Printable View
I used a jig from MottN to remount ATK heels to match new boots and my wife used it to mount her new ATKs. It was our first time mounting skis unsupervised (I helped Hop mount some skis several years ago) and it was easy with MottN's jig. It's also a lot cheaper than the OEM ATK jig.
See his thread for more info:
https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...ig-(printable)
I borrow the ATK jig from a friend’s shop (sweet jig btw) but I thought Skimoco had a very complete set of template pdf’s on their site?
Does anyone know if ATK is coming out with a brake seat for the raider EVOs this year?
Also is it mainly the incorporated toe riser that makes the voyager heavier? Or is it just a difference in how the weigh them, like including screws or something like that
I was specifically referencing the Haute Route Plus which seems to only be available in Europe unless you want the DPS branded version. It has magnetic risers (two of them!) but as pointed out by Tjaardbeeuwer there is no elastic travel in the heel and I like the Raider toes better too. The weight difference between Raiders and HR10+ is considerable though. I started without toe shims and now have shims and like it better.Quote:
Originally Posted by ey_allen
Speaking of elastic heel travel, anyone know why ATK uses a 4 mm gap for their elastic travel heel? Seems weird when Alpinists, Xenics etc are zero gap.
Anyone running zero gap on their ATKs anyway?
So much to learn with these derivations of the same binding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason4
Thats good to know. I think I'm still very happy with my choice given the inbounds usage, but I have the Haute Route Plus on my shortlist for my more "everyday" touring skis in the future. That weight is pretty unreal.
Would love if they would come out with a brake cover - evos are great but i dont really see any upside to the brake configuration (or brakes at all) and as far as i can tell there is no equivalent evo version of the regular raider brake covers yet. Its pretty difficult to flip the risers when theyre down forward after spinning the heels, and the brakes are deployed. Just another thing to remember in transitions, I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
FWIW, I'm planning the same setup as you, brake-less CR12s on wide boards for powder touring. Think the wider footprint will be great for driving bigger skis. Plus, I calculate CR12s ex brakes to be about 260g per binding (w/o freeride spacer, 290g with it) so not a million miles away from the sub-200g category.
And don't worry about ATK's million item lineup, they are notorious for this haha. Just look at all the toe shims and freeride spacers they have now (on top of past models and variations)...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ey_allen
It's hard to go wrong and easy to get lost in all of the variations. I keep looking at those HR+ thinking they'd be great for a pow touring ski but have ended up buying Raiders instead for the same reasons you did. I don't have a lot of trust in the brakes to actually stop a ski if it takes off (already had that happen once this year) so the only value I see in brakes is that it makes it easier to carry the skis on the pack or over the shoulder. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by ey_allen
It's hard to go wrong and easy to get lost in all of the variations. I keep looking at those HR+ thinking they'd be great for a pow touring ski but have ended up buying Raiders instead for the same reasons you did. I don't have a lot of trust in the brakes to actually stop a ski if it takes off (already had that happen once this year) so the only value I see in brakes is that it makes it easier to carry the skis on the pack or over the shoulder. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by ey_allen
Tecnica Zero G pro tour with Lange XT3 140 liners currently.Quote:
Originally Posted by SB
The skis are not soft underfoot - elasticity is not the issue, more so its ability to get back or maintain the start position.
I have adjusted the freeride spacers to fit with the sole - so an extra .6mm spacer on the outside compared to the inside and less on both than the 2.4 I started out with.
Time will tell - I will need to do some more experimenting, or possibly change the boots as well. Thanks for the comments none the less :)
10-4, was talking with a buddy and we have a theory that wider skis can put higher torque on bindings. Possibly causing them to release..
Lateral or vertical prerelease? If its lateral, the elasticity of the vario2 toes might be beyond the return-home range of the r12 heels. I would imagine a carving prerelease to be lateral, unless youre super frontseat in the boots...Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-kapow
Heel pin alignment can cause that release issue. Really any tech binding at the correct release setting should hold you in on hard carves so long as it isn't really chattery hardpack, so seems sketchy
This is my worry about running frankenbindings with Trab toesQuote:
Originally Posted by Westcoaster
There was a lot of discussion about Trab toes vs [insert your heel] early last year in either this thread or the 300g bindings thread. Lot of heel toe physics being dropped IRC. Wonder if it would be possible to get the lateral forces definitively measured at a ski shop or factory i.e. Trab toe can move this much, heel can only move this much, beyond this, you fall out and break your legs.
Yeah, as much as i want to play around, this is why i wont do it. tech bindings are already sketchy, why make them sketchier?Quote:
Originally Posted by Benneke10
The magic of the Trab Vario is not just the elasticity of the toe, its that the heel can be rotated much further than pretty much any other tech binding and still return to center, and the combination skis very well. There are other heelpieces that perform similarly, but most are heavier. I think the Dynafit Superlite 150 is the only other light heelpiece that performs close. Shame that the Superlite 150 toe is crap.
This may be old news (if so, sorry), but skimo.co just informed me that much-loved universal freeride spacer is going extinct.
I found a pair on BD's website, so... yeah. You know what to do. https://www.blackdiamondequipment.co...eeride-spacer/Quote:
The "Universal Freeride Spacer" is the one that mounts directly onto the ski, so yes that's the one you want. Unfortunately we are all out of them, and ATK has discontinued it. So if you want one, I'd snag one from somewhere else before they disappear forever!
Why'd they discontinue it? Regardless, seems like an easy hole for 3D printer to fill, provided there's an appropriate material to use.
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
Interesting that the templates aren't readily available. Same for the freeride spacer.
Anyhow, I downloaded the following ATK templates when developing our layout tool:
ATK Crest 8-10
ATK freetour-2020
ATK R12-2.0
ATK xFreetour-2020_new
ATK xfreetour-2020
ATK Kuluar-lt_brake_dima
ATK RT8-10
HTH
Out of stock at BD too now.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
I bought one this Nov from Skimoco, it works pretty well if you don’t switch boots with a pair of skis often. In the lowest position it barely works with my Alpinists but would be fine with higher ramp tech bindings.
As noted by me above, ATK screwed up when choosing mounting screws for their Crest and C Raider bindings. Interestingly they also screwed up the mount screws for the Universal Spacer. The 6 screws provided had a head just a bit too wide to fit into the recessed holes. Rather than dremeling out the plastic, I bought 6 correctly sized stainless screws at hardware store.
Like their bindings, the spacer is very nicely designed and manufactured. This is why the mount screw fail is so weird to me. It’s like buying a Bugatti Chiron and realizing that the gas tank inlet is too small for US gas nozzles.
Speaking of shims... here they are, finally: https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...usp=drive_link
There are two versions, one has a little tongue matching the crampon retainer, another has a solid platform under it. 3mf files (for those who can 3d print) are for 4mm thick shims.
Attachment 482356
Attachment 482355
Attachment 482354
@kid-kapow
One issue is simply that (most) tech bindings are not certified. Testing shows that most of them release at very different values than what that RV number should be in a certified binding.
Still, ost of the ones I saw, were releasing high.
For what its worth Skimo.co has the hole measurements here: https://skimo.co/tech-binding-hole-patterns
It seems like the C-Raider and Raider have shared the same pattern for past versions so hopefully that is true for the 2024 version as well.