Marker Jester GW compatibility question

[phatboy64]

I have a pair of Jester binding that came out the year before Marker released the ID version. So that don’t have the ID marking but they do have adjustable AFDs and the AFD metal sliding plate lines up with the AFD pad on the bottom of my boot. “Technically “ these aren’t GW compatible. My question is if everything lines up and the AFD height is correct wouldn’t they be fine to use with GW soles?

[1000-oaks]

If you're able to properly adjust the AFD height, I'd run it.

[waxoff]

That boot toe looks a bit wedged into the binding, no? Will the lowest afd setting also allow the boot heel to fall freely and low enough to be able to engage the heel piece if binding was mounted, or at least sitting flush on a flat surface?

[phatboy64]

That boot toe looks a bit wedged into the binding, no? Will the lowest afd setting also allow the boot heel to fall freely and low enough to be able to engage the heel piece if binding was mounted, or at least sitting flush on a flat surface?

I think it would but not sure. I took them off a pair of skis that I mounted a set of shifts on. My memory is not as good as it used to but I think I remember that a GW boot would click in with enough clearance to allow the AFD plate to slide freely.
I think I will mount them on a 2x4 and double check. I would hate to have a perfectly good pair of bindings collecting dust thinking that the won’t work with GW soles.

[YoEddy]

I had a few of the pro version of that binding and they wouldn't work because unlike the that one the pro didn't have the floating AFD pad. I was told by the Marker rep that it wouldn't work regardless and shouldn't be used with the GW sole because the interface angle is not compatible. With that I purged all of my Jester Pros and started buying the ID versions because it just wasn't worth the mental space to worry about incompatibility.

[ZomblibulaX]

I’m running roughly the same setup (krypton w/GW soles in a jester pro of the same vintage) and it’s very much tight. But it very nearly passed Marker’s don’t-tear-the-slip-of-paper test. I had already shaved the rubber lugs either side of the sole afd to work in pivots, and it’s still a little too tight. But elastic travel return is okay even without the sliding afd.

Being more concerned with retention than release, I’m okay with it. YMMV.

[waxoff]

I think I will mount them on a 2x4 and double check.

Atta way to go!

[phatboy64]

So I mounted it on a wood plank. It looked promising but the AFD is tight plus it look a tad off.I can adjust it to be under the boot AFD but it doesn’t help. So much for having an extra set of bindings.

[YoEddy]

... Being more concerned with retention than release, I’m okay with it. YMMV.

Yeah that changes with time!