Plum Guide vs 2012 Dynafit Radical?

[DoWork]

Well, I was talking about the parent material, not the joint (which, of course did not exist before the weld; how does one "weaken" something that did not previously exist?)

I'll go with the decades of metallurgical and welding engineering studies which have consistently concluded that welding weakens almost all parent materials. I'm just a stupid attorney/former bicycle framebuilder, so what do I know? Thus I rely on the metallurgists and engineers, all of whom who acknowledge that welding weakens parent material. Open this link: The HAZ in Aluminum Welds and scroll down to Table 1 and Table 2 which show Al alloys becoming substantially weaker in the heat affected zone after welding. This graph linked from here shows the pattern of weakened parent material (3 different Al alloys) in and proximate to the weld, which confirms that both the weld area and and the HAZ are substantially weaker than the parent material unaffected by the weld. (Yes, I know that most or all of the strength loss when welding some Al alloys can be recovered via post-weld heat treatment.) Lots of data re weakening of welded steel alloy is out there. (I acknowledge that some modern steel super alloys are engineered to preserve, or even enhance, strength upon air hardening after welding or brazing -- I have built some frames out of these new super alloys -- but that's a very special case of specialized alloys for a specialized application which have been engineered to be welded or brazed and then air cooled as part of their heat treat engineering strategy.)

Indeed, if, as you suggest, welding did not affect the strength of the parent material proximate to the weld, then why do engineers and metallurigsts spend so damn much time and effort analyzing heat affected zones ("HAZ") and grain growth, writing welding specs and engineering post-weld heat treats? From my 35+ years of experience with bicycle frames, I know that welded bicycle frame (Al, Ti and steel) failures almost always occur proximate to the weld, i.e., in the HAZ. Sounds like you have some relevant background, so I'll assume you'll agree with me that the best materials for the jaw arm (strong, fatigue resistant) would not be the best material for the pincer (hard). In all tech bindings, the pincer fitting is held in compression (and glued??) or screwed, and I've never heard of one falling out. Why apply heat where it is unnecessary?

Re tool steel composition, I'm uncertain what point you're trying to make. Yes, of course some tool steels fall are compositionally similar to non-tool carbon or alloy steel, but the converse is not true, i.e., the vast majority of carbon steel alloys are not suitable as tool steels, e.g. carbon steels with too much Mn, which tend to crack when quenched. And, yes, of course, controlled heating and quenching is required for most but not all tools steel. Have you not heard of air-hardening tool steel? Pretty cool stuff.

Wow, well I'm glad you felt the need for a long winded breakdown and personal history... I hope you feel vindicated from talking down to me as it seems like you've had that bottled up- there's about a dozen things in your post that are true and that I agree 100% with but there's also stuff I would love to debate the relevance to this instance but instead I'm just going to leave you with a stripped down version of my original point since I'm tired and you seem to be looking past what I'm trying to say (or rather ponder out loud when applied to this instance)- If you put a hole in something and don't make an effort to share that stress with what's in the hole, you're looking at a major weak point, far moreso than what welding it would do. That's really all I was trying to say man, Woo-sah Now please direct your (pretty effective yet unnecessarily dickish) lawyer aggression elsewhere, as I fully agree that in this case there are far more realistic approaches to strengthening the arm than welding it, especially seeing as how they are NOT similar metals and the likelihood of finding an alloy with the desirable characteristics for both arm and pincer is not likely and therefore my overall argument is more or less invalid so who cares.


Jethro, bear with me- that was used as an example of a hard, light metal with high tensile strength and I'm not saying they should scrap everything and go with Ti.

[Jethro]

Jethro, bear with me- that was used as an example of a hard, light metal with high tensile strength and I'm not saying they should scrap everything and go with Ti.

Me neither. I think Ti arms instead of Aluminum, with steel insert pinchers would be perfect, if there is a design flaw. Steel arms would be fine also, just a bit heavier.

