2009/2010 Look Pivot

I know this has been posted before and easily (or not) found by doing a search, but here it is again!

All this and more can be found on http://www.lookpivot.com/

P18 Wide
-Din 8-18
-Race Toe Piece
-72mm Wide Teflon AFD
-Ramp Angle 0.0
-Height 19mm
-Brake Width 80/95mm
-Street Price $439USD

P18 XXL
-Din 8-18
-Race Toe Piece
-72mm Wide Teflon AFD
-Ramp Angle 0.0
-Height 19mm
-Brake Width 100/115mm
-Street Price $439USD

P14 Wide
-Din 5-14
-Full Drive Toe Piece
-72mm Wide Teflon AFD
-Ramp Angle 0.5
-Height 19mm
-Brake Width 80/95mm
-Street Price $339USD

P14 XXL
-Din 5-14
-Full Drive Toe Piece
-72mm Wide Teflon AFD
-Ramp Angle 0.5
-Height 19mm
-Brake Width 100/115mm
-Street Price $339USD

Misc.

-There is a new mounting template that will extend 78mm-140mm.

-Base plates to upgrade your old Pivot/FKS heels are not available!

-One of the great things about the Pivot heel and rarely if ever mentioned and I think an argument can certainly be made that because the heel can move in conjunction with the toe of the binding the Pivot design reduces or possibly eliminates inadvertent release due to sheer loads (lateral shock that is neither twist at the toe or heel).

-Also besides durability, I think the feedback you get from the ski is the best I have ever felt.

-There should be some 1mm and 2mm lifter kits around so you could change binding delta by 1-2mm with OEM parts.

coup

Wonder why they cost so much...

(A) Metal vs.Plastic
(B) Machining vs. stamping
(C) Quality vs. quantity
(D) Precision
(E) Performance
(F) Demand

Examine those factors, compare the P-14 against say a Marker Griffon/Jester (fergodsakes). That should answer your question.

SJ

So....

Why did they stop making them?

Why have they started making them again?

I may have to find a pair of skis just to mount them with Looks... I skied them exclusively for decades...

It doesn't.  They had the technology, improved on it, then released it to the public.  Has little to do with the manufacturing process and materials used.   I can see the performance, but c'mon.  4 bills......

(a) Production costs

(b) Demand

(c) Indeed.......................

SJ

Especially if you consider that all the tooling already is made and paid for, many times over.
You're going to pay for the exclusivity of the new production run. Well that, or buy a NIB pair of the previous run from SJ at the Starthaus
http://shop.starthaus.com/store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idcategory=26&idproduct=665

I know you are a Nordica ski fan, take a look at the flat Hot Rods, there is a 78 and an 84 that ski fantastic. 

 Some say production costs were the reason they were discontinued;
some think it was the heel slop issue that caused them to be replaced.

Who knows, but the limited brake options didn't help.

The Axial / PX were SUPPOSED to be an improvement.

I've never seen slop on the FKS style heel.
That was the pivot series that did that trick!
Here's the guilty party.....


Pivot = BAD   (above)
FKS= Good   (below)

I just looked on the Look web page....they ARE calling them PIVOT...that could be a marketing blunder making folks think of the wrong thing. But MOST of the folks looking to buy these probably skied the old FKS's.

Has anyone had any negative experience with the PX18?  Obviously the toe is the same, and the heel (in theory anyway) does offer some advantages. 

• Greater adjustment range between boot sole lengths
• More accurate forward pressure adjustment
• Less likely to break your finger in half
• Separate brakes that can be exchanged for different widths.

Like I said....   "in theory"  I only have limited experience with either one.  Does anyone who has experience with both have any input?

I've got FKS 155's, Pivot 12's, PX15 and 18's ( not to mention MANY N77's, 57's and 17's)

The Pivot 12's heel slop drives me nuts and in general the PX was a big improvement over them.
The PX race series (15 and 18) are a very nice binding indeed. Especially when you can pick then up for around $180 . I do like their ability to adjust for a small BSL variation. They also seem to be holding up very well as I would expect from a metal binding. Are the FKS style any better? I don't see any real advantage over the metal PX'x....perhaps even a few things lacking. I'm going to stay with the PX for new skis.

Good info.  Thanks.

Kinda the way I'm thinking.

