Thanks again. Template with the change from 38 to 36mm is up (also because two more people suggested it on the German forum).
Printable View
Thanks again. Template with the change from 38 to 36mm is up (also because two more people suggested it on the German forum).
I have updated the file to include a few of the bindings that hit the market in the last years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
Someone in this forum was looking for a vipec/kingpin mount pattern comparison, I think - but I fail to find the post again. Whoever you are and whatever you need, there you go! :D
Does anyone have the new Rossignol SPX templates?
I haven't seen one on the webs yet. The heel pattern has changed in comparison to the Axial2, correct?
If you'll measure it, I'll make a template, no problem.
I think so, theres two versions. The SPX and the Rocker Flex (which is race plate only) but I flat mounted it as it fitted perfectly on an old ski. As far as I can tell the holes are simialr but I will try and get some proper measruements for you of my pals race plates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
I have a small suggestion for the templates. If the scales on each half templates had numbers facing each other (e.g. left for the top, but right for the bottom) it would be super easy to assemble the templates by cutting along the black line and matching numbers against each other.
Created a Vipec template due to minor errors I found in the PowderGuide and Dawson templates (Spring of 2016). Perhaps they fixed it since then, but I've used my template for two mounts.
I published details (and PDF download) in the Vipec thread (post #472): http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...67#post4917867
Cheers,
Thom
Where can i find paper templates for Atomic warden 11 demo and Atomic warden 13 demo?
The Salomon rental template is not the one.
Anyone knows?
The markerfit template isn't on bindingfreedom's website despite the other plates being on there. Is the template here correct?
Mount a 2x4 and let me know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chugachjed
If by 2X4 you mean sexy praxis Quixotes then I will.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...7840c73883.jpg
Markerfit template works.
Sick!
Damn fine looking skis
Now I won't be the only one with Praxis that are side specific
Just a heads up on the Tyrolia template, and this was first mentioned a few years ago in post #788, but the template seems to put you in front of the line, at least for smaller boots. Mounted a pair of Padlock 11s for the wife a year or two ago for a 285 bsl, mondo 24.5, and it ended up being about 5mm ahead of the line and the heels were all the way to the front of the track with correct forward pressure. Was really pissed I didn't do a test mount on those but figured maybe I accidentally mounted for a 295 bsl since that's my boot size, especially since the mount was right on the line and in the middle of the track if adjusted for my boot.
Fast forward to today when I did some test mounts for an Attack 16 using my 295 bsl. Same thing, put me way forward of the line, about 1 cm. To properly adjust for my 295 bsl to be on the line and the heels in the middle of the track, I needed to put the toes for a 282.5 bsl and the heels for a 307.5 bsl.
Just be sure to test mount before using this template and confirm it's putting you where you want to be relative to the line.
Looking for a Marker titanium 1200 template. Any help out there?
That's the standard M-Series template.Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSapp
No changes to the hole pattern based on my recent swapping around of current and former Rossi and Look bindings, therefore:Quote:
Originally Posted by lordf
Rossignol Axial2/SPX/SPX WTR = Look PX10/PX12/SPX/SPX WTR
Do note that screw lengths have changed for the new SPX bindings. However, brakes remain interchangeable.
I've been a bit well, skeptical, after reading this thread of mounting with a paper template. Are these things ever reliable? I feel like pretty much every template you guys are talking about is all screwed up or off on some way not making it mountable without some pretty nice adjustments. Am I wrong, or is it pretty easy to do these adjustments without a huge risk of screwing it up.
It all depends on you. Are you capable of setting things up, testing it out, double checking and then drinking a beer and mounting; or should it just work perfectly with no thought or input on your part? If the latter, find yourself a 'professional' and pay them for their gumption in performing the prior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zennan
Every template I've used which is many has worked perfectly. I've mounted probably over 1000 skis working in shops and maybe 20 with templates. It takes longer to setup but I've seen a lot of guys screw up mounting with a jig too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zennan
I just tried this template and it was way off. The holes were correct but the boot length was off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
I lined it up at 305mm and it was too long, exceeding the heel adjustment and about a cm off boot center.
I've gone over it several times and pretty sure I lined it up right.
Has anyone else used this template?