[marshalolson]

"people who aren't core ride Dynafits, but I ride plums. Therefore, I am core, and the other people are not."

not sure if this is directed at me personally or not, but it seems to be.

i really really like the vertical series. but there are limits to what you can and cannot do, just as the plum has limits, and everything else in the world has limits.

for ME and what i am doing, the plum seems to fit my needs a little better, but that may change once i can test the radical, which however is semi-uninspiring to me to be honest.

i don;t see how someone thinking they are "core" or not has anything to do with it.

[CookieMonster]

not sure if this is directed at me personally or not, but it seems to be.

i really really like the vertical series. but there are limits to what you can and cannot do, just as the plum has limits, and everything else in the world has limits.

for ME and what i am doing, the plum seems to fit my needs a little better, but that may change once i can test the radical, which however is semi-uninspiring to me to be honest.

i don;t see how someone thinking they are "core" or not has anything to do with it.

Absolutely NOT directed at you, nor anyone else participating in this thread. Some of the remarks in my first post refer to the subjective praise of the plum that is contained herein. With respect to the subjective praise, I didn't name anyone specifically because the remarks were meant to apply to the generally subjective praise, and not the specific comments of any particular person. I do wonder whether or not some of the praise is, as I stated, due to the fact that people who buy expensive products may exhibit bias in reviews.

The remarks about being "core" were just meant to apply generally to purchasers of plum bindings who are also the type of people who "liked that band before it was cool" and "can't stand Starbucks". Everyone participating in this thread already knows that a significant number of plum purchases will be made by people who don't want to ride Dynafits because "too many people use them".

I posted my remarks about testing the plums because I really didn't notice any particularly superior qualitative/quantitative elements during my (admittedly ) short test drive. They felt like Dynafits, had the same fiddliness, and rode the same. For me there is almost no difference between plums / dynafits, and a huge difference between plum-dynafit and my dukes. In difficult PNW snow, I'll take the dukes, and big boots, hands down, any day. Even if it means I haul more weight uphill.

Worth mentioning, I don't huck, but I have been known to intentionally get airborne, including when I'm skiing Dynafits at a resort. Since you huck, the plums may indeed offer superior features ( as you noted ).

No offence meant, and none taken I hope.

[neck beard]

how many folks are going to say "well I spent a lot of money on these plums and it turns out that they're not better than my Dynafits".

This is the number one problem with reviews of anything from ski destinations to bindings as provided by the lowly consumer: "I spent a lot of time researching, and spent a lot of money consuming.... and in the end my decision sucked, I got it wrong, but my ego wont allow that, so I'll just call it 'awesome'!"

[Jonathan S.]

But why bother with any kind of metal at all for the arms?
I mean, just make a cf base with curved wings, drill four holes in the base for mounting screws, drill a hole in each curved wing for the metal pincer, extend the wing on one arm a bit to function as a manual release mode, and you're all set:
http://www.pierregignoux.fr/GB/PackUltimate.php

[GeezerSteve]

Cool idea, JS. Could do that with spring steel too.

I hope you feel vindicated from talking down . . .

Wasn't doing that. Merely defending my position. Didn't intend to butthurt anybody

[marshalolson]

CM- frankly i find your generalizations about the consumer of a particular product both distasteful and uninformed. you say your comments are not directed at anyone in particular, and then make blanket statements that are both offensive and ridiculous that are intended to be directed at ALL consumers of a particular product.

for the record, the plum guide's direct competition in the dynafit landscape are: the dynafit ft12 @ $579, the radical @ $660. i anticipate seeing the plum right at the same price as the radical. sure a speed binding is $369, but is realistically a very different piece of equiptment.

the plum was designed to offer the stiffness and skiing experience of an alpine binding, with the retention that meets or exceed the dynafit 12's, has the heel adjustibility of a demo track binding, and the weight and simplicity of the speed. if the ONLY criteria you are interested in is the weight and simplicity, then sure, you can say the cost of the guide makes NO sense (to you). but if you are evaluating the binding over its entire stated design goals, there is a very different path of assessment.

feel free to say "for me and my needs the tlt speed offers exactly what i need, in a competitive weight as the plum, and is less expensive", but don't bad mouth people because their needs are different than yours, and for sure don't talk smack about someone being a poser because they need something that you do not. it is ridiculous to expect every user on the planet to have the same needs, and you have based your assessment of each user along the lines of your own personal needs and criteria.

