That is definitely the best and most-informed Silvretta defense I have
ever read.
Now back to the debate!
Although I’ve attended clinics from:
http://www.vermontskisafety.com/
.... and read many articles on alpine downhill binding safety, I will
agree that I have no direct evidence that placing the lateral release
at the toe is superior to placing it at the heel.
But given that *all* recent alpine downhill bindings have a lateral
toe release, and that very few bother with a lateral heel release
(despite having all sorts of other innovative features), my conclusion
is that a lateral toe release is a critical safety feature, while a
lateral heel release is not a significant advantage. Also, as I try
to envision it, the situation that a lateral release is trying to
solve arises from the boot and ski diverging - the heel is aligned w/
the shaft of the leg, so the pivoting occurs there, and lateral
pressure that the binding can sense occurs at the toe, not the heel.
(Think about hooking a tip on a branch, a la a slalom race course: the
Diamir toe will release laterally, but will the Silvretta heel release
laterally in that situation?)
I’ll agree that fixing crampons w/o exiting the binding is a
nifty feature - I’ve been in many situations where that would
have been a nice plus.
Standards for alpine touring bindings though exist just like standards
for alpine downhill bindings - you can order the DIN from that Euro
website (though it costs a non-negligible sum, so I haven’t
bothered yet).
As for the mode switch, I’ve played w/ it in shops, and it does
indeed appear to be a par w/ the Diamir.
Regarding durability, I heard some nightmare stories from these guys:
http://www.andesmountainsports.com/
....but that of course is just one step (barely) above anecdotal
evidence.
Overall, I still think that for those most concerned about weight,
Dynafit is the best choice; for climbing boot compatibility, Silvretta
500; everyone else, Diamir (or maybe the new Naxo).