Alpine Bindings for Smaller Folks: Pivot 14 vs. 18

[dark_star]

After a few years skiing nothing but tele, I think I'm going to be on an alpine setup for more of the season next year, in part because I've been doing more touring on AT gear this spring and it's friggin' sweet. I'm thinking about bindings- I'm 5'6", 145 lbs, and have a BSL of 319mm or so. This puts me at 7-8.5 DIN for III/III+ on the charts. I've been skiing on a DIN of 8 on my tech bindings, and I think that's where I'll start next season. Prereleased a few times on the DynaFiddles in the resort, but I was really giving them a test workout on bumps and ice, so I think it had nothing to do with DIN.

I'm currently debating between the Pivot 14 and the Pivot 18. Differences between the bindings have been discussed here before, and I think I'm drawn to the bomber construction of the 18, all else held constant. But of course it starts at a DIN of 8. I'm aware that there are some who say that you shouldn't ski a binding on the highest DIN setting, but what about the low setting? Am I dumb for considering this, should I just accept the fact that I'm small and go for the 14? What are other people in the same height/weight/BSL range doing?

[MTT]

I would go with the 14's You are not going to break them. Unless you throw you skis off a cliff onto the rocks?

5,10 200 pounds, Kinda aggressive Skier

Look Bindings DIN 9 or 8
Other Bindings I set @ 10 or 11

[Supermoon]

Yeah,you want to be in the middle of the DIN range, not at either end to get a consistent release. Plus the 14s should be lighter.

[davieboot]

Yeah,you want to be in the middle of the DIN range, not at either end to get a consistent release. Plus the 14s should be lighter.

Are you sure? What do you mean by "consistent?" If you mean same release in the same conditions time after time, I gotta disagree with you.

[shroom]

i see far to many "shredders" in 16+ din bindings these days. i ski pretty hard at times and at 6'2" 185 ~330 bsl and have never had release issues running a din of 12-13. i ran a pair of baron 13's at 13 and have my plum's maxed at 12 and have never pre-released from anything other than spacing out on kicking the snow off my boots. i think if the DIN you want to use is in the range of the binding, you'll be fine. metal vs plastic is another [more subjective] argument.

[1000-oaks]

That's the whole reason for DIN standards: consistency of release at a given setting, regardless of binding brand or design. Shouldn't matter if you're in the middle or at the end of the range, a DIN value is a DIN value is a DIN value.

[bfree]

That's the whole reason for DIN standards: consistency of release at a given setting, regardless of binding brand or design. Shouldn't matter if you're in the middle or at the end of the range, a DIN value is a DIN value is a DIN value.

This. Running at 8 on an 8-18 is fine.

i see far to many "shredders" in 16+ din bindings these days. i ski pretty hard at times and at 6'2" 185 ~330 bsl and have never had release issues running a din of 12-13. i ran a pair of baron 13's at 13 and have my plum's maxed at 12 and have never pre-released from anything other than spacing out on kicking the snow off my boots. i think if the DIN you want to use is in the range of the binding, you'll be fine. metal vs plastic is another [more subjective] argument.

It's not a prerelease issue as much as a construction issue. I've shattered two plastic toepieces (granted they were Marker biometrics), but I just don't like plastic as much anymore. I'd happily run 3-11 DIN bindings at 11 if they were made of metal. They don't make them, so I use 916s instead.

[Supermoon]

That's the whole reason for DIN standards: consistency of release at a given setting, regardless of binding brand or design. Shouldn't matter if you're in the middle or at the end of the range, a DIN value is a DIN value is a DIN value.

In theory that's correct, but the springs perform much better over time if they are towards the middle of the range.

[Alpinord]

DS,
I out weigh you by 40lbs and have been using the Pivot 14s for a couple seasons set at 8 with no pre-releases. They have been swapped between FX94s and Keepers in all kinds of conditions, terrain and aggressively. The elasticity is great. On the FX94s with Marker F10s and Barons and no elasticity I'd pop out in the wrong situations at 9 DIN. IMO the 18s would be overkill, cost more and add more weight.

[davieboot]

In theory that's correct, but the springs perform much better over time if they are towards the middle of the range.

According to what? DIN is a standard, messing they they meet certain quality and performance criteria including release. If you have access to data that shows that release changing over time relative to it's setting, that would be huge. But I think that falls into generally accepted ideas that aren't true.

[davieboot]

It's not a prerelease issue as much as a construction issue. I've shattered two plastic toepieces (granted they were Marker biometrics), but I just don't like plastic as much anymore. I'd happy run 3-11 DIN bindings at 11 if they were made of metal. They don't make them, so I use 916s instead.

This. DIN is DIN, but the higher DIN bindings tend to have more metal, and therefore stand up to more general abuse. That is a durability issue, not a safety release issue. Go with the 14s. They are pretty solid.

[DougW]

DS,
I out weigh you by 40lbs and have been using the Pivot 14s for a couple seasons set at 8 with no pre-releases.

