Check Out Our Shop
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 123

Thread: Marker Duke Review

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins
    Posts
    803
    Seems to me like there are different needs for different types of skiers and what they're doing. So obviously different bindings can meet those different needs (kinda like skis).

    For me the Duke will work perfectly. It'll probably see most of it's use either in the actual ski resorts or on Loveland pass. Since there's a road going up Loveland pass, there's really no need for me to use a lighter weight, switch on-the-go bindings. Just something burly I can use for backcountry kickers and such.

    On the other hand if you're touring up the an entire mountain, lighter weight bindings with more options available definitely seem the way to go, less weight, less fatigue, less fuss.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    22,532
    for those still on the fence, this review from backcountry.com has to convince you:

    duke marker bindings

    Posted by backcountry.com addict:

    You best get yosef a pair of these less you be a chump trying to climb up the hill with some sorry ass old school dubtronic 2000's.
    yesterday i done showed up on da scene with these bad motherf'ers and all the beyotches be like "waa?" and i'm all like "yo fo sho, mang" and then they says like "oh no you d' int!" and then i slap them in the face and say "check yosef, foo".
    Then we all chill and lay back in the cut sippin on cognac and sprites while all the ladies be diggin how tight i done rocked my setup, son.
    Kill all the telemarkers
    But they’ll put us in jail if we kill all the telemarkers
    Telemarketers! Kill the telemarketers!
    Oh we can do that. We don’t even need a reason

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    FYI it wasn't this addict that wrote that. Although from that review I think I need another pair. Solid endorsement.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,058
    to those of you with dukes, how much play do you have after drilling them? ie if i drill for 317 and eventually get new boots which are 306, will i have to redrill?

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Too Far South
    Posts
    5,269
    Since its a plate binding you wouldn't have to re-drill, you could just adjust the bindings and be 1.1 cm ahead of the old center


    unless you mean re-drilling to re-center right?
    For sure, you have to be lost to find a place that can't be found, elseways everyone would know where it was

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,058
    Quote Originally Posted by laseranimal View Post
    Since its a plate binding you wouldn't have to re-drill, you could just adjust the bindings and be 1.1 cm ahead of the old center


    unless you mean re-drilling to re-center right?
    i mean can i re-center the toe and heel piece for the smaller boot without having to redrill anything?

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    yes, by switching to tour mode......

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    SnoqWA
    Posts
    2,685
    Quote Originally Posted by grapedrink View Post
    i mean can i re-center the toe and heel piece for the smaller boot without having to redrill anything?
    the toe piece doesn't move, if thats what you're trying to suggest. you would just slide the heel up 1.1 cm as stated above, and wouldn't be quite centered anymore.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    22,532
    Quote Originally Posted by grapedrink View Post
    i mean can i re-center the toe and heel piece for the smaller boot without having to redrill anything?
    Your Jongness is showing.

    All AT bindings that are adjustable for different boots only have a moveable heel - the toe is always fixed.
    As long as you are within the binding range, no drilling is required.

    They are not like alpine demo bindings with a moveable toe.

    That is why everyone says yes, you can go smaller, but it puts your boot center further forward of the ski center.
    Kill all the telemarkers
    But they’ll put us in jail if we kill all the telemarkers
    Telemarketers! Kill the telemarketers!
    Oh we can do that. We don’t even need a reason

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    1,897
    It should only move the boot center forward about half of the 1.1cm, depending on the boot.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post
    Your Jongness is showing.

    All AT bindings that are adjustable for different boots only have a moveable heel - the toe is always fixed.
    As long as you are within the binding range, no drilling is required.

    They are not like alpine demo bindings with a moveable toe.

