PSA: Physics bindings failure... it will happen

[DiveBomber]

well I broke a physics binding, luckily I was comming to a stop at the time and it was the rear binding.

its the T-nuts, I checked all the ones I have and 90% of them have cracks!!

STOP using them NOW, they WILL break, part of the design flaw is that the metal base plate has a sharp corner which is creating a stress riser in the T-nut, (aside from the fact that the t-nut is cheap pot metal!)

heres some pics

[bobdea]

Yeah they are the most failure prone bindings iknow of

for some reason though no one wants to hear it

pretty sure it came up in threads you were a part of.

[Jack M]

and how many days are on the binding? everything has a service life.

[frunobulax]

Using various Race Physics for 10 years now. In the beginning nothing broke for nearly 5 years. Since then breakages increase every year, esp. cables of course, but also heels, heel socket plastics, and one ground plate. No difference between used parts and unused ones.

One week ago on the last turn of the day I had a loose feeling on my front foot after a rather sharp BS turn.

Looked down, and had virtually half of the binding stuck to the heel of my boot, the other half still on the board.

Both T-Nuts broken, and strangely enough also the ground plate torn at the very same point (usually I thought that only the weakest part breaks).

Lucky me, I had another binding in stock.

But I think as the parts grow old, they are more and more subject to fatigue, no matter whether the parts are used or not.

I liked the physics very much, but I think its life expectancy comes to an end.

[surlyguy]

Hmm, then the brand new in a box set I installed last night should be good for a few more years.

Excellent.

[bobdea]

Hmm, then the brand new in a box set I installed last night should be good for a few more years.

Excellent.

nope, could last one run. the first ones that were clear blue would break very fast. my second set lasted about a hour.

they eventually changed the plastic but still they were failure prone just not as bad as the first ones.

[patmoore]

I have a set that I no longer use if anyone needs 'em. The release cable snapped off in the heel of one of the boots.

They worked fine for four or five years. The only problem I had was not being able to release them easily. Many times I'd be trying to disengage the rear boot only to find that tugging on the cable wouldn't free it.

I've posted this photo before but for those who haven't seen it, this was my only remedy when I really needed a bathroom stop in Davos and the binding wouldn't release.

[skategoat]

That photo gave me a good chuckle. My immediate reaction was - wtf is wrong with his foot?

Step-in failures are the reason why I run standard bindings only. I had an Intec pin break on me a few years ago. They too are just cheap pot metal.

[kjl]

Step-in failures are the reason why I run standard bindings only. I had an Intec pin break on me a few years ago. They too are just cheap pot metal.

How about the fintecs?

[Jack M]

Step-in failures are the reason why I run standard bindings only. I had an Intec pin break on me a few years ago. They too are just cheap pot metal.

Keep in mind that in any over-center cam device, there is a way out. It takes certain circumstances and significant force, but there is a way out. Especially if you size your bindings for a little extra "feel" or flex.

There is no way out of a step-in binding without something breaking.

[skategoat]

Keep in mind that in any over-center cam device, there is a way out. It takes certain circumstances and significant force, but there is a way out. Especially if you size your bindings for a little extra "feel" or flex.

There is no way out of a step-in binding without something breaking.

I've seen racers eject out of Burton bindings. No breakage. So I know it happens. But I don't ride hard, rutted race courses. I prefer the simplicity of standard bindings with less points of failure and less chance of there being hidden damage. The convenience factor is a non-issue for me. It takes me 5 seconds to engage a standard bail.

kjl, I don't know about the Fintecs. Never seen one in person.

[jtslalom]

DiveBomber,

Take a close look at the tower pieces coming up out of the orange heel piece on Patmoore's front binding. Those tower pieces were redesigned the last year Burton manufactured those plates. Those specific towers are a little more heartier than the ones you probably have. I also have been through this a few times. I snapped quite a few tower pieces along with many release wires. I have also snapped many base plates from the carbon race, carrier and physics bindings. All those bindings were good while they lasted but it would certainly suck to break them off while in some crazy mach 3 carve. Looking back on it I am lucky not to have gotten seriously hurt.

However, at the time (1995 - 2002) Burton replaced all the parts for free. In 2003 they started making me pay. One year after that I got rid of all my Burton stuff.

I would not use them any more if I were you.

