It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
I'm 6'3" and over 200 lbs on a full stomach. I like to think that I charge pretty hard on variable terrain, but I only have my dins at like an 11 (depending on the ski) and have never released unnecessarily. Who are these people rocking dins in the high 'teens? Who actually needs a binding like the pivot 18 other than like Duncan Adams? If you're one of these people, enlighten me please.
Dangler_DangerDon't disagree with your overall points, just a few things:
As someone whose fractured their tibia from a binding not releasing, those standards do make sense, especially if, according to your argument, most bindings do nothing to prevent ACL tears anyway. Might be more on the consumers for not realizing the limitations of bindings.
Also, I may not understand the definition of "lateral," but isn't that the entire point of Pivots? My heel has released sideways out of my binding before.
Thoughts?
Bindings do help avoid ACL tears a little bit, but only as a by-product of preventing tib/fib fractures. I guess what I'm saying is it's inadequate protection, any statement about bindings preventing ACL tears are half-true at best, and data indicates no binding is safer than another.
By lateral release, I mean your heel moves out of the binding sideways, just like the toe. The Pivot design has a rotating heel piece that makes lateral toe release more consistent, which it probably does. Basically, theres no added resistance from the heel of the boot rotating in the heel piece of the binding, because they rotate as one unit on low-friction bearings. Its the same idea as the AFD under the toe, it just makes release more consistent by removing friction. You can still twist out of them by pushing on the back of the ski sideways, it releases the toe sideways out the other side. Its just a much higher force needed than the toe, because you have less leverage.
IsaacNW82To put it simply, first is that a lot of people don't really care that much, and second, the high-DIN bindings tend to be built sturdier, higher quality, and last longer, and more people than you'd think run 18 DIN bindings as low as 8.
*Paragraph ranting about ski bindings and how much they suck at protecting from ACL tears*
To be fair, ski bindings are systemically flawed when it comes to ACL ruptures, so people who crank DIN's *almost* kinda have a point. You can blow a knee at virtually any DIN setting, its just more likely at the higher ones. DIN/ISO standards regulate release values to protect against tib/fib fractures; when these standards where written, they were the most common ski injury, with ACL ruptures being a somewhat rare event. As better equipment helped us ski faster and bigger, and with other injuries not as common anymore, ACL tears became more prevalent. To protect against ACL ruptures, you need a lateral heel release. As it is a difficult problem to solve technically, and there is no requirement to do so, bindings do nothing about this (with the exception of knee bindings, which aren't DIN/ISO certified and pre-release). If you look at your top of the line Marker Jester Pro's or Tyrolia's, the heel *might* come out laterally if you get lucky and the plastic heel pushes out of the heel cup by pushing the binding heel piece backwards against the forward pressure, but isn't really the way the bindings are designed. On a Pivot, you have even less luck, with the side-lugs that hold the binding heel piece physically blocking the boot heel from coming out laterally. This isn't a knock on Pivots, they're solid bindings, and have advantages over Markers for instance (toe pieces last longer), I'm just saying the rumor you hear sometimes about Pivots being better for your ACL's is total BS.
As far as the argument to "run a binding in the middle of its DIN range", I have not heard a single argument for why, other than "Its designed for it". My guess is that you want your retention to come more from spring stiffness and elastic travel than spring preload, (you cant change spring stiffness, but you can add preload to increase DIN setting), but that is a guess, and only explains why you don't want to max the DINS, not why you shouldn't run them super low in the range. If anyone has a legitimate technical explanation, I'd love to hear it.
In summary I don't think you should crank your DINs too high, but I do think there are legitimate reasons to get higher DIN bindings that are built better (within reason). If you run an 11, I'm not aware of any downsides of getting a 6-16 or even an 8-18 binding.
Why do so many ppl fall for this shit.
as an example, the only difference between tyrolia attack 13s and attack 18s is how stiff the springs are.
for some bindings, yes, the higher din models have more robust parts that can handle heavier forces. But this is not a rule.
Im joking man. I dont have any urge to fuck teenagers. The only reason i bring up the 14 yr age of consent in many euro countries is to lambaste the righteousness americans have about their oppressive as fuck laws.