    That is why everyone says yes, you can go smaller, but it puts your boot center further forward of the ski center.
    hehe, well i've never seen the binding and everyone keeps talking about how its on a plate, most plates let you reposition the entire binding so it seemed like a reasonable question thanks

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    7,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post

    You best get yosef a pair of these less you be a chump trying to climb up the hill with some sorry ass old school dubtronic 2000's.
    yesterday i done showed up on da scene with these bad motherf'ers and all the beyotches be like "waa?" and i'm all like "yo fo sho, mang" and then they says like "oh no you d' int!" and then i slap them in the face and say "check yosef, foo".
    Then we all chill and lay back in the cut sippin on cognac and sprites while all the ladies be diggin how tight i done rocked my setup, son.
    [spitting coffee]bahahaha!

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    1,126
    All these real world reviews make me want to get a pair.....Already mounted PX15's on my Goliaths, but Dukes and Goliaths would make a killer resort/slackcountry setup. I guess another set of holes won't matter too much....
    Martha's just polishing the brass on the Titanic....

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    120
    Thought I'd share my 2 cents after skinning around Alta for the last two days
    Yesterday was my first day skiing on the Dukes with 183 Katanas.
    I decided to make my first run ever on them memorable so i skinned up and skied the main chute on Baldy. I don't have any experience with Freerides or other At bindings because i used Tour Wreckers last year. In tour mode they are great. I like how when you put it in tour mode, the bindings moves back a couple CM. My only gripe is that i wish the heel lifter had a few different height adjustments.

    The whole having to take your skis off to lock the bindings in doesn't bother me at all because i always take my skis off to relax at the top anyways.

    The duke is probably the most solid feeling bindings i have ever had. Ive skied on Look and Salomon's for the last 6 years and i like the feel of the dukes so much better. On a similar note I've always HATED Marker bindings until now.

    When i started skiing i couldn't even tell i was in an AT binding. In fact i ended up straight lining the bottom half of the cute and came out into some of the Knarliest Chunder ive ever skied. It was damn scary but the bindings held strong.

    Ill have to do another review once i start hucking on these things. But for now my only concern is the plate holding the heel to the ski is plastic. I've Broken a couple Titanium bindings before so im a little worried about only being held on by plastic.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    31

    Low DIN test results

    Love the Dukes so far. Solid, tough, no complaints.

    BUT it's worth mentioning the rears test out way low in the shop. Set on DIN 10 (the highest they'd "officially" do in the shop), the front falls right in the middle of the torque range it's supposed to release at. The rear however... to barely meet the desired spec force range for a 10 release, it's gotta actually be set at 11.5. So if you're setting at 16, I doubt it's coming out even at a 14 in reality.

    For what it's worth.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    4,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfmansbro View Post
    My only gripe is that i wish the heel lifter had a few different height adjustments.
    It has three heights (flat, med, high) ... just like Naxos, FR...

    you might not have realized that the lifter pushes all the way forward for the med hight.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    canada
    Posts
    2,058
    Quote Originally Posted by Poop*Ghost View Post
    It has three heights (flat, med, high) ... just like Naxos, FR...

    you might not have realized that the lifter pushes all the way forward for the med hight.
    the maximum climbing height on the duke is less than the middle height on the freeride. they should really fix this, wouldn't be hard..

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    VT
    Posts
    204

    1st day on Dukes

    181 Blizzard Titan 9's
    185#
    Sugarbush

    Fitrst day on this setup & am very pleased with the perfomance. I did not notice any slop in the toe piece. As a comparison I had taken the first couple of runs on Monster IM 82's, 182's with 914's. Two different skis, but I can say this the Titans with the Dukes will probably be my everyday ride, better edge hold than the heads, easier to initate turns and does not seem to give up anything at high speeds.

    Snow conditoins were eather ski soft snow in the guns or early season boiler plate. DId not get a chance to skin yet, nothing to skin to.

    Happy!!!!

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    46
    Anybody have any experience with the Jester...lots of great info on the duke but next to nothing on the jester?
    I'm not a Gynecologist, but i'll take a look

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Puget Sound
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by J-Mo View Post
    Love the Dukes so far. Solid, tough, no complaints.

