Fritschi Zenith tech binding

[reckless toboggan]

11mm toe elasticity is wicked low. vertical/radicals gets that (iirc 10mm laterally).

a look p18 toe is 45mm, a marker jester is 35mm, and the beast is 26mm.

looks like a different color mouse-trap rather than a better one.

Thanks for the info.



I'm also concerned about icing and play in both the heel track and toe track.

[marshalolson]

Excellent point, when i heard 11mm toe elasticity ~1:15 into the video, i idiotically thought maybe they combine the 11mm in each direction to come up with 22mm, still lowish, Duh! lol.
Fwiw, STH2 toes have 52mm lateral travel (PhilPug got that from Salomon, read it on gapicski). Interesting info wrt the Look Pivot toe elasticity.

think about it as angle when the boot releases. the "elasticity value" is basically the tangent (trig, yo) of the angle of release times the boot sole.

since the "elasticity value" however is just the toe's component, look and salomon elasticity values are apples to oranges. there is lateral elasticity in the heel of a look. i don't have an actual number, but the heel contributes probably 10-15mm of elasticity, all said and done.

[GeezerSteve]

vertical/radicals gets that (iirc 10mm laterally)

Really? That doesn't make a lick of sense to me. See Lou D's video re prereleasing via lateral load + rocking load, which shows c. 2 or 3mm of lateral elasticity but at the cost of a corresponding disengagement of the toe pincer from the socket. IME, if the boot toe deflects sideways >3mm or so in a Dynafit or Plum binding, the ski usually falls off the boot. OTOH, the Vipec video shows >1cm of elastic lateral travel of the Vipec (fka Zenith) toe and no corresponding disengagement of the toe pincer. That certainly looks like a big improvement re lateral elasticity (w/o disengaging toe pincer) to my eye.

Anyway, the comparisons are apples vs. orange cuz Dynafit and knockoffs (e.g., Plum) release horizontally at the heel, while the others release at the toe.

ETA: Okay, Marshall, looks like we cross posted while I was writing that. Right, it's apples v. orange. If someone spec'd Dynafit Vert/Rad as having 1cm of elasticity, they must be talking about lateral travel at the the heel and, if so, I would agree with that. Bottom line = Vipec looks like a substantial improvement re toe lateral elasticity both as a matter of range and keeping toe pincers in the sockets.

[Hugh Conway]

I didn't get it either. Vertical/Radicals aren't adjustable release value at the toe either. < shrug, oh well, the herd has already been redirected >

[jamesp]

all you need to know is TGR gods have declared this new binding is shite because:
(1) its made by fritschi &
(2) it doesn't have the same toe elasticity as a 18 DIN alpine binding.

[Cocximus]

all you need to know is TGR gods have declared this new binding is shite because:
(1) its made by fritschi &
(2) it doesn't have the same toe elasticity as a 18 DIN alpine binding.

No orange color scheme. White is like speedoes...

[neck beard]

all you need to know is TGR gods have declared this new binding is shite because:
(1) its made by fritschi &
(2) it doesn't have the same toe elasticity as a 18 DIN alpine binding.

(3) plastic.

<shrugging with Hugh>

[marshalolson]

All I said was don't get drink on upgradeitis simply because it has toe release.

The first few pages are just people creaming their shorts over a toe release binding, which I was too, until I saw 11mm.

Fundamentally, the binding will have about the same angle of release as a radical/vertical. All i said.

The vipec is fixed in the heel, the radical/vertical are fixed in the toe. Is one better than the other from a safety standpoint? No idea - i will let an orthopedic surgeon answer that. Will one actually ski better? To be seen, I look forward to trying them. I am sorta skeptical though, since there is so little elasti travel.

I was hoping for more like 20mm elasticity. That would be awesome in my book.

If someone has a compelling reason for why lateral toe release better than heel, given te same amount of elasticity,I would love to hear it!

[Hugh Conway]

So, you were wrong about toe elasticity on the Vertical/Radical marshal?

11mm toe elasticity is wicked low. vertical/radicals gets that (iirc 10mm laterally).

[LeeLau]

ETA: Okay, Marshall, looks like we cross posted while I was writing that. Right, it's apples v. orange. If someone spec'd Dynafit Vert/Rad as having 1cm of elasticity, they must be talking about lateral travel at the the heel and, if so, I would agree with that. Bottom line = Vipec looks like a substantial improvement re toe lateral elasticity both as a matter of range and keeping toe pincers in the sockets.

