Printable View
Am getting Vipec 12 black to install on some BD Converts 105. Thinking of using inserts for mounting (have mounted alpine bindings in the past). Is there an alpine binding with compatible hole pattern such that I can mount alpine bindings on the Converts in addition to the Vipec's?
thanks.
- Phil
Phil,
No answer, but maybe try printing templates from here and mocking them up with the Vipecs on top? http://www.bindingfreedom.com/paper-tempaltes/
Out of curiosity, why Vipecs and alpine bindings on that particular ski? Given the nature of the ski, I'd think just Vipecs would be sufficient for inbounds because of the relatively low speed limit on the Convert.
Check out the PDF file to be found here under the link "Vergleich der Bohrlochpositionen für verschiedene Bindungen": http://www.powderguide.com/community...8d8abab15c36a5Quote:
Originally Posted by PCK
(My apologies for not hotlinking it directly, but then the link would get broken the moment I update the file)
Keep in mind that you can often move the heel piece >1cm back and forth due to the heel's adjustment range.
E.g. Rossi Axial1/2 and FKS would fit nicely.
Geil! Danke!Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
do you have one for smaller BSL's as well (e.g. 295 mm)?
I second this.Quote:
Originally Posted by LightRanger
I have Carbon Converts, and putting Vipecs on them has made them into a really versatile ski. I could insert them but don't really see any need to run frame bindings now that the Vipecs are on.
I'm considering replacing my solly fits on l120 spoons with Vipecs. They only get out when it's soft so might as well take advantage of the lightweight potential of that combo and I don't really like the verts after skiing Vipec on another setup.
As long as you don't want to compare frame bindings with normal bindings (i.e. bindings where toe and heel piece are mounted independently), the BSL doesn't matter. The pattern overlap will be the same for all BSLs, because toe and heel piece will be moved accordingly.Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth operator
Unfortunately, making this one document is already a ton of work, so I didn't make more BSLs, sorry.
Vipec mounting came up in the Praxis thread, and I re-directed my answer to this thread. I found some minor errors in both the Powderguide and Dawson templates. As I recall (and documented in the template), the fore/aft hole spacing was slightly off. I recall each of the two templates had it partly right. I also made a minor adjustment to the fore/aft heel location:
Here's the template I drew (refer to the printing notes, below): http://galibierdesign.com/images/oth...Vipec_Thom.pdf
- I noted front to back hole spacing discrepancies in the notes in the upper right quadrant of the template and I believe this was the only key difference from the Dawson/Powderguide templates.
- I positioned the heel of the boot 18mm “behind” (closer to the tail) of the front heel mounting holes. As I recall, this was 2-3mm different from one or both templates. The goal was to end up with the heel in the middle of its measured 24mm travel range. I’d verify this, and of course, if you’re finagling for adjustment to cover two widely different BSL’s, I’d experiment on a 2x4.
The following may seem pedantic, but I received a few PMs about the template, so I included these clarifications.
Boot center mark scale: I didn't add one to the template. I’m old-school about templates and work off toe and heel marks instead of using a boot center-mark scale on a template. I use the two small, rectangular “windows” (toe and heel) on the template which I cut out with a double edged razor.
Locating the Toe: Use the “Boot Toe” line which bisects the rectangular window. The 15mm/.591” pin line is mainly informational. I measured the pin line on my Maestrales as being 15mm behind the front edge of the boot.
Heel: Use the heel line which bisects the rectangular window. I mark the heel position using a square which typically only differs by 1-2mm from the bottom of the sole (IOW, it’s not a big deal).
Example (using a 300mm BSL):
- Establish the boot center (e.g. the mark on the sidewall, top sheet, etc.).
- Measure forward by 150mm to locate the front of the boot.
- Locate the heel. I don’t like to stack errors, so I’ll then measure backward (300mm) from the toe. Of course, I double and triple check.
Printing Notes: Ignore the printing instructions and follow your normal PDF printing procedure to print at 100%. The printing instructions on the template are for my CAD tool. Check the scale of the template (measure the 4.000” x 4.000” box). Overlay the binding on the template to verify that the holes line up.
Notes:
- Make any fore/aft heel adjustments if you're trying to accommodate two sets of boots with a large difference in BSL.
- As always, be sure you've established the boot center correctly - checking for mis-markings on top sheets, etc.
- If in doubt, test-mount on a 2x4.
Cheers,
Thom
Nice template. And I am absolutely with you on mounting based on toe/heel edge positions. I do it the same way.
