# Flat ski vs. System



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 23, 2008)

Today I was bored and talking to someone about if it is worth it to have system bindings over a flat ski and picking your own binding.

We decided it was easier to sell a system, because you don't have to sell a ski then a binding.  But neither of us really felt a system was that much better than a flat ski.  

Personally I usually like flat skis.  the reason is mainly because the types of skis I like are flat(twin tips), but I also like them because I can choose what binding gets to go onto them.  i really like Rossi Axial bindings, and can only get a system with them on Rossi's or Dynastars, so I like flat.


----------



## snoseek (Feb 24, 2008)

I don't like all the extra weight involved with a lot of the systems.


----------



## sledhaulingmedic (Feb 24, 2008)

For me, it's a toss up.  I have some B5 and M11 Metrons that I love, but they are way heavy.  While they work well in powder and crud, I'm happier in those siuations on my powderbirds w/ Freeride Plus or Big Stix with Dukes.

I think in general, the "systems" only help on "firmer" groomed.


----------



## madskier6 (Feb 24, 2008)

Doesn't it depend on the type of ski you're buying?  Meaning, if you're looking for a carving ski, systems are predominately what's available & there's benefits to a system ski for carving.  I know there's systems available on some midfats like a Volkl AC40, which strictly speaking aren't carving skis.  But they are more like a carver than a freeride floater.

If you're looking for a powder or freeride ski (including twin tips), systems generally aren't available & there's very little benefit to having them.  I may be wrong about all this but that's how I thought it worked.

Now if the question is: I'm looking at 2 all mountain midfats in the 70-85 mm waist range.  One has a system & the other is flat.  Which ski do you prefer?  That's a different question.  I would make that decision based on the ski's characteristics & feel for my skiing style, not on whether it has an integrated binding system.  If I'm looking to save a few bucks by using an existing binding that I already have, then economics drives that decision & you go with the flat ski.  But if money is not an issue, then I would base the decision solely on which ski I prefer based on how it skis & reacts to the type of terrain I like to ski.  Whether it's a system binding is almost meaningless in that situation, isn't it?


----------



## Warp Daddy (Feb 24, 2008)

I do like the system s on My Atomic Sx 10's but the suckers are HEAVY , especially when you are yo yo skiing for 5-6 hrs in an area with NO footrests - UGHH


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 24, 2008)

I mostly agree with you Madskier.  The reason the entire conversation came up is we were thinking of carrying Dynastar next year.  You can get the Legend 8000, and a bunch of their other skis either as a flat ski, or you can get it as a system ski.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 24, 2008)

Warp Daddy said:


> I do like the system s on My Atomic Sx 10's but the suckers are HEAVY , especially when you are yo yo skiing for 5-6 hrs in an area with NO footrests - UGHH



The neox binders on my LT11s are heavy as all Heezy..


----------



## Greg (Feb 24, 2008)

I prefer flat mounts. Considering the way I ski I will never fully take advantage of a binding system. I would rather minimize weight as well.


----------



## Warp Daddy (Feb 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> The neox binders on my LT11s are heavy as all Heezy..



 Yeah mine are  Neox 4-12's on both pairs ---heavy  but damn the skis ARE fast


----------



## madskier6 (Feb 24, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> I mostly agree with you Madskier.  The reason the entire conversation came up is we were thinking of carrying Dynastar next year.  You can get the Legend 8000, and a bunch of their other skis either as a flat ski, or you can get it as a system ski.



In that case, for that model ski, I'd prefer buying it flat.  I wouldn't be buying a Legend 8000 to rail on groomers, so I'd prefer to choose my own bindings (either new or existing ones I already have).


----------



## millerm277 (Feb 24, 2008)

I prefer a flat ski over a system, because I like to pick my own binding, and I prefer a lighter ski.


----------



## Dr Skimeister (Feb 24, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> The neox binders on my LT11s are heavy as all Heezy..






Warp Daddy said:


> Yeah mine are  Neox 4-12's on both pairs ---heavy  but damn the skis ARE fast



Funny...I have Neox 4.12 on my Crimsons and I think of them as light. Much lighter than the Look TX 7.0 on my Betacarv 9.18.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Feb 24, 2008)

Dr Skimeister said:


> Funny...I have Neox 4.12 on my Crimsons and I think of them as light. Much lighter than the Look TX 7.0 on my Betacarv 9.18.



That's a first..my Rossi Mojo 15s on my Rossi Scratch BC Sprayers are much better binders IMHO..and are lighter..


----------



## bigbog (Feb 24, 2008)

*...*

Maybe it is just a personal preference.  However the way I've heard it...right or wrong... for more _feel_ ..ie bump/powder/all-mtn(some) tools,  you want to be closer to the ski, whereas with a carving/all-mtn-carve ski you want the fastest and greatest response to any angulation you create = the higher up you are, the less movement _you_ have to make...y/n?   ..But seems as though there could be some technically specific reasoning..(ie ski-dimension-specs).that I have no idea of...


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 24, 2008)

I voted to flat, but that said, I've never tried a 'system' ski.  From what I understand, flat mounting is probably best for the type of skiing I usually do.  That said, I wouldn't mind having a set of race stock system rippers in my quiver for hard snow days.  I feel I can lay over my skis and carve pretty well as it is, but I would love to try a true race carve ski today.  Haven't been on a set of race skis in over ten years and I think it would be fun to try.

The primary reason I'll probably mainly stick to flat though is I tend to hold onto bindings until I either break them or a ski shop refuses to work with them.


----------



## thinnmann (Feb 24, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> I mostly agree with you Madskier.  The reason the entire conversation came up is we were thinking of carrying Dynastar next year.  You can get the Legend 8000, and a bunch of their other skis either as a flat ski, or you can get it as a system ski.



Can't you order both?


----------



## riverc0il (Feb 24, 2008)

There seem to be some technological performance increases with system skis in the right conditions. That said, it mostly seems like a marketing/sales idea due to the horizontal integration of binding and ski companies. What better way to ensure a Look binding is mounted on a Dynastar ski or a Marker on a Volkl? I have a system on my groomer/carver ski in my quiver but that will remain the one and only system in my quiver. Overall, I prefer flat since systems do not add as much performance (and can take away in some cases due to higher stack height) in many natural snow conditions that are not groomed out. Flat skis also allow binding transfers so you can reuse your old bindings (bindings are getting pretty darned expensive these days) and keep prices lower for skis. As previously mentioned by others, flat skis also allow freedom of choice so you can match your favorite binding with your favorite ski. Bundling in most industries helps some people save money when they want all the aspects of the bundle. However, savvy consumers are often not served best by bundles options including system skis.

Hawkshot99, regarding the decision your shop is facing, I think it all comes down to target demographics. Who are you selling the skis to? People that prefer groomers and are looking for a "all mountain mid-fat" with a lot of excess cash that want to buy the 8000 because they saw it in SKI magazine? Or people that enjoy the skis' natural snow performance and enjoy the cheap price tag of the 8000 and will look to recycle older bindings? Savvy expert skiers are not sold on systems and value choice, is my arm chair assessment of the systems market. Whereas less savvy varied skilled folks that don't invest a lot of time into quiver and gear choices are probably more tuned into the system stuff. Just my layman's best guess. You guys will obviously sell more of one than the other if you understand your target consumer and their needs rather than the preferences of a "dedicated" lot of internet forum posters.


----------



## I_Bike_Alone (Feb 24, 2008)

don't forget the ease of mounting and adjustability. no holes drilled into the ski itself during the mounting process. But i prefer a flat ski if it matters, mainly due to weight concerns.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 24, 2008)

This begs the question, do system binding HAVE to be so heavy?  Again, never tried em, but this seems to be a common complaint.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 25, 2008)

Like other aspects of skiing technology system bindings are an advancement in that they don't just attach the boot to  the ski they integrate them resulting in better balance and more powerful turns. 

They are also an easy mount and it's a seconds adjustment to let your friend with a larger sole length use your skis.

As all can see they are becoming a larger segment each season.


----------



## riverc0il (Feb 25, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> This begs the question, do system binding HAVE to be so heavy?  Again, never tried em, but this seems to be a common complaint.


Ah yes, the weight factor. I forgot to include that in my post above but it is significant. Similar to how a ski feels heavier with a demo binding. The toe and heel pieces are similar to a regular binding, but systems usually have components (often a plate/riser) connecting all the parts together and at the least needs components to make the binding attach to the ski. Volkl does this with rails. All of these parts add up and add weight.

Good point was made that you don't have to redrill. Like demo bindings, this is helpful if you are buying used and will save you the time and effort to redrill at the cost of no binding choice and more weight.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Feb 25, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> Ah yes, the weight factor. I forgot to include that in my post above but it is significant. Similar to how a ski feels heavier with a demo binding. The toe and heel pieces are similar to a regular binding, but systems usually have components (often a plate/riser) connecting all the parts together and at the least needs components to make the binding attach to the ski. Volkl does this with rails. All of these parts add up and add weight.
> 
> Good point was made that you don't have to redrill. Like demo bindings, this is helpful if you are buying used and will save you the time and effort to redrill at the cost of no binding choice and more weight.



