Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

Tom M wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 01, 2023 11:05 am

but in my mind, the Xplore system with a sturdy and supportive boot is every bit as capable as most leather boot and cable combinations.

Very helpful Tom! I believe you!
Question→ forgive me- I cannot remember- are you using the stiffer downhill flexor?
Gareth

lilcliffy wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 01, 2023 11:47 am

Yes- agree- and I believe you that the Rotte ST cable will significantly stiffen up the lateral dimension of a soft-soled boot (e.g. Alaska 75). There must be a limit to this though- one is still pressuring the boot and that soft sole is going to twist at some point- no? Wouldn't our much stiffer-soled Ski March boots be laterally-stiffer in that binding?

This is where the wheels come off the bus.

Sole compliance is needed in order for the duckbill to flex. This allows acceptable kick and glide.

Sole resistance is needed to limit twist. Cables can limit twist to a degree but they’re working against the boot.

A stiffer 3 pin boot will be more resistant to twisting. But flex at the duckbill will suffer. So the choice eventually becomes “drive” OR “movement”.

lilcliffy wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 31, 2022 6:13 pm

In the end I may still mount the Rotte ST+cable on my Rabb 68. Why?
Because:
1) I already have the binding- and I- AMAZINGLY- can buy this binding for 50% of the $$$ as an Xplore binding + downhill flexor.
2) I have a number of 3pin boots that I love- including the Scarpa T4.

Re. point #2: Have you tried the Scarpa boot in the un-mounted binding? Aligning the pins is no problem, but closing the clamp on the ratchet very definitely is. I have the binding mounted on two different skis, one with the anti-ice foils and the other without. It's the same story with both. The boot (T4) fits perfectly in the Rottefella Super Telemark binding. The problem areas are the points where the clamp makes contact with the tops of the "ears" of the duckbill - not with the front. For me, personally, this is no tragedy, as I never intended to use either ski with a plastic boot. If necessary the problem could be solved by some judicious sanding of the areas in question. However, someone who is considering purchasing the Rotte 75 Cable for use with said boot should be made aware of this. My boot is relatively new, so its duckbill might be thicker than previous versions (duckbill thickness = 18mm).

lilcliffy wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 31, 2022 6:13 pm

3) I think I would rather clip on a heel cable than frig with that ridiculous flexor plate system on Xplore that I DAMN well know will FREEZE in my local environmental context...

Re. point #3: That's my view also. It's fiddlesticks, even if no icing-up is involved. If icing comes into play, then it's fiddlesticks with the addition of bad language.

One of the advantages of nordic touring, in comparison with alpine touring, is the lack of what alpine ski-tourists call the "transition" - skins off, binding to downhill mode, boot buckles cinched down, and don't forget to switch the heel-block from "Walk" to "Ski". It's surprising the number of tourists who, even without stress situations, set off down with bindings still in climb-mode or boots not in downhill-mode. A cable lever can be flicked on quickly without removing the skis and a good cable binding will deter even straight nordic skis and leather boots from thinking of insubordination. This beats taking your mittens off in a howling gale and fiddling with different buffers or scraping the plate clean of ice.

Having said that, if the Xplore boot/binding gives improved downhill controll with its standard buffer, in comparison with NNN BC, then that is to be welcomed. This past season in Norway I spoke to several users of the Xplore system and they all agreed that it did indeed offer better downhill controll.

Another major plus for the Xplore is how light the boots appear to be. I was very surprised to learn that a pair of Alpina Alaska Xplore in size 45 had a weight of ca.1590g, as opposed to 1970g for Alpina Alaska BC in size 44. That's almost 200g per boot and is also less than a pair of Alfa Guard Advance (1660g in 44), which most people would consider to be a light boot.

GrimSurfer wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 01, 2023 10:31 am

Last time I checked, “yup” meant yes.

Good idea to confirm though… because “yup” may mean “no”. “Lots of times” may mean “never at all”. Grip wax may be for glide… Skis may generate lift…

Anything to shift the convo away from how stuff actually works…

The reason I ask about your experience is because the things you say that are physically impossible, like getting tip pressure from a cable or generating lift with your ski, are a common part of skiing for most of us.

BTW, I don't think you're good enough to ski in jeans, you'll come home all wet. lol

lowangle al wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 01, 2023 12:59 pm

GrimSurfer wrote: ↑

Sun Jan 01, 2023 10:31 am

Last time I checked, “yup” meant yes.

Good idea to confirm though… because “yup” may mean “no”. “Lots of times” may mean “never at all”. Grip wax may be for glide… Skis may generate lift…

Anything to shift the convo away from how stuff actually works…

The reason I ask about your experience is because the things you say that are physically impossible, like getting tip pressure from a cable or generating lift with your ski, are a common part of skiing for most of us.

BTW, I don't think you're good enough to ski in jeans, you'll come home all wet. lol

A ski floats and sinks. It plows and ramps. It takes an edge and carves.

It doesn’t generate lift. That’s a figment of your imagination.

Some light reading…

https://www.thesnowpros.org/download/P ... Skiing.pdf

Just read and understand the whole thing instead of looking for narrow passages that support an incomplete understanding. That’s even more embarrassing than skiing in jeans.

I think you need to spend more time on the hill and less doing research.

I wouldn't even be embarrassed skiing in jeans if I were skiing where you do with the lycra clad crowd.

Uh huh.

What other people choose to do doesn’t embarrass me.

It sounds like you have a great setup Adam. Are you using a Voile or the Rottefella? If Voile, the cable or hardwire version? It sure is a great time to be an XCD skier as there are so many choices and combinations of skis, boots, and bindings, each with their advantages and disadvantages, but all capable of endless fun in the snow. Everyone has their own preferences. The downhill experience with the Xplore feels very different from the typical cable combination. But to be honest, skiing a soft leather boot with a spring cable feels very different from skiing a plastic boot with hardwire, so the answer to your question is "it depends". I won't be skiing soft leather with a cable or hardwire in the future. I will continue to ski my plastic Scarpa T2's with the Voile Switchback but I would never classify that setup as an XCD setup. Everyone has their own definition as to what constitutes XCD, but in my mind, the Xplore system with a sturdy and supportive boot is every bit as capable as most leather boot and cable combinations. I understand the resistance by many toward the new system. There is no reason to jump ship if you have several 75 mm systems and they are working well, but for those who are new to the sport and are buying their first setup, my advice to them is to go with the Xplore system for XCD and if you want to ski a plastic boot in a downhill setup, go with a free pivot system. So on that line of thinking, you have a great XCD system, so no need even think about swapping out to the Xplore system until your boots blow out (and they will over time). When that time comes you can reevaluate the situation. If you find yourself leaving the cables in your pack more often than you pull them out, you will know for sure that you would be very happy with an Xplore option.
[/quote]

Tom

This is a great, thoughtful response and all I was looking for in my question. I think I'll stick with my pin and cable setup until things fall apart and then play with the XPlore. By then, maybe things will be a little cheaper.

Thank you! Going to log off this site for a few days until everyone cools off!

Because I should practice correctly explaining simply mechanical things, so one day I may be able to discuss higher things. I will admit I was wrong as describing the cable as a lever. The lever is actually the tarsal region of the foot. The cable allows for progressive attachment to the ski, as opposed to direct attachment to the ski. It is simple for one to imagine that if instead a spring solid wire was attached to the ski and the boot in the same manner as a cable, when the heel was lifted high enough to make the wire tight, at that point the foot would act as a lever pushing the front of the ski into the snow.
The bottom line for people to understand is a cable depending upon how active can indeed pressure the front of the ski.
Remember just because one has theoretical knowledge, doesn’t necessarily mean they can visualize theory in practice.

Would it help clarify this debate about what effect a cable binding has on ski tip pressure by bringing in the concept of “Active bindings?”

I think all NTN bindings have some degree of “Activeness,” and none attach the ski boot heel to the ski.
The heel is free to lift up and off the ski.
Yet, as the heel lifts, weight on the ski is redistributed away from the tail of the ski and towards the tip of the ski.
I think this is what some people are trying to say with the reference to “Cable bindings” and “Tip pressure.”
(This is a long thread and I don’t have all the details in my head.)
So the cable on a cable binding resists the raising of the boot heel because that make the cable longer (which engages the spring by compressing it).
The resistance in raising the heel allows the skier to transfer relatively more weight to his/her toes, which applies additional pressure to the ski tips.

All that said, physics and science are great for understanding things.
I’m sure lots has been applied to, say the Mona LIsa, but it’s the art that captivates our soul, not the science.

Scientific Reductionism
“One form of scientific reductionism follows the belief that every single process in nature can be broken down into its constituent parts and can be described scientifically. The broadest sense of the term upholds the idea that science can be used to explain everything, and that nothing is unknowable.”

Ok, but in the end, so what?
We’re born, we live, we die.
Either god made us, or he didn’t.

This is like the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.
The answer is 42, but we’ve forgotten the question by now…

HAPPY NEW YEAR — WAHOO