Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

FKS 185s on my Park Skis?

profile picture
PC.
Posts: 1105 - Karma: 18
So I know what most of you are thinking, if you have to ask, don't use them. However, I am a very heavy skiier, with a large BSL, which means my din hovers around 10-11. I weigh 210 lbs and am 6'5. I just got some 185 Coreupt Colbys and needed a new binding for them, so I saw some FKS 185s for a deal and hopped on it.

Now I'm wondering if the FKS 185's are going to be a good fit for the ski, since they dont have a vertical release and are a bit heavy? I really want a bombproof binding that we all know the FKS to be, but I need something that won't be crazy heavy but release me when I NEED it to.

More and more I read, more I hear that everyone puts the 185s on pow/big mountain skis and not park skis.

Thanks
Dec 15 2010 10:02PM
0 0
profile picture
84891jnf92048
Posts: 11552 - Karma: 2,550
I've got the 180s on my afterbangs (unnecessary? yes. awesome? yes. bombroof? FUCK YES) and LOVE THEM. now to be honest, you dont really want vertical release on a park binding. if you had it, and landed pretty far back, you could blow out of your skis, where normally you could ride out.

also, i noticed IMMEDIATELY that the FKS has an incredibly strong feel. i had never noticed one binding over another before i rode FKSs.

you dont even notice the weight since it is centered around your boot, and its really just a fairly heavy toepiece. the heel is incredibly light for being mostly metal.

I say go for em.
Dec 15 2010 10:12PM
0 0
profile picture
PC.
Posts: 1105 - Karma: 18
Word. Thanks.

Anyone else?
Dec 15 2010 11:05PM
0 0
profile picture
MEGAZORD
Posts: 4531 - Karma: -7
The FKS, despite being primarily metal, ends up being lighter than quite a few other bindings on the market, namely the px series.
Dec 15 2010 11:09PM
0 0
profile picture
Triple_Strum
Posts: 6384 - Karma: 953
Lots of people put 185s on their park skis. As a big skier with a large BSL, I think they are perfectly fine. Would 140s or 155s be plenty? Sure. But being in the middle of the din range on an indestructible binding is a good thing. If you got a good deal then of course you should mount them up!
Dec 15 2010 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
you got them because they were orange, didn't you
Dec 15 2010 11:43PM
0 0
profile picture
84891jnf92048
Posts: 11552 - Karma: 2,550
i got them because they were free, and a great binding.

and being orange didnt hurt...
Dec 15 2010 11:44PM
0 0
profile picture
sagesnow
Posts: 3116 - Karma: 1,593
not trying to thread jack but i have a similar question and it looks like you got a pretty solid answer for yours.

Anyone know about Rossy Axial Pro 120's as a park binding? I feel stupid for putting them on my 2012's cause they were heavy as shit in the back but i really needed bindings and they were only $60 shipped. I'm 5'7" 130 lbs. am I going to die riding on this binding? any help would be very greatly appreciated, thanks.
Dec 16 2010 12:03AM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
^don't skimp on axials, save up and buy some fks, they'll last you for years. ive got a good 400+ days on mine. if you get serious about skiing park, bigger stuff, 50+ days a year, your axials will be shot in a year easy. fks are the best binding out, there's a reason almost every pro that isn't on salomon or 4frnt uses them

OP, you'll be fine. if your legs are strong you should be fine.

Dec 16 2010 12:39AM
0 0
profile picture
sagesnow
Posts: 3116 - Karma: 1,593
thanks man. is it ok for park though or is it too heavy or what?
Dec 16 2010 12:53AM
0 0
profile picture
dylan.r.1080
Posts: 161 - Karma: 10
a longer BSL is going to be a lower DIN setting...
Dec 16 2010 1:07AM
0 0
profile picture
japanada
Posts: 13785 - Karma: 1,956
true true, cant believe nobody mentioned that
Dec 16 2010 1:46AM
0 0
profile picture
PC.
Posts: 1105 - Karma: 18
Haha, errr sorry. I meant SMALLER. I'm 6'5 but only wear a 29 mondopoint Salomon.

And sweet! Thanks guys.
Dec 16 2010 5:24AM
0 0
profile picture
MEGAZORD
Posts: 4531 - Karma: -7
I was going to, but i wanted to sit back and watch the misinformation.
Dec 16 2010 9:55AM
0 0
profile picture
Session
Posts: 5390 - Karma: 22,293
I go about 210 before boots, helmet, pack etc. Even then I really don't need an 18 din binding. But yah...Orange!

I wish they made STH's in orange.
Dec 16 2010 11:06AM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
fks are not heavy, especially the 140's.

i can't find my powder buyers guide. it has all the weights of the most common bindings. the 180's are heavier, but if your good enough to actually use the benefit of the 180's, you should be strong enough to not notice a difference. the weight between the 140's and other bindings is something like 300 grams...its like a .25 lbs. maybe my math is wrong, but you shouldn't be worried about .25-.75 lbs under your feet. you won't notice. and again these bindings are the shit, who cares about weight, this isn't cycling.
Dec 16 2010 11:58AM
0 0
profile picture
sagesnow
Posts: 3116 - Karma: 1,593
I was talking about rossy axial pro 120's not FKS, but thanks anyway? haha
Dec 16 2010 12:14PM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
i think the weight is pretty similar axial 120's vs fks 140's. neither are "too" heavy, but i think the axial 120's are too heavy for what you're really getting.....a ton of plastic
Dec 16 2010 12:53PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,273
yeah me neither, i just have a pair of fks 180's because i got them for $160
Dec 16 2010 2:11PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)