Good Luck

[DiveBomber]

DiveBomber,

Take a close look at the tower pieces coming up out of the orange heel piece on Patmoore's front binding. Those tower pieces were redesigned the last year Burton manufactured those plates. Those specific towers are a little more heartier than the ones you probably have. I also have been through this a few times. I snapped quite a few tower pieces along with many release wires. I have also snapped many base plates from the carbon race, carrier and physics bindings. All those bindings were good while they lasted but it would certainly suck to break them off while in some crazy mach 3 carve. Looking back on it I am lucky not to have gotten seriously hurt.

However, at the time (1995 - 2002) Burton replaced all the parts for free. In 2003 they started making me pay. One year after that I got rid of all my Burton stuff.

I would not use them any more if I were you.

Good Luck

its not that piece, its the T-nut (the part in the photo), however ive just gone through all the T-nuts a I had, and ALL of them had cracks!! some of them were tiny but still, you could see them developing!

[Guest]

Using various Race Physics for 10 years now. In the beginning nothing broke for nearly 5 years. Since then breakages increase every year, esp. cables of course, but also heels, heel socket plastics, and one ground plate. No difference between used parts and unused ones.

One week ago on the last turn of the day I had a loose feeling on my front foot after a rather sharp BS turn.

Looked down, and had virtually half of the binding stuck to the heel of my boot, the other half still on the board.

Both T-Nuts broken, and strangely enough also the ground plate torn at the very same point (usually I thought that only the weakest part breaks).

Lucky me, I had another binding in stock.

But I think as the parts grow old, they are more and more subject to fatigue, no matter whether the parts are used or not.

I liked the physics very much, but I think its life expectancy comes to an end.

Why would you willingly put another set of these bindings on your board if they keep breaking? Aren't you worried about getting injured?

[frunobulax]

Why would you willingly put another set of these bindings on your board if they keep breaking? Aren't you worried about getting injured?

You're hitting a sore spot..

Apart from the fact that I've still got three complete Physics pairs with heels at home, I like the feeling the physics gives more than any other binding I've tested so far. Especially the lateral flex (I'm using normal toe bails, not the "speed hook").

But yes, it's getting too dangerous. I will buy Bombers or Cateks this or next year. Until then I have to double check all the parts prone to breaking.

[mc-alex]

I have used the Physics many years, I was really happy without any problems.

About the broken "nuts", the Pro-Team have got special parts in the past, this was a "turned-Nut" and not a "pressed-nut".

[Guest]

You're hitting a sore spot..

Apart from the fact that I've still got three complete Physics pairs with heels at home, I like the feeling the physics gives more than any other binding I've tested so far. Especially the lateral flex (I'm using normal toe bails, not the "speed hook").

But yes, it's getting too dangerous. I will buy Bombers or Cateks this or next year. Until then I have to double check all the parts prone to breaking.

If you like lateral flex get some sidewinders. Incredible.

[jtslalom]

Now I see what you mean DiveBomber. The parts you are talking about were under the heal piece. Believe it or not I only had one problem with them. I actually sheared the whole flat round base on them and pulled them up through the binding. The whole heal assembly was stuck to the back of my boot. This happened while in a toe side carve coming into soft snow. The front of my board almost came to a hault and my back foot pulled so hard it tore the bases right off. No bull*&%t. I really think you are going to run into trouble if you keep on using them but I was the same way. I used them for close to 10 years. I always felt that i had so much $ rapped up into Burton boots and bindings that to go and buy new stuff at the time was out of the question. I just kept on fixing the old stuff. Good Luck with it.

[frunobulax]

It's just.. you know, the physics is a technical solution I really like. Simple, elegant, light, flat, enough flex and - apart from the difficulties with releasing - functional. Just like the IBEX.

I do think that's the reason why so many people still use them. I'm really reluctant to buy something that's twice as expensive in all the words meanings. And that comes with the ridiculous intec-system which was inelegant and behind the times from the first day on.

If I don't use cant and heellift, why do I have to carry around something that's as big as a motorhome? If the physics can provide controlled flex without pads and stuff why do I need them? Next year someone convinces me to buy a vist plate and TD3 sidewinders... then I'm 4 or 5 inches from the snow, and my board weighs 30 lbs... wasn't snowboarding a simple sport at one time?

I could have stick to the Swingbo Fuzzysurfer then..

Somehow I'm still waiting that someone takes the design of the physics, eliminates all the flaws (which would be easy.. better T-Nuts, slightly thinner tower pieces, a slightly thicker ground plate, and some modifications to the heels) and strikes back against the evil Intec Imperium.