The only differences I found with my template are 0.25 mm front/rear spacing on the toe and 0.5mm front/rear spacing on the heel. That are truly so minor differences that I would consider the templates to be identical for home mount precision range.Quote:
Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un
Furthermore, your toe line is a good mm further towards the tip, heel line is within one mm. Again a very minor discrepancy.
Thanks for the feedback! I should compare the PDF I posted against how I normally use the template (printing directly from my CAD program) - if only for self-knowledge, although (as you implied), this borders on being OCD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
Fritschi and Marker must be difficult to deal with, because the Dawson and Powderguide templates for these bindings were either missing some information, or were off in some regard. I'm guessing they did what I did - trace them out and iteratively adjust their drawings until things visually lined up. I should buy my machinist a 6-pack and use his tracing tool & software.
Cheers,
Thom
I know the subject of Vipecs and Spectres has come up.
I have quite a few days on mine. But, I am wondering- anybody do any mods of any kind that make entry easier? I am still not consistently easily getting in. Latest gen vipecs.
Wondering if it's me. If it's me, I probably can't fix it. On the other hand, I have all kinds of tools......
Have 10+ days on vipec blacks, did not ski previous generations but have ski partners who do.
Bindings have been excellent. No pre-release, no issues. Skied multiple days inbounds. Step in learning curve was slightly more challenging than dynafits, IMO, but now I'm adjusted and usually step in first time. Brakes deploy well for me on a 116mm waisted ski. Also have them on protests and was able to hand bend the 120 brake to work well.
I like the easily release of the heal while breaking trail in deep snow. Overall no feelings of the materials being anything but solid.
The one thing i do with vipecs i do differently than dynafits is to put one side of the toe into toepiece first. Then at an angle to horizontal plane then bring the entire boot down to horizontal plane. Boot then snaps in with satisfying kachunk.Quote:
Originally Posted by hhtele
I've also seen in ski mode some people put heel in first then toe next. Doea this make sense?
I am familiar with the alternate toe socket move- have done it with Dynafits. Doesn't work well for me with the Vipec/Spectre combo. Part of why I was wondering if it's partly the boot shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
And, the heel index thing does work OK, but less of an issue. Most times I am going to ski mode, my toes are already locked in.
Just put a pair on Vector BCs I normally ski tele. GREAT being able to easily go ski to tour, and ski that ski with that boot. Just skied a closed ski area. Skins on for the first climb, a low angle fishscale climb for seconds, then a half mile traverse back to the car.
Strange. I dont recall the Spectre being different but I only briefly looked. Not sure what the answer is as you're an experienced userQuote:
Originally Posted by hhtele
I think It's probably user error, just can't sort out the error.
Two questions:
- Is the Vipec crampon really the only compatible ski crampon? I'd love to be able to use my B&D 'pons (the classic) which work in Dynafits, Plums, Kingpins, etc. After reviewing upthread, it looks like the Voile is an option too, but the hingeless crampon doesn't seem like a great approach, but maybe I'm wrong. ETA: never mind - that G3 Ion crampon looks awesome.
- Anywhere I can find a pair of the Blacks for less than $550? L9 seems to have the best deal right now...
$350 plus shipping
https://www.telemark-pyrenees.com/bi...pec-12-binding
Add discount code ATBOOTW10
Yup, TP for the win
next years vipecs even easier than current year and lightyears easier than 1st gen
Anyone know the minimum ski width for a Vipec? Picked up a pair of G3 Findr 86, and not sure it's okay for the wing pivots to hang over the edge of the raised binding area of the ski. Suspect I know the answer...get different skis if I want to use Vipecs.
I have some 70mm waisted skis that my vipecs go on every now and then. No problems yet, but not really doing GS on them either :tongue:
Attachment 198776
Can somebody remind me the best position for storage? Asin least stress on springs, both toe and heel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hhtele
Toe in Ski mode. Heel doesn't matter. Per Instructions.
SierraTradingPost has an older generation Vipec for $244 right now.
Measured Vipec toe, looks like the topsheet needs to be a minimum of 65mm wide to fully support the plastic base.
This is part report and part question.
First, the question. Has anyone had any issues with spontaneous telemark mode?
I have Vipec Blacks, mounted on Billy Goats, using the latest vintage Cochise 130 boot. I am a fairly big guy (6'3" 225 lbs), and although I don't ski as aggressively as I used to, I still ski pretty hard.
I have had 3 instances of "holy shit", my heel is free, so far in about 8 days on the bindings. Besides that I have been quite pleased. In all cases, I wasn't doing anything particularly strenuous right when the release occurred. Today, I actually crashed, and the toe released nicely. I am fairly certain that in 2 of the instances I had been skiing multiple runs without issue, prior to setting my heel free. After the 2nd occurrence, I tried to fine tune the mini tech gap for the heel, and I had hoped that I had solved the problem, until it happened again today.