I don't have time to revisit this now to see where there may or may not be an issue with this template from over two years ago. I don't recall other issues to date. You might try the alternative method stated on the template to 'git 'er done':Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
Attachment 201461
EDIT: IIRC, I mounted one or two sets with this template and at least one using the G3 Jigarex plate that matched this template.
http://www.slidewright.com/Bindings/...%20Jigarex.jpg
http://www.slidewright.com/Bindings/...difference.jpg
Hmmm, I've used it four times, but instead of using the printed scale I followed the "Alternative For Locating The Heel" instructions printed on the template which worked fine. I usually do something like that for any paper template, so I didn't really pay any attention to the printed scale.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxtar
And the standard "try it first on a 2x4" advice is useful.
Ok ya for sure! thing is back in the shop I work in they never let anyone mount or even learn to mount, only guy allowed to was the main shop tech, and he would almost only use jigs, and if it were a template, it was straight from the manufacturer. I mean I watched him many times but I guess just do a few check ups and practice runs and it should be fine then! For sure, nothing can get done well without perfect attention and maximum precision you can do, not just kinda doing it to get it over with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chugachjed
main thing I was worried about was just not finding a good template to mount with, because to me that's kinda what it sounded like on this thread lol, but sick love the input my man!
Shit. I was mounting skis on day one working at the shop. What kind of shop only lets one guy do mounts?
And now we know why the mount your own fucking skis thread existsQuote:
Originally Posted by Chugachjed
Of course I'd mounted many skis already with templates and day one mounts were supervised and all Nordic.
Uh huh
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
THIS! STH2 Mounting template Error PowderguideV1.3- WARNING!!!! Leaving the wording so it's grabbed in searches. Yes templates can be off. Have a look at this for yourself. I'll happily edit this post if proved otherwise or when the template is corrected. Until then I stand behind the reco above and leave this as a warning for other to avoid my mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
First off huge thanks to Knut for making these available. My intent is to provide some productive feedback not challenge the work. Seems this has been debated years back so I'm surprised it hasn't been corrected. For those that want to see the back-history and the post which led to my resolution begin at post #908 quoted above. Props to 1000-oaks for sharing the details.
I stand with 1000-oaks that powderguide V1.3 STH2/Warden template is off. Extra thanks to Muggydude who has confirmed he independently came up with nearly identical technical measurements as 1000-Oaks.
My bad I didn't verify before using, but the powderguide template is off by enough to botch a pair of insert installs. Cross ref to Jondrum's older STH file, which seems to match perfect with an actual plate. I'm sure the powderguide template might work for screws, but that doesn't make it right. It's off enough I'd hate others to run into an issue.
*Clarification: I believe older STH had elongated holes which may bring the powderguide template in a perfectly workable range. Verify first. I have no knowledge of STH vs. STH2, my only firsthand experience is with the newer STH2's but picked up a comment on the older version.
I'm not sure what went wrong but using the alternate method with Scarpa Mobe, 305BSL got me dead on center. I matched the holes up to this template and ended up with a 146mm toe to center length.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
One that gets your gear out to you a while after you get it to us if you wanted a mount. But I mean same thing, what kind of a shop allows you to mount day one? That is also pretty insane, other extreme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chugachjed
A big busy shop with a good reputation and who knew I'd mounted lots of skis before. I think I mounted 12 pairs of Nordic skis on day one, very busy shop.
The funny thing being that 100-oaks referred to V1.0 and his suggestions have long since implemented.Quote:
Originally Posted by Breomonkey
Drama queen :rolleyes2
My and Jondrum's template (current R6) are identical when it comes to the front holes*. Are you sure this isn't user error?Quote:
Originally Posted by Breomonkey
*to be precise, it is 42 mm lateral hole spacing on mine and 42.4 mm on his. That's 0.2 mm per hole. With the lines on my template being 0.35 mm (probably double that on his) and your average printer only being able to print 3 lines per mm (i.e. 85 lpi), I highly doubt you'll notice the difference, let alone make it botch your insert mount.
Edit: funny (and by funny I mean bloody annoying as hell) side note: when you edit posts on google/android, they get automatically deleted.
My measurements and personal template I use give the following toe dimensions:
The front toe holes are 42.53mm apart, rear toe holes 40.13mm apart, and distance between the front and rear toe holes 30.93mm.
I've mounted maybe 6-7 sets of inserts for STH2 with these, plus same number of normal STH2 mounts. I use a big drill press and guide, very confident in my numbers.
I think the combination of .53mm on the front holes laterally and .93mm front to back would be enough to mess up the insert mount, especially if drill/tap isn't perfectly on mark either.
I'd concede maybe the numbers Salomon used when designing the bindings was probably 42.5mm, 40mm, and either 31mm or 30.75mm front to back.
If you print on clear plastic and put the STH2 toe base over it you'd see that the current template is off.
That's 0.265 mm per hole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
Besides being well within the wiggle room an M5 machine screw has within the binding's holes, see my post above for reference of why I don't agree. Hell, the line thickness of Jondrum's template already covers that discrepancy.
Besides having myself mounted a dozen or so solly bindings with said template, I've also done insert mounts with them without ever encountering anything close to being an issue. I am convinced that the template is correct.
If you disagree, use Jondrum's template. I think it's great. If you disagree with that, too, get a shop mount. If that's not to your liking, use a system binding.
I think it's great to offer choices.
The fact that there is a little 'wiggle room' after installing the inserts and before the epoxy cures, I recommend mounting the binding with boot in place during the curing process. This forces an immediate fit check which can be tweaked or you can remove inserts and epoxy if it's way off. Also, this will utilize the binding and screws to force the alignment relative to any minor discrepancies that may occur during the process.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
Have you mounted STH2 though? Same toe pattern as the older gen, but molds can be slightly different between models. I'm not saying your template wouldn't work necessarily (especially if you lightly install bindings while epoxy is still wet, which I do). But I know my measurements are pretty spot on for this model. When I get back to Colorado in a week I'll post picture with some digital caliper measurements to show where I get my numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knut
You also didn't mention a fourth option, which is make my own templates with drafting/CAD software [emoji16] I've done it for fks, STH2, Marker, and attack. I also don't mount bindings in the middle of their boot size adjustment range, as pretty much nobody uses a 24.5 boot that would ever use my skis, so I try to maximize the usability of mine (I have 25.5 boots).
I wouldn't ever let a shop mount my bindings.
I'm not bashing you guys. I think what you do with the templates is awesome, most people don't have access to software or the time to make templates. I almost always start with you or jondrums templates when making mine.
Not for inserts admittedly, but I doubt that wouldn't have worked. The template has been used for 9xx, STH and STH2 in my hands as well as quite a few other's I trust to be competent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
Of course, if you feel like something in the 0.1mm deviation range calls for that, it's an option. As it is if you just enjoy doing these kind of things. A very legit reason, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
Wow, Knut. You are stubborn. So far as I can tell, you've got 2 engineers and someone with a solid machining background attempting to give you some constructive feedback. In small font with an * you even concede there's a difference and point the finger back my way. I'm happy to live on as a dramaqueen in your eyes.
In the post above you note you haven't used it for STH2 with inserts? They need a bit more accuracy than your everyday screw mount.
Let me reiterate. I've mounted 10+ pairs of skis this year and flubbed 2. Guess which 2, STH2 inserts off the template. Both drilled in succession as I was doing a seasons worth of skis for the family production line style. I fixed it by fill -n- redrill, but I'm convinced it was the template issue. I didn't mount immediate after install, which I now will. I'm not afraid to admit my mistakes.
I'll share the pic which I shared with you via PM for all to reference. Are those front cross marks lined up? NOPE!
Attachment 202039
Here's Jondrums template vs. yours.
Attachment 202040Attachment 202041
It may be <1mm in total, but it's off. You can argue printer tolerances, binding tolerances, and even human tolerances all you want, but if you start off you're already erring towards a limit. In many lines of work 0.25mm off would be enough to send you walking.
To counter the direct response regarding line thickness, it's called a center punch for a reason. The intent is to land dead center, not just near the x. To your credit, landing in quadrants -x:y and x:y adjacent to your lines hedges enough of the error to likely negate, but users shouldn't need this inherent knowledge.