EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › what is a good binding for watea 101?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

what is a good binding for watea 101?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 

Hi,

I just bought some Fisher Watea 101 and I am looking for good bindings.

I am 5 ft 7 in, 165 lb. I am not expert but very advance. I normally ski blacks, double diamond and some powder. I bought the watea 101 b/c I want to start doing more offpiste.

 

From my online research and price, my options are:

Salomon sth 16

Look Pivot 14 or Rossignol FKS 140 (they are the same thing)

Marker Jester.

 

What do you recommend?

post #2 of 26

The Sth16 starts at 9, way too much for your size, same with the Jester. You would be fine with the lighter little brothers of both of these in the Sth12 and the Griffon. Either the Turntables will be fine too. All 4 bindings are good, whatever you can find a better deal on. 

post #3 of 26
Thread Starter 

the Jester starts at DIN 6 (6-16)...is that still good? or should I go with the Griffon? 

post #4 of 26

The Watea 101 is a flat camber ski, so if you want it to function properly I think you need a binding that will flex to allow the ski to flex under your boot as it is designed to do.

post #5 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by aleal View Post

the Jester starts at DIN 6 (6-16)...is that still good? or should I go with the Griffon? 


For your weight, the Jester gives you absolutely nothing of value for you over the Griffon. Save the $50+ bucks. 

post #6 of 26
Thread Starter 

Sorry fot he ignorance...so is it one of those mentioned a binding that will flex?

Marker Griffon, Salomon sth12, Look Pivot 14 or Rossignol FKS 140?

 

I am also having a hard time figuring out the width of the breaks. For example I have found Look Pivot 14 with 90 mm brakes or 115 mm brakes...what is better? I know I can stretch smaller ones and I should use brakes that are too wide. Same with Griffons in 90 mm...and I suppose same with the rest.

post #7 of 26

Look's all the way! Pivots or PX's

 

 

The 101's are a great ski. They will even surprise you with how good the are on harder snow.

 

But when in their prefered element, softer deeper snow, the Look's give you an easier way "out" and "in" should you not have a firm place the click in. Simply reach down and pop them up. And in the dreaded tree well scenario you'll have a chance to get out as "well".............

 

The Marker Royal heel's are a poor attempt to get PX performance, stick with the original!

post #8 of 26

Flex? The Look/Rossi have the shortest mounting distance and will let the ski flex more naturally, for your weight, it isn't a big concern though. PM SierraJim here on the forum, they have the Look's on stock at Start Haus and they take care of Epic members. 

post #9 of 26
Thread Starter 

Thanks for all the advice. First time at Epic and I am finding it very useful.

What about the brakes width? Should I go with the wide (90mm) and stretch them or go with the oversize XXL (115) with the risk of interference in my skiing? Remember the skies are 101.

Brakes is important to me b/c I am planning on going on a trip to Chile this summer (winter there) to test these skies and I don't want to have to deal too much with brakes before leaving.

post #10 of 26

Fischer makes bindings too!  (Tyrolia/Head platform)  You should look into the X13.  Basically the same as a Head Mojo or Tyorlia Peak.  DIN to 13 is all you need at your size, and they have a 97mm brake available which could unnoticeably be bent a few mm to fit the 101mm ski.  Then your ski/bindings match too!  It's Win!

post #11 of 26



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

Flex? The Look/Rossi have the shortest mounting distance and will let the ski flex more naturally, for your weight, it isn't a big concern though.

 

Phil:

 

I believe there are two principal factors affecting ski flex, the main one for most skis is the length of the binding, but flex under the binding can also be significant.  As you note, shorter mounting distance means less of the skis length is inhibited from freely flexing. The part under your boots is not of as much concern because the camber is being compressed into a basically flat shape designed to make the ski function. 

 

I have been skiing (and loving) a pair of Watea 101s since the first year they came out. They are a soft no camber ski with a consistent tip to tail flex pattern, which means that if there is a flat spot under your boot during the turn they are not operating as designed. There are some rail flex type bindings that are designed to allow the ski to more freely flex under your boots and bindings during a turn, and I think that type of binding allows the Watea 101s to ski better.

 

Since I am a big guy, I feel my soft Watea 101s basically become a full rocker ski as soon as I stand on them in deep snow, and I have blown out of my bindings on more than one occasion hitting big compressions becasue the skis flexed too much under my flat mounted bindings.  Regardless of a skiers size, the 101s are designed to be flex in a "big smile" pattern, and you don't want a crimp in the middle of your "smile."

 

I know the Marker binding "wide footprint" has been making a lot of press because of skis getting fatter, but I think as rocker skis proliferate we will see more rocker specific bindings with shorter footprints, and a mechanism allowing maximum flex under the boot.  It does not make sense to get a full rocker ski and then put a binding on it that keeps if from functioning properly. The new skis are flexing differently, and I think bindings need to adapt.  If it is not on the market already, I am sure we will see a rocker specific binding in the near future.

 

 

 


 

post #12 of 26
Thread Starter 

sorry, I still don't know what to do with the brakes of the pivot 14....should I get the 90mm brakes or the 115mm? Is it better to bend the 90mm ? or is it better to go with the 115mm? is the extra 14 mm going to be too wide and bother when skiing? 

