or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Philpug's 2015 Steals & Deals Winners
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Philpug's 2015 Steals & Deals Winners - Page 2

post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
is very similar but like you say, the heel is the older twin cam design that is proven. While it might be a tag heavier, it is a proven design and very functional, it is also significantly easier for smaller, lighter skiers to get into especially with shorter BSL's (Boot Sole Length)

Yeah I for one am challenged a bit getting into the Griffon's heel piece and frankly don't need a DIN 12 or 13.  Was therefore intrigued by the Squires (they're uber-light), will see which go for.

post #32 of 44

Rocker 2 100's killed it in 12-15" of blower yesterday.  I liked it alot and the best of any of the 6 skis I have demoed this year so far.  I'll try it again on a hardpark day and see what I think but this ski is a definite maybe to replace my Ones.

 

I should have known to just check Phil's reviews:o

post #33 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

Yeah I for one am challenged a bit getting into the Griffon's heel piece and frankly don't need a DIN 12 or 13.  Was therefore intrigued by the Squires (they're uber-light), will see which go for.

Hope you haven't bought them yet. They're a royal PITA for exactly the same reasons you say about the Griffon. There are 2-3 bindings that are better and less expensive.
post #34 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
is very similar but like you say, the heel is the older twin cam design that is proven. While it might be a tag heavier, it is a proven design and very functional, it is also significantly easier for smaller, lighter skiers to get into especially with shorter BSL's (Boot Sole Length)

Yeah I for one am challenged a bit getting into the Griffon's heel piece and frankly don't need a DIN 12 or 13.  Was therefore intrigued by the Squires (they're uber-light), will see which go for.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

Yeah I for one am challenged a bit getting into the Griffon's heel piece and frankly don't need a DIN 12 or 13.  Was therefore intrigued by the Squires (they're uber-light), will see which go for.

Hope you haven't bought them yet. They're a royal PITA for exactly the same reasons you say about the Griffon. There are 2-3 bindings that are better and less expensive.

Yup, the Squires are actually tougher to get into than the Griffons. 

post #35 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

Yup, the Squires are actually tougher to get into than the Griffons. 

Actually I did end up with the Squires - got a great deal (much less than the 11.0's are going for), and was intrigued by the light weight & very short "footprint".  I find them much easier to get into and out of than the Griffons, though they still are a bit harder than most other bindings.  The weight reduction is definitely noticeable, but I can't yet speak to durability or reliability of release (I've only skied them twice and haven't been in a release situation yet).  

 

So far I'd give them a thumbs up and would buy them again vs. the overkill Griffons (for my 130# weight).  That said I would definitely consider the 11.0's instead on my next purchase.  So...YMMV!

 

Happy Holidays from Steamboat!

post #36 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 
Yup, the Squires are actually tougher to get into than the Griffons. 
Actually I did end up with the Squires - got a great deal (much less than the 11.0's are going for), and was intrigued by the light weight
The TC11's are $149, how much less could the Squires be? $50? IMHO, that is no savings for the wrong or inferior binding. If I don't have confidence in a binding, I won't ski them no matter if it is a great deal or not.  Just because something is cheap, doesn't mean it is right or a good deal.
Edited by Philpug - 12/23/14 at 8:23am
post #37 of 44

Full range of brake widths on the TC11?  

post #38 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

Full range of brake widths on the TC11?  

No, only 90. Ironically, marker made a squire killer in the process of making a price point binding to compete with Amer. not listed on their pro deal site either.
post #39 of 44
Thread Starter 
90mm out of the box but narrower available. I probably would not go much wider, it is still a 149 binding.
post #40 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post


The TC11's are $149, how much less could the Squires be? $50? IMHO, that is no savings for the wrong or inferior binding. If I don't have confidence in a binding, I won't ski them no matter if it is a great deal or not.  Just because something is cheap, doesn't mean it is right or a good deal.


Yeah they were $100 and I agree that that's not a deal if the bindings are crap.  But like I said I was also intrigued with the low weight and short footprint (and they have they same toe piece as the TC11's).  So far they seem fine and, other than the limited discussions here, the feedback on these bindings otherwise is quite positive (except from those too heavy or abusive for a binding like this).

post #41 of 44

Interesting. 

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

narrower available. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post
 
 
No, only 90. Ironically, marker made a squire killer in the process of making a price point binding to compete with Amer. not listed on their pro deal site either.
 

No worries.    From the mouth of the  aesthetics committee "It's got a such a flat nose.   It will make my skis look stupid"   :D          :eek:eek What have I done?


Edited by cantunamunch - 12/23/14 at 10:07am
post #42 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

Big Mountain >100mm:

 

 

Century 102

 

Atomic Century 102 $499.00

 

102 (172cm 130/102/121 16.5M)

 

 

I guess it's overdue that I post my award for the best ski I tried at the March 2014 Alpine Demo while I'm on Epic today.  I LOVED the Atomic Century 102 for being solid in firm avy debris, and really nice and maneuverable for bumps too - good frontside & good backside.  It definitely deserves to be here in steals&deals, even with this peach+teal 102 version selling for $600 in CO a couple weeks ago. 

 

Liz

post #43 of 44

"I found the 84 Pro to be an exceptionally inexpensive option for someone looking for a hard snow biased mid 80mm ski."

 

The ski is $899.........exceptionally inexpensive ??

post #44 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed Peters View Post

Nice work on this Phil. Means a lot to the membership the work you put in on this stuff.

Hear, Hear!

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 › Philpug's 2015 Steals & Deals Winners