Don't mean to take away from this review but I'm looking at picking up some of the Look X-tracks, but looking at the rage version. Partly from your review of the x-tracks. But thinking about the rage because 1. The contact area is 63 mm wide vs 57 and the whole contact area goes up from 350 mm² to 545 mm². 2. Then, as you mentioned with the Mallet DH's, these will be my only clip-in pedals so I'd like something that does it all and offers some protection from rocky descents while also having a bit of area for unclipped errors. And don't think I need the platform size of the "Plus" model, nor the pins... think the rage is a nice middle ground... and you save some weight and cash over the plus model.
Anyway, additional thoughts on this? You think that just the x-track is enough? Will be mating them to Giro Chamber II's.
Thanks!!
March 11, 2019, 3:07 p.m. - IslandLife
Don't mean to take away from this review but I'm looking at picking up some of the Look X-tracks, but looking at the rage version. Partly from your review of the x-tracks. But thinking about the rage because 1. The contact area is 63 mm wide vs 57 and the whole contact area goes up from 350 mm² to 545 mm². 2. Then, as you mentioned with the Mallet DH's, these will be my only clip-in pedals so I'd like something that does it all and offers some protection from rocky descents while also having a bit of area for unclipped errors. And don't think I need the platform size of the "Plus" model, nor the pins... think the rage is a nice middle ground... and you save some weight and cash over the plus model. Anyway, additional thoughts on this? You think that just the x-track is enough? Will be mating them to Giro Chamber II's. Thanks!!