I bet it'll punch right back. 5 year old boots so not concerns.about experimentingQuote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Printable View
I bet it'll punch right back. 5 year old boots so not concerns.about experimentingQuote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Dang, they gonna haf2 fix this one b4 I lay down cash.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
I am still looking at Tecton over the Shift rite now.
And there it is... this seems really obvious. Is it boot specific?
Was about to go tecton but it think I'll hold off for a while
Showed pics to my local shop, he hadn't seen this yet. Asked him to call BD, told him I wasn't mounting the pair I got from him just yet.
Just when they had that toe dialed in...
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth operator
Same here. I've got a new pair of MTN Explores that need bindings but maybe I'll hold off.
How many of you actually fall forward like this when you're skinning? Show of hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
Seems like people are searching for a problem, and this is one that won't ever (or hardly ever) occur in real-life conditions. Unless you're really fucking clumsy.
ETA: I'd be happy to take someone's catastrophically designed Tectons off their hands for the low, boot-saving price of $100. SAVE YER BOOTS PEOPLE. (and sell me your Tectons)
I have a few times, while doing a kick turn on an icy skin track.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using TGR Forums mobile app
Ever since the confirmation of how this boot-accident became clear, I feel pretty much the same way. Don't fall directly and forcefully forward with your heel free and your toe locked. Seems easy enough. Don't lock the toe while skiing and then crash into something head-on, and try to avoid a total faceplant while skinning. Can't recall ever doing one of those.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
I have while bushwhacking through some scrubby shit looking for the best way around an obstacle, shit happensQuote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
people do fall like that, I remember the early F10's were cracking the toe pivot from forward falls while skinning
you would think they tested for that but no matter what they test for something always gets missed
Yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by ticketchecker
Exactly! Shit happens. I've seen plenty of falls that way.
Why look at the shift binding now when it releases a year from now?
Fair enough. I'll check my boots this evening and see if the toe box is high enough for this to be an issue on mine or not. Could be boot-specific, which might help explain how they missed it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ticketchecker
I'd also be interested in hearing what DINs people are using. I know that the incidents all involve the lockout-mode, but the shop guys told me that on the Tecton, it isn't really a lockout. It just increases the force required to release on your DIN setting by about 50%. So if you have it maxed out, it might behave differently than if you have it set more modestly. I don't have a spare pair of boots to experiment with, but I'd be curious if it has any real effect.
Mounted mine last night, and compared them to Dyanfits Rad 2.0s. In terms of toe denting.... on the Dynafits, boot toe (both MTN and Vulcan) will hit the front of the binding as well, but at an angle where your knee would already be on the ground. So no real impact. But on the Tecton, the impact occurs at an angle where your knee will still be in the air above the ski. So I can see how this could/would happen. Can the plastic bumper thingy that is causing the indents just be ground down with a Dremel? What purpose does it even serve?
I believe the bumper is designed to release the toe in a forward fall when in ski mode, but it appears that in walk mode the release value is too great to release.
^^^^same Q as Reemer - what purpose does that thing serve.
I've probably fallen that way too (cuz I'm fucking clumsy), so, seriously guys, don't chance it with yer boots! Not worth it.
I'll give you the satisfaction of protecting your boots, and will take these bindings off your hands for $75. I'll even trade you an old pair of Plums if you prefer. ;)
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by telemon10
Phooey. I was pondering these, but I take occasional knee falls. WA touring isn’t always pretty. It’s also hard to pay for brand new binders and start by grinding off material. Looks like I’ll stick to kingpins for now.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Thanks for playing "crash test dummy" and unraveling this, Lee!Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
It will be interesting to see Fritschi's position on this, as well as whether these gen. 1 (gen. 4?) Evo/Tecton toe pieces will go back for updates this Summer.
... Thom
I could count the number of skinning falls I have had on both hands, I am sure the shells will punch back out. Seems a design flaw but hopefully LeeL will share his info from Fritschi.
We are not getting this kind of feedback from anyone on shifts.
I wonder how much testing Salomon does compared to fritschi. Alkasquauwlik made it sound like Salomon puts a lot of time in to testing the bindings. Maybe the issue is that companies test with industry guys that are generally good skiers. If the fritschi team is half as best as I am, I doubt anyone on their team fell forward. Also does fritschi test with multiple brands of boots? Does Salomon only test with Salomon boots...?
Yeah cause there ain't anyone on Shifts yet.
Kinda shit when you have to finish your tour with curled up toes..... for 600 bucks
Some basic pre-launch multi-brand boot testing should've easily highlighted this.
It sucks as a consumer, and I want to take this opportunity to thank all of you 2017/18 paying beta testers for your selfless service ;-) Unfortunately (unlike software), you can't just download an update :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by daught
If I read Lee's comments correctly, this isn't boot-specific, but rather a "feature" of the toe being in walk mode. Well, they tried to work around the two bumper system of the previous versions, but not successfully.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderjon
I get that everyone misses something, no matter how diligent they are (and I'm a big fan of Fritschi), but missing this one was a bad move.
I wonder if the Fritschi testers consider walk mode to be unnecessary? Obviously, if the walk mode position exists, it needs to be tested - something that could have easily been uncovered on the bench - even before field testing.
... Thom
My bad, for some reason I'd interpretted it as boot specific but a front impact is obviously going to happen to every boot, the only boot specific element will be how bad the damage is.Quote:
Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un
And yes, not being boot specific really makes the issue (error) worse.
I know that Dynafit have had their 1st gen issues on models & that Marker had an initial Kingpin issue but I was skiing a pre-production Beast & Kingpin a season before they were released. And it's well documented how long Salomon have been working on their tech offerings.
I remember the Vipec being launched at ISPO a couple of years ago and they were asking for dealer orders for Autumn delivery when all they had at the show was a crappy 3D printed model. There was no way they were going to have a properly tested binding in time and now 4/5 generations later they've got another major problem. My take on it was that after years of selling their frame bindings against tech bindings that Fritschi new they had to get in to the tech game real quick or die so everything was rushed & it appears to be the case here too. I think they have an elegant design but they've just not done the ground work.
Well the 2nd and 3rd generation vipecs have almost zero problems and lots of people using them successfully.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderjon
I dont disagree with your points but a solid design and manufacturing process has proved itself for BD/fritschi for some of their binding generations.
So...maybe the move is to pair my vipec black toe with the tecton heel?
Whoa. I've been skiing pow so haven't followed up with Fritschi yet.
I described the circumstance on how the boot impact occurred precisely so you all could see how it occurred. As meterman and CLong so ( sarcastically ) remarked, it's rare but it can happen. I did this before contacting Fritschi because you all as paying consumers should know about it, and how it occurred so you can decide for yourself whether to go/no-go with Tecton as opposed to the timelag of waiting for a response.
Now take a look at the older black Vipec toe from last model year. The toe contact on the older Vipecs were lower profile. It's noteworthy that the boot dent issue could not happen in a knee fall on older Vipecs toes
My next to-do
1. Go to a shop and see if the lower profile toe bumps on the older Black Vipecs can be swapped onto newer Tecton and Evo toes. I think they can. The Tecton toe bump looks like they're held on by press fit pins which can be punched
2. Get hold of Fritschi/BD and see if this is a known issue and can be resolved.
Btw full disclosure. I am reviewing this binding and this will be part of the review
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...fd880180a3.jpg
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
On the Black toe, the boot contacts the swappable bumper and directly pushes the toe lever down to open the wings. Simple.
On the Evo/Tecton, the boot pushes a sliding cam mechanism, which in turn pushes down the toe lever. The cam mechanism is probably intended to reduce the amount of boot force needed to lower the toe lever so that adjusting for a specific boot with the assortment of bumpers isn't required, but something is going wrong.
Hopefully the solution is as simple as greasing these small moving parts so they don't freeze together or hang up. I'll take a closer look sometime in the next week.
Thanks for that!Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
I got curious as to whether the bumper would actuate the release with my Black toes with the lever flipped up to walk mode. It does (I never fell forward in walk mode).
... Thom
I’m not an engineer and I don’t have the toe with me...
But couldn’t we just belt sand the “higher target” down? What would that do to the binding functionally? Anything?
