EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Is Something wrong with Marker bindings??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is Something wrong with Marker bindings?? - Page 2

post #31 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimski View Post

A couple posters mentioned that they had problems with Tyrolia bindings.  What were the problems?    How about Head Peak and Mojo bindings -- good/bad?

Head Peak and Mojo bindings are Tyrolia bindings. In my opinion they are excellent.
post #32 of 57
Whiteroom -- Thanks.  Are they the same in the sense that both Buick and Chevy are GM cars?  Or are they literally the same but just marketed as different brands?
post #33 of 57
epic,
thanks for the link to the knee binding.  I was already aware of it, but not necessarily convinced to get one.  It's pretty complex and being such a small niche, I'm not sure about the company's long term viability and ability to support their equipment.  For the price I'd want to make sure it really made a difference and didn't sacrifice performance.  I think the'yre like $500.

Based on some reading online, and an unbeatable price at REI today, I got the Rossi freeski2 120's on some Prophet 100's.  Hard to believe deals now.  The 120's were $118 and the 140's were $144.  Both good deals.  I figured I'd save the money, because the appropriate DIN setting for me is certainly not more than 12 and there was no need just to spend the xtra.  Considering price, performance, design, I think it was a good call. 
post #34 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by vermonte View Post

epic,
thanks for the link to the knee binding.  I was already aware of it, but not necessarily convinced to get one.  It's pretty complex and being such a small niche, I'm not sure about the company's long term viability and ability to support their equipment.  For the price I'd want to make sure it really made a difference and didn't sacrifice performance.  I think the'yre like $500.

They are. What does an ACL cost? I can't say I'm 100% convinced about Knee Binding either, but if you want to protect your ACL, it is the only choice out there. All other bindings are built to protect the bones in your legs, not the ligaments in your knees.
post #35 of 57
no right,  good call epic,

if it were a matter of $500 to prevent an injury then I wouldn't hesitate.  I've already invested $800 in a brace for skiing at the orthos. recommendation. (insurance invested it actually).  I feel like wearing the brace hopefully accomplishes the same thing the knee binding aims to ( keeps your knee form extending all the way to protect the ACL from being in a vulnerable state)  If I knew the binding was only added protection and the performance was there, then it's worth the $$.  I don't know anyone whose used them and have only seen them in ski shops.  I'm no engineer, so like a said, its a tough call making the best decision, all things considered.
post #36 of 57
 The Kneebinding will do a good job protecting the ligament in one specific type of fall and it will do that better than any other binding out there. There are other types of falls that the Kneebinding is either the same as any other binding or in some cases worse than other bindings. I think they are on the right track, I just don't think they are there...yet. 
post #37 of 57
 Worse than others in what scenario? You determined this how?
post #38 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 Worse than others in what scenario? You determined this how?


 Taking bait . While there is lateral release out of the heal, there is no upward compensation in the toe that would help in some rearward falls nor os there a sliding AFD or rollers like other manufacturers that assist in forward twisting falls. I determined this by simply looking at the binding and its capacity for different release scenarios. 
post #39 of 57
 I don't think the FKS has those things either and yet it seems to be touted here as the ultimate binding.
post #40 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimski View Post

Whiteroom -- Thanks.  Are they the same in the sense that both Buick and Chevy are GM cars?  Or are they literally the same but just marketed as different brands?

Literally the same.  Head = Tyrolia same thing just different logos.  BTW Fischer FreeFlex are also Tyrolia.
post #41 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 I don't think the FKS has those things either and yet it seems to be touted here as the ultimate binding.

I have a couple of FKS's here and they actually do. 
 
post #42 of 57
 I hate to get all nit-picky, but what DIN? I am looking at FKS155s and P18s right now, and I'd say they don't. FKS 120 might, but those don't seem to be the Holy Grail. At any rate, I never said the KneeBinding is perfect. I've never skied it, I've never tested it and I wouldn't know how either, but I do know that they offer a mode of protection no other binding has. I know that ACL injuries are very common, and I know that they cost way more than $500.
post #43 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 I don't think the FKS has those things either and yet it seems to be touted here as the ultimate binding.

