Илья, если Вы нам не доверяете, то вот Вам оригинальный текст, впрочем, человеку,
не сумевшему правильно написать свой ник, он вряд ли поможет.

НЛ

"After the sales meeting some of our sales reps have come up with some
questions about the PX bindings. They want to have answers for these
questions before their dealers start asking them. Can you please provide
answers to these questions?

1) Why doesn't the heel pivot? Without the pivot heel, how does the PX
provide rear release with out tourqueing the knee? When selling the pivot
bindings, one of the key features was the location of the "pivot point"
under the fibula tibia axis, this reduced torque during a twisting fall.
How does the PX Compare?

>>> The pivoting heel was a great concept and device to reduce legs and
knee injuries during several decades because the toe-pieces were not
performant and safe enough. Nowadays with such great concept like the
Full-Drive toe with its high elastic travel, multidirectional release and
AFC-gliding plate, the role of the heel-piece during twisted fall can be
minimized. The specific patented design of the lateral arms of the PX, and
the design of the heel-cup, pressing and holding the boot with a vertical
force more than horizontal unlike traditional step-in bindings, allow the
boot to release very easily in twisted falls. The heel part of the boot can
slide directly outside the heelcup when it was "trapped" in the arms of the
pivot binding.
Beginning of January, Michael will send you more test results from the lab.
Please note also that when Look launched the current pivot binding in 1999
, the same kind of remarks were made because the rotation was limited to
17╟.
Look, as the pionnier of the "alpine safety binding" and one of the major
contributor to the history of alpine bindings would have never launched a
new product if this one would have been a step back in terms of safety.
Look cannot accept any compromize on safety.

2) How does adding more forward pressure increase performance for all
around skiing?

>>> It allows a better transmission of the energy from the skier to the
ski. An expert skier will use it to have more power and acceleration in
curves, an intermediate/advanced skier will get a stronger edge-hold, a
feeling of more consistency under the foot. He will gain confidence. He
will ski better.

3) Why is the mounting point so long? What about a flat spot ( especially
in Legend skis) Won't this effect the natural flex of the ski compared to
Pivot? Why have we lost the shorter mounting zone, especially with the new
shorter skis where the problem of a flat spot is exaggerated?

>>> The short mounting point was very useful when the skis were straight
and 200cm long and above to let them flex as much as possible. Nowadays, to
the contrary, shorter skis, with deep sidecut, and with integrated plate,
have a different flex distribution. The waist need to be more
mechanized.Most of all-mountain skis come with a plate like the Autodrive
plate which has the function to liberate the flex.
Re; the freeride and freestyle skis without plate, first, we must say
that,the new Dynastar skis Legend 05/06 and BigTM, TM, have had their
construction tuned for the PX, and that the increase in performance due to
the bigger forward pressure is much appreciated. An on-snow test is the
best evidence.
Note also that the top riders of the Dynastar freestyle team will all use
the PX instead Pivot and P18/P15. During the several tests we had with
them, they largely prefered the PX because they could get a better
"pop-effect" at the start of the jump.
More than the mounting zone, we'd rather talk about a "compact zone", where
all the mass (weight) is concentrated right behind the boot, no leverage
effect like with other traditional step-in bindings. Perfect for 360 and
all other tricks. It is another reason why the PX heel-concept is so much
appreciated by freestylers.

iskoskov@trial-sport.ru

http://www.trial-sport.ru/