Voile comparison-contrast

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
Post Reply
User avatar
lilcliffy
XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 2197
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: Nordic backcountry touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad BC; Asnes Gamme 54 BC; Asnes Storetind Carbon
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Voile comparison-contrast

Post by lilcliffy » Tue May 29, 2018 10:41 am

Just read the other thread on the Switchback vs. the Switchback x2.

What are the performance differences between the Voile Telemark bindings?
1) 3-pin cable/traverse (3PC)
2) 3-pin hardwire (3PH)
3) Switchback (SB)
4) Switchback x2 (SBX2)

I have personal experience with the 3-pin cable and the 3-pin hardwire- have briefly tested the other two.

This is my very basic understanding- please correct if I am wrong!

- The 3PC and the 3PH share the same 3-pin toe piece and therefore the pivot-point of the heel cable attachment is the same.

- The 3PH and the SB share the same spring/cartridge stiffness.

- The SBX2 has 25% stiffer springs/cartridges than the 3PH/SB.

- The SBX2 has a longer toe piece and therefore the pivot-point of the heel attachment is further back than the SB.

- The stiffer springs of the SBX2 produce more resistance and therefore greater power transfer (i.e. more "active").

- The more aft pivot-point of the SBX2 produces greater mechanical advantage and therefore greater power transfer (i.e more "active").

- The SB/SBX2 both have a free-pivot "tour" mode that allows climbing and XC skiing with zero binding and heel resistance. Switching from downhill to tour mode is made with the use of a mechanical switch on the front of the toe piece.

- The 3PC/3PH both have a traditional Nordic Norm (NN) 75mm-3-pin toe piece, that clamps down the duckbill. The clamping of the duckbill offers some resistance, creating some power transfer down into the base of the ski- this facilitates efficient XC kick & glide technique, as well as offering some power transfer in a telemark turn. However, the resistance in the 3-pin does not offer as efficient climbing performance as the free-pivot SB/SBX2.

- The heel cable must be released on the 3PC/3PH for efficient climbing and XC skiing.

- The heel assembly on the 3PH can be easily clipped to the heel riser when not in use.

So- at least a couple of questions:

Woods' comparison tests of the 3PC vs. 3PH suggest that the 3PC has stiffer springs than the 3PH/SB cartridge...Is this correct? If so- what is the advantage of the 3PH over the 3PC? My experience/impression is that the 3PH offers greater torsional stability than the 3PC...Is this true?

Is the pivot-point of the 3PC/3PH further back than the SB? And- if so- how does this compare to the SBX2?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.

User avatar
fisheater
XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI
Occupation: Construction Manager

Re: Voile comparison-contrast

Post by fisheater » Tue May 29, 2018 6:06 pm

I also only have experience with the 3-pin cable and the 3-pin HW. I find I can give the HW's a few extra twists and they seem to be more active than the 3-P cables. I find the 3-P cable's tension limited by my ability to pull it over the boot. I hesitate to attempt more tension out of the HW only because I do not want to damage the cartridges, not because I can't get it over the boot. I'm a 28.5 in my T-4's if that matters.

User avatar
Woodserson
XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire
Ski style: Bumps, trees, and steeps and long woodsy XC tours
Favorite Skis: DH: Voile Objective and V6, Altai KOMs, Atomic Vantage 85, XC: Gamme 54, Classy Woodies
Favorite boots: T4, Alaska
Occupation: Retro Rager-grouch

Re: Voile comparison-contrast

Post by Woodserson » Tue May 29, 2018 7:08 pm

Answers IN ALL CAPS
lilcliffy wrote:Just read the other thread on the Switchback vs. the Switchback x2.

What are the performance differences between the Voile Telemark bindings?
1) 3-pin cable/traverse (3PC)
2) 3-pin hardwire (3PH)
3) Switchback (SB)
4) Switchback x2 (SBX2)

I have personal experience with the 3-pin cable and the 3-pin hardwire- have briefly tested the other two.

This is my very basic understanding- please correct if I am wrong!

- The 3PC and the 3PH share the same 3-pin toe piece and therefore the pivot-point of the heel cable attachment is the same. YES

- The 3PH and the SB share the same spring/cartridge stiffness. THE SB IS STIFFER

- The SBX2 has 25% stiffer springs/cartridges than the 3PH/SB. YES, THE SB

- The SBX2 has a longer toe piece and therefore the pivot-point of the heel attachment is further back than the SB. YES

- The stiffer springs of the SBX2 produce more resistance and therefore greater power transfer (i.e. more "active"). YES

- The more aft pivot-point of the SBX2 produces greater mechanical advantage and therefore greater power transfer (i.e more "active"). YES, MUCH

- The SB/SBX2 both have a free-pivot "tour" mode that allows climbing and XC skiing with zero binding and heel resistance. Switching from downhill to tour mode is made with the use of a mechanical switch on the front of the toe piece. YES

- The 3PC/3PH both have a traditional Nordic Norm (NN) 75mm-3-pin toe piece, that clamps down the duckbill. The clamping of the duckbill offers some resistance, creating some power transfer down into the base of the ski- this facilitates efficient XC kick & glide technique, as well as offering some power transfer in a telemark turn. However, the resistance in the 3-pin does not offer as efficient climbing performance as the free-pivot SB/SBX2. YES, DEPENDS ON YOUR OPNION.

- The heel cable must be released on the 3PC/3PH for efficient climbing and XC skiing. YES... PINS!

- The heel assembly on the 3PH can be easily clipped to the heel riser when not in use. YES

So- at least a couple of questions:

Woods' comparison tests of the 3PC vs. 3PH suggest that the 3PC has stiffer springs than the 3PH/SB cartridge...Is this correct? If so- what is the advantage of the 3PH over the 3PC? My experience/impression is that the 3PH offers greater torsional stability than the 3PC...Is this true? THE CABLE IS STIFFER THAN THE BLUE CARTRIDGES VIA STAND-ON-SKI AND PULL BY HAND TEST, BUT THE HARDWIRES ARE SMOOTHER AND MORE SUPPORTIVE

Is the pivot-point of the 3PC/3PH further back than the SB? And- if so- how does this compare to the SBX2? YES, THE SB IS THE MOST NEUTRAL FROM A PIVOT STANDPOINT, THE 3PC/PH ARE LESS THAN THE SBX2

User avatar
lowangle al
XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1130
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Voile comparison-contrast

Post by lowangle al » Wed May 30, 2018 10:33 am

Even if the 3pc is more active than the HW I think the HW skis better. Probably due to having greater leverage to get the (rear) ski on edge.

Post Reply