Funshapes + Bindings

Q:

Does it really make sense to put regular old alpine bindings on the new funshape skis? (I recognize the occasional appropriateness of this strategy but rather am talking about as a default)

I was heckling a couple of guys that are stuck bootpacking or alpine treckering with 120s & 138s and it just seemed sad pants to me. :shrug: They both go backcountry skiing frequently and...talk about a milieu where those skis shine. You quite simply are going to want to tour on them and if you want to ski them inbounds often conditions are probably fine for AT bindings.

It's all academic to me so I don't have a dog in this fight other than not getting stuck breaking trail all over the place. And I suspect that the new "Maker Dukes" are gonna make it even less attractive to mount normal bindings up.

meh
its all one big compromise

do you want burly boots and bindings for the DH or stuff that makes it easier to get there on the uphill.

whether it makes sense or not is for each person to decide since everyone has different priorities.

fwiw, if I were to get dp120s, id stick comforts on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pechelman

fwiw, if I were to get dp120s, id stick comforts on them.

---

Now that's just crazy talk there.

(1) If I'm booting and you're skinning, we're about the same speed. So what's the problem? ;)

(2) My regular alpine mount of 138s was a temporary solution, while waiting for Dukes. I thought I might pick up some used Trekkers, but it's getting late in the season for that.

All that aside, I agree with you. I'm more comfortable using alpine binders for big vert days of pow and cut-up inbounds. Given the light weight and "fun shape" of DPs, they are clearly a good option for touring, especially on guaranteed pow days. On a tour, I get less vert, and there is more "finesse" skiing. If the snow is good, I don't think touring bindings and boots limit you.

I'd like to slap the Duke on my 138s. I'd also like to run comforts on some 120s.

my question is, do bindings act differently/perform differently when they are on a fun shaped ski, EX. Praxis? are the pressure spots on a bindings different when you ski differently?

or is it the same?

so what i am really asking is, should i mount some 957's on a Praxis or "newer" 912's?

Supertrekkers, flexons and rossi 180 Pro's (traditional look turntables) on my '07 big daddies, but I don't tour much.

The days when you will be using your biggest fattest skis are the days when you will be skiing the fastest.hucking the biggest, so I'd think some burly bindings would be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by workinforturns

my question is, do bindings act differently/perform differently when they are on a fun shaped ski, EX. Praxis? are the pressure spots on a bindings different when you ski differently?

or is it the same?

so what i am really asking is, should i mount some 957's on a Praxis or "newer" 912's?

---

The same logic would say you should put the burlier bindings on the praxis. Are the 957s metal? I can't remember, but if so, there ya go.

ya, i think im going to put the 957's on the praxis and another pair on the 192 bros:D

duke -> 138

^^^BWAHHHAHAHAHA, good one;)

duke costs $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ though

The bigger problem here is the stiffness to control a ski that fat. With 138mm underfoot the slop of a freeride will just be that much more evident. This even more true when the major contact point of reverse-whatever skis is underfoot. That may not bother some people depending on the conditions skied and style. But as skis get fatter and fatter, the stiffer a binding you'd want to use.

Then again, if you only ski blowerpow in the backcountry it doesn't really matter....

Just buy 2 pairs, one with 916s, one with ATs. Sell everything else you own, you can do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Z

Then again, if you only ski blowerpow in the backcountry it doesn't really matter....

---

Ummmm isn't that the point? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Z

...the stiffness to control a ski that fat...

---

Yeah, I've been a believer in that theory ever since Spats posted about the benefits of torsionally rigid bindings on fatter skis. Recently, Stephan Drake posted somewhere he is noticing performance differences between Lotuses with different bindings.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Z

The bigger problem here is the stiffness to control a ski that fat.

---

Amen to that.

Plus the fact that if you are a big guy, skiing a very wide-waisted ski, you're torquing an enormous amount of force into your binding mount. There's no getting away from the fact that it's easier for a manufacturer to 'manage' the torsional flex characteristics of a narrow ski than a wider one. Also the narrower the screw footprint, the likelier you are to tear the binder out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Z

The bigger problem here is the stiffness to control a ski that fat. With 138mm underfoot the slop of a freeride will just be that much more evident. This even more true when the major contact point of reverse-whatever skis is underfoot. That may not bother some people depending on the conditions skied and style. But as skis get fatter and fatter, the stiffer a binding you'd want to use.

Then again, if you only ski blowerpow in the backcountry it doesn't really matter....

---

the force is strong in this one.

even though I think the cold smokers would want stiff binders.

so, just crank up my bindings a couple more dins?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by workinforturns

so, just crank up my amp a couple more dins?

---

Only if it goes to 11... otherwise it just wouldn't be loud enough:fm:

i just would never want to ruin a great ski with a pair of crappy AT binders. Cally me a sensitive sally, but I CAN definitely tell the difference that a torsionally loose binder makes on the performance of the ski, even in backcountry pow.

It's just not true that a freeride or naxo gives you the performance you can have with a full strength binder. They're not the same creatures.

So, you have only a few sane options IF you're looking for 0 compromise relative to your desired type of skiing, for backcountry use. 1) Put tele binders on, 2) Put real alpine binders on, and maybe 3) put Duke's on them if they pan out. I rule out even Dynafits, because there aren't any truly full performance alpine boots that are Dynafit compatible.

I'm not saying I wouldn't put Dynafits, or Naxos, or Freerides on a funshape ski. I'm just saying that you'll make "some" compromise in pure skiability if you do so, and I want the most out of my funshape.

I'll dilute some other skis with my freerides.

bump, motherfucker, for the shitducker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

bump, motherfucker, for the shitducker

---

And this'd be the "you probably want dukes on your praxis" thread I searched up and mentioned ;)

Nice try, but I really did search....