G3 Ascent Telemark Touring Binding
Early Impressions (or how I
learned to stop worrying and love the free pivot)
by Ben Paik
Telemarking is stupid,
That’s what I said.
Touring on telemark bindings is even more stupid,
Or so I have read.*
* apocryphal final verse from “Big
Bottom”; St. Hubbins, Tufnel, Smalls
September, 2006-- Last winter when Mitch asked me if I wanted to
test the new G3 Ascent bindings and review them for Telemarktips
in the fall, I immediately understood the nature of the opportunity
being presented to me and jumped at the chance. This was not
just testing a new gadget. This was an opportunity to flirt with
self-improvement, to taste the forbidden fruit of a free pivot
and to improve my uphill efficiency without having to take any
action whatsoever to minimize my downhill inefficiency. Zero
resistance going up. Sweet, sweet tele turns on the way down.
In short, an opportunity to make telemark skiing and telemark
touring slightly less stupid (for further context see, “Telemark
skiing is stupid: A Quick Summary," below). With this new
“freedom of the pivot,” I would thumb my nose at all
the AT skiers, especially at the tele-turned-AT skiers, the most
sanctimonious of them all! Telemarking is not stupid! Behold
the wonders of my frictionless travel!
Whoa, whoa, whoa, there big fella. Let’s
not get carried away. Let’s hold onto at least a modicum
of skepticism. For most folks, the wish list of tele binding
advancements includes, in no particular order, releasability,
step-in functionality, free pivot touring and improved durability,
all in a light weight, economical package (and by economical,
I mean cheap). However, I think we all know that we will not
get this magical and wondrous binding anytime in the near future.
Let’s take a minute to consider each of these four "holy
grail" features. On releasability: in my mind there remains
debate over its merits – just look at all the threads on
this very website debating that very topic. On step-in functionality,
I don’t particularly mind bending over to get into my binding,
and in fact do not like having to step down into a binding on
a steep, exposed face. I’d rather be able to hold onto the
ski and binding and ease my way in. I know this is less efficient,
but over the years I’ve come to convince myself that my
hand firmly on my heel throw is the surest way to prevent a runaway
ski. On the free pivot, I have never been particularly enamored
with the idea of a free pivot figuring that a free heel was enough.
I lift my heel just a few inches and the spring resistance does
the rest, pushing the ski forward. I like to shuffle. It’s
almost like a very slow glide. On increased durability, now you’re
talking. For me, if I had to choose just one of these advancements,
I would choose durability. (Where is the unbreakable binding?
I’d pay good money for that. Of course, that is another
discussion for another time.)
So would the free pivot tele binding turn
out to be one more incremental “innovation” with dubious
value and a heftier price tag? Or would it be a sublime delight,
reminiscent of when chocolate was first dipped into peanut butter?
(Don’t pretend like you don’t remember the commercials:
you got your peanut butter in my chocolate! You got your chocolate
in my peanut butter!).
On to the review!
When I first held the Ascent in my hand,
it was like looking at an old friend; albeit an old friend who
had just visited the local plastic surgeon. Similar, but different.
First, it sits high. Approximately 1.5 cm higher than a Targa
/ T9 on a regular shim. Second, it’s heavy (1406 g / 45.6
oz for the Ascent v. 1213 g / 42.5 oz for the Targa v. 1020 g/
35.7 oz for the T9). Third, the climbing bale looks really cool.
A clear improvement over the flimsy wires on the Targa / T9s.
Fourth, it requires 2 more holes, 6 holes in all for the toe
piece (the original 4 holes for a G3, plus two more in front).
Fifth, the front of the toe piece was slightly raised to create
a slight downward angle from front to back. Ah, yes, the integrated
wedge – would that affect the way it skis? I was curious.
Very curious.
But what to mount it on? Well, the 10ex
is my backcountry ski of choice and I’ve owned 3 pairs over
the years, all mounted with Targa’s. I had a pair of backup
unmounted TM-EX’s and I thought they would be perfect as
a test pair for some Ascents. I know the ski. I know how the
binding skis. Isolate the variable. Very scientific. So as soon
as I got it mounted up, I eagerly took it out on some tours and
I skied it inbounds. I took my new rig out on 5-6 day trips in
the high Sierra in April / May, most of which had significant
skinning (Mt Wood, Mt Gibb, Mt Emerson, Mt Whitney, etc). I also
took them on a 3 day overnight trip and I skied them inbounds
at Mammoth from time to time, beginning in March. Here are my
observations:
THE FREE PIVOT:
At first, the free pivot felt strange.