Are suggesting that there is a difference between the bindings on todays demo skis and system bindings? I don't mean park skis and fats that have to be mounted flat.


----------



## campgottagopee (Feb 25, 2008)

All the skis I purchased in the last 4 years have been system and honeslty I like it. The less decision making I need to do the better.


----------



## jack97 (Feb 25, 2008)

madskier6 said:


> In that case, for that model ski, I'd prefer buying it flat.  I wouldn't be buying a Legend 8000 to rail on groomers, so I'd prefer to choose my own bindings (either new or existing ones I already have).



Definite agree, I wouldn't buy a legend 8000 to go on groomers. The other consideration is once you get toward expert skis, the buyers get more fickle. A flat ski will give more options on binding vendors. In addition some vendors have different version of the same product; some have versions with lifters and rubber cushions for the park rats.


----------



## thinnmann (Feb 25, 2008)

Isn't it great that we have a choice?  I am still wondering why a shop can't just order both the system and flat versions and stock both.

I have an Atomic Metron m:EX with the Neox "system" (AKA "integrated binding")  Yes, they are one heavy pair of skis when they have to be carried, but I don't really notice he weight difference when I ski them.  They can rail on groomers and have been ok - but just ok - in 2 feet of western powder.  I only recently noticed that they are sluggish in the bumps.  That could be because I feel I have recently improved at skiing bumps, and also because I have picked up some really light Atomic 9.22s's (flat with light Fischer bindings) and Volant Zip Karv's that I can torque over bumps and in the air with a lot less effort.

Also, consider that your entire "system" includes your boots.  I have some heavy Rossi's, but my son's Lange's are significantly lighter.  If you include the boot factor in the "system" equation, that really makes the overall equipment performance picture more complex.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 25, 2008)

thinnmann said:


> Isn't it great that we have a choice?  I am still wondering why a shop can't just order both the system and flat versions and stock both.



Cause sometimes when you carry many brands, it gets very expensive to carry both.  Especially if one version will just sit there and not sell, while the other sells very good.

I am not asking this only on the 8000, that is just one of the few that I remember reading about from the product catalog.


----------



## tree_skier (Feb 25, 2008)

I voted for system even though the correct answer would have been Lifter as opposed to flat.  A good plate allows the ski to flex more evenly and gives added leverage when laying them over.


----------



## jack97 (Feb 25, 2008)

tree_skier said:


> I voted for system even though the correct answer would have been Lifter as opposed to flat.  A good plate allows the ski to flex more evenly and gives added leverage when laying them over.



IMO, this is where a ski shop can add value; by catering to the market segment that wants options. Not only different binding vendors but also accessories, mounting position and so on. 

Once a ski shop start pushing the integrated systems, they start playing into the margin game with online stores. A battle they will eventually lose.


----------



## Brettski (Feb 25, 2008)

Both

My Dynastar Mogul Skis get titanium markers

My Pocket Rockets had to be a system I think


----------



## thinnmann (Feb 25, 2008)

So I am reading March's _Skiing _magazine at lunch, and notice a short piece (page 30) about Blizzard IQ system on their freeride skis that can take alpine, Marker Duke AT and tele bindings.  "This means you can buy one pair of skis for alpine skiing, alpine touring, and telemarking."


----------



## riverc0il (Feb 25, 2008)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Are suggesting that there is a difference between the bindings on todays demo skis and system bindings? I don't mean park skis and fats that have to be mounted flat.


Not sure where you were going with this question? My statement was in reference to the fact that both systems and demo bindings weight more than their flat mount counter parts. Demo systems do not have the same performance characteristics as integrated systems to the best of my knowledge. But they both carry similar weight penalties relative to non-system counter parts.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 25, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> Demo systems do not have the same performance characteristics as integrated systems to the best of my knowledge. But they both carry similar weight penalties relative to non-system counter parts.



The K2's and Vokle's are the same performance wise as the production, just easier to adjust and weigh a bit more.

Rossi Does not have a demo binding on their system, or at least we don't use them, easy enough to adjust the production

*all this is system binding demos.*


----------



## Rushski (Feb 26, 2008)

Could not vote, as I believe it depends on the type of ski.

Thin waisted carver - System
Midfat or wider - Flat

Just my .02


----------

