thanks 1000-oaks.
yes, mine have a plastic brake spring cover.
Printable View
thanks 1000-oaks.
yes, mine have a plastic brake spring cover.
^ just chiming in... I noticed that when I took them out of the box. Once mounted it flattens out.
cool, thanks zero.
I just un-mounted a pair for use as backup whilst travelling. They have the same soft bump you described. Didn't notice it before. That bump is soft enough to flatten I'd guess, but it is in front of the mounting screws and not under direct pressure, so that may explain why I could not get the plastic section at the leading edge of the heel piece to sit completely flat against the top sheet.
Something else: Rusty water dripping from my heel piece. Likely from that adjustment screw. That is dirty/rusty grease from the screw and spring on the topsheet as well.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-u...o/DSC09760.JPG
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-s...o/DSC09761.JPG
Finally, revisiting this:
Update: The heel piece is totally rotating on one particular ski from tour to ski. I can use force to get the heel piece fully rotated and it stays put. But when comparing to other heel pieces it is obvious that this one heel is not positively clicking home into tour mode like the others do. This one is vague, positively doesn't snap into tour mode our snap out of tour mode. My guess is a slight deformity in the plastic molding of the locking bits.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
Duh, the covers were in the screw bag, my mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by N1CK.
The soft bump is from a plastic carrier that rolls the brake latch forward when in tour mode. The latch mechanism really needs the ski to hold everything in place, so the carrier gets pushed into the thin section of the baseplate by the latch spring.
Hope that grey baseplate bottom isn't polyurethane (looks like it could be), PU often reverts to it's liquid components (melts) in just five to ten years. I loathe the stuff, hate seeing manufacturers use it.
I have a couple of skis that I wouldn't mind mounting with inserts for both IONs and an alpine binder (preferably Solly).
One of the skis already has a Radical mount, the other one for a Guardian.
Regardless of existing holes, I was concerned that the aforementioned mount combo was problematic.
Turns out it looks like the two rear holes of the toe on the ION line up nicely with the two rear holes of a Solly's toe.
With the front two ION toes being forward of the solly front two toe holes by ~12mm (guess).
i think (but am not sure) that the +/- on the toe placement of the two different binders/boots should be damn close; actual measurements forthcoming.
BLOG:
Newski#1) Kusala Pow Pure with one mount for Radical @ 99 from tip (0).
I think that want Sollys and Ions (with inserts) @ 99.5/100 (-0.5/-1.0) which I think will work using the shared rear toe hole technique.
Newski#2) Vicik Tour Veneer top with one mount for large Guardians at unknown spot.
I'm not even sure what 0 is on this ski.
But there is a fair amount of open area for the ol' Solly/Ion one-two.
I've fucked around with having a quiver with plates and sharing binders.
Hated it, the fuck around factor the night before / morning of skiing didn't work for me.
But I've got a couple of other go to resort skis, so I think sharing binders on a touring quiver subset sounds reasonable.
Rear two holes on a Solly toe are only 0.1mm further apart than Ion, so plenty close enough. (I don't know yet how the boot position compares between the two.)
Each pair of Ion heel holes (37mm apart) are close enough to fit inserts for pre-EPF Duke/Baron/F12/F10 heels (36mm apart), since M5 machine screws are 0.5mm smaller in diameter than alpine binding screws. So if your ski is already inserted for Duke, you might be able to reuse one pair of heel inserts (depending on BSL).
Ion toe holes are 6mm to accommodate fat-thread AT binding toe screws, so an M5 machine screw is pretty loose in there. I ordered some 6mm x .45 wall aluminum tubinghttp://rover.ebay.com/roverimp/1/711...1;CACHEBUSTER] for a few bucks to cut into little sleeves to fill the gap.
^ good info
interdasting.
I just swapped my IONs to another pair of skis and the Mz was dead on for one and the other not visible in the window and loose.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
For wider skis the upper inside intersection of the brake arm and plastic end catches on the edge. Grinding the corner down will help it retract more smoothly.
Checked the position of the Ion toe mounted on inserts for Solly. If you use the rear Solly toe inserts for the rear Ion toe screws, you'll end up about 18mm forward of the line (assuming the Solly was mounted on the line). If you use the rear Solly toe inserts for the front Ion holes, you'll be 27mm behind the line. So you'll only be able to reuse toe inserts for Solly if they were mounted for a substantially different BSL than you.
Received that 6mm aluminum tubing today, and it fits the Ion toe holes perfectly. The M5 screws have just a bit of play inside the tubing, but you probably wouldn't want it any tighter anyhow.
