Blizzard IQ Max - one screw mounting plate

[Core Shot]

Pretty neat system - wonder if they had problems with the old duke system and that is why they had to widen the sliding plate.

Anyone have any feedback? Is this system better than the old one?

Do they really mean that it is open source? Or are they only meaning that you can open source your bindings?

see here:
http://www.blizzardsportusa.com/Technology/IQMaxSlider.html
http://www.blizzardsportusa.com/Technology/Bindings.html

OTOH, the IQMAX slider itself is $65
http://www.shopatron.com/products/productdetail/IQ+Max+Slider/part_number=610900/1548.1.1.1.0.0.0.0.0?

http://www.blizzardsportusa.com/assets/technology/slider%20green.jpg

The Slider is extremely innovative because it is a true system interface that provides all of the system benefits, tremendous versatility, power, adjustability, & flex but allows you to use any binding of any type.

This year Blizzard introduced the new fully integrated IQ MAX. IQ Max is a new IQ system that functions in exactly the same way as the original IQ system but the rails are moved to a wider position on the ski. The original IQ rails are placed at 37mm wide and the new IQ Max rails are moved to 59mm wide. The results of this wider IQ platform are better leverage and more control over wider body skis. IQ Max simply makes wide skis feel narrow. IQ MAX is found on all Blizzard skis that are 80 mm or wider in the waist.

The Slider works with any IQ Max ski (and only IQ Max). You can mount ANY binding from ANY company onto the Slider (Alpine, Tele, and AT). Therefore, you could have one pair of Blizzard Skis with three different Slider set ups depending on what you felt like doing that day. (this saves you from having to buy multiple pairs of skis)

The Slider also addresses the standing position adjustment problem. The Slider itself has 7 cm worth of adjustability. Bindings are then mounted on the Slider like traditional bindings are mounted on a flat ski. Therefore you have the additional opportunity to mount the binding wherever you like on the Slider, this results in essentially limitless standing position options. Watch how it works.

[Chowda]

I know nothing about the IQ Max other then what you posted, but it sure seems like the most appealing of all the binding systems. At least it gives you binding choice and offers something other then "improved carving sensation".

[klauss]

I picked up a pair of last years blizzard 187 argos skis recently with dukes with the older slider system. One of the benefits of the new system is the binding does not have to be specific to the slider system. The old slider system had a few select bindings made specifically for it and the binding could not be transferred to any other ski except one with the same system in place, so basically you were limited by both using the binding for another non blizzard ski and if the binding broke you would likely have less of a chance for repair/replacement/ spare parts. The new slider system has more versatility too as the old system only has two mounting points and I believe the new system has many more mounting point options.

I did some research before purchase and nothing really came up regarding issues with the older system, I just think it had less appeal as the binding was married to the ski and I think the re-design was a good move.

I have not had issues yet and really like the way it skis, but if I do brake the binding or the ski, scrambling to find a soon to be vintage donor binding/ski replacement could be a pain.

[jondrums]

so, is that slider plate just made out of plastic? you drill it and screw the bindings right into the plastic plate?

I think that is really cool. what a shame that it is only compatible with blizzard's skis.

[Core Shot]

I1NkOvpLH-Y

t
j56tYqp_8vw

[midwest_skier]

Saw a guy on the side of the skintrack on a longer tour who had lost the screw while he was skinning. Had to one ski all the way back to his car. Not bashing the idea, just reporting what I had seen.

[AKvS]

IQ system = :D

Skied the Blizzard Argos, Titan and Zeus pretty recently during a Ski test weekend (in Sweden = HARDpack in the morning and bumps in the afternoon) and they came out on the top of my list in their category!

This is mostly due to the fact that they ski great but also due to the versatility the IQ system supplies. Having one ski with a plate of alpine bindings and a plate of dynafits would be a really good and versatile setup to travel with. According to the Blizzard guy they had very little problem with the system, he also moved the binding back a few steps inbetween runs so that the ski would fit the skier.

Just imagine not having to think about how badly the ski-shop will fuck it up. Just move the binding back and forth according to your preference for the day!

I'm looking forward to buying a Titans as my next pair of touring/allmountain/inbounds ski.

[jmars]

I have a pair of Titans Cronus's......last years IQ system......I love the ski. The idea behind the binding mounting sold me. As another noted.....check the screws....I used locktight blue on them and I haven't had any issues. My screws never came loose but I figured it was a good idea coming from my snowboards where binding do come loose. I have dukes on my mine now but not orginally.This ski got me into touring

The new IQMax is awesome......I'm now jealous of that plate.