FKS releases upward at the toe, 120 pretty much like a beefy rec binding, the 155 I think still can, but takes enough force to make it irrelevant except at racing speeds. It's touted as ultimate binding more because the heel design aligns forces closer to the tibia, and allows rotary movement at the heel to help lateral release. Personally, do not think it's nearly as knee friendly as Tyrolia, but better than any other, and amazing elasticity if you need to stay in. 
post #44 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 I hate to get all nit-picky, but what DIN? I am looking at FKS155s and P18s right now, and I'd say they don't. FKS 120 might, but those don't seem to be the Holy Grail. At any rate, I never said the KneeBinding is perfect. I've never skied it, I've never tested it and I wouldn't know how either, but I do know that they offer a mode of protection no other binding has. I know that ACL injuries are very common, and I know that they cost way more than $500.

Forget cost...who wants to go through with that even if it were free!
post #45 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 I don't think the FKS has those things either and yet it seems to be touted here as the ultimate binding.

FKS 140 do release vertically/diagonally at the toe, the FKS 180 does not. 
post #46 of 57
I've never really understood why people say the FKS bindings 'help' with lateral release. look at a boot in an FKS binding. Could someone explain how a boot can exit the heel in anything but a pure vertical plane? The boot is captured by the metal base plate, the base plate is in-line with the tibia... so the heel can rotate a bit, this doesn't help release at the toe at all and it lower the ability for the boot to exit the binding at the heel, the heel piece can actually stay engaged with the heel lug until the boot is fully ejected and out of the toe, the heel needs to come straight up to release... why would anyone think this is 'safer'??? They stay ON, that's why they are 'good', they are not 'safer'.

Oh yeah, and there is absolutely no gliding AFD or track to reduce friction at the toe, one of Phil's criticisms of the Kneebinding.
post #47 of 57
This thread is killing me. I was about to order a pair of Schizos.
post #48 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by RatherPlayThanWork View Post

This thread is killing me. I was about to order a pair of Schizos.


 Order them, it is a fine binding. 
post #49 of 57
 I have skied Tyrolia for years and have never had a problem with them. Some people are still hung up on the recall that effected some of their lower end bindings in the last millenium. Salomon had the same breakage problems but did not replace effected bindings. Markers on the other hand never seem to stay on my feet. If you want a solid binding that keeps you in when it should and lets you go when needed nobody tops Tyrolia.
post #50 of 57
 Marker is still living with their pre release stigma of the older twimcam toes from the M46-M54 generation. While the newer Logic toes don't have reputation of the others that were mentioned here but they also don't deserve being lumped in with the older ones either. 
post #51 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by RatherPlayThanWork View Post

This thread is killing me. I was about to order a pair of Schizos.

Jester, Griffon, Duke, Schizo's, etc are not the type of Markers that people don't like. I have never heard a bad thing about those particular bindings.
post #52 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post




Jester, Griffon, Duke, Schizo's, etc are not the type of Markers that people don't like. I have never heard a bad thing about those particular bindings.

they actually prerelease at the heels. The toes no longer prerelease. I could just be alittle to far forward sometimes in ;tricky" situation though.
post #53 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 Marker is still living with their pre release stigma of the older twimcam toes from the M46-M54 generation. While the newer Logic toes don't have reputation of the others that were mentioned here but they also don't deserve being lumped in with the older ones either. 

How long ago did those go out of production?   I recall all the women skiers that were on Marker bindings during the Torino Olympics pre-releasing, even the commentators cited that the women who's skis were popping off were all on Markers, and that there might be something wrong with the binding design.
post #54 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post




they actually prerelease at the heels. The toes no longer prerelease. I could just be alittle to far forward sometimes in ;tricky" situation though.
I will agree with you to some extent there. And I would also concur that it only REALLY happened when I was waaaay over the front in cascade concrete.
post #55 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

Could someone explain how a boot can exit the heel in anything but a pure vertical plane? The boot is captured by the metal base plate, the base plate is in-line with the tibia... so the heel can rotate a bit, this doesn't help release at the toe at all and it lower the ability for the boot to exit the binding at the heel, the heel piece can actually stay engaged with the heel lug until the boot is fully ejected and out of the toe, the heel needs to come straight up to release... 
I'll give it a try; not a specialist like you on bindings but know a bit about bodies. "Lateral" to an anatomist means to the outside, away from the midline of the body. In a real body, most lateral movements of the leg or arm also include a rotational component, and often abduction. If you move a limb sideways, it also describes an arc in and out of a sagittal plane. Below the hip, all our joints (yes, including the knee, ankles, and foot itself) are not simply hinges. They routinely allow some rotation; the ankle allows a lot. Ligaments take up the strain as they absorb this rotation; the ACL is particularly involved. Also leg joints do some complex sliding with both lateral and sagittal components, but that's less relevant here. 

