I've got a pair of Jesters on some Bros (99 waist) They have been great so far. I bought them because I really liked the wide interface. I have a pair of Sanouks with Dukes on them. I liked the Dukes enough to get the Jesters for my other skis. I do feel that the wider skis feel more responsive then with normal bindings.
Question for all of you Jester lovers. I just picked up a new pair of Enforcers and I was thinking about the Jesters as my first choice for bindings. I don't do a lot of touring, so there is no reason for the Dukes. My question is that I don't really hit the park or pipe too often and I'm wondering how your Jesters handle freeriding terrain?
They handle it great. I don't know why they are marketing this to the park crowd. Its a good light weight bindings. I wish it had a little more metal. I guess then it wouldn't be as light. There are always trade offs in anything you get. I have had some problems with some of the "other" Marker bindings but these seem to be really solid. They are easier to get into the the Look/Rossi. Plus you get the STEEZY white color (would have preferred black). I don't spend anytime at all in the park
Thanks for the reply. Just wondering what your size and weight numbers are for comparison? I'm 6'4" 230. I haven't heard a bad thing about the Jesters, but you're right, all of the marketing is as a park binding.
Ignore the marketing parkalou hype. OP; you’ll rock with that setup. Normally I would look only at the brake width [in relation to the ski waist size] as a possible issue as some folks lock up break arms depending on their particular stance. If so, some minor modification/bending is in order. However, the Jester comes with a 90mm wide break [as well as options for 110 and 125]. No worrries mate. Mount up and ski ‘em
I'm shorter then you by a bit 5'10" but only about 15 lbs lighter. At 88 in the waist the standard brake would work perfect. I think I read that the Jesters/Dukes require a ski that is atlest 79mm and wider. Give them a try and report back on what you thought.