[XavierD]

I have had no problem with they system, used last spring and so far this year.

I think its pretty cool. change mount point and binding.

[adrenalated]

Just bought a pair of Answers with the new IQ Max plate. Skied the Answer in demo and thought it killed it, but the thing that sealed the deal was that I can use the ski for both alpine and tele.
Should be getting them the end of this week. Am a little nervous about the single screw, but am stoked. Loctite seems smart, will probably use that.

[kkerley33]

Blizzard didn't have any major problems with the old IQ system. In fact, they still use it on all skis under 80mm width. The old system track had a width of 39mm while the new system is 56mm wide. They went with a wider track to allow the use of some of the newer bindings with wider mounting patterns. The marketing spin is that the wider track also allows the ski to have better edge response (same argument made for bindings with a wider mounting pattern).

I am using the old IQ system with the dukes and am currently working on a "swap" plate for that system that would allow the use of "some" other mfg's bindings. The main problem is finding a binding with a mounting pattern less than 34mm center bolt to center bolt so the bolts actually would fit in between the track on a "new plate". I actually got the idea to try this because Kreitler was mounting regular bindings on IQ skis by "grinding" his own spacers to fill in the space. I am just trying to expand upon that by creating an entire plate. Yes, it would be easier just to buy new skis with the new IQ max, but that wouldn't be any fun...especially when I have three sets that arleady utilize the old system.

BTW, it is also great for traveling. I can travel with two or three sets of skis in the ski bag, plus my wifes skis...throw my bindings in my carry on and still be under weight. The personal record is 4 sets of skis (2 IQ, 2 with Bindings, two sets of poles, 2 pair of pants and gloves) with a weight of exactly 50lbs. The IQ bindings went in my carryon.

[Core Shot]

Wow. I wonder if we could get a plate machined out of Ti or Alu that you could flat mount to a ski to accept the IQ plate?


1) would those machined lips be strong enough?

2) did Blizzard patent their channel system? Can one of you patent law nerds check on that issue?

3) I offer one important idea, which is to close the front end of the channel. If the bindings slid in from the back only, that would make screw failure far less catastrophic. If you slid to the front of the channel and stopped, you could at least hobble down the mountain. It might just work.

[El Chupacabra]

Wow. I wonder if we could get a plate machined out of Ti or Alu that you could flat mount to a ski to accept the IQ plate?


1) would those machined lips be strong enough?

2) did Blizzard patent their channel system? Can one of you patent law nerds check on that issue?

3) I offer one important idea, which is to close the front end of the channel. If the bindings slid in from the back only, that would make screw failure far less catastrophic. If you slid to the front of the channel and stopped, you could at least hobble down the mountain. It might just work.

Search for a post by Flexon Phil on the separate mounting channel. He put up a photo of one that he took off another, skinnier Blizzard ski (don't remember the model) -- instead of being molded into the ski like the Argos, Zeus, etc., it screwed to the topsheet. You would basically need to make a copy of it.

I think this is a great idea.

[jondrums]

I ordered one of the iq max plates to play with...

[PB]

How wide are the IQ and IQ max plates?

[Flexon Phil]

How wide are the IQ and IQ max plates?

37 and 51mm respectably.

[Core Shot]

Final thought that occured to me as I was lying in bed.

How much would one long metal plate affect the flex of the ski?

Could you or should you build an IQMAX adapter plate in 2 pieces instead of one?
You could use a screw insert into the middle of the ski, and have a front plate and a rear plate to hold the IQMAX. That way the ski could free flex more easily.

[PB]

37 and 51mm respectably.

Thank you kind sir!

[mtnjam]

37 and 51mm respectably.

does this also apply to the IQ tele adapter plates? I've got a pair of Argos (white and orange, 07/08?) that I want to give this a try on, they're such fun skis with the "Dukes", but I'm not sure if I ordered the tele plates from Base Camp that they'd be the right width.

[El Chupacabra]

Could you or should you build an IQMAX adapter plate in 2 pieces instead of one?
You could use a screw insert into the middle of the ski, and have a front plate and a rear plate to hold the IQMAX. That way the ski could free flex more easily.

Or might having 2 plates cause the IQ binding to bind on the rails? (what if they don't flex more-or-less the same, at the same time? Possibly too much stress on the center screw?)