Yup everyone on TGR creamed pants over the Beast and rightfully so. Lots of return to center elasticity built into a system where you have some allowable movement at one point (whether toe or heel) and the other point has an adjustable spring release mech

I didn't get it either. Vertical/Radicals aren't adjustable release value at the toe either. < shrug, oh well, the herd has already been redirected >

Another example - Look Pivots aren't adjustable release at heel and only adjustable for release at toe yet that induces masturbation in TGR. Seems to me that Fritschi has adjustability at toe and at heel and the toe allows some side to side movement. Very unlike Dynafits where the toe interface is pretty rigid. I don't get the micro-parsing. But please everyone resume enginerd e-speculation which includes me as i am only looking at pretty pictures for now

Thanks for the info.



I'm also concerned about icing and play in both the heel track and toe track.

back to e-speculation. Onyx had heel track like the Vipec and that didn't have issues

[saxon]

Try they spent money building a bigass HQ http://www.archdaily.com/179959/ Dynafit's but a wee part of Salewa.

I am so very disappointed that building is not shaped like a boot.

[GeezerSteve]

FTR, I haven't declared the Vipec a winner (nor did I jump on the Plum bandwagon).

[adrenalated]

FWIW I do think this binding will be a commercial success. While it's probably still an improvement over the dynafit radical, I don't foresee it being enough of an improvement that I'll sell my radical FTs and switch over to this anytime soon. Equivalent elasticity as an alpine binding at the same weight as an FT might have done that. Still, I think many will like this binding.

[marshalolson]

So, you were wrong about toe elasticity on the Vertical/Radical marshal?

No I am saying it STILL isn't enough lateral elasticity. Or rather the vipec does not address the issue.

At least on those you can just lock lateral out if so required.

[reckless toboggan]

back to e-speculation. Onyx had heel track like the Vipec and that didn't have issues

Yes. For sure only speculation. I was actually going to also type that people who have actually touched the binding will have more expertise than me in this, but I didn't type that cause I thought that would be obvious. There's not necessarily going to be icing or play or wiggle in the binding track for sure, I just thought it might be something to consider.

[Jonathan S.]

If someone has a compelling reason for why lateral toe release better than heel, given the same amount of elasticity, I would love to hear it!

Be careful what you wish for ... no, that someone is not me, but rather Rick Howell:
http://epicski.onthesnow.com/u/38647/richard-howell

I have no background (whether educational or training) in MechE (though I do know you're supposed to call it that from my far too many years spent coaching the then NCAA varsity ski team at MIT), but based on his various posts, my understanding is:

1. Alpine downhill bindings vary widely in release/retention characteristics, even for a given release value setting that passes the standard shop test for maximum torque. (See, TGR collective wisdom could be right on Marker "Biometric" toes!)

2. No alpine binding (whether downhill or touring) does *anything* to protect against the *vast majority* of soft tissue injuries to the knee ... with the possible exception of the Knee Binding, which is he now legally prohibited from discussing: http://epicski.onthesnow.com/u/21360/rick-howell ... and which doesn't have any supporting epidemiological evidence (yet).

3. Although "elasticity" is a valid concept in release/retention characteristics, the definition in the context of touring bindings has been "elastic" at best, and at worst utterly meaningless.

4. Specifically regarding lateral release at the heel, although this reply was regarding the Beast:
http://epicski.onthesnow.com/t/12136...s#post_1610158
... I think he really just addressed the lack of lateral release at the toe. The answer seems to be that locating the lateral release there can be blind to certain types of situations. By contrast, the goal of the Knee Binding's lateral release is to prevent the most common type of soft tissue injury to the knee, so maybe it balances out? However, the Knee Binding’s “PureLateral” (trademark!) release is really medial-side-only horizontal release. I wonder if the presence of bilateral horizontal heel release on non-Vipec/non-TR2 Tech bindings prompts some skiers to use higher release settings to protect against prerelease, and thereby offsets some of the benefits of locating the horizontal release there?

[Hugh Conway]

No I am saying it STILL isn't enough lateral elasticity. Or rather the vipec does not address the issue.
.

