or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

bindings from the past

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
I was reading the threads about problems with bindings, early releases etc , and it remembered me of a salomon system from a few years back. I think it was called propulsion or something like that, and had some kind of plastic spring underfoot, meant to boost response energy. Anyone remembers it? Skiied it? Why did it fail? I also remember a marker binding that allowed to change between 3 preset modes, race, slope and off piste, i think, with a turn of a button on the toe piece.Any memories about this one?
post #2 of 9
Ive seen the markers, but I don't know if it works or not(I highly doubt it considering that it didn't last very long). Never heard of anything like the salomons that you described.

post #3 of 9
marker selective control. worked on soft skis (to stiffen them) did nothing for stiff skis and added lift and weight.

Pro pluse. some salomon energy return thingy, angain just weight and lift and fat brakes don't work. They did do a 9-15 spring that was nice.
post #4 of 9
Thread Starter 
The Marker device was supposed to affect the ski stiffness? How? I thought it was just a DIN setting device.
If they were so useless, how and why did the companies start marketing them? From your posts it seems the products did not work, that it was not a case of a working product that just didn't fit well in the market. I mean if you know your product is a lemon, isn't it better to safeguard your reputation?
And also, you ski shop guys, how willing will you, or others you know, be to push such a product?I am interested in how the regular Joe (and not pros) can evaluate the true value of a new toy.What statemens are usually made when pushing a product because of a big commision, and because you think that this guy will not be returning soon to your area?
Demo the bindings? Is that a feasible option?
post #5 of 9
I was one one of the test teams for the pro-pulse. I felt it worked. Simple anology... If Markers Selective Control os an on demand 4WD, where you can switch it depending on snow conditions.. The Pro-pulse was a full-time AWD.. where depending on your pressure in the boot it would put additional pressure to the snow. It had a cam under your heel, the more you would pressure, the more it would transfer to the ski, so hard snow where you were angulating it would hod the ski better. Soft snow where you are lighter on the ski, no addition pressure. IMO, it worked very well. With the advent of shorted skis.. it came out 2 years too early.
post #6 of 9
I used the salomon propulse binding for about 3 years. It was noticable how much more pop the skis had when coming out of a turn. I took the propulses off a pair of K2 X14 when they became rock skis and put some other bindings on, and the skis had a noticably deader feeling. Downside was they were a really very very heavy binding.
post #7 of 9
If you went with the 900 Aliums, the weight wasn't that bad. The trick is to find the 850's, they were much lighter, but only a DIN of 3.5-10.
post #8 of 9
Thread Starter 
Wow, Phil, that's gotta be a cool job, testing new products for companies.
If the posts here are representative, it seems that most skiers were put off by the added weight.So maybe some lighter materials could have solved that, but maybe it wasn't worth the premium.
Thank you all for your responses
post #9 of 9
Look at the end result of the propulse - added energy to the ski that is proportional to the amount of energy the skier puts into the ski. Then compare it to PowerAxe in all it's iterations - Race GS, Race SL and the various iterations of PowerAxe integrated with bindings. The effect of the two systems are the same. PowerAxe is lighter, less bulky and easier to install. I'll admit that the integrated binding versions of PowerAxe are not quite as energetic as the Propulse 900 but I believe the other benefits outweigh that loss. The plate versions of PowerAxe are more energetic than Propulse and are lighter to boot.

I believe the PowerAxe bindings also have a tighter roll coupling than Propulse did. It is definite in the PowerAxe plates and arguable in the integrated binding versions. I believe this is largely due to the evolution of the axial pivot forward roll release feature.

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