I'm even over that and have over the years had P12, p14, Px12, Px15 ( which has same construction as PX18) , if your din 8-10 a DIN of 12 is fine, not the middle but margin on end range

[dark_star]

Thanks, guys. It sounds like I can't go wrong either way, but this points me towards the Pivot 14's. Anyone have a chrome pair with skinny brakes (<100mm) that they want to sell (or a pair of the 18's)?

[Mustonen]

Concur on 14's. I think 18's toe may well last longer if you pound on them, but I don't think you'll ever break the 14's either.

I'm 5'9" and 160-ish. Rode a 7 all season with no issues. Was halfway through the season before I really noticed. Maybe it's cuz I'm slow and timid, but if you aren't riding high consequence lines I fail to see a good reason to adjust up if you aren't having issues.

[adrenalated]

I've known several lightweight but powerful aggressive skiers (that run their DIN in the 9-10 range) destroy the plastic 14 DIN toe pieces. I don't trust them. My opinion is go with the 18, or try to find a solid pair of used FKS 155s (older 15 DIN bindings that used the same bomber toepiece and construction as the current 18).

[Shorty_J]

That's the whole reason for DIN standards: consistency of release at a given setting, regardless of binding brand or design. Shouldn't matter if you're in the middle or at the end of the range, a DIN value is a DIN value is a DIN value.

3rd this.

In theory that's correct, but the springs perform much better over time if they are towards the middle of the range.

How do you know the spring isn't at the middle of it's range at DIN 8 and engineers thought of this?

If the binding meets DIN standard at 8-18, you can count on it at 8.

I'd buy the 18's if you can afford them. Edit: this opinion is not based on durability, but skiability differences I've read about, FWIW.

[gwat]

Ya, hunt down a set of the 6-15 din metal turntables and you'll be happy.

[Supermoon]

How do you know the spring isn't at the middle of it's range at DIN 8 and engineers thought of this?.

I honestly thought this was common knowledge. I know this from working for a company that makes bindings. We would always recommend finding a binding where you'd be skiing in the middle if the range.

It's obviously not dangerous or anything, but you'll get better performance in the middle. Same thing for turning your DINs down for the summer. It's just better on the springs in the long run.

[bfree]

I honestly thought this was common knowledge. I know this from working for a company that makes bindings.

Well you must be qualified then.

It's obviously not dangerous or anything, but you'll get better performance in the middle.

Wrong. What does this even mean? Better performance? It's a linear elastic spring.

We would always recommend finding a binding where you'd be skiing in the middle if the range.

Yes, but not for structural or release reasons. This allows for flexibility if they increase or decrease weight, ability, boot size, or have an injury. It's also good marketing to sell bindings and it generally sorts bindings into price/performance/durability catagories.

Same thing for turning your DINs down for the summer. It's just better on the springs in the long run.

This also makes no sense, and I might even argue that it harms the bindings if anything. Steel springs are certainly not going to creep in compression at room temperature. Unloading them and reloading them every year introduces fatigue that lowers the strength of the spring every cycle (though I've never seen a snapped DIN spring, so probably not an issue).

Back to the OP...one more vote for the 14s to save $$ and weight unless you tend to break things. Those 14s are solid bindings.

[LC]

This discussion is still going on? Pretty sure the whole "running at the min/max" thing was number one in the ski gear mths thread over 5 years ago.

[JayPowHound]

Ya, hunt down a set of the 6-15 din metal turntables and you'll be happy.

/thread..

[SiSt]

/thread..

Concur. Fks 155 is my choice. The px/axial 2 toes suck donkey balls. Same goes for the heels.

[DoWork]

Buy the 155s.

Lighter spring than the 18s, same one piece housing with the single pivot toe, which is better than the 14's wings IMO.

[Beyond]

I'm currently debating between the Pivot 14 and the Pivot 18. Differences between the bindings have been discussed here before, and I think I'm drawn to the bomber construction of the 18, all else held constant. But of course it starts at a DIN of 8. I'm aware that there are some who say that you shouldn't ski a binding on the highest DIN setting, but what about the low setting? Am I dumb for considering this, should I just accept the fact that I'm small and go for the 14? What are other people in the same height/weight/BSL range doing?

All things else aren't equal. I'm heavier than you by 20 lbs and ski the 14, usually set at 8. You don't need the higher settings on either binding, and one of the major selling points of the Pivot is its elasticity and placement relative to the tibia allows a slightly lower, thus more knee friendly, DIN. So: The 18 only has upward release at the toe under extreme force, such as you'd get on a course or hard landing. The 18 weighs more. The 18 costs more. So if you plan to take major air, or really mach in rutty snow at high edge angles, and if you won't tend to ski bumps or tight trees where rearward falls can happen even to strong skiers, then the toe and and the heavier housing on the 18 might be an advantage. Otherwise, your call gets down to the weary "bomber" tag. Which, since I haven't heard about an epidemic of broken 14's, further devolves to "mine is soooo big that I need a really badass binding to haul it around..."

[DougW]

Concur. Fks 155 is my choice. The px/axial 2 toes suck donkey balls. Same goes for the heels.

wouldn't a PX15 have the same toe? though checking site don't seem to market P15s or PX 15s anymore