• The use of binding sprays or wax removal sprays is prohibited as these can considerably alter the release values. Note: The X-RACe binding can be mounted: • onto ATOMIC d2 skis with pre.
I'm using a pair of Atomic SX11's which I actually really like, but they've got a pair of Centro 412's that are giving me some serious pre-release issues, even when skiing non-aggressively (relatively speaking). Has anyone had similar issues with these bindings or might the issues just be with this pair? Thanks, guys.
Joanie The heel release spring's tend to break on the 412's specifically. I would try a pair of the non-centro 614's. How old are the bindings? Atomic may warranty if with in 1-2 years. No, they're not within warranty, but Atomic should stand behind them if they produced a crappy binding. You wouldn't believe the header I took on these things.Jesus. Due to a pre-release.
I would be able to tell if the heel release spring was broken. I'd think that would be pretty obvious!
Somebody on the mountain told me that he had a pair of Centro 412's and they would release if he hit the slightest mogul. The SLIGHTEST mogul.
His were not on SX11's either. That's why I'm wondering if these bindings just had issues. I'm just brash enough to know the issue isn't me! Anyone else have issues with Atomic bindings? Where do I go to join the 'Atomics Suck' club?;). There are two important things to know and abide when using those bindings.
1) is turn the forward pressure screw in one or two millimeters beyond the housing especially for higher DIN settings. The tech manual says flush with the housing but one or two mils (one or two clicks) makes a huge difference. 2) NEVER EVER turn up the forward pressure screw with the boot already in the binding.
This is the source of most prerelease problems. It should not be done with any binding but other bindings may tolerate it, these will not. If this has been done there is a good chance the worm screw (or band) has been stripped.
Also check the binding with no boot in it and the heel cup up. The back lever should move freely. If it does not move freely in this position there is a broken internal piece that happened with a limited production and you MIGHT still get somewhere with warranty. Joanie - here's a picture from this listing 1238QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem I have no idea what the Centro looks like. If it helps I'll pm the name of the tech I dealt with and the name of the shop which did the test.
It was a long long time ago. To be fair I've had absolutely no problems with the new 614 binding that Atomic got me. My sister also has the Xentrix 412s on a Atomic 9:22 and had no problems.
LeeLau, thanks. That would be great. I'm curious as to whether the issues may have been with the Centro 412. I'm also wondering if maybe the Centro was the demo binding and the Xentrix was similar, but not the demo/rental.
Maybe someone else on the board will know. I'm anxious to see if anyone else has had pre-release issues with the Centro 412 in particular. Something's not right here at all. Also, reading what L7 wrote, it would seem odd to me that you have to take precautions outside of the company's own specs to keep the pre-release from happening! What the heck? 2) NEVER EVER turn up the forward pressure screw with the boot already in the binding. This is the source of most prerelease problems.
It should not be done with any binding but other bindings may tolerate it, these will not. If this has been done there is a good chance the worm screw (or band) has been stripped. How else do you set the forward pressure? The boot has to be in the binding to set the forward pressure.
I'm assuming you mean, that turning the screw up beyond the normal setting should not be done with the boot in. So, set the binding like normal, then release the boot and turn an additional X amount of turns?
You might want to specify how far or at least give an idea. Two turns 'might' be too much. Any binding that strips if you turn up the forward pressure is crap in my opinion. The band on the Atomic is really thin and a poor design in my opinion.
If nothing else, I think it's BS to have to compensate for a poor design. No personal experience on the NEOX but the older one is not stout enough for anything beyond recreational skiing(1018 aside).The boot has to be in the binding to set the forward pressure. No, turning that screw with boot in can strip/warp the metal band. If you want to see how frail the metal band looks, slide the heel piece off the track and look at the wimpy grooves that interface with the wormscrew on the underside of the heelpiece. L7 means you should turn the forward pressure screw 'blindly' while boot is out, then stop turning screw, insert boot, and check position of forward pressure screw while boot is in. The screw position won't be perfect on your first guess, so remove boot again, and turn screw again to refine its position.
Then reinsert boot to check position again, and repeat the process until screw is flush with housing while boot is in (or to a position 1-2mm inside the housing if you wanna try L7's suggestion to reduce pre-release by increasinig forward pressure). Bonus points: Insert and remove boot a few times to verify that your screw position remains where you just set it. Agreed: Atomic should try to suck less. 1018 performs better, but same weak metal band. Geez, you've gotta be kidding me.