So let's assume a binding that only allows purely lateral release at the toe, 90 degrees to midline and on the horizontal plane. We'll forget about upward release at the toe. So, just like shop tests with pistons are set up for. If we apply a spiral twisting sideways movement, such as in an actual fall, the foot is also trying to rotate around an axis (well, several, but we'll just assume one) between the tibia and the toe. Assuming the heel can only move upward, until the toe releases sideways, the shaft of the tibia has to take up the portion of the force that's rotational. That movement is sent to the ankle and up to the knee. However, a modern high stiff boot cuff will prevent much rotation at the ankle, so most of the force will be transmitted up the tibia and fibula, which will rotate to the detriment of knee ligaments, particularly the ACL. Moreover, a twisting fall also typically involves downward flexion at the knee as you move from a vertical extended position to a collapsed position. That in itself will tend to create inward rotation at the knee. Which will preload the ACL, eg, stretch it taut, as it's also dealing with increasing torsion coming up the tibia. Or if the force is very high, over a briefer time interval, the tibia or fibula will fail, typically just above the boot, before you flex downward. By contrast, if the heelpiece allows some rotation, as the toe rotates outward, the heel can rotate inward (think propeller). So there is less rotational force that the tibia has to deal with before the toe is out of the binding; the heel "helps" in the counter direction. The classic Look turntable allows some limited rotation, regardless of whether it ultimately releases upward or at all, and regardless of whether the sides allow lateral displacement of the boot. Rotation not equal to lateral, in short. 

Other advantages of classic Looks (and to a lessor degree the PX's) have to do with the location of the binding axis relative to the tibia, as it relates to fractures, but that's not your question. And let's not get going on actual lateral release designs, or Chris from RI will feel obligated to chime in with how many days he's been injury free, and someone will have to remind us that Tyrolias only release at 150 degrees, and we'll need to replicate several hundred posts over the years. 

Now back to our regular scheduled trashing of Markers...
Edited by beyond - 4/4/10 at 10:07pm
post #56 of 57
Beyond,

Do the Rossi FKS's employ the same design as the classic Looks that your talking about?  rotating heel?  I think I started all this and ended up getting the Rossi freeski2 because they were inexpensive and I mistakenley thought they had the rotating heel that the FKS do.  I returned them and ordered the FKS 140's.  I still think it makes more sense wearing a custom brace and spending $250 on these instead of $500 or more for knee bindings. 
post #57 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by vermonte View Post

Beyond,

Do the Rossi FKS's employ the same design as the classic Looks that your talking about?  rotating heel?  I think I started all this and ended up getting the Rossi freeski2 because they were inexpensive and I mistakenley thought they had the rotating heel that the FKS do.  I returned them and ordered the FKS 140's.  I still think it makes more sense wearing a custom brace and spending $250 on these instead of $500 or more for knee bindings. 
I'm literally 5,200 miles from my skis, so this'll have to be from memory, and I'm not a shop guy who knows each model of each year by heart. But I'm pretty sure that the basic design of the FKS (I own several) and the old turntables (I grew up on them, now just own one rec version that I haven't used in 5 years), is the same. There are differences in the shape and build of the wings/shafts that connect the body of the heelpiece to the side of the turntable. The really old versions were just bent metal shafts, then they went to a flattened alu "wing" in the rec models. Also recall that near the end of the run of the pre-px's, the "turntable" no longer turned a few degrees along a 360 perimeter, but had more of a small lateral shift along an arc. Would have to think about how that would effect forces on legs, and should be applying myself to other stuff called work. 

As far as your ultimate call, agree totally. (Well, would still give the nod to Tyrolias, but that's me.  ) Have lost track of what my knees have cost me and/or my insurance company over the years. Even discounting what my lawyer buddies call "pain and suffering," and I call rehab and maintenance, binding cost is trivial by comparison. If I could find a binding that was significantly better than my Tyrolia's or Look's, I'd pay 10X what they run. Nothing else out there that does, to date. 
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 › Is Something wrong with Marker bindings??