Advice Needed - Replace non-indemnified bindings on older skis in good condition?

Jerk85

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Posts
10
Location
Los Angeles
I have a pair of 183 Atomic Sugar Daddies from 2007 that I really like. Bases and edges are still in good condition. I have found I like skiing with these in nearly all conditions in the resort. Currently they are mounted with Atomic 614 bindings from the time of purchase. When I purchased new boots a couple of weeks ago I discovered these bindings are no longer indemnified by the manufacturer, so pretty much no chance of getting a shop to service them. I considered adjusting them myself to fit my new boots and even managed to find a guide online for these bindings, but my new boots are shorter in the sole and I can't slide the heel forward far enough to get proper forward pressure on the boot. I'm not going to attempt remounting myself, so these bindings are basically done for me.

On to my questions:
  1. Would it be worth replacing the bindings with new or recent model used bindings to get some more life out of these skis? While I'm happy to demo some new skis I'm not looking to make another big purchase at the moment.
  2. For new bindings, is there anything the community would recommend at a bargain price? I'd have a hard time justifying $400+ and mounting costs to slap on an older pair of skis. I would need a 110mm brake.
  3. What about something like the Tyrolia RX 12? Seems like a good deal: Amazon product
A little about myself. I would call myself an advanced skier that skis the whole mountain in varied conditions. I'm not usually hard charging or aggressive, but I like to open up the speed on groomers and firmer smooth snow. I tend to prefer softer snow conditions. I usually spend my time wherever I can find the best turns on the mountain (best buttery wind buff or similar), and will lap that all day. Coming from LA I almost always ski at Mammoth.

I sure appreciate any advice the community can provide!
 

DanoT

RVer-Skier
Skier
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
3,919
Location
Sun Peaks B.C. in winter, Victoria B.C. in summer
You might have trouble finding used bindings that don't come already attached to a used ski.

You should be able to find good new bindings for around $250, not $400. And then when you are ready to get new skis in a year or two, you will already have the bindings.
 

CalG

Out on the slopes
Pass Pulled
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Posts
1,962
Location
Vt
I put new looks MNC bindings on my Volkl Explosiv to replace the Rossi FKS that I had fit so many years ago.

Well worth the effort. ;-)
 
Thread Starter
TS
J

Jerk85

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Posts
10
Location
Los Angeles
You should be able to find good new bindings for around $250, not $400. And then when you are ready to get new skis in a year or two, you will already have the bindings.

Interesting, I hadn’t considered upgrading bindings then using same for new skis down the line. Certainly worth considering.

Attack2 13 GW with 110 brakes are running for $170 shipped on ebay.

Not a bad price at all, seems to be a better quality binding. Thanks!
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
31,935
Location
Reno, eNVy
Yeah, not only is that binding not indemnified, it was recalled. Shame the original owner didn't know, in many cases Atomic replaced the ski and binding. These heels were prone to breaking. Any modern binding will be a lot better, just for the simple reason, you will be shedding almost a pound per ski, the 614s with their plate were heavy.
 
Thread Starter
TS
J

Jerk85

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Posts
10
Location
Los Angeles
Check out Level9 for Attack 13's @ $119 ... I bought mine for $129. Due in 1/3 w/ brakes.

I’m not seeing the attack 13s with the 110 brake... maybe I missed the deal but thanks!

Yeah, not only is that binding not indemnified, it was recalled. Shame the original owner didn't know, in many cases Atomic replaced the ski and binding. These heels were prone to breaking. Any modern binding will be a lot better, just for the simple reason, you will be shedding almost a pound per ski, the 614s with their plate were heavy.

I was actually the original owner. Purchased them with bindings mounted from backcountry.com. I never heard anything about the recall until very recent Google searches, but I‘m wondering if it might have applied to a different heel piece. Another thing I found in my research is that heel piece seems to match the Salomon Z series while the toe piece matches Salomon STH series. Not sure if it makes sense that toe and heel pieces would be mismatched from different series but appears to be the case.

Whatever the case, the bindings served me well. Always released when they should, never pre-released. Time for new hardware and weight savings is a plus!
 

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,752
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
I was actually the original owner. Purchased them with bindings mounted from backcountry.com. I never heard anything about the recall until very recent Google searches, but I‘m wondering if it might have applied to a different heel piece. Another thing I found in my research is that heel piece seems to match the Salomon Z series while the toe piece matches Salomon STH series. Not sure if it makes sense that toe and heel pieces would be mismatched from different series but appears to be the case.

