Page 5 of 21 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 512
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Amherst, Mass.
    Posts
    4,233
    Quote Originally Posted by lynchdogger View Post
    Actual elasticity numbers/percentages?
    How about actual quantitative information on "elasticity" for any alpine binding, whether AT or downhill?
    Then again, maybe even just a definition of "elasticity" in this context should come first...

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesp View Post
    BD only make tele bindings... why compare a tele binding to a tech?
    He meant the Fritschi Vipec AT "Tech" binding, distributed by BD in North America.
    For those stuck in the Northeast, check out the NE Rando Race Series and my avalanche course. (For other avalanche course providers anywhere, feel free to use any of my "homework" assignments for your own courses too.)

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southern NH
    Posts
    4,268
    Sure JS that would be right up your quantitative alley. Bring it.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using TGR Forums
    Last edited by lynchdogger; 01-06-2014 at 10:12 AM.
    The Passion is in the Risk

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    Nice writeup from Louie Dawson - http://www.wildsnow.com/11812/g3-ion...#comment-58018

    Note that all Ion's right now are pre-production / protos

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    6,227


    http://www.doglotion.com/ion-landed

    Well no denying that the marketing machine isn't firing on the new binding.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    399
    Lee - nice video. Is that the G3 Synapse? thank you

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    157
    Any word on the hole pattern? Match any existing tech patterns?

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    817
    ^ according to wild snow's blurb today the mount pattern is different than Dyanfit's, so looks like no

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    the big dirty
    Posts
    700
    I skied a pair mounted on some demo boards at the Coldsmoke Festival this weekend. This binding interests me more than the Vipec, and I only had a couple of runs.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20140222_143415.jpg 
Views:	946 
Size:	60.2 KB 
ID:	151354
    A bit of an unconventional setup. I've only ever skied those boots in autolocking race bindings. First of all, the plastic tabs were no help with stepping in, I imagine that on other boots with short boot welts (TLT6, Alien, etc...) they probably wouldnt help much. But what was really scary was that although I'm sure I was properly stepped in, I could feel the toe inserts moving out of the sockets on hard turns. Probably not much of an issue on Dynafit spec inserts, but something to look out for if you have something else...

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    That is insane that tech fittings are still so badly out of spec. What boot is that? No issue with Dynafit, Scarpa, Technica fittings in the ION for now but it seems so whacked that manufacturers can have such variation

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    Finally got around to getting these for testing.

    G3 Ions and G3 Empire Carbons

    Aluminimum shiny 7005 alloy anodized for all the Plum look-how-shiny-it-is form over substance gear fappage crowd.



    Demo track has 60mm adjustment. Standard binder is 22mm adjustment



    Forward pressure via spring in the heel


    Getting ready to shred the gnar of Ego Bowl for the TGR cred



    Meadowskippy pow turns on Whistler Bowl at 2pm



    Positive engagement in the toe. Doesn't seem have to the vagueness of tech binders with the heel spacing. Having skied icy moguls or slammed them sideways into crud to test how "elastic" they feel. Easy to setup. Looks pretty. Brakes that are nice and long and seem to deploy easily. That's it for now

  11. #111
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Juxtaposition
    Posts
    5,787
    I really hope G3 are rewarded with a solid binding for their efforts. I'll happily Sell Dynafit/Buy G3 if so.

    Lee - off topic question, but you mentioned it first: is the Empire as fully rockered as the Empress? A friend of mine has left some Empress skis in my ski room a few times this season and they are curvey. Your last photos does not look so much.
    Life is not lift served.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    They seem a lot less craptastic than the Onyx with that stupendously impractical mechanism of toe entry. But I'm old and cautious and will very slowly sneak into the backcountry with them rather than wholesale drink koolaid. Always remembering that 1st generation backcountry products are destined to have failures and quirks

    Empire is really rockered but curiously the tips don't flap around like say a Megawatt (which is just as rockered) so maybe its because they're not as banana-floppy as BD offerings. I'll snap a picture at some point

  13. #113
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Juxtaposition
    Posts
    5,787
    Thanks Lee.

    I reckon those plastic flaps will break under full-time/professional use. I just can't imagine them being durable enough to handle the work-out that comes from shoving your toe at them 400+ times a season, including resetting the pincers with your foot before stepping in, and standing on the toe piece rather than the slippery top sheet in deep snow (my bad habits will have to change). At least a flap failure will not affect the safety of the binding, which is always the real first season concern.
    Life is not lift served.

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,958
    I saw a couple guys skiing, er, 'testing' these today. They were mounted to a new G3 carbon 109-waisted somethingorother. I have nothing of value to add aside from they looked stout. Maybe just metal vs plastic?

    Skier had positive things to say; Preferred the toe and said they climbed and descended great, better than his Verticals.

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    Quote Originally Posted by N1CK. View Post
    I saw a couple guys skiing, er, 'testing' these today. They were mounted to a new G3 carbon 109-waisted somethingorother. I have nothing of value to add aside from they looked stout. Maybe just metal vs plastic?

    Skier had positive things to say; Preferred the toe and said they climbed and descended great, better than his Verticals.
    G3 Carbon Synapse wonderski. Climbed better? Biting tongue there

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,958
    Yes, Synapse. that was it.

    As far as doing anything 'better', again I have NO idea if they even worked, just passing along what random guy had to say.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    No problem Nick. The Ion binding brought me up hills on the wings of unicorn



    Brakes on the Ion actually work


    Plastic towers help guide the boot into place




  18. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    215
    Is the mount pattern the same as either Dynafit or Plum bindings? Read through the thread but didn't see any definitive statements about the mount pattern.

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Lakelander View Post
    Is the mount pattern the same as either Dynafit or Plum bindings? Read through the thread but didn't see any definitive statements about the mount pattern.
    No. Wider. Thx geoffers - edited "Toe is wider; heel is different but about the same"
    Last edited by LeeLau; 04-07-2014 at 10:16 AM.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    13
    http://www.wildsnow.com/11763/ion-g3...kcountry-tech/ says this
    The screw pattern of the rear is about the same width as other tech bindings, but is designed to mount over other hole patterns without unacceptable overlap of screw holes -- a smart sales touch for the 'new kid on the block.'

  21. #121
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    727
    Lee - It looks like you've tried them with a beast-heel-spur equipped boot. Any issues with that?

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Judo Chop! View Post
    Lee - It looks like you've tried them with a beast-heel-spur equipped boot. Any issues with that?
    None. Same setup as with other boots. G3 heel must just touch the back end of whatever boot you have. I also tried them with Tecnica Cochise 120 boots which didn't have the Beast fitting but are amazing performers. The Beasts feel like an alpine binding. Ion feels less twitchy then regular tech bindings with heel gap (ie think rattly) but not as solid alpine-feeling as Beasts.

  23. #123
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    303
    I had a chance to try these bindings on the G3 Synapse 109 and liked it. Comparing to the Radical ST they feel more solid, especially stepping in the toe, it seems to clamp onto the boot with more force. There's not really much need to lock the toe for easy/moderate climbs, it takes quite a bit more twisting force to lever out of the toe piece compared to the ST. They have a more secure feel riding the resort runs than the ST. The toe lever is big/easy to grab onto and also solid feeling.

    The heel piece works well with the twist-either-way tour mode, and easy return to ski mode with a boot kick or smack with a ski pole. The brakes staying deployed until ready to step in is a nice feature after de-skinning on a slippery slope. The heel lifters are easy enough to hook'n'flip with the pole. The pair I used was a bit sticky flipping them over, they weren't as light/snappy as the ST, but maybe with some time, or lube, they'd be better, but they were still ok. Forward pressure is a great feature. Overall, seems G3 did a good job with this binding.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SLC, UT
    Posts
    763
    How did that synapse ski?

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    303
    Synapse was good fun in anything soft/deep/untracked. Very lightweight, easy to move around, semi-soft flex, but still lively (I'm 200lbs), reverse camber, very pivoty, super easy short turns, good med/long turns on edge to avoid feeling too loose at higher speeds. They kinda felt like Vectors but sportier, surfier and more fun in deeper, steeper, tighter places.

    One day BC, one day at the resort. At the resort, by mid afternoon the deep, soft snow was sun-roasted, tracked and getting heavy, the skis still handled it well enough for slower, shorter turns, but were getting knocked around a bit, at speed it took some paying attention and getting tiring to keep them under control. The last few runs, I switched back to my Infidels, narrower, same camber, more weight/ramming speed, stiffer... all was good again, it felt like a fresh start to the day.

    G3 also has the Synapse 101, which is similar, obviously narrower but with camber underfoot. I didn't try it but seems like it'd be more versatile and not so pivoty/loose feeling. Reverse camber is fun and all, but I like a bit more edge contact in the BC, which is where these lightweights work best anyway.

Posting Permissions

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