The NNN/BC Truth Thread

[Raventele]

Ron,

Thanks for uploading the video.
But only that one wouldn't prove the superiority of 3-pins very well.
Please don't ski on such nice snow.
Others may be wanting to watch more samples of yours.

In any case, I think we have to agree that what we want to look at are yaw and roll as the primary issues for contrasting pins with System bindings, as that is fundamentally what turning skis is about.

It may be about time for us to refrain from going into detail about technical issues so as not to make MikeK raise a laugh any more. From his point of view, your talk may not sound like science but dubious alchemy.

Here's another 3pin wonder Cima..Same mountain..low angles here 10 -15 degrees..
BTW, if you know of any other ways to apply torsional force to skis other than to pitch, roll or yaw them, perhaps you woudl like to share it !?? The world awaits! Again I'll say it: turning skis is primarily, fundamentally about yaw and roll. Mikek ??? O, yes, and the jump-yaw-roll !!! And I mentioned the issues of weight and size first, but that's ok, you can credit mike! ..
[video][/video]

[MikeK]

Go easy Ron. I'm sure CIMA just didn't see your post.

It's getting to the point of information overload.

And yes, the roll torque application is much great via the pin due to the width of the wings relative to the width of the ski, and also if risers are present, the added leverage from that about the edge of the ski. We also know the yaw torque is great too due to the wings on the 3 pin binding. The connections themselves are also inherently stiffer.

I don't think CIMA is arguing that that NNN has any great mechanical advantage, at least not that I can see. If anything he is promoting the opposite, that the skier must use more precise and defined motions through skeletal mechanics rather than using a more fixed foot/ankle/knee position and relying on the mechanical advantage of the pin binding.

As far as the reliability and robustness of each, that is rather a trickier one to call. It seems there are proponents on either side that state each are superior.

It is sometimes hard to think that plastics could be stronger, or more robust than aluminum and steel, but really it comes down to the application and the applied loads. Seen as how the skier can't physically transmit as much load to the ski via the NNN, it should be obvious that the system need not be as stiff and strong as the plate and bail. It is a no brainer to see that the plate and bail provides a more rigid connection to the ski with higher loads. I don't think anyone has argued against that. We also know that the latch mechanism within the NNN is metal (appears to be stamped steel) and is fairly robust.

Testimony from each side has shown that each are sturdy enough for backcountry skiing given that they are not pushed too hard. We have all seen/heard stories of the bails and wires breaking when put up to the most extreme conditions i.e. big skis, aggressive skiers, and hard snow. I'm of the mind the Voile pin bindings weren't designed for that type of skiing. Certainly none of that falls withing the XCD or trail touring realm.

[MikeK]

I also add one little note on another reason a person could be swayed from NNN because it is my personal experience.

Due to Hobbit foot, I have a hard time finding boots that are wide enough that they won't cramp my feet whilst maintaining the proper length.

I almost always have to size up just for the width. This presents a problem with the toe connection of the the NNN. It adds to the floppiness for me because my toes usually aren't up there. It's not an issue with a 3 pin because I feel connected right at the widest part of my foot, and that's where the wings are. Added floppiness or lack of fit near the toe is almost unnoticed and probably adds some flexibility in my case.

If I could get a boot that fit like a slipper with no slop and no cramping/pinching with an NNN connection, I might like it better.

[Raventele]

Go easy Ron. I'm sure CIMA just didn't see your post.

It's getting to the point of information overload.

And yes, the roll torque application is much great via the pin due to the width of the wings relative to the width of the ski, and also if risers are present, the added leverage from that about the edge of the ski. We also know the yaw torque is great too due to the wings on the 3 pin binding. The connections themselves are also inherently stiffer.

I don't think CIMA is arguing that that NNN has any great mechanical advantage, at least not that I can see. If anything he is promoting the opposite, that the skier must use more precise and defined motions through skeletal mechanics rather than using a more fixed foot/ankle/knee position and relying on the mechanical advantage of the pin binding.

As far as the reliability and robustness of each, that is rather a trickier one to call. It seems there are proponents on either side that state each are superior.

It is sometimes hard to think that plastics could be stronger, or more robust than aluminum and steel, but really it comes down to the application and the applied loads. Seen as how the skier can't physically transmit as much load to the ski via the NNN, it should be obvious that the system need not be as stiff and strong as the plate and bail. It is a no brainer to see that the plate and bail provides a more rigid connection to the ski with higher loads. I don't think anyone has argued against that. We also know that the latch mechanism within the NNN is metal (appears to be stamped steel) and is fairly robust.

