Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    59

    New PLUM FREERIDES

    Just looking at the Plum Site and they now have the Plum "J'Envoie Du Gros" up as well as the YAK.

    http://fixation-plum.com/en/fixation...693400060.html

    As talked about before the YAK seems to be a plastic composite whereas I am hoping the new version "J'Envoie Du Gros" is full metal jacket. Anyone have any beta?

    Still no signs of brakes though....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    a buddy has a pair of those. as far as i could tell they are a YAK with blue and black anno.

    also, i don't get the whole yak / wider footprint thing. why not just get a regular guide and add a sollyfit plate or whatever, gain the same larger footprint (both are 50mm), about the same additional stack height, about the same weight, give or take, and then be able to swap bindings if you want?

    also, is anyone arguing that wider footprints make skis flex torsionally under foot less? that seems to be the argument for them?
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Posts
    15,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Leisg View Post
    Still no signs of brakes though....
    Does that round plug on the forward part of the heel piece look like it might be on a place to attach brakes? Or am I just a hopeless optimist?

    BTW, for your files, I got a quick and coherent response from Plum recently using this contact info:
    matthieu@fixation-plum.com
    Skype: Polux6873

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    mattheiu is sold. thumbs up there.
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    6,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper View Post
    Does that round plug on the forward part of the heel piece look like it might be on a place to attach brakes? Or am I just a hopeless optimist?

    ^^^ i think that's just the heel support post. :/
    In search of the elusive artic powder weasel ...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Posts
    15,780
    Quote Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister View Post
    ^^^ i think that's just the heel support post. :/
    Yeah, I was just thinking it looked possible to remove the plug and screw a brake in there.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Chamonix
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Leisg View Post
    the YAK seems to be a plastic composite whereas I am hoping the new version "J'Envoie Du Gros" is full metal jacket. Anyone have any beta?
    The full metal version at ISPO was labelled "J'Envoie Du Gros", so that seems to be the case. Although the YAK and Gros are both there at €550.

    Guide: Metal/composite, skinny mount, optional wider plastic mount plates.
    YAK: Metal/composite, wide metal mount
    Gros: Full metal, wide metal mount

    Marshall's Sollyfit comment is totally on-point. Guides plus one set of Sollyfits would be €20 cheaper and give more options. Sollyfits are still pretty unknown though especially in Europe so the wider Plums will still sell.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    912
    In this description:

    "Heel pad, to reduce the boot rolling play and the stress on the pins."


    I thought all you tech-junkies claimed having your heel "floating" doesn't affect the binding performance. Obviously it does.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Powdurr View Post
    I thought all you tech-junkies claimed having your heel "floating" doesn't affect the binding performance. Obviously it does.
    If you are talking about skiing performance, my experience is that skis ski the same with or without the heel pad. I've used DIY heel pads with my tech bindings for several years on two pairs of touring skis. Both pairs of skis ski the same with or without the heel pad.

    The heel pad has a purpose: it saves wear and tear on the heel pins, probably moreso when hucking (which I intentionally avoid at my advancing age and large butt physique). That's a good thing because heel pins do eventually fatigue and sometimes shear.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bravo Delta.
    Posts
    6,135
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    also, i don't get the whole yak / wider footprint thing. why not just get a regular guide and add a sollyfit plate or whatever, gain the same larger footprint (both are 50mm), about the same additional stack height, about the same weight, give or take, and then be able to swap bindings if you want?

    Quote Originally Posted by BamBam_540 View Post
    Marshall's Sollyfit comment is totally on-point. Guides plus one set of Sollyfits would be €20 cheaper and give more options.
    Werd....

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMAG0258.jpg 
Views:	327 
Size:	998.6 KB 
ID:	118130

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMAG0257.jpg 
Views:	398 
Size:	1.03 MB 
ID:	118131
    Last edited by iscariot; 07-09-2012 at 04:55 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Socialist View Post
    They have socalized healthcare up in canada. The whole country is 100% full of pot smoking pro-athlete alcoholics.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    Think I read somewhere else that they didn't, but it would have been neat if they matched the Duke mounting pattern.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Schruns
    Posts
    839
    The only fatigue i've had on with the heels is that the plastic under the pins became depressed a mil or so. I don't have a heel pad and was hitting jumps left and right. I was thinking the metal version would help this, but a heel pad is likely all I need.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper View Post
    Does that round plug on the forward part of the heel piece look like it might be on a place to attach brakes? Or am I just a hopeless optimist?

    BTW, for your files, I got a quick and coherent response from Plum recently using this contact info:
    matthieu@fixation-plum.com
    Skype: Polux6873
    Brakes? I have wholly given up on that idea. It can't be that fucking hard so I would assume Plum never had any intention of offering them.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,749
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Think I read somewhere else that they didn't, but it would have been neat if they matched the Duke mounting pattern.
    Would have been fantastic for current Duke/Baron/Tour users, but it sounds like Plum was worried that Marker might take legal action against them if they used the Duke screw pattern.

    Seriously lame.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,230
    this may be getting into way overspeculation territory, but it is TGR so here goes:

    i do like the idea marshall had of plates with plums, which seem much more versatile. my concern is the toe overhang creating leverage especially on the dynalooks which are narrower from my view vs. the sollyfits.

    this is the one way i could see the i have a huge wang version or whatever the fuck they are being better.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    59
    I couldn't resist and ordered myself up some j'envoie du gros.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342581802.384776.jpg 
Views:	152 
Size:	22.3 KB 
ID:	118459

    The base plate is not full metal but rather a composite like that of the yak. The quality is very good and stood up to the rigors of being placed on my living room floor. The footprint is really wide, of the skis I have lying around I would say the wootest would be the skinniest ski I would put it on.

