Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    28

    Dynafit ST Rotation 10

    Putting a feeler out there to see if anybody has possibly tested the new Dynafit ST Rotation 10 bindings. Was thinking about picking up a pair of Radical ST 2.0s and ran into these new bindings. Looks like they're about the same as the Radical 2's just a bit lighter, with equal performance.

    Any thoughts?
    Snow? Snow.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    21,328
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    992
    The Rotation is a more expensive solution to a problem that doesn't exist! I've used the Rad 2/Beast 14 toe for years and it's super easy to step in the toe. And if for some reason the user finds it hard to align their foot with the heel (say on some steep sketchy terrain) then all they need to do is to flick up the toe lock to fix the toe in the in-line position whilst they click in the heel. The Rotation toe basically has a ball bearing/detent in the in-line position to hold the toe straight whilst stepping in the heel - but it can't be that strong otherwise it'd effect the rotation of the toe.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    401
    Quote Originally Posted by Spyderjon View Post
    then all they need to do is to flick up the toe lock to fix the toe in the in-line position whilst they click in the heel.
    Which also gives a you chance to clear the boot toe pin inserts from snow/ice by working the boot around the locked pins prior to stepping in the hees. I've regarded that as SOP when clicking into (Dynafits) Edit: any Pin tech binders

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    28
    Thanks for the words guys & the link.
    Snow? Snow.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,661
    Like Spyderjon implies, the Radical 2.0 was not really hard to step in to, it was just a bit disturbing to people used to a non-rotating tech toe. I thought the 2.0 itself was a solution to a problem that didn't really exist, as the elasticity problems with earlier Dynafit designs were mostly in the vertical plane, not the lateral.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    I thought the 2.0 itself was a solution to a problem that didn't really exist, as the elasticity problems with earlier Dynafit designs were mostly in the vertical plane, not the lateral.
    My understanding of the Radical 2.0 toe is that it was designed to solve the problem of boots with other manufacturer's toe fittings, which would sometimes bind and affect the release of earlier Dynafit bindings.
    Last edited by Oceanic; 10-25-2017 at 02:16 PM. Reason: Grammar

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,661
    I think Dynafit's point of view is that they don't care about other manufacturer's tech fittings since only the "real" thing counts, and the industry is coming around to their point of view. The current iteration of ISO 13992 specifies Dynafit fittings for the test, and the vast majority of new tech boots use original or Quick Step Dynafit toe fittings. My understanding was that the rotating toe was designed to allow the heel to rotate further off the center axis without forcing the jaws open, thereby creating more lateral elasticity.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    5,806
    ^ Agree. In addition, allowing the toe to rotate allows the heel to handle 100% of horizontal release activity, which probably makes release more consistent and better for meeting DIN/TUV/etc standards. With a non-rotating toe, variation in pin movement in toe sockets of various states of wear (or manufacturing tolerances) adds a lot of variability to release at the heel.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps
    Posts
    583
    I only have the beast 14, but since it is the same toe: I feel it has significant performance improvements over the old radical toe, especially in hard snow. I can ski hard in the resort, with no prereleases and significantly better dampening compared to the old rad. So to me the improved elasticity makes a lot of sense.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,350
    Quote Originally Posted by smooth operator View Post
    I only have the beast 14, but since it is the same toe: I feel it has significant performance improvements over the old radical toe, especially in hard snow. I can ski hard in the resort, with no prereleases and significantly better dampening compared to the old rad. So to me the improved elasticity makes a lot of sense.
    That’s just the forward pressure talking.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps
    Posts
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by XavierD View Post
    That’s just the forward pressure talking.
    well its speaking in tongues....

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    501
    sorry for jongin,

    i bought a stoeckli stormrider with dynafit st rotation 10... almost like new, like 10days on them.
    the ski was to long for the 1st owner, she couldnt get the kickturns around and bought a smaller ski.
    i can still return the binder and just keep the ski. but then i am in a whole conflict, what i dont like.
    maybe i will return the binder and get the din12 and reuse the wholes.
    it is not my binding of choice but a great deal.
    it is going to be my lighter setup so i need to start somewhere.


    i am struggling with the bsl adjustment to be spot on!
    this is on my bench
    everytime i get the length right i push the boot in and it is perfect.
    if i release the boot and recheck the heel is further away like 1-2mm+
    if i bend the ski and rattle the heel unit it moves in.

    no i am worried....do i need to grease the spring... is the binding faulty
    LIVE IS NOT A CHAIRLIFT

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    133
    One more “agree” on the improvement from 1.0 to 2.0. Definitely rattled out on the 1 on a few hard snow occasions. 2’s are less harsh and knock on wood no pre release yet. I’m not great at lining up the toe to lock it out... but I should be

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    501
    Ok i got it myself,
    if i increase the forward-pressure value (small screw).... the carrier moves the heelpiece right were it belongs.
    one thing less to worry.....
    i have more dynafit questions, but i will ask them later ( is there a thread correct use of dynafit???)))
    LIVE IS NOT A CHAIRLIFT

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    21,328
    Tech bindings don't have forward pressure SO all you did is just move the heel piece which is how the clearance between the back of the boot heel and the binding is set

    That clearance allows the ski to flex, every brand is different and it could be different between models of the same brand, some heel piece are spring mounted and use a minimum clearance

    https://www.wildsnow.com/19791/dynaf...-1-comparison/

    " Pictured here is a Dynafit Radical 2.0 heel unit (all black, later versions have green and gold components), with ‘kiss gap’ adjusted to what we think works best, a very small gap that just allows a sliver of light to come through. THIS IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN Radical 2 & 1, as all versions of Radical 1.x need a 5.5 mm gap at the heel, including the versions with a flex compensation spring. In my opinion the reason Radical 1 still requires the 5.5 mm gap is the Radical 1 spring system is clearly not as robust as that of the Radical 2.0, which uses the “kiss gap.” More here covering the Dynafit heel gap setting "


    it used to be fairly easy to find this kind of info but this^^ took me a long time to find, I assume becuz as i understand it Lou Dawson no longer owns this site and so the good tech info id not very well organized IMO
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    501
    uhmm i am jonging here so bad....
    i red the "kiss gap article" before so i got that. they are set like this now.
    https://www.wildsnow.com/2599/dynafit-tech-heel-space-shim-gauge/
    there is 3 adjustment points on the heel piece

    1. to move the heel piece (lowest torx)

    2. din value for horizontal release ( big screw flathead)

    3. din value for lateral force /forward pressure (top small flat head) or am i wrong and this is something different??

    thanks for helping me out

    edit: ok i got it, the small flatheadscre is for the pin value (uspring)
    Last edited by nordekette; 10-16-2020 at 06:19 AM.
    LIVE IS NOT A CHAIRLIFT

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    21,328
    Quote Originally Posted by nordekette View Post
    uhmm i am jonging here so bad....
    i red the "kiss gap article" before so i got that. they are set like this now.
    https://www.wildsnow.com/2599/dynafit-tech-heel-space-shim-gauge/
    there is 3 adjustment points on the heel piece

    1. to move the heel piece (lowest torx)

    2. din value for horizontal release ( big screw flathead)

    3. din value for lateral force /forward pressure (top small flat head) or am i wrong and this is something different??

    thanks for helping me out

    edit: ok i got it, the small flatheadscre is for the pin value (uspring)

    the big screw is the side to side lateral value and the little screw is the up-down vertical release value

    So I set the little screw one mark higher than the big screw and it keeps the heel from pre-release during high shock when I hit bumps and G-outs
    Last edited by XXX-er; 10-16-2020 at 10:13 AM.
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •