The Official Salomon S/Lab SHIFT MNC Thread -AMA

[3PinGrin]

As long as the coating is intact, "normal corrosion" would be hindered. But if the coating is damaged, the corrosion rate would be higher than for a non-coated surface. As the surface area for the uncoated piece would be greater, giving a reduced corrosion rate. See equation below.
Attachment 294840

If you are implying "surface area" = "sample area";
as surface area increases, the denominator would increase thus reducing CR, correct? So something else must be at play. I assume density would decrease. And perhaps "sample area" is a 2 dimensional top view, which would equate to "A" decreasing?

[MrLarsen]

If you are implying "surface area" = "sample area";
as surface area increases, the denominator would increase thus reducing CR, correct? So something else must be at play. I assume density would decrease. And perhaps "sample area" is a 2 dimensional top view, which would equate to "A" decreasing?

If the surface area (area no longer covered by coating due to damage, or sample area if you will) were to increase, the CR would be reduced, hence that would be correct. But if you have no coating at all, then you would obviously have the biggest surface area you can achieve for any given "object", and the lowest possible corrosion rate, if we assume the surface area is the only variable in play.

IIRC the density is the actual density of the metal in question, as this equation would be correct for any galvanic cell.

Not following what you mean by "2 dimensional top view" as we are talking about the total "uncovered" surface area, no matter the orientation of this area.

[whyturn]

Dissimilar metals would also cause corrosion. So titanal layer on ski maybe?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[1000-oaks]

Not following. How can something rust if it's coated? Wouldn't the coating cut off the oxygen supply? I thought that's why we prime and paint steel structures, engine blocks, bike frames, etc.

Corrosion then, not necessarily rust. I'm not a scientist and can't explain it, but corrosion pockets between stainless and a coating can actually be a thing. Naturally it's good to coat almost everything, but stainless is the exception.

[lucknau]

Ok, corrosion then, not necessarily rust. I'm not a scientist and can't explain it, but corrosion pockets between stainless and a coating is a thing.

I believe that, although I think all the memories I have of stainless steel rusting were just weld joints.

Regarding corrosion in ski inserts. If they're made of passivated stainless steel, which apparently really is a thing, then the increased area due to surface roughness means more exposed chromium in a smaller space, which means more oxidized chromium and greater corrosion resistance.

Passivation for greater grippiness in the ski is a nice idea. I wouldn't be surprised if it helps, but it's not why you'd typically choose passivation.

[tuco]

Rust is oxidization.
All metal oxidizes.
Except.......
Gold

[1000-oaks]

Passivation for greater grippiness in the ski is a nice idea. I wouldn't be surprised if it helps, but it's not why you'd typically choose passivation.

Would wager the adhesion difference between thoroughly-cleaned inserts and ones that still have cutting fluid on them is 100x the difference between clean passivated inserts and clean non-passivated inserts.

Which brings up an interesting point: if they're passivated, how can they do it if the inserts still have cutting fluid on them when sold? Or does the manufacturer of the all-threaded rod allegedly passivate the rod?

[3PinGrin]

If the surface area (area no longer covered by coating due to damage, or sample area if you will) were to increase, the CR would be reduced, hence that would be correct. But if you have no coating at all, then you would obviously have the biggest surface area you can achieve for any given "object", and the lowest possible corrosion rate, if we assume the surface area is the only variable in play.

IIRC the density is the actual density of the metal in question, as this equation would be correct for any galvanic cell.

Not following what you mean by "2 dimensional top view" as we are talking about the total "uncovered" surface area, no matter the orientation of this area.

I think I was confusing metal surface area with coating surface area which would be inversely proportional (assuming zero corrosion).

The "2 dimensions" was thinking of a top down view of a flat piece of metal assuming a hypothetical flat dimensional object with no discernible edge.

[eggsbenedict]

Would wager the adhesion difference between thoroughly-cleaned inserts and ones that still have cutting fluid on them is 100x the difference between clean passivated inserts and clean non-passivated inserts.

Which brings up an interesting point: if they're passivated, how can they do it if the inserts still have cutting fluid on them when sold? Or does the manufacturer of the all-threaded rod allegedly passivate the rod?

As a pretty casual skier (in adulthood anyway), I never find myself having anything helpful to add when reading here, so I was surprised to see something I actually have some experience with, passivating stainless steel! Sorry for boring everyone else, but I can finally contribute so I'm not going to let the chance go by.

Your thinking is along the right lines, wood glue, epoxy, or threadlocker, wouldn't give two shits about whether it was "adhering" to passivated or non-passivated stainless. The adhesion strength is entirely mechanical, which means the adhesive is flowing into the surface roughness of the metal, and then curing. The difference between different adhesives used for a job like this lies in the different curing mechanisms, not the principle of why the bits stick together.

Another concern might be that the passivation could actually smooth out the surface roughness. I'm not 100% sure whether passivation affects surface roughness by "adding" material (adding oxygen to the chromium) or "removing" material (dissolving free iron into the acid), or a mix of both that doesn't affect roughness at all. But the worst case for maintaining surface roughness would be a purely "adding" scenario (think 10cm of fresh snow on a mogul field versus removing 10cm of snow from same field) so we can explore that. Passivation brings the protextive oxide layer from a couple nm up to 100nm or so, which is an order of magnitude at least below even the fanciest electropolished stainless used in food processing (roughness of 1um at best), so no worries there.

To your last point, if there's cutting oil still on the screws that is left over from machining then those machined surfaces are not passivated, as the machining strips the oxide layer off, and cleaning the surface of oils is required in order for the acid to reach the surface and dissolve the iron. A decent passivating scheme will include some detergent to also clean minor machining residues, but either way the end customer is not going to get cutting oil on their final product. Unless it's applied after passivation for shipping protection or something. But it wouldn't matter in any case.

[Norseman]

Nerds

[detrusor]

I think I was not the ideal user. Any amount of snow contamination and it was pre release city. Clean click in at the bottom and no issues. It was just an appropriate release on a powder day and then I could never get the ski to stay on without getting to the lift and really cleaning it out


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[1000-oaks]

^ Not too surprising, in ski mode the Shift heel doesn't appear to be much beefier than a Tecton heel. Snow or ice between the boot and heel piece would reduce the already-limited vertical elasticity,

[SkiLyft]

^ Not too surprising, in ski mode the Shift heel doesn't appear to be much beefier than a Tecton heel. Snow or ice between the boot and heel piece would reduce the already-limited vertical elasticity,

Data point: Bumped my heel up 1 din value from standard -> all my pre-release issues dissipated.

[bioicon]

Doing patrol work I've had iceing issues on WTR soles in some conditions, and often due to boots getting warm on snowmobile.
Filed the holes over the screws and most of the thread pattern with Sicaflex (Tech7) glue and issue is gone..
Will try Shift bindings this winter

Sent fra min Moto G (5) Plus via Tapatalk

[shaft]

I noticed that when I release from these bindings and get back in, there is all kinds of play in the toe and they become the worst bindings in the world. It's like the vertical AFD adjustment has reset to a lower position. Happened three times last year. Is this a common issue?

Apologies, I didn't have a chance to search the 86 page thread in its entirety

[galibier_numero_un]

I noticed that when I release from these bindings and get back in, there is all kinds of play in the toe and they become the worst bindings in the world. It's like the vertical AFD adjustment has reset to a lower position. Happened three times last year. Is this a common issue?

Apologies, I didn't have a chance to search the 86 page thread in its entirety

The answer to correctly adjusting the AFD height is indeed in this thread.

Persist and you'll be rewarded ;-)

... Thom

[lucknau]

I noticed that when I release from these bindings and get back in, there is all kinds of play in the toe and they become the worst bindings in the world. It's like the vertical AFD adjustment has reset to a lower position. Happened three times last year. Is this a common issue?

Apologies, I didn't have a chance to search the 86 page thread in its entirety

The answer to correctly adjusting the AFD height is indeed in this thread.

Persist and you'll be rewarded ;-)

... Thom

Lee Lau wrote an article on NewSchoolers that summarized the issues and fixes identified in this thread. I'd go out on a limb and say it's pretty much a definitive guide to conquering the quirks of the binding.

Search for the "SHIFT ISSUES" header in this article:
https://www.newschoolers.com/news/re...n-Atomic-Shift

[shaft]

^Wow, big ups to lucknau and LeeLau! Still a little confused on the forward pressure.

Looks like the back edge of the rectangle is supposed to line up with the arrows, correct?
Stepped AFD adjustment makes a lot of sense wrt last year's issues.

[lucknau]

^Wow, big ups to lucknau and LeeLau! Still a little confused on the forward pressure.

Looks like the back edge of the rectangle is supposed to line up with the arrows, correct?
Stepped AFD adjustment makes a lot of sense wrt last year's issues.

I set mine so the back of the metal piece is flush with the housing. The green line in the instructions is indicating this, to my eye. I think this puts the back of the square inline with the arrows. I've never had prerelease problems. I think some people who've had problems have adjusted the binding the way it's pictured in the article with good results, where the back of the metal piece is flush with the arrows. I'd try the other way first. Some of the prerelease issues have been due to snow packed under boot heels and binding parts, so be hyper vigilant about keeping that cleaned out. The heels have quite a bit less elasticity than trad alpine bindings.

[snowtastic]

Looks like Marker is releasing something like a Shift.
DIN 16 and with pins (that hopefully stay where they are supposed to [emoji56])

https://www.marker.net/www.marker.ne...for-the-reset/

[hafjell]

Looks like Marker is releasing something like a Shift.
DIN 16 and with pins (that hopefully stay where they are supposed to [emoji56])

https://www.marker.net/www.marker.ne...for-the-reset/

I like that the Alpinist announcement is just above the Voluntary Safety Recall for the Kingpin.

[reckless toboggan]

Looks like Marker is releasing something like a Shift.
DIN 16 and with pins (that hopefully stay where they are supposed to [emoji56])

https://www.marker.net/www.marker.ne...for-the-reset/

I like that the Alpinist announcement is just above the Voluntary Safety Recall for the Kingpin.

That why the advertising tag line is: "Marker...Time for yet another re-reset, again".

[406]

I picked up some shifts at a good price, seems like the general consensus for prerelease issue is mounting error? Thinking I might put them on wildcat 108's.

[Jtlange]

I picked up some shifts at a good price, seems like the general consensus for prerelease issue is mounting error? Thinking I might put them on wildcat 108's.

Forward pressure setting and maybe toe height issue. Its all in the adjustment.

[jacob_dbu]

Anyone see this video of Josh Daiek with what looks like a pretty clear pre-release in the Shift? Sprained MCL...

https://www.instagram.com/p/B4Pt7Jyl71P/