I mean.I appreciate all of the knowledge you have about all of this, but really. Suppose I go to a mountain shop and rent a set of skis with Atomic Centro 412 bindings. Am I suppose to convince the shop to do what you're talking about here? I don't think so. And if I buy a pair of SX11's with these bindings on them and don't know any of the particulars you're talking about here, (and neither does the shop owner), then same thing.
You've got the dins and that's about it. So I go off on a pair of shitty bindings from a bad batch that Atomic put out and never recalled? What a bunch of crap. I'm sorry, but this enrages me. They put out crap and I spin out a header on a pre-release and wreck my knee and my shoulder. They owe me a new set of bindings at the very least. Anybody else spin out of a set of Centro 412's on a pre-release and get Atomic to send you a new set when your bindings weren't under warranty?
Xentrix has a higher lift plate, Centro is the demo track quick and easy adjustment for boot sole but not for position on ski. Yes turn the screw one or two 'clicks' to get the 1 or 2 mils. Any shop should adjust any binding this way but many bindings are more tolerant of the mistreatment. I will often turn the screw too far in (boot out) and back it off with the boot in to desired location. The neox does not have the issue and is also tolerant of snow under boot.ie they made it more idiot proof.
![Manual Manual](/uploads/1/2/5/6/125624500/215349543.png)
Thanks very much, friends. L7 wrote: Xentrix has a higher lift plate, Centro is the demo track quick and easy adjustment for boot sole but not for position on ski. Okay, thank you. That explains the difference between them.
Centro would be found on a rental system then, most likely. Are you familiar with the older Centro (in my case 412), L7? I'm starting to read of a general heel spring issue with them. These are from somewhere around 2000-2003 or so, I think. Hard to find skiers who remember equip from that far back!;) Unless of course they took a header like me.
Geez, you've gotta be kidding me. I mean.I appreciate all of the knowledge you have about all of this, but really. Suppose I go to a mountain shop and rent a set of skis with Atomic Centro 412 bindings. Am I suppose to convince the shop to do what you're talking about here? I don't think so. And if I buy a pair of SX11's with these bindings on them and don't know any of the particulars you're talking about here, (and neither does the shop owner), then same thing. You've got the dins and that's about it.
So I go off on a pair of shitty bindings from a bad batch that Atomic put out and never recalled? What a bunch of crap. I'm sorry, but this enrages me. They put out crap and I spin out a header on a pre-release and wreck my knee and my shoulder. They owe me a new set of bindings at the very least.
Anybody else spin out of a set of Centro 412's on a pre-release and get Atomic to send you a new set when your bindings weren't under warranty? You dont want a new pair of bindings, you want another brand of binding. Like Rossignols/Looks or Salomons. Atomic made a bad binding. They took the ESS design and didnt improve upon it much.
The best thing you can do is not use those bindings. There is a reason why older salomon and look bindings are so coveted here. They work well. The truth is most people who use atomic bindings will not notice the pre release.
If they do, they will think its their own skiing. They might even go to the shop and have them tighten it. But the bulk wont go search out internet forums and find out that indeed, their bindings suck.
Be thankful you found out before you hurt yourself, and dont use their products again. ^^^^^ Unless of course you read my post and realize you can avoid prerelease in the bindings by simply adjusting it correctly. Thanks very much, friends. L7 wrote: Okay, thank you. That explains the difference between them.
Centro would be found on a rental system then, most likely. Are you familiar with the older Centro (in my case 412), L7? I'm starting to read of a general heel spring issue with them. These are from somewhere around 2000-2003 or so, I think. Hard to find skiers who remember equip from that far back!;) Unless of course they took a header like me.
That was around that one batch of bindings had an internal part that bent (not the spring). The test to see if that is the case is described in my earlier post with the free movement of the released lever. I am describing the same thing you are talking about. ^^^^^ Unless of course you read my post and realize you can avoid prerelease in the bindings by simply adjusting it correctly. That was around that one batch of bindings had an internal part that bent (not the spring). The test to see if that is the case is described in my earlier post with the free movement of the released lever. I am describing the same thing you are talking about.