Ok I know I'm somewhat backward myself, and it's all just whining..

[WinterGold]

I agree with frunobulax that the Race Physics was a clever design and the binding had a nice feel to it.

But there were sooo many issues. I was product tester at that time and I know the person who designed it (and still has the molds, etc.) and I had to laugh when I saw the picture of patmoore ... I remember one time running around in socks on the glacier ... there are funnier things I can think of ... ... lots of release problems at certain temperatures ... for racing (Grabner) it was good, but for everyday use there were some problems ... at the moment there are no plans of reviving this binding (although the mechanism was rather clever and together with the Speed Hooks you could design a pretty short boot/binding combination).

Who wants to keep the sport "simple"? Whatever improves my ride is welcome. Bring on the hightech innovations ... Progress keeps the sport interesting and alive ...

[Guest]

If the physics can provide controlled flex without pads and stuff why do I need them?

Because the pieces of shlt keep breaking. Besides, it's not engineered controlled flex, it's because the things aren't well engineered that they flex. It's a fault of the bindings.

Are new bindings more expensive? Yup. But you pay for durability and security in knowing that the things aren't going to break. I like my legs the way they are, and twisting one off due to a broken binding doesn't seem all that appealing. Besides, you need not go the intec route. I never have.

I guess it all comes down to what is more important to you, your legs or the "simplicity" of your bindings.

[frunobulax]

You got a point there, Jim. More than one, to be honest. I have to admit that I'm on the wrong side, and it is useless to defend a binding that is prone to breaking and that cannot be bought anymore.

But I'm not giving up that easily: as a matter of fact, I've never heard of a plate binding that doesn't break. Before I'm asked, yes I've seen a broken TD2 ground plate. Anything can happen. I suppose I would trust in a TD3 more that in any other binding, but you can never be sure.

And there is one thing to say about simplifying: the lesser parts there are, the lesser parts can break. And it's easier to check a simple binding (that consists of a plate and a couple of screws) for breakage and crazes, than to check a technical marvel like a TD3 or Catek.

[Guest]

You got a point there, Jim. More than one, to be honest. I have to admit that I'm on the wrong side, and it is useless to defend a binding that is prone to breaking and that cannot be bought anymore.

But I'm not giving up that easily: as a matter of fact, I've never heard of a plate binding that doesn't break. Before I'm asked, yes I've seen a broken TD2 ground plate. Anything can happen. I suppose I would trust in a TD3 more that in any other binding, but you can never be sure.

And there is one thing to say about simplifying: the lesser parts there are, the lesser parts can break. And it's easier to check a simple binding (that consists of a plate and a couple of screws) for breakage and crazes, than to check a technical marvel like a TD3 or Catek.

True, any binding can break. However, if I had to choose between a binding with less parts and shoddy materials and a binding with more parts that are of superior craftmanship and superior materials, I'd pick the latter hands down.

Plus, with the superior materials, there really isn't a need to check for breakage, beyond the normal maintenance of said bindings. You said you've broken a TD2 plate. How many more things have you broken on race plates?

I hope I'm not coming off as an ass here, I'm enjoying the discussion immensely.

[trailertrash]

You said you've broken a TD2 plate.

I think he said he has seen them break, not that he broke one. Just to clarify.

[frunobulax]

I hope I'm not coming off as an ass here, I'm enjoying the discussion immensely.

my chance...

No, me too. What else should we do in our offices while the precious snow is destroyed and flattened by those a......s who have taken a day off today...?

Where I live we call this kind of discussion "hirnwixen" which would translate "brainwanking".. you got a better word for that?

No, it wasn't my TD2, it was a friend's. And he has broken lots of things, ok.

Myself, I never broke anything else than parts of my physics bindings and of my body.. *knockonwood*

Superior craftsmanship ok.. there's not many things that are as beautiful as a piece of technical art that emerged from a solid alloy block. And I have to bow deeply before the men who gave such a piece of craftsmanship to us.

But does it have to be so complicated? Ever tried to assemble a Catek?

I'm not an engineer, but to me the task sounds simple: Fix two boots to a flat plank of wood. The fixation should be easy to release, pivotable, adjustable to boots between 25 and 32 cm, and a bit flexible to the sides.

And it should not damage the plank.

Is it naive to dream of a solution that's not Intec, that's light, flat and cheap?

Ok maybe it is.

What impresses me about the physics is that it is the only different approach to the matter. It may be a less than perfect approach, but I still like it for that.