PNW Quiver?

My quiver

PNW powder touring- Mt Baker superlights/silvretta 404 bindings/Garmont megarides.
PNW powder resort- Mt Baker superlights/fritschi bindings/Garmont Adrenalin's
PNW spring touring- Mt Baker superlights/targa telemark bindings/ Scarpa T2's

ROFLMAO!

Do you really have 3 pair?

My Baker Superlights were decent in fresh powder but left me wanting under any other circumstance.  I needed something with more torsional stability to deal with the thicker stuff that's so common around here.  The Atomic Aspect, (and predecessor the RT86) are nearly identical weight and dimensions as the Baker SL, but a bit firmer flex.

D00d, you need to pay closer attention and....

Turn up your
http://www.orangepower.com/attachments/sarcasm-meter-jpg.8323/

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'm narrowing in on a setup .

I'm seriously considering a setup where I can swap bindings on a pair of skis. In deciding between plates and inserts, does anyone have any insight on that decision? Would rather do inserts since they don't add height and weigh less. But what about all the holes it requires?

I don't really have many nice things to say about plates; they're over designed and ruin the ski's flex pattern.

Inserts are lighter, but its a pain to realign your bindings every time.  Swaps will probably take about 10 minutes per ski even for a skilled user as you get a few degrees of toe piece wiggle that need to be sorted out and torqued slowly and in sequence.  You probably won't want to swap your bindings on inserts in the parking lot, but you will want to carry extra screws and use blue loctite every time to keep them from backing out in a non-opportune moment.  In any case with the stainless steel inserts you realistically get about 10 swaps before you are likely to degrade the insert's internal threads.  I would not reuse a stainless machine screw more than once or twice.  Again, use loctite every time or you will reap the consequences due to the large amounts of vibration and load cycling.

If you haven't guessed, I view inserts as more of a once a season thing than a once a weekend thing.    To me, a better solution is just to have two pairs of skis.

I'm seriously considering a setup where I can swap bindings on a pair of skis. In deciding between plates and inserts, does anyone have any insight on that decision? Would rather do inserts since they don't add height and weigh less. But what about all the holes it requires?

E_N hit the nail on the head.

I have QK inserts.  Lighter than plates but still noticeably heavier than stock. Installation is pretty straight forward.  Swapping Dynafits with brakes has proved to be more of a hassle than anticipated, but it definitely saves some money.

I don't really have many nice things to say about plates; they're over designed and ruin the ski's flex pattern.

If you can really tell the difference, and think it presents any sort of performance disadvantage, beyond theoretical, you must be a much better skier than I am (and handful of others that I can think of), and have a lot of experience on this system.

To each their own. My point of view here is that the extra stack height gives me a leverage advantage when I get a wider ski on hard pack. You can take that with a grain of salt though because i skied on Debryflex plates on race skis for years with no apparent ill effect.

Regarding "ruined ski flex"... The plates are tapered under foot, and the mounting hole pattern isn't wide enough to make a difference. I would also point out that if you are running dynafits, that swap plates offer a more secure mount to the ski because the mounting pattern to the ski is larger than the 5 hole pattern of the toe. I've seen a lot of people either pull their toes out over time, or have the ski break right the mounting point. Swap plates side step this problem for the most part due the increased area of the mount.

Inserts are lighter, but its a pain to realign your bindings every time.  Swaps will probably take about 10 minutes per ski even for a skilled user as you get a few degrees of toe piece wiggle that need to be sorted out and torqued slowly and in sequence.  You probably won't want to swap your bindings on inserts in the parking lot, but you will want to carry extra screws and use blue loctite every time to keep them from backing out in a non-opportune moment.  In any case with the stainless steel inserts you realistically get about 10 swaps before you are likely to degrade the insert's internal threads.  I would not reuse a stainless machine screw more than once or twice.  Again, use loctite every time or you will reap the consequences due to the large amounts of vibration and load cycling.

If you haven't guessed, I view inserts as more of a once a season thing than a once a weekend thing.    To me, a better solution is just to have two pairs of skis.

I share the same opinions on the inserts FWIW.
Installing inserts requires much more attention to detail when installing.
You need to be very careful to ensure that your hole depth is correct, the inserts need to be exactly flush with the top sheet of the ski. If the holes are too deep, and the insert sits below the level of the top sheet, you will end up breaking them loose and pulling them up when you torque on the mounting screws.

Another note on Loctite...
Not sure what bindings you will be swapping however, there are known issues with the compatibility of certain types of loctite and some plastics used in the manufacture of bindings (Salomon specifically AFAIK, maybe others). Loctite has information on their site that covers this if there is any doubt.

If you can really tell the difference, and think it presents any sort of performance disadvantage, beyond theoretical, you must be a much better skier than I am (and handful of others that I can think of), and have a lot of experience on this system.