Theres a difference between a man or woman in their 20s using their maturity and experience to woo a teenage boy or girl vs a nonvirgin teenager soliciting sex from a guy or girl in their 20s. The former is predation but the latter isnt.
I was in a psychiatric ward of a hospital yrs ago and this 16 yr old girl kept coming to my room taking her shirt off and grabbing my crotch. I didnt do anything with her but considering the situation, if i did, would it really be predation?
fuck no it wouldnt.
this is the logic behind the laws of countries like germany and austria. I dont really care what the age of consent is; i just cant stand the “america knows best” attitude of the us government and us laws, stemming from the irish and puritan attitude that children are innocent flowers and adults are guilty predators, and i literally enjoy raping the minds of government officials and lawmakers who have to read my posts online and accept into the deep recesses of their minds that im literally less of a pedophile than they are themselves.
i mean look how fucked up american society is; Governor andrew cuomo made “flirtatious” comments to some of his previous employees and he also SENT THOUSANDS OF COVID POSITIVE PATIENTS BACK TO NURSING HOMES WHERE THEY KILLED 12,000 GERIATRIC PATIENTS THERE, THEN HE LIED ABOUT AND COVERED UP THE STATISTICS SO HE WOULDNT GET IN TROUBLE.
And pelosi-kong and the shiteating chimpanzee democrats are literally only criticising cuomo for his “innappropriate” remarks to his female employees, and these fucking apes are TOTALLY FINE WITH CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS.
and you think this country isnt fucked up? We are so puritanically obsessed with the idea of male guilt and male sexual guilt that we are going to fire cuomo bc he made a joke to some female employees that in all likelyhood didnt bother them at all?
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS HE GETS A FUCKING PASS??????
are you fucking serious?
now you see why i leverage the laws of european countries as a machiavellian tool to straighten out the american psyche. Its not because i think pedophilia is ok. Pedophilia is the worst thing in the world. But if a guy or girl in their teens is already fucking then i dont understand why an attractive person in their 20s is off limits because they are A GUILTY, CORRUPTED OLD PERSON.
its fucking bullshit. People who age horribly should not be considered when you make your stupid fucking laws.
fuck why do i always end up going on a rant like this.
Its funny how many high ups in the government probably got godsmacked by rumors of a more reasonable worldview based on shit i post on the web.
thats the best part of the internet tho. Government officials and fatherfucking righteous assholes think they are badass great white sharks...
but sooner or later they realize that in the open ocean that is the internet there be megalodons like dolan.
DolansLebensraumIm joking man. I dont have any urge to fuck teenagers. The only reason i bring up the 14 yr age of consent in many euro countries is to lambaste the righteousness americans have about their oppressive as fuck laws.
Theres a difference between a man or woman in their 20s using their maturity and experience to woo a teenage boy or girl vs a nonvirgin teenager soliciting sex from a guy or girl in their 20s. The former is predation but the latter isnt.
I was in a psychiatric ward of a hospital yrs ago and this 16 yr old girl kept coming to my room taking her shirt off and grabbing my crotch. I didnt do anything with her but considering the situation, if i did, would it really be predation?
fuck no it wouldnt.
this is the logic behind the laws of countries like germany and austria. I dont really care what the age of consent is; i just cant stand the “america knows best” attitude of the us government and us laws, stemming from the irish and puritan attitude that children are innocent flowers and adults are guilty predators, and i literally enjoy raping the minds of government officials and lawmakers who have to read my posts online and accept into the deep recesses of their minds that im literally less of a pedophile than they are themselves.
i mean look how fucked up american society is; Governor andrew cuomo made “flirtatious” comments to some of his previous employees and he also SENT THOUSANDS OF COVID POSITIVE PATIENTS BACK TO NURSING HOMES WHERE THEY KILLED 12,000 GERIATRIC PATIENTS THERE, THEN HE LIED ABOUT AND COVERED UP THE STATISTICS SO HE WOULDNT GET IN TROUBLE.
