EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Alpine Ski and Binding Weight Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Alpine Ski and Binding Weight Thread

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

This thread is for listing ski weights and binding weights. This may include 1) skis, 2) bindings, or 3) skis with mounted bindings (which may also include plates). In your post, please be sure to specify the unit of measure (pounds or grams) and if the weight is for the pair or for each item.

 

Please refrain from posting in this thread any comments that essentially state that weight doesn't matter for alpine skis. I'd like to limit this thread to technical data. Thanks, and weigh away!

post #2 of 24

While you are giving orders, you might ask for length of ski.  They come in more than one.

post #3 of 24
Thread Starter 

Bindings:

 

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12: 1170 grams (2.58 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Ti: 1190 grams (2.62 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Lifter: 1260 grams (2.78 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Lifter Wide: 1270 grams (2.80 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Jib: 1280 grams (2.82 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Jib Wide: 1290 grams (2.84 lbs), each

 

2009 Dynastar PX Racing 12 (PX 12 Racing): 1210 grams (2.67 lbs), each

2009 Dynastar PX Racing 14 (PX 14 Racing): 1250 grams (2.76 lbs), each

 

2009 Marker Griffin (std. brake width): 945 grams (2.08 lbs), each

2009 Marker M11.0 Twincam Free: 960 grams (2.12 lbs), each (source REI.com)

2009 Marker Jester (std. brake width): 995 grams (2.19 lbs), each

2009 Marker 12.0 Free: About 1200 grams (2.65 lbs), each (source: backcountry.com)

2009 Marker Baron (std. brake width): 1225 grams (2.70 lbs), each

2009 Marker Duke (std. brake width): 1300 grams (2.87 lbs), each

 

2009 Rossignol SAS2 120: 1160 grams (2.56 lbs), each (source REI.com)

2009 Rossignol SAS2 140 Ti Wide: 1361.5 grams (3.00 lbs), each (source REI.com)

 

2009 Salomon Z12 Ti: 857 grams (1.89 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 12 B100: 1015 (2.24 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 14 B100: 1025 grams (2.26 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 16 B100: 1161 grams (2.56 lbs), each

 

post #4 of 24
Thread Starter 

That goes without saying, along with manufacturer and model.

 

Also, if known: model year, source of specification, or any other information that may be useful.

 

Thanks!

post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 

For ski weights (and some other data), check out this great thread: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76416

 

2007/2008 K2 ski weights (complete list):

www.k2skis.com/support/0708_K2Ski_Length-Radius-Weight.pdf

 

My two cents:

2008 Dynastar Speed Omeglass World Cup (165 cm) w/ 2009 Dynastar PX Racing 12: 6895 grams (15.2 lbs) per pair

 

2009 DPS Lotus 120 (190 cm): 1819 grams (4.01 lbs) per pair (manuf. spec.); w/ Marker Duke: approx. 9.75 lbs per pair

 

 


Edited by atalio - 3/15/2009 at 08:47 am


Edited by atalio - 3/15/2009 at 08:54 am
post #6 of 24

I tried to refrain but weight does not matter except when carrying your skis from the parking lot or perhaps doing Ariel work.

 

All manufactuers list these specs so go look there if you just have to know that badly

post #7 of 24

I've found the heavier bindings make the ski perform better.

 

Sorry, you told us to refrain from arguing about the relevance of ski weight, not bindings.

 

This is Epic ski.  After you have more than two posts you'll see that we'll argue about anything, anytime we feel like it.

post #8 of 24

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post

 

I've found the heavier bindings make the ski perform better.

 

Sorry, you told us to refrain from arguing about the relevance of ski weight, not bindings.

 

This is Epic ski.  After you have more than two posts you'll see that we'll argue about anything, anytime we feel like it.

 

Now there IS a comment worth a discussion. The metal 'race' bindings, besides having much greater durability also have less inherent flex and as a result better response to the ski from your every command.

I love the Look PX15's for just this reason among the current binding designs.

post #9 of 24
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post

 

I've found the heavier bindings make the ski perform better.

 

Sorry, you told us to refrain from arguing about the relevance of ski weight, not bindings.

 

This is Epic ski.  After you have more than two posts you'll see that we'll argue about anything, anytime we feel like it.


