Author Topic: Head Power Rail bindings for 100mm skis  (Read 1493 times)

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Head Power Rail bindings for 100mm skis
« on: August 30, 2010, 11:34:37 am »
Ron, Phil, Jbotti:

As you may know, I'm considering the Ullr's Chariot for a 1-ski western quiver.? That means use in powder, but also on groomed (I hesitate to classify any Colorado or Utah trails as hard packed).? My last several pair of skis have had the Tyrolia railflex system.? I like the simplicity of being able to move the bindings forward and backward on the ski, it doesn't get in the way of the ski's flex, and there is a little bit of stack height associated with the rail.

I also am aware that powder specific skis are typically flat mounted and that snow feel is more important than a free round flex.

So share with me your thoughts about recommended bindings for the Ullr's Chariot.? What is the best compromise between a flat mount binding and a Railflex system binding?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2010, 01:52:57 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Hey Ron (and Phil):

A quick check on Epic and I stumbled across a thread where Sierra Jim is pretty negative about the Griffon/Jester??? Says that its not really wider, that the different feel is just because it has more stand height (and this is before Schizo).? He also said something about being binding brand manager or something like that.? In your opinion(s) was this an objective post and information from his point of view, or does he have some axes to grind?

The Griffon-Schizo has desirable fore-aft adjustment but is expensive.?
« Last Edit: August 30, 2010, 01:19:31 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
well, all I can say is I have them on all my ski's.  light and dependable. what did you want the binding and ski to do?

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
I will throw in my two cents. To me the schizo is a great idea but it falls short because your max movement is something like 7mm. That 's not very much I would not pay up for that amount. I will say that the only pair of skis I tried with Jetsers I really liiked the binding. Railfex bindings allow 1.5cm in each direction which is better than anything else out there. It is also the easiest binding to travel with because you can slide it right off, and if you travel with two pairs of skis both with railflex plates and bindings you need only travel with one set of binders. The negative on the Railflex is the stand height. It's lilke having a lifter on a powder ski. Many don't like this. I actually find it easier to get them on edge especially on harder snow. If moving the binding 1.5cm in each dircetion is real important, the railflex is the answer as the perceived negative on stand height is more than offset with the ability to move the center point.

I buy all my bindings cheap. Last years bindings are as good as this years. I generally buy 14 din bindings because when I set them on 9 or 10 I am about in the middle. You can buy Mojo 15 bindings right now at Levelninesports for $139. The brakes are around 100mm wide and will work fine for a 101mm waisted ski. IMO that's all you need unless you want to go railflex for the flexibility on moving the binding.

I personally think bindings are a commodity, with one exception, the old Markers did suck. Solly, Tyrolia and Look all make super bindngs. Buy to be in the middle on din and buy them cheap!!


jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
John:?

I thought the Schizo had 3 cm forward and backward, a total of 6cm??
Thanks very much for the 2 cents worth.? What I was looking for.
And, since for my boot sole length I only use a DIN of 6, I get lower range bindings to get in the middle (usually 4-12).

So what are you going to mount on your Ullr Chariots???? ?>:D
« Last Edit: August 30, 2010, 10:51:13 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
yes, jim you are correct, personally, i don't move bindings. Pick a good spot, drill em' and ski em' move them if you don't like the mount. i will take lightweight dependable bindings anyday over heavy duty Mojo's but that's just me. I have really liked the griffon and jesters very happy with them. I have them on Piglrims up to powder boards. i just put Dukes on my Icelantic Keepers. The look TT's are another binding as well. Phil has some good pricing, not sure what he has left though.

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
I bought a pair of Look PX 14 XXL's on sale a year or so ago and I never mounted them on anything. They are sitting in the garage waiting for a 100-110mm waisted to ski. I have never noticed the weight of a binding while skiing, only while carrying. For resort skiing I pay no attention to the weight of the binding. Actually for resort sikiing a heavier binding that has metal in I think is preferable in that it holds up better. Usually 12 din bindings have more plastic and therefore are lighter. If you are hiking and carrying your skis, weight makes a difference.

BTW I would not use dukes as your every day resort binding. The piece that the binding connects to is all plastic. All over TGR where guys are skiing dukes 100-150+ days per year guys are complaining about the plastic chipping and the binding becoming problematic. The guy that mounted my first pair pointed all this out to me and said "don't use these bindings all the time in a resort setting because they will wear out on the plastic". I don't ski mine enough to worry, but it's not designed as a resort binding and should not be solely used as one. Great for skinning though!! Also ramp angle is flat so it is a slightly different feel.

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739

Lynn bought a couple of pairs of Head railflex bindings (but not the rails) for $5 a couple of years back from a ski store going out of business.  I have one pair on the Watea 84's and she has the other on her Muanga's.  just requires a bit of brake bending.  ;D ;D
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Gee john, you wouldn't use a duke as an everyday binding?  Really?  Thanks so much. Here I was thinking an AT binding to be used for skinning and hiking would be perfect for front side groomers and lift served terrain...  ::)

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
I agree but a lot of guys do use them as ther only binding and ski on them 150 days per year, and they all have problems with the Duke because the plastic wears away. For the amount that I ski one binding (too many different pairs of skis) it really doesn't matter. I ski my dukes in bounds no more than ten days a year and they work great for that.

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739

That's ok, I wasn't considering the Dukes for my needs.  ;D  Am considering the Head/Fischer Power Rail.  Similar to RailFlex, but wider and lower and lighter.  Also considering the Griffon (non-Schizo).
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
GOOD! you don't need them and make no sense unless you are hiking. Still lovin' the griffon choice, did you call Phil? Pretty sure he has some around on smokin' good prices.... 

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
Wow just looked at this video on the Power Rail. Assuming that the ability to move for and aft 1.5cm remains on these, I would put these on every ski that doesn't have race plates. They have lowered the stand height which was really the only issue with the Railflex skis where you would mount flat. It looks like a great improvement over the old system. There won't be any deals on these this year but next year these will be the ticket!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkRxZGmCKyo

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
That was my initial impression when I stumbled across them.? Half way between a flat mount and a railflex (and liked the wider and lighter part as well).? And MUCH simpler to adjust to different size boots in case you want to let someone else try your skis because the front and back adjust separately (to accomodate the rental fleet).? It may have been out last year, but this is the first I have come across it.

And actually, I think the range of adjustment is much greater than 1.5 cm, because you can put your toe-piece and heel-piece wherever you want (including screwing it up).? You could do that before but you had to remove the binding and change the location of the rail on the bottom of the binding -- now it's all on top.? Sort of a hybrid of railflex and rental/demo bindings??

Initial install--  Slide the toe on, flip the lever to lock it in place, slide the heel on, flip the lever to lock it in place.
Move binding forward 2 cm -- release the toe, move it forward 4 marks, lock. Release the heel, slide it forward 4 marks, lock it.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2010, 03:00:08 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."