Recommended Skis & Bindings List

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

01-31-2006, 07:44 PM
addict

I'm still saying Elan 777s, and Nordica Supercharger Blowers should be there too. Also, Volkl Mantras with their lame, flappy tips shouldn't be in stiffer skis IMHO.
01-31-2006, 07:50 PM
leroy jenkins

I would also like to give a little info on the Rossi Scratch BC's. I don't know if this is enough to put them in the "not recomended" category, but the bases are seriously thin, and soft. A freind of mine recently put a core shot in his and he says he barely even felt himself hit anything. Looking at the hole, I saw that there is almost no thickness to the base.
02-02-2006, 09:30 AM
frorider

Quote:

Originally Posted by hop

Here's what I'd change to LB's tele binding list:
Linkens (easy step in, neutral feel, durability issues with toebar, snow buildup in wetter snow, de facto binding for certain maggot crew that prefers Coors Light ;) )
Bombers (bomber, heavy, expensive, adjustable active/neutral)
R8's (relatively active, relatively solid, relatively cheap, no frills just performance)
Hammerheads (highly adjustable from very active to very neutral in theory but a pain to do in the field)
UTBs (10 point crampon under your toes, step in once you put the binding on your boot, sweet heel lifter, expensive, less active than R8, more so than Linken, maybe HH position 3)
G3 (relatively neutral, somewhat less durable than others, somewhat sloppier than others, relatively cheap)
Voile Hardwire (??? simple, relatively cheap)

yer summary is pretty much identical to my experience. 'ceptin' i haven't (yet) tried the UTBs.

And I'd add this on the voile hardwire (beyond simple and cheap): almost as active as the R8, lightest tele binding on the market that can crank stiff fatties reasonably well.

And I'd add this on the 7tm Power: definite improvement over the regular 7tm, sorta feels like a G3, not a great choice for driving stiff fatties
02-09-2006, 08:53 AM
sfotex

bumpity bump
02-09-2006, 03:34 PM
Playa

Quote:

Originally Posted by leroy jenkins

I would also like to give a little info on the Rossi Scratch BC's. I don't know if this is enough to put them in the "not recomended" category, but the bases are seriously thin, and soft. A freind of mine recently put a core shot in his and he says he barely even felt himself hit anything. Looking at the hole, I saw that there is almost no thickness to the base.

is that this year's or last year's? big difference between the two
02-20-2006, 02:14 PM
carolalacaracola

what`s the matter with marker bindings??
02-20-2006, 02:19 PM
marshalolson

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechmaster

The issue with Marker bindings comes from the lack of elasticity in the release mechanism. The shape of the release cam favors release over retension; that is, the toe has a tendency to release under small impacts rather than "snap" back to center. Thus, although the behaviour under the quasi-static loading of the release test may say one thing, the actual dynamic behaviour of the mechanism is very different.

Current retail Markers have a vertical release mechanism in the toe. Unfortunately, the mechanism is "tuned" very conservatively; ~1/5-1/10 of the release force required for lateral release is required for vertical release, presumably to help prevent knee injuries. This implies that during events where the skier places a load on the toe in a vertical direction (ie. hucking), the boot is much more likely to release than during "regular" skiing.

In response, many skiers increase their DIN setting. This increases the vertical load required to release, but also raises the lateral force required for release. Marker team bindings have a metal "bar" in the toe which locks out the vertical release function. In theory, this should increase the binding retension characteristics. In practice, pro skiers generally raise the DIN in these bindings to unrealistic values. The Marker binding with the 18-30 DIN represents the largest DIN range I've ever seen; the max comp bindings from Salomon and Look run from 14-20 and 8-18, respectively.

to make a long story short. search, and there are MANY MANY MANY threads about this
02-20-2006, 02:19 PM
Jim S

Quote:

Originally Posted by carolalacaracola

what`s the matter with marker bindings??

Nothing. If you like unexpected big air.
03-18-2006, 10:20 PM
mojorisin

this needs to be made a sticky. this will hopefully save some bandwidth space as there'll be less "does anybody make skis to slay the gnar pow" questions. oh yea, and the answer to that question is "NO".
03-19-2006, 11:30 PM
leroy jenkins

Quote:

Originally Posted by Playa

is that this year's or last year's? big difference between the two

I'm pretty sure it was last years.
03-20-2006, 02:53 AM
verbier61

yeah make it a STICKY!!!!
03-20-2006, 06:25 AM
Free Range Lobster

Toss Telebulldogs in there too (burly step in 3 pins, neutral yet torsionally stiff)
03-21-2006, 12:05 AM
CS

Heh, just came across this thread. Nice work marshall.

And to all the Linken homers: wake up and get on some bindings that don't have you skiing like a ballerina. Bishops rule over the Linkens any day.
03-21-2006, 12:23 AM
skibackwards

how come u put ANTs on ur list but not jp vs juliens?
03-21-2006, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mojorisin

this needs to be made a sticky. this will hopefully save some bandwidth space as there'll be less "does anybody make skis to slay the gnar pow" questions. oh yea, and the answer to that question is "NO".

