or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Head M88 or K2 legend 8800, what bindings to run?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Head M88 or K2 legend 8800, what bindings to run?

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
Decided that I will buy either one of these skis (which ever demos better) in a 185ish length. This is for an all mountian ski in CA and occasionally FR and UT, I am looking for some binding recomendations, the turntable looks I run on my current ski appear to no longer be in existence, but I like that type of binding with a smaller footprint. I also need to consider some binding lifts or risers, the question then becomes which binding fit that bill and what hieght risers should I look at to make the ski as flexible as possible. These will be skied in Crud, bumps, hopefully powder and hopefully not Sierrra Cement.
post #2 of 9
Head recommends the HD14 Railflex II for the i.M88 and I do too.
post #3 of 9
You can still get some look p12/14 or the rossi equivalent at some online shops. I think they had some at rei-outlet.com or backcountry.com last time I checked (if that's what you want). Like noodler says, Head recommends tyrolia.
post #4 of 9
I have 8800's, I suggest P12/P14 Ti's depending on what DIN you want. I have the Lifter version which includes a 6mm riser which is small enough to not mess up soft snow performance but enough to make them more enjoyable on hardpack, which I ski a lot of since it never freaking snows around Banff.
post #5 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler
Head recommends the HD14 Railflex II for the i.M88 and I do too.
Where did you find this suggestion. I like it and was considering it but then I saw that they listed the Mojo as the binding for the IM88 on their website.
post #6 of 9
I'm actually impressed that in these replies no one has mentioned the little error in the thread title.

I don't know why, but modern Tyrolia bindings seem a wee bit cheesy to me. I've also had rather unfavorable results with their release tests, though the sample size is fairly small for me.

As for the lifter height, may I suggest trying a few different standheights and see how you like each compromise? This isn't terribly difficult to do, and it will provide much more meaningful feedback than the opinions of others.
post #7 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501
Where did you find this suggestion. I like it and was considering it but then I saw that they listed the Mojo as the binding for the IM88 on their website.
The 2006 Head catalog shows the HD14 Railflex II on most of the Monster line, but the i.M88 is not shown with the binding. So maybe they are suggesting the Mojo 15 (could it be due to the brake widths that are available?). I'd take the Mojo 15 on it too. I have 2 sets of Mojo 15s and they are truly bomber bindings (all metal, serious DIN, scratch-resistant finish). However, if the wide brakes will work with the HD14 then you'll have a significant advantage in having a binding that allows for fore/aft positioning adjustment and is also a free flexing design.
post #8 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
I'm actually impressed that in these replies no one has mentioned the little error in the thread title.

I don't know why, but modern Tyrolia bindings seem a wee bit cheesy to me. I've also had rather unfavorable results with their release tests, though the sample size is fairly small for me.

As for the lifter height, may I suggest trying a few different standheights and see how you like each compromise? This isn't terribly difficult to do, and it will provide much more meaningful feedback than the opinions of others.
OK - you can't just leave the "cheesy" comment and the release test issues "hanging" out there without some backup and additional info. Please elaborate.
post #9 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler
OK - you can't just leave the "cheesy" comment and the release test issues "hanging" out there without some backup and additional info. Please elaborate.
Well, I really don't know what else to say. I don't put much faith in gut feelings myself, so I wouldn't expect anyone else to put faith in my gut reactions. Like I said, I haven't tested thousands of them...maybe just a hundred or two. It seemed that there were a lot of awkward or failing results in there, but again I wouldn't put any stock in that being indicative of a larger trend.

As to them being "cheesy", thats completely a personal feeling that I have. There is a detent when you turn the DIN screws, and each quarter turn is marked by a very sketchy sounding tin-like noise and very to judge movement of the indicator. The indicators seem to have a lot of lash in them, which is not necessarily of any actual consequence except for a wee more care being needed to set them up. Also, the metal tracks that hold the floating bindings together are at least as thin as the ones that often bend in the old Atomic binding design. Furthermore, it seems the material they use for the covers is fairly susceptible to getting trashed quickly.

I've spent very little time skiing in them, so this is all based on my experiences pulling them out of boxes and mounting/testing them, and testing used models. Its possible that they merely take weight more seriously than most...it'd be interesting to see how heavy they are compared to similar models from other manufacturers.

Your mileage will probably vary.
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 › Head M88 or K2 legend 8800, what bindings to run?