Beefy Alpine Binding for a Beefy Man

Looking for advice for a burly binding. I'm 6'2 around 270. I skied a 14 max DIN salomon system binding last year set at 10 which I destroyed so I am going with flat skis this season. Trying to figure out what bindings I should put on them. At first I was thinking marker griffon/jester but now I'm leaning toward the look pivot/rossi fks bindings (14 or 18). I've heard several folks talk about durability of all/mostly metal bindings which is what led me to the pivots. The pivot heel piece also seem to make sense for a guy with two acl reconstructions, but that could just be me digesting the marketing. Salomon also makes a few all metal or mostly metal bindings but after my experience last year I am a little gun shy of the brand.

Any thoughts from the gallery?

FKS 18 is the way to go. I broke every system binding I ever owned (at 200 lb). Flat skis, and drilling a burly binding right into the ski is the way to go. I have 14s, but I'd go 18 if I were you, Dan.

It's just nice not to worry about it.

Thanks Matt. That's all the nudge I needed. I was thinking the 180 might be overkill (it might be), but its all metal and I haven't seen any bad reviews of it online. I just ordered a pair from sports page. Same price as the interweb (plus tax) and they are gonna mount them for free. Not a cheap binding but its a long term investment.

I have the Look version of the 14s. Awesome bindings. I'm 6'1" 220ish lbs and have the 14's set around 8 or so and I have never had a release issue (coming from the Look Px12's which I had a lot of release issues with and the Look P12's which were great and if they were still around would be a better value than the Pivots). Even at 270, I think the 18's are overkill for anyone that isn't charging the hardest terrain ski video style. But if you are fearful, you might as well, it isn't going to cost that much more.

Thanks Steve. I am certainly not ski video material. I was leaning towards the 14s. The only thing that made me think the 18s is the metal toe and the fact that it is even a bit burlier than the 14. What DIN would you ride on a "regular" binding? I've read that most people set the pivot/fks a little lower than normal due to the elastic range. The standard logic of wanting to be in the middle of the DIN range would put me in the 14 (range 5-14) vs the 18 (8-18) if I was riding a DIN of 8-10. The order doesn't go through until monday so I could still get the 14's (which they carry in stock).

Matt what's your logic for thinking you should have gone with the 18s?

I was thinking exactly what Steve said. It isn't going to cost that much more, so why not? Sure, it might be overkill, but if you get them, they'll last years and years through many pairs of skis.

In actuality, the 14s are probably fine (I ski mine at 9), but like I said, if you don't want to worry at all about it, why not just go Super Burly?

I wouldn't want to carry 18s from the car just to ski them at 9.

I think the 14s are 4.5 lbs per pair and the 18s are like 5.5 pounds per pair, but don't quote me on that...

1 lb. is quite a bit of a difference.

I don't know if modern bindings are still the same but I know the generally accepted wisdom is that it is better to have your DIN set in the middle of the range rather than at the extreme ends. I can't imagine needing to get the 18s if your DIN is 10 or less. You could just get the 14 and go "plus" (i.e. when I have bindings mount I write down III+).

So I ended up in the shop today and got to talking to the tech about the 140 vs. the 180. Based on my conversation with him and reading online I ended up going 140 for several reasons:

1. The solid pivot toe piece of the 180 doesn't have much vertical release. Its listed as 180 degrees, but really it is meant to keep you in the binding almost always. The split toe on the 140 provides more traditional release. The guy said he's only seen one toe piece broken on the 140 - ever.

2. At the bottom end of the DIN range on the 180 you generally run it 1 or 2 settings below your normal DIN. So that means I would be riding at 8 or 9 which is not ideal as you should be in the middle of the DIN range (the rule of thumb still applies). The 140 is closer to a persons actual DIN and at a 9.5-10 would put me in the middle of the range.

3. The 140 is $100 cheaper which just paid for rentals for one of my daughters for the season:)

Thanks for all the input gents. I am looking forward to getting these mounted.