Fritschi Tecton

[Griff And Or]

Just ordered up some Tectons...to be an abominable anchor on some new 178 ZeroG 95s (the short ski I've ever owned!). Flog me for I have sinned.

I just want that sweet sweet "damp" Vipec toe, some downward pressure on my heel, and to not have to buy another pair of ski crampons. So what if I'm hauling around an extra 250g per foot!

I figure the demanding ride of a light, stiff, tiny-ass ski set-up will be better and more smoothly controlled by the Tecton than the tooth-rattling, heel-bobbing, pastry-fragile ultra-lightweight binders (MTN, ATK, etc.). I'll take that trade-off.

Very. Stoked.

I'm putting vipecs on a tour1 lotus 124. At least I'm not sticking to my original plan of putting shift bindings on them.

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

[1000-oaks]

Just ordered up some Tectons...to be an abominable anchor on some new 178 ZeroG 95s.

I've done two inbounds days on that exact setup with Cochose 120's, and it's not a damp ride but it rips once you get used to the lack of weight on your feet. Ninja light.

[Choucas]

Last year, I moved from a Vipec 12 to a Tecton on the same skis and the downhill performance kicked way up. At the same time, I dropped 500+ grams off my boots. Light boots and skis, compromised on the binding. Works for me.

[grinch]

Last year, I moved from a Vipec 12 to a Tecton on the same skis and the downhill performance kicked way up. At the same time, I dropped 500+ grams off my boots. Light boots and skis, compromised on the binding. Works for me.

I was wondering that. I’ve had vipecs and liked them. Definitely be considering Tectons now if that’s the case

[TahoeJ]

The Tecton heel is great- very confidence inspiring. Much like the kingpin without the same fear of the toe exploding on you at the worst moment possible.

[Griff And Or]

Griff, looks like I can’t send you a pm, maybe try me?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Riff, thanks for the trade. The ones you sent me are measuring about 10mm wider.

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

[grinch]

The Tecton heel is great- very confidence inspiring. Much like the kingpin without the same fear of the toe exploding on you at the worst moment possible.

i skied Vipecs last year and went to Tectons this year.

Hard to beat how ez they are to use. I hadn’t skied a tech binding with any kind of elasticity. I’m not sure how much of the goodness I was feeling was from the elasticity in the heels of my vipecs and the toe design but with a little more with the tecton heel has me wanting a pair for something. I did dent my boot toe from just daydreaming and bending down to get my pack but rumour has it they’re addressing that

[riff]

Riff, thanks for the trade. The ones you sent me are measuring about 10mm wider.

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

Great! Indeed, the ones you sent me are just barely smaller. Cheers

[nickel]

Just got my tectons. Brakes are a real wtf moment. 100mm brakes once assembled almost fit over protests. 120mm are ridiculous. inside width between narrowest part of black plastic measures 115mm on the 100. Same measures ~140mm on the 120s.

What in tarnation...

does anyone have the small 82mm to measure?

[nickel]

Some brake arm measurements taken on a Tecton heel, measured from the inside of the tips of the plastic ends. Might help folks figure out what they actually have, and what ski width the brake will fit.

---------- Unmounted Arm -------- Tips at ---------- Tips Fully
---------------- (tip to tip) ------------Topsheet -------- Deployed

90 ------------- 135 ------------------- 91 ------------------ 110
100 ------------ 152 ----------------- 102 ----------------- 122
110 ------------- 157 ----------------- 108 ----------------- 130
120 ------------ 170 ----------------- 130 ----------------- 147


Some details:

• There seems to have been some brakes labeled "115mm" in 2017 that were actually 110mm brake arms.
  