 

Fair enough. However, it seems that weight data is not sufficiently covered elsewhere in this forum (in the sense of data on a broad spectrum of skis and bindings, for whatever reason that might be pertinent to forum users), whereas the question of ski (or ski and binding) weight relevance is. As far as the relevance question, one may refer to the following posts:

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/42954/if-weights-an-issue-then

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/34030/weight-of-boots-skis-and-bindings-lighter-better

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/35840/how-much-does-a-new-pair-of-all-mountain-skis-bindings-weigh

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/47226/weight-of-skis

 

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/41686/weight-difference-atomic-st-11-and-nordica-hot-rod-modified

 

post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post

 

I tried to refrain but weight does not matter except when carrying your skis from the parking lot or perhaps doing Ariel work.

 

All manufactuers list these specs so go look there if you just have to know that badly


 

The parking lot quip has already been mentioned numerous times in other threads. Most manufacturers do not list weight specs.

post #11 of 24
post #12 of 24
Thread Starter 

Too complex a topic to be handled in a single post.

 

The engineers who design skis make many informed tradeoffs related to ski weight. Weight is indirectly (and, in some cases, directly) related to the ski's flexibility, damping, modulus of elasticity, torsional strength, bond strength, compressive strength, manufacturability, sense of stability, etc. Moreover, the best materials for a particular intended use may not always be the ones with the highest strength to weight ratio. Sometimes extra weight is good in its own right or is acceptable because the materials chosen impart a better sense of feel to the ski. The intended use is key, as in racing versus backcountry versus freeskiing versus moguls, etc. Much the same for bindings.

 

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in" 

post #13 of 24

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post

 

I tried to refrain but weight does not matter except when carrying your skis from the parking lot or perhaps doing Ariel work.

What evidence is there for this?  Certainly it matters for back country skinning.

post #14 of 24

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

 

 

What evidence is there for this?  Certainly it matters for back country skinning.

 


Alpine Ski and Binding Weight Thread

Not AT or BC

post #15 of 24

Hey, atalio, how about making this a wiki item instead of a thread item?

post #16 of 24
Thread Starter 

That's a great suggestion. Maybe if we get some additional technical input, we can combine some posts into a wiki. The only issue I see with creating a wiki now, with limited information, is that the wiki section of this site doesn't appear to be too actively updated by its users. Information from that thread at Teton Gravity would be a good start, though.

 

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76416

post #17 of 24

The weight data is already in the gear wiki for some of the binding models.

 

Sounds to me like wikiweights projects have 3 problems instead of one:

 

- The ability to specify weight limits when searching or browsing gear wiki.

- The  gear wiki isn't comprehensive for models, current or previous

- Reviews are slow.

post #18 of 24
This threads pretty old but hopefully someone can help me. Can someone find the weights of the Nordica HR-Pro Helldiver Ca and Rossignol Phantom SC 87 w/ Rossignol Freeski2 140 bindings (90mm)
Thanks
post #19 of 24
Thread Starter 
Rossignol Phantom SC 87 '09/'10 skis: 3,910 grams (8.62 lbs) per pair (believe this is for the 186 cm length)
Rossignol Freeski2 140 bindings (XL version):  1,361.5 grams (3 lbs) each, 2,723 grams (6 lbs) per pair

Combined (skis and bindings): 6,633 grams (14.62 lbs) per pair

Source: REI.com
post #20 of 24
Does weight matter? well depends. If I can get the same performance for a lighter weight I will. When Colin McCrae was getting the most performance out of his automobile designs, he "added lightness". With bicycles, particularly race bikes, the more you spend the less you get (as far as weight). Personally, one of the reasons I like the "Grif-Sters, is that I can get a high performance, laterally rigid binding that IS light weight..

Besides carrying them from the parking lot to the slopes, I am also carrying them to and from the lodge, to and from the gondolas and trams and having them pull on my feet when riding chairs. One of the reasons I don't like many of the system ski/bindings out there is that the added weight of the system overshadows the performance benefits. IMHO, Nordica and Look systems are the worst offenders, Blizzard has one of the lightest and most efficient "systems" out there. 
post #21 of 24
Ok, I'll bite! 

If our new friend is so concerned about the weight of his equipment, why doesn't he just look it up for himself? Are there so many skiers on Epic who really give a rat's a$$ how much their equipment weighs, as long as it's not excessive or cumbersome?

