I honestly have no idea why brake swapability matters to anyone, or how people break them so often. I'm assuming it must be a park skier thing.
I can see if you did them all day it might be annoying, so on that front I can understand why you'd have some kind of adverse reaction to them.
Markers though, I don't really like. Plastic, plastic, plastic. But I digress. I am an all-metal, single-pivot kind of person and I see no reason to downgrade. I view the STH and FKS as different but totally equal in terms of performance, with markers somewhere down the line a bit- but still a good binding if weight matters a lot to you. Sure they're easy to work on but personally that means exactly shit to me because I own them to ski on them, not fiddle with them.
Sessions, I didn't mean the inclusion of the Beast's toe in my comment to mean "every future binding will/should have turntables", but more of an indication that a lack of elasticity is less than ideal- and even the latest and greatest still look to employ this 30 year old technology to incorporate some friendliness into the package.
I guess I'm just fed up with threads with titles like these. Sure there's some hype surrounding them but for fuck's sake people, WHY IN GOD'S NAME DOES EVERYONE HAVE THE SAME DUMBASS QUESTION EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEEN ANSWERED ONCE A WEEK FOR THE LAST 6 YEARS.
It's not hype, it's function- whether or not the buyer is heavy enough or skis hard enough to experience those functions is another matter altogether but it's just a question of what pleases the end user the most- the pronounced CHUNK sound of an STH and rock-solid feel VS. the snap of an FKS and that little bit of wiggle room at mach tittyballs.
One thing is for sure, the next person to start an FKS hype thread is getting verbally abused haha