Testimony from each side has shown that each are sturdy enough for backcountry skiing given that they are not pushed too hard. We have all seen/heard stories of the bails and wires breaking when put up to the most extreme conditions i.e. big skis, aggressive skiers, and hard snow. I'm of the mind the Voile pin bindings weren't designed for that type of skiing. Certainly none of that falls withing the XCD or trail touring realm.

Generally true, though the 3pin Hardwire has virtually no limits this side of Alpine racing. And even the 3pc can handle the resort hardpack quite well at moderate speed.
BTW, the bails on a pin binding also provide leverage for torsional forces and to stabilize the boots laterally.
My preference is to mount my 3pc on either 20 or 30mm risers and that gives 3 levels of leverage (risers, wings and bails) 4 screws to connect the riser (front) and 3 to connect the binding to the risers. Pretty damned secure and sturdy for 99% of what can reasonably be called XCD.
My contention has been from the start here that System"BC" is way oversold in that if you think you are just going to get on the likes of NNN/BC and pull of great Teles ( or Parallels) , better think again ; and I think this probably turns off far more people to XCD than it turns on.
Also it's almost impossible to Accurately compare durability between pins and System (this side of a lab) in that the truth is NNN and the like will almost always eject you before you have reached anything close to the kinds of forces you could exert on a good pin binding.

[MikeK]

Correct. The bail can provide some torque through the upward movement of the boot. I guess I assumed this obvious (because the mechanism wouldn't work without the bail) but if you want to prove it to yourself try rolling the ski without the bail, the outer part of the boot will start to lift at some point and separate from the plate.

If you were very careful you could roll the ski without the bail, but it would be much more difficult to do so, proving the upward force on the bail must also create some rolling torque.

You could also say the same of the 'bail' on the NNN. It is much closer to the edge of the ski and provides less leverage, but the effect is still there.

[Raventele]

Also there's a downward levering by the bail which most ppl seem to miss.. Push your boot down and at a point the duckbill levers up against the bail ..this makes for great lateral stability in a parallel turn..the trick , of course is to simply sit with some force..
If you really try the same thing with NNN you will probably pop out of the binding ( hence the vaunted system acl safety)
And , btw, boots in the basket, bail unlatched are pretty snug..and that's why the simple springy cable is enough to tighten them to be skiable even if the bail fails.

[MikeK]

I think that is the exact point I was making about the durability. Durability, the way we measure and define it has to do with the function of the part. If the part cannot physically reach the same limits as another, it needn't the same strength. Increasing durability through limiting forces on a component is a smart way to increase durability. The brute force way of adding more material, or stronger materials happens under a condition where the design is limited.

So in that essence, what makes NN pins good for control, also limits the durability.

The limitations in control on NNN is what contributes to it's durability. Seen as how it cannot, and was not designed to have massive inputs to the ski, it need not be any greater than what it is.

As far as ejection, I'm not sure about that with the manual locking mechanism. It may be hard, or virtually impossible to release it from the bail. The auto, OTOH, because it is spring loaded, I'm pretty sure can release. I've never had it happen with just normal skiing on NNN.

[Raventele]

I have been ejected countless times riding on NNN..every direcion
As far as the manual version goes, SB mentions it's safety in a backward fall so apparently it ejects also.

[MikeK]

I'm not quite convinced about the any downward pressure from the bail. The bail can't apply any more than what you have preloaded it to i.e. you're boot can't pull on the bail, it can only push.

I know the fit is snug, I've had to grind some of my boots to fit the newer bindings. But even so, if the bail was completely missing, there would be little but the friction between the wings and the the duckbill to keep you in there. I can see how the wedging action of the plate forced by the cable might make this great enough to be ski-able, but I've never tried.

I've always rather thought of the cable as redundancy for a failure of the pin holes in the boot to limit longitudinal motion toward the tail of the ski. I understand the cable does much more than that when skied, but I've heard this argument for keeping the cable in your pocket.

All my bindings thus far are Mountaineers. I risk it. I'll being skiing back with a lot of duct tape around my boot if I ever blow apart the duckbill.

[Raventele]

Well, equal and opposite , right ? the force of moving your boot down locks against the bail. More proper to say the boot is the lever and the bail is a pivot. all the same, your boot will be locked tight against the bail. i guess it's more properly said to be upward pressure from the boot.
If the bail breaks on 3pc, the cables will get ya down, nice and ez does it.