[jondrums]

I got my IQmax plates in the mail last night. A few notes:

*the quality is surprisingly low. No defects, just a crappily made part. I think it'll work great anyway
*it appears that it is a low grade plastic part, but with a thin metal topsheet (probably for screw retention).
*Not so light, but reasonable for adding to an alpine ski. I would hesitate to think about using this with dynafits, it just seems wrong
*the instructions say not to use the "5th" screw when mounting dukes. WTF - that won't end well! There is no place to mount it, so I consider these incompatible with dukes/baron.

I originally had thoughts that maybe I could make some plates that accept IQMax sliders, but I am very much reconsidering it. I feel the concept is extremely sound, but their implementation leaves a little to be desired. If I do something like this, it'll be with a slider plate I design.

[Core Shot]

^^^ that is so sad to hear.

Blizzard makes a hard charging big ski that made me think the plate would stand up to hucks and hard landings.

If you think dynafit will pull out, then tele is for sure off the options list.

Thanks for making the effort.
I can paypal some beer money for your expenses.

[adrenalated]

I actually didn't find the quality to be particularly poor. It's a die cast part, so yeah, it's not as perfect and beautiful as a CNC machined part, but it's fine.
Light weight is not the system's strong suit for sure though.

Core Shot, don't think he was implying Dynafits will pull out, just that it's too heavy for Dynafits to make sense.

[jondrums]

^^ yeah, I'm not concerned with pull-out at all. I went back and "bolded" my statement:
I think it'll will work great!

I didn't mean to bash Blizzard. Its a cool product for what it is: heavy but quick-swappable.

[irish51]

Is there a way to mount IQ bindings on another brand of ski? Would the slider help?

[Gordyman]

The IQ system is not complex, and from Jondrums's take, nor is it ideal. A 3" wide C-channel and mating slider could be fabricated to mount any binding on any flat ski. Goddamn it, I have a machinist friend and I am going to have a chat.

[Camber Sidecut]

The IQ system is not complex, and from Jondrums's take, nor is it ideal. A 3" wide C-channel and mating slider could be fabricated to mount any binding on any flat ski. Goddamn it, I have a machinist friend and I am going to have a chat.

Are you thinking something similar to NTN toe piece plate (on the left)?

http://www.bergsskishop.com/images_prod/999/9168.jpg

[Gordyman]

I am not an engineer or good at drawing things on the computer but something like the picture below. Materials used and how the binding plate would affix to the c-channel I don't know. Maybe two J-channels would be lighter but would probably require more screws in the ski.
75547

[jondrums]

^^^ I've been working on something like this.

the main problem I'm having is that the total package is going to be fairly tall - probably about 14mm added to the stack height. I can't see any way around this at the moment, and I fear its too much added stack.

[Gordyman]

Have you made a working proto?

[snowful]

The problem will be in making the system come in at a reasonable weight and retain adequate amounts of strength and durability. See the ess/Atomic binding.

[El Chupacabra]

Another issue is in the stiffening effect of any plate attached to the ski.

A channel like Gordyman posted would work, but it would be fairly thick (~1cm) to accommodate a standard binding screw. If made from aluminum, something that thick could really stiffen the binding plate area of the ski, like a racing deflex plate. That might not be desireable.

[Gordyman]

I concur. The mounting plate should not be aluminum, instead a more flexible material, something like the plates on the Volant Fat Bastard. The heel and toe should be separate, mitigating stiffness.

Shit, the ideas that keep popping up in my mind remind me of srsosbso's brilliant work:
DIY Alpine Touring binding. - Teton Gravity Research Forums

[jondrums]

If the system were set up so that it weighed about 200grams extra per ski, and didn't stiffen the ski any more than a normal pair of bindings, would the 14mm of extra stack height scare you off?

[Gordyman]

14mm stack height seems small sacrifice for what is gained. But I've never toured and I suck at skiing so you should find out for yourself.

I think a Tyrolia RailFlex system has potential. The base plates are available cheap. I guess there are two incarnations, RailFlex I and RailFlex II.
http://www.tyrolia.sk/viazanie/railflex/rfd12_silver_red.jpg

[windaveski]

I am new to this thread but find it very intersting. Seems it has gone quiet for a while. Anybody made progress on this?

I have a pair of Answers with both alpine and tele (BD 01s). They rip either way but are way to heavy for touring. I'm going to mount NTN on them later today.

All the blizzard skis I have seen are to heavy for touring. Are there some that are OK??

As for the adapter to a flat ski I think using the already available blizzard plate makes a lot of sense. It is certainly lighter than an equivalent thickness of aluminum. As for the tracks, composite (carbon fiber) seems like the right way to go but this takes it out of the hands of the home builder/machinist. Anybody out there have the expertise/equipment for this?