or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Attn Marker Haters: lets talk Jester
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Attn Marker Haters: lets talk Jester

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
The new Jester has a wider platform, which is supposed to help transfer weight from edge to edge faster on wider skis. I have also read that it does not have the biometric toe piece, and therefore should not pre-release like many other marker bindings supposedly do.

If you are against marker bindings, does the new toe make you think any differently?

If not, is there another company making a binding with a wide footprint?

Or is this quicker pressure to the edge with a wider binding thing just a bunch of marketing BS?





post #2 of 13
I am NOT a Marker hater......but.

Energy tranfer is all about the coupling strength of the binding. Ie: when a twist load is placed into the system, how much flex/twist is there?

The coupling strength is due to the flex within the toe mechanism, the downward pressure of the heel, and within the context of recreational bindings, the flex of the baseplates which is reliant upon the baseplate materials and more importantly, the width spread of the screw pattern.

Look bindings have wider screw patterns than Jester.
Look bindings have wider AFD platforms than Jester.
Look bindings have more downward heel pressure due to cam configuration.

The Sollie race bindings share some of this as well.

Does any of this mean that LOOKs are better bindings than the Jester?...no!!

What is does mean is that the supposed advantages of the Jester have turned the market bias from solidly anti-Marker to a more competitive situation. That is all good.

SJ
post #3 of 13
Conversely, I am a traditional Marker hater. The biometric toe is terrible and in my opinion, dangerous.

That being said I am impressed with the Jester. That's because it's not a traditional Marker in any way. I agree with everything the SJ said above. What I have found suprising is that a large number of Marker employees seem to have some degree of disdain for the new bindings. They support the bindings because they have to but they don't seem to believe in the bindings since they don't have the bio-metric toe.

There are a lot of great bindings out there. There are a lot of mediocre bindings out there. Truth be told, most skiers can't tell the difference once they're skiing
post #4 of 13
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
Look bindings have wider screw patterns than Jester.
Look bindings have wider AFD platforms than Jester.
Look bindings have more downward heel pressure due to cam configuration.
SJ
Hmm, which ones? Marker is making a big deal about the new width of THEIR screw patterns... even saying that the Jester needs at least a 76mm waist to fit on a ski. Is this the same for the looks?
post #5 of 13
The width of the screw pattern is the same on the Jester as on the more std Marker bindings like the M-12.0 etc.

SJ
post #6 of 13
Thread Starter 
Ok, so Marker claims that the new freeride bindings (ie. Griffon and Jester, and Duke) have:

"10 mm wider interface than traditional "racing" bindings"

"Connecting brackets strategically placed for better edge control"

"The only freeride/AT binding designed for skis 76mm and wider"

They also say that the "Wide brackets connect to the ski directly where the power needs to be transferred. Competitors ruin ski flex with their "torsion bar" designs. Standard bindings are designed around 63mm skis, but the Jester is designed for a minimum ski width of 76mm."

So how much of this is just marketing spin, and how much actually means something? What does it mean? What other bindings specifically do these things as well/better?
post #7 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPowHound View Post
So how much of this is just marketing spin, and how much actually means something?
Ummmmmmm.................................

This is much like the "brand new layers of unobtanium" or the "10% stiffer under the foot" (where you can't feel it BTW).

WADR...don't give yourself a headache.

SJ
post #8 of 13
I'm not sure it makes a giant difference at the current width - but it is one of the two bindings I'd choose this year. However, there is little doubt that widening the base of the binding is going to facilitate pressure xfer if the rest of the binding is designed appropriately. I was disappointed they didn't move the bar further and set a minimum of 90 or 100mm ski width. The price of accommodating market segments stuck in the past I guess...
post #9 of 13
I hate the Marker toes. Their turntable heels I never had a problem with. I have zero experience with the new Jester/Duke toes, so no comment. The whole wide footprint thing sounds like BS to me. Also - put a higher climbing bar on the Duke for Chrissakes.
post #10 of 13
Never skied the jester. I assume the wide platform is their way of saying that the bindings are more laterally stiff than previous marker bindings. Seems like an improvement. But many people have been using solly or look bindigns for years. Narrow PX12s can drive a 100mm wide ski just fine. Usually on wider freeride skis people don't want more leverage over their edges and thus tend to mount flat binders or those with minimal lift. So these wide platform binders with a fairly high lift seem to be a solution in search of a problem.

Credit where due, the jester is pretty light weight compared to other simmilar bindings.

I think the duke is the much more important binding than the jester and the only reason I see to buy a jester is if you ski alot on dukes and want normal bindings with similar ramp angles, etc... For my part i have bindings that I like and see no reason to change.
post #11 of 13
Being a Sollie fan for a long time, and having Drivers on most of my skis I chose to order a couple of pair these for my wider skis. A couple of factors went into the decision. 1. The wider platform, I wanted a laterally stiff binding and the wider platform will contribute to that. 2. Weight, for a high DIN binding, these things are light!
post #12 of 13
They look neat.
post #13 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I'm not sure it makes a giant difference at the current width - but it is one of the two bindings I'd choose this year. However, there is little doubt that widening the base of the binding is going to facilitate pressure xfer if the rest of the binding is designed appropriately. I was disappointed they didn't move the bar further and set a minimum of 90 or 100mm ski width. The price of accommodating market segments stuck in the past I guess...
Agreed, and I thought it was designed for 76+ mm, but according to Jeff Curtis of Marker, it is only 70+...
http://www.skiandsnowboardequipment....nding/p/SS1100
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 › Attn Marker Haters: lets talk Jester