EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Schizo v Railflex v Carve Plate
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Schizo v Railflex v Carve Plate

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
Hi again everyone.  Hope I'm not boring you regulars by asking the same questions again.  It's been a while, though, and I was hoping someone out there might have some-on-the-slopes feedback for the Schizo or some new input regarding the best way to achieve an adjustable mount point.

I started a thread some months ago and got some really great advice:

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/87746/can-carve-plate-be-used-for-adjustable-mounting

The main goal is to try not to lock myself into a static mount position yet sacrifice as little performance, stability and quality as possible.

The impressions I've got so far about the major contenders (see the thread above for some other recommendations - among other things, some people suggested some demo bindings they think live up to the task too):

Railflex:
+ been around a while, presumably the kinks are mostly worked out
+ large adjustment range
+ about as cheap as many non-adjustable bindings
- sets you up high (about 35mm) off the ski
- some people claim they start to develop slop after a while
- some people say the plastic construction sacrifices quality/performace

Schizo:
- this is the first year they're on the market
- no one seems to have reviews for them anywhere
+/- looks like these are about 23mm off the ski, which is in the range of typical non-adjustable bindings (not the lowest height around, but still acceptable even for non-adjusters I think)
- more expensive than RailFlex, but not all that much more
+ good adjustment range

Carve Plate (mainly looking at Tyrolia -- Vist is another option, but is expensive, hard to find and hard to understand specs):
+ pretty darn cheap
+ the newest plates from Tyrolia seem to have as much adjustment range as the RailFlex/Schizo (but solid details on this point are lacking)
- even the lowest plate height added to a very low non-adjustable binding on top sets you up as high as a RailFlex
- Not meant for continuous re-mounting -- plastic might not hold bindings as solid as they once did if you remount too many times
- Not officially meant for this purpose, although that shouldn't dissuade many people here (but the lack of details about specs for this specific purpose as well as general info about which plate is more suitable for a flexible interface, etc. are not easy to come by)

After having taken some time off from thinking about this, I went and looked at the Schizo's specs and realized that the standover height (23mm) is actually competitive with an average non-adjustable binding, and to me, that really tipped the balance in its favor.  After all, the main sacrifice people talk about with adjustable bindings is the added standover height.  The question of developing slop or other quality issues might be an outstanding thing that is left to be seen since this is the first year Marker is offering these.  On the other hand, Marker is synonymous with pretty good quality.  Even the price of the Griffon Schizo is just a few dollars more than a top-of the line Tyrolia Freeride binding.  That might be twice as much as you might otherwise pay for an average binding that'll suit most purposes, but it's also just at the top of the range of "OK, I could pay that much for a binding"....

So I'm currently tempted by the Schizo - the Griffon in particular.  Anyone have any thoughts to add?

Thanks in advance!

PS - Along with some of the demo binders other people suggested, I am pondering what the difference would be between Marker demos and Marker Schizo:

http://www.untracked.com/p3360c81b54-10_marker_grifon_12_demo_ski_binding.html

Demo price seems to be cheaper, standover height is lower yet....  is quality/slop potential higher for these demos?  Or is the price difference just down to the fancy new easy-to-understand interface of the Schizos?
Edited by pdontthink - 1/11/10 at 12:31pm
post #2 of 14
 I have a few days on my Schizos now. No issues at all, they adjust easily - even when the binding is packed with snow.
post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thanks, epic.  Do you find the standover height reasonable?  That is, doesn't feel like you're up too high, which should be harder to control in deep powder?

I should have added one key difference between the various adjustable systems -- weight.  I don't have the weights in front of me (and not sure those specs are available for all of them - anyone?), but the RailFlex and Schizo probably pay more penalty in that department.
post #4 of 14
Stop bean counting and buy the schizos  You won't feel any weight difference once you're sliding on the snow anyway. The difference in stand height between your options will be minimal too - the only way of achieving a significant height reduction would be to mount a flat binding, defeating all adjustability.
post #5 of 14
 All I can say is that I don't notice the standheight or the weight. I do feel the standheight on my Dukes, but not on the Schizos.
post #6 of 14
There's another recent post on the Schizo where the heel section broke for the guy (something about the cable coming out of the track because of a flaw in the design).

