|
Post by smackboy1 on Jan 14, 2014 9:22:19 GMT -7
How often do you safety test ski bindings? Over the years I've figured out how to adjust to the BSL; look up and set the release DIN; check forward pressure. I don't have any equipment to torque test the actual release forces. So the only way for me to get that done is take it to a shop.
|
|
|
Post by JimRatliff on Jan 14, 2014 10:36:12 GMT -7
I never do. Bindings are warranted for liability (I don't remember the term) by the manufacturer to be compliant with DIN standards for quite a while. This is to protect the local shops from any liability IF the bindings are set to DIN standards. Once they are no longer "warranted" by the mfg, ski shops will no longer work on them or mount them. In fact, you could probably make a case that the shop who torque tests the release values and then sets the binding to something other than DIN standards is opening themself up to potential liability -- their technician is making a judgement to deviate from the warrented settings.
I'm like you, I looked up the DIN setting for me long ago, and I understand the forward pressure setting and BSL for our bindings. Actually, I then set the binding one less. I would much rather a pre-release problem than no-release; I never had any pre-release issues so I stayed at the lower number. Of course, now that I've turned 65 the chart says I should reduce the number by 1, so I'm where the chart indicates. Parenthetically, my level of fitness and bone density at my current age would not lead me to reduce my DIN setting, but I understand why that is part of the chart, but I always feel like my skis come off when they should and stay attached when I expect them to. Of course, many of you may not do as much "fall testing" as I do.
Hmmm!! I've lost 30 pounds from bike riding in the last couple of years, maybe I need to revisit the chart.
|
|
|
Post by danboisvert on Jan 14, 2014 14:42:36 GMT -7
I crash every now and again and pay attention to whether my skis come off when I want them to, too early, or too late. I'm in the opposite camp from Jim on the pre-release thing. I tore my left MCL due to a ski vibrating off my foot when I didn't want it to several years ago, so I'm careful about settings that are too low for me. My skis started staying on the way I wanted them to when I hit the DIN setting for a type IV skier. The bindings on my race skis are set a bit higher than that, and they all release when I want them to.
My personal take on it is that, if you buy good bindings to begin with, there's enough variability in every individual fall that worrying about a binding being off by half a number or whatever isn't worth it. I might feel differently if I was skiing on Markers or something.
|
|
|
Post by JimRatliff on Jan 14, 2014 16:32:54 GMT -7
Dan: See the link. I assume that, when you said Type IV skier you really meant Type III+. There is no defined DIN category that I am aware of for a Type IV skier. Type III+ is for those who want, for whatever reason, a higher release value than specified in the chart. Specifying Type III+ is sort of like a liability waiver -- by selecting that category on the form you are acknowledging that you are doing something other than the manufacturer's recommendation. I will also admit that I factored in my normal mode of skiing in the decision to go with a lower DIN. www.dinsetting.com/dinchart.htmDetermine the type of skier, from one of the following groups: Type 1 - Cautious skiing at lighter release/retention settings. Skieers who designate themselves "1" must accept a narrower margin of retention in order to gain a wider margin of release. Type 2 - Average/moderate skiing at average release/retention settings. Skiers who designate themselves "2" must accept a balanced compromise between release and retention. Type 3 - Aggressive, higher speed skiing at higher release/retention settings. Skers who designate themselves "3" must accept a narrower margin of release in order to gain a wider margin of retention. Type 3+ - For skiers who desire visual indicator settings higher than settings for a Type 3 skier. Type -1 (neg. 1) - For skiers who desire visual indicator settings lower than settings for a Type 1 skier. For skiers 38 lbs. and under, Skier Type -1 is inappropriate.
|
|
|
Post by JimRatliff on Jan 14, 2014 16:42:36 GMT -7
This is sort of off topic, but not a total highjack. There is a big difference between bindings that are flat mounted and bindings that are free to float on the ski, such as with a rail or carving plate. Bindings that are flat mounted on the ski are subject to widely variable forward pressure. When the ski is cambered, the curvature of the ski actually forces the bindings to press harder against the boot (increasing forward pressure) as the boot resists compressing into the curve of the ski. Similarly, when the ski decambers the bindings move away from the boot and have considerably less forward pressure (depending, of course, on how dramatically the ski springs back into position). I'm sure the binding manufacturers design some allowance for this into their mechanisms.
With any kind of floating mount as is common with rails and carve plates, the binding is mounted to the rail and the screws from the rail into the ski are slotted so that either the toe or both bindings are able to float on the ski as the ski cambers and decambers.
I remember having pre-releases with flat mounted bindings, but haven't had one with the Tyrolia Railflex/Railflex II/Super Rail) in a lot of years now. If I actually fall, they come off, if I just slide down they normally stay on. Their behavior is quite consistent with my expectations.
Having said all of that, there is a big difference between Dan's athleticism and skiing ability and mine (not to mention 35+ years of age).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2014 18:10:34 GMT -7
As somewhat of a continuation of Jim's comments on binding float and fwd pressure, there are also significant differences in the amount of float between various binding models. I had a long chat with a knowledgeable shop tech about that a couple of years ago. He noted that the bindings with the most float, and therefore presumably the greatest ability to absorb flex when cambering and decambering of a ski when flat mounted, were the Look PX series (and their Dynastar/Rossignol equivalents). It may be unrelated, but whenever I click into a PX binding, they have a more "locked in" feeling than any other bindings I have used. They feel very secure and solid. Personally, they are my preferred bindings for that reason.
|
|
|
Post by smackboy1 on Jan 14, 2014 19:43:55 GMT -7
I hit the DIN setting for a type IV skier. . . "These go to 11 . . ."
|
|
|
Post by smackboy1 on Jan 14, 2014 20:12:25 GMT -7
I take my kids skis to the shop every year to have their bindings safety tested. But my own skis, once they've passed once, I go years between a shop tests as long as the binding looks and feels OK. I don't rack up many ski days so with my current skis they will probably all fall off the manufacturer's binding indemnification list before they wear out. Then I won't even have the option to have a shop test them. How do bindings mechanically fail with age? Do they tend to release below or above the spec torque? I'm not an engineer (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night) and it would intuitively make sense that with age the springs and parts would wear in such a way as to decrease the amount of force required to release. It would also make sense from a fail safe design point of view. Or am I just rationalizing my cheapness
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2014 11:18:34 GMT -7
That video is hilarious. Good one. Makes me want to watch that movie again. Must remember that quote, too..."These go to eleven."
|
|
|
Post by danboisvert on Jan 20, 2014 19:57:43 GMT -7
I've heard type 3+ and 4 used interchangeably by shop folks, Jim. I'm not sure if everybody has unified on calling it 3+ now, but I've seen at least one binding chart somewhere that called it 4. I'm familiar with what the chart says about it, but folks also use it to refer to folks like me who bump down one more box from where a 3 puts us. Wonderfully ambiguous, isn't it? The bindings I used to figure out where I wanted to be were the Freeflex Pros on my SS Magnums. I started somewhere around a 6 and kept bumping up by 0.5 until they stopped vibrating off my feet. I never had a problem with general skiing; it was always jumping off stuff and landing that caused my problems. I'm pretty sure every binding I own goes to at least 12!
|
|