(sigh) I doubt it. Seems like that question is asked by every jong retard with incredible frequency. If they can't read the other numerous threads about gnar-pow-slaying skis, I doubt they'll read stickies.

Hell, they don't even read "Meet The Minions"
03-22-2006, 08:59 PM
nutcase

Was looking at this thread again and figured might as well bump it
03-28-2006, 01:28 PM
leroy jenkins

I'm at work with nothing better to do so, BUMP.
03-28-2006, 02:29 PM
marshalolson

bump for waists and 06 skis
03-28-2006, 02:45 PM
freak

how about adding the sandwich fischers as softer everyday skis?

fischer watea (101mm) - very soft tip, very easy to handle, best in soft snow. not that stable at higher speeds,great in the trees. 192 only but feels shorter...

fischer atua (96mm) - soft allmountain twin 186cm only...

freak~[http://freeskiers.x-skier.com/forum/...fault/fish.gif&http://freeskiers.x-skier.com/forum/...ault/ghost.gif]

edit: phat luv 90mm waist? i thought they got 95... but can be wrong.
03-28-2006, 02:49 PM
BLOODSWEATSTEEL

Bump to add King Salmons to the lineup..... to pretty much fill any spot in the quiv, except the super-fatties.
03-28-2006, 03:53 PM
DePierre

No love for Titan Nines? Everyday east coast ski 181(86mm),188(92mm).
03-30-2006, 10:10 AM
leroy jenkins

So why aren't Armada ARV's listed anywhere? Good ski that can serve as an everyday/icy conditions/park ski.
03-30-2006, 10:54 AM
jackstraw

Quote:

Originally Posted by DePierre

No love for Titan Nines? Everyday east coast ski 181(86mm),188(92mm).

titans must rip up maple ridge, eh?
03-30-2006, 11:37 AM
soul_skier

titans rip the shit out of jay peak
03-30-2006, 08:37 PM
DePierre

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackstraw

titans must rip up maple ridge, eh?

eh. i havent graduated from the golf course yet. i might try maple next year if i can progress enough.:fuckyou: ;)
04-02-2006, 11:07 PM
XtrPickels

Marshal- Goodupdate with the customs skis on there. The Iggy link is spelled wrong though.

Also, I think its good to not include every ski that someone suggests, only the ones that many people have been on and liked. This seems to be what you've been doing for the most part, so keep up the good work man.
04-03-2006, 05:12 PM
mc_roon

more skis

you should add AK rockets. A beast of a ski. Probably under powder skis.
04-03-2006, 08:23 PM
marshalolson

Quote:

Originally Posted by mc_roon

you should add AK rockets. A beast of a ski. Probably under powder skis.

ak swallowtail - filed under soft everyday skis
04-24-2006, 07:47 PM
nutcase

bumping because I was trying to decide between STS or clipfix on some BD skins and this thread told me that "clipfix sucks balls" which is good advice.
04-27-2006, 02:11 AM
Silence

awesome, helpful post...
04-27-2006, 10:31 AM
Terpski

I would definitely not consider the Karmas "skinny" skis (they're 87 not 85).

Also, I think that the gripe with the new 12/14 heel piece is groundless. I have a pair of both the New and turntable p12's and I think that the New ones keep my boot in better. I think people just don't like the way they look.
04-27-2006, 10:33 AM
ulty_guy

uh, no terpski, there have been many cases of plastic cracking with the new molds. do a search. hopefully they will remedy the problem for next year.
04-27-2006, 10:43 AM
marshalolson

karma and PE -> everyday twins

87 = skinny.

as ulty said, lots-o-breakage
04-27-2006, 10:52 AM
keksie

correct address for birdos is http://www.birdos.com (.net not worky)
04-27-2006, 10:58 AM
Terpski

That sucks if there is a lot of them breaking out there. I got them through a prodeal, so I didn't have much choice in the matter. However, I do like them - SO FAR, and I ski quite a bit on hard pack/Icy east coast conditions.

Is there a warrenty on Rossi Bindings that I should know about?
04-27-2006, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terpski

That sucks if there is a lot of them breaking out there. I got them through a prodeal, so I didn't have much choice in the matter. However, I do like them - SO FAR, and I ski quite a bit on hard pack/Icy east coast conditions.

Is there a warrenty on Rossi Bindings that I should know about?

Whoa! A pro-deal? Can I touch you?!?!

You shouldn't have to worry about warranties. Just ask for another free pair.
04-27-2006, 01:15 PM
Terpski

umm i didn't get them for free. If they were to break on me next year I don't know if rossignol would replace them after two seasons.
04-27-2006, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terpski

umm i didn't get them for free. If they were to break on me next year I don't know if rossignol would replace them after two seasons.

ok, so you did have a choice. you're not restricted by contract to ski those bindings.

maybe you should have gotten fks 120s. those are probably pretty durable. or find a deal on older-style bindings.

as for the warranty, i bet http://www.rossignol.com has the relevant info.
05-19-2006, 06:32 PM
mc_roon

bump this back to the top
05-19-2006, 11:24 PM
leroy jenkins

Is there some reason this hasn't been stickied yet?

It should be.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page