If only someone could've seen this coming!
Printable View
If only someone could've seen this coming!
Friend of mine got "Sallied" last week.
His MTNs did not release in a crust-caused fall, and he broke his tibial plateau. Had to be heli-evaced from deep in the mountains near Jasper BC. His love affair with MTNs is most certainly over.
Obviously, no lateral toe release is a known issue with most tech bindings, but think he was surprised he did not come out at all. He certainly expected to.
Yeah I’m going to say if you stomp on an ultra light riser in the wrong position you are likely to break it. These 300g bindings are not exactly fragile but do need care. Vibes to the sallied buddy too. Tech has its limits.
sucks about the broken bones but at least the binding didn't weigh him down on the weigh up, so what U spring was buddy using and how much did he weigh ?Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
For yars I have been pointing out (somewhat pedantically) that flippy lifters are an engineering abomination, it does not take a rocket scientist to recognise, that bad engineering ... is always just badQuote:
Originally Posted by CaliBrit
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by nickel
Men's. Weighs 175-180 nekkid, but skiing with 25 lb pack. As another friend said, it was probably at the "dead spot" on the binding, so RV / spring he was using might not have changed much.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
so did your friend get “sallied” or did he get “tech-bindinged”Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
can you tell the difference?
would he have released from a dynafit, an atk, a g3?
was he fucked no matter what?
I have no idea, dont own salomons. Just curious what leads you to believe its a salomon specific issue
Another advantage of sub-300 gram bindings. Since they weigh less the heli can fly you faster to the hospital.
Quote:
at least the binding didn't weigh him down on the weigh up
I think it depends on the design.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
Solid:
https://www.skimo.co/image/data/dyna...ke-mounted.jpg
Will break:
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1697/...d3b66932_k.jpg
IMVHO, that Dynafit flipper is a solution to a problem that didn't exist.
weigh faster eh
But seriously when it comes to tech bindings people talk about weight first/foremost then maybe price and whether or not its likely to break (guarrantied)
they never talk about safety
yes one flippy lifter is supported and the other (most flippy designs) are not
what do you need the extra riser for anyway :fm:
(I also read an awful lot of musings about tech toe elasticity/release, tech binding release tests in machines, how the Shift is the only acceptable choice for "everyday touring" due to its supposedly superior release characteristics, etc... at least on TGR I think the ultralight people are the minority)
fwiw I absolutely loathed the Speed Radical heels. I'm like 150lbs soaking wet and every step on the low (more supported) riser and I could feel the thing flex and bend, I was always afraid it would snap right off. It's heavier than a speed turn, with no extra features except that you can't easily rotate it with your pole, and exploding risers which I guess might count as a feature. I also always had snow building up under the boot heel preventing the for-some-reason-not-circular tower base from easily rotating unless I poked the snow away with a ski pole.
shit bindings if you ask me.
The other question/issue is skiing with locked toes. I know several people who always lock their toes because they don't "trust" pin bindings to not release. Granted, it's oftentimes body weight dependent but for me at least it's rarely necessary to lock the toe, even on the uphill.
And, MTN flippy lifters are the best. The old pole tower twist routine is a slow PIA.
I too have no idea. Probably impossible to say with certainty. As noted, it might just have been a dead spot issue. Wild Snow did a great article on this awhile ago, and can't remember if it has been posted here. "Ripping Ligaments & Snapping Bones — Tech Binding Release Testing" https://www.wildsnow.com/15123/tech-...cl-broken-leg/Quote:
Originally Posted by TG
Looking forward to when we get a 300g tech binder with lateral toe release like the Vipec.
This. As you know, I'm somewhat sensitive to tib-fib fractures from binding non-release.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
Well ... there's always the Vipec until then ;-) I still go back and forth on this one - at least for my light skis.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
... Thom
Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
Failing to clear the pins and springs even once and the ski is very likely to fall off so after what some people term a pre release they just lock the toes.
this ^^ became most apparent to me using a light tech ski to set up B-nets for a race in a snow storm, I wanted the light weight for walking around but what happened was I couldn't/didnt always clear the pins or springs cuz I was carrying stuff so the skis fell off repeatedly
IME TECH bindings suck to work in
I do lock toes for the up because the heel piece is not there to hold the boot straight with the toes in the pins so the pins are going to release, that IS how they are suposed to work
As pointed out flippy lifters are a solution to a problem that didn't exist before the RAD1, every one of them out there is a ticking time bomb
whereas the Verts and Comforts did NOT break as long as the skier didnt try to use the pole as a lever instead of something to Rotate the heelpiece but even if a tower did break the heelpiece didn't explode
I should qualify my statement by mentioning that I'm talking exclusively about the Atomic/Salomon Backland/MTN binding, which I bought three years ago after a Dynafit Rad heel exploded while skiing downhill.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
In addition to not failing at the worst possible time, and unlike Dynafit bindings, the Backland/MTN binding has enough toe strength to not require an uphill lockout. Most have probably forgotten to unlock their toes from time-to-time for the downhill. With the Backland/MTN it's not an issue. I can still pop out of the binding unlocked in tour mode if I carelessly stomp on the ski but otherwise it's never a problem. You also get reliable flippy lifters.
I just mounted a set of Plum Oazo bindings and I'm hoping for similar reliability/benefits in an even weight weenie-er package.
Same for the G3 Zed toes. I skin unlocked and have only popped out once in an understandable situation/terrain.Quote:
Originally Posted by MultiVerse
You guys probably know this, but be careful skinning locked in avalanche terrain.
Hafjell, are you still skiing on Zeds? Just curious as I thought I remember you getting them warrantied/replaced with Ion LTs after yours failed so spectacularly.Quote:
Originally Posted by hafjell
I've also been wondering if there's any issues popping up regularly with production Zeds now that they've been out in the field for several months? I'm on ~20 days with them -- no issues and quite happy.
I am on day 32 with mine, no issues here either. Probably 10 resort and the rest touring.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewpringle
I’ve got some extra Tecton toes...could
I pair those with a xenic heel and get a ~400 g binding with a more alpine like toe?
You also get something that releases laterally at the toe and the heel. IIRC, wildsnow experimented with that a while back and didn't have good results.Quote:
Originally Posted by SupreChicken
Toes only. I got spooked by the heels and now ski with AT toes only and no heels. If the heels aren’t mounted, they can’t fail. I did mount the stomp pad to keep corporate and the mags happy.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewpringle
Agree on all the above.Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
IMO if you spend the 15 seconds it takes to fully clear the pins, the area under the springs, and the fittings on the boots, you're G2G with 100% confidence and you know the clamps will only release when you start to tomahawk (assuming you haven't locked the toe that is). If you're in and out of your skis a lot though (patrolling/course prep/lots of short booters) it's easy to skip the cleaning part and then all bets are off.
A patroller buddy spent half a season on tech bindings because he refused to get a new pair of boots compatible with alpine bindings. He relented after 3 months of repeated pre-releases (usually right under the lift for maximum shame) and constant back and forth with warranty to replace chunks of his heel pieces.
Personally I have never had a Dynafit tech toe release that wasn't 100% due to user error (as you mentioned not cleaning the binding properly) or completely necessary (happens right as I start feeling like my knee is finally going to get it or because I hit a rock dead on at high speed). That's based on 10 years of touring with Vertical ST, Radical FT, Speed Turns 1 and 2, and Ultralites. I'm 175 lbs in the nude, probably 200 with gear, and I ski big skis with a style best described as angry charging moose. DIN is between 8 and 9. I only lock the toes in real no-fall zone or whenever I might flex the shit out of the skis (anywhere with compressions) and I hate it, I have visions of major DH falls on the WC circuit where the bindings never release due to the 20+ DIN and racers get tossed around until the ski itself breaks or they hit the nets. Having said that I've seen people come out of a tech binding at high speed for no reason whatsoever and I totally get the desire to lock the toes...
As for flippy lifters, fuck those things. As others have mentioned you can watch the Radical lifters flex at every step, it's not exactly confidence inspiring. I'll take the stripped-down metal volcano of the Speed Turns any day over those flimsy pieces of plastic. Takes a couple days to find the proper pole position to rotate without levering but the amount of force required to do actual damage is high enough that it's rarely an issue. The new crop of clamps is so over-engineered it has dozens of potential failure modes. The older versions weren't super sexy but at least they were sturdy and fool-proof...
It’s interesting to see people’s different perspectives on touring bindings. I think that the folks who ski a lot of backcountry prize reliability and weight over anything else and are willing to change their skiing style a bit (or don’t have to because they ski more conservatively far from civilization) while resorts skiers are always looking for the resort binding that you can tour on. Shifts are a perfect example, great features and safety but heavy and way more complicated any 300g binding.
I have both Kingpins and the original Dynafit Speed Turns with the Volcanoes. It’s hard for me to do a real comparison because they are mounted on different skis and I use different boots with them but for me I don’t think the Kingpins are worth the extra weight. For the powder day I do ski them in a resort I think a 300g binding would have been fine and I would have appreciated the weight savings on the skin track. Personally I wouldn’t trust any pin binding for real aggressive resort skiing but they are fine in resorts when there is soft snow and you are willing to ski with some finesse.
The funny thing is what I appreciate most about the Kingpins is their ease of use with touring. I have no snow build up problems with the toe (I have more problems with the Dynafits), they transition quickly and they don’t have any touring quirks like the brakes not staying down in tour mode or unwanted transitions from ski to tour mode. Also, after using the Speed Turn I don’t really care how easy a binding is to step into. Like others said, with any pin bindings you need to make sure to clear the snow and then it shouldn’t be too bad even without guides. Even better, don’t step out of the binding when you transition to ski mode.
