The Official Salomon S/Lab SHIFT MNC Thread -AMA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdadour

Guys, was thinking about this on the drive to work this morning, and we MAY be thinking about Ramp and Stack Height incorrectly for the Shift. Does the height position of the toe lug in the toe piece change alpine vs grip walk vs wtr vs touring? And the moving AFD is just making up for the gap of thicker vs thinner sole types? Correct me if I'm wrong, but then doesnt the ramp delta stay the same despite the differences in stack height of the different sole types?

---

you're probably right. I thought the mags already figured this though? I don't want to go back and read 48pgs, but your logic makes sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judo Chop!

you're probably right. I thought the mags already figured this though? I don't want to go back and read 48pgs, but your logic makes sense to me.

---

Just thought I would bring it up, because from what I can recall from previous posts in this thread people have been equating the difference in sole stack height to equal ramp delta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdadour

Guys, was thinking about this on the drive to work this morning, and we MAY be thinking about Ramp and Stack Height incorrectly for the Shift. Does the height position of the toe lug in the toe piece change alpine vs grip walk vs wtr vs touring? And the moving AFD is just making up for the gap of thicker vs thinner sole types? Correct me if I'm wrong, but then doesnt the ramp delta stay the same despite the differences in stack height of the different sole types?......

---

No, the delta does change. You just have to measure from the base of the ski to the underside of the sole at the toe and the heel and compare that to the boot sitting on a flat surface (the boot sitting on a flat surface would be zero delta).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

What? I was off by 1mm?

---

If you're going to do a job...............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spyderjon

No, the delta does change. You just have to measure from the base of the ski to the underside of the sole at the toe and the heel and compare that to the boot sitting on a flat surface (the boot sitting on a flat surface would be zero delta).

---

If were going to be that particular wouldn't you measure from the surface of the sole on the inside of the boot? Easiest way to test would be to put an L-square in the boot (as if it were a foot) and then measure the angle of the vertical portion when the boot is on the ground vs. in the binding.

At the end of the day, you're looking at the boot board surface, but you'd need to take x-rays to make truly valid comparisons.

Since every manufacturer has a different interpretation of all of the dimensions comprising the various standards (whether it be 9523 or otherwise), the best we can do is to make an educated guess as to measuring points that translate across boots.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spyderjon

If you're going to do a job...............

---

Speaking of job, did I do a hack job here? Threw inserts on another set of skis. Kept the toe but moved the heel back 1.0cm back to avoid some conflicts. My boot is 327mm so these are technically mounted for 337 therefore. Thus when mounted with correct forward pressure, the heel is 10 mm forward of “middle.”

On a napkin plus eyeball, this looked fine knowing the 30mm of adjustment. But mounted, I’m leery.

Pic 1: red line showing where my mount puts me in relation to the STOP

pic 2: my assumption for the 30mm of adjustment

pic 3: my mount clicked in

The bindings are ruined. Pm me and I'll give you my address so you can send them to me for proper disposal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

Speaking of job, did I do a hack job here? Threw inserts on another set of skis. Kept the toe but moved the heel back 1.0cm back to avoid some conflicts. My boot is 327mm so these are technically mounted for 337 therefore. Thus when mounted with correct forward pressure, the heel is 10 mm forward of “middle.”

On a napkin plus eyeball, this looked fine knowing the 30mm of adjustment. But mounted, I’m leery.

Pic 1: red line showing where my mount puts me in relation to the STOP

pic 2: my assumption for the 30mm of adjustment

pic 3: my mount clicked in

---

You're in the window. I think you're good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

Speaking of job, did I do a hack job here? Threw inserts on another set of skis. Kept the toe but moved the heel back 1.0cm back to avoid some conflicts. My boot is 327mm so these are technically mounted for 337 therefore. Thus when mounted with correct forward pressure, the heel is 10 mm forward of “middle.”

On a napkin plus eyeball, this looked fine knowing the 30mm of adjustment. But mounted, I’m leery.

Pic 1: red line showing where my mount puts me in relation to the STOP

pic 2: my assumption for the 30mm of adjustment

pic 3: my mount clicked in

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lucknau

You're in the window. I think you're good.

---

Your pics are exactly what I'd expect given the criteria you've used and yes, you're good to go - albeit that you're at the shortest end of the adjustment range.

Day one on the shifts today, feel awesome on the down.

They are way less harsh than my kingpins and have stopped some juddering or chatter when my carbo katana’s are on an extreme edge dumping speed on firm.

They do, however, seem prone to icing under the brake pedal which makes clicking in, and latching the brakes up hard. Worse icing than my kingpins for sure.


Attachment 259824


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The first time out I also had this issue with ice under the brake. Since then I have been much more careful to shake out the snow prior to clicking down and it has helped significantly.

The issues I have so far (1 major, 2 minor):

1. Brakes falling down (major) - this can get very annoying depending on the day
2. Snow under brakes - as you mentioned, this happens but is easy to deal with, I just stick my pole in a clean it out
3. Riser - I would like a higher riser for certain days, especially when the skin track is already set.

Overall, the binding is amazing, but the rise/brake interface could be much improved. I don't know why they couldn't of spent more time sorting this system out. The toe piece is amazing, but the brake/riser system seemed like it could easily improved.

Hmm.

Can the plastics of the brake area handle a shot of silicone spray?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norseman

Hmm.

Can the plastics of the brake area handle a shot of silicone spray?

---

My question also...

Brakes deploying while skinning up were a major issue with the kingpin (under-reported here on TGR IMHO), and I really hope the shift doesn't have the same issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mg.

The first time out I also had this issue with ice under the brake. Since then I have been much more careful to shake out the snow prior to clicking down and it has helped significantly.

The issues I have so far (1 major, 2 minor):

1. Brakes falling down (major) - this can get very annoying depending on the day
2. Snow under brakes - as you mentioned, this happens but is easy to deal with, I just stick my pole in a clean it out
3. Riser - I would like a higher riser for certain days, especially when the skin track is already set.

Overall, the binding is amazing, but the rise/brake interface could be much improved. I don't know why they couldn't of spent more time sorting this system out. The toe piece is amazing, but the brake/riser system seemed like it could easily improved.

---

Easily improved? Curious, please go on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

At the end of the day, you're looking at the boot board surface, but you'd need to take x-rays to make truly valid comparisons.

Since every manufacturer has a different interpretation of all of the dimensions comprising the various standards (whether it be 9523 or otherwise), the best we can do is to make an educated guess as to measuring points that translate across boots.

... Thom

---

And if you are in Tecnica Cochise, the boot board in that has probably around 7mm (just a guess) of delta that isn't planar, but a big dramatic step in heights, occuring at the back of the arch. Where a mach 1 is flatter and planar.

It is all guessing in the end. But the numbers are relevant if you are keeping the same boot and switching bindings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rob stokes

Day one on the shifts today, feel awesome on the down.

They are way less harsh than my kingpins and have stopped some juddering or chatter when my carbo katana’s are on an extreme edge dumping speed on firm.

They do, however, seem prone to icing under the brake pedal which makes clicking in, and latching the brakes up hard. Worse icing than my kingpins for sure.

---

Stokes I sprayed some cooking spray on the spot where the ice builds up. Helped a lot

Also whenever I used them I would pick up the ski and whack it on the base under the brakes while holding ski upside down and dislodged snow. Just made it a habit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

Brakes deploying while skinning up were a major issue with the kingpin (under-reported here on TGR IMHO), and I really hope the shift doesn't have the same issue.

---

This happens non stop with my kingpins. Was there ever a fix? It hasn't happened with my shifts though and they seem very locked in place while up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toastybroski

This happens non stop with my kingpins. Was there ever a fix? It hasn't happened with my shifts though and they seem very locked in place while up.

---

you can adjust the set screw that holds them up. Details in the kingpin thread. I’ve had mixed luck — worked alright on my pair, didn’t help at all on a friend’s. Only failsafe way is to get the brakeless afd.

Has anyone had any experience mounting the shift on a ski that pervisioly had look pivots 14 mounted? I am woundering if I would have issues with the new screw holes conflicting with the old ones

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatboy64

Has anyone had any experience mounting the shift on a ski that pervisioly had look pivots 14 mounted? I am woundering if I would have issues with the new screw holes conflicting with the old ones

---

Assuming the same bsl for both you'll get a clash with the rear toe locations on the Pivot with the central toe holes on the Shift. You'll need to mount the Shifts at either -8mm or +12mm to get 10mm centre-to-centre separation etc:
Attachment 260158

quality reply! Full score - 5 outta 7! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spyderjon

Assuming the same bsl for both you'll get a clash with the rear toe locations on the Pivot with the central toe holes on the Shift. You'll need to mount the Shifts at either -8mm or +12mm to get 10mm centre-to-centre separation etc:
Attachment 260158

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

quality reply! Full score - 5 outta 7! :)

---

Yup. This place rules.

I had the same question (didn't post it), and I'm sure there are others out there too.

Spyderjon nails the landing.

Thanks!

Lol, my study material this morning is similar.

Pivot at 315mm BSL, Shift at 305, both dead on the line.


Holes of interest (new band name?) are .32 inch apart on center, 8.1mm... close... but a couple mm movement would be comfy and not quite noticable on ski.



Attachment 260173

Attachment 260174