    So to the question of which is better vs. dynalooks plus guides. I had both sitting around so I compared.

    The footprint of the new plum is much wider than the dynalook
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342581665.340076.jpg 
Views:	154 
Size:	23.6 KB 
ID:	118458
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342581854.931706.jpg 
Views:	145 
Size:	22.6 KB 
ID:	118460

    However stack height is where things get a little weird
    The heel stack height of the plum is considerably lower
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342581945.886017.jpg 
Views:	142 
Size:	27.1 KB 
ID:	118461

    However the toe is almost identical
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342581993.232724.jpg 
Views:	115 
Size:	25.5 KB 
ID:	118462

    Now the dynalook plates are the same height so the difference is in the plums themselves. Not sure what difference this will make to how they ski but we will see...

    Weight wise the plate plus guide seems the same to new plums, but no digital scales around to confirm.

    I guess it all depends on how much you buy into the theory of a wider footprint being better for bigger skis. I got this for a pair of custom skis I have coming that I am only planning on using outside the resort but if I was border line on the need for sometimes needing alpine bindings I would definitely go with the dynalooks. But these are all just conclusions from the sofa.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTGR Forums1342580901.888446.jpg 
Views:	47 
Size:	20.7 KB 
ID:	118450  

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    2 things -

    1. first off be VERY aware of how wide the binding reinforcement plate on your ski is... most/almost all non-metal top sheet skis are narrower than 70mm. if you mount 70mm footprint bindings outside the binding plate, you almost assuredly will pull the binding out. for sure DPS plates are ~60mm wide, and just about every brand i can think off of the top of my head (4frnt, moment, bluehouse, salomon, k2, rossi) are all narrower than 70mm.

    2. a wider binding plate will only add performance if the ski and boot and binding are all so torsionally flexible that they need additional support. this of course is possible, but typically those setups will not see a YAK or whatever. however, skis are skiable stiff, the boots are not made of jelly, and the binding actually retains your boot, then a wider plate will do literally nothing.
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    1. first off be VERY aware of how wide the binding reinforcement plate on your ski is... most/almost all non-metal top sheet skis are narrower than 70mm. if you mount 70mm footprint bindings outside the binding plate, you almost assuredly will pull the binding out. for sure DPS plates are ~60mm wide, and just about every brand i can think off of the top of my head (4frnt, moment, bluehouse, salomon, k2, rossi) are all narrower than 70mm.
    This seems like a damn good thing to know. Wonder if Plum is even aware of this?!?

    Leisg - lower "stack height" in the heel simply decreases the ramp angle. This is almost assuredly good thing, assuming your boots fit correctly. (Some people even shim the toe of their Dynafits to decrease this ramp angle.)
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    This seems like a damn good thing to know. Wonder if Plum is even aware of this?!?
    yes, i have discussed with them at length.
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    In your opinion, do they fail to understand the issue, just not care, or have some other reason for making a mount pattern that is unusable in most touring skis (if I understand your post correctly).

    Edit: They do mention this issue on their site. So I slightly over-reacted.
    Last edited by auvgeek; 07-18-2012 at 02:05 PM.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    In your opinion, do they fail to understand the issue, just not care, or have some other reason for making a mount pattern that is unusable in most touring skis (if I understand your post correctly).
    i can't say i know for sure if a binding would pull out or not, but it would be much more likely. i have not tested it, and i don't know the exact specs of *that* many other brands...

    i don't think there would be an issue on a full metal top sheet ski and i don't *think* (<-opinion, not fact, and not tested) there would be an issue with a full edge to edge carbon ski, but pullout here is certainly possible.

    these bindings will be pretty risky IMO on most (and more than likely all) fiberglass skis, unless the user verifies 100% the binding plate is at least 80mm (i.e. the entire screw goes into it) - dps hybrids are ~65mm...

    hopefully that clarifies?
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    i should add that plum is offering a 50mm wide mount version, based on my (and others, i assume) conversations with them. that is the same basic width as a dynaduke plate, and PLENTY wide IMO... and will actually fit into basically all skis.

    so just buy those.
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    59
    Yeah, I had the same concerns that Marshal points out regarding binding plate width which is exactly why I got them for a pair of custom skis I have coming so as to ensure a plus 80mm width.

    While I agree with Marshal on some points, where I do think footprint width is going to start having an impact is as companies experiment more with convex bases. Now this is all ignorant physics but my feeling is the width of the footprint will make a less twitchy experience. Think short bars versus wide bars on a bike. Now on a flat base this isn't so much of an issue but the addition of a convex base brings an element of inherent instability into the mix.

    As I say, just feeling rather than knowledge but with DPS, surface releasing full convex base skins and on3p with the semi convex PF we will see.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Mexitana
    Posts
    2,474
    dps has a metal mounting plate now in the ski? AL material?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    33,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Leisg View Post
    I do think footprint width is going to start having an impact is as companies experiment more with convex bases. Now this is all ignorant physics but my feeling is the width of the footprint will make a less twitchy experience. Think short bars versus wide bars on a bike.
    You're not really thinking this through completely are you?
    Quote Originally Posted by Downbound Train View Post
    And there will come a day when our ancestors look back...........

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •