I can’t really see enough detail to give an accurate thought on this. I can however see how it could improve touring except for one detail (which may have already been put through the ringer), but I’ll mention it anyways….

What happens if your ski is causing enough friction that your binding advances beyond that extender pivot? You could find yourself bucked off due to negative climbing lifter angle and gouges in your topsheet due to the heel of the binding hitting an unprotected spot. Add really soft snow and you could be snapping your split skis in half. It’s pretty hard to explain the picture I have in my head, but a video and better pics would be helpful to understand this in it’s best light. I couldn’t see any pics in that link, but then again I am on my work pc.

That walking plate link shows up though and is exactly what I had in my head. Doesn’t really seem like a useful idea for a splitboard with the current heel riser setup.

Ive used the multi-step ski bindings and found them to be very awkward. It may be that if youre actually running it would be better. at a walk, even a fast walk, the two step process of the system left me with a hiccup in my stride right where it was at its weakest. Might be the best thing in the world for rando raceing.

In addition to the above comments, ‘natural gait’ defeats the primary efficiency of touring over hiking; namely, you don’t have to pick up the weight of your foot/boot. It slides along the snow.
A “more natural” movement will add to efficiency of movement, however, that efficiency is a redundant action.
The jury is still out whether the net biomechanical advantage of natural motion outweighs the inefficiency of lifting your boot each step *plus* the weight/hassle of the apparatus over the traditional touring bracket.

FWIW, Stefano Maruelli is better known for his M2 binding design than his Natural Walking Plate. Ahmjusayin’
He’s the first to come up with a simple U-bracket and screw for tech toes.

They even have a #naxosplit tag at the one website… Naxos were/are incredibly popular with entry ski tourers in my (poor) country, because they were very cheap. Lastet about a season too.

@radam wrote:

Indirectly related but this reminds me of the Naxo backcountry ski binding which had a double pivot, before they went out of business…
https://www.wildsnow.com/articles/naxo_faq/naxo_faq.html

That’s the one I tried

@chrishami wrote:

@peacefrog wrote:

@radam wrote:

Indirectly related but this reminds me of the Naxo backcountry ski binding which had a double pivot, before they went out of business…
https://www.wildsnow.com/articles/naxo_faq/naxo_faq.html

That’s the one I tried

Just got a killer deal for my gf on some skis mounted with the Naxo 21 AT binding. They are burly as hell, a bit heavy but she’s been riding them inbounds already this season and loves them. I do like the looks of the dual pivot mechanism, I just wonder why other AT binding makers haven’t copied it. Maybe it just complicates things and has questionable benefit. I think this idea, for splitboarding in softboots at least, definitely complicates matters, with questionable benefit. Unless you’re a size 13 yeti. In that case you’re probably going to break this thing on the first tour anyway.

The Naxo must be old stock then, ehh. FWIW my ex-GF had them and loved them. According to her they really helped float the ski tips when breaking trail and had a more natural movement to the stride. But like everyone else the durability was an issue after a year or two, part of what lead to their demise I believe.