And pelosi-kong and the shiteating chimpanzee democrats are literally only criticising cuomo for his “innappropriate” remarks to his female employees, and these fucking apes are TOTALLY FINE WITH CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS.
and you think this country isnt fucked up? We are so puritanically obsessed with the idea of male guilt and male sexual guilt that we are going to fire cuomo bc he made a joke to some female employees that in all likelyhood didnt bother them at all?
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS HE GETS A FUCKING PASS??????
are you fucking serious?
now you see why i leverage the laws of european countries as a machiavellian tool to straighten out the american psyche. Its not because i think pedophilia is ok. Pedophilia is the worst thing in the world. But if a guy or girl in their teens is already fucking then i dont understand why an attractive person in their 20s is off limits because they are A GUILTY, CORRUPTED OLD PERSON.
its fucking bullshit. People who age horribly should not be considered when you make your stupid fucking laws.
fuck why do i always end up going on a rant like this.
Its funny how many high ups in the government probably got godsmacked by rumors of a more reasonable worldview based on shit i post on the web.
thats the best part of the internet tho. Government officials and fatherfucking righteous assholes think they are badass great white sharks...
but sooner or later they realize that in the open ocean that is the internet there be megalodons like dolan.
You'd be surprised at how many ripping skiers run pivots 14s. The plastic toe actually has more elasticity and its cheaper. The metal ones are for if you want cast or like to kick the shit out of it (I have both). A din above 14 is pretty much useless for anyone except downhill racers and pipe/slope skiers when the course is firm as fuck, or if you're in a no fall zone and basically want to be locked out. Most "pro" skiers don't run 18 din unless they're doing some psychotic death-defying shit, 12-14 is probably pretty normal. Shit, look at the shift, it maxes out at 13 and stan rey did a 50 ft backflip to flat on it
I'm starting to see fewer 5'4" 99 pound 29.5 mondo wearing teens using Pivot 18's to do as many 2 mph switch ups on a flat box.
Y'all should check the soles of your boots, because I guarantee that's why most of you are "pre-releasing". I also think many of you are confusing releasing with pre-releasing.
I understand the durability aspect, but I always get a kick out of everyone's fascination with ski weight, and then a fat chunk of overkill metal bindings get mounted up.
@dolanslebensraum “Im joking man. I dont have any urge to fuck teenagers. The only reason i bring up the 14 yr age of consent in many euro countries is to lambaste the righteousness americans have about their oppressive as fuck laws.”
oh yea i totally figured that just wanted to joke around a bit.
DolansLebensraumIm joking man. I dont have any urge to fuck teenagers. The only reason i bring up the 14 yr age of consent in many euro countries is to lambaste the righteousness americans have about their oppressive as fuck laws.
Theres a difference between a man or woman in their 20s using their maturity and experience to woo a teenage boy or girl vs a nonvirgin teenager soliciting sex from a guy or girl in their 20s. The former is predation but the latter isnt.
I was in a psychiatric ward of a hospital yrs ago and this 16 yr old girl kept coming to my room taking her shirt off and grabbing my crotch. I didnt do anything with her but considering the situation, if i did, would it really be predation?
fuck no it wouldnt.
this is the logic behind the laws of countries like germany and austria. I dont really care what the age of consent is; i just cant stand the “america knows best” attitude of the us government and us laws, stemming from the irish and puritan attitude that children are innocent flowers and adults are guilty predators, and i literally enjoy raping the minds of government officials and lawmakers who have to read my posts online and accept into the deep recesses of their minds that im literally less of a pedophile than they are themselves.
i mean look how fucked up american society is; Governor andrew cuomo made “flirtatious” comments to some of his previous employees and he also SENT THOUSANDS OF COVID POSITIVE PATIENTS BACK TO NURSING HOMES WHERE THEY KILLED 12,000 GERIATRIC PATIENTS THERE, THEN HE LIED ABOUT AND COVERED UP THE STATISTICS SO HE WOULDNT GET IN TROUBLE.