Couple of knocks I've been hearing about the PX vs FKS:

PX are WAY heavier

PX have a much bigger footprint on the heelpiece, which affects the flex of the ski (bigger dead spot)

Good points.  I would be using them for my race skis, so I don't see either of those things as much of a negative.  Heavy is good when you want to stay glued to icy, rutted snow. 

All race skis have a plate which allows for free flex, so I think the short mounting base would only make a small difference, if you could notice at all....

JPH,

The new Look Pivots and Rossi FKSs are identical save the colours:

Look Pivot 14 = Rossi FKS 140 (with P/FKS metal turntable heel and full-drive toe)
Look Pivot 18 = Rossi FKS 180 (with P/FKS metal turntable heel and race toe)

The "Pivot" in Rossi Smash's picture was a short lived cul-de-sac in turntable bindings, sold by both Look and Rossi. Instead of adjusting the forward pressure by adjustable side arms, the arms were fixed and the whole turntable was moved by a worm screw to the rear of the base plate. The heel piece is sprung to return to centre, unlike the "pure" turntables. I don't believe they were ever sold as adult race bindings - (P15/P18, FKS155/FKS185 were the real deal) - they seem like an attempt at a consumer friendly turntable. Apparently they develop heel slop - but reports also claim that this is unnoticeable with a boot engaged and has no effect on performance.

Well said Squawker...
The slop does "go away" with the boot engaged...the heel spring pressure pulls it up to the top of the "slop". On the bench you can see the gap created. "Unnoticeable"? I can't really say as mine are on my old Explosiv's, so they only see soft (and hopefully deep) snow. I've got to believe on hard snow it would feel imprecise to an aggressive skier.

Back to business....the new series will be welcome by many, me included. I wish the price point was lower but after all they are competing with the Marker Royal family so they can't set the price low or people will think they are not as good

I'll still be looking for some deals though.....

What are the performance differences between the race toe piece and the full drive?  I know it's metal vs plastic and single pivot vs uh, not single pivot.   Does the full drive have any advantage over the race, besides being lighter?  Thanks!

The FD toe has the advantage (or disadvantage depending on your viewpoint) of multidirectional release capabilities. Thus, like any binding with these features, it is a binding that biases toward release rather than retention. Is it as release biased as say a Marker? certainly not, but still.....it's in that genre.

The "Forza" toe is definitively biased toward retention. It offers lateral release vectors only. Durability aside, the attraction of the LOOK single pivot type of toe (and the real deal TT heel FTM) is a very rigid coupling between the boot and ski. Nothing is or ever has been as rigid in boot/ski coupling as this binding. Hence the revered status of this binding among some skiers over the years.

SJ

Does anyone else find it "interesting" that this incarnation of the Pivot is being clearly marketed for the park? The graphics, lowered heel and thus zero delta angle and even Look's marketing video all scream PARK. To bad they didn't keep one variation "pure" with decent graphics and the old delta (would be so simple). I'll bet the brand sponsored racers will still be skiing the PX18's this season.

What the hell were/are they thinking? Will the park rats pony up the $400 to be seen on these.(or should I say, their parents!)

So I see it as a win/loose effort by Look/Rossi. Glad it's back and yet not living up to what they could have.....

Thanks SJ.  What directions does the FD toe release in, besides lateral? 

Not so much "interesting" as indicative of the market.

The park crowd are the ones that voted with their dollars by snapping up most of the available older models

The park crowd was the most vocal in demanding the return of the product.

The edgy graphic is compatible with most of the "big" skis on the market park oriented or not.

The zero delta can be altered with a simple 2mm lifter under the heel but it would not have been easily reversible had the lift been built in.

SJ

 What SJ said...

The big error in this product is the lack of a standard 130 brake option.

I actually think that the old delta was one of the unfortunately "features" of the old design, so welcome the flat delta, enabling boot work to more completely address my balancing needs. Nice! 

 Has anyone heard one way or the other if there will be a Dynastar branded version too?

HI
There will be,

I think that is incorrect.

SJ

 Fight, Fight, Fight!!!

 There will be a Rossignol version. 

 Hey comon';

Its Look/Rossi/ Dynastar, we are destine to have at leat 1500 (ok, 3 at least) versions of the same thing with conflicting models # just to confuse and confound the market.

What a marketing strategy, confuse and concour.

But , yeah,  Marker sucks, after all they make it clear what they sell.  Who needs that?

.