Remember the watea 101 (101 under foot)

 

My other option is to simplify and go with the sth14 or 12 and get the 100 mm brakes.

post #13 of 26

I am running bent 90 mm brakes on my Watea 10s without a problem.  Getting 6mm per side out of brakes is generally not a big deal.  The 115mm brakes are a viable option, but IMO they would be pushing things on the wide side.  It really depends on how much that particular model retracts when they are up.  If your brakes stick out too far you may be banging them together, and it is even possible to accidentally hook them together while skiing, which is not a fun or safe experience.  The other side of it is that the bindings will probably outlast the skis, and you may want the wider ones to give you more options in the future.

 

How about a response for some shop guys who mount bindings with wide and narrow brakes on a regular basis!

post #14 of 26

I run Look on all my skis. And I've bent the hell out of most of the brakes, one poor set was bent wider and then re-bent back to original width to put on some 75mm skis. I bend them out straight completely, then put a vice grip at the new bend location, put the vicegrip in a huge vice, and bend to that demension. I would not hesitate to bend brakes. I have had the experience of mounting 115's on my 97mm Legend Pros, and that was an experience I did not like. They did grab at each other and I never had confidence they wouldn't boot out on hardpack. You could buy either pair and bend to suit. 'Cause you can bend again if you have to.

 

Also, the Look Pivot and Race 14 have quite a bit of travel (expansion) built into the design, It may be adequate to allow natural flex of a softish, round flexing ski.

post #15 of 26

Yadda...yadda....yadda.....it's a freaking binding

 

Whatever you can find laying around in the closet or super cheap

post #16 of 26

I currently have Dynastar, Tyrolia, Head and Salomon bindings.  I buy whichever one requires the least bending of the brakes for a given ski.

post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by FujativeOCR View Post

Fischer makes bindings too!  (Tyrolia/Head platform)  You should look into the X13.  Basically the same as a Head Mojo or Tyorlia Peak.  DIN to 13 is all you need at your size, and they have a 97mm brake available which could unnoticeably be bent a few mm to fit the 101mm ski.  Then your ski/bindings match too!  It's Win!


I'm a big fan of the Tyrolia bindings with the Aero toe (like the X13).

 

And the big advantage isn't cosmetic matching, but the fact that ski warranties are typically doubled when mounted with co-branded bindings.

post #18 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGASkiDawg View Post

Yadda...yadda....yadda.....it's a freaking binding

 

Whatever you can find laying around in the closet or super cheap



couldn't agree less.....

 

Bindings are THE most important piece of safety equipment you have. While many makes should work well, to say use whatever is laying around is just wrong!

post #19 of 26


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post





couldn't agree less.....

 

Bindings are THE most important piece of safety equipment you have. While many makes should work well, to say use whatever is laying around is just wrong!

Couldn't disagree more.....the most important safety equipment you have is your brain followed by your helmet.  Bindings don't work significantly differently/better today than they did 20 years ago.
 

post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by UGASkiDawg View Post


 

Couldn't disagree more.....the most important safety equipment you have is your brain followed by your helmet.  Bindings don't work significantly differently/better today than they did 20 years ago.
 



You prove my point....bindings were just as important 20 years ago. The fact that Look's have not changed much since the 60's only proves how good they are/were!

post #21 of 26

also, Look's involvement in development of top level bike pedals keeps them on top of things, innovating and improving.

post #22 of 26



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

also, Look's involvement in development of top level bike pedals keeps them on top of things, innovating and improving.



clipless pedals may be a bit more convenient and possibly safer in a crash but they are no more of a solid connection to the pedal than clips and cleats were for road bikes. Off road they are a huge step forward. Who remembers what it was like banging through a rock garden or trying to restart in a slimy off camber, root infested piece of single track with toe clips on their no suspension mtb???

post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post





You prove my point....bindings were just as important 20 years ago. The fact that Look's have not changed much since the 60's only proves how good they are/were!

 

 

Exactly so any binding from the last 20 years works about the same so pick one and put it on your ski...you can pick one with a hihg din or a low din but they all work.  Minor differences between the manufacturers but they all work from a safety standpoint.  Some weigh more, some are made of plastic and break easier but they all work the same.  No significant safety differences between any of them.
 

post #24 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post



 



clipless pedals may be a bit more convenient and possibly safer in a crash but they are no more of a solid connection to the pedal than clips and cleats were for road bikes. Off road they are a huge step forward. Who remembers what it was like banging through a rock garden or trying to restart in a slimy off camber, root infested piece of single track with toe clips on their no suspension mtb???



gotta disagree on the superiority, objectively, of clipless due to the whole range of rotation with solid connection you can sellect, and the lack of choking your forefoot to get that connection.

 

I do recollect all that misery, but I was usually in a group of people that enjoyed laughing at the guy having grief.

 

On ski bindings, any binding with a tendency to pre-release, or to release with chatter or vibration would be inferior, IMHO, as we are not top racers and are not capable of never permitting pressure on the ski to  lessen and chatter.

post #25 of 26

While you are on the subject, can anyone tell my why the $400 Look PX Racing bindings do not have a turntable?  I would think that a shorter binding foot print would allow for a better flexing ski and use of a lighter touch.

post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post

While you are on the subject, can anyone tell my why the $400 Look PX Racing bindings do not have a turntable?  I would think that a shorter binding foot print would allow for a better flexing ski and use of a lighter touch.



If you want the turntable simply buy the re-released Look Pivot, here in P18 form.....Look Pivot 18.jpg

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 › what is a good binding for watea 101?