Pivot and STH toes

[burrito]

Curious about mags’ reasoning for all of the love surrounding the Pivot and STH toe pieces. I’m not disputing said love at all, just looking to get some clarity on the myth that surrounds these two. From what I can tell it’s mostly due to both the all-metal and single-piece constructions that seemingly make for killer durability and extremely smooth, reliable release.

I think what I’m most interested in is that if we all love this general setup, why have so many other bindings moved to having independently actuating “wings” on each side of your toe? Is it simply that plastic, which you need to use to make lower price point bindings, can’t handle the release force of a single-piece setup? Do the “wings” keep plastic bindings from exploding upon release?

Thoughts?

[m2711c]

cast is what makes me love pivot toes...




fact.

[Shorty_J]

Elastic travel in those toes is the highest I know about in any retail ski binding.

Look up the binding shootout on blister and it shows the specs.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[Bandit Man]

It’s interesting how the Attack/Jester/Warden toes all allowed the designed to be used in AT frame bindings since the spring placement and wings shortened the housing in front of the boot toe and allowed for a walking/pivot/stride motion. Now that frame bindings are on their way out, the cheaper, simplified design is being touted as a superior evolution. It’s got to be cheaper to produce and has to have better profit margins. I’ve skied them all, but prefer the metal Pivot or STH toe. Old dog, new tricks or something like that.

[toast2266]

cast is what makes me love pivot toes...




fact.

X2

[Eluder]

Elastic travel in those toes is the highest I know about in any retail ski binding.

Look up the binding shootout on blister and it shows the specs.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

historically Its this.

[utagonian]

And the single pivot (STH, p15 & p18) toes clear snow really well. The geze toes clog up with snow like most others.

[1000-oaks]

Attack/Jester/Warden toes all allowed the designed to be used in AT frame bindings since the spring placement and wings shortened the housing in front of the boot toe and allowed for a walking/pivot/stride motion. .... It’s got to be cheaper to produce and has to have better profit margins. I’ve skied them all, but prefer the metal Pivot or STH toe. Old dog, new tricks or something like that.

This.

The youngsters think transverse spring toes must be better since they're a newer design, but thanks to marketing they're actually paying more for less. If you want a laugh, look at how little of the boot toe is captured by the wings on a Warden toe, and how little movement it takes to eject. They're "on" or "off", with very little in between. (Blister's figures disagree, but just looking at them yourself, it appears Marker wings have a little more travel before boot ejection, and the Attack2 wings have the most swing because they have the most distance between the pivot and the roller. Take my personal observations with a grain of salt though, since Blister probably used a testing machine and careful measurements.)

All three can trap snow between the front of the boot and binding, whereas single pivot (or dual pivot in the case of 9XX/STH/STH2) toes have space for snow to be pushed out. The Salomon "dual pivot" is more than just marketing; the post is functionally rectangular, so the pivot point moves to one side of the post when the "jet fighter" head is twisted, which effectively increases the swing of the wing in that direction.

Haven't played with the DukePT toes yet to see if the wing protrusion past the roller is functional (for more travel), or if it's just for looks. Blister didn't measure the Squire/PT12 heel, but it definitely has much less vertical elasticity than Griffon/Jester/PT16 heel.

[utagonian]

I never got the impression that blister did any measurements or machine testing. Seemed like cut and paste of manufacturer’s marketing specs.

I don’t know if the upward release (even if partial) features like on pivot/sth2 add any real-world safety but I got a little freaked in a cartwheel tumble down a ravine a couple years ago with Attacks on. I wanted out of a ski with an upward toe release and it took a semi sideways one on my next rotation to be free of that ski. Ankle sprain resulted from that first hit.

Decades ago I had a tib-fib and recall similar thoughts (wishing for upward release) during that slow motion thing you get mid-fall. I was clamped into some Marker MRRs. Bought my first Salomons after that.

Oh, and sideways springs are ugly.

[DarthMarkus]

I feel like this conversation has happened a few times. But whatever, I'll still bite.

All bindings have a certain amount of elastic travel. When you design one where the entire head can rotate with the boot, the amount of play in that toepiece is gonna be less when the elastic travel is there, as well an increase in the amount of movement than can happen before you're out. Conversely, when elastic travel happens, and you're just creating space (with other, non-rotating toepieces), the boot-binding interface will not be as connected and your control over your equipment is arguably less.

So you think about something like moguls, chop, etc., The amount of jarring in your binding is gonna be high. In those moments, what you don't want is a loose connection between your boot > ski, but you also don't wanna just get spat out of your binding (see: marker).

There are benefits and detriments to both. There have been a few times where I would have rather released, but instead my binding kinda 'stretched' then rebounded back into position. As most of my skiing is off-piste though, 9/10 I'll always appreciate the rotating pivot/sth toe.


Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[1000-oaks]

Wouldn't say 900/STH has actual "upward release", it's more like the head can lift up a bit to eliminate AFD friction. If you somehow spun a release tester backwards to test the toe the same way as a heel and we were in Las Vegas, I'd bet a grand that it wouldn't release straight up. Have a lot less experience with Pivot, but I'd put a couple hundred on it not fully releasing straight up either. ACL tears wouldn't be much of a thing if they did, but the premature ejections would be unacceptable.

[utagonian]

That’s why I wrote “(even if partial)”. Thanks for the more in depth description. It’s that little extra help, not necessarily 90 degrees back/up, that I superstitiously look for. Most falls have an element of twist, even backwards falls. I know this has been belabored here in the past so sorry for opening the worm can.

[utagonian]

It’s also interesting to me that probably 95% of competitive mogul skiers are on Pivots and a good share of racers including WC level in both sports are using spx/Px with the same toes. I doubt either would like a “loose connection”. They do want their skis to stay on their feet. That being said, If there was a performance advantage for Look bindings, I would think someone would be trying to go off brand with them like racers do with the Marker piston plate/binding combo.
The new Atomic/Salomon Icon race bindings is said to make a real performance difference (does it?) but it isn’t an STH toe.

[Shorty_J]

.. wrong thread.

[burrito]

It’s also interesting to me that probably 95% of competitive mogul skiers are on Pivots and a good share of racers including WC level in both sports are using spx/Px with the same toes. I doubt either would like a “loose connection”. They do want their skis to stay on their feet. That being said, If there was a performance advantage for Look bindings, I would think someone would be trying to go off brand with them like racers do with the Marker piston plate/binding combo.
The new Atomic/Salomon Icon race bindings is said to make a real performance difference (does it?) but it isn’t an STH toe.

The PX/SPX/Rockerace heel was created, as I remember, to give a much more positive forward pressure feel than the tiny little springs on the Pivot heel. Look ditched the Pivot mechanism in favor of a more traditional track-style heel so they had room for a big ass forward pressure spring. This makes sense for alpine racing vs mogul skiing as mogul skiers likely value the extra elasticity (real or perceived) and smooth release of the Pivot heel even if it means they're not quite as welded to their skis as their racing counterparts, and racers want the reassuring ca-chunk of being locked in by a modern forward pressure mechanism.