  
• Any of the brake arms can fit skis about 8mm wider than the "Tips at Topsheet" measurement if you grind off the inner points of the plastic brake arm ends a bit. (With the brakes mounted, move the brakes from stowed to deployed to see where they need to be ground to clear the topsheets.) If you do a heavier grind, you could go an additional 10mm or so. So with a moderate inner tip grind, "90" brakes could probably fit 101mm width ski, "100" brakes could fit a 112mm ski, "110" brakes could fit a 118mm ski, and "130" brakes could fit a 140mm ski. This is without even bending the brake arms.
  
  
• Interestingly, the "115" (110) and 120 brake arms are the same from the middle to the first bend, and a more shallow bend angle (followed by a tighter outer bend) is what makes the 120 wider. Adjusting the ~45 degree bend angles in a vise should be a lot easier than modifying alpine brakes with 90 degree bends, since you can play with minor changes to the two existing bends instead of completely relocating full 90 degree bends.

Just found this... is the 90 what BD now call the 82?

[1000-oaks]

The formatting of that table is a bit screwed up, the "fully deployed" dimensions are ending up in the first column on my phone.

[nickel]

looks fine on PC...
90 (82?) says 110 fully deployed.
100 - 122 fully deployed
110 - 130 fully deployed
120 - 147 fully deployed.

Having said that the post seems to imply that tips at topsheet is the important number.

[1000-oaks]

^ Absolutely correct.

[nickel]

so how does one get a small in north America? or just run the 100 on the yetis and live with overhanging brakes?

[N1CK.]

Just got my tectons. Brakes are a real wtf moment. 100mm brakes once assembled almost fit over protests. 120mm are ridiculous. inside width between narrowest part of black plastic measures 115mm on the 100. Same measures ~140mm on the 120s.

What in tarnation...

does anyone have the small 82mm to measure?

I have 100 brakes on a 106mm ski and they're huuuge. Makes no sense.

sure do ski great though ....

[nickel]

I have 100 brakes on a 106mm ski and they're huuuge. Makes no sense.

sure do ski great though ....

still huge once clicked into ski? if so I'll really need to source some smaller brakes.

[N1CK.]

still huge once clicked into ski? if so I'll really need to source some smaller brakes.

well, they don't fully retract over the ski that's for sure. Based on the clearance I could prob use 90mm on these 106mm skis.

[LightRanger]

FWIW, they definitely narrow a fair bit when stepping in. I have 110s on my Helio 116s (bought in ~February 2018). They look huge when deployed. When stepping in they clip the edges a hair, though not enough for me to bother dremeling.

[nickel]

LightRanger - you're at the opposite end of the problem from me. I'm looking to use brakes on a ski narrower than the nominal width of the brake.

Anyone care to comment if the crampon sizing is just as wonky? Do 120mm crampons fit bigger skis?

[riff]

I’ll check tomorrow on crampons.
Still hoping to trade either 120 or 110’s for 100’s.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Havn]

I'm looking at the Tectons for my 96mm waist ski. From reading everyone's posts, is the 90mm the way to go? Sounds like the 100mm would be huge on the 96mm ski.

[nickel]

I've seen all the brakes except the 90mm (82?) but from what I've seen i would go 90 and do a slight bend if needed. I'm mounting 100s on my 94mm skis because it's what i have and i haven't found any 90s for a reasonable price at this point.

I'll report back once they're mounted with pics.

[yellofin]

I'm looking at the Tectons for my 96mm waist ski. From reading everyone's posts, is the 90mm the way to go? Sounds like the 100mm would be huge on the 96mm ski.

I have a 100 mm brake going on a 108 ski and it test fitted with ease. I am mounting them this weekend and will report back

[telemon10]

You might find the the stuff below helpful. It was originally posted by 1000-oaks back around page 20 of this thread:

Some brake arm measurements taken on a Tecton heel, measured from the inside of the tips of the plastic ends. Might help folks figure out what they actually have, and what ski width the brake will fit.

Stated--- Unmounted Arm ------ Tips at ----------- Tips Fully
--Size-------- (tip to tip) ------------Topsheet -------- Deployed

90 --------------- 135 --------------------- 91 ------------------ 110
100 -------------- 152 ------------------- 102 ----------------- 122
110 --------------- 157 ------------------- 108 ----------------- 130
120 ------------- 170 -------------------- 130 ----------------- 147


Some details:

-- There seems to have been some brakes labeled "115mm" in 2017 that were actually 110mm brake arms.

-- Any of the brake arms can fit skis about 8mm wider than the "Tips at Topsheet" measurement if you grind off the inner points of the plastic brake arm ends a bit. (With the brakes mounted, move the brakes from stowed to deployed to see where they need to be ground to clear the topsheets.) If you do a heavier grind, you could go an additional 10mm or so. So with a mild inner tip grind, "90" brakes could probably fit 101mm width ski, "100" brakes could fit a 112mm ski, "110" brakes could fit a 118mm ski, and "130" brakes could fit a 140mm ski. This is without even bending the brake arms.

[Havn]

You might find the the stuff below helpful. It was originally posted by 1000-oaks back around page 20 of this thread:

Some brake arm measurements taken on a Tecton heel, measured from the inside of the tips of the plastic ends. Might help folks figure out what they actually have, and what ski width the brake will fit.

Stated--- Unmounted Arm ------ Tips at ----------- Tips Fully
--Size-------- (tip to tip) ------------Topsheet -------- Deployed

90 --------------- 135 --------------------- 91 ------------------ 110
100 -------------- 152 ------------------- 102 ----------------- 122
110 --------------- 157 ------------------- 108 ----------------- 130
120 ------------- 170 -------------------- 130 ----------------- 147


Some details:

-- There seems to have been some brakes labeled "115mm" in 2017 that were actually 110mm brake arms.

-- Any of the brake arms can fit skis about 8mm wider than the "Tips at Topsheet" measurement if you grind off the inner points of the plastic brake arm ends a bit. (With the brakes mounted, move the brakes from stowed to deployed to see where they need to be ground to clear the topsheets.) If you do a heavier grind, you could go an additional 10mm or so. So with a mild inner tip grind, "90" brakes could probably fit 101mm width ski, "100" brakes could fit a 112mm ski, "110" brakes could fit a 118mm ski, and "130" brakes could fit a 140mm ski. This is without even bending the brake arms.

Thanks. I saw this post, but was just a bit confused at what the "Tips at Topsheet" means. Based on the description, am I right to understand that if I don't grind down the plastic tips of the 90mm brake, then the widest ski I would be able to fit it on is a ski with a 91mm waist?

I have a 100 mm brake going on a 108 ski and it test fitted with ease. I am mounting them this weekend and will report back

Thanks! Good info. This is without the need for any sort of filing down of the plastic tips?

I've seen all the brakes except the 90mm (82?) but from what I've seen i would go 90 and do a slight bend if needed. I'm mounting 100s on my 94mm skis because it's what i have and i haven't found any 90s for a reasonable price at this point.

I'll report back once they're mounted with pics.

Cool, thanks, much appreciated.


Overall, I'm a bit undecided between this and the Shift. Based on my understanding, both are good 1-quiver bindings with the Shift leaning a bit more to the downhill side (alpine toe, more elasticity, etc...) while the Tecton leans more to the touring side (lighter, more riser settings, ability stay locked in during transitions, etc...). I grew up boarding, but just started transitioning to skiing last season. Was and am lucky enough to be able to semi-perma borrow a friend's extra extra extra set of skis (BD Boundary 100 with downhill bindings). Towards the end of last season, I was able to carve down not too steep blacks at the resorts. However, overall, I'm generally not a hardcharger even as a boarder.

I understand that I still have a ways to go before doing any big touring adventures, but would like to get myself a pair of skis and not have to perma-borrow my buddy's skis. Likely will be skiing the resort more often than not, but would like to eventually go on some day tours as well, and maybe some longer ones knowing full well that I may suffer a bit more compared to if I went with a full dedicated light touring binding.