Post subject: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:02 am
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:29 pm Posts: 232 Location: Tacoma,WA
Hi I'm a long time shredder, and powder hound, mostly resort, shoeing and sleds in the sierras. I moved to WA state last season, and what wanted to get into splitting for a few years.
I'm finally sacking up and buying a splitboard. I'm getting a good deal on a 11/12 venture zephyr 64/26 that is still pristine, and have decided to go with spark binders. I'm trying to get good gear and not break the bank. I found some fuze frankens for $150.
What I am wondering is what the differences are between the new sparks and the fuse model. Is it worth the extra money for the newer models? Is it all in the components, or are there improvements in the base as well? I'm a metal fabricator, so modifications are not an issue. I have lots of old binding parts that can be spliced
The newer models are much lighter than the Fuse models. Significantly so. Maybe a 30-40% weight reduction? The grommets that the pins slide through are much better on the current models too. The Fuse ones can easily fall out.
I find the interface design is cleaner with the new models. Overall, I'd go with the Burner (or Blaze, high back is really soft though), over the Fuse, unless money is an issue.
Post subject: Re: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:47 pm
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:29 pm Posts: 232 Location: Tacoma,WA
Thanks for the reply,
Ya, I'm trying not to spend too much to get going. Reading the advancements that the bindings are making, like the new edisons, I don't know if I want to drop $300 on something that may be outdated in a year or so. Although I have heard that the burners are the way to go.
The fuse that are available are just the base plates. The rest are bent metal parts.
I was also reading reading the rughty binding thread. I'm debating doing that with a old pair of bent metal aluminum bindings. They are heavy already, but they are layered. I think I can make them lighter by converting them. A lot of cutting and welding, but they are super stiff and responsive. I've got all the tools and know how....plus I like making my own things.
I'm undecided. I'm going to pick up the deck this week. I'll decide by then. Any other insight would be appreciated
Post subject: Re: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:00 am
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:29 pm Posts: 232 Location: Tacoma,WA
Thanks Pedro.
I think I'm leaning toward fabbing some up for now. Seems pretty strait forward, and I'll save a couple bucks. Then upgrade later if I feel its worth it.
Post subject: Re: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:49 pm
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:41 pm Posts: 1603 Location: Santa Cruz, CA
saign wrote:
The fuse that are available are just the base plates. The rest are bent metal parts.
You could also hack something together with the Fuse baseplates, and parts from another binding. I hated the highbacks on the Fuse and earlier Ignitions, so I hacked together these Franken-Fuse's with highbacks/straps from a Burton C60. Love 'em! A little heavy but they ride great. The pin bushings do tend to get loose from time to time.
Post subject: Re: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:54 pm
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 5:29 pm Posts: 232 Location: Tacoma,WA
Thanks for the reply. Those do look pretty clean.
I just hacked up some old bent metals and welded some sliders in, I'll see how those do. They are probably the stiffest, most bombproof bindings ever. The highbacks are solid 1/8" aluminum! So I decided to lighten em up a bit. I'll post some before and after weights and some pics if I get around to it. But I think I'll be happy with em...at least to get started.
Post subject: Re: Spark fuse, blaze/ burner comparison?
Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:03 am
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2012 10:58 am Posts: 12
Hi! I have a chance for a good deal on Spark Blaze set, but they come in L size ( officially for size 11+). My boots (driver X) are 9. Fitting them seems OK. The question is, how this combo might behave in real (unfortunately not able to test it). Any suggestions? Should I go for it or leave it? Thanks!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum