A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Backcountry Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Silvretta 400 parts



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 23rd 03, 05:46 AM
John Horton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Silvretta 400 parts

Help I am looking for a supplier for Silvretta 400 parts or a similar
design binding. Are these things still manufactured? Does anyone make
something very similar?

Thanks,


Ads
  #2  
Old July 23rd 03, 11:33 AM
Gary S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 22 Jul 2003 22:46:22 -0700, (John Horton)
wrote:

Help I am looking for a supplier for Silvretta 400 parts or a similar
design binding. Are these things still manufactured? Does anyone make
something very similar?

I thought they had moved on to later models, like the 404, which has
been around a few.

Three places to try, all in New England:

Ragged Mountain Equipment, Intervale, NH
http://www.raggedmt.com/
International Mountain Equipment, N. Conway, NH
http://www.ime-usa.com/ime/index.html
Climb High Retail Store, Burlington , VT
http://www.climbhigh.com/

All carry parts for some AT bindings, and may have what you want. You
will need to speak with someone in their retail stores, and possibly
get referred to their binding gurus. If they don't have, they will be
able to either suggest other shops or give you a realistic assessment
of the odds of finding what you want.

HTH,
Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom
  #3  
Old July 30th 03, 06:13 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Jonathan Shefftz wrote:
The 404 was a contemporary of the 400 - just a different length
adjustment mechanism I think.
The 500 updates the 400/404 with carbon fiber rails to save weight.
The 505 adds a true step-in (as opposed to latch-in) heel piece, but
loses compatibility with many climbing boots.
The 555 is similar to the 505, but compatible only with alpine touring
boots (as opposed to climbing boots).
Unless you really want to use climbing boots for skiing though, I
think Fritschi and Dynafit (and maybe even the new Naxo) offer far
better products.


_ Depends on your definition of "better". I've been using a pair
of 500's this spring and I'm pretty impressed with
them. Mounting them is definitely tricky, you need to be very
precise in aligning the heel piece to the rails. They're light,
they work with climbing boots and they are very easy to switch
modes. If they match your needs, I see no reason not to get
them. Especially as the price in the USA has dropped
dramactically. I admit I got mine mostly because of the
climbing boot issue, but after having used them for a while I
don't think they should dismissed out of hand as a general
purpose ski mountaineering binding.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBPygKsWTWTAjn5N/lAQHDXgQAp6Rk/Kfedlg7q/S4ovLp5cudKQncmDij
IH6On3aPAM656DEZ7jI8ODVKhXkW4GHFXU25sZx6lv/wnj4qDCaA2iqHJReAn0C3
tMjUA7D0lj16i0AF8t2BGmfls8PKADAGfOj7yhE5Sf8EtlLfM9 fgwm98PYvjtWHl
3jMQCfB15RY=
=rVvj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #4  
Old July 30th 03, 06:58 PM
Clyde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Jul.30.03@telemark. slac.stanford.edu
wrote:

In article ,
Jonathan Shefftz wrote:
The 404 was a contemporary of the 400 - just a different length
adjustment mechanism I think.
The 500 updates the 400/404 with carbon fiber rails to save weight.
The 505 adds a true step-in (as opposed to latch-in) heel piece, but
loses compatibility with many climbing boots.
The 555 is similar to the 505, but compatible only with alpine touring
boots (as opposed to climbing boots).
Unless you really want to use climbing boots for skiing though, I
think Fritschi and Dynafit (and maybe even the new Naxo) offer far
better products.


404 also had a different heel.

_ Depends on your definition of "better". I've been using a pair
of 500's this spring and I'm pretty impressed with
them. Mounting them is definitely tricky, you need to be very
precise in aligning the heel piece to the rails. They're light,
they work with climbing boots and they are very easy to switch
modes. If they match your needs, I see no reason not to get
them. Especially as the price in the USA has dropped
dramactically. I admit I got mine mostly because of the
climbing boot issue, but after having used them for a while I
don't think they should dismissed out of hand as a general
purpose ski mountaineering binding.


Agreed, I like the 500 over the others as well but haven't tried the
Naxo yet. However, I am drooling over the new Silvretta with Dynafit
toe.
  #5  
Old July 30th 03, 10:53 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Clyde wrote:
bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Jul.30.03@telemark .slac.stanford.edu
wrote:

Unless you really want to use climbing boots for skiing though, I
think Fritschi and Dynafit (and maybe even the new Naxo) offer far
better products.


404 also had a different heel.

_ Depends on your definition of "better". I've been using a pair
of 500's this spring and I'm pretty impressed with
them. Mounting them is definitely tricky, you need to be very
precise in aligning the heel piece to the rails. They're light,
they work with climbing boots and they are very easy to switch
modes. If they match your needs, I see no reason not to get
them. Especially as the price in the USA has dropped
dramactically. I admit I got mine mostly because of the
climbing boot issue, but after having used them for a while I
don't think they should dismissed out of hand as a general
purpose ski mountaineering binding.


Agreed, I like the 500 over the others as well but haven't tried the
Naxo yet. However, I am drooling over the new Silvretta with Dynafit
toe.


_ Interesting, but I don't understand the advantage of it other
than perhaps a better toe release. One other thing I've heard
of that I would definitely consider after using the 500 is a
using the 500 rails and rail lock as a combination
riser/climbing lift for a telemark binding. There was a review
of this setup on www.telemarktips.com. The easy of AT climbing
with the fun of a telemark turn.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBPyhMbWTWTAjn5N/lAQHhygP+J/TIYGGxfjx/nVPuLEl991+T+Bbd+8mo
nMXaDaJYHCPMDMIWRw8r8tgoi1z+xBmtUKfUeGr2eq2X4xwG06 re2BTGaJMXPaZ8
dE7awwRuIrKdj+HkSvMLZI3rVglSKtpd0mHRMUnR+nQn7//sfuUFafCp8UqT/C4G
RxkYzv7e0Nw=
=izV1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #6  
Old July 31st 03, 12:14 AM
Clyde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Jul.30.03@telemark. slac.stanford.edu
wrote:

_ Interesting, but I don't understand the advantage of it other
than perhaps a better toe release. One other thing I've heard
of that I would definitely consider after using the 500 is a
using the 500 rails and rail lock as a combination
riser/climbing lift for a telemark binding. There was a review
of this setup on www.telemarktips.com. The easy of AT climbing
with the fun of a telemark turn.


None of that silly stepping on/off ski to change modes like on the
Dynafit bindings and not much heavier. True step-in with Dynafit
compatible boots. But it won't be sold in the US this season and
supplies will be limited.

The tele set-up isn't sold by Silvretta, some small Euro company, but
makes sense for touring with heavy gear, especially in the Alps. Tua
makes something similar but didn't import it.
  #7  
Old August 1st 03, 04:31 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Ulrich Hausmann wrote:
bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Jul.30.03@telemark. slac.stanford.edu wrote:


_ Interesting, but I don't understand the advantage of it other
than perhaps a better toe release. One other thing I've heard
of that I would definitely consider after using the 500 is a
using the 500 rails and rail lock as a combination
riser/climbing lift for a telemark binding. There was a review
of this setup on www.telemarktips.com. The easy of AT climbing
with the fun of a telemark turn.


do you mean this: http://www.telemark-easygo.com/ ?

if so, it's sold by silvretta, but was out of stock very soon. a friend
of mine uses it on trab (on Svalbard last year) - and was very happy
with it.


_ Yes, that's exactly what I mean. In addition to getting a
better climbing mode, you also have a very easy to use
ski crampon available.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBPyqV7WTWTAjn5N/lAQF59wQAmt0CmlMXrbB+Cm1PtAjOnCb+UW0wyB5Z
/ptRh9w+g6icLd7bli+IjX+y/AV7Y3Dkfla4FOWSdq5EPU/NJOUC1LRcxFnwEp3O
kgfjLrKuwLI2IBFVrqh1Gp7K3XGs39xdXqEm7Uk35mIFs3iWG4 5ax/eSdN++4oc/
gA12JdbYWpk=
=5eKJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #8  
Old August 4th 03, 03:52 PM
Jonathan Shefftz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The Silvretta 400/404/500/505/555 all lack a lateral release at the
toe (instead placing it at the heel). No recent alpine downhill
binding has ever lacked a lateral toe release. This strikes me as a
significant Silvretta disadvantage.
Silvretta advantages? The 500 is a few ounces lighter than the Diamir
III, but lacks a true step-in heel. The 505 has a step-in heel, but
is almost exactly the same weight as the DIII.
So other than climbing boot compatibility, I can’t think of any
reasons to buy a Silvretta.
  #9  
Old August 4th 03, 06:31 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
Jonathan Shefftz wrote:
The Silvretta 400/404/500/505/555 all lack a lateral release at the
toe (instead placing it at the heel). No recent alpine downhill
binding has ever lacked a lateral toe release.


_ Very few alpine bindings have a lateral heel release.

This strikes me as a
significant Silvretta disadvantage.


_ I said "ski mountaineering" not skiing. There is no standard
for AT binding release, so it's all smoke and mirrors anyway.
The Diamir lacks a lateral heal release, so it's less "safe". My
ancient Marker beartraps had a "toe release", I suspect the 500's
are much safer.... Show me a test the one passes that the other
doesn't. The silvretta uses a different engineering technique to
solve the same problem, you haven't demonstrated that it's an
inferior solution. Why is a lateral toe release superior to
a lateral heel release? If the Diamir's had an upward toe release
you might have an argument, but they don't.

Silvretta advantages? The 500 is a few ounces lighter than the Diamir
III, but lacks a true step-in heel. The 505 has a step-in heel, but
is almost exactly the same weight as the DIII.
So other than climbing boot compatibility, I can’t think of any
reasons to buy a Silvretta.


_ Try using a pair. They require a careful install and getting
them adjusted properly takes some time, but once things are set
up properly they are incredibly easy to switch modes with, the
pivot point is in the right place to make skating easy and the
crampon is simple to take on/off, you can do it without taking the
boot out of the binding. You don't hear stories of toe pieces or
rails breaking[1]. IMHO, durability and ease of use are just as
important as any perceived safety advantage. Sometimes
"simpler is better".

_ If you want a binding to ride the lifts then the Diamir is
probably beefier, but if you're looking for backcountry only
I don't see any obvious reason to not look at the Silvretta.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- This may have more to do with who buys the bindings rather
than anything inherent to their design. I suspect people that
"huck" don't buy Silvretta's.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBPy6mkWTWTAjn5N/lAQFxgQP8C1VGJUokYfkjSPbCOKuUee4kUlJ+5M3y
sd4aBh/rWz/sjR2cPOw/PuPF0vcQT9AMpPoRncOfBb4NtkPIabX28/XVXxDQrWVU
zfa2rioXWeJ/Qeesu1B8Jf8VWT8+6+3J9+e0niG1DY+R+Lyc8WSWMyKi07XKBX uI
Nyy9jy2QZJs=
=S/wt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #10  
Old August 4th 03, 09:40 PM
Jonathan Shefftz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That is definitely the best and most-informed Silvretta defense I have
ever read.
Now back to the debate!
Although I’ve attended clinics from:
http://www.vermontskisafety.com/
.... and read many articles on alpine downhill binding safety, I will
agree that I have no direct evidence that placing the lateral release
at the toe is superior to placing it at the heel.
But given that *all* recent alpine downhill bindings have a lateral
toe release, and that very few bother with a lateral heel release
(despite having all sorts of other innovative features), my conclusion
is that a lateral toe release is a critical safety feature, while a
lateral heel release is not a significant advantage. Also, as I try
to envision it, the situation that a lateral release is trying to
solve arises from the boot and ski diverging - the heel is aligned w/
the shaft of the leg, so the pivoting occurs there, and lateral
pressure that the binding can sense occurs at the toe, not the heel.
(Think about hooking a tip on a branch, a la a slalom race course: the
Diamir toe will release laterally, but will the Silvretta heel release
laterally in that situation?)
I’ll agree that fixing crampons w/o exiting the binding is a
nifty feature - I’ve been in many situations where that would
have been a nice plus.
Standards for alpine touring bindings though exist just like standards
for alpine downhill bindings - you can order the DIN from that Euro
website (though it costs a non-negligible sum, so I haven’t
bothered yet).
As for the mode switch, I’ve played w/ it in shops, and it does
indeed appear to be a par w/ the Diamir.
Regarding durability, I heard some nightmare stories from these guys:
http://www.andesmountainsports.com/
....but that of course is just one step (barely) above anecdotal
evidence.
Overall, I still think that for those most concerned about weight,
Dynafit is the best choice; for climbing boot compatibility, Silvretta
500; everyone else, Diamir (or maybe the new Naxo).
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WANTED: Burton Mission parts... toddjb Snowboarding 0 May 5th 04 05:34 PM
Heavy parts? Terje Henriksen Nordic Skiing 6 April 11th 04 06:26 PM
FA: 3 auctions for parts rollerskis: Karhu, Exel, Roleto Jeff Potter Nordic Skiing 0 March 22nd 04 07:36 PM
What ski-pass system in Iscgl Silvretta? STREBOR European Ski Resorts 2 January 16th 04 11:42 AM
K2 Clicker Spare Parts Geoff Snowboarding 3 October 7th 03 05:18 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.