Anyone familiar with Black Crows seen anything coming out birdie ski line with a wider full rocker flat underfoot - ala Corvus birdie?
On Corvus 193; is it a beefy bump up or same build as 188 with length?
Printable View
Anyone familiar with Black Crows seen anything coming out birdie ski line with a wider full rocker flat underfoot - ala Corvus birdie?
On Corvus 193; is it a beefy bump up or same build as 188 with length?
There’s a Daemon Birdie now. No idea about new shit or Corvus birdie.
After something wider but good suggestion. Cleaned up my question. May just get her a straight Corvus 176Quote:
Originally Posted by Andyski
Y’all can have your puffy bunion slippers. I’m here for podium kicks. Attachment 268360
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
They're losing market share because their POS products keep grenading in terrible ways. I wish them the worst of luck with their future endeavors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetdog
THISQuote:
Originally Posted by nickel
^this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abol98
x3Quote:
Originally Posted by nickel
It's horrible that I want that shoe simply because it says Lange on it. But that's why I want it. Take that name away and I likely wouldn't even notice the shoe in the wild. It's like a must-have at this point.
Ze Pindung ready for launch in the fall. Retail 499 Euro. DIN 5-14. Adjustable brake width. 1.3 kg per unit. Why is it not red?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnILPDdjOak
Awesome! Doesn’t look as finicky as other bindings in particular the attention to the brakesQuote:
Originally Posted by SoooL
Nice to finally see a finished product!Quote:
Originally Posted by SoooL
Is it really an adjustable brake width? I wonder how that works. For use with inserts for different skis that would be extremely useful.
Apart from that, it will need to be really bomb proof and free from pre-release issues to justify that weight.
That's what the guy confirms in the video, at circa 0:58.Quote:
Originally Posted by MnO_____
sweeeeetQuote:
Originally Posted by SoooL
Love the innovation!!! What's the stack height? Looks tall in vid.
anyone have any info on the new Kastle FX range for 19/20? Saw a terrible Instagram story from ISPO Munich and looked like more options.. maybe wider ones above the 95 HP... maybe even taking over from the BMX range?
BMX goes away, four widths in the FX line now. 86/96/106/116. Not sure if they all have HP versions. I need a mid and was curious what the FX 96 would look like. Bash guard is a plus for me. Not feeling that top sheet yet. Curious about weight because it looks like it should be lighter, despite the slight width increase.Quote:
Originally Posted by MickeysEars
https://www.pugski.com/threads/k%C3%...ce-2007.13801/
Photo on the right per Pugski insta.
Attachment 268391Attachment 268392
Pindung looks cool. Can’t wait to hear some feed back on it’s use.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Yeah, 1300g seems pretty heavy. Was hoping it would be under 1kg. Step in seems more complicated than the Shift.Quote:
Originally Posted by MnO_____
The company seems cool. I hope they're wildly successful and really give the shift some solid competition.
I just read deeper into that Kastle thread and it seems like the FX96 HP and FX106 HP will be the only HP versions, and offered exclusively as HP. However... if the commenters are correct, the HP designation now means carbon and not metal.
Where's my torch?
1.3 kg per fooQuote:
Originally Posted by MnO_____
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
The mtn has no pre release issues at all and it's a fraction of the weightQuote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
I wouldn't bet on it. It's more than DOUBLE the weight. 1300 grams is a lot. I mean.... maybe in 2015? Maybe. Why not just go CAST at that point?Quote:
Originally Posted by auvgeek
For reference shift is 950g and cast in touring mode is about 1050g. Cast would probably be the similar weight in ski mode. A few pages back people wanted steel Solomon 916 shifts , in red of course.
Maybe a slightly different market, more on hill/slackcountry, than the shift if that weight translates into greater durability. Maybe more closer to a competitor for CAST. Is the added half pound on each foot while walking worth the convenience?
I'm going on record to say this binding is pretty stupidQuote:
Originally Posted by grinch
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
Not much reasoning why but to each his own. One thing I really liked about my v1 cast system with sth was that they just ripped around the hill as a normal Solomon sth with zero drawbacks, then when I wanted to go for a lap or 4 outside the rope the weight was fine with next to no approach and the ability to push it like I do on alpine set up or to alternate laps outside the rope with laps in bounds. And back and forth. To me this looks to accomplish that. Some hills or touring spots they may not be the best I guess. Jury is still out, probably for another year and a bit so they get bashed for a full seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
I think i get what you're saying, but there are a couple or more tech bindings that will not pre release and people ski really gnarly lines on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
The advantage is that you will be fresh when you get to the top, so you can ski better.
