# Atomic Centro 412 pre-release issues?



## J-ski (Oct 19, 2006)

Hey, friends.

I'm new here and not sure where to post my question. It's related to gear, but I don't have any gear for sale.

Just wondering if anyone else has experienced pre-release issues with Atomic bindings.  In my case, the Atomic Centro 412...I think they're circa 2000 or so...maybe a couple of years newer than that, but they're not under warranty.  I hear they may have had issues so I'm hoping to learn something about that before contacting Atomic for a replacement or anything.  I did spin out one hell of a header on these thing despite DIN to company specs, etc.

I'll try posting this in another part of the forum in case this is the wrong spot, but I sure would appreciate any information or experience anyone here might have re: these bindings.

Let it snow!

J-ski  (Joanie)


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 19, 2006)

There were lots of problems with them last year.  Atomic was warrentying them after it was up for a bit last year, but it depends on how old.  At the end of last year they denied a pair that had the heels failing so it is best to give them a call.  It cant hurt.  Or take them into the shop that you bought them from, they can provide a bit more leverage for you on the claim.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 19, 2006)

Thanks, Hawk.

When you say there were lots of problems from them last year, are you referring to last year's model?

I'm actually talking about a set from 2002 or so...somewhere around there anyway.  Hard to believe their bindings are still having lots of pre-release issues from crappy heel pieces even now!

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Joanie


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 19, 2006)

No, I am saying that we had to fail lots of them last year and try to warrenty them.  They were previous model bindings.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 20, 2006)

Oh, okay.  Could they have possibly been from as far back as 2002 such as mine are?

I'm wondering how difficult it is to spot a faulty heel piece.  Do you know?  Are you a certified Atomic tech?  Just wondering because you say "we had to fail a lot of them"...I'm assuming you mean in a shop situation.

From what I'm reading back circa 2002 or so there was a bad batch produced (not sure how big a "batch" it would have been, but...) and lots of pre-releases started creating a lot of returns, then finally they figured out that the heel piece was the culprit.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 20, 2006)

Yes I am a certified Atomic rep in a shop.  The heal starts releasing at levels of around half tyhe strenth the should release at.  the way to tell for sure is to take them into a shop and have them function test them.
The bindings should release at a certain pressure(varies depending on height weight....) and they could tell you if they are good.


----------



## NYDrew (Oct 20, 2006)

do they have backward release?  Turn it off, I had problems with my SX bindings of a similar error.

Also make sure they are sized properly.  Because of the variable nature of the toepeice, they tend to be installed bad.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 21, 2006)

*Thanks...*

Thanks, guys.

Hawk, a certified Atomic tech told me that they're okay.  I'm not convinced he's right.

The way you test these things...is it absolute?  Can I be absolutely certain they're okay if he says they are?  The reason I ask is that I read on another board that it's possible for the heel piece to be weak and ON ITS WAY to failing, but test perfectly fine.

Do you agree with that?

Thanks again for your time.  Thanks for your response too, Drew.

Joanie


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 21, 2006)

As long as the parts in it havent failed yet, then it will test and pass fine.  Some of the bindings will last for a long time, with no problems.  It is there has been more of those bindings failing over others.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 22, 2006)

Thanks, Hawk.  Quick follow-up question for the sake of clarification...

You wrote:



> As long as the parts in it havent failed yet, then it will test and pass fine. Some of the bindings will last for a long time, with no problems.



Can it test and pass fine even though it has already pre-released me?  I mean...let's say these bindings are pre-releasing me big time...so I get them tested, and they test and pass fine as you say here...

Can the reason for the pre-release STILL be a bad binding or bad heel piece that just isn't testing bad yet?

Thanks so much for helping me to sort through this.  

Joanie


----------



## NYDrew (Oct 24, 2006)

Hawkshot99 said:


> As long as the parts in it havent failed yet, then it will test and pass fine.  Some of the bindings will last for a long time, with no problems.  It is there has been more of those bindings failing over others.



disagree.  the machines that I have been taught to work with can detect a 0.001 deviance in tourque (DIN) pressure.  If a binding begins to deviate more and more without adjusting the setting, then it is probably failing...but this is something the machine can detect and multiple tests is something a reputable tech will do in this situation.

These machines are regulated by insurance companies and inspected obsessively.  I doubt they are wrong.  

Try investigating two scenarios:
A) you are underestimating your ability and are setting them to low
B) you are doing something wrong (a knee quirk) which is triggering a real release.

If you don't mind me asking, what is your height, weight, and describe to me where and how you ski.  Then tell me what your bindings are currently set for.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 24, 2006)

NYDrew said:


> disagree.  the machines that I have been taught to work with can detect a 0.001 deviance in tourque (DIN) pressure.  If a binding begins to deviate more and more without adjusting the setting, then it is probably failing...but this is something the machine can detect and multiple tests is something a reputable tech will do in this situation.








Is that the tester you are trained on?  It is the one we use, and there is no way that you can read that to the 0.001 deviance in tourque.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 25, 2006)

Not at all.

My weight is 128, height 5'6".

Bootsole is 295,  DIN 5.5.

Expert.

Re: the pre-releases, I was just cruising along a slope, turned, and zap.  Gone.  Ski released.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 25, 2006)

You should have a higher DIN setting than 5.5 if you are a type III skier.  (This is assuming you are under 50 yrs old.)


----------



## JimG. (Oct 25, 2006)

Hawkshot99 said:


> You should have a higher DIN setting than 5.5 if you are a type III skier.  (This is assuming you are under 50 yrs old.)



No kidding. Sounds like the shop you went to to get those adjusted are overly cautious about liability issues. I once had a shop do that to me, years ago. I spent the better part of a ski day stepping out of my skis for no reason. I cranked the DIN settings up to 8.5 or so and had no trouble after that.

And I never went back to that shop again.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 26, 2006)

Suppose I'm 52?


----------



## skidbump (Oct 26, 2006)

gain more wieght to compensate for old age and brittle bones


----------



## JimG. (Oct 26, 2006)

J-ski said:


> Suppose I'm 52?



A number...that is all.

I'm 48 and I'm in better physical condition than most people I know who are 10 years or more younger.

As we get older we do need to mind our loss of bone mass though, especially women. This is why age is a factor in DIN setting.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 26, 2006)

Well for 52 your DIN is ok.


----------



## J-ski (Oct 27, 2006)

Yup.

The problem isn't the DIN.

The problem is the bindings.  Either defective or poorly designed/constructed.  Either way, I think Atomic should have done a recall.

Market share be damned, pre-releases are freakin' dangerous.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 27, 2006)

Well as long as the shop is saying they are fine, then Atomic most likeley wont do anything for you.

Have you tried contacting Atomic?


----------

