|
Post by albertatele on Feb 27, 2023 18:38:00 GMT
The capability of a binding is determined by the boot that is in it. So the question is how does the stiffest xp boot(alfa free) compare to the lightest 75mm boot(T4) Ahh, dragging out that old nonsense. A simple 3pin binding will accomodate a pair of Trace boots as well as various other 4-buckle 75mm boots. What kind of an idiot would try and win Tele races in such a silly setup as plain pins and 4-buckle boots? Or ski a 50-degree chute in it? That's really not a valid question at all. Truth is that Xplore binding will never have a boot that approaches a T4 because it's simply not capable of working with a boot in that class. NNN/BC is not better or worse than Xplore (some say Xplore is certainly no better for downhill skiing) but though NNN has been around a long time, never has a T4 class boot appeared for it. If that worn out boot claim were even close to correct, cables and hardwires would not even exist.
|
|
|
Post by albertatele on Feb 27, 2023 18:40:42 GMT
It's a simple matter really: Xplore is essentially a meadow skipping design. Ok for low angles and good snow. Not really remarkably good for anything.
|
|
|
Post by Telebabble on Feb 27, 2023 18:48:32 GMT
Af, how would you flex the T4 in the Xplore binding? With the help of some chinky little piece or rubber? Well, if that worked, then TTS for Tele would not need hardwires; they would use "bumpers" hahaha. Seriously almost everyone skiing Xplore skis tippy-toed and that's with the floppy boots they are now stuck with. Just imagine a T2 in an Xplore binding. Does not work because it can't. Have you ever noticed how Telehiro ALWAYS skis his T4 boots with hardwires? Think about it. And he's the best at keeping his heels low.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 27, 2023 19:29:08 GMT
Here's the deal, there's no feature of the Xplore binding that can really help hold the heel of a T4 class boot down or provide enough leverage to help break the bellows of a T4, let alone a stiffer boot. It's simply not designed for real Telemark boots. It was intended to be a modest upgrade to NNN/BC and it's not all that. Af's just making a hypothetical claim that amounts to: "if 2 binding systems can handle the same boots in the same ways, then the one with the more capable boot in it is more capable"..in other words, a T2 in a Switchback is more capable than a T4 in a Switchback. That's all it really comes down to.
|
|
|
Post by Ankle flexer on Feb 27, 2023 20:22:59 GMT
The capability of a binding is determined by the boot that is in it. So the question is how does the stiffest xp boot(alfa free) compare to the lightest 75mm boot(T4) Ahh, dragging out that old nonsense. A simple 3pin binding will accomodate a pair of Trace boots as well as various other 4-buckle 75mm boots. What kind of an idiot would try and win Tele races in such a silly setup as plain pins and 4-buckle boots? Or ski a 50-degree chute in it? That's really not a valid question at all. Truth is that Xplore binding will never have a boot that approaches a T4 because it's simply not capable of working with a boot in that class. NNN/BC is not better or worse than Xplore (some say Xplore is certainly no better for downhill skiing) but though NNN has been around a long time, never has a T4 class boot appeared for it. If that worn out boot claim were even close to correct, cables and hardwires would not even exist. I don't know what old nonsense you're talking about. All I'm saying is that the boot determines how much power and control you can get out of a binding. Alpina made a nnn-bc boot that appeared to be the same class as the T4 but it didn't ski well and never became popular.
|
|
|
Post by Ankle flexer on Feb 27, 2023 20:30:15 GMT
Here's the deal, there's no feature of the Xplore binding that can really help hold the heel of a T4 class boot down or provide enough leverage to help break the bellows of a T4, let alone a stiffer boot. It's simply not designed for real Telemark boots. It was intended to be a modest upgrade to NNN/BC and it's not all that. Af's just making a hypothetical claim that amounts to: "if 2 binding systems can handle the same boots in the same ways, then the one with the more capable boot in it is more capable"..in other words, a T2 in a Switchback is more capable than a T4 in a Switchback. That's all it really comes down to. You guys don't think you can ski a T4 without a cable. I can ski mine with pins only or with Targas that are probably less active than the three pins. All I'm saying is it can't compete with heavy telemark because it doesn't have a big enough boot. Whether or not it can handle a bigger boot is of no concern to me.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 27, 2023 21:09:22 GMT
I never said a T4 can't be skied in pins..if you have even a 3pc, no idea why you would though. XPLORE CANNOT COMPETE WITH TELEMARK BECAUSE IT'S NOT DESIGNED FOR EVEN A T4 CLASS BOOT. THERE WILL NEVER BE A BOOT IN THE T4 CLASS FOR THAT FLOPPY MESS. XPLORE IS NOT A TELEMARK BINDING.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 27, 2023 21:15:56 GMT
For Christ's sake, Targas are not less active than plain pins. Generally speaking activity is a property of cable, spring and hardwire systems. To call plain pins active is a joke and ditto for Xplore.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 27, 2023 21:24:11 GMT
If it (XPLORE) CANNOT handle a Telemark boot, then your argument is just irrational. Go ask ROTTEFELLA, it's not designed for TELEMARK BOOTS (as in T4 or stiffer). How would it make sense to produce boots for a binding that simply cannot work with them? What mechanism in the Xplore binding would effectively aid in breaking the bellows of a T2? There's no hardwire or cable and that chunk of plastic does little to keep Xplore skiers off their toes in those floppy boots they have now.
|
|
|
Post by Telebabble on Feb 27, 2023 21:36:27 GMT
Seems Af does not realize none of those Xplore boots even have bellows, none. If that binding were designed for Telemark boots, then why would there be no Telemark boots for it? I would love to see Tom M trying to ski a modified T4 in the Xplore binding. That system is so bad and such a ripoff that Johnny finally shut up his bullshit about it.
|
|
|
Post by Telebabble on Feb 27, 2023 21:45:10 GMT
Here's the deal, there's no feature of the Xplore binding that can really help hold the heel of a T4 class boot down or provide enough leverage to help break the bellows of a T4, let alone a stiffer boot. It's simply not designed for real Telemark boots. It was intended to be a modest upgrade to NNN/BC and it's not all that. Af's just making a hypothetical claim that amounts to: "if 2 binding systems can handle the same boots in the same ways, then the one with the more capable boot in it is more capable"..in other words, a T2 in a Switchback is more capable than a T4 in a Switchback. That's all it really comes down to. You guys don't think you can ski a T4 without a cable. I can ski mine with pins only or with Targas that are probably less active than the three pins. All I'm saying is it can't compete with heavy telemark because it doesn't have a big enough boot. Whether or not it can handle a bigger boot is of no concern to me. Let me get this straight, you are saying that if a binding that obviously CAN'T handle a real telemark boot COULD handle a heavy telemark boot, THEN it could compete with real telemark? That's quite an argument. T4's are now the lightest Telemark boot in production and over the years they soften, but most by far use cables with T4.
|
|
|
Post by Ankle flexer on Feb 28, 2023 4:35:34 GMT
For Christ's sake, Targas are not less active than plain pins. Generally speaking activity is a property of cable, spring and hardwire systems. To call plain pins active is a joke and ditto for Xplore. If you don't think 3 pins can be as active as a neutral cable binding you probably never checked. Activity is created by the duckbill being clamped down flat on the ski and the stiffness of the boot when you lift your heel. I prefer cable/ hardwire bindings, but as neutral as possible.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 28, 2023 13:37:30 GMT
You are confusing terms. Neutral, strictly speaking, does not mean the cable or hardwire or spring does NOT lever or resist heel lift or those would be worthless parts of the binding systems. AS YOU ARE US8NG IT, the term has to do with what you feel. "Activity" has almost nothing to do with the duckbill or the bumpers in NNN and other xcd systems. "Activity" is a term invented to describe WHEN, as the boot heel lifts and rotates, hardwires and the like actually "activate" in terms of heel resistance and provide "tip pressure". People have begun to garble these terms up and apply them in nearly ridiculous ways, like talking about the "activity" of the Xplore system which has virtually no levering mechanism at all. As usual the utter babble is rife at Ttalk. Stiffness is a matter of the amount of resistance to boot heel lift. Activity is the when and stiffness the how much but the terms apply very poorly to XCd bindings. Any 3pin without cable has to be less active than any 3pin with any useful "cable". "Neutral" does not mean completely not active. Voile rates stock Switchbacks as neutral but obviously they have levering systems that "activate". When the pivot point is moved back as with the SBX2, then we have a pretty active binding (more active than a stock SB) which also has stiffer springs. Arguably these terms are somewhat inherently vague but less so if only applied to "cabled" binding discussion. For practical purposes, no NNN or other binding sans "cable" is active and cannot be stiff being that stiffness is a property of "cables". The term "neutral" is often almost useless as a matter of clear thinking. It seems of use only to indicate degree of activity, hence plain pins, NNN, and Xplore can be said to be neutral. It really makes little sense to talk about cabled bindings being "neutral" except if we just talking about "feeling" or degree of activity. So your Targas are either neutral in the sense of being low on the activity scale (the cables cannot do absolutely nothing) or by neutral you mean the resistance never "seems" to increase as the boot lifts and rotates in them. The term is TOO often vaguely applied. Sometimes it means there is no significant activity in a binding and other times it's used to indicate feeling in a cabled binding.
|
|
|
Post by Ankle flexer on Feb 28, 2023 17:21:28 GMT
I'm not sure I'm buying the "when" and "how much" theory. In a three pin binding I get resistance as soon as I lift my heel. In most cable and HW bindings there is a "dead spot" before the spring engages with barely any resistance at all.
In a voile 3p with the cable on I get more resistance as soon as my heel comes up compared to the 3 pin HW, that has that dead spot before the cable engages. Once the springs engage on the HWs they will give you more leverage(activity in my book) than the 3p cable.
|
|
|
Post by LoveRonnyRavenSC! on Feb 28, 2023 17:32:37 GMT
Haha! Pins are rated the very least active Telemark binding EVER, though they were never designed for Telemark..
|
|