NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/skiing/8885

Text File | 1992-12-23 | 2.0 KB | 45 lines

Newsgroups: rec.skiing
Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!gatech!destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!fornax!jacobi!vaisey
From: [e-mail] (Jacques Vaisey)
Subject: Re: xc heel positioner question (and bindings in general)
In-Reply-To: [e-mail]'s message of Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:56:57 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Jacques Vaisey)
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C. Canada
References: <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Dec 92 09:05:22
Lines: 30

>>>>> On Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:56:57 GMT, [e-mail] (Ilana Stern) said:

Ilana> I like the NNN-BC (*not* the "light touring" NNN) because it holds
Ilana> my foot very well in line with the ski.  It's a vast improvement over
Ilana> my previous 3-pin binding;  however, my previous boots and bindings
Ilana> were very much lighter-duty, and obviously quite a bit of the difference
Ilana> is due to the heavier-duty equipment.  I can telemark adequately, although
Ilana> not well, but I hesitate to assign any blame to the equipment!

Ilana> In sum, I feel that the differences between a stiff boot and a light-duty
Ilana> boot overwhelm the differences between NNN-BC and 3-pin.

From what I can see, the NNN BC seems to be a superior binding in terms
of control - especially when you want to do some diagonal stride type
touring as well as backcountry up and down. However, someone I talked
to at MEC (an equipment co-op here in town) told me that a friend of hers
had problems with the NNN BC binding auto-releasing at inconvenient times
when they were loaded down with a pack.

Does anyone out there have any comments on the reliability of the
NNN BC?

Thanks,


--
Jacques Vaisey              |     email -> [e-mail]
School of Eng. Science      |     phone -> [phone]
Simon Fraser Univ.          |       fax -> [phone]
Burnaby, British Columbia