The NNN/BC Truth Thread

[CIMA]

The hardwire is another Achilles' heel.

[CIMA]

The wire cable won't be an alternative.

[CIMA]

As for NNN/SNS, very little stress concentrations are generated in pitching thanks to its hinge structure. Even if yawing and rolling is applied to the binding, those stresses will be distributed to the five screws which are aligned in the longitudinal axis of the ski. Such sturdiness overtakes the strength of the bar unit of the boots.

Screw hole layout (Salomon SNS XA)



Toe plate (Salomon SNS XA)



Second plate



The NNN has a similar configuration of the screws.


(Jens Teglers)

As for 3-pin, all the stresses, yawing, pitching and rolling, are applied to the the screws which fasten the toe-plate. That makes the screw-hole area of the ski very vulnerable.


(Jens Teglers)

[TeleMarcin]

As Raventele is struggling to post the photos of the defective NNN BC bindings I am posting to pictures of my Rottefella NNN BC Auto binding I have broken last season. In fact I have ripped it off from the skis during the fall. Before I have been using it for 12 years and the part of the problem is that this bindings has been remounted to skis mounted previously with NNN bindings. You would be suprised but all mechanical part of this NNN BC binding is metal made and seems to be very solid. This metal mechanism is wrapped around by plastic and maybe this is a reason of the poor perception of the NNN BC system bindings by some.

[CIMA]

That picture would be a nice gift for Raventele.

Twelve years of using is good enough for any bindings to end their lives.

This metal mechanism is wrapped around by plastic and maybe this is a reason of the poor perception of the NNN BC system bindings by some.

You have a point here.
The reason why the makers of NNN/SNS are using plastic is not only the weight saving but also the prevention of frost.

[Krakus]

I am not biased, as I use both NNN and 3-pin bindings for XCD. The truth is that no binding is indestructible. I have seen, but cannot find it now, photos of NNN boot with badly bent/skewed metal bar as a result of telemarking.
It is known that automatic NNN/SNS bindings are prone to icing. My personal experience is NNN BC Magnum blocked by ice.
NNN/SNS bars and hinges work well with longitudinal stress. But during turning, there could be a lot of lateral and twisting forces, which they were not designed for.

[Teleman]

Techno mumbo jumbo.....Sorry boys but it's about FEEL and in our world pins FEEL better...They turn better....they go up hill better.... but...in a totally cc environment at a ski area....groomed area..... nnn beats pins totally....Anything downhill pins win...Teleman

[Raventele]

As for NNN/SNS, very little stress concentrations are generated in pitching thanks to its hinge structure. Even if yawing and rolling is applied to the binding, those stresses will be distributed to the five screws which are aligned in the longitudinal axis of the ski. Such sturdiness overtakes the strength of the bar unit of the boots.

Screw hole layout (Salomon SNS XA)



Toe plate (Salomon SNS XA)



Second plate



The NNN has a similar configuration of the screws.


(Jens Teglers)

As for 3-pin, all the stresses, yawing, pitching and rolling, are applied to the the screws which fasten the toe-plate. That makes the screw-hole area of the ski very vulnerable.


(Jens Teglers)

Wonderful, except that NNN anything is really not a torsional design..You cannot really apply the same twisting forces to that binding as to 3pin AT all..so who is talking apples and pears ?

[MikeK]

I've been reading along with this thread for a little while now and I think it's time to throw in my $0.02...

You can argue the engineering merits of the two, or perhaps multiple systems (I don't consider a simple 3 pin the same as a plate and wire, or SNS the same as NNN) on paper, but it will never convince certain people to switch, myself included.

The only area I actually find the NNN/SNS superior is for skate skiing. Everything else I'd rather have a pin. Even touring on flat terrain I prefer the pins.

I'm an engineer and I try to look at the data when determining strengths and weaknesses of a particular system, but with some things, it just come down to preference. And I simply can't stand the feel of the system bindings.

I've owned skate skis and touring skis with NNN bindings, and I rarely used them. I've skied on BC rental skis with NNN bindings, and the whole time I was wishing they were pins. Given the choice, almost regardless of the ski, I'll chose the pin.

As far as traditional XC goes, I'm the minority. Everyone seems to ski system bindings now. I'd tolerate them for skiing in hard groomed tracks. You don't really need any directional control of the ski in those. As far as trail touring in the backcountry, I think that the majority still prefer pins. For downhills... pins. You can chalk it up to lack of skill, because that is really what it is... but there is no sense in using gear that exceeds your skill level. I'd rather take every advantage I can get from my gear and have fun, rather than struggle for years trying to master something that will give very little advantage.

"NNN for track, pins for the back" YMMV.

[TeleMarcin]

You can argue the engineering merits of the two, or perhaps multiple systems (I don't consider a simple 3 pin the same as a plate and wire, or SNS the same as NNN) on paper, but it will never convince certain people to switch, myself included.

I do not think it is possible to convince someone to switch from pins to system bindings and I like that both concepts are available. My personal experience is that SNS XA Salomon bindings are effective and sturdy enough to suit my purposes and I do not expect to change it in the nearest future