I think the alpinist skis so so close to the kingpin. I’m pulling the kingpins off my praxis gpo UL powder BC setup to put alpinist on as there is no justification for the kingpins.Quote:
Originally Posted by hercule33
That’s the thing, everyone was so excited about the power transfer of the heel of the Kingpin but the reality is that in the backcountry I don’t find that extra power transfer that useful. Perhaps if I was carving up groomers or smashing through crud and moguls it would be a bigger deal but that’s not what pin bindings are for and not the conditions you encounter in the backcountry. And if I have to slow down a hair or use more finesse to ski bad conditions in the backcountry I just don’t care.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliBrit
The flip side is that on the firmer conditions inbounds, I still find my Kingpins to be much harsher than Alpine bindings. It’s not even close, the difference seems like between a sports car and a softy sprung Lexus. In soft snow or powder the harshness disappears.
Agreed on the KP on firm snow.Quote:
Originally Posted by hercule33
Vipec was a huge upgrade in firmer conditions. Not alpine good, but much much better than the KP, even without the alpine heel.
Tecton is the cats pajamas.
Good to know. How honestly I have been a bit disappointed how my Lhasa Pow Hybrid, Kingpins and Salomon MTN Labs ski inbounds. I came with the expectation that it would be closer to an alpine setup than it really is. Two areas I have found lacking are deep crud where the setup seems to get bounced around more than I would like (this is a pretty heavy setup by backcountry standards) and firmer conditions which feel much harsher than an alpine setup. Don’t get me wrong, I can ski pretty hard inbounds but I wouldn’t consider this a 50/50 setup, more like 70/30 with the thirty percent inbounds being on soft days looking for untracked.Quote:
Originally Posted by SupreChicken
For me at least, the boot makes a bigger difference than the touring binding but I haven’t tried the Shifts or Tectons. Right now I agree that I would take the Marker Alpinist or Salomon Mtn/Atomic Backland over the Kingpin. If I skied more resorts, I would add an Alpine setup.
Any updates on the Marker Alpinist? I saw the discussion earlier in the thread, but am curious how they've been holding up. They can be had pretty cheap from euro-land. Personally, I never had problems with my old Marker Tours but I know their reputation. Looking for something with less ramp angle and better feel on hard snow than my Speed Turn 2.0s
Just compared to older Dynafits. Added data point - Note that I can tour with toes unlocked both in MTNs and Alpinist. Not so in older Dynafits.Quote:
Originally Posted by EricB
Comments about risers below
Disclosure that I did not pay for these. Definitely keep nickel's comment in mind re Marker's repQuote:
Originally Posted by nickel
Agreed its a puzzling design decision. I checked all fasteners on binding and all still tightQuote:
Originally Posted by CaliBrit
Been skiing lots so catching up. So far so good. Broke the pull tab thingies off the binding right away but haven't bothered replacing them. I just use the pole tip to lever them open anyhow. If you cared to replace the pull tab a zip tie would probably do better but i want less complexity not more. Lots of pics of use in the Blister review so you can see the mechanismQuote:
Originally Posted by DolphinSki
They're still a pain in the ass to spin the heelpiece around so I just leave them in ski mode and put the brakes into tour mode and don't bother. When I need lifters (rarely) I flip the lifters on which means they're in highest mode so there's insubstantial leverage on them. They ski fine on groomers, on bumps, on slushy bumps, on fast, on pow ie feeling better than tech 1.0 bindings with heel-gaps as per my previous post. They release great on high speed tip-burial tomahawks. The brakes still suck on firm but do the job in pow. The toes are still harder to step into than most other tech fittings. Overall for their lower than most other offerings price they work fine. 25+ days on them now. 78 kg skier
Does anyone have experience skiing both the Zed and Alpinist? Blister seems to be convinced that the Alpinist skis smoother and has better power transfer, despite the design of both bindings looking very similar. The Zed has forward elasticity of 10mm, while the Alpinist only 4mm, which would lead me to believe that the Zed would be better in those too aspects. Am I missing something?
I do. IMO there’s not that much in it. They both ski great. I’d say the Zed feels a little smoother while the Alpinist might have a slight edge in terms of power transfer. I prefer the Alpinist as it’s noticeably lighter but if downhill performance is your chief concern, I think I like the Zed slightly better. The Zed also has better ergonomics switching between ski / tour modes and more convenient risers (the heel turret on the Alpinist 12 isn’t super easy to rotate, Alpinist 9 is better in that respect).Quote:
Originally Posted by jdadour
On the alpinist I wouldn’t really call it elasticity. More length compensation that as the skis flexes the heel of binding moves away from the boot. This removes the need for a heel gap and ensures a most consistent release from flat to flexed ski. But it’s not really elasticity.
Thanks for the input on the Alpinists everyone. Just got em mounted up to my Zero G 95s yesterday. Playing around in the living room, I don't have any problem getting the heel to rotate with my ski pole. We'll see if that happens in the real world. Right now I just plan on only using flat/high to avoid rotating back and forth. Will report once I get a few days on them.
I find I just stick with the low. Unless it’s really steep or really flat for long sections. It’s a nice height.Quote:
Originally Posted by DolphinSki
Gonna do the same (swap KP for Alpinist) on some Protests. Nice to be able to share the toe holes. Thanks for the comments!Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliBrit
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Just know you will be a little forwards with a swap as for reasons only marker knows the pin line to hole position is not the same. It’s a little over 0.5cm.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man