i personally cannot ski in a tlt speed, period, and for sure do not see it as comparable to the plum in terms of retention or durability. dynafit bindings may be seen as "bombproof" but stuff still regularly breaks, and if you are ME, the speed heel WILL regularly break, heck the vertical heel still regularly broke on me. not to mention, that the dynafit "10" din setting is more comparable to an alpine "8.5" in my experiance. which is fine more MOST people, but it simply will not retain me, personally, in the binding. that has nothing to do with being a "hucker", and that does not mean i am some super rad guy, it means i am a tall, heavy, strong person that puts significant force into the edge of the ski, even in bottomless powder, and simply cannot ski at that DIN setting.

i am bummed that TC saw a failure, and i am super interested to see what plum says about what happened and caused this. even if all they say is that a 250lb dude with a pack and skiing wide skis on boilerplate is the limit for the binding, i don't think that means the design is flawed or it needs a significant reworking. i just think that means there is a limit to what the binding can take. there is a limit to what ALL bindings can take. and it for sure will NOT make me stop using them. my own personal testing of the binding has caused no failures, and has included similar strains in terms of amplitude, just very different in terms of the bio-mechanics of the strains.

ok, rant over. enjoy the thread.


edit- and in terms of my review, they sent me a binding, i review and posted it, and decided to sell my ft12's and buy the plum's. so you can write off what ever you want about that review, but that was the scenario on my end.

[Sinecure]

I can't stand Starbucks and I like my Plums. Pretty sure I'm not core.

[Mofro261]

The remarks about being "core" were just meant to apply generally to purchasers of plum bindings who are also the type of people who "liked that band before it was cool" and "can't stand Starbucks". Everyone participating in this thread already knows that a significant number of plum purchases will be made by people who don't want to ride Dynafits because "too many people use them".

I'm totally core.

But I'm not core because I think I'm core, I'm core because other people think I'm core. They see me coming and step aside but I hear the whispers, 'there goes that Hardcore Mofro..." I'd really like to try a pair of guides. Too bad they are just for hipsters though, because my thighs are too big to fit into skinny jeans.

(And I can't stand Starbuck's because Howard Shultz is a douche who sold the Sonics down the road.)

[CookieMonster]

This is the number one problem with reviews of anything from ski destinations to bindings as provided by the lowly consumer: "I spent a lot of time researching, and spent a lot of money consuming.... and in the end my decision sucked, I got it wrong, but my ego wont allow that, so I'll just call it 'awesome'!"

Yes, that's why I am curious about sorting out the signal from the noise.

CM- frankly i find your generalizations about the consumer of a particular product both distasteful and uninformed. you say your comments are not directed at anyone in particular, and then make blanket statements that are both offensive and ridiculous that are intended to be directed at ALL consumers of a particular product.

My remarks were neither directly directed at you, nor indirectly directed at you. Not sure how my remarks qualify as offensive, but I apologise retroactively for any hurt feelings.

I think it's pretty clear that my remarks DO NOT apply to ALL users of particular product. As written above, my remarks about plum binding purchases apply to people who hate Starbucks and "liked The Shins before everyone else".

[toiletduck]

Marshal, I think the difference is that you can't pick up Plums for $250 in Gear Swap. It's not apples to apples, but it doesn't matter. Stuff that costs boutique prices will always carry a stigma from it's price - and it's hard to always take the reviews seriously when you know that someone's invested triple the money you're willing to spend on a setup. A good example is 112RP pures w/ plums - there's no dirtbag hookup there, it cost $1800. People that can afford that much on a setup undoubtedly have disposable income, and the price will attract the type of person that defaults to the most expensive. If it's also the best, it'll attract the people that need it too - but far fewer people that need it will be able to afford it.

