Results 1 to 25 of 32
Thread: New PLUM FREERIDES
-
07-09-2012, 03:04 AM #1Registered User
- 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....
-
07-09-2012, 08:00 AM #2
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?
-
07-09-2012, 08:42 AM #3
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
-
07-09-2012, 09:23 AM #4
mattheiu is sold. thumbs up there.
-
07-09-2012, 09:23 AM #5
-
07-09-2012, 09:33 AM #6
-
07-09-2012, 10:01 AM #7Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- Chamonix
- Posts
- 1,012
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.
-
07-09-2012, 10:29 AM #8
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.
-
07-09-2012, 10:39 AM #9
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.
-
07-09-2012, 04:44 PM #10
-
07-09-2012, 04:58 PM #11Registered User
- 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
-
07-10-2012, 01:12 AM #12
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.
-
07-10-2012, 03:01 PM #13Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
- Posts
- 157
-
07-10-2012, 11:20 PM #14
-
07-11-2012, 09:03 AM #15Registered User
- 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.
-
07-17-2012, 09:37 PM #16Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 59
I couldn't resist and ordered myself up some j'envoie du gros.
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
However stack height is where things get a little weird
The heel stack height of the plum is considerably lower
However the toe is almost identical
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.
-
07-18-2012, 11:46 AM #17
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.
-
07-18-2012, 12:27 PM #18Registered User
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
- Location
- SW CO
- Posts
- 5,588
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
-
07-18-2012, 12:34 PM #19
-
07-18-2012, 12:47 PM #20Registered User
- 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
-
07-18-2012, 01:50 PM #21
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?
-
07-18-2012, 01:56 PM #22
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.
-
07-18-2012, 05:45 PM #23Registered User
- 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.
-
07-18-2012, 06:18 PM #24
dps has a metal mounting plate now in the ski? AL material?
-
07-18-2012, 07:03 PM #25
Bookmarks