Mounting 3-Pin over Xplore

[Lhartley]

I'm no expert but I've skied my Blizzard zero G with both AT and tele Mounts pretty hard, and they're pawlonia. Holes everywhere. I mean, QK likely going to void your warranty anyways so poke away til you find what you like? This is why lots of people buy previously mounted stuff at a heavy discount and do lots of experimenting. Not to speak for others, just an observation

[JohnSKepler]

More data. Balance points with bindings. I think that makes more sense than a bare ski.

Front of ski is to the right.
- CL is the centerline and balance point (BP) of the bare ski. They are within 1/16” for this ski.
- 3P is the BP of the ski plus the 3-pin binding.
- 3P W is the BP of the binding with the hardwire.
- CA is the center of the arc; mid-point between the widest point at the tip and the widest point at the tail.
- Numbers along the bottom are centimeters.

For carving a turn on edge the best place to apply pressure should be CA. I’m going to mount the binding to put the pin-line over, or close to, CA. It will also bias the weight towards the rear when touring so the tail will drag more than the tip.

[Manney]

Best to sleep on it for a few nights.

The flawed premise is that skier pressure is transmitted along the pin line instead of at the BoF. But in a carving turn, the skier’s foot will need to be planted to gain an effective edge.

[Roman]

I went the BOF/CRS route. The explanation in the thread below. It’s just another way of looking at things. The decision should be based on your specific needs.

http://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... 041#p58041

[fisheater]

John, a completely different thought. The FT X is a well designed ski designed to be skied at BP. It is not a performance track ski where any of this minutiae about how balance point means anything. This is a backcountry ski that you are skiing in soft snow.
12 mm isn’t a lot. It isn’t going to change in any perceptible manner how your body weight pressures or flexes the ski. Even when you factor in the shape (sidecut) of the ski, and how the ski bends in a turn, with the changes in force that occur with velocity. I bet 10 pounds in a pack would make a bigger difference.
Even 24 mm isn’t huge. Skier unconscious adjustment should overcome 24 mm. While being fully supportive in soft snow, the FT X is still a relatively light, soft ski. An inch either way just isn’t going to change things greatly.

[fisheater]

John, a completely different thought. The FT X is a well designed ski designed to be skied at BP. It is not a performance track ski where any of this minutiae about how balance point means anything. This is a backcountry ski that you are skiing in soft snow.
12 mm isn’t a lot. It isn’t going to change in any perceptible manner how your body weight pressures or flexes the ski. Even when you factor in the shape (sidecut) of the ski, and how the ski bends in a turn, with the changes in force that occur with velocity. I bet 10 pounds in a pack would make a bigger difference.
Even 24 mm isn’t huge. Skier unconscious adjustment should overcome 24 mm. While being fully supportive in soft snow, the FT X is still a relatively light, soft ski. An inch either way just isn’t going to change things greatly.

[mca80]

For carving a turn on edge the best place to apply pressure should be CA. I’m going to mount the binding to put the pin-line over, or close to, CA.

If the first point is true then why would you propose that mounting point? The duckbill won't be the spot applying most pressure to the ski. It will rather be further back at the ball of foot. Or am I mistaken to think this?

[Manney]

You are right to point out BoF, @mca80. For a true carving turn, it might even be as far back as the mid foot because the foot is firmly planted in a carving turn.

[lilcliffy]

Hi John,
Just read through your thread and have a- perhaps obnoxious- question-

I am curious as to your motivation for doing this?

Why would you do this- as opposed to simply buying another set of FTX and mounting 75mm?

Also- curious- why you are mounting 75mm on this particular ski?
I would think that a rigid 75mm Telemark boot would be waaay overkill for this very narrow Nordic touring ski...

[JohnSKepler]

Hi John,
Just read through your thread and have a- perhaps obnoxious- question-

I am curious as to your motivation for doing this?

Why would you do this- as opposed to simply buying another set of FTX and mounting 75mm?

Also- curious- why you are mounting 75mm on this particular ski?
I would think that a rigid 75mm Telemark boot would be waaay overkill for this very narrow Nordic touring ski...

It's a good question with something of a multilayered answer. If I've read between the lines on your posts here and there it seems you are a university lecturer or professor. That makes sense because this is a philosophical question and my answer goes that direction. Doesn't it also mean there are no bad questions?

The simple answer is that I want to make an informed decision about mounting point. If I throw the question out there I get everything from 5-10 cm back to 5-10 cm forward. About the only think I don't get is advice to mount them on the bottom! For me, as an engineer, data is king. I make measurements and attempt to understand. I didn't grow up doing this. I don't have a gut feel for how things work. There's no real data out there. My 'instinct' in this case is to understand. I'm quite a good engineer but generally not the life of the party.

Another answer, because my brain is what it is, I'm always seeking efficiency. The ups and downs of that are for another conversation (mostly it sucks but people like heat in the winter so...). But the idea of modularity resonates with me. With my motorcycles, simply changing tires can transform my R1200GS from a pretty good road bike to a pretty good adventure bike. Two bikes in one! (Kind of. It's always a compromise. Dual sport tires are even worse. etc...) My job is this way, too. Solutions these days have to be modular. Everything we do is that way. Hard to keep it from creeping in to your daily life. The idea of modular skis is no different. Less stuff to store. Less stuff to maintain. Fewer boxes on the doorstep. Fewer lies to tell my sexy wife...

Another answer: I'm somewhat jealous of you guys. You've got a lot of experience that you use to both ski better than me, and are [mostly] happy to answer my questions, for which I'm grateful. How'd you get that experience? Well, by doing. You've done your own experimenting. You've skied stuff as it 'came out.' You've watched the equipment landscape change. You know how different systems perform so you can extrapolate as to how modifications will change things. I have none of that and I don't think you all really appreciate what you have and how hard it is to acquire. All I have is knowledge of physics and engineering and enough sense to know when it doesn't apply. By the time I gained regular access to skiing I was in my 50s and partly cripple. By "doing this" I get the experience of having done it. I get the experience of having skied it. And I can pass on what I learn along the way. It may seem trivial to some but there are a few nuggets up there that have come out of this.

Ultimately I may buy another set of FTX but I'm going to fill this set with holes first. At the end of last winter I was just getting good enough, honestly, to even tell a difference between Xplore and 75mm! I'm going to move the bindings around and see how it feels from one point to another. And then I may do it on another ski. If I'm really lucky I'll get some good snow this winter and try things out in a variety of conditions. If I'm even luckier I'll get maybe ten to twelve more years to do this with at least one knee replacement in there and who knows what else.

I guess I appear very enthusiastic. I'm curious. I'm still excited. Still eagerly anticipating the first good snow fall. I'm still a kid. My wife tells me not everyone is like that but I'm not going to apologize for it.