In return, it's bound to make the people skiing second hand comforts on 06/07 wailers wonder what the fuss is all about, given the skis are just a part of what makes skiing more or less fun. Both setups are going to be in the same margins, performance wise, but anyone seeing it from the other side of the coin - the people that TLT speeds are perfect for, are going to read "more retention, lighter, like an alpine binder" and wonder why someone's re-invented the wheel, are bound to be disinterested.

Personally, from how I ski and my experience/preference of skis, I feel like the pure RP/plum setup might actually be perfect for me - but I don't feel comfortable trusting the limited reviews, and how can I justify spending twice the value of my car on a ski that I have to ski tech bindings inbounds on? Not bringing DPS into this since you're associated, they just happen to have the market leading expensive ski that suits the lightest/burliest tech binding.

So what I'm saying is I agree with CM. He didn't blanket everyone, just said that some % of people will buy them (and probably a relevant %, because skiers don't tend to be rich) because they're the new flashy must-have, which is true of any new flashy product. That doesn't discount or disenfranchise people that actually do need the improvements that Plums offer. Oh, and I instruct in winters, so I'm way past the disliking Starbucks level of un-core.

[marshalolson]

i am just poking fun at the lameness of the argument.

am i mad at toyota for selling the 2012 tacoma for $35k when i can buy a used one with 50k miles for $25k? or one with 100k miles for $15k? do i think that the people that buy the new ones are posers and look down at them? no! i am stoked, because then i can buy their "old" truck for 40% less when they want something new...

same deal applies here.

so go hate on the poser, core fools all you want, but they are the ones hooking you up with a sick deal on 5 year old clap out shit

[GeezerSteve]

. . . if you are ME, the speed heel WILL regularly break, heck the vertical heel still regularly broke on me

MO, I assume you are breaking the heel pins and the heel pin bushing, both of which eventually happens to many of us. (I wonder if Plum is using a stronger/more fatigue resistant material for its pins.) Anything else breaking on heel pieces? The Speed heel is burlier in places (e.g. main post, volcano) and otherwise pretty much the same beefiness as the Vertical, so if one is breaking the Speed I'd expect the Vertical to also break.

Agree that Dynafit vertical release set at 10 is more like 8.5-9. That's my only real beef with Dynafits. I can live with replacing heel pins/bushings every couple years.

[marshalolson]

sure the small moving parts can break, that is cool with me, but i do feel the plum heel pins are better supported that the dynafits.

i more meant the heel posts would crack or shear off. the vertical is more robust than the speed/comfort

http://www.wildsnow.com/images-blog/...t-base-com.jpg

occasionally when the posts failed, the plastic body would crack or blow up too.

not seen anything like this in any way on the plum, which stokes me out. the baseplate on the plum is about 2x as thick here, and in my opinion much better designed to take hard shock-loads.

[GeezerSteve]

Lou's pics don't hot link.

Lou suggests that the solid (i.e. no bore hole, wider base, shorter lever) TLT/Speed post is the burliest of all, and that's the way it looks to my eye: http://www.wildsnow.com/618/dynafit-durability/ (scroll down a few pics for ST vs. TLT/Speed post comparo). Experience confirms this. I have seen one Comfort/ST post fail and read about 2 others, all after years of use. OTOH, I've never seen nor read about such a failure on a Speed post. Maybe JS can chime in. The FT and newer ST posts are beefed up a bit (smaller bore hole), but it's still a hole while the Speed post is solid, wider and shorter.

In addition to wider, hole-free, shorter post, the Speed heel base plate is thicker, and it also lacks the plastic heel ledge that often sheers off a Comfort/ST/FT.

But if you need more vertical release value and/or longer pins and/or more adjustment range than the Speed offers, I guess the Speed's beefiness is academic.

[JoeStrummer]

Goddamnit. I started telemarking because that was cooler than alpine. Then I got into Fritschis because it was way cooler than tele skiing. Then I abandoned Fritschi after my first ski trip to the French Alps when I saw all the cool Pierres were on Dynafit.

Now I need to go Plum if I want the binding that confers the most status and glory to my otherwise empty life?

Fuck this, I am going back to Voile 3-pins. Wonder if my wife tossed my lurk in the dumpster?

