riser plates in the backcountry?

[lilcliffy]

So- I just bought a pair of 162cm Altai Koms and am trying to decide on a binding.

I will be mostly using my Scarpa T4s on this ski.

I have never used a riser plate on a backcountry ski...

Had originally assumed I would put the standard old-school Voile 3-pin-cable binding on this ski...

But- am considering other bindings- all of which have a riser plate.

Thoughts?

[connyro]

Have you looked at the Voile Traverse: basically 3-pin cable with integrated risers. http://www.voile.com/voile-3-pin-cable- ... nding.html

Another option that some folks I ski with use is the BMD Telebulldog 3-pin: http://www.burntmtn.com/00TB3pin/ltindex.html It would NOT need risers.

I use Voile 3-pin cables/Asolo Snowfields leathers on my Guides without risers and they work/feel fine.

[Woodserson]

LC- I dug a little deeper why I used riser plates on my last post in the KOM thread.

[lilcliffy]

Definitely considering the 3-pin traverse...

Just unsure whether I need/want the riser in the backcountry...

[Harris]

Riser plates are kinda a non-issue. I'm not a big fan of the Meidjo 2.0 (have not experimented with the 2,1) after they pulled out of my ski within 2 weeks under normal conditions, but one of the things I really like about it was that it sat down lower on the ski than any other NTN. I could in fact feel the difference and liked it. It was subtle, but I felt a better sense of the ski. However, was it epiphany level? No. In the old days when skis were sub 85 mm waisted a riser helped eliminate "binding/boot out" on steeper slopes, and because of that I suspect many MFGs adopted them (plus in the 90's that was the thing in the alpine world and still is in the alpine race world). Tele binding MFGs in the 90's also offered wedges to compensate for early plastic duckbill boot "rocker launch," a real problem back then. That said, I wouldn't worry about risers as far as keeping you from a binding choice. What I would worry about is picking a binding that flexes the way you like it. That is the real problem with selecting a binding. Many basically do the same thing, but each one has a different feel. Even a Red Chili feels different than a G3 Targa despite the fact that they basically work the same. Same with all the others beyond an old school straight up 3 pin clamper without a heel loop setup. But the issue with the 3 pin only setup (no loops) is for solid, regular use, it pretty much sucks with regard to durability; it will eventually elongate the pin holes severely enough that you either resole (leather) or ditch the three pin eventually for a different binding (plastic). The combo heel loop/pin bindings seem to hold up well though.

[lowangle al]

I like the 3 pin HW. There light and tour well w/o the heel throws and they ski real well on the down. It's a more practical binding for e than y switch backs.

[lilcliffy]

Riser plates are kinda a non-issue. I'm not a big fan of the Meidjo 2.0 (have not experimented with the 2,1) after they pulled out of my ski within 2 weeks under normal conditions, but one of the things I really like about it was that it sat down lower on the ski than any other NTN. I could in fact feel the difference and liked it. It was subtle, but I felt a better sense of the ski. However, was it epiphany level? No. In the old days when skis were sub 85 mm waisted a riser helped eliminate "binding/boot out" on steeper slopes, and because of that I suspect many MFGs adopted them (plus in the 90's that was the thing in the alpine world and still is in the alpine race world). Tele binding MFGs in the 90's also offered wedges to compensate for early plastic duckbill boot "rocker launch," a real problem back then. That said, I wouldn't worry about risers as far as keeping you from a binding choice. What I would worry about is picking a binding that flexes the way you like it. That is the real problem with selecting a binding. Many basically do the same thing, but each one has a different feel. Even a Red Chili feels different than a G3 Targa despite the fact that they basically work the same. Same with all the others beyond an old school straight up 3 pin clamper without a heel loop setup. But the issue with the 3 pin only setup (no loops) is for solid, regular use, it pretty much sucks with regard to durability; it will eventually elongate the pin holes severely enough that you either resole (leather) or ditch the three pin eventually for a different binding (plastic). The combo heel loop/pin bindings seem to hold up well though.

This is all so true Harris- thank you.
Your perspective on the riser plates is valuable.
When I spoke to Nils recently he said that he finds the riser plate makes the Kom even a bit "twitchy" (his word- but a good one) on backcountry snow...

As far as flex- again you are right- this is a more important question- and I really am not experienced enough with modern Telemark bindings to know the differences.

I have tested many different boots-bindings at demo days on-piste- but the only Telemark binding I have real experience with is the 3-pin-cable.

Ignoring the riser plate for a moment-
I think that the 3-pin hardwire is likely the best choice for my everyday local use of the Kom.
It will do everything that the 3-pin cable offers- but will also offer more stability and resistance/activity when I really want to push the Kom on steep and difficult snow.
Probably the only reason not to get the hardwire is the extra DOUGH- and it is a LOT more cash!

The low verticals slopes that I will mostly hit with this ski are not worth dealing with climbing skins- therefore, I will be laying low-angle scale-friendly climbing tracks.

My limited personal experience is that the climbing performance advantage of a free-pivot binding only becomes realized on truly steep climbing tracks with full climbing skins.

If I was going to regularly ski with others using free-pivot bindings and climbing skins, the switchback might be worth it.

AND- to truly take advantage of the flex the switchback has to offer probably requires a boot beyond the T4, which I am not interested in at the moment...

[lilcliffy]

I like the 3 pin HW. There light and tour well w/o the heel throws and they ski real well on the down. It's a more practical binding for e than y switch backs.

Yeah- when I realized (DUH) that the 3-pin hardwire had a removable cable- it has really grabbed my attention.
A lot more cash though- is it worth it?

[lowangle al]

I like the 3 pin HW. There light and tour well w/o the heel throws and they ski real well on the down. It's a more practical binding for e than y switch backs.

Yeah- when I realized (DUH) that the 3-pin hardwire had a removable cable- it has really grabbed my attention.
A lot more cash though- is it worth it?

I don't know, the traverse may be all the binding you need I never skied them so I don't know.

[iBjorn]

The only advantage with riser plates is when edging skinny skis (sub-70 waist) in icy conditions (and that can be a life-threating thing in delicate situations when the binding hits the ice and the next thing is that you are going down the icy sloope at 50mph on your gore-tex ass...). But otherwise it would only add bulk, weight and most importantly, you will loose contact with your ski. The closer the binding is to the ski, the better control you will have. The only ski I have with risers is a pair of 65mm waist Rando waist skis with 3-pins, but for my next Rando race skis I will go for skis with +70mm waist to get rid of the riser plates.