Thread: MFD Alltime or Marker Baron ?

I've just bought Majesty Velvet 170 for my girlfriend and need to decide which option will be the best.
Baron: weight - 2.450
MFD: weight - 1.200 + binding at least 2.000
Stack height is for sure big +, however on the other hand there is weight, almost 1.000g more.
One thing also concerns me, for the size S/M total lenght of the plates is 581mm isn't it too much for such short skis - 170cm ?

It comes down to opinion. Both systems have their pros and cons, and I think you covered them well.

I can tell you that I haven't found the stack height on Dukes to be a problem, and my gf likes her Barons on her 168 S3s.

Personally, I'm concerned of the effects of the MFD on the ski's flex.

unless she's hucking some hudge cliffs or is a real fatty i don't see a reason to get the mfd's.

We're going to need pictures..

If you already have a binding that is compatible with MFD, then go with MFD. They are cheaper, have a lower stack height, and ski better.

The MFD plate allows the ski to flex way more than any other AT binding.

Another thing to consider is whether the bindings you're putting on the MFD can accept touring soles, and if you're going to care about that.

Neither of that. She is thin and quite a beginner. I am also concerned how will plates effect on flex, especially when the skis are so short...
Barons seems to be the best option for her.

I have a friend who works ski patrol up on Hood and she rides barons. No issues that I am aware of and she rips pretty hard.

Originally Posted by josef

I have a friend who works ski patrol up on Hood and she rides barons. No issues that I am aware of and she rips pretty hard.

There you go. Case closed.

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

There you go. Case closed.

but he's concerned about the flex, man!

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

There you go. Case closed.

Any other questions you guys need definitive answers to?

Marker touring bindings don't affect flex much, the heel-end of the frame is free to slide on the rear baseplate.

i can't believe it took this long:

barons mounted on mfds, best of both worlds.

with trekkers

You guys are too nice.

We're going to need pics of the girl. naked as possible. to make an accurate recommendation.

Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn

with trekkers

Mounted on swap plates with inserts?

I already asked for picture.

dynaduke swap plates on inserts on 3 pairs of Rax.

Get the Tours, they are a pound lighter per pair and ski just fine...I don't understand everyone's obsession with clunky, heavy "touring" setups...

I guess the MFD concept is cool for the 5 skiers who actually ski hard enough that they actually think they will blow up any other binding, but its the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen, not to mention the weight of that setup...

I think there is an unrealistic industry-wide paranoia of "plastic-y" bindings not being bomber enough...

I agree with Powdurr about the Tour's, especially if weight is such a concern of yours. If she doesn't leave the ground on a regular basis she will be fine and porbably really like the weight savings...(SPAM ALERT) I have a couple new pair of F12 tour smalls for a good price if your interested...

Since no pics of the slender maiden are forthcoming,

HIJACK

I have a set of mounted but not used black MFD'ds for Look pivots, with screws, for $200 shipped. Look unused. Never seen snow.

I am just gonna shoulder the bitches and bootpack it.

A ski bum with an alpine set up & no $ for AT boots & bindings can be touring (except of course AVIY GEAR ) for the price of the MFD's and some skins ... since they are young they can suck up the weight penalty

a skinny beginner GF wouldn't know or care about stack height,ski flex, or any fucking thing unless you told her, she would notice a setup that is heavy but she would likely just think she sucks

So I would say get the Barons or some used FR+ would be even cheaper, lighter,durable, proven design & they would ski fine

Originally Posted by Powdurr

Get the Tours, they are a pound lighter per pair and ski just fine...I don't understand everyone's obsession with clunky, heavy "touring" setups...

I guess the MFD concept is cool for the 5 skiers who actually ski hard enough that they actually think they will blow up any other binding, but its the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen, not to mention the weight of that setup...

I think there is an unrealistic industry-wide paranoia of "plastic-y" bindings not being bomber enough...

i dunno man. i'm a fat fuck. 6'2" 230 stark nekkid. don't worry, no pics coming. by the time i get all loaded up i'm sure i'm well over 250. not saying i crush it hard enough to need them but i ski pretty hard and i'm not so sure i trust some 12din touring bindings to hold me in. factor in the cost, i picked up new plates for $190 and i had the bindings, the fact that they really don't weigh all that much more than dukes, and the fact that they'll ski inbounds just like a normal alpine binding and i'm sold.

edit: add to all this the fact that for $80 you can have them on another set of skis is pretty nice as well.

Originally Posted by nobueno

i dunno man. i'm a fat fuck. 6'2" 230 stark nekkid. don't worry, no pics coming. by the time i get all loaded up i'm sure i'm well over 250. not saying i crush it hard enough to need them but i ski pretty hard and i'm not so sure i trust some 12din touring bindings to hold me in. factor in the cost, i picked up new plates for $190 and i had the bindings, the fact that they really don't weigh all that much more than dukes, and the fact that they'll ski inbounds just like a normal alpine binding and i'm sold.

For bigger guys like yourself, I understand wanting a bomber binding. I'm 6' but only weigh 160 and used to only shred on STH16s or Metal Sollys if I could, for fear a lighter, more plasticy binding might just explode. I've gone 180 degrees in the other direction and just got my first pair of tech bindings, and won't use a touring binding heavier than the tour. Never had a single problem with any bindings I've ever owned, from Atomic Race, Atomic Neox, pretty much most models of Sollys, and markers (I actually hate the way marker heel pieces "click" in, but other than that haven't had a problem). I'm no pro, but I ski hard, 10-20 foot drops on a daily basis and a couple 30 footers per season, steeps, straightlines, etc. Not a big park skier but will hit any of the biggest jumps and do some 3's and 5's.

Not sure what you mean by "not sure I trust a 12 din binding to hold me in". Do you require a din above 12? If so, obviously you need a higher din binding, but a 12 din is a 12 din, whether its on marker jesters, dukes, solly sth16s or solly sth12s. For downhill only it doesn't really matter, but anyone heading into the BC should probably get the lightest binding they can. I was laughing as my buddy was telling me about his new touring setup: Motherships and Dukes. That's fine for some sidecountry but damn I wouldn't want to shlep that setup around for anything more than a short lap. Big guys dropping big cliffs to ice on the reg might need bindings made of pure steel, but I'm convinced 99% of people using dukes or barons would be just fine on tours...

One word...plastics!

Originally Posted by Powdurr

... but I'm convinced 99% of people using dukes or barons would be just fine on tours...

One word...plastics!

you are likely in the right direction but you should check the thread on exploding Tours, it is a greater than 1% failure rate (at least on the 1st edition) May or may not have been rectified...

Originally Posted by jfost

you are likely in the right direction but you should check the thread on exploding Tours, it is a greater than 1% failure rate (at least on the 1st edition) May or may not have been rectified...

Ya, 1st gen tours were sketch. I haven't heard of any problems with the new ones...I've been rocking em just fine.

I like tha fact you can go from walk to ski mode on the fly with the MFD