PNW Quiver?

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.