Sure it addresses the issue marshal - there's way more toe elasticity than the existing tech bindings (not counting Beast) and it's adjustable (the Dynafit "lockout" isn't a "lockout" and fucks up boots, that doesn't count). I mean, it's 11mm at the toe vs. 2-3mm in current ones (if that).

[coldfeet]

IMO, elasticity could/should be quantified by not just the amount of travel in the binding, but the progressiveness of the restoring force - does it ramp up smoothly, or does it go sharply up to a hard limit at the release-value torque once you reach the limit of travel?

IIRC, people complained about Marker alpine bindings as having less of this progressive resistance vs Look or Salomon, so it's something to account for in the "feel" of the binding, unless that's also folklore.

Of course, I have no idea how the Fritschi binding behaves and since hardly any of us have touched one, it's all speculation or gear-wanking at this point. I'm not in the market for one now, but it would be nice if they succeed.

On a more important point, someone said it had steezy neon green accents, but it looks all-white to me. Were those reflections of the green test boot? White may eliminate clashes with some boot-pant combos, but color accents are critical for branding.

[shirk]

Psssst it's 13mm, the 11mm was from the initial release data with the proto. Looks like they bumped it up some, not that it's a massive difference.

[shirk]

As an aside knowing Diamir's past stance on traditional tech systems it's a very safe bet they are going for some sort of TUV certification on it actually meeting DIN release standards. So if you're set at 12 on this it's going to release the same as a 12 on an alpine binding. Or at least that's my speculation.

[marshalolson]

Hugh, from where i am sitting, "lateral elasticity" is the sum of the total lateral elasticity in the binding, toe and heel. IMO, "prerelease" is best combatted thru more overall elasticity in the system.

[devils advocate] its generally accepted that lateral heel elasticity ie look turntable is desirable (lee- the turntable heel's lateral motion is spring controlled by the forward pressure vector), so again from where i am sitting, all the vipec does is trade heel elasticity for toe elasticity. but you are not gaining overall lateral elasticty in the system. [devils advocate]

if you are talking about what i would refer to as "toe-jiggle-out". i say "jiggle-out" since that isn't really a lateral release, there since you are not pivoting around the heel to release. you are literally jiggling within the pincher's and releasing.

i saw that as a dynafit vertical issue not really a plum (stronger picher springs) or radical (power towers preventing jiggle) related issue. i don't doubt the vipec is better than a vertical here, but that also isn't a current binding...

i have not heard many complaints about this issue from plum or radical skiers about "jiggle-out", and personally have not had the issue the way i did with verticals. maybe i am missing something? happy to admit if i am wrong here, but not experienced this on a personal level with the current bindings.

anyhow, no idea if they ski better or not. all i am saying is i was super bummed to see that the total elasticity be the same as a current tech binding

[marshalolson]

Psssst it's 13mm, the 11mm was from the initial release data with the proto. Looks like they bumped it up some, not that it's a massive difference.

ha, fair enough! however, if by "modern alpine" charecteristics, they mean marker m48, then yes

true standardized TUV values would be awesome though - sorely needed totally agree.




not trying to rain on any parade, i was just very optimistic about this thing, since i am luke warm at best on the beast (unlike lee and toby). i thought this thing looked promising, and am just a little bummed about that design component. but this is tech talk is it not, rather than mindless navel gazing? just trying to talk tech about the binding. carry on your regularly scheduled mindless navel gazing, looks like hugh is assuming the lead on that charge.

[Hugh Conway]

and people were just calling you out on your incorrect bullshit marshal, and now you handwave away like normal. Marshal's spoken herd this binding be shit! To the Beast!

[marshalolson]

common man, i genuinely appreciate the conversation. should i edit in a winky emoticon?

however, you and i both know that if i posted under an alias the same concerns and indicated that a new product might not be all that it was cracked up to be, you would have been the first to agree and condem the love-fest of an untested product. but since you see me as the evil empire for some reason, it suits your needs to be "anti-marshal" before your crusade to be "anti-tgr-bandwagoning"?

in all fairness, i do feel i provided in depth reasoning behind my expressed concerns. feel free to agree or disagree or ask for additional clarity about my stance. or feel free to leave it at the casual dismissal.

despite whatever you might imagine, i truly have no horse in this race, other than just wanting a binding that properly functions. i still don't see that binding out there, and its super frustrating.

[Hugh Conway]

whatever constantly changing line you need to take to maintain the same position marshal