise with 108 width.

EVO has some good prices especially if you can get the additional 20% discount. I got my PX14s for $97. You still need 120 brakes so shop around but make sure they are compatible as PX 15 and 18 brakes don't fit PX 12s. I don't know which brakes fit the PX 14.

post #4 of 17

They need to do a complete redesign of ski boot soles and binding footprints in general.  Only racers are still skiing on sub 70mm waist skis.  It won't be long until a 75mm wide boot sole will be the norm, bindings will have bigger claws and then everyone won't have those silly looking little bindings on big fat powder skis. The best part is that boots with wider soles will undoubtedly be much more comfortable.

post #5 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

They need to do a complete redesign of ski boot soles and binding footprints in general.  Only racers are still skiing on sub 70mm waist skis.  It won't be long until a 75mm wide boot sole will be the norm, bindings will have bigger claws and then everyone won't have those silly looking little bindings on big fat powder skis. The best part is that boots with wider soles will undoubtedly be much more comfortable.

 

Ummmmm......................absolute and unequivocal no to everything in this post except the part about about racers and sub 70mm skis. Ain't gonna happen, won't change boot fits at all, who cares what the silly bindings look like on the big fat powder skis that actually only a small fraction of skiers actually use very often.

 

Otherwise.......rightonman!!! 

 

 

SJ

post #6 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

 

Ummmmm......................absolute and unequivocal no to everything in this post except the part about about racers and sub 70mm skis. Ain't gonna happen, won't change boot fits at all, who cares what the silly bindings look like on the big fat powder skis that actually only a small fraction of skiers actually use very often.

 

Otherwise.......rightonman!!! 

 

 

SJ

 

 

Mark my words.. It will happen within the next decade.  As soon as some boot and binding manufacturers agree to do it this will be then next revolution in ski technology.. wider boots and bindings to go with the wider skis.  Honestly, how many people were skiing in 75mm or wider this season?  I'm guessing 80mm will be on the low end of average by the end of the decade.  Boot and binding companies would be foolish not to jump to a wider footprint.  It just makes sense to do so.  And, when they do EVERYONE (but racers) is going to want the wider footpint gear. I know I would, and I'm a laggard hahaha!  Skinny boots and bindings will be as obsolete as straight skis.  You're gonna need a buttload of new jigs.

post #7 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

 

Ummmmm......................absolute and unequivocal no to everything in this post except the part about about racers and sub 70mm skis. Ain't gonna happen, won't change boot fits at all, who cares what the silly bindings look like on the big fat powder skis that actually only a small fraction of skiers actually use very often.

 

Otherwise.......rightonman!!! 

 

 

SJ


that would be my thought as well SJ.  For the simple reason that making a change of that nature would provide no forward/backward compatibility between gear.  No reason not to make the binding footprint larger without changing the boot interface though

post #8 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScotsSkier View Post


that would be my thought as well SJ.  For the simple reason that making a change of that nature would provide no forward/backward compatibility between gear.  No reason not to make the binding footprint larger without changing the boot interface though

And the DVD quality was just fine.  No need for BluRay.  It is the nature of business to create and market things we don't really need but make us think that we do.  Suddenly (or gradually) making everyone's gear look obsolete (even though it isn't) is just what big business does.  Think of all the new demand once product awareness surges.  I'd compare this more to the move to the DIN standard.  Suddenly a whole century of binding generations seemed obsolete.

 

Now, if I were a dealer I wouldn't be telling anyone that a new wave of totally different gear was just beyond the horizon.  That would be stupid.  I remember working in the luggage industry when they changed the design of suitcases in general, putting the wheels on the short sides and adding the pull handles and piggyback straps.  The reps tried to tell the folks at store level it was just a fad and would fizzle out because they didn't want to be stuck holding all of the older models.  That happened anyway. And, the new models weren't very backward compatible with the legacy products at all. 

post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

Only racers are still skiing on sub 70mm waist skis.  It won't be long until a 75mm wide boot sole will be the norm, bindings will have bigger claws and then everyone won't have those silly looking little bindings on big fat powder skis. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

Honestly, how many people were skiing in 75mm or wider this season?

Actually unequivocal no to the sub 70 racers comment, too, if you count the United States east of the Rockies. (Yeah, I know it's tough to realize there is a U.S. east of Colorado, but...) There's also this little place called "Europe," which seems to have some people in it who like narrower skis than (gasp) we do. Plenty of good recreational skiers from Nebraska east to Poland on everything from the 63 mm Laser SC's or 69 mm CX's to the Blizzard R series, various Volkl Racetigers, etc. And if you expand the envelope to 75 mm (recall that includes skis like the 4x4, Progressor 9, 10+, Head SS, iSpeed, and Magnum, Volkl Code and RTM 75, well you get the idea), I'd guess about half of those on groomers, which is a large majority of all skiers.

 

Moreover, disregarding the cost to manufacturers of changing the sole widths of current lasts, not clear it would be a net gain. Having the last spread well over the sole must increase the leverage of the leg against the fixed narrower sole, so less effort to tip the also narrow ski. If you make the soles wider, you lose some of that advantage, seems to me. 

 

Making those silly looking little binding footprints 80 mm wide might be an advantage if you have a wider ski, but then what happens to all the folks with skis < 80 mm? Do the standards police come along and arrest them for possession of narrow skis with intent to carve? Or do the binding companies just encourage that segment of the market to switch to Nordic for their next skis? 


Edited by beyond - 5/25/12 at 4:31pm
post #10 of 17

I skied 2 places in NC and one in WV this season.  I'd say that probably 70% of the skiers I saw were on something over 70mm.  100% of the race rats were on something 60 something of course.  Race boots and higher din race bindings can certainly stay as is.  Most recreational skiers (not including beer league or SERIOUS NASTAR pole bangers here) don't like race plug boots or 18 DIN bindings.  It won't be like suddenly you will walk in to a ski shop and all they have is 75mm footrpint gear.  new product introductions rarely happen like that, only when something gets banned or outlawed.  But, I suspect that pretty quickly most everyone purchasing 80mm + skis is going to want wider boots and bindings if they are available.  And, the carving folks and ice pickers might prefer more specialized race gear ( 63mm plug boots, higher DIN  bindings) anyway.  That might just be pretty cool as a niche.  Makes fir some distribution and inventory management complexities, but having more choices is good for the consumer and sells product.  It doesn't have to really be a more efficient and better performing product for folks to want it in masses.  Look at all the peeps watching movies and TV shows on 5" screens now LOL!

 

Boot quivers coming 2020 hahah.. well no, but many will have 2 pair of boots.  Boot fitters should rejoice at this possibility!

post #11 of 17

two words: alpine touring (if you ignore the telemarker fringers).  

 

So there's already space and proof that the market can have multiple boots/bindings.  You just need to really show that indeed there's a order of magnitude gain in performance or capability in exchange for giving up the option to be able to strap into the quivers of raceskis if you feel like it on a raceday.

post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

........Boot quivers coming 2020 hahah.. well no, but many will have 2 pair of boots.  Boot fitters should rejoice at this possibility!

Six pairs of skis in active use from 63mm (Laser SC) to 108mm (MX 108).  Managed to get my alpine skis down to one set of bindings (Vist Speedlock).  but have to change boots to go AT'ing...now I'm gonna need phat boots as well as skinny boots and the Dyndadfiddle ones eek.gif..  Might take up snowboarding instead.  And I've skied both places in the World; the northern and southern hemispheres wink.gif.

post #13 of 17

Ya, rail system rigs would probably be a big obstacle to a wider footprint binding.  Maybe not, I haven't seen any really fat skis with rail systems on them.  Those tend to be the all mountain variety.  Race plates are fine as is on race and carving skis.  I'd think that this concept would likely first diffuse through the 100+ segment.

 

From an engineering standpoint, wouldn't a wider, more dispersed anchor screw pattern/footprint be more secure and less likely to pull out of the fatter ski?  Also having the outside edges of the boot closer to the outside edges of the ski seems more efficient and optimal than having the outside edges of the boot an inch inside of the outside ski edges.  The latter leaves room for the ski to sag some torsionally.

post #14 of 17

A little off topic here guys. Anybody have suggestions for the OP?

post #15 of 17

idk about cheap, but the rossi FKS/look pivot goes to 130 now...

post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

 

 

Mark my words.. It will happen within the next decade.  As soon as some boot and binding manufacturers agree to do it this will be then next revolution in ski technology.. wider boots and bindings to go with the wider skis.  Honestly, how many people were skiing in 75mm or wider this season?  I'm guessing 80mm will be on the low end of average by the end of the decade.  Boot and binding companies would be foolish not to jump to a wider footprint.  It just makes sense to do so.  And, when they do EVERYONE (but racers) is going to want the wider footpint gear. I know I would, and I'm a laggard hahaha!  Skinny boots and bindings will be as obsolete as straight skis.  You're gonna need a buttload of new jigs.


I dont understand this at all.  I recall you suggesting this earlier and I dont get it.  My boot width is determined by the width of my foot.  Sure my skis are wider then they used to be...but my feet arent.  So why would I get a wider boot?  Boots need to fit my feet.  What would I do with all the extra plastic on the sides?  What purpose would it serve?

post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle Dave View Post

A little off topic here guys. Anybody have suggestions for the OP?

 

Yup forget the brakes.  Just go old school and get tethers.  Meets his cheap criteria for sure, and has the added benefit of not losing the skis in all the pow!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion