or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Federal investigator for CPSC looking for reports of failed Atomic Xentrix 614 bindings
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Federal investigator for CPSC looking for reports of failed Atomic Xentrix 614 bindings

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

After the heel cup of one of my Atomic Xentrix 614 bindings failed last month (causing a nasty crash), I did my duty as a good citizen and filed a report with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission [CPSC] at SaferProducts.gov.  [At first I'd thought my crash caused the binding failure.  However, I spoke to a binding expert who explained it was the other way around -- I crashed because the heel cup split.  The bindings were indemnified by Atomic at the time of the crash, so I was concerned this might be a hazard to others still using them; Atomic has since removed them from indemnification.]

 

Today I was contacted by a CPSC investigator who wanted more information.  When I expressed my surprise, she explained they tend to focus their follow-ups when a product that failed was very similar to products already included in a recall (which is the case here -- many of the other Atomic bindings from that era were recalled), and when they've had more than one report of failure (also the case).  

 

I thought it might help in her investigation if I posted a thread here asking if others had also experienced failure with this model.  If so, she'd like to hear from you!  Her name is Kathy Bellenfant, and you can contact her at KBellenfant@cpsc.gov.

post #2 of 10

March 26, 2013

 

Hi chemist:

 

I haven't skied on Atomic binding for the last 10 years, but it is nice to know that finally we see our tax dollars at work for of all things: SKIERS.  Great and wow.  Thanks for posting this and may others in your boat notify the "G" Woman.

 

Think snow,

 

CP

post #3 of 10

You filed a CPSC claim for an 11 year old binding? I would have chocked it up to "old shit breaks sometimes".

 

Seems like a waste of time.
 

post #4 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

You filed a CPSC claim for an 11 year old binding? I would have chocked it up to "old shit breaks sometimes".

 

Seems like a waste of time.
 


Rarely a waste of time where deep pockets and lawyers are involved..... for the lawyers that isduck.gif

 

At the least it seems to have prompted Atomic to change the indem status..th_dunno-1[1].gif

post #5 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

You filed a CPSC claim for an 11 year old binding? I would have chocked it up to "old shit breaks sometimes".

 

Seems like a waste of time.
 

Normally I might not have, except I'd seen other reports of failures of the 614 heel cup, and I knew very similar Atomic bindings had been recalled (also for heel cup failure), and I knew this was still in use at the time, so I thought perhaps Atomic erred by not recalling this one as well.

post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemist View Post

 so I thought perhaps Atomic erred by not recalling this one as well.

 

Is it an error when they were almost certainly perfectly well aware of what they did? The recalled the fewest models that they could possibly get away with, despite lots of evidence that other bindings with the same design were also failing the same way.

 

Personally, I would love for a lawsuit on one of the non-recalled bindings to get to the discovery phase so that the evidence of what exactly they knew and when sees the light of day.

post #7 of 10

The following models were recalled, over 1.25 million bindings. Hardly sounds like a minimum recall. And it was voluntary.

 

Race 310

Race 412

RaceRace 310

RaceRace 412

Xentrix 310

Xentrix 311

Xentrix 412

C310

C311

C412

CR 310

CR 412

R 310

R 412

SX 310

SX 412,

Device 311

Device 412

Centro 310

Centro 412

Dynamic models ADX 312, RD10, X412, and Centro 412.

Other models, such as the Race 614 and Race 1018, are not involved
in the recall.

 

I personally have owned and skied on numerous Race and Xentrix 6.14's without issue. And I skied all day yesterday on a pair of 10.18's mounted on a 209 SG.  The entire Atomic WC team skied on 10.18's for years.

 

Additionally it was the heel housing that cracked not the heel cup.  And it was bindings manufactured from 1998-2002.

 

I have no affiliation with Atomic.

post #8 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

Additionally it was the heel housing that cracked not the heel cup. 

Thanks for that clarification, Atomicman.

post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieP View Post

March 26, 2013

 

Hi chemist:

 

I haven't skied on Atomic binding for the last 10 years, but it is nice to know that finally we see our tax dollars at work for of all things: SKIERS.  Great and wow.  Thanks for posting this and may others in your boat notify the "G" Woman.

 

Think snow,

 

CP

The Neox series has been flawless to my knowledge.

 

As a side note, The recalled bindings were in essence ESS VAR bindings and I believe Atomic bought the company or the patent. The Neox series and newer were designed as new.

post #10 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

The Neox series has been flawless to my knowledge.

 

As a side note, The recalled bindings were in essence ESS VAR bindings and I believe Atomic bought the company or the patent. The Neox series and newer were designed as new.


To be fair A-man, there have been numerous tales of Race 6.14 heels breaking the same way. Heard it on here and heard it first hand from racing dads who were never even aware that there was a recall. Seems like juggling unbroken Race 6.14 heels was an Atomic sport for some people. It was very much under the radar over here, but my local store did swap a pair of recalled Device 4.12 heels on my 9.18s when I pointed them to the Atomic documentation. Never heard of 10.18s breaking, but isn't there a lot more metal in those where the others are plastic?

 

All ancient history anyway. Neox, X-series and all the Solly variants are what Atomic are about today, and apart from some anecdotal X-series pre-release issues (skis wandering off on their own is speed events!) there doesn't seem to be much wrong with any of them.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Federal investigator for CPSC looking for reports of failed Atomic Xentrix 614 bindings