I was definitely enthused about the Schizo until I saw that you needed a screwdriver to make the adjustment - for me that practically puts it back on par with the other options.  I'd much rather be able to make a really quick on-slope adjustment without having to pull out a screwdriver, but it's not an entirely bad option.

Railflex definitely develops lateral slop over time (personal experience) - I won't go near another Railflex setup - especially on a wide ski.

So that leaves you with the Tyrolia plates.  The newer plates are non-existent in the market place at this point.  I've inquired to see if I can get some.  To solve the re-usability of the holes go look up Puderluder's post here or the long threads on TGR for the binding inserts.  Those inserts could easily be used on the plates (along with machine screws) and completely solve the durability issue.  I've purchased a bunch of the inserts and plan on using some of them with my Tyrolia plates.

For me I could care less about the stand height and I generally prefer some height even on wider skis.  I don't see what all the fuss is about in 3D conditions.  The only place I think it really plays out as having some bearing is in the park - which I don't frequent.  The extra stand height definitely isn't something you'd want when landing tricks on the hardpack.
post #7 of 14
Thread Starter 
Noodler - good points. 

I'm not sure the screwdriver thing is a big deal in my book -- it's not like there aren't ones provided by most resorts near the lifts and pulling one out of my hydration pack is a no-brainer.  I won't be adjusting them every time up the lift after all.

Lateral slop on the RailFlex - interesting.  The whole mechanism just loosens enough?  After how many days of skiing?  Can you elaborate on what lateral slop feels like on the slopes?

Yeah, those plates.  Did you hear back about the new ones?  Doesn't Tyrolia actually want to sell them??

As for using the inserts on the plates instead of the skis, are the plates thick enough for the inserts?  I just read all the related threads about those and it's really great to see that come together, although I'm surprised no one has talked about using them in plates.  Here's the links for anyone interested (and there's several more interesting threads linked from those):

http://www.tetongravity.com/FORUMS/showthread.php?t=113720
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=173708
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=179060

Interestingly, jondrums over at TGR actually put together a custom plate that allows something very similar -- using a custom plate to be able to mount two different bindings to it.

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=169419

Anyway, if you end up using inserts in a carve plate, I'd really like to hear how it goes.  If you post a new thread about it, would you mind pinging this thread with a link?

I don't have a lot of experience playing with standover height, but others have claimed the added leverage makes your skis both easier to edge on the groomers but more twitchy (so harder to control and ride smooth) in the deep stuff.  You have no such issues in deep powder?  I'm sure a lot of it is very subjective.

Personally, I'm growing tired of being in a state of indecision and am probably going to go with the Schizos, if only because I want to actually ride my new skis THIS season.  It's just too bad the Schizos haven't had a few years to mature.
post #8 of 14
I still don't see the need for this product. Mount a binding on the ski manufacturers line and go ski.

Why create a problem where there is none. Twenty page threads on whether or not to go +1 or -1 on the mount. Just go ski!
post #9 of 14
 Just another opinion on on Railflex. I've used this setup on 100 mm and 85 mm waist skis and have noticed no lateral slop. However, I weigh about 175#. You do need a screwdriver to adjust the binding. It is fairly easy to do the + 1.5   -1.5  on the hill. It is also nice to just buy a Railflex plate for $10,  mount it on that new pair of skis, and slide on your old binding. I have also traveled with two pairs of skis and one pair of bindings on planes, saving weight / space / fees.
post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post

I still don't see the need for this product. Mount a binding on the ski manufacturers line and go ski.

Why create a problem where there is none. Twenty page threads on whether or not to go +1 or -1 on the mount. Just go ski!
 