Whatever the case, the bindings served me well. Always released when they should, never pre-released. Time for new hardware and weight savings is a plus!

Umm, NO. the heel and toe pieces on the older Race 614 binding you have do NOT match any salomon toe or heel piece. Some later atomic bindings are simply rebadged salmons but not these.
 

sparty

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Feb 15, 2018
Posts
656
I'm guessing those might not actually be the Race 614, which I thought generally mounted to a track that very significant adjustment for boot length. Got a photo? (Probably academic, but this is the internet and now we're curious)

I've swapped to newer bindings before, particularly with a ski I liked that was no longer available, but I was lucky enough that the old bindings (Salomon Driver with race springs) were damn near the same as a then-current one (STH).

Redrilling really isn't that big a deal if you are comfortable measuring precisely and drilling without getting too deep, but that is still a step beyond what most folks want to do. There's a really good thread on TGR if you want to reconsider it, though.
 

cantunamunch

Meh
Skier
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Posts
12,354
Location
Who wants some Monkeypox?
Sugar Daddies? In 2007? The Xentrix 614 had already been phased out and it would be VERY surprising for backcountry.com to have mounted a pair of old-vintage R614s onto Sugar Daddies, especially since they would also need to hack in a Xentrix brake.

If OP's binding says NEOX anywhere on it, I want it. Not kidding. Neox 614s are bomber.

Pictures?

(Obviously, if OP's bindings are NEOX, he has absolutely no need to re-drill and all the adjustment can be done with the center strap.)
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
J

Jerk85

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Posts
10
Location
Los Angeles
I’m very curious now as well so I’m attaching some photos. I was also able to find my email receipt from backcountry back in April 2007 and the line item description calls it FFG 14 Driver binding.
 

Attachments

  • E077EBA2-91FB-45EE-931E-A601D500D863.jpeg
    E077EBA2-91FB-45EE-931E-A601D500D863.jpeg
    84.2 KB · Views: 52
  • 3DE013F7-9E70-408A-813E-752B0E738471.jpeg
    3DE013F7-9E70-408A-813E-752B0E738471.jpeg
    74.1 KB · Views: 52
  • AE802119-5219-4507-898A-C463CBE084A9.jpeg
    AE802119-5219-4507-898A-C463CBE084A9.jpeg
    75.5 KB · Views: 53
  • 04ABEE66-EDA3-447B-B64D-6FF34E57596F.jpeg
    04ABEE66-EDA3-447B-B64D-6FF34E57596F.jpeg
    71.9 KB · Views: 52

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,752
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
Sugar Daddies? In 2007? The Xentrix 614 had already been phased out and it would be VERY surprising for backcountry.com to have mounted a pair of old-vintage R614s onto Sugar Daddies, especially since they would also need to hack in a Xentrix brake.

If OP's binding says NEOX anywhere on it, I want it. Not kidding. Neox 614s are bomber.

Pictures?

(Obviously, if OP's bindings are NEOX, he has absolutely no need to re-drill and all the adjustment can be done with the center strap.)

Yup, my bad. When the recall was mentioned I assumed it was the previous Race binding (and i was using them long past 2007! in fact still using some 1018s! they were bombproof_


I’m very curious now as well so I’m attaching some photos. I was also able to find my email receipt from backcountry back in April 2007 and the line item description calls it FFG 14 Driver binding.

They may not be indemnified but I would have no hesitation using that binding.! Still basically a current design
 

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
1,877
Location
Tokyo
I had FFG14s on my Hell & Backs, great binding IMHO
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
31,935
Location
Reno, eNVy
There is no reason this binding shouldn't pass. Plus this is one of the few Drivers that had the sliding AFD. I bet this would pass with a Gripwalk boot.
 
Thread Starter
TS
J

Jerk85

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Posts
10
Location
Los Angeles
There is no reason this binding shouldn't pass. Plus this is one of the few Drivers that had the sliding AFD. I bet this would pass with a Gripwalk boot.

To my untrained eye this binding seems perfectly fine as well. It has performed flawlessly for me. But with the remount required for my new boots my options really only seem to be redrilling myself (definitely beyond my comfort level), or actually taking it into different shops and hoping they recognize it as an indemnified binding. The latter is complicated by the fact there are almost no ski shops left in L.A., so very limited local options.

I think I'll try emailing the photos to my local REI and see if they will in fact recognize as indemnified.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
31,935
Location
Reno, eNVy
I think poart of the problem is that it has the same numerical name to one of the Atomic bindings that is NOT indemnified, the Centic (Race) 614. Let me check something for you.
 
Top