New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Marker 16.0 comp

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
Looks like marker is getting smart with offering the comp 16.0 . I saw a pair in the store this weekend . For some the 18.0 and 20.0 was too much and the 14.0 was too plastic . Looks like the 16.0 could fill the gap .
post #2 of 12
Is the 16 metal?
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 
The 16 is metal . When I first saw them I was sure they were the 1800s but they are not .
post #4 of 12
Other than the different springs, did you notice other differences between the 16 and 18? It would be great if the 16 were identical to the 18 (except for the spring).
Check out this link You can compare the 16 to the 20 and 12. It appears that the 16 does not have the Biometric WC toe. Other than that, it should be quite similar to the 20.
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
I did not really look at the specs to see if they are identical to the 18s . I just noticed they were different that the 14s . I saw the teeth on the toe piece which caught my attention.
post #6 of 12
I'll do a comparo next week when my 187s come in. They did look like they were metal though.
post #7 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by sywsyw View Post
It appears that the 16 does not have the Biometric WC toe. Other than that, it should be quite similar to the 20.
But Marker's achilles heel has been the consumer toe, which is consistently derided for its tendency to prerelease. I can't imagine that the 16 is likely to win a lot of converts.
post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 
I dont think the 16 has the same toe as the 14 or the 12 . I was just looking at them at to me the 16 is much better . It looks just like the 18 to me . The only difference I can see right away is the heel brake . its round like the 14 and not flat/square like the 18 or the 20 . I was asking the buyer if all the marker problems were release related and his response . Markers are as good as they get if you purchase them above the 12 din range . He would put the WC bindings against any on the market .
post #9 of 12
I went to the web site and the toe on the 16 is a biometric-pro the same as the 12. The 20 has a biometric-WC.
The heals are the same on the 16 and the 20
post #10 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gator View Post
I was asking the buyer if all the marker problems were release related and his response . Markers are as good as they get if you purchase them above the 12 din range .
The last Markers I skied on were a pair of 14.0 frees from two years ago. They were on a friends pair of skis. I used to ski on Markers a while ago, so I instinctively cranked the toes to 14 (I usually ski Salomon 916's at 12 on the toe). They pre-released all over the place just like I remembered in the bad old days. I've heard the really high DIN Markers are better due to the metal bar that locks out upward release and the teeth on the toe wings. But teeth on the toe wings? C'mon - if the binding works well, you shouldn't have to resort to stuff like teeth on the toe wings. Of course the buyer is gonna say they're great - when's the last time you went to a Ford dealership and the salesman said "To be honest, Fords are inferior to GMC"?

Marker heels are as good as anything out there, but the toes are a different story.
post #11 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gator View Post
Markers are as good as they get if you purchase them above the 12 din range . He would put the WC bindings against any on the market .
LOL. Clearly a smooth skier, that buyer. Or full of BS. The 14 setting bindings for instance still suck pretty hard. This is the company that builds a binding with a setting of 30...

Actually I disagree with Jer about the heels being as good as anything, but that might be because I like to ski at low release settings. Rarely go over 12 in a heel, rarely over 10 in a toe. Even less in bindings that work well for me. I twisted out of a good WC toe at 14 last year and it felt a lot like my leg was going to break.
post #12 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Actually I disagree with Jer about the heels being as good as anything, but that might be because I like to ski at low release settings.

I should have qualified that a bit. I've got a lot of experience with the old metal MRR turntables - almost no experience with the normal heels. So for all I know the normal heels suck as bad as the toes.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion