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. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Silvretta 400 parts
|
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
-----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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
-----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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
-----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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
-----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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 06:36 PM |
What ski-pass system in Iscgl Silvretta? | STREBOR | European Ski Resorts | 2 | January 16th 04 10:42 AM |
K2 Clicker Spare Parts | Geoff | Snowboarding | 3 | October 7th 03 05:18 PM |