Page 44 of 87 FirstFirst ... 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 ... LastLast
Results 1,076 to 1,100 of 2151
  1. #1076
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    4,538
    Should be so that you can just pull the paper out without it tearing. Shouldn't be able to slide it in.
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  2. #1077
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    356

    The Official Salomon S/Lab SHIFT MNC Thread -AMA

    Quote Originally Posted by detrusor View Post
    You need to aggressively pull up on the toe of the boot. There is a huge amount of space between the wing and boot lug in the photo


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    That was it. Had the boot in at a screwy ramp angle. Thanks for the help.

  3. #1078
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    351
    First day shift-ing: Tour beautifully, but fully expect heel riser to be the first point of failure, a-la floppy Duke wire-loop heel risers. Downhill mode feels like a full-on alpine binder. Testing release, can confirm it will definitely dump you when required\.

  4. #1079
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    679
    I had two days inbound skiing with shift clamps. I can't tell any difference between these and my Look or Marker when skiing inbounds. I also crashed pretty hard, and they came off without any issue.

  5. #1080
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,426
    Does the shift use a Teflon pad on top of the afd?

    Sent from my DROID Turbo using Tapatalk

  6. #1081
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by daught View Post
    Does the shift use a Teflon pad on top of the afd?
    Yep

  7. #1082
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    LCC
    Posts
    605
    Been skiing these in bounds at Alta for the last week. Blown away at how well a “touring binding” feels. Took them up the other side of the road yesterday and did a side by side with same qst118’s with Dynafits. I have zero complaints the weight difference was negligible but could see it stack up on longer tours. Get over the riser height people! The Wasatch is full of stupidly steep skinners and the riser was in a very usable middle ground compared to my tlt risers. And skiing down with a true alpine binding just made my year. I am so excited to get these things all over the place here. Great work Cody and team much respect to all the work you put in on this product

  8. #1083
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    [a] Van [down by the river]
    Posts
    1,235
    ^ Pretty much the same here. So far, everything has been awesome. Minimal issues with the brakes coming down while skinning. Happened once when I really smacked my skis together yesterday. Also running 100mm brakes on a 109 ski, so a little narrower brake than normal.

    Assuming they hold up durability wise, arguably no reason to go anything else when considering a hybrid setup (not touring specific).

    Riser height is a non-issue unless for the steepest of skin-tracks. Not a deal break, especially given what I am using these skis for (inbounds/slackcountry laps).

  9. #1084
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    54
    I've ordered ones with 110mm breaks and received them in the box written 100mm.
    The measured internal width is 108mm.
    Can anyone tell me it's the 100mm brakes or 110mm?Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3520.JPG 
Views:	144 
Size:	227.2 KB 
ID:	258467


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  10. #1085
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by j0z77 View Post
    I've ordered ones with 110mm breaks and received them in the box written 100mm.
    The measured internal width is 108mm.
    Can anyone tell me it's the 100mm brakes or 110mm?
    You've got the 100mm width brakes. The 110mm brakes measure 118mm internally.

  11. #1086
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    vernon
    Posts
    2,390
    Quote Originally Posted by j0z77 View Post
    I've ordered ones with 110mm breaks and received them in the box written 100mm.
    The measured internal width is 108mm.
    Can anyone tell me it's the 100mm brakes or 110mm?Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3520.JPG 
Views:	144 
Size:	227.2 KB 
ID:	258467


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I will trade ya for some 110's
    www.skevikskis.com Check em out!

  12. #1087
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Northern BC
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by LiveLarger View Post
    I had two days inbound skiing with shift clamps. I can't tell any difference between these and my Look or Marker when skiing inbounds. I also crashed pretty hard, and they came off without any issue.
    Yep, that's the thing i come back too. Sure they are a bit heavier and the single heal riser is at times a bummer, and I have had issues with my breaks engaging when in walk mode. But really, they ski so f@cking well it's easy to overlook at all that stuff. And nearly 50 days in, no signs of significant failure or breakage or anything of that nature.

    And they ski so damn well!!!!!!
    Last edited by Angle Parking; 12-06-2018 at 01:03 AM.

  13. #1088
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Angle Parking View Post
    I have had issues with my breaks engaging when in walk mode
    So, I was having that problem too, and I think I might've solved it by engaging the heel clamp after "locking" the brake down with the walk/ski lever. Dunno how they interact or if that's how it's supposed to work but it hasn't happened since. Also, since the issue appears to be caused by the strength of the brake spring overwhelming the ski/walk lever catch, and since repeated retraction/deployment cycles would seem to exert wear on the spring over time, I can see this being less of an issue as a binding sees more days.

  14. #1089
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    You've got the 100mm width brakes. The 110mm brakes measure 118mm internally.
    Thank you for your quick reply!

    Quote Originally Posted by el hefe View Post
    I will trade ya for some 110's

    Thanks but I'm in Japan...

  15. #1090
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by el hefe View Post
    I will trade ya for some 110's
    Might be interested in this since j0z is out. Sent you a PM.

  16. #1091
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,036
    Tour’d up a groomer and skied down just fine on my production pair. Didn’t experience the brakes deploying in tour mode like they did on sample pair last spring. If durability doesn’t become an issue these may start to replace alpine bindings on my soft snow resort skis.

  17. #1092
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    356
    So I mounted my shifts last night, seemingly without issue. I noticed this morning that I can see a sliver of light under the front part of the toes as if the front screw post thing wasn't in tight enough. The post is flush with the ski (i.e. no light is creeping underneath the post allowing me to see the silhouette of the screw), and I cranked those suckers pretty tight (but not so much as to spin the screws at the bottom) when mounting. Has anyone else noticed this?

  18. #1093
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Brohemia
    Posts
    2,104
    Quote Originally Posted by burrito View Post
    So I mounted my shifts last night, seemingly without issue. I noticed this morning that I can see a sliver of light under the front part of the toes as if the front screw post thing wasn't in tight enough. The post is flush with the ski (i.e. no light is creeping underneath the post allowing me to see the silhouette of the screw), and I cranked those suckers pretty tight (but not so much as to spin the screws at the bottom) when mounting. Has anyone else noticed this?
    That's actually exactly how it should look. Mine when mounted properly on a flat top sheeted QST 118 have about a 1mm to less than 1mm gap towards the tip of the toe piece. I had some guy Instagram DM'ing me, threatening me and saying this was some major flaw that was gonna cause a recall, the bindings to break in droves and he knows better than the 200+ people that tested it and the engineers that spent 7 years developing it because it worked as an insurance agent once...yeah, it was a fun conversation. Talking to the engineers about it this past week as it's something I noticed but never worried about, it's just a byproduct of the mounting pattern. Which brings me to another point that I'll want to see if you SHIFT owners can corroborate. When I really started pushing this binding I noticed that my skis felt as if they had more energy. As if the bindings were giving the ski more life. Having tested tons of skis over time, Salomon's generally have a lot of pop and life in them so I originally thought it was just me or the skis. Then my wife started skiing them and her first feedback was that she felt like the skis were skiing better with those bindings. I never could figure it out until I started inspecting the bindings more and thinking about that little gap and the mount pattern. And here is my theory, I think because of that forward mount screw being a free floating mount point on a gasket, the ski flexes further back towards your toe and produces more energy into the ski. Essentially the dead point in a ski because of a mount is minimized. I talked to one of the senior French binding engineers...well the guy that invented the Pivot toe....and he confirmed my thoughts. So yeah, interesting by product of the mount point that they probably thought about cause they're smart.

    So long story short, I wouldn't worry about that gap one bit if it's around 1mm and in fact, think it positively effects the performance of the ski.

  19. #1094
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkasquawlik View Post
    ...So long story short, I wouldn't worry about that gap one bit if it's around 1mm and in fact, think it positively effects the performance of the ski.
    That exact thing popped into my head as I was looking at them. The toepiece is so long compared with a traditional binding I really do think it would affect the ski's flex pattern if it was fixed all the way to the end. A short mounting zone attracted me to the Marker Jesters (my favorite alpine binding to date) back in the day, and I actually mounted the heels of my Shifts 10mm forward of the paper templates to give me an extra 10mm of tail flex.

  20. #1095
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    4,316
    The boot will create the dead spot in the flex of the ski along with the binder? Everything is giving a little, but it would be something to notice the difference of a mm or 2, no?

    And btw, this is why old school tele skiers ripped...full flex and fully free!

  21. #1096
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Brohemia
    Posts
    2,104
    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw View Post
    The boot will create the dead spot in the flex of the ski along with the binder? Everything is giving a little, but it would be something to notice the difference of a mm or 2, no?

    And btw, this is why old school tele skiers ripped...full flex and fully free!
    Yeah, the boot can create a dead spot in ski flex and yeah, you can notice it. Hence why I noticed and my wife noticed our skis having more energy in the ski with the SHIFT set up. This is often why so many skiers look for a short binding footprint. So although the SHIFT looks long, the floating collar interface in the front and the four other screws being under toe and right near the main torque points of the toe, the binding has a short footprint in reality.

  22. #1097
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkasquawlik View Post
    Yeah, the boot can create a dead spot in ski flex and yeah, you can notice it. Hence why I noticed and my wife noticed our skis having more energy in the ski with the SHIFT set up. This is often why so many skiers look for a short binding footprint. So although the SHIFT looks long, the floating collar interface in the front and the four other screws being under toe and right near the main torque points of the toe, the binding has a short footprint in reality.
    Or, get a stiff ski, and the binding won't make a difference.

    Sent from my moto g(6) using TGR Forums mobile app

  23. #1098
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    836
    I've been doing a couple of Shift mounts this morning and had to dodge some existing heels holes.

    The Shifts overall heel length adjustment is 30mm but the jig doesn't position the heel in the middle of this adjustment. If you use your boot in the jig to set its length then when the forward pressure is spot on you'll have 12mm rearward adjustment left on the track or you can go forward 18mm.

  24. #1099
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    2,990
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    ... If you use your boot in the jig to set its length then when the forward pressure is spot on you'll have 12mm rearward adjustment left on the track or you can go forward 18mm.
    Great observation, and worth taking note of (test mount) if one is using the printed template.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  25. #1100
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Santa Cruz, CA
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    I've been doing a couple of Shift mounts this morning and had to dodge some existing heels holes.

    The Shifts overall heel length adjustment is 30mm but the jig doesn't position the heel in the middle of this adjustment. If you use your boot in the jig to set its length then when the forward pressure is spot on you'll have 12mm rearward adjustment left on the track or you can go forward 18mm.
    Good on Salomon for this. In my experience, mainly with Look and Marker, their jigs do the opposite, and it drives me nuts. They always have noticeably more rearward adjustment, and it makes their mounting patterns significantly longer than they need to be.

    I understand that strategy for junior and entry price point bindings where you’re liable to move up to bigger boots as your feet grow, but how many adults have ever bought new boots with a significantly longer BSL? Maybe if you simultaneously switch brands and move up a shell size you’re adding 20mm, but more often than not any change in boot will change your BSL by less than 10mm. I’d rather have a shorter mount than be covered for an odd situation that rarely occurs.

Posting Permissions

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