VERTICAL TOE RELEASE - Does it matter?

So, most of the solid, reliable high DIN bindings have no upward toe release.

Granted, after the horror of the Marker Biometric ejection device, vertical release was unthinkable.
But, there seem to be some bindings like the Tyrolia/Fischer/Head/4Frnt family of bindings that have a vertical toe release in a DiN 15 or 18 hard charging binding.
http://www.tyrolia.com/ski-bindings/...ade/index.html

Tanner Hall used that binding up until he died for the third time. He even put his name on it.

That "diagonal toe" is the same as their race toe that has a stif upward release and is used in world cup skiing.
(the recreational toe in the lower bindings is not so good and more like a Marker Ejectomat binding)

Is this a desirable development?

Once you make the upward release strong enough for racers, does it do any good? Obviously it won't release if you are just off balance in the backseat.
It will never save your ACL from the phantom foot.

But if you take a digger or get your skis under a logfall, could it help?

Why have it on a race ski binding if it has no benefit?

bored and curious

The industry term "backward-twisting-fall" is really a code term for "only-gapers-fall-this-way."
Look for binding models WITHOUT this "feature." It will only lead to pre-releases if you are a ripper.

The Salomon z series toe releases vertically. While I've heard of lots of people breaking them, I have yet to have a problem. I've definitely released vertically (or pretty close to vertically) out of the toe in a crash. I recall one time getting kicked funny off of a windlip and landing on flat ground waaaaay in the backseat. Both toes released, which was a good thing. I've never come out of them when I felt that I shouldn't have, although I'm not a big guy and don't generally have problems with bindings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DropCliffsNotBombs

The industry term "backward-twisting-fall" is really a code term for "only-gapers-fall-this-way."
Look for binding models WITHOUT this "feature." It will only lead to pre-releases if you are a ripper.

---

^^^What he said^^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

So, most of the solid, reliable high DIN bindings have no upward toe release.

---

Which ones?

All versions FKS and S916 both have upward release, and have had it for the last 20 years.............so you must be talking about some other bindings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Damian Sanders

Which ones?

All versions FKS and S916 both have upward release, and have had it for the last 20 years.............so you must be talking about some other bindings.

---

Huh???? :nonono2:

The only thing you could confuse as upward toe release in the Sally's you name, is the type of compresing/flexing release where the heel moves elastically backward along the binding track, and the toe backs out of the toe piece. That is not upward release. The toes do pivot outward and slightly diagonally-upward (only a few degrees) upon release, but not directly upward.

As for the FKS comment...I have never had the Sally thing happen to those, although it is technically possible as they do have heel elasticity...so I'm not sure where your confusion may be coming from.





and...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Tanner Hall used that binding up until he died for the third time. He even put his name on it.

---

:fmicon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iscariot

Huh???? :nonono2:

---

Just because it's repeated on TGR, and you believe it, doesn't make it true.

The driver toe, from the S916 going all the way back to the 957 (and probably the 747), has upward release.

The P18 look toe going all the way back through the Z-Racing, has upward release, as does the geze version.

So, the last 20 years of both these bindings, every single one has upward release that I'm aware of. Including the S920.

The upward release IS fairly tight, compared to more common commercial bindings. If you don't beleive me, turn down the din and pull up on the toe wings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Damian Sanders

Just because it's repeated on TGR, and you believe it, doesn't make it true.

The driver toe, from the S916 going all the way back to the 957 (and probably the 747), has upward release.

The P18 look toe going all the way back through the Z-Racing, has upward release, as does the geze version.

So, the last 20 years of both these bindings, every single one has upward release that I'm aware of. Including the S920.

The upward release IS fairly tight, compared to more common commercial bindings. If you don't beleive me, turn down the din and pull up on the toe wings.

---

Its not through tgr that I know there is no upward release; its from working in ski and rental shops for pretty much all of the of the 1990's.

There is upward flex in the toe pieces (as would anything with that much leverage essentially mounted on a thin post), but no upward release threshold mechanism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iscariot

There is upward flex in the toe pieces (as would anything with that much leverage essentially mounted on a thin post), but no upward release threshold mechanism.

---

It's not flex....lol. :rolleyes2

fks 12/14 diagonal toe release
fks 15/18 lateral only

tyrolia 15/18 upward/diagonal toe release, (older models diagonal heel).

salomon 916 limited diagonal toe release (could be wrong)

I thought the Salomon toe wings (on 916 type toes) could release at a slightly upward angle, but there isn't technically an upward release. The main portion of the toe won't tilt upwards (not counting flex), but the wings will swing slightly upward when releasing, meaning that you can get a bit of semi-vertical release during the infamous backwards twisting fall.

Seriously.....turn down the din on a toe and try for yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Damian Sanders

Seriously.....turn down the din on a toe and try for yourself.

---

While I agree that if you back the din all the way off it will basically disengage the top/winged part of the toe from the post and allow you to pull the toe vertically, this is not upward release for two reasons.

One: the upper toe housing is disengaged from the post upon which it creates tension, and therefore there are no din release values at specific thresholds. You have disabled the binding system. If you back the din all the way off it is no longer a usable binding, its a paper weight. This upward movement is removed when the din mechanism re-engages the pivot post.

Two: there is no din settable threshold release mechanism in the toes of the S916 or the FKS. No release threshold mechanism, no settable release values = no upward release.

What you are talking about is akin to saying that you can ride a bike with zero air in the tires*** and that's a valid, intended, and designed/engineered operation of riding the bike.

[end thread cunting/back to people who would like to weigh in on the OP's question]










***cue thread cunting about how you could do that if only you ran tubeless :rolleyes2

salomon driver toes can release at shallow angles. they will not release truly upwards. the motion in the toe peice when the spring is removed is to allow for shallow angles, there is no leverage to release.

set the din low enough you can turn the toe. i gaurentee you cannot lever it upwards (edit-) enough to have the boot release. it is to accomidate an angled release. somewhere around 25-30deg angle from horizontal to each side.

Anybody want to see pics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iscariot

While I agree that if you back the din all the way off it will basically disengage the top/winged part of the toe from the post and allow you to pull the toe vertically, this is not upward release for two reasons.

One: the upper toe housing is disengaged from the post upon which it creates tension, and therefore there are no din release values at specific thresholds. You have disabled the binding system. If you back the din all the way off it is no longer a usable binding, its a paper weight. This upward movement is removed when the din mechanism re-engages the pivot post.

Two: there is no din settable threshold release mechanism in the toes of the S916 or the FKS. No release threshold mechanism, no settable release values = no upward release.

---

That's all BS.

I'm not talking about talking the spring out or otherwise disabling the binding. I'm talking about turning it down to the bottom of the marked range, so you can check it without mucho force.

When I fall backwards my knees bend. Why would I want my bindings to release that way? If my knees were fused I'd want vertical release to prevent my legs from snapping in half right above my boots, 'cause that would suck.

Also, I just came across this completely unrelated http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thum...h-mono-ski.jpgpicture:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by otto parts

fks 12/14 diagonal toe release
fks 15/18 lateral only

---

Not true. The FKS 15 has upward toe release, just a very heavy spring that won't move much until just before (or after) your knees blow up. Can't speak to the 18, owned and used the 15.

As far as the OP, yes, slow twisting backward falls are more characteristic of intermediates backseating, but it can happen to anyone. Think about moguls and stumps and refrozen crap between trees with 6 inches of nice fresh over them. Not much room to begin with, and not the kinda terrain you mach and float, and the fresh obscures what's underneath. Oh, and (gasp) you're not on a super rockered ski, just something you use for everyday conditions. So you bury a tip against a hidden limb/rock/bump/UFO. Welcome to slow twisting falls backward for experts.

^^^^^^^^^ When I spear a stump or mogul, I release at the heels and do a forward roll or two. How do you fall backwards in that situation?

I was thinking about this last night while I couldn't sleep. I cannot remember the last time I came out of the toes, always the superman ejection from the heels. Granted I am not a super ripper but I ski pretty hard. I do remember skiing at Mt Spokane at night in high school during the eighties with a pair of Tyrolia 380 D's cranked. They had diagnol release at the toe and heel, I buried the tails exactly backwards down the fall line in a mogul field and thought I broke my legs off at the boot top. I think most bindings require some measure of lateral motion to truly release at the toe. there are exceptions of course, the look xm (early nineties?) comes to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds!

^^^^^^^^^ When I spear a stump or mogul, I release at the heels and do a forward roll or two. How do you fall backwards in that situation?

---

Agree if the path in front is open and the tip stays buried. But if I'm looking at a tree in my face, I'm throwing myself away from it (sideways and backwards). This happened to me two years ago, in fact. Or if the tip hangs up on something for a moment like a bump taken at an angle as your line changes (sudden deceleration) and then breaks free (sudden acceleration toward new line) in tight quarters, that can send you backwards.

And if course my fav, a pedestrian on a ramp suddenly cutting cross your line off a lip, lot of heavy chop over refrozen. You swerve trying to figure out how to avoid cutting off the odd arm or leg, and suddenly you're accelerating on ice, so weight shift backwards for an instant, followed by recovery or yard sale. Not saying it's common, and not saying I might not be able to avoid some toe releases if I were better, just saying that it can happen even if you're marginally competent.

And FWIW, I've never had a Tyrolia/Head toe (I tend to ski the 14's) prerelease me...Markers, all the time back when I used them.

The upward toe release is a protection factor in a set of rather rare falls. In addition to the backward twisting fall, falling straight back also exposes the knee to potential ACL rupture. This is an uncommon injury because most people do not fall straight back, the physics don't typically align right for that mechanism. It does, however, happen, and often at slower speeds. The decision for the consumer is whether to protect against this rarer fall, or to opt for more retention to protect against pre-release in potentially more hazardous conditions.

In the straight-back fall, rearward movement of the heelpiece (the forward pressure spring) combined with some vertical play in most binding toe wings accomplishes much of what the vertical release would, just not at standardized, consistent and measurable levels of force.

[/pseudo-scientific response]

Thanks for the input.
Again, I am NOT trying to protect and ACL in a slow fall back.
That will never happen in a Tryrolia race toe set to 10 or 11.

I was just wondering about the rare yard sale/tomohawk/logfall/bizzaro world freak accident.

They use them in world cup races.
I guess the theory there is that you could be cartwheeling backwards or snag your tip on a gate while sliding headfirst down the hill.

I guess the consensus here is no, it does not matter.
But on the other hand, the high DIN Tyrolia/Head/Fischer seem to not pre-release and are good bindings (other than not working well with worn boot toes) so why not use them?

The Salomon Z binding is a whole other matter of plastic cheapness, but I have been thinking about a Z10 Ti for my wife. She does not charge, is not fat, and has no ACL.

Last spring, skiing in the alps, I ejected from my P18's right that way.

I dropped a small rimaye and found a hidden layer of old avalanche debris below soft snow. That shit threw me in the air again, waay backseat. The tails of my skis then snagged to this debris and both of my skis fell right off.
And I really am glad for that.

I was skiing my old 957s and floated/under-rotated a front flip on about a 25 foot drop, landed on a couple inches of new snow on a solid layer. I thought I had broken both my legs right at the shin.

I figure that the look heelpiece (for everything 14din and under) would probably release in that occasion. Is that right?