Campaign: Hey, Look! Bring back the Pivot 15

[Flexon Phil]

I know there are members here who appricate the all metal goodness of a high end Look Pivot...

[I]Some consider the Pivot 15 to be the best high-performance binding ever produced — a bold statement, for sure. There is a bit of a “You can have my Pivot 15s when you pry them out of my cold dead hands”mentality here. But why? First, all-metal goodness. More than anything, high-performance skiers want durability, and an all-metal housing gives you that. I would bet many skiers have moved their Pivot 15s from one ski to another a dozen times. Next is performance: all-metal bindings bring a level of performance that can actually be felt by most any competent skier. The combination of short mounting distance, low rotation weight, and extreme lateral rigidity enhances the feel of a ski. Finally, Look Pivots give you lift-line cred. Pivots are the Jeep Wrangler of skiing; they might be the only piece of gear that gets you “the nod” from young and old. It is the binding that transcends generations. Read More.

Pivot 15 Forza Collection?

#itrustlook #bringbackthe15

[adrenalated]

Oh god yes.

[ScrewYou]

Yes please

[CaliBrit]

Forgive my ignorance but what do they bring to the table over the in production pivot 18's?

After they brought those back to the market they have seemed to struggle to sell them at full retail.

[ScrewYou]

18s are great, but 15s have a lower price and lower DIN. Some people don't need or want 18 DIN..

[Flexon Phil]

Forgive my ignorance but what do they bring to the table over the in production pivot 18's?

After they brought those back to the market they have seemed to struggle to sell them at full retail.

You are answering your own question, the 18 at $399MAP does not sell well at all, mostly to pro's and not to mortals. I would venture to say that IF offered, these will be in the $339-359 range which is in the range of other 15-16DIN bindings. IMHO theses will have a more obtainable DIN range of 6-15 than the 8-18 and Look would sell the 15 3-5 times more than the 18. The 18 can still remain for that elite athlete but for everyine else who wants an all metal binding and might ski them at a 8-12 range, this will be at least as good or better option than the 18.

[adrenalated]

^^^ exactly. Case in point: I weigh 140 lbs and stay in FKS just fine at DIN 8-9. However I have had issues with plastic bindings, have worn out an STH14 in under a season, have had several smaller/lighter friends break FKS 14 toes, like the ski feel of the solid AFD and single pivot toe, etc. It'd be nice to not have to hunt down old FKS155s and deal with bending brakes or swapping baseplates, or run 18s at their lowest setting. Honestly if the price is identical to the 18 that'd be fine with me, I just want the single pivot metal toe at a lower DIN range.

[XavierD]

Sure, why the fuck not. It is a better binding for 95% of skiers out there.

That said, releasing any new free ride focused binding that doesn't play well with non standard soles is stupid. Granted, this isn't really a new binding. I'm currently starting to progress over to STH 16s from P18s because they interact better with the variety of boot soles I use. This from someone who truly belives in the superiority of the pivot/turn table system and has been using them for years.

Look needs a good WTR/ISO 5333/whatever compatable AFD interface and the current Pivot14WTR isn't it. A multiple angle fixed AFD with an adjustable toe height would be a good start

[Damian Sanders]

I want them to bring back the metal housing Geze style toe from the FKS of mid to late 90's. The plastic version of this design is still in use today, why can't we have a metal version?

[Damian Sanders]

Oh, and I have several pairs of Salomon's that start at a DIN of 11, and one pair that starts at 14. If you can't ski a metal Look at a din of 10, I question your need for metal bindings.

[Damian Sanders]

Oh, and I remember a few years back asking someone here if they could bring back the Salomon 957. They sort of did, with the styling of the STH2 series.

[TomCrac]

Sign me up, I'm in.

[geo039]

I want them to bring back the metal housing Geze style toe from the FKS of mid to late 90's. The plastic version of this design is still in use today, why can't we have a metal version?

But I hate the style. The old Y toe (with a few more screws) gets my vote.

[Flexon Phil]

But I hate the style. The old Y toe (with a few more screws) gets my vote.

No problem with the shape although the Y toe was lighter. I have some metal Y toes that are down to a 13 DIN.

[1000-oaks]

I'm in.

Would be super easy for Look, they currently sell DIN 14 turntable heels and DIN 15 metal pivot toes (race bindings), all they need to do is box 'em together on the production line.

[Meadow Skipper]

^^^ exactly. Case in point: I weigh 140 lbs and stay in FKS just fine at DIN 8-9. However I have had issues with plastic bindings, have worn out an STH14 in under a season, have had several smaller/lighter friends break FKS 14 toes, like the ski feel of the solid AFD and single pivot toe, etc. It'd be nice to not have to hunt down old FKS155s and deal with bending brakes or swapping baseplates, or run 18s at their lowest setting. Honestly if the price is identical to the 18 that'd be fine with me, I just want the single pivot metal toe at a lower DIN range.

Pretty good price:
http://www.steepandcheap.com/rossign...20-ski-binding

They also have the 180s.

[Damian Sanders]

I'm in.

Would be super easy for Look, they currently sell DIN 14 turntable heels and DIN 15 metal pivot toes (race bindings), all they need to do is box 'em together on the production line.

This is just too hard when your company is run by morons.

[Phill]

I don't get the issue. How many people are in the market for a full metal race binding and run their DINs lower than 8?

Even if you run " 8 - 9 " like the 140lbs guy who posted above the bindings still work as they should.

I also don't get the obsession with the turn tables. I have 2 pairs of the later generations and a pair of ZXs and in every regard but weight they're inferior to PX18s.

[Flexon Phil]

I don't get the issue. How many people are in the market for a full metal race binding and run their DINs lower than 8?

Even if you run " 8 - 9 " like the 140lbs guy who posted above the bindings still work as they should.

I also don't get the obsession with the turn tables. I have 2 pairs of the later generations and a pair of ZXs and in every regard but weight they're inferior to PX18s.

PX's and now SPX's are no longer available higher than a 14 either. As far as the weight different, that is acutally a big part, the actual weight and rotational weight. Also, by offering the 15, they will have a lower price point making the binding more obtainable for more skiers looking for a high end metal binding, this will create more sales also. Look basically took this strategy with bring in the Pivot 12 under the 14. If dropping the Rossignol name was to increase market share, this is as another additial way they can increase sales.

[nickwm21]

Also, by offering the 15, they will have a lower price point making the binding more obtainable for more skiers looking for a high end metal binding, this will create more sales also.

Compared to what? Huh... This is the exact reason they do a metal fks18 and a plastic fks14. A metal fks15 will cost the same to produce as the fks18, so they will have to price them the same.

The only market for a more expensive fks15 over a cheaper fks14 are people that ski hard enough to worry about a metal binding but are small/light enough that they can't hit the din range of the fks18. That market is so small.

[Flexon Phil]

Compared to what? Huh... This is the exact reason they do a metal fks18 and a plastic fks14. A metal fks15 will cost the same to produce as the fks18, so they will have to price them the same.

The only market for a more expensive fks15 over a cheaper fks14 are people that ski hard enough to worry about a metal binding but are small/light enough that they can't hit the din range of the fks18. That market is so small.

Then why did they come out with the 12? It costs the same to produce as the 14 but sell it for less, what they loose in profit, they make up in volume..and market share.

[doebedoe]

...A metal fks15 will cost the same to produce as the fks18, so they will have to price them the same....

MSRP and price to produce are related to each other, yes, but not so precisely. Pivot 12 and 14 have the same cost to produce (spring rate is a very negligible difference in cost perhaps), but one is $249 MSRP and one is $299.

Manufactures take a lot into consideration when pricing besides cost of production. Do you really think Salomon skis are several hundred dollars less to produce than similar competitors and that's why they're cheaper.

As for the market: some of us ski right on an 8, like a metal binding but don't like skiing a binding at the lowest possible setting (whether that actually matters or not.)

[cat in january]

Sure, why the fuck not. It is a better binding for 95% of skiers out there.

That said, releasing any new free ride focused binding that doesn't play well with non standard soles is stupid. Granted, this isn't really a new binding. I'm currently starting to progress over to STH 16s from P18s because they interact better with the variety of boot soles I use. This from someone who truly belives in the superiority of the pivot/turn table system and has been using them for years.

Look needs a good WTR/ISO 5333/whatever compatable AFD interface and the current Pivot14WTR isn't it. A multiple angle fixed AFD with an adjustable toe height would be a good start

I could get pretty excited about this, Listening Look? This is how you get back on top.

[Muggydude]

Simply put if they had a 15 they'd sell to people who want the durability of the 18, but are smaller and ski with a din of 7-8-9. Basically, a lot of park rats for starters.

Plus psychologically a lot of people don't like running a binding at its lowest DIN settings, even though it's completely fine. And a lot of shop reps will still recommend people go with a binding where they are in the middle of the DIN range.

Pricing the 15 lower than the 18 may mean they'd make less per binding, but they might sell considerably more bindings, in competition with the jester and sth2 16.

It's the same reason I buy sth2 16 instead of 13. I'll never ski over an 11 din, so the 13 spring is just fine. But I want the extra metal in the 16 construction

[ScrewYou]

As long as they leave the 14 and 18 DIN versions available, reintroducing the 15 would be good for a lot of people.. However for me, I personally like the current 14 and 18 versions. I am 220 lbs geared up, and usually ski at 12-14 DIN.

I like the pivot 14 for the 200g weight savings on the pair, for when using them on my jib skis, and I have had no problems with prerelease riding them with the spring set at 12. On directional skis, I use the 18 and ride them at 14, so the current options work very well for me.

Still, I'd buy a pair of 15s. I really like how the metal toes ski and they release like butter.