22Designs mounting point and adjustment

[No.Quarter]

I'm currently drafting up some hole pattern templates to mount inserts for both Alpine and Telemark (with multiple options too) on my skis. I currently have my Outlaws mounted with my boot center pretty much on the same line I was using for alpine I think, maybe with a little bit of deviation due to originally being mounted with AXLs or to locate the holes nicely with the constraints of the previous mounting holes. I dunno if it's because I'm still learning to drop a knee or I just don't have them mounted in the ideal location for telemark, or if relatively short twintips with a lot of rocker just aren't ideal tele skis (ON3P Jeffrey 114), but I'm sometimes feeling like I should have mounted them a bit further back.
Luckily the hole pattern for these bindings seems to lend itself well to providing a bit of adjustment due to the consistent 1.5" hole spacing. My plan for these skis is to simply add another pair of holes and bunch of inserts so that I have the option of setting them back by 1.5" (3.8 cm), is this too much of a jump back? I have seen so much conflicting information on peoples preference for mount points that I am unsure what would be best to try. I also plan on putting inserts in the old holes just so that I have the option to run my skis with alpine bindings, but after drawing up some plans that currently is seeming to add a heavyhanded constraint to how fine of an adjustment I'm allowed.
Anyways I've been going down the rabbit hole drafting up all of the geometric possibilities for mounting holes and it seems like the best options are to have increments of adjustment of 0.5" (12.7mm) or 0.75mm (19mm). Going to have a chat with someone at Binding Freedom to confirm if 0.5" is too close or not.
Hopefully someone can be a voice of reason before I commit to putting 60 holes in a pair of new skis. 30 inserts per ski at 0.5" increments for a total adjustment range of 2" (50mm). Is this experiment even worth attempting or will I probably be happy just adding 3 extra holes per ski and call it a day at a single 1.5" adjustment increment?

[No.Quarter]

Here is a visual summary of my ideas

[No.Quarter]

I guess I probably should have studied up on the "Bindings 101: Where to mount telemark bindings" thread because it seems like my question is really if it's a bad idea to try to make a shift plate out of inserts directly into my skis. Now I've started drawing up plans to cut some shift plates on my own, my boss is itching to cut some aluminum on our CNC soon and it's looking like we might have enough scrap 1/4" material to make a set.

[joeatomictoad]

Shift plates, for sure.

If you get a decent prototype, please consider to get that out on the market. Our community needs more options.

Probably wouldn't have to search too hard on this forum to find some alpha / beta testers to help you out.

[Smitty]

Second on the shift plates.

If you want to fab some yourself, that's awesome. If you want to give some a try first or you run into snags, check these folks out:

https://bndskigear.com/adapters.html

He fabricates all kinds of adapter and shift plates.

[No.Quarter]

Second on the shift plates.

If you want to fab some yourself, that's awesome. If you want to give some a try first or you run into snags, check these folks out:

https://bndskigear.com/adapters.html

He fabricates all kinds of adapter and shift plates.

I've drawn up a few plans based on the B&D plates, the one I have gravitated to the most has the front 3 holes omitted so that there are only two additional mounting positions behind the original holes. With the addition of a set of additional holes 1.5" back from the standard hole pattern and the use of binding freedom inserts, the minimalized design will provide a similar adjustment range with a reduction in form factor. And I will also only have additional positions to the rear of my original holes, which is good since I don't have any desire to move my bindings forward on my current skis.