Page 16 of 18 FirstFirst ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 434
  1. #376
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by davjr96 View Post
    I used the 110mm crampon on 94 waist skis and survived.
    but how close dou


  2. #377
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,644
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    but how close dou
    I recall @doebedoe had some wide 'pons on some CD 104s with Vipecs which he took on a Euro hut tour two years ago. They were quite a bit wider than the skis (115? 120?).

    I recall him reporting reduced fun factor, and that he thought the wider crampons torqued on the binders. I can't recall if he mentioned reduced comfort on traverses, or other details.

    Regarding torquing on the binders (potential point of stress/failure), I can't say, but I can't visualize increased stress by using a wide crampon on a narrower ski than it's intended for. The contact points are the same, irrespective of ski width: the crampon mount and the ice/snow.

    Are you getting out this year? I'm shut down due to a immune challenges in the household.

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

  3. #378
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,749
    ^ Sidehilling, the too-wide cramp gets twsted horizontally and really torques the mount.

  4. #379
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    I recall @doebedoe had some wide 'pons on some CD 104s with Vipecs which he took on a Euro hut tour two years ago. They were quite a bit wider than the skis (115? 120?).

    I recall him reporting reduced fun factor, and that he thought the wider crampons torqued on the binders. I can't recall if he mentioned reduced comfort on traverses, or other details.

    Regarding torquing on the binders (potential point of stress/failure), I can't say, but I can't visualize increased stress by using a wide crampon on a narrower ski than it's intended for. The contact points are the same, irrespective of ski width: the crampon mount and the ice/snow.

    Are you getting out this year? I'm shut down due to a immune challenges in the household.

    ... Thom
    The (new) wife and I will be doing just tours this year. We are new to CO and it seems like a good way to learn the land. Won't be visiting resorts.

    We moved into an apartment from our house in Montana and I am going crazy without my shop. I bought her new tech binders and skis. How am I supposed to mount these? In our living room?? Barbarian


  5. #380
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    ^ Sidehilling, the too-wide cramp gets twsted horizontally and really torques the mount.
    So pick is the story. 100 (for 98) or 110 (for 104).


  6. #381
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,644
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    ^ Sidehilling, the too-wide cramp gets twsted horizontally and really torques the mount.
    I'd expect that (torquing of the mount) to be a function of crampon width irrespective of ski width ... no? IOW, a ski does nothing to support the crampon or the mount, but yes ... getting as narrow of a crampon as possible is never a bad thing (apart from swap-ability).

    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    The (new) wife and I will be doing just tours this year. We are new to CO and it seems like a good way to learn the land. Won't be visiting resorts.

    We moved into an apartment from our house in Montana and I am going crazy without my shop. I bought her new tech binders and skis. How am I supposed to mount these? In our living room?? Barbarian
    In normal years, I'd say drive down the road a piece to drill some holes. Ah ... but these aren't normal times, and no one has set foot in our doorway since March. It's a delicate situation here, and even getting out in the BC this year will be touch and go. PM me if you're really in a bind (pun intended) and maybe we can work something out.

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

  7. #382
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,749
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    I'd expect that (torquing of the mount) to be a function of crampon width irrespective of ski width ... no? IOW, a ski does nothing to support the crampon or the mount, but yes ... getting as narrow of a crampon as possible is never a bad thing (apart from swap-ability).
    There's some flex in crampons and the mounts, so if you've got a really close fit and you're sidehilling, the uphill blade pulls the crampon sideways enough that the other blade hits the ski and limits the twisting load on the mount. But if the fit isn't close, the mount takes all the load, all the time when sidehilling. Not a big deal, just an observation. If you're not sidehilling, it doesn't matter if the crampon is a lot wider than the ski, but never sidehilling seems unrealistic.

  8. #383
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,644
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    There's some flex in crampons and the mounts, so if you've got a really close fit and you're sidehilling, the uphill blade pulls the crampon sideways enough that the other blade hits the ski and limits the twisting load on the mount. But if the fit isn't close, the mount takes all the load, all the time when sidehilling. Not a big deal, just an observation. If you're not sidehilling, it doesn't matter if the crampon is a lot wider than the ski, but never sidehilling seems unrealistic.
    That makes sense ... a slight bit of interference stabilizing the 'pon. Whether one can size them like that is another question.

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

  9. #384
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    608
    My new replacement Xenic toes have seen a few days on snow now. Night and day difference as far as the toe lever, the new ones are so much easier to toggle between ski mode and walk mode.

    Fingers crossed they stay that way...

  10. #385
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    My new replacement Xenic toes have seen a few days on snow now. Night and day difference as far as the toe lever, the new ones are so much easier to toggle between ski mode and walk mode.

    Fingers crossed they stay that way...

    i love my replacement set so far. zero complaints.


  11. #386
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    That makes sense ... a slight bit of interference stabilizing the 'pon. Whether one can size them like that is another question.

    ... Thom
    Does it sound like the Xenics take Dynafit crampons? If so, ATK are the same fit, and avaible in lots of widths*(and different ones), so that would help finding a close fit.

    *92, 97, 102, 108, 120mm
    Last edited by Tjaardbreeuwer; 01-04-2021 at 06:48 AM.

  12. #387
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Tjaardbreeuwer View Post
    Does it sound like the Xenics take Dynafit crampons? If so, ATK are the same fit, and avaible in lots of widths(and diffrent ones), so that would help finding a close fit.
    Exact same. Just bought a pair. See convo higher up


  13. #388
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Location
    Toulouse, France
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    Xenic and Tecton toe mounts with inserts... additional holes but pin position is exactly the same for the two bindings. Heel tracks left mounted with wood screws in the ski, should be able the use the worm screw track for either heel piece as desired.

    Attachment 318696

    Attachment 318697
    Great work, I am interested by doing that.

    If you have time:Could you tell us
    the xenic drilling locations compared to the Tecton ones.
    the effective mounting point.

    Do you use for the heel the small plate (4 holes) or the rent one (6 holes) ?

    Thanks

  14. #389
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Benito View Post
    Great work, I am interested by doing that.

    If you have time:Could you tell us
    the xenic drilling locations compared to the Tecton ones.
    the effective mounting point.

    Do you use for the heel the small plate (4 holes) or the rent one (6 holes) ?

    Thanks
    I used the standard heel plate, four wood screws.

    I don’t remember the exact specs on the toes, but basically the Xenic holes were centered lengthwise between the Tecton holes. The SkiMo binding guide is always a handy reference for this, in addition to the paper templates found on this forum.

    https://skimo.co/tech-binding-hole-patterns

  15. #390
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    482
    Alright, it's been a full season on the new toes. What's the verdict?
    90% of skiing is just looking cool

  16. #391
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps -> Bozone,MT
    Posts
    671
    About to buy some Xenics (as ATK is sold out) throuhg BD. All good nowadays with the toe piece?

  17. #392
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    13,964
    Quote Originally Posted by smooth operator View Post
    About to buy some Xenics (as ATK is sold out) throuhg BD. All good nowadays with the toe piece?
    Yup. No issues

  18. #393
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tahoe>Missoula>Fort Collins
    Posts
    1,798
    i like mine still. low fiddle factor and ski gud. under the radar binding at good price. people dont like the plastic


  19. #394
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Location
    SEA
    Posts
    69
    heya xenic dudes,

    jumped on the plastic train this year, but now need a xenic binding template to get these bad boys onto my sticks.

    anyone have a xenic binding template?

    i’d also be very interested in a set of 1/4” shims. after reading this thread, it seems inserts + M5 screws are the way to roll there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #395
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,749
    Toe holes centers
    Width: 43.88mm, length: 33.12mm
    (pin line is 15.81mm behind front hole center)

    Heel hole centers
    Width: 18.04mm, length: 60.32mm

    Hole distances from midsole
    (for 26.5 ZeroG Tour Pro (300mm BSL), positioned to also be able to use 27 Scarpa Alien RS or F1-LT)

    Toe 152.69 - 119.57 - midsole line - 127mm - 187.32 - Heel

    Round to nearest mm if you're not using a mill with DRO. Adjust distances as needed for your BSL, and definitely do a test mount on a 2x4 to confirm.
    Last edited by 1000-oaks; 11-04-2022 at 12:13 PM.

  21. #396
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    233

  22. #397
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Access to Granlibakken
    Posts
    11,172
    Has the heel riser stayed the same height? Anyone modified it to be taller? I recall that being a complaint from some.

    Personally, with good ROM boots, I prefer a moderate height riser but these would be for the GF & she likes tallish risers.

    In the Alpinist thread I posted pics of my riser mod (works great) but even with that mod she wishes hers were taller.

  23. #398
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    793
    I've been envisioning some options for a heel riser modification. Drill a small hole in the riser and screw something in. Or maybe cut something to match the profile and try epoxy. Although it looks like you'd have to be careful to always flip the riser down when going into ski mode or you would hit the heel (and likely break the riser extension off).

    I'm about to mount a set and I suspect I will end up adding a shim to the toes which will make the Xenic's heel riser even lower...still debating whether this is all worth it or if I should just sell them and buy some other bindings.

  24. #399
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    89
    Does anyone know if it is possible to get the replacement toe levers, without first breaking the bindings?

    I haven’t broken anything yet, but I would would like to replace the original toe levers.

  25. #400
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Karl_H View Post
    Does anyone know if it is possible to get the replacement toe levers, without first breaking the bindings?

    I haven’t broken anything yet, but I would would like to replace the original toe levers.
    Yep. That’s what I did for two pairs.

Posting Permissions

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