Xplore Flexors — Thoughts on Standard vs Hard

[CIMA]

It looks like the TTS Legacy.

I wish that Rottefella could change their spring pin to this one.

[boby13]

But that binding is plastic. Push plastic past spec and it cracks.

I'll have to take another look at my bindings, for some reason I was pretty sure they are anodized aluminium.

Xplore bindings are made out of Derlin molded arount some sort of steel inserts.

https://www.delrin.com/

Its is plastic... but really really strong and high quality plastic.

Delrin plastic works as an excellent replacement for metal because of its high-tensile strength, low-friction and high-wear resistance, creep and warp resistance, and overall durability and toughness. Delrin material properties include it having superior density, low moisture absorption, and it is chemically resistant to hydrocarbons, solvents, and neutral chemicals.

[CIMA]

Do other Rottefella's NNN bindings use Derlin as well?

[Capercaillie]

I wish that Rottefella could change their spring pin to this one.

Re-using the low tech standard at first appears like a good idea, but I think it would not work.

Low tech inserts sit at the very front of the boot toe, sometimes in the part of the sole that protrudes forward of the toe. I don't know how well flexors of any design or geometry can be made to work with an AT or TTN/TTS boots' protruding sole. Both NNNBC and Xplore rely on having the front of the sole recessed and beveled in relation to the toe. The flexor pushes on the bottom of the angled front part of the sole, not on the boot toe. Both NNNBC and Xplore have the pin/bar about 2cm behind the toe (I don't know how to measure this accurately).

If you make a boot with low tech inserts 2cm behind the boot toe, it would probably not work in most of the existing tech toe bindings. Release definitely would not work for leather boots, and probably not plastic boots with the inserts positioned that far back.

So you are making a different binding (tech toe with flexor) that only works with completely different boots. It is not compatible with tech toes anymore, and there is no reason to use the dimensions or mechanism of that standard when you can have something much better, that can be made for less money at the same time.

Xplore has inherently superior geometry that ensures less play: Xplore pins are 7mm wider apart, which decreases pivot angle play by 10% for the same +- distance of fore-aft play in the pins, and increases leverage for pivoting by 11% (ideally this would be true for edging too, but I think other factors end up being more important). Xplore pins pivot on their shaft instead of their conical part, which should give better alignment and less play.

Low tech toe pieces have many potential sources of slop: arm pivot axis alignment and pivot play (the Voile toe piece in the photo only has one movable arm - best case scenario), and the alignment of the pins pressed into the arms. All you need for an Xplore binding is two holes aligned and a consistent distance apart. It is a lot easier and cheaper to make a good Xplore binding.

There are some good articles on EarnYourTurns about dimensional problems in real world low tech toe boots and bindings:

https://earnyourturns.com/24620/backcou ... en-2-pins/

https://earnyourturns.com/32833/inserts ... ch-system/

What Rottefella missed out on improving is increasing the diameter of the pins. Going from 5mm to 6mm would have basically doubled the strength of the pins (it is proportional to the 4th power of the diameter).

[Manney]

Nice write-up @Capercaillie.

[turnfarmer]

I think the Xplore is a good concept but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. As said above the pins could have been larger, the pivot maybe even a little further back. But the big thing for me is the process needed to change the flexor. With a hinge and a simple lock mechanism, one could easily switch from free pivot to the bumper.With a little more tinkering, I think they could easily set it up for soft flexor, hard flexor, and free pivot change with a pole tip. That would justify the price increase of NNN-BC. It also needs a T4/Excursion, BC2000 style boot.

[Manney]

Interesting. How many miles do you have on your Xplores? What sort of conditions have you tried them in? Pros, cons of your experience so far, @turnfarmer?

[CIMA]

@Capercaillie
Hmm...
I'm feeling uncertain about this. As you mentioned, the Rottefella designers would have provided an explanation. I just hope that they considered all of the potential issues that come with a low-tech pin design.