Take back your newsgroup

I'm tired of stupid, lazy ass bitches coming in here an complaining
that there's no on topic content. If you don't like it, start a
****ing thread. It's not like it's difficult to do. just ask your
stupid question and follow the **** up. Okay?

I'll be if each of you worthless pieces of **** started 5 new topics a
day the "noise" would disappear in the background. Quit your bitching
and start posting. or just quitcher bitching, and admit that this is
the most fun you've ever had.

The Real Bev wrote:
Gonar the Whiner wrote:

Fixed that for you.

I'm tired of stupid, lazy ass bitches coming in here an complaining
that there's no on topic content. If you don't like it, start a
****ing thread. It's not like it's difficult to do. just ask your
stupid question and follow the **** up. Okay?

I'll be if each of you worthless pieces of **** started 5 new topics
a day the "noise" would disappear in the background. Quit your
bitching and start posting. or just quitcher bitching, and admit
that this is the most fun you've ever had.

It used to be, but it eventually got old.

Next week I'm going to get my new old skis' bindings remounted or
replaced with some virgin $2 yard-sale bindings that are newer than
anything I already own.
My older non-rental bindings have a wider range of adjustment than
newer bindings. Is this an income-enhancement feature for the
binding manufacturers or is there some actual value in bindings with
no more than half an inch of length adjustment?

Rental bindings are heavier and have to have more moveing parts, normal
bindings are more restricted, but it's far more than 1/2 an inch


--
Chris *:-)

Rule 1 - Me first
Rule 2 - Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!
Rule 3 - Skis at the bottom, Head at the top!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk

On Nov 9, 5:27*am, The Real Bev wrote:

My older non-rental bindings have a wider range of adjustment than newer
bindings. *Is this an income-enhancement feature for the binding manufacturers
or is there some actual value in bindings with no more than half an inch of
length adjustment?

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.

On Nov 9, 5:29*am, Evojeesus wrote:

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.

They have those now. But as mentioned they are rental bindings AFAIK.
Sometimes just the heel will slide on a plate that is about 3" long.
But then you lose center. If both heel and toe are on plates you can
still center the boot.

That much plate would really increase the underfoot flat spot though.
I doubt anyone pays much attention to that anymore as the skis are so
short that I don't see how they could get that nice even arc anyways.

None of that means anything to an "intermediate" skier though.

MoonMan wrote:

The Real Bev wrote:
Gonar the Whiner wrote:

Fixed that for you.

I'm tired of stupid, lazy ass bitches coming in here an complaining
that there's no on topic content. If you don't like it, start a
****ing thread. It's not like it's difficult to do. just ask your
stupid question and follow the **** up. Okay?

I'll be if each of you worthless pieces of **** started 5 new topics
a day the "noise" would disappear in the background. Quit your
bitching and start posting. or just quitcher bitching, and admit
that this is the most fun you've ever had.

It used to be, but it eventually got old.

Next week I'm going to get my new old skis' bindings remounted or
replaced with some virgin $2 yard-sale bindings that are newer than
anything I already own.
My older non-rental bindings have a wider range of adjustment than
newer bindings. Is this an income-enhancement feature for the
binding manufacturers or is there some actual value in bindings with
no more than half an inch of length adjustment?

Rental bindings are heavier and have to have more moveing parts, normal
bindings are more restricted, but it's far more than 1/2 an inch

Not these. Marker Selective Control M41 Twin cam. I need about 1/4" more
travel and I can't get it. I cranked the damn things back and forth and that's
all the travel there is. Took 'em to two shops, figuring that there was some
secret adjustment I didn't know about, and both agree -- that's all the travel
there is.

I always buy used skis and this is the first pair I've been unable to adjust to
my size, including my first ones which were given to me by a woman whose feet
were three or four sizes smaller than mine. No, they weren't rental bindings.
My Elans have rental bindings. If I was sure I was going to like the Volants
I'd just have the Elan's bindings transferred.

Given the weight of the skis, extra binding weight seems within the noise range
-- although true gram-shaving bicyclists would certainly find that much extra
weight unacceptable :-)

--
Cheers, Bev
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++
Warning -- Driver carries less than $20 worth of ammunition

On Nov 9, 5:27*pm, pigo wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:29*am, Evojeesus wrote:

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.

... If both heel and toe are on plates you can
still center the boot.

That much plate would really increase the underfoot flat spot though.

I don't think such a spot exist with modern bindings.

I doubt anyone pays much attention to that anymore as the skis are so
short that I don't see how they could get that nice even arc anyways.

Häh/waas?

Evojeesus wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:27 am, The Real Bev wrote:

My older non-rental bindings have a wider range of adjustment than newer
bindings. Is this an income-enhancement feature for the binding manufacturers
or is there some actual value in bindings with no more than half an inch of
length adjustment?

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.

IIRC, ESS is now Atomic bindings - bought out ...

On Nov 9, 3:25*pm, Evojeesus wrote:
On Nov 9, 5:27*pm, pigo wrote:

On Nov 9, 5:29*am, Evojeesus wrote:

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.
... If both heel and toe are on plates you can
still center the boot.
That much plate would really increase the underfoot flat spot though.

I don't think such a spot exist with modern bindings.

I doubt anyone pays much attention to that anymore as the skis are so
short that I don't see how they could get that nice even arc anyways.

Häh/waas?

You'll have to excuse Piglet, He knows about as much about ski design
as he does about politics.

Atomic bought ESS/VAR (as LAL points out) the binders are free
floating on a proprietary plate structure. you can move them forward
and back. The downside is that you are stuck with the ski/binding.
the upside is that you have nearly infinite remount capability.

On Nov 9, 9:54*pm, Gonar the Incontinent wrote:
On Nov 9, 3:25*pm, Evojeesus wrote:





On Nov 9, 5:27*pm, pigo wrote:

On Nov 9, 5:29*am, Evojeesus wrote:

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable centre-point?
Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the bindings on modern
skis methinks a movable binding would be useful.
... If both heel and toe are on plates you can
still center the boot.
That much plate would really increase the underfoot flat spot though.

I don't think such a spot exist with modern bindings.

I doubt anyone pays much attention to that anymore as the skis are so
short that I don't see how they could get that nice even arc anyways.

Häh/waas?

You'll have to excuse Piglet, He knows about as much about ski design
as he does about politics.

So are you trying to tell me that a short piece of anything will flex
the same as a longer one? Is this from the jeff davis school of
physics?

And how's that hope and change working out for YOU?

pigo wrote:
On Nov 9, 9:54 pm, Gonar the Incontinent wrote:
On Nov 9, 3:25 pm, Evojeesus wrote:





On Nov 9, 5:27 pm, pigo wrote:

On Nov 9, 5:29 am, Evojeesus wrote:

Yeah and what happened to Ess Var with the adjustable
centre-point? Seeing all the dicussions on where to mount the
bindings on modern skis methinks a movable binding would be
useful.
... If both heel and toe are on plates you can
still center the boot.
That much plate would really increase the underfoot flat spot
though.

I don't think such a spot exist with modern bindings.

I doubt anyone pays much attention to that anymore as the skis are
so short that I don't see how they could get that nice even arc
anyways.

Häh/waas?

You'll have to excuse Piglet, He knows about as much about ski design
as he does about politics.

So are you trying to tell me that a short piece of anything will flex
the same as a longer one? Is this from the jeff davis school of
physics?

No, they change the shape of the short piece of material so that it flexes
exactly as required just as they used to with the long pieces, and still do
for speed skis.


--
Chris *:-)

Rule 1 - Me first
Rule 2 - Downhill Good, Uphill BAD!
Rule 3 - Skis at the bottom, Head at the top!

www.suffolkvikings.org.uk