^^^ yeah, I wasn't too pleased with that either.
if one share's the front two toe holes on the ION and the front two toe holes on a Solly the Solly mount is only 5mm behind the ION mount.
however, the ION CTC is 40mm, the Solly CTC 42mm.
drill @ 41mm, put inserts and hope that the smaller M5 screw size allow for a mm of wiggle before cinching down?
it's soooo close!!!!
Bummer. But thank you for comparing your experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
This is potentially not a good development. However one interesting outcome has been learning just how much skiing I can apparently do with an Mz of <=5
I wonder how many other people bother to check their settings over time? I certainly never looked at my release values on other tech bindings once they were set.
Just checked mine, and after around 40 days, they're still at what I set them at (about 9). I checked them because I just had a knee injury and decided to lower them to 8. Yeah yeah...
Amen, brother.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
Cheers,
Thom
You ought to try para-marking skiing bumps, breakable crust and powder with Mz = 0 for a real test. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
Less is more in the thread locker department. I put too much on and some excess spooged on the inside of the gauge window AND it was harder to tell if the threads were engaged properly per Knut's recommendation. They feel like they're not going anywhere now. We'll see over time.
FYI: If someone wants different width on the brakes for their ION's, the G3 Onyx Brake has the same brake arms. They will fit the ION's just fine.
^ Yep, exactly the same arms. Taking the arms off the Ion isn't as easy as most bindings though, have to dissassemble the lower track and slide off the brake housing. Getting the forward pressure preload nut at 5mm during reassembly is tricky the first time you do it, but easy after you figure it out.
These things are still going strong for me. Interesting results over at wildsnow: https://www.wildsnow.com/16117/g3-io...gs/#more-16117
I've never had an issue with the toe of the binding, but have had some weird releases at the heel. Anyone else feel like they're popping out of the heel piece too easily? This is only happening for me inbounds on firm bumps (I know I know get an inbounds set up), DIN at 10+. 180lbs.
Been on mine since Dec so far so good, no weird releases, nice brakes and crampons. Ski well, easy to use and oh so orange and shiny.
Went for a short tour yesterday, first time out on Ions. Skinned up some stupidly-steep wet sno-cone slush with a kick turn every 15 feet and the toes unlocked (was worried I might tumble down the face a few times), and never had a toe release. Step-in is super-easy with the plastic guides, haven't had a release yet but so far am really digging 'em.
My twisting release setting on one heel piece has (again) backed off from about 7 to about 5 in 12 days of ski touring.
Thanks for keeping us apprised. As another first year adopter, I'm pleased that we're generally reporting good things with the bindings, in the sense that any problems we're seeing appear to have a simple solution and (for us) one that G3 can and will fix on bindings sold this season. Yeah, it kind of sucks to have to monitor it for the remainder of the year, but at least G3 seems to be good with issues like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by neck beard
Cheers,
Thom
Will be interesting to hear how the Ion compares to Radical 2.0 once people start getting some laps in on them.
The question is, do we purchase the ION at reduced price (425$ + tax) now or wait in the fall or early 2016 to get the Radical 2.0 FT (750$ + tax).Quote:
Originally Posted by powtario
Read that the Ion is unchanged for 2016, except that they'll offer a brakeless version.
I'm just back (more accurately, sitting at DIA) from a week in the Selkirks and had no issues with the IONs. Everyone else was mostly on Dynafits. I loved the way they toured, skied and look. We had highly variable conditions, including low visibility, high winds, powder, warm soft, corn, breakable crust and one award winning face plant after hitting a compression in super low visibility where the heels came out cleanly as expected during my ejection and full roll. One toe released, while the other stayed on and it seemed correct under the circumstances. :o
The guides said they are also seeing more of them and seemed somewhat interested in them. On a couple descents in variable conditions one guide recommended to the Dynafit users to engage the toe lock to the first click. I did the same and noticed that the indicator is still sort of at the 'ski' mode on the lock indicator. I thought I recalled the instructions 'officially' saying not to do this, but it did add a little more confidence in binding retention. Still unsure, however.
As my first venture into tech pin land, I'm liking the G3 IONs. The previous issue of the Mz loosening wasn't one thanks to the Vibra-Tite VC-3.