I've also had an entirely positive experience with the plates. I haven't noticed any difference whatsoever in flex, but I have in my bank account . The other bonuses are fewer holes in the ski and extreme ease of mounting. To each their own.

Hmmm. After reading a bunch of Wildsnow articles I was set on getting inserts (professionally installed), now you all have me convinced to do plates. Or suck it up and buy more skis!

I have QK inserts.  Lighter than plates but still noticeably heavier than stock.

You can feel the difference? Impressive!

For Binding Freedom inserts, with a 9-hole bolt pattern, they're at most 10 extra grams/ski ( 11.4 g/ski for inserts , but the machine screws should be lighter than normal binding screws). For a 1500 g touring ski, it's <0.7% increase in mass. On a 720 gram race ski, it's more like 1.4%.  Race bindings only use seven screws though, bringing it back to 1%.

In contrast, Binding Freedom's Dynaduke plates are supposed to be about 130 g/ski, which is 8.6% of a 1500g ski.

I don't really have many nice things to say about plates; they're over designed and ruin the ski's flex pattern.

Inserts are lighter, but its a pain to realign your bindings every time.  Swaps will probably take about 10 minutes per ski even for a skilled user as you get a few degrees of toe piece wiggle that need to be sorted out and torqued slowly and in sequence.  You probably won't want to swap your bindings on inserts in the parking lot, but you will want to carry extra screws and use blue loctite every time to keep them from backing out in a non-opportune moment.  In any case with the stainless steel inserts you realistically get about 10 swaps before you are likely to degrade the insert's internal threads.  I would not reuse a stainless machine screw more than once or twice.  Again, use loctite every time or you will reap the consequences due to the large amounts of vibration and load cycling.

If you haven't guessed, I view inserts as more of a once a season thing than a once a weekend thing.    To me, a better solution is just to have two pairs of skis.

I've always wondered this about the longevity of the SS inserts, although I know a few people who have regularly swapped with the inserts for a few seasons running now. I know there are some headaches with installation of the inserts (larger drill bit - not standard 3.6 or whatever, tapping holes, alignment issues, etc) that the plates don't have.

Regarding plates, I'm sure there is some effect on flex, but I bet the majority of skiers never notice it, and I haven't heard any first-hand issues by the hoards of people skiing them on TGR. The bolt pattern is larger, but it's worth noting that a large portion of the plate doesn't actually touch the ski (at least on the dynaduke. The Look plates have a much longer bolt pattern). This actually makes the dead spot (for lack of a better term) caused by the plate to be less than that of the Duke.

As I posted earlier I have 3 skis - Traditional camber/sidecut, Wailer 112's, and reverse-reverse. For various reasons I use alpine bindings and dynafits on each ski, so to get the same functionality without plates I would buy 6 skis and 6 bindings. I also like the adjustability for dynafit BSL offered by the plates, and that you can normally get the cost of the plates back when you sell the skis.

YMMV

This actually makes the dead spot (for lack of a better term) caused by the plate to be less than that of the Duke.

Not sure I am following your logic here.
The Duke (and all related Marker touring variants) have a floating mount at the rear of the binding.
Only the toe and the transition lever are tied together (maybe this is what you were referring to?).
The plate under the binding engages the rail, but slides freely when the ski flexes, avoiding the "flat spot".
The new Salomon/Atomic bindings have a locking attachment at the back of the binding, where it is "fixed", sort of like a Fritschi (include the MFD in this category as well). That said, the way the Fritschi locks down it still allows the ski to flex, though the system also tends to go into "autotele" as a result at times.

Not sure I am following your logic here.
The Duke (and all related Marker touring variants) have a floating mount at the rear of the binding.
Only the toe and the transition lever are tied together (maybe this is what you were referring to?).
The plate under the binding engages the rail, but slides freely when the ski flexes, avoiding the "flat spot".
The new Salomon/Atomic bindings have a locking attachment at the back of the binding, where it is "fixed", sort of like a Fritschi (include the MFD in this category as well). That said, the way the Fritschi locks down it still allows the ski to flex, though the system also tends to go into "autotele" as a result at times.

I agree completely and was referring to the transition lever on the toe. If I remember correctly the Duke toe is rigid all the way back to this piece, whereas on the plates the transition lever hole is cantilevered above the ski, allowing the ski to flex underneath.

P.S. to the OP: You want some well loved ARG's with installed plates and fresh skins that fit wall-to-wall? I've got your cheap ride to deep pow nirvana right here.

In any case with the stainless steel inserts you realistically get about 10 swaps before you are likely to degrade the insert's internal threads.  I would not reuse a stainless machine screw more than once or twice. 

I wonder if using a zinc-coated screw instead of stainless would cause less degradation of the insert threads?