Voile comparison-contrast
Posted: 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?
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?