With the expiry of Dynafit's patent in 2012, the monopoly in the pin binding market is also history. This not only led to a certain boom, but also to numerous new developments from various manufacturers. While some models differ only in detail from the original Dynafits, others have been significantly further developed. Although the typical Dynafits (and their numerous copies) work very well in principle, they have some system-related disadvantages, as described in the first parts of our article series. For example, the release value cannot be set very precisely and is usually limited in height, which is particularly problematic for heavy riders with an aggressive riding style. In addition, the elasticity of the bindings is quite low, which can lead to false releases. The same applies to the lack of length compensation, which prevents a clean release when the ski is bent. The "Pin 2.0" bindings address this issue, but often also offer increased ease of use. The current models are briefly presented below.
G3 Ion
The Ion from G3 is basically a classic pin binding, but also has a length compensation that enables a constant release even when the ski is bent. This is the case with all Pin 2.0 bindings, but most of the following bindings also have other special features.
Dynafit Radical 2.0
Similar to the G3 Ion, the Radical 2.0 is a "classic" binding with added contact pressure to compensate for ski bending. In addition, however, the toe piece has a slightly pivoting bearing, which increases elasticity and thus reduces the risk of false releases. In this video from Dynafit, the advantages of the pivoting toe piece are clearly illustrated.
Dynafit Beast
The Beast models from Dynafit are probably the most suitable pin bindings for freeriding. Their high maximum Z-value, robust design and good elasticity also allow for spectacular action. However, the massive rear jaw, which also has a function to compensate for ski bending, also has disadvantages. In addition to the relatively high weight, the lack of a flat walking mode should also be mentioned. As the stoppers are blocked by the climbing aid, you are forced to walk with it. In addition, you need a special insert on the heel of the boot, which is easy to fit, but prevents the boot from being used in alpine and frame bindings as well as in the Marker Kingpin. Switching from ascent to descent mode is also a tricky affair. Beast 16: The Beast 16 (here's a Gear of the Week) has the highest Z-value in pin bindings and also has a fairly massive, rotating toe piece that can also release independently of the rear toe piece and therefore offers additional protection against injuries.Beast 14: The Beast 14 has already been extensively tested on PowderGuide.com. It has the slightly rotating toe piece of the Radical 2.0 and thus saves a lot of weight compared to the Beast 16, but also offers "only" a maximum Z-value of 14.
Fritschi Vipec
With the Vipec (also already reviewed on PowderGuide.com ), Fritschi focuses on safety. A release on the ascent is just as guaranteed as a fully adjustable release. The lateral release is set on the toe piece, the vertical release on the non-rotating rear toe piece. Of course, the Vipec also has length compensation on the toe piece. All in all, the binding also offers very good downhill performance and weighs only slightly more than the competition from the classic camp.
Marker Kingpin
Marker is the first "major" binding manufacturer to enter the market for pin bindings. The Kingpin differs from other models in that pins are only used on the toe piece. At the heel, the binding sits on the edge of the ski watch, similar to an alpine binding. Although the rear jaw also looks like an alpine binding, its function is more similar to that of classic pin bindings: Both the vertical and lateral release values are set on the rear jaw and lateral release is achieved by rotating it. Short test of the KingPin.
Trab TR2
Similar to the Beast models, the TR2 from Trab grips the boot heel with an additional metal part, which is why most touring boots need to be converted by a certified dealer (only Scarpa offers a few models specifically for the TR2). As with the Fritschi Vipec, the lateral release value is set on the toe piece, and the binding naturally also has a length adjustment.
Conclusion
The Pin 2.0 models have all been on the market for a few seasons now and work reliably. The advantages over the classic concept are obvious. For just a little more weight, you get a compensation of the ski bend and therefore a more reliable release, a higher elasticity - which makes false releases less frequent - and sometimes Z-values in the range of alpine racing bindings. We are looking forward to further developments, after all, a lot has already happened in just a few years and developers are continuing their efforts (see e.g. BAM). The future probably belongs to Pin 2.0 bindings, at least outside the Ultralight segment.
