Withdrawn: Objective BC w/ Lite Dogz

[phoenix]

Very tempted to sell my Objective kit, the (?) is because I'd only sell while I can get them in a 170, which are available at the moment. Won't sell if I don't have the replacement lined up.

With that said, they're in what I would call good used condition. Bases show scratches, primarily in the scale zone, no core shots or deep gauges. Edges are good; not tuned sharp but no damage. I think the current mount is the 4th, all done by yours truly, all were solid, holes properly plugged, lots of space between the various mounts. Topsheets are good. Burnt Mtn. Designs Lite Dogs bindings; 3 pin step-ins. These are excellent bindings, however please be sure the boots you'd use are compatible with 'em; the bindings themselves are very well engineered, but the lack of consistency in sole thickness & duckbills mean some boots won't get along with the binding.
Price would be $500.00 for skis and bindings, shipping extra if required (I'm in the Jay Peak area), probably around $40-50 these days.

I'd be very interested in a trade, if anyone has some 171's and would like the 164's. Waxable's definitely considered as well.

Thanks for looking.

[frankforestman]

Hi-- I'm interested. Can you send any pictures of the skis? And do you know the thickness of duckbill that works, or how I would check if my boots will fit? Feel free to email me at fizbin22 at gmail dot com. Frank

[paulzo]

PM sent.

[frankforestman]

Didn't get a PM, tried to send you one but it seems to be stuck in my outbox...

[Stephen]

@frankforestman, the way PMs work on this site, a PM you Send will be “Stuck” in your Outbox until the recipient opens the PM that is sitting unread in his / her Inbox.
It will not show as Sent for you until it is Read by the recipient.
This is always true for all PMs for all users.

It’s not the same as an email, where once you send it, it is gone from you Outbox.

[phoenix]

Frankforestman, if I can get pics I'll post them here. As far as boot fitting, any plastic boot should be OK for sole thickness, leather boots are a case by case basis; some OK, some too thick. Another factor is the placement of the holes relative to the end of the duckbill. And, I don't know specifically which brand or model is a reliable fit.

Thing is it's no fault of the binding, easily my favorite for an xcd 3 pin; skis great, step in feature is nicer than anticipated, and workmanship is excellent. Problems are with the boots... fact is there's a lack of accurate consistency in 3pin duckbills other than the lateral spacing of the pins, which is consistent. There are a number of discussions around this if you search a bit.

Paulzo, sent you a reply.

[Nick BC]

I had a problem when I first bought the LiteDogz, fitting them into my T3’s. I ended up sanding the duckbill down at the sides and it eventually clicked in. Subsequently I tried a pair of Alaska’s and they clicked right in from the get go. However, when I raised the heel I could see exposed pins due to the lower duckbill thickness.

[frankforestman]

Hi Paul-- Unfortunately, on further research I think I'd need the 171s. Thanks though. Frank

[phoenix]

"I had a problem when I first bought the LiteDogz, fitting them into my T3’s. I ended up sanding the duckbill down at the sides and it eventually clicked in. Subsequently I tried a pair of Alaska’s and they clicked right in from the get go. However, when I raised the heel I could see exposed pins due to the lower duckbill thickness."

I checked the fit with Alaska's when I got the bindings, looked good to me, and they were skiing well... but after a season or so I started noticing some slop, and found the pinholes were chewed up. So I checked my Excursions (which also ski well with the binding), and saw they were showing undue wear. I thought about sanding the duckbills (I've done that before to get a good fit in pinless tele bindings), but not sure it would be a good fix at this point.

[Nick BC]

"I had a problem when I first bought the LiteDogz, fitting them into my T3’s. I ended up sanding the duckbill down at the sides and it eventually clicked in. Subsequently I tried a pair of Alaska’s and they clicked right in from the get go. However, when I raised the heel I could see exposed pins due to the lower duckbill thickness."

I checked the fit with Alaska's when I got the bindings, looked good to me, and they were skiing well... but after a season or so I started noticing some slop, and found the pinholes were chewed up. So I checked my Excursions (which also ski well with the binding), and saw they were showing undue wear. I thought about sanding the duckbills (I've done that before to get a good fit in pines tele bindings), but wasn't sure it would be a good fix at this point.

Interesting phoenix. I’m away from my gear at the moment but when I get back I’ll measure the height of the pins on my LiteDogz and compare to those on the Rotte ST. I haven’t noticed any undue wear on the T3’s pinholes and I don’t use the Alaska’s with the LD’s anymore.