I have very little experience with other tech bindings. I know about some of them having a similar issue on a softer ski that gets overflexed. I haven't seen anything similar on the Vipec. I need to try to be better about doing a visual check of the heelpiece at the top of each run, to try to mitigate the problem.
So, if anyone has any insight, that would be great.
It is a little hard for me to offer an insightful, comparative review, but I'll give my impressions. I skied Beast 16's briefly. They seemed finicky and I got some of the original batch that had issues with the toe pins, so I went back to frame bindings for a few years. I have only skied the BG's with the Vipecs, so it is a little hard to isolate some of the feel between different skis and different style bindings. I have skied the setup on some pretty firm days because I wanted to play on my new stuff, even if conditions were not ideal for it. I also wanted to see how it would perform in firm, bumpy, less than idea conditions. I also often end up splitting a lot of days between the resort and side country laps.
I have not felt like it was the best set up for firm bumps, but it has also been surprisingly fine. My day ended today with a partial collision with another skier (I will take some of the blame). We were in an area where trails cross paths in multiple directions, and just as I was coming past, he changed plans and caught my tails with his tips, and after a moment I went down in a sprawling mess. I'm sore in a number of places but both toes released nicely, potentially saving me from further injury (the other guy was fine BTW).
So, if I could stop telemarking, I think I would be happy overall. TIA
A couple of obvious things you've likely checked, but it doesn't hurt to mention them ...
1. Does your heel length adjustment put you in the fore/aft adjustment range of the heel track - between the two "stop" lines?
2. Do you feel a positive "click" when latching the heel into downhill mode?
Cheers,
Thom
Thom, thanks for pointing out the obvious, because apparently I needed it! My fore/aft is indeed beyond the stop range. I now remember somehow goofing this, even though I checked on a 2x4 first. The binding still seemed to adjust and work, so I went with it. I guess that was a stupid.
I will remount (I think/ hope there is room) and update in awhile.
Many thanks!
You're welcome. Scroll back to my January 24th post if you need a template.
Cheers,
Thom
Well, upon further inspection I think my original mount was actually fine.
Attachment 199151
Attachment 199152
At least I think I am between the two "stops"?
If so, I am back to wondering why I am having any issue.
I realized that I should probably add that when the heel releases, it actually goes into tour mode (at least sort of). The heel unit slides back on the track and the trigger portion for the heel is down. No idea how or why this happens?
The position of the heelpiece in the track looks fine.
When you put the heel back into ski mode, does it takes some force to click into place? The lever goes to "almost ski" pretty easily. The last 10% takes some force. You should hear a loud click, and there should be no gap between the black riser and the white mode lever.
What North said. The positive click I mentioned above does take a bit of force.
... Thom
Thanks for the confirmation. I believe I have gotten the positive click into ski mode, but I will be extra diligent about checking it in the future. As I mentioned, in at least two of the instances I skied multiple runs without incident before suddenly freeheeling it.
I appreciate the feedback. I will try to pay close attention to the bindings every run for awhile to see if I can catch anything.
2 more days of skiing. One instance of tour mode creep. Catching up a partner, so took a look down mid run and I noticed that one of the heel pieces had somehow unclicked from locked ski mode (the release mechanism was slightly down). The heel assembly had not yet slid back on the track. So, I clicked it back into place and carried on. No idea how or why it happened, so I just figure I will keep a close eye on it.
I'd call BD about it. Sounds like a warranty issue?
Maybe a freezing issue?Quote:
Originally Posted by greasyslope
First run on the Black last season after skinning up inbound early season to the top of Keystone - same thing...opened it up (ha, early season groom) and right heal went spontaneous tele-mode. 46mph to 0 in no time.Quote:
Originally Posted by greasyslope
Since learned that IT WAS me NOT ensuring the lower/rear piece FIRMLY snaps up, locking the binding.
For what its worth, the new 2.0 toe is substantially improved and thus far, no icing in the heal piece (cant count the # of times I had to piss on the 1st gen heal after a tour to thaw the ice in the cavity.
anyone want a used 1st gen (with 2nd gen heals)...washed after each use...
(a little bit off-topic question, but don't want to open separate thread)
Is there anywhere in the interwebz the place where I can order Vipec parts or separate toes/heels at least?
Something like skimo.co, but with Fritschi stuff. Googled it, nothing but diff color toe inserts found.