2016 - 2017 Indemnification Lists (and their bullshit)

[doebedoe]

Solly and Atomic lists here: http://www.salomoncertification.com/...20Bindings.pdf


The good:

- Added a "last year" heads up.
- Recognizing that the all metal version of Solly bindings shouldn't be retired at the same time as their plastic counterparts (916 etc).

The stupid:

- FFG 12/10/7 are marked as "last year". You could buy these as 2016 model year. By 2017-18 they will be off the list. Yet, their exact counterparts (STH12) are fine?

Atomic putting itself in an odd place where they could potentially have products which are still covered under their 2 year warranty but are no long indemnified?

Guess I'll go mount my own fucking skis.

[skimaxpower]

Dropping FFG while maintaining STH is crazy stupid. I'm not sure which deserves more hate, legal dept. or marketing dept.

[gregL]

Guess I'll go mount my own fucking skis.

Doesn't everyone on TGR? Amer's biggest blunders this season are not in their indemnification list but introducing the non-MNC Warden 11 (WTF, isn't that the whole point of the Warden?) without a sliding AFD, and not bringing out a Warden 16 (they already have all the parts in the Guardian or STH2 16 bin).

[Lindahl]

That is pretty bad...

[galibier_numero_un]

I wonder if they don't think the Warden MNC 13 scales well to a skier requiring 16 DIN? With the Guardian, the weak point is likely the rail/pivot system, and perhaps this masks some inherent weakness in the heel & toe piece? Just thinkin' out loud ...

... Thom

[gregL]

The heel is exactly the same as the STH2, the toe is the same as the Guardian without the frame, only the spring is different.

[Flexon Phil]

Shops can still work on them, they just fail visual inspection. No need to live and die by the table. A proper should just do anything, you just have to sign off on it.

[gregL]

Someone in the know at Salomon contacted me within hours of post #3 above with some of the backstory on the Warden bindings. Apparently it wasn't just a matter of adding a sliding AFD to the Warden 11, there was an engineering issue with the heel as well, hence the ISO 5355 only spec. As for the Warden 16, a few pairs were made but they found the frame of the Guardian enhanced the strength of the toe structure in a way the stand-alone toepiece couldn't match, so for the time being the 16 spring is a no-go.

I'd encourage them to keep working on both projects, though, as I think the use of powerful ISO 9523 boots and crossover boots is only going to increase (they could also retrofit a sliding AFD on the STH2 bindings, they already go high enough).

[galibier_numero_un]

... As for the Warden 16, a few pairs were made but they found the frame of the Guardian enhanced the strength of the toe structure in a way the stand-alone toepiece couldn't match, so for the time being the 16 spring is a no-go.

This is encouraging - that they're thinking about MNC bindings for powerful 9523 boots/skiers. Thanks for that update, Greg.

The fact that the frame of the Guardian enhanced the toe's strength is a surprise, but points to the fact that you can't transfer part of a system (i.e. convert a Guardian to a Warden MNC) and expect it to behave identically.

This was what I was trying to articulate previously, although I had it a bit inverted - thinking perhaps that a weak rail system or pivot was the first point of failure in the bindings.

... Thom

[doebedoe]

Shops can still work on them, they just fail visual inspection. No need to live and die by the table. A proper should just do anything, you just have to sign off on it.

That's all fine and well, but it sends a very nasty message to consumers. It undermines the whole purpose of an indemnification list which is supposed to be related to the likely safety of a particular binding. Telling consumers that two identical bindings, one of which says "STH" and one of which says "FFG" have different safety characteristics is, well, dumb.

Unfortunately most people buy and get bindings setup by folks who have less knowledge than your average tech-talk TGR poster.

[Flexon Phil]

That's all fine and well, but it sends a very nasty message to consumers. It undermines the whole purpose of an indemnification list which is supposed to be related to the likely safety of a particular binding. Telling consumers that two identical bindings, one of which says "STH" and one of which says "FFG" have different safety characteristics is, well, dumb.

Unfortunately most people buy and get bindings setup by folks who have less knowledge than your average tech-talk TGR poster.

You are correct. Not arguing with you one bit.

[1000-oaks]

The STH Steel isn't on the list either, but undoubtedly it's covered.

[volklpowdermaniac]

Man, didn’t know where else to put this, gotta love the 4 year bump....

How long do you reckon the STH16 (non 2) but also newer than the 916, will be indemnified for? Mine are the white/orange ones, reckon they were like third year of STH run? Like maybe 13/14? 14/15?

These jams
https://www.rei.com/product/822962/s...l-ski-bindings

Just found a pair buried in a closet. Pretty psyched.

[ZomblibulaX]

Man, didn’t know where else to put this, gotta love the 4 year bump....

How long do you reckon the STH16 (non 2) but also newer than the 916, will be indemnified for? Mine are the white/orange ones, reckon they were like third year of STH run? Like maybe 13/14? 14/15?

These jams
https://www.rei.com/product/822962/s...l-ski-bindings

Just found a pair buried in a closet. Pretty psyched.

According to Solly's 19/20 indemnified list, this was their last season. But like Phil said four years ago, if you brought them in to my shop I wouldn't hesitate to mount them for you. You just sign a form and go ski happy. Its a brand new binding.

And yes, Amer Sport's bullshit continues: the Tracker, which was produced up until 2018 and is still available for retail sale, is on the "last year" list as well. They have extended that before with a small handful of models, but it really is complete crap.

[volklpowdermaniac]

According to Solly's 19/20 indemnified list, this was their last season. But like Phil said four years ago, if you brought them in to my shop I wouldn't hesitate to mount them for you. You just sign a form and go ski happy. Its a brand new binding.

And yes, Amer Sport's bullshit continues: the Tracker, which was produced up until 2018 and is still available for retail sale, is on the "last year" list as well. They have extended that before with a small handful of models, but it really is complete crap.

Sounds great, thanks for the heads up, my favorite binding, can’t belive I forgot about them in the closet for so long.

[nickwm21]

Just looked at the 2020 list. Nothing I have mounted is indemnified.... 916s, 914s, FFG14s, FFG16s....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whyturn]

FKS pivot 18 FTW


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ZomblibulaX]

Sounds great, thanks for the heads up, my favorite binding, can’t belive I forgot about them in the closet for so long.

Yeah, that’s a sweet find. Almost like a barn Ferrari, except they’re not worth anything and you get to actually use them.

[old goat]

Anyone have a link to the 20-21 list? Why is the list such a secret? Manufacturers hoping to screw people buying used gear so they can sell more new? Only reason I can think of. Are first generation STH off the list, as threatened? Mine don't need work--although I suppose I should have them tested--but it would be useful to tell my wife that my bindings and therefore the skis they are attached to are no long safe to ski on.

[3PinGrin]

Just looked at the 2020 list. Nothing I have mounted is indemnified.... 916s, 914s, FFG14s, FFG16s....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Welcome to my 40 years of free heel skiing!

Mine don't need work--although I suppose I should have them tested--but it would be useful to tell my wife that my bindings and therefore the skis they are attached to are no long safe to ski on.

Great approach!