A few years ago, when the cast was developed, there were no tech bindings that you could ski unlocked in no fall terrain.
But in the last 4 years, things have changed.
This year, i had a problem with my big toe, not the binding.
So i skied about 40 days with my katanas with g3 ion bindings.
30 of these days were pretty firm, icy.
I skied this setup just like i would ski my alpine gear, with no issues whatsoever.. Pretty fast, high edge angles, some on no fall terrain (squaw valley)
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
The Shift is a whisker under 890g. At 1300g and 25% dearer than the Shift the Pindung is dead in the water unless the durability of the Shift proves to be poor. They'll sell some but nothing like the numbers needed relative to their tooling costs etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
There is no comparison between skiing pins and an alpine toe on the down inbounds. None as in zero. Even the tecton is noticeably less damp. Yes there is lots of pins you could ski on the hill but many people wouldn’t consider it, for good reasonQuote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
890 is with the smallest brakes but that’s splitting hairs.close enough. Shift is awesome. I’m just sceptical it can be rat bagged around the hill for the same life span and safety asan alpine binding. Maybe it can. I’m just playing the odds and the weight difference suggests otherwise. I have confidence that the CAST system is capable of that as I’ve done it. The pinding wouldjust be a guess but weight and design point to it being capable of it although yet unproven obviously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderjon
I aim to have skis with a tecton , skis with a shift and skis with cast and/or pinding. Personal opinion/I just think they’re in a slightly different category. Without trying pinding I’m grouping them in the same category as CAST. There is some holes in my research. I’m just playing the odds with my guesses
Jeez. 3 sets of skis all with their own binding? You must be a periodontist
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I just don’t see a need for alpine only binding now. I can see my exp with their simple speed turn, my 102 steeple with a tecton, my gpo with a shift and an onhill/slackcountry 2 ski 105 and 118 ski with cast. Maybe a 98/99 little twin with the lone alpine binding. The practice is really picking up. Maybe is all the sugar and meth people are ingestingQuote:
Originally Posted by mtnwriter
That's how Nike makes most of their money. You take the swoosh off A LOT of their shoes and no one would give two shits.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaijin
This. Skiing pins inbounds sucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
If the pindung skis and holds up every bit as well as an alpine binding, I'd be interested. I'd only use it for short sidecountry tours, so the weight doesn't really bother me at all. I'm a bit skeptical of its durability just because it's a semi complex contraption from a small, unproven company, but that's a different discussion.
Not trying to be argumentative, but why do tech bindings suck?Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
Granted, they transmit more vibration, but all you have to do is put your did on edge.
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
Super harsh in the toe. Depending on design, vague at the heel. Depending on the design, somewhat untrustworthy release. But mostly the harshness in the toe.Quote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
And a pin binding requires me to ski a boot with tech fittings all the time. I've yet to find a boot with tech fittings that both fits me and skis like a proper alpine boot.
Know what weights less than that Pindung?
Marker Barons.
Marker Dukes are only a little heavier than 1400g (yes I know it'd tour better since it's not lifting the heel)
Also that entry rotational motion doesn't look easy to do, especially when you already have one ski on.
It's a bummer they spent all this time and came out with a pinDUNG pile in relation to current binding weights and features. If you actually need more than a DIN of 13 then just get Cast.
Why do you need windstoping fabric for something that lives under a shell? You could just go to a higher pile for less weight.Quote:
Originally Posted by PowTron
Exactly. They are darn close to Guardians.Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCalNomad
The boot part is true, bc boots are not Alpine boots.Quote:
Originally Posted by toast2266
Harsh in the toe?
I bet in a blind test you couldn't tell, since the snow varies so much from hour to hour.
Anyway, why even think of skiing bc bindings in a resort?
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
So I don't have to switch skis if I want to do a quick sidecountry tour.Quote:
Originally Posted by rod9301
I'd take that bet and then take your money/beer/gf very shortly after.Quote:
Originally Posted by rod9301