Are you mounting a women's ski? I've had several women's skis that were 'thin'.
Printable View
Are you mounting a women's ski? I've had several women's skis that were 'thin'.
Great advice, and I'll do that. I've never repaired a peep hole, so chalk this up to meaningful life skilz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
No, sadly, these were some bomber Praxis Rx's. Fortunately, they are my skis, so the fuck up is on me and I can live with it. The base is now smooth and, as far as it matters, good as new.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timberridge
Any advice on mounting dynafit radical toe pieces?
Using jigarex with radical jig. Mounted a half dozen vertical/tlt toes (5 screw pattern) with paper templates and jigarex without problem with the toe pieces lining up with heel. With recent radical mount with jigarex, one toe piece was off by a few mil, so the boot doesn't fall cleanly into the heel piece. Obviously this may just be human error. But it seems without that fifth center hole to triangulate, the toe piece is more apt to be misaligned. Thoughts?
Did you try loosening the screws holding the toe in, then using the boot to match up the heel of the boot with the heel piece prior to tightening? Haven't mounted Radicals but I think you can access the front two screws while the boot is in the binding.
John - I did try that. It helped a little. These skis are the way they are and I doubt I'll notice the misalignment much (the heel pins miss the grooves by 2-3mm). Mostly curious if people use any particularly anal retentive techniques when mounting to avoid this.
Well, I've mentioned this before, but I use the SVST center punch in the jig; it makes a hole directly in the center of the bushings on the jig plate. I then remove the jig and use a small bit to make that hole a tad bigger. I then use the appropriate alpine bit. If it's a direct mount, I'm done. I do all that by hand, but some use a guide and some use a drill press. The merits of those have been debated (probably in this thread), but if you don't have a press, this has worked well for me, esp. with inserts where there's very wiggle little room.
Adding to what John_B & dschane said, while tightening screws take the tire lug nut approach and an ole carpentry trick. Partial tighten in a diagonal pattern and then put the boot in the toe and heel to check alignment. If not nuts on, give either the toe, heel or both (to split the difference) a little 'love tap' or crank to align the pins and the heel. Then torque whatever screws are available while the boot is in the binding, followed by the remainder and let the binding sealant cure.
If using inserts. Do this too, to align the inserts while the epoxy cures.
Thanks for the info! I'll give your tips a shot.
Attachment 176460
Stoked on this set up. Steeple 102 / Guides.
Attachment 176465
I'll just leave this here. Template from Knut's German stash.
Remounted sum fishr outtaboundcrowns with Rottie TRP 100s und good ole pins.
Tripling up on this comment. I've seen several mounts with inserts where people just dropped the insert into the hole and let everything set before making the necessary adjustments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
Just finished mounting some skis for my girlfriend. I borrowed the jig from the shop and thought it was going to be the easiest mount yet. I learned something on the third hole on the first toe. INSPECT THE DAMN JIG before you go jamming your bit in there! The bushing had a slight burr in it from previous use that grabbed onto the bit and snapped it just below the shank before I could say "Wut the?!" Wouldn't have been a big deal if I had another step bit, but I didn't, so out came the freehand supplies and off to the races I went. The rest of the mount went perfect thanks in large part to the info and advice contained in this thread. My current process is as follows: templates printed on mylar, measure recommended mid sole mark from tail on both skis, use the centering marks on the templates to center on ski, small sharp pick for initial marks, double check locations with templates, solid center punch for drill marks, synthetic cork as a depth gauge on a standard drill bit, easy, steady pressure on the drill double checking the bit depth after each hole to ensure bit hasn't extended out from the cork, bang dust and crud from holes, glue of your choice into holes, get all screws started and then torque 'em down in a crisscross sequence almost as tight as you can get them by hand. Check that bindings are tight to the topsheet of the skis, install brakes, set release values and forward pressure, set aside to let glue dry and crack second beer. Easy, but I learn something every time.
So. I've been having issues with inserts seeming to push up the top sheet. I'm drilling plenty deep and not overfilling with epoxy. Any ideas?
