Mini Jester Review

[Brewski2]

Me: 5'9 170lbs, bindings mounted on 183 '08 gotamas, xwave 10 boots 295mm
Conditions: early season pow and packed pow groomers at stowe.

Intial impression: Solid looking binding albiet kind of alot of plastic. Very solid feeling when clicking in, lots of binding-boot contact, light weight. Had them mounted at +1.5 from boot center. Started with DIN at 10.

After 3 days: They feel solid when skiing and really seem to help drive the skis. Couldn't really tell that they were a level standheight. I ended up basically walking out of these twice. It was in cut up pow/crud/manmade. I didn't fall and then they released; I was just skiing along and was suddenly missing a ski, then I fell. One heel release and one toe. The chart put me at a 8 and I set them to 10 just cuz. I'm def suprised that they released that easily. I moved em up to 11 after today and will see how it goes tomorrow.

Overall: I like these bindings and I do feel that once I get em dialed they'll be great. More to follow as I get more days on them.

[The Dad]

Well, that's disappointing. I'm 4" taller and 40 pounds heavier than you, and never prerelease with Salomons or Looks set to 9 or 9.5.

[Kied]

Huh, that's interesting... how's the forward pressure? Is it flush or cranked in a few turns? I just mounted my Jesters up too and never actually tested them, just put em at 11 and figured it'll be good - similar wieght/ boot length. You gotta be stoked to be skiing right now though, I grew up in Stowe... livin in Tahoe now and NO precip at all...bummer.

[ptavv]

Jacking the DIN up won't help if your forward pressure isn't set right.

[Tunco]

Who mounted them?

Did they get tested?

[Brewski2]

Mmmmm forgot about the ol forward pressure, I'll check that when I get home from work. SkierShop mounted em for me, I trust them but these are a new model so mabey something was overlooked....

[flip]

Mmmmm forgot about the ol forward pressure, I'll check that when I get home from work. SkierShop mounted em for me, I trust them but these are a new model so mabey something was overlooked....

I'd bet a 5 spot that's the issue. Other factors MAY be:
- worn boot soles
- bindings may need lube. New factory, new tooling, they may not be coating the tracks with enough grease yet, which would slow the rebound on a fast decamber/camber... you'd be able to walk right out.

[Flexon Phil]

Well, they ARE Markers. (It took this many posts for that to be said?)

[The Dad]

I thought that was implied by my use of "prerelease."

[MTT]

they are MARKERS

so they relase like all marker binding?

who wodda thought

Hey they have there place on the hill

[Core Shot]

I dunno, this is supposed to be a prk and pipe binding.
It should have no "biometric" pre-releasing toe.
It also should have been extensively tested by team riders. Maybe it only works on DIN 16?

[Brewski2]

So it seems that forward pressure was the culprit. The screws were not quite flush, I turned em about 1/4 turn and they actualy clicked into the flush position. Boots are brand new so thats def. not a issue. I was hesitant to buy these at first and really only got em because of Ptex being the fuckin mang! and hooking it up.( I'm a sucker for a good deal) I think its almost funny how they market these as park/pipe bindings. Its the same friggin binding as the duke w/out the touring plate. That would make the duke a binding for skinning up the park. Anywho, I dig em and hope that my prerelase issue was just the pressure.

[dirtybryan]

I look forward to hearing if this fixes it.

[skea 457]

If 1/4 turn of forward pressure is the culprit for 2 pre-releases in 3 days it would sound like Marker are up to their same old tricks. Temparmental.

[Kied]

So it seems that forward pressure was the culprit. The screws were not quite flush, I turned em about 1/4 turn and they actualy clicked into the flush position. .

Glad that was probably the case. FYI... most guys skiing aggressively on Markers tend to turn the F.P. screw in a couple of extra clicks past flush to chase the boot. All but eliminates pre-release.

I think its almost funny how they market these as park/pipe bindings. .

Yeah, but... more specifically it was designed to accomodate the wider skis we're on these days. The bigger contact point on the ski (as opposed to the old rigs) gives the binding more leverage. That coupled with the better DIN range than the 14s makes them a good, lightweight, big mountain-binding. I'm stoked on them anyway. The Duke just sits way too high off the ski IMO.

[Brewski2]

Update:
Three more days on them after getting the forward pressure dialed and its all good. Skied 6" of light-n-fluffy on crust yesterday and condensed pow/crud today. Haven't had a fall yet(knock on wood) so no report on normal releases but def. no more prereleasing. Also, with just that little bit more forward pressure, they feel even more solid when clicking in. I like em, they hold my on my skis.

Side note: the white plastic, esp. on the heel, already looks pretty grung after 7 days. I wish these were black like the Dukes

[laseranimal]

brewski

is the Zero ramp angle on the Jester noticeable?

[Brewski2]

I can't tell. BUT, I tele'ed for 3 straight winters and only switched back halfway through last season. FWIW I think most bindings only have a 2 or 3 mm diference in heel and toe height. The ramp angle of your boots probably would affect how much you could notice it too. I bet even if you could tell, you'd get used to it after a couple of runs and not notice anymore.

[StuntCok]

Any more Jester skivvy? I need new park skis and decided on the walls, which the shop is giving me a great deal on IF I buy the Jesters with them. I have found heel pre-release on the Dukes as well without a lot of fwd pressure but I think I have sorted it. I am more concerned now with whether they release when they are supposed to and if people are finding the lack or ramp angle an issue.

[Jim S]

BUMP

.

[DropCliffsNotBombs]

A lot of people that bought Dukes should really be on the Jesters, since everyone keeps saying how great they are as alpine bindings... don't tour, and don't own skins anyway! They are solid bindings. Too bad to hear of the pre-releasing issues but I don't even pre-release from the biometric Markers!

[allenataylor]

I have done a bunch of hucking in jackson hole and at stowe on the dukes. 185 lbs. 6'1" 326 bsl toe din on 10 heel on 12. No pre releases yet. Hopefully I'm going to test them out on the waterfall tomorrow.

[Nobody Famous]

Yeah, but... more specifically it was designed to accomodate the wider skis we're on these days. The bigger contact point on the ski (as opposed to the old rigs) gives the binding more leverage. That coupled with the better DIN range than the 14s makes them a good, lightweight, big mountain-binding. I'm stoked on them anyway. The Duke just sits way too high off the ski IMO.

I'm having trouble buying into the argument that more surface area gives more leverage, that violates tried and true mechanical engineering principles. But I've heard that said elsewhere about these binders, so maybe there's something else going on. Anyone with add'l insights?

[bean]

I'm having trouble buying into the argument that more surface area gives more leverage, that violates tried and true mechanical engineering principles. But I've heard that said elsewhere about these binders, so maybe there's something else going on. Anyone with add'l insights?

It wouldn't be the surface area, but the farther distance from the centerline where the screws go in. More than anything else, this will eliminate unevenness and wobble due to less shear being put on the screws.

[Nobody Famous]

This still isn't making sense. Can someone who paid attention in their statics and dynamics classes help explain this?