Voile Switchback v. Switchback X2?

Anyone familiar with both of these? I'm about 200 lbs, not super-aggressive. Now I am using Targa G3s on my touring skis and the Voile releasables (essentially Hardwires) on another pair. Wondering if I need the extra power that the X2s are designed with. Supposed to be considerably more active than the original Switchback. Would appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

I weigh 223 and the original switchback was too active for me that's why I'm selling a pair.

Have never quite understood the 'power' aspect of tele bindings, except that some take more input to function than others, and that input can only come from sufficient weighting of the rear (uphill) ski - a basic tenant of the telemark technique.  In any event, the Switchback has more 'power' than the basic G3, and I believe Voille tweaked the design with the X2 to target the 'more powerful' Hammerhead/Axl crowd, both by moving the pivot point rearward and by using a stiffer spring, thus requiring more input to function.

I have them all (well, X2 is coming on new waxless Vectors - but I understand the premise), and I like them all.  Also straight three-pins.  What I like about those that require a 'powerful' (weight) input is that I'm reminded (forced) to properly weight that rear foot.  And when doing so, I feel like I can charge the line I'm looking at.

The converse is that if you're not liking HH on 4 or 5, you won't do any better with G3 or Switchback.  It's about weighting the rear ski...

It's also about the quiver.  We all, simultaneously, seek the one-quiver while lasering in on specific setups for specific tasks.  That's mostly the skis' job.  You can't have too many skis.

I say get the binding that you're most concerned about being able to push.  But  consider, as well, the basic and lowly unit , cheap and light, that only works well when you can load the back same as front.  You know..

Obviously there is a great range of preferences, abilities, and objectives (lift vs. bc) in the telemark group of skiers. I was a Hammerhead beta tester and thoroughly disliked the higher settings that many loved. I ended up skiing mostly 3 pins after all the cable bindings of the day up through HH. My bc preference was for 3-pin hardwires rigged so the hardwires were removable and stayed in the pack for all but the most difficult snow conditions, especially where parallel turns were much more effective than tele turns. Now, I never had tele bindings on skis larger than 80 mm at the waist. I really enjoyed the lightness of skis like the Tua Excalibur family and the Volkl Mountain family (e.g., Snowwolfs), the lightness, freedom of the heel, and lack of weight on the heel in climbing of a 3-pin binding. And by the time I went back to 3 pins I didn't have any trouble weighting the rear ski, etc.

One caveat about active bindings, especially hardwire types: with the heel retention it is really easy to lapse into using parallel turns instead of tele turns; if that's what you like, fine; it is more work to do a tele turn with an active binding and that also prompts a lapse into the easy parallel turn; 3-pins necessitate good tele technique.

FWIW, just an old codger running his mouth

So what's this parallel turn I keep hearing about?   

For myself, I've found that skiing the HH in pos#5 requires a different approach than what will work in while skiing with a "neutral" binding like the G3. With a very loose heel binding one can use a "knee to ski" style and use a wide fore/aft spacing between feet. With the a highly active binding like the HH in pos#5 I find it uncomfortable skiing in those styles. I choose to stick with the HH and developed a more compact telemark movement pattern which I characterize as "butt-to-heel". With this style I found that I could ski both active and neutral bindings easily and that for me this style handled variable snow conditions better, took less energy and allowed quicker turns. However making that adjustment to my style required a significant amount of practice on "boring" lift served slopes, working on technique and fitness. YMMV