Ream out the top edge of the hole with a knife before you tap the hole? Trim the top sheet back a tiny bit. There shouldn't be anything for the insert to push up on.
Maybe try a countersink bit to knock down the lip?
There's that...
JONGin' out... where can i find templates on mobile? Also, any chance dynafit heel or toe piece will fit into some jester16(not sure what year...I can check if the pattern changed) holes? Will any dynafits fit into any of markers touring bindings? Are there many different dynafit hole patterns? Thanks in advance.
over there. no. no. kind of.
And when you MYOFS, remember that the graphics for the center point may be off. The white line in the pic is drawn across the center point lines molded into the skis and is the same distance from the tip. The graphic lines…well, always check.
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n...psxac5qfdm.jpg
Depending on your BSL, you may be able to reuse the two rear Duke/Baron/F12/F10 heel holes as the Ion's rear heel holes. At my BSL of 296, I mounted my Ion heel baseplate about 5mm to the rear of where it normally would be if using an Ion jig (to reuse the rear heel holes of a small-frame F10), and then adjusted the heel post forward 5mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by GrantN
My Duke pattern was mounted on the line for a 305mm BSL though, so the math gets a little tricky. A BSL 5mm to 10mm bigger than mine would probably be even closer to having the small-frame Duke holes in the exact right place, so that the Ion heel adjustment would be in the center of the range.
As long as you're within the Ion heel adjustment range (having a jig or Jigarex makes it easier to see where you're at), make the front heel holes for the Ion 52.5mm forward of your rear Duke holes.
Why didn't I think of that? Holding each screw to paint on the Vibra-tite(or dribble on if you have the small squeeze tube) is so much harder than painting the inserts. Gotta try that next time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
Cheers,
Thom
I picked up a pair of Vipec Blacks to throw on some new skis. I was thinking that I'd like to remount my other 2 pairs with them, but having a hard time figuring out an acceptable mount offset for them. Here's what I've got:
Lotus 138s, mounted twice by previous owner at +0 and +1, longer BSL than I have, so was able to mount them with Radicals at ~+0.7. DPS recommends a ~+1 mount.
Praxis BC, mounted once by me for Radical 2s at -1.
I'm playing around with templates in CAD and not seeing a good offset. For the L138s, it looks like if I use the same offset or +3mm as my previous mount, there's no toe conflict, but the heel is right on line with the Radical holes, but different width. From what I understand from Fritschi's manuals, the regular Vipec has 25mm adjust (12.5 forward/back). I don't really want to get too clever with the heel mount. What's a reasonable amount of the travel to use up with an offset mount? About half (so like 6mm)?
The Praxis mount is so annoying. Fucking Radical 2 toe screw horizontal spacing is 42mm, Vipec is 44. So close to being able to re-use holes! If I mount back another 10mm (total of -2 from dimple), the inserts will still be pretty close, like 4.5mm edge to edge. Moving it forward just causes a conflict on toe.
Assuming I'm using inserts, tech bindings, am not a fatass (150 lbs) and am not hucking shit, what's a safe edge to edge distance for the inserts? I know the normal answer from manufacturers is 10mm min, 25mm desired. The L138s are beefy as hell (super thick, plus have a bunch of carbon), so I'm inclined to get a bit closer, and the Praxis are pretty well built too.
article is a few years old, but lou dawson seems to not be too worried about it
https://www.wildsnow.com/wp-content/...ts-525x334.jpg
https://www.wildsnow.com/4004/backco...-binding-swap/
Nice, that makes me feel a bit better. I'll snug them up. Lou is similarly light to me, but uses wimpy skis in comparison.
Andeh, it wasn't clear to me above: are the old holes currently inserted, or just (filled) holes? If the former (and if your desired mount overlaps), pull inserts, fill with machineable epoxy, remount as normal, and don't worry about it. If no overlap, just drill them. If plugged, maybe pull the plugs, fill with machinable epoxy, and don't worry about it. Or leave them.
Here's what I did years ago: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...(photos-within) Many days since then without any issues. Inserts should be at least as strong, and if the old holes are filled right, I wouldn't worry about even straight up overlap--especially at your weight.
On the L138s, the previous owner did 2 mounts (some alpine binding, forget which), which have been filled with wood dowels & epoxy/steel wool. Current mount (3rd) on them has BF inserts.
On the BCs, they only have BF inserts.
I used a healthy amount of epoxy on the inserts, so I don't think they're coming out. Plus I think I'd like to leave them in... not sure if I'll use them, but who knows. I think I remembered the comments about wood filled holes being fairly safe, so was just going to drill through those if there's any overlap.
Yeah man, I'd say your pretty safe and don't worry about it. If you weighed another hundred pounds and they were tele bindings, then maybe I'd be concerned. But if I was in your shoes (I'm 160 lbs, so not too far), I wouldn't be concerned.
Been mounting the hell outta my own fucking skis this year...and everyone else's...
But...my JigaRex seems to have developed a bit of an "off-set", and it's getting a bit annoying. Pads seem to be okay - no wear. No skipped teeth. No bent legs that I can detect. Mounting as flat as I can. But with all that, I'm getting consistent mount off-axis probably about 3mm or so almost every time. Not sure what the hell to do.
When in doubt, go old school with paper templates. I'm too young to be old school but I love the accuracy of paper. Even if it's slower and means I have to drink another beer and smoke a second bowl while mounting my own fucking skis. Sorry, I have no experience with the jig.Quote:
Originally Posted by axebiker
I'm less than impressed with the Jigarex. Paper is way more accurate.
I haven't seen this issue, but I always draw a centerline and have a centering ruler sticker on each end to assist with double checking alignment. I'd never blindly assume the alignment was perfect and drill without checking. I don't know a fix and you should try contacting Dave. In the mean time, I'd consider drawing a centerline and spring clamping the jig to the skis since the plates relative to the jig and each other are reliable AFAIK.Quote:
Originally Posted by axebiker
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/eq...A=w351-h623-no
I don't get much faster, but am getting better.
Does this photo show?
Quote:
Originally Posted by axebiker
I've had the same issue with the Jigarex and if you're going to go to all the trouble to double check alignment longitudinally and finding true ski boot/ski center you might as well just use a paper template and some tape IMO. It's really not hard to drill perpendicular holes in a ski. I'm regretting participating in the jig group buy I was in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
I spring clamp already. The problem is that I don't know exactly where the problem is occurring- is it the jig or is it the plate? That and I'm not sure I have anything that I could use to measure alignment to that level of accuracy. That said, it more of an annoyance than anything- I don't really notice it skiing. But for what I paid for the jig, it's probably worth addressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
If the purpose of the Jigarex is facility, it's a success but if the purpose is accuracy I think they need to work on it. It's the clamping/centering mechanism that you have to double check every time to make sure it's centered, and then recheck and recheck because the jig tends to move around. If it's centered and I still have to spring clamp to hold it in place then something is not right.
With a long straight edge and framing square I can get perfect alignment every time with paper templates and tape. I'm not sure that it really matter that much but in a world where we split hairs over moving bindings as little as .5 cms I would have to think it's at least somewhat important.
You could print a template to use as a gauge to see if the plates align and if there is a common difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by axebiker
A lot of comments I read on mounting do sound like inconveniences and annoyances compared to absolute perfection. Generally, I'm betting at least some of the accuracy issues that arise are inconsequential and people get worked up over small issues and slam products. Don't get me started on the time dealing with minor screw issues.....
Not on my screen.Quote:
Originally Posted by hhtele
If i was doing it for money at 45$ a mount jigs make sense but when I might mount 1 binding a year buying my own jig/jigs just don't make $$$ senseQuote:
Originally Posted by AaronWright
Sure the paper template but if I layout using t-square on painters tape with binding as template its seems to work fine for once a year
and yeah I think some folk are overly anal about accuracy ...its just a powder ski with floppy AT boots fercrisake
I freaked about over being off-center by 1.5mm on a 108mm waist ski. The offset is invisible when actually skiing.