    BUT it's worth mentioning the rears test out way low in the shop. Set on DIN 10 (the highest they'd "officially" do in the shop), the front falls right in the middle of the torque range it's supposed to release at. The rear however... to barely meet the desired spec force range for a 10 release, it's gotta actually be set at 11.5. So if you're setting at 16, I doubt it's coming out even at a 14 in reality.

    For what it's worth.
    I didn't find that problem on the Dukes and Jesters I've mounted, but it's a breath of fresh air considering most bindings I test release high. In my experience the heel design of these bindings, like the heels of Look and Rossi bindings, seems to always release much smoother and at the middle to lower end of the N-m range, though. Could also be my calibrator.
    -Thomas

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    125
    No shit: I saw a guy at Chinook Pass on Sunday with a broken pair of Dukes, the toe piece was cracked or something. I didn't look at it closely but he was bummed. Maybe he will post here and let us know what happened. He may have hit a rock, it was shallow.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Puget Sound
    Posts
    184
    Here's a bit of tech, or worthless details, what have you. Mounted a pair of Dukes on some Mantras yesterday and took some measurements.

    Heel lifter height:
    Medium = 27 mm of lift
    High = 57 mm of lift

    Stack height as measured between bottom of boot and top of ski:
    Minimum of 26 mm; measured at touring boot toe height, which is considerably lower than that for alpine boots.

    Garmont boot sole size of 317 mm and large Duke binding.

    DIN 8.5, skier code N (for release value reference).

    Initial function test results:
    Clockwise twist release @ 85 N-m (inside inspection range)
    Counter-clockwise @ 85 N-m
    Forward lean release @ 260 N-m (a little low, but nowhere near what J-Mo experienced)

    Pictures:

    Toe holes drilled


    Heel holes drilled


    Mounted


    Toe height for alpine (top) and touring boots (bottom)


    Stack height


    Toe


    Forward pressure


    The whole shebang
    Last edited by AKBckntry; 12-01-2007 at 10:47 PM.
    -Thomas

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    11,326
    I absolutely pounded on the dukes today at Targhee. All sorts of variable crud bump trench mank skiing at mach looney speeds. DIN at 9 and never even a hint of trouble. I'm 6'1" 210#. Solid binder.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    T-town, CO. USA
    Posts
    2,098
    I haven't tried the Dukes yet but I have mounted four pairs so far this season. I wonder about the slide lock interface on the heel icing up or getting nicked and failing to lock the heel back down.
    Also, the locking lever seems impossible to operate with gloves on and you must also have your ski off.
    Another thing I noticed was when in free-heel mode, it wasn't nearly as resistant to lateral flexing as I expected such a beefy binding to have. Kinda sloppy actually.
    So to go against most opinions here on this forum,I'm going to say that it is a heavy, expensive, flexy, over-DINed, non user-friendly, version of the Fritschi Freeride. Trust me, I wanted them to be the new "Fritschi Killer" on the market. Turns out, maybe not.

    P.S.- These things were never field tested between production and delivery, so essentially YOU are the R&D for this product. And don't think that they are ready for mass warranties or a recall... they sold every pair that they made this year. Good luck. I'm waiting for the first generation design to do a whole season before I plunk down the cash!
    Last edited by DropCliffsNotBombs; 12-02-2007 at 07:56 PM.
    Leave No Turn Unstoned!

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    8530' MST/200' EST
    Posts
    4,648
    dukes are trekkers that are lighter and dont suck.
    "If we can't bring the mountain to the party, let's bring the PARTY to the MOUNTAIN!"

Similar Threads

  1. MARKER DUKE UPDATE!!! ( Great news)
    By ptex1 in forum Gear Swap (List View)
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 12-18-2007, 10:43 PM
  2. Dynafit FR Aero and Marker Duke Review
    By laseranimal in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 09:29 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 01:34 PM

Posting Permissions

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