I found myself taking long, loping strides like I was walking,
not skinning. This stride generally disrupted any attempts at
a smooth skinning rhythm and created a lurching movement plus
a strange dangly weight on the ball of my foot. Without realizing
it, I had regressed to the less efficient technique of picking
up my skis slightly off the snow. This frictionless travel makes
it too easy to revert to a walking v. sliding technique. Luckily,
one of those tele-turned-AT skiers was there to alert me to my
inefficiency. “Ah, yes,” I said. I resolved to keep
the ski on the snow and to resume the tried and true shuffle-like
technique. Keep the ski down. Pretty quickly, I settled into
a rhythm and began to really enjoy the relative ease of ascent
(pun fully intended).
As a test, I decided to lock down the free
pivot, engage the touring heel throw and see if I could feel
the difference. Boy, howdy! The conventional mode made me feel
locked down and the resistance of the binding and boot was immediately
noticeable. My first impression was, “Wow, praise be the
free pivot! Conventional tele-touring is clearly inferior.”
And the immediate contrast only amplified that point. My second
impression was, “wait a second. Not only does this feel
worse than the free pivot, but it also feels worse than a normal
G3. What’s going on here?”
I thought about it for a second. Of course,
the wedge! The wedge makes the binding more active and consequently
makes it tour worse than a conventional G3. Most folks like a
slightly more active binding anyway, so why not give it to them
as long as they also get the free pivot. Win, win. Very clever
of G3.
The one thing that I did not like about
the free pivot was it’s floppiness for side slipping uphill.
Again, perhaps I could be the beneficiary of AT-tips on how best
to do this, but I found that it was difficult to raise the entire
ski parallel to the slope efficiently on a steep face. The spring
resistance of a tele binding allows you to keep the heel relatively
close to the ski when stepping up. I couldn’t quite get
this dialed with the free pivot.
All in all, I like the free pivot. It makes
skinning much easier. Plus there’s more to learn, which
is always fun. I need to learn a few more things (re: AT technique
tips), but if I could have frictionless travel without having
to make other tradeoffs (price, potential durability issues,
more active binding, etc), I would certainly like to have it.
So what about the other stuff about the binding? I’m glad
you asked . . .
THE OTHER STUFF:
|
There is a “pole activated actuator”
in the front of the binding. What this means is that you can
put your pole tip into a hole to move a dial (between 10 o’clock
and 2 o’clock) that toggles back and forth between touring
and skiing mode.
This mode change can certainly be done
with a pole while standing up, but it takes some concentration,
and I kept having a nagging fear that I was going to snap my
pole in half – a bad idea anywhere, but especially in the
backcountry. |
|
I soon switched to the “safer”
technique of grabbing my pole below the midpoint to toggle the
dial, but I eventually realized that every time I switched to
ski mode I couldn’t help myself and just had to reach down
with my hand to make sure I was all the way engaged. Soon enough,
I was done with this whole pole technique and just started to
reach down with my hand every time. On the nuisance meter, I
would rank this as very low. On any given day, I only switch
back and forth a couple of times so taking an extra second to
make sure it’s right is no big deal. Again, the dial does
give some resistance, but I had no problems with a bare or gloved
hand switching between modes.
Switching to the topic of adjustments that
happen many times throughout the day, I really liked the new
heel piece. It is very stable with a nice forward lean so that
it won’t inadvertently flip down. It is easy to put up and
down and seems much more durable than the climbing wires of yore.
They really should integrate this into the Targa and T9 lines.
I can’t emphasize enough how much
of an improvement this heel piece is. In the past, the climbing
wires rested in a groove in the heel shim, flush with the ski.
Then when flipped up, they would lock into another groove in
the heel shim perpendicular to the ski (facing upwards). The
problem was that you had to expand the wire over the wide part
of the shim in order to get it from the resting groove to the
flipped up groove. Not only is this difficult to do (almost always
making it necessary to bend down) but over time it stretches
out the wire. A stretched wire goes down when it’s not supposed
to and sometimes goes up when it’s not supposed to (for
example, when you’re skiing at high speed through chop).
This new heel piece suffers none of these issues, plus it is
really easy to flip up and down. On the first day I couldn’t
get over the novelty of merely raising my foot and flicking it
up or down with my fingers or pole. I was so excited that I even
called out a few times, “hey guys, watch what I’m about
to do!”
G3 also offers an XL (or more aptly named,
extra tall) climbing wire. I really enjoy the height advantage
and always opt for it. Of course, the XL suffers most acutely
from “stretched wire” syndrome. An XL version of this
new heel piece would be ideal.
My one (minor) gripe about the heel piece
is that it has created a significant wear mark on the topsheet
of my ski. When the heel piece is up, the front of it rests on
the topsheet and both the front of the heel piece and the topsheet
where it rests are showing noticeable signs of wear and tear.
Over time, we’ll see if this turns out to be just cosmetic
or perhaps more serious.
Finally, let’s talk about how it skied.
My summary: just fine. Like a slightly more active G3. So if
you like the feel of G3's Targa like I do, this is good. As for
the effect of the wedge: I didn’t even notice the wedge
going downhill on backcountry days. Where I did notice the difference
was skiing inbounds. Lap after lap, as we got on towards the
afternoons especially, I felt a difference. As to whether you
like this difference, that depends on what you like in a binding.
I personally prefer a less active binding so I didn’t particularly
like it, but that is all personal preference. As far as reference,
I’d say the Ascent skis like a Hammerhead with the pivots
set somewhere between 2 and 3, and that it is somewhat less active
than an R8.
OPEN ISSUES:
My early impressions of the Ascent are
quite favorable. However, there remains one significant open
issue that only a lot of field testing and experience can really
address. Specifically, I’m talking ‘bout snow buildup.
One thing I noticed about the binding is
that the channel beneath the toepiece catches a lot of snow (remember
that the binding sits high). In fact, I found that when I wanted
to carry my skis on my shoulder or put them back on my backpack
after skiing, that I had to actually clean out the channel with
my fingers. Otherwise I’d be dripping snow down my back
and / or carrying extra pounds of snow for no reason. The binding
sits high though, and the channel is wide open on both ends.
This should help keep snow from getting trapped and compacted
beneath the binding.
Due to the timing of the product launch,
to date the testing of this binding has been conducted almost
entirely in the spring and summer, with little time in true mid-winter
conditions. However, anytime you have a plate moving up and down
the potential for snow compaction is there (think Linken), and
a review of the Ascent is incomplete without a true wintertime
test that includes a lot of field testing. Part of the beauty
of telemark skiing is that there are no real adjustments. It
is largely the same going up and going down. Simple There may
be a price for a free pivot, and that may come in the form of
added complexity. The possibility of snow build up in any new
freeheel binding design is always a concern, and the Ascent is
no exception. This potential issue will bear watching.
BOTTOM LINE:
So what is the bottom line? I’m a
big fan of the Ascent and so far, as a dedicated spring backcountry
binding, it has proven to be a solid winner all the way around.
I went on a multi-day tour in June and many times I thought to
myself, “how could I ever tour again without a free pivot?”
And it's been durable. With my size and style, I'm hard on gear,
especially bindings. I have had zero problems with the Ascent.
However there is a caveat to this early review, true mid-winter
conditions testing still lies ahead.
The other issue for many folks may be price.
Is the free pivot worth $100 or so extra added to the cost of
a standard G3 T-9? The answer to this question depends on how
much you tour, the magnitude of your appetite for a free pivot,
and the size of your checking account. The price of tele bindings
has been climbing every year and the cost of the Ascent is not
meaningfully different from a Bishop or 7TM.
As a wise AT skier once said, “you
can’t fix stupid.” To that I would retort, “stupid
is as stupid does.” The promise of taking at least some
of the stupidity out of telemarking is a welcome notion, and
the Ascent delivers with its frictionless pivot. We are very
enthusiastic about this binding and if the Ascent proves itself
over the winter, then this binding will have to be seen as a
major step forward for telemark touring.
We’ll get back to you this winter
with a full review and more thoughts on wintertime performance.
By then we’ll have more days under our belts, as well as
more observations. In the meantime, stay tuned.
A word about the author (above):
I have a long history with, and affinity for, G3s Targa bindings
and I have skied them almost exclusively for the past 6-7 years.
I weigh approximately 220 pounds, wear Garmont Squadras and strongly
prefer neutral bindings, probably mostly due to my low stance.
This is my first contribution to Telemarktips.com. Photo: Rick
Wheatley
“Telemark skiing is stupid:
A Quick Summary”
So what’s all this “telemark
is stupid” blather? What’s the big deal about a free
pivot? I think you know, dear reader. But like any good story,
the tale just gets better with each telling. So here we go!
Here’s the conventional wisdom: Telemark
skiing is stupid for so many reasons. It is an inefficient way
to get down the mountain (all those deep knee bends! How can
you ever expect to do that with a full pack?). The gear is antiquated
and prone to breaking (who among us has not had some sort of
catastrophic gear failure?). And as a final insult, it is even
inefficient on the way up. As we skin, we fight the flex of the
bellows and the resistance of the bindings and we end up exerting
more energy than our AT “friends.” Ironically, the
freedom of the heels actually puts us in bondage: bondage to
inefficiency.
But really, telemark skiing is not about
efficiency. It is about love. And if loving telemark skiing is
wrong, then I don’t wanna be right. I love to make the tele
turn. I love the feel of the carve. The angulation. The proximity
to the snow. The absolute level of physical engagement required
to make the turn. There’s just so much going on. Knees,
heels, arms, shoulders, toes. I know it may be inefficient, but
I simply don’t care. I love it. It's my turn. |