(to steal the phrase from Rhett Butler)- Frankly, my dear- I don't give a damnn... As long as it performs the way I want it to, then it is what it is!
post #22 of 24
 IMO I think weight matters to actually skiing, and not just carrying them from the parking lot.  I have found that, especially towards the end of the day, if I'm on some bumpy terrain and I want to pull my legs up underneath me, I can definitely feel the difference in weight between some of my heavier skis and some lighter weight skis. I've got a pair of K2 Apache Outlaws (Marker M11 bindings), which are fairly heavy skis (I don't know what they weight though).  I demoed some much lighter skis and not only were they livelier, but easier to 'suck my legs up" even when I was getting more tired.  Granted, the liveliness was not due to the weight alone, but weight does make some difference.....and yes, they are easier to carry back to the car.  Actually, the most tiring part of skiing at my local mountain is the trek from the parking lot to the closest chair lift - it's all up hill and it does get tiring carrying heavy skis.  Sorry for digressing and not contributing any weight data, but I did want to add a counterpoint to those that say weight doesn't matter - I guess if you are good enough, strong enough, in-shape enough, a few extra pounds on you feet won't matter as much.  Maybe I can lighten my load a bit  by not carrying so many pepperoni sticks, snack bars and candy bars in my pockets.
post #23 of 24



roflmao.gifbiggrin.gif  Or you can eat them in the car before skiing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ILOJ View Post

 IMO I think weight matters to actually skiing, and not just carrying them from the parking lot.  I have found that, especially towards the end of the day, if I'm on some bumpy terrain and I want to pull my legs up underneath me, I can definitely feel the difference in weight between some of my heavier skis and some lighter weight skis. I've got a pair of K2 Apache Outlaws (Marker M11 bindings), which are fairly heavy skis (I don't know what they weight though).  I demoed some much lighter skis and not only were they livelier, but easier to 'suck my legs up" even when I was getting more tired.  Granted, the liveliness was not due to the weight alone, but weight does make some difference.....and yes, they are easier to carry back to the car.  Actually, the most tiring part of skiing at my local mountain is the trek from the parking lot to the closest chair lift - it's all up hill and it does get tiring carrying heavy skis.  Sorry for digressing and not contributing any weight data, but I did want to add a counterpoint to those that say weight doesn't matter - I guess if you are good enough, strong enough, in-shape enough, a few extra pounds on you feet won't matter as much.  Maybe I can lighten my load a bit  by not carrying so many pepperoni sticks, snack bars and candy bars in my pockets.


 

post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by atalio View Post

Bindings:

 

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12: 1170 grams (2.58 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Ti: 1190 grams (2.62 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Lifter: 1260 grams (2.78 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Lifter Wide: 1270 grams (2.80 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Jib: 1280 grams (2.82 lbs), each

2009 Look/Dynastar PX 12 Jib Wide: 1290 grams (2.84 lbs), each

 

2009 Dynastar PX Racing 12 (PX 12 Racing): 1210 grams (2.67 lbs), each

2009 Dynastar PX Racing 14 (PX 14 Racing): 1250 grams (2.76 lbs), each

 

2009 Marker Griffin (std. brake width): 945 grams (2.08 lbs), each

2009 Marker M11.0 Twincam Free: 960 grams (2.12 lbs), each (source REI.com)

2009 Marker Jester (std. brake width): 995 grams (2.19 lbs), each

2009 Marker 12.0 Free: About 1200 grams (2.65 lbs), each (source: backcountry.com)

2009 Marker Baron (std. brake width): 1225 grams (2.70 lbs), each

2009 Marker Duke (std. brake width): 1300 grams (2.87 lbs), each

 

2009 Rossignol SAS2 120: 1160 grams (2.56 lbs), each (source REI.com)

2009 Rossignol SAS2 140 Ti Wide: 1361.5 grams (3.00 lbs), each (source REI.com)

 

2009 Salomon Z12 Ti: 857 grams (1.89 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 12 B100: 1015 (2.24 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 14 B100: 1025 grams (2.26 lbs), each

2009 Salomon STH 16 B100: 1161 grams (2.56 lbs), each

 


Actually I found this very helpful (contrary to the know it all from vail) when deciding between Duke's and MFD alltimes ,so thank you

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 › Alpine Ski and Binding Weight Thread