True, but like I mentioned, the only way you'd know that is to check this place out. I had atomic bindings on a pair of 9.18s a few years ago(before I discovered the powder board and tgr) and prereleased all the time. I thought it was because I sucked at skiing(which I still do). Then i got them tested, they cranked the din up, and still the same problem. I sold those things so fast. Thanks, guys.
L7, you wrote: That was around that one batch of bindings had an internal part that bent (not the spring). The test to see if that is the case is described in my earlier post with the free movement of the released lever. I am describing the same thing you are talking about.
When was the bad batch on the market exactly? And how can I identify whether or not I have a set of bindings from that bad batch? I'm not as knowledgeable or well-versed about this stuff as you are, so when you write this: Also check the binding with no boot in it and the heel cup up. The back lever should move freely. If it does not move freely in this position there is a broken internal piece that happened with a limited production and you MIGHT still get somewhere with warranty.I need to just confirm with you: If I try to move the back lever and it does NOT move freely (with heel cup up and no boot in the binding), then I definitely have a set of bindings from this so-called 'bad batch'?
How come they didn't publicize that there was a bad batch? I mean.I could have killed myself on these freaking things! Do you know anything more about when the bad batch was sold/rented/whatever?
And how did you find out about the bad batch??? CantDog is right.without some heavy duty research on ski boards a person might never know about this, right? Or was it advertised? Recall issued?.I need to just confirm with you: If I try to move the back lever and it does NOT move freely (with heel cup up and no boot in the binding), then I definitely have a set of bindings from this so-called 'bad batch'? Yes How come they didn't publicize that there was a bad batch? I mean.I could have killed myself on these freaking things!
Atomic dealers knew about it, the problem didn't necessarily show up right away. I suppose if you filled in a warranty registration card they could notify you but who actually fills those out and do the bindings even come with one? Do you know anything more about when the bad batch was sold/rented/whatever?
And how did you find out about the bad batch??? CantDog is right.without some heavy duty research on ski boards a person might never know about this, right? Or was it advertised? Recall issued? Or by having only an Atomic certified rep touch your bindings which is what all the literature for Atomic and other bindings tell you to do.
The literature also tells you to have a tech check the bindings every season. Did you or CanDog do this? Things happen and other bindings have had similar problems that you would only here about at a shop certified for that binding. Well.what you said is that there was a 'bad batch' of Atomic bindings first of all, and that is what I am inquiring about. I want to know more about this 'bad batch'. Secondly, YES a certified Atomic tech set these up according to spec and out of the shop and onto the slopes I went. Just like that.
From the tech to the slopes. And maybe you have a set that the heel lever sticks on with the cup up which may not have become apparent until recently. Check it, go from there. If your shop adjusted them in a way no certified tech should maybe the guy's an idiot, maybe someone did them who shouldn't of.
I suggest you take it up with them. I really don't know the history of you and your binding but your shop should be able to help you out. But the heel pieces.or the springs within them.didn't necessarily break, correct? Anyway.L7, you being a certified Atomic tech, if I gave you my personal specs (height, weight, DIN), would you be able to tell me anything more? Just curious, really.
Maybe it has nothing to do with anything, but I can tell you with absolute certainty that the guy who set me up was/is a certified Atomic tech. Another guy told me that the 'bad batch' of bindings everybody talks about were a certain color.an orange/reddish color with checkerboard somewhere. I can tell you that the bindings I've got don't look like that at all. But.from all I'm reading, it sounds like that whole 'color' issue is bogus because from what I understand the 'bad batch' from back then was not just a bad batch of Centros but pertained to other models as well. Some might say I'm overreacting, but I think pre-releases are horrifically dangerous. Mine certainly scared the crap out of me, I can tell you that.
I thought I was going to bite the dust.er, the snow.right then and there. And oddly enough, I have never pre-released from a binding in all the years I've been skiing.
Not even once. Which is probably odd, considering all I'm reading here. What Viva said here says a lot. I guess I can see why L7 knows exactly how to spot the issue in those bindings. L7, did Atomic also send you a bunch of heel pieces in case of returns to your shop? Maybe they only did that in Canada. Or maybe they did it across the board?
I'm just curious if certified Atomic techs throughout the U.S. Were given a heads up about this issue back in 2002 or thereabouts. Were you, L7?
The reason I ask is that maybe you're right.maybe the tech who set me up had been sort of pre-warned about this potential issue with the heel pieces and didn't give it enough credence or whatever. In that sense, I guess you'd be right. Do you suppose certified Atomic techs were given this information? But the heel pieces.or the springs within them.didn't necessarily break, correct?
Maybe it has nothing to do with anything, but I can tell you with absolute certainty that the guy who set me up was/is a certified Atomic tech. Did he do a release test? Before the fall or after?
Bad heels would and do show up on release tests. There really is no mystery. Another guy told me that the 'bad batch' of bindings everybody talks about were a certain color.an orange/reddish color with checkerboard somewhere.
I can tell you that the bindings I've got don't look like that at all. But.from all I'm reading, it sounds like that whole 'color' issue is bogus because from what I understand the 'bad batch' from back then was not just a bad batch of Centros but pertained to other models as well. Checkerboard - winner flag logo on the toepiece of the possibly suspect 310s and 412s of that era (and 614s and 1018s, not so suspect) That lets you date them. Yours are not them.
Also check the binding with no boot in it and the heel cup up. The back lever should move freely. If it does not move freely in this position there is a broken internal piece that happened with a limited production and you MIGHT still get somewhere with warranty. Damn, I'm pretty sure I have a set of these 'bad batch' racing 4-12's. They're on my beer league race skis that have only 10 days after 4 seasons. Took 'em out last night and pre-released on the cat track right before my first run.
Blew out again three gates in. They sure do look purdy with those checkered flags but what fucking pieces of shit!! Hope the shop or Atromic takes some pity on me. So would a set of 614's be OK? What else can I use for my skinny Atomic BetaRace 9.20's?
I have some solly 914's and PX14's in the basement. Do I need that mount what you want plate or can I mount to the plastic riser that's there already? I saw this discussion on the pre-release problems with the Centro binding and it interested me because I know someone who was badly hurt after her Atomic binding released. It saddens and shocks me to learn that this was not the first time this happened and Atomic apparently knew about these problems all along and did nothing about it. How many others has this happened to? Is there any way to hold Atomic accountable for selling such a lousy product?
Why haven’t they told people if they know about these problems with the bindings? What can we do to make sure that this doesn’t happen to anyone else? The incidence of the specific problem was pretty low so FIRST I guess your friend would want to determine if his/her injuries had anything to do with this specific problem. The much more common problem was pilot error, snow under the boot, self inccorrect adjustment, lack of maintenance, worn boot soles and a host of other things. Then I guess the recourse would be a court of law. Our friend Joanie was bound and determined to blame Atomic and anyone but herself but that doesn't mean she would win a court case nor does it mean every ski accident was caused by the binding. I hope all the folks in the thread know this already, but Atomic re-called a large number of bindings for rear (heal) release problems.
You can check the Atomic site, or better yet the CPSC site under recall atomic bindings (google). Some the relevant text is as follows: The models with a widespread suspected problem were made between 1998 and 2002.
(Have to read very small dot under heal lever for DOM. I had to use a magnifying glass. ) From the CPSC site (or the Atomic site) this is the information regarding which models are subject to the recall: Description: The recall affects the heel components of the following Atomic alpine ski bindings: 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, and Dynamic ADX 312, RD10, X412, Centro 412. The recall includes only those bindings manufactured from 1998 through 2002 The year of manufacture can be located on the underside of the heel lever. Sold at: Authorized Atomic USA ski dealers nationwide from 1998 through 2005.
Bump - just cracked plastic heelcups on the warrantied 614s I got. Same failure as this ent%2F1233037&ei=38iyUNOLbDWigKAvoCQCQ&usg=AFQjCNFbzUfA2QmWHnh5dFwItqoNrs3dWg&sig2=2QX-34Hzeq3bTl32jvMgQ and this ent%2F1225840&ei=38iyUNOLbDWigKAvoCQCQ&usg=AFQjCNEDtlSFEEefHTADCr-Kx3xVdzLRcQ&sig2=-uIsv5lUy9JfrlsKiQrxA Little spooky. I spotted the crack after prereleasing on a groomer and going face first downslope. Pretty happy it wasn't into trees. Examined the binding and noticed the crack.