Swapping them from one ski pair to another is a piece of cake for the toe, but somewhat more tedious for the heels due to the alignment of the screws under the brakes and the brake spring cover. I'm definitely interested in another pair for this reason if I can find a smoking deal. I've blown the toy and trip budget for a while. :rolleyes:
EDIT regarding going brakeless: it was stressed when making stops on the ridge top crust during high winds (and basically as SOP) to first release the brakes before setting the skis down. This was illustrated when this was forgotten and a diving ski rescue occurred by a group member. I'm not sure I'd want a pair without brakes, but possibly with a brake/brakeless option. What are other's opinions on pros and cons?
At that difference in price I think it's a no-brainer. Ion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cass
Is the Radical FT 2.0 really going to cost $750? Seems way high to me, even for a tech binding.
The ST is going for 500 Eur on the Dynafit website which is ~675-700 CAD. I imagine the FT will run at least 50CAD more.Quote:
Originally Posted by whatsupdoc
For $750 you could buy a pair of beast 14s
Right now you could buy 2 pairs of Beast 16's for that off one of the Yurp websites.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin_mcbride
I've got two pairs of AT skis, both brakeless and I love it that way. I used leashes on Denali because a lost ski there would've been catastrophic, but I otherwise never use them. There's a slight chance I'll get a dedicated pow setup, in that case I'll get something with brakes. It'll be next season so I can see how Ion vs. Vipec vs. Radical 2.0 all shakes out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord
Just be cognizant of your skis and the terrain and it's fine. Brakes don't do much in pow anyway.
One week in, 3 moderate tours and 3 days of piste skiing and I'm really happy. They feel super solid and don't have that harsh ride my old Dyna FT12s had. Will keep an eye on potential drift of the release value.
I just had 3 days of melt-freeze issues in my heel pieces when finishing mild days of touring later into the colder early evening during some long days along the Wapta.
Ice in the mechanism resulted in the brake on both skis being held in tour mode after rotating the heel piece to ski mode. I had to hold the tip of my skis and kick the base under the heel piece aggressively to smash the ice. Even then, one heel piece would not move forward - it was frozen in the tour position - and I had to ski one ski in 'almost' walk mode, aka, the heel pins only engaged the boot inserts by 1mm and popped out every other turn. I twisted that ski back to tour mode and skied it that way for a long early evening run.
I put the skis in the hut overnight to melt out and dry the bindings and they were always fine the next morning.
Great bindings, but I'll be looking to warranty mine based on 3 different undesirable heel piece problems:
- twisting 'din' wont stay set
- rusting parts (rusty water dribbles down my ski each evening)
- freezing heel piece mechanism.
Plus one of my 6 heel pieces (3 pairs) will not fully click into tour mode and it rotates back when the heel riser is used.
Currently have ski toured 75 days on IONS this season. Will ski another 40 or so before June, so no chance to switch them out, and no desire to re-drill my skis for Dynafit, but the melt freeze heel issue worried me for spring.
Aside: amazes me how few Americans with Dynafits have heard of G3.
Think it was ice between the heel post and the brake carriage? Or did the base of the post freeze to the upper track and/or bottom cover? Glopping a bunch of binding grease into the space between the post & the carriage might help, and make it easier to pick out with an awl or small knife blade.
I don't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
The hooks which hold the brake pads down were extended even after I violently kicked the bases of the ski and freed the brake. If I pushed the brake down again, I had to kick it to free it once more. This happened to both skis, 3 days in a row.
One one ski, the heel piece spring seemed to be affected by ice, as after kicking the brake free the heel piece would be moved for/aft by hand by about 3mm each direction. This was the ski that only had 1mm of heel pin in the boot inserts and would release my heel when skiing. In the field I tried adjusting the BSL of that ski and the screw would not turn with out applying a lot force (that was going to break my multitool).
After an overnight melt and dry, none of these issues were present.
ps - I think these are potentially very good bindings and wish G3 great deserved success with them. Damned if I want to ski Dynafit again if I can help it. I'm just relating my ION issues since I've used them a moderate amount so far and think my findings are worth sharing.
Do you have those little plastic covers on top of the brake spring underneath the pad? Because I was having icing problems on the one tour I've gotten on mine so far but I didn't have those little plastic covers on yet
Yes, using those. The icing was far more extensive than just the springs under that pad.
Damn that is not what I wanted to hear. I'm glad I have until the beginning of March next year for my 1 year warranty. hopefully they get the details fixed by then. thanks for the info
I don't understand this, you're going to get a pow ski rig with brakes and then you say brakes don't do much in pow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bean
I did find something annoying yesterday. I was skinning through some undulating wind drifts and with the ski severely flexed the heels of the boots would bind on the heel pieces. This is because of the non gap adjustment. Not a deal breaker but it is annoying.