[thin cover]

i am bummed that TC saw a failure, and i am super interested to see what plum says about what happened and caused this. even if all they say is that a 250lb dude with a pack and skiing wide skis on boilerplate is the limit for the binding, i don't think that means the design is flawed or it needs a significant reworking. i just think that means there is a limit to what the binding can take. there is a limit to what ALL bindings can take. and it for sure will NOT make me stop using them. my own personal testing of the binding has caused no failures, and has included similar strains in terms of amplitude, just very different in terms of the bio-mechanics of the strains.




edit- and in terms of my review, they sent me a binding, i review and posted it, and decided to sell my ft12's and buy the plum's. so you can write off what ever you want about that review, but that was the scenario on my end.

Regardless of the failure the plums performed better then the ft 12, from step in to keeping me in, all season long on 50+ days as I said. Granted one failure is all it takes, but I am hoping it was a fluke and not indicative of the bindings strength. The amount of firm I was on was literally a few turns, so obviously I am very interested to hear if that is the only explanation they can offer up. Which makes sense, but not the "robustness" I was looking for or would expect out of a $550 pair of clamps. It if was pounding on firm bumpy terrain for an extended period of time I would be more understanding, but this is honestly no where near the case. Regardless, I am still skiing mine and loving them, albeit off steep and firm terrain and will continue to use them in this manner until I see plum's review of the failed toe piece and the resulting improvements they intend to make. I would hope what I was skiing that day was not the limits of these things, unfortunately I think that would be telling of a not substantial enough R&D process or just hoping someone of my girth was not going to buy them.

The same argument could be made for those that have not bit the bullet yet on the higher price and purchased an obviously superior tech binding system and now see a failure and feel rewarded for their deprivation efforts

I hated the price tag, but also hated having the ft-12's sucked off my feet from a bad step in or from heel retention that was no where near the stated numbers. Its always a trade off.

[marshalolson]

big steve - i have seen this failure on the vertical, personally, numerous times (6-7). granted i was doing things with them that i would consider well out of the intended purpose of the binding. my point is that i can do the same things with the plum with total confidence and no failure. anyhow, i was under the impression that the vertical was beefed up over both the comfort and speed. at this juncture. i guess it is only the comfort. good to know, thanks.

tc- i only was referring to a worst case scenario, and how it would/wouldn't impact my choice to ski the binding. knowing alexis, i am quiet confident if they find a way to improve the binding based on your experience, they will.

[ex-powderbroker]

Ha, the Shins, that band has sucked for AT LEAST five years.

Cookie Monster = FAIL

[AKbruin]

Seriously tempted to pick up some Plums this week.

I've just had so many problems with my FT 12s over the past three years: (1) ripped the toe piece out of my ski in a scary place (not necessarily Dynafit's fault but still); (2) broke the plastic piece beneath the heel holding the screw that moves the heel up or down the ski, with the end result being that I couldn't click in because the heel was about a centimeter further away; (3) suffered relatively constant auto-rotate issues with my left heel in steeper, icier terrain; and (4) often twisted out of my toe piece in lock mode when climbing steeper, icier terrain (might have solved this problem with the recent purchase of a power plate). #2 happened a second time yesterday.

At this point, I don't care about indicting Dynafit. I just want a touring binding that consistently works. While I fully acknowledge that they've worked perfectly well for countless others, my FT 12's have sorely disappointed me.

So, tell me Internet experts, is Plum the right call? Should I consider the Onyx (which is far cheaper)? I'm about 6'1", 190 lbs, and these bindings will be mounted on a pair of Praxis Backcountries (105mm) that, since my rip-out, now have a plug mount for the FT 12s. This last point is important because it means I need a binding with the same screw pattern as the FT 12s. (Not sure the Onyx fit the bill in this regard.) I need these bindings for everything from 2-hour dawn patrol in deep powder to multiple-day Sierra spring tours.

[GeezerSteve]

AK, #1 was a ski core failure and/or mounting failure. #2 happens on FT/ST/Comfort, but the Speed base plate is more robust and not prone to that sort of failure. (IMO, the Speed is Dynafit's burliest binding. A Speed with a vertical 12+ release would be the tits.) #3, autorotation, usually results from a boot lug deflecting the volcano and is easily fixed by grinding the offending lug. I would think the Plum would have the same potential. #4 has happened to me with an FT but never with a Speed or Comfort, so, yeah, the Power Plate might take care of that.

canwilf, Al alloy can be the right material if the design gets the stresses going in the right direction. The Radical looks like an attempt to do that.

[gregL]

Getting Plums won't help you with #1.

As far as #2 goes, I've had problems with Speeds and Comforts with the fore-aft adjustment - losing the "c" clip that holds the shaft with the Speeds, and stripping the nylon threads in the post on Comforts. The Plum adjustment system is totally different, simply two Torx bolts that fix position as the heel moves back and forth in a track. It won't be prone to the SAME problems, and so far seems bomber, but I don't have that many days on them. Autorotation with Dynafits seems to be associated with brake use and/or boot sole lugs hitting at an angle or snow/ice buildup on the boot sole/top of volcano. It's only happened to me a couple of times in a number of years of Dynafit use and never with Plums; again it's hard to say, although the Plums seem to return to center with more authority. No idea about #4, if they're locked properly and you are still falling out "often" I would be worried with either binding.

Agree wth Big Steve about the Speed being Dynafit's best binding if you can live with a DIN of 10 (not having seen the Radical in person) - If I needed a pair of bindings right now for general touring and didn't want to go over 10 for forward release, I would get Speeds and grind off the bump under the heel pins.

Speaking of which, I just mounted a pair of Speeds for a friend, and it looks like the heel pins are slightly longer on the newest version (not quite as long as the ST/FT, though) - I get about 11.41 mm from the base of the heel to the end of the pin. Anyone have an older set of Speed/Classics around to compare?

[AKbruin]

AK, #1 was a ski core failure and/or mounting failure. #2 happens on FT/ST/Comfort, but the Speed base plate is more robust and not prone to that sort of failure. (IMO, the Speed is Dynafit's burliest binding. A Speed with a vertical 12+ release would be the tits.) #3, autorotation, usually results from a boot lug deflecting the volcano and is easily fixed by grinding the offending lug. I would think the Plum would have the same potential. #4 has happened to me with an FT but never with a Speed or Comfort, so, yeah, the Power Plate might take care of that.

With respect to #1, like I said, it's not necessarily Dynafit's fault. I think it was probably a combination of Dynafit's traditional screw pattern being too tight for fatter skis, the skis having a softer wood core, and a not completely perfect mount. If we got the ski maker, the mounter, and a Dynafit rep in the same room for a post-mortem, I'm pretty sure each would be pointing the finger at the others. (The ski maker and mounter are, it should be said, generally very good at what they do.) Still, rational or not, it's not easy to feel totally confident in your current bindings when they've ripped out in the past.

As for #2, it sounds like there's no real fix except maybe to get a Speed plate.

#3, I'll check my boot sole. But I spoke to a couple guides who had the same auto-rotate problem with their Dynafit bindings, switched to Plum, and now are auto-rotate free. Obviously, this isn't conclusive proof that Plum has solved the problem. But it's at least a data point in Plum's favor. (Edit: I should also note that it happens in the middle-riser position at least as much as it does on the volcano. E.g., it rotates from mid-rise to flat.)

#4, I think it was you that recommended that I pick up the Power Plates from Salewa, which I did last week. (Thanks again.) I've only had two days on the snow with the Power Plates inserted, so I can't say whether it has fixed the problem. But the design of the Plum seems to provide more support for the toe wings to prevent flex, which is/was probably the problem.

[sb]

Goddamnit. I started telemarking because that was cooler than alpine. Then I got into Fritschis because it was way cooler than tele skiing. Then I abandoned Fritschi after my first ski trip to the French Alps when I saw all the cool Pierres were on Dynafit.

Now I need to go Plum if I want the binding that confers the most status and glory to my otherwise empty life?

Fuck this, I am going back to Voile 3-pins. Wonder if my wife tossed my lurk in the dumpster?

I love you man. (movie reference)