Voile comparison-contrast
- lilcliffy
- Posts: 4114
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Voile comparison-contrast
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?
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.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
- fisheater
- Posts: 2532
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:06 pm
- Location: Oakland County, MI
- Ski style: All my own, and age doesn't help
- Favorite Skis: Gamme 54, Falketind 62, I hope to add a third soon
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska, Alico Ski March
- Occupation: Construction Manager
Re: Voile comparison-contrast
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.
- Woodserson
- Posts: 2969
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 10:25 am
- Location: New Hampshire
- Ski style: Bumps, trees, steeps and long woodsy XC tours
- Occupation: Confused Turn Farmer
Re: Voile comparison-contrast
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
- lowangle al
- Posts: 2741
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:36 pm
- Location: Pocono Mts / Chugach Mts
- Ski style: BC with focus on downhill perfection
- Favorite Skis: powder skis
- Favorite boots: Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Retired cement mason. Current job is to take my recreation as serious as I did my past employment.
Re: Voile comparison-contrast
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.