Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 197
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    851
    I've just mounted a set of Xenics and the delta is 7.5mm (with a Scott Celeste AT boot):

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Xenic delta.jpg 
Views:	117 
Size:	782.9 KB 
ID:	299748

    I can also confirm that the Xenic toe pattern mounts within the Tecton/Evo/Vipec toe locations, assuming the same bsl. The Xenic heel pattern is identical to the Tecton/Evo/Vipec as it uses the same base plate - which also means that the longer 60mm base plate for the Tecton/Evo/Vipec will also work with the Xenic.

    I don't yet have a Xenic jig but it looks like the jig would position the heel plate in the same location on the ski as that of a Tecton/Evo/Vipec - if it is different then it's only a few mm off which is easily accommodated by the length adjustment. So if you had Tectons and wanted to dual mount with inserts for the Xenic then you'd only need inserts for the toes and the heels could share the same base plate.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    I've just mounted a set of Xenics and the delta is 7.5mm (with a Scott Celeste AT boot):

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Xenic delta.jpg 
Views:	117 
Size:	782.9 KB 
ID:	299748

    I can also confirm that the Xenic toe pattern mounts within the Tecton/Evo/Vipec toe locations, assuming the same bsl. The Xenic heel pattern is identical to the Tecton/Evo/Vipec as it uses the same base plate - which also means that the longer 60mm base plate for the Tecton/Evo/Vipec will also work with the Xenic.

    I don't yet have a Xenic jig but it looks like the jig would position the heel plate in the same location on the ski as that of a Tecton/Evo/Vipec - if it is different then it's only a few mm off which is easily accommodated by the length adjustment. So if you had Tectons and wanted to dual mount with inserts for the Xenic then you'd only need inserts for the toes and the heels could share the same base plate.
    I am intrigued by this. Spyderjon (or other binding experts), do you think it would be possible to swap out Tecton and Xenic heels via the base plate, but leave a Tecton toe in place for both set ups? Any potential reasons that retention or release wouldn’t work well with a Tecton toe and a Xenic heel?

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,697
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    I am intrigued by this. Spyderjon (or other binding experts), do you think it would be possible to swap out Tecton and Xenic heels via the base plate, but leave a Tecton toe in place for both set ups? Any potential reasons that retention or release wouldn’t work well with a Tecton toe and a Xenic heel?
    I believe the xenic is lateral release at the heel and tecton is lateral at the toe... double lateral release like that should not play well together.

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    I've just mounted a set of Xenics and the delta is 7.5mm (with a Scott Celeste AT boot)
    Thanks. Not that it matters much, but the delta should be the same regardless of boot? Do you measure the toe and heel pins, or parts of the boot when in the binding?

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorty_J View Post
    I believe the xenic is lateral release at the heel and tecton is lateral at the toe... double lateral release like that should not play well together.

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Interesting.... how does the Evo work then? It shares the lateral elasticity and potential lateral release of the Tecton toe, but doesn’t it use the standard heel pin tech of most tech bindings? Or put a different way, what is the difference between the release and retention characteristics of the Evo heel vs the Xenic heel? Evo heel is vertical release only maybe?

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Evo heel is vertical release only maybe?
    This is correct.

    Another xenic question that I didn't see in this thread or the fritschi page: does it use the standard dynafit crampon interface?

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    3,822
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Interesting.... how does the Evo work then? It shares the lateral elasticity and potential lateral release of the Tecton toe, but doesn’t it use the standard heel pin tech of most tech bindings? Or put a different way, what is the difference between the release and retention characteristics of the Evo heel vs the Xenic heel? Evo heel is vertical release only maybe?
    Xenic: Lateral release and vertical release in the heel. No lateral release in the toe.

    Vipec Evo/Tecton: Lateral release in the toe. Vertical release in the heel.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by caulfield View Post
    ......Another xenic question that I didn't see in this thread or the fritschi page: does it use the standard dynafit crampon interface?
    Yep, the Xenic uses the standard Dynafit crampon interface.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Thanks. Not that it matters much, but the delta should be the same regardless of boot? Do you measure the toe and heel pins, or parts of the boot when in the binding?
    I didn't measure the respective pin heights, which of course remain constant. However the actual delta effect on the user is boot specific as it's essentially comparing the angle of the boot when in the binding to that when stood on a flat/horizontal surface. So my method is to measure from the lowest part of the sole at the toe and heel vertically down the the ski base. The Neutralizer balancer that my customers use to determine their ideal delta is based upon this method as it then encompasses the internal board angle and the forward lean of the cuff of their specific boot so that's why I use this method. So whilst the pin heights are constant different boots will measure differently in the same binding depending upon their sole profile.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    I didn't measure the respective pin heights, which of course remain constant. However the actual delta effect on the user is boot specific as it's essentially comparing the angle of the boot when in the binding to that when stood on a flat/horizontal surface. So my method is to measure from the lowest part of the sole at the toe and heel vertically down the the ski base. The Neutralizer balancer that my customers use to determine their ideal delta is based upon this method as it then encompasses the internal board angle and the forward lean of the cuff of their specific boot so that's why I use this method. So whilst the pin heights are constant different boots will measure differently in the same binding depending upon their sole profile.
    Copy, guessed that was the case.
    Anyhow, thanks for measuring. If you get the opportunity, measurments of the pin heights would be nice

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Bump
    I have a pair I'm going to test mount soon (this weekend hopefully). Will post up delta numbers then...I'm pretty curious about this too.

    Edit: Whoops, thought I was on the last page of the thread. Spyderjon has this covered.
    Last edited by billyhoyle; 10-28-2019 at 03:52 PM.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    5,273
    Tecton and Vipec Evo use the same toe (except for color), only the heel is different (Vipec heel is 50g lighter).
    Last edited by 1000-oaks; 10-28-2019 at 07:52 PM.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,137
    This data point might be useful until we get the final returns on the pin delta for Xenics. I measured my Vipecs both ways.

    Pin delta = 10.5mm (same as what skimo.co sez)
    Sole delta (Zero G Pro Tours) = 5 mm (harder to measure ... figure +/- 1mm)

    If the relationship between the two boots holds, then the Xenic's pin delta will be 11-12mm. From the photo however, these look like flatter binders than the Vipecs.

    At the end of the day, that's why UHMW sheet exists, although the more food-centric amongst us would argue that it's for cutting boards

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

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    3,697
    I would also be interested in the pin delta as a reference to the skimo data.

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    851
    Xenic pin heights (from underside of binding to pin centre):

    Toe = 32mm
    Heel= 46.25mm (+/- a tad as it's a bitch to measure when mounted on a ski)

    And the QK/BF screw spec is the same as the Tecton/Evo/Vipec Black, ie 8no. 14mm pan heads for the toe and 8no. 12mm countersunk flat heads for the heel plate.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,337
    Xenic maximum brake width 105mm. Max crampons width 105mm. I'll check whether that's being conservative and if so, how much wider they can go

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    whistler
    Posts
    996
    Anyone know if they're planning on releasing an RV12 version for the husky gentleman?

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    Xenic pin heights (from underside of binding to pin centre):

    Toe = 32mm
    Heel= 46.25mm (+/- a tad as it's a bitch to measure when mounted on a ski)

    And the QK/BF screw spec is the same as the Tecton/Evo/Vipec Black, ie 8no. 14mm pan heads for the toe and 8no. 12mm countersunk flat heads for the heel plate.
    Thanks.
    That is a metric shit-ton of ramp, even if you account for some measuring error

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Mid-tomahawk
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Thanks.
    That is a metric shit-ton of ramp, even if you account for some measuring error
    Yeah, and a bad option for a toe shim given the single heel riser. Bummer.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,337
    Quote Originally Posted by nickel View Post
    Anyone know if they're planning on releasing an RV12 version for the husky gentleman?
    It depends on the reception of the pinner version which is currently dedicated to the svelte one-eyed Azn crowd. You can see from the max brake widths that they won't be amused when I bend brakes to put this on 118 mm underfoot

  21. #121
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,337
    Quote Originally Posted by sf View Post
    Thanks.
    That is a metric shit-ton of ramp, even if you account for some measuring error
    Yeah I'm going to see if I can mod that heel to make it lower without getting stupid like grinding plastic

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    851
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeLau View Post
    Yeah I'm going to see if I can mod that heel to make it lower without getting stupid like grinding plastic
    Probably easier just to shim the toe and add a spacer to the climbing riser.

  23. #123
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    1,829
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    . . . and add a spacer to the climbing riser.
    Got any suggestions for this? I was thinking about how to increase the height on the Alpinist's riser too.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    11,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    Probably easier just to shim the toe and add a spacer to the climbing riser.
    Probably but grinding new stuff is fun!

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    5,273
    4.5mm toe shim to match Vipec ramp eh....might be enough to make it an adapter to the Vipec pattern, lol.

Posting Permissions

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