I've seen many failures of the 2nd & 3rd gen Vipecs all different. I swapped out 4 pairs of Blacks last March belonging to two Cham guides that all broke in their first week of use.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveski
I still have the Guardian release in fresh memory so I take the "tested for years of Salomon pro team" statement with a huge grain of salt. In the case of the Guardian, they said a group of skiers of the highest level had tested the binding for years and tweaked the design to perfection and jada jada jada. I don´t understand what they actually did in those years of testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by daught
With the Guardian it took me, as a totally random skier, half a run of skiing and 2 minutes of inspection to realize that there are some very obvious design flaws. Sure, products are never perfect and they need to get out to the market to make money and all that, but the Guardian binding is in it´s own league when it comes to design mistakes that would have been really easy to fix if just someone with a little bit of critical mind would have been integrated into the process somewhere along the timeline. How is it even possible that the pro riders don´t see things that are so obvious if they test the product? I mean things like the thin metal hooks against stainless steel bars for the heel holddown? Pretty much an optimized construction to build play up after a few weeks. And then you add the a narrow distance between the fastening points of the heel, further enhancing the problem by more than doubling the effect of the play. Just widening the platform would mean a lot less play travel, and would have reduced the forces on the fastening points so the weight could have been reduced, even while keeping the metal hooks. But no, instead they widened the inactive parts, so you have to haul around a lot of mass that have no positive impact on stability. Why make the heel so wide and beefy (and heavy) when the actual interface to the ski is so freaking narrow? Then, while you are at it, put some alu bars that are riveted in plastic meaning you create a weak spot seen from the moon. And like that isn´t enough, they also AGAIN multiply the practical effect of that weak spot by using a walk-ski-switch that make people think they can just slam the heel down to lock into ski mode. Which you can´t because then the snow buildup and icing just behind the toe joint will make the binding break. How do you maximize snow buildup? Well, ask any ten year old, and they know they should not lick on a metal bar in icy cold weather (special info to the Salomon Team: the tounge will stick just as snow stick to metal parts of bindings). Ten year olds would not use metal parts where you don´t want snow to stick. So many details that would have been an easy fix and that any tester should have noticed long before the launch.
I really hoped the Salomon Pro team learned a thing or three from the Guardian testing, especially in the sense that they actually have to test the products and not only borrow the helicopter and drink free beer. If they did, the Shifts might be great. The concept seems very promising and I look forward to try it. And I hope that I will not find the same obvious and simple points of improvements this time.
Funny you should mention Guardians, was at a buddies shop the other day and they were trying to mount some guardians, it would not align and engage the hooks on the heel base properly. These are experienced ski techs mounting fresh out of the box bindings using the appropriate jigs.
If so much time and energy was put into the SHIFT why did they even Guardian?
I don't/won't sell Guardians but I have a bag of spare toe base plates in stock to replace broken/cracked ones.
Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spyderjon
Between myself and a few regular ski partners no issues with them after two years of use. They did have regular icing problems with the 1st generation, which made me hold off from switching from dynafits for another year.
As stated earlier: thanks to all who are real world "testing" first generation bindings and providing feedback and identifying problems.
What were the failure modes? I lost a heel riser in the 2nd gen model. It levered off when in high heel mode. I broke one of the black plastic pieces that guides the toe into the pins on the 3rd gen. Neither failure made the binding unskiable fyiQuote:
Originally Posted by Spyderjon
Our full review is now live, including a response from Fritschi regarding the boot toe damage concern:
http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...schi-tecton-12
So Fritschi's response is basically: don't fall that way, then you won't damage your shit.
That seems like a lame response to me.
Great write-up, and an interesting response from Fritschi (no spoilers - read the review). Thanks, Lindahl!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl
I didn't want to give that comment away (my reply was sitting in draft mode while you posted).Quote:
Originally Posted by doebedoe
One could argue that Fritschi considered the plusses to outweigh the minuses of the new design.
More likely, they discovered this during late stage testing when it was too late to implement a change. We'll never know until perhaps next year's model. At this point it is what it is (I ain't makin' excuses for them).
Im not a fan of the swappable bumper design, however (gen 1 through last year's Blacks). In this sense, I'm glad they tried to replace it. At one point, my two touring boots required different bumpers, and I didn't like the idea of having to swap them - with the possibility of them loosening over time and getting lost on the trail.
... Thom