Glad this works for you.  You're probably of average height with average build and an average foot size.  For those of us that don't match up with what ski manufacturers have decided is their average - we must adjust to get the best performance out of a ski.  There are many, many threads here on the subject if you care to be enlighted .
post #11 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by quickfoot View Post

 Just another opinion on on Railflex. I've used this setup on 100 mm and 85 mm waist skis and have noticed no lateral slop. However, I weigh about 175#. You do need a screwdriver to adjust the binding. It is fairly easy to do the + 1.5   -1.5  on the hill. It is also nice to just buy a Railflex plate for $10,  mount it on that new pair of skis, and slide on your old binding. I have also traveled with two pairs of skis and one pair of bindings on planes, saving weight / space / fees.

Put one of your skis flat on a hard floor (no carpet).  Snap a boot into the binding and then "straddle" stand on the ski with one foot just ahead of the toe and the other just behind the heel.  Grab the boot and rock it side to side.  With a used railflex setup you should notice that your boot moves and it can be quite a bit depending on how much slop has developed.  Note that the railflex isn't the only binding setup that this happens to.  Ever since I discovered this issue I've stuck to the two bindings I've found that don't have any lateral slop - Look and Tyrolia.
post #12 of 14
pdontthink - the problem with the railflex is in the base (the rail itself) - it's just not a "bomber" part and wears over time creating the slop.  There isn't any problem with the Tyrolia binding itself, just the rail.

I'm still waiting to hear back on the newer Tyrolia plates - dawgcatching is checking on these for me.

As far as the inserts go - the plates are thick enough for binding screws (9mm) and the inserts are 7mm.  So I don't think there would be a problem there.  I did see your post on TGR and the response about t-nuts.  Sorry, but I just don't see how a t-nut could easily be made to work on a plate like an insert can.  You would have to route out the under side of the plate and even then most plates have lots of "hollow" areas and a t-nut needs something to grab onto so that it doesn't spin.  IMO the insert is a much better solution.

Most freeride/freestyle type guys are landing airs and need a low stable platform to help in their landings - so a low stand height binding setup totally makes sense for them.  If you're not landing big airs then the additional stand height can help with edging on the harder stuff and I've never noticed any negative effects when skiing in the deep stuff.  To each their own.
post #13 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

Quote:


Glad this works for you.  You're probably of average height with average build and an average foot size.  For those of us that don't match up with what ski manufacturers have decided is their average - we must adjust to get the best performance out of a ski.  There are many, many threads here on the subject if you care to be enlighted .

let's see......6'.......200+lbs in my gear....with a 29mondo boot.

The line works just fine on the small quiver I have to work with........

Enlightened? Hardly......sometimes I swear it's just to give you guys one more thing to over
think. But, if that's what works for you........
post #14 of 14
Thread Starter 
@Rossi Smash I appreciate the reality check (because I see that it can get over-cerebral around here), but at the same time, I don't appreciate that you come to a thread like this without any helpful input, essentially implying that this conversation is useless.  I don't understand why you'd bother to even read it, then.  If you don't care for detailed discussion about playing with things like mount points, then you can just move on by.

But again, the reality check is appreciated.

That said, I got the Schizos, and unlike you imply ("I still don't see the need for this product"), I am glad I bought them.  I have been able to play with mount point on the fly as conditions changed on slope and have learned a lot about what fore/aft mounting does to a ski and how you need to change your style to suit. 

It might be true that after I settle into my new skis I might leave the mount mostly static, but that was my intention - to find the point that felt right for my skis.  Mine are K2 Obsethed, and there is a lot of conflicting information about where to mount these, so I am pleased to have had the ability to play with the mount and find where the skis felt best to me.

OTOH, it is quite possible that I might settle into a mount position that I use for powder days and a different point that I use on groomer days.  And if I were a park rider, I can definitely feel how playful the skis are at +3 from traditional....

Also, just a note that someone posted that they made the decision to go with the Tyrolia plates because the Schizos looked like too much could go wrong.  That person has yet to post details about which plate he got and so forth, but I'm hoping he follows up about that.  Here's the link:

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/85690/marker-schizo-bindings-opinons/30#post_1189541
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 › Schizo v Railflex v Carve Plate