And pelosi-kong and the shiteating chimpanzee democrats are literally only criticising cuomo for his “innappropriate” remarks to his female employees, and these fucking apes are TOTALLY FINE WITH CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS.
and you think this country isnt fucked up? We are so puritanically obsessed with the idea of male guilt and male sexual guilt that we are going to fire cuomo bc he made a joke to some female employees that in all likelyhood didnt bother them at all?
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO CUOMO KILLING 12,000 NURSING HOME PATIENTS HE GETS A FUCKING PASS??????
are you fucking serious?
now you see why i leverage the laws of european countries as a machiavellian tool to straighten out the american psyche. Its not because i think pedophilia is ok. Pedophilia is the worst thing in the world. But if a guy or girl in their teens is already fucking then i dont understand why an attractive person in their 20s is off limits because they are A GUILTY, CORRUPTED OLD PERSON.
its fucking bullshit. People who age horribly should not be considered when you make your stupid fucking laws.
fuck why do i always end up going on a rant like this.
Its funny how many high ups in the government probably got godsmacked by rumors of a more reasonable worldview based on shit i post on the web.
thats the best part of the internet tho. Government officials and fatherfucking righteous assholes think they are badass great white sharks...
but sooner or later they realize that in the open ocean that is the internet there be megalodons like dolan.
I stand by my original response that I posted that meme as a joke. But you probably shouldn’t go saying shit like that to just anyone, (Not because what you say offends me or that I care that much) but saying stuff like that will probably get you in more arguments and fights than civil discourse just my two cents.
jprene8@dolanslebensraum “Im joking man. I dont have any urge to fuck teenagers. The only reason i bring up the 14 yr age of consent in many euro countries is to lambaste the righteousness americans have about their oppressive as fuck laws.”
oh yea i totally figured that just wanted to joke around a bit.
All good man i wasnt taking it personally.
jprene8I stand by my original response that I posted that meme as a joke. But you probably shouldn’t go saying shit like that to just anyone, (Not because what you say offends me or that I care that much) but saying stuff like that will probably get you in more arguments and fights than civil discourse just my two cents.
I probably shouldnt but if i had these opinions and never expressed them to get it off my chest id probably walk around all day with my jimmies in a bunch.
one of my math teachers in middle school had a great line that kind of describes my philosophy. He would say “i dont get mad, i get even”
abar.You'd be surprised at how many ripping skiers run pivots 14s. The plastic toe actually has more elasticity and its cheaper. The metal ones are for if you want cast or like to kick the shit out of it (I have both). A din above 14 is pretty much useless for anyone except downhill racers and pipe/slope skiers when the course is firm as fuck, or if you're in a no fall zone and basically want to be locked out. Most "pro" skiers don't run 18 din unless they're doing some psychotic death-defying shit, 12-14 is probably pretty normal. Shit, look at the shift, it maxes out at 13 and stan rey did a 50 ft backflip to flat on it
The interesting thing about bindings is the “plastic” parts are actually glass fiber reinforced polyurethane. The glass fibers are mixed in with the liquid PU when they go into the mold, and just like rebar reinforced concrete, they are literally so strong you could smash them with a hammer and they would give zero fucks.
its really cool how little tricks and mixtures of materials can make materials that are unbelievably strong.
DolansLebensraumThe interesting thing about bindings is the “plastic” parts are actually glass fiber reinforced polyurethane. The glass fibers are mixed in with the liquid PU when they go into the mold, and just like rebar reinforced concrete, they are literally so strong you could smash them with a hammer and they would give zero fucks.
its really cool how little tricks and mixtures of materials can make materials that are unbelievably strong.
You may be an annoying fuck sometimes but good lord you know a lot about skis. I know people have suggested this but you should seriously look into positions with a ski company
THANOSDOGFARTJesper Tjader ran his dins at 12 and upped them to 14 because he was tweaking grabs too hard. Seems crazy to think he could have ran a pivot 12
not really that crazy. Henrik rode 14s (Forza/ forza w black Toes) in every single comp early this year
IsaacNW82As far as the argument to "run a binding in the middle of its DIN range", I have not heard a single argument for why, other than "Its designed for it". My guess is that you want your retention to come more from spring stiffness and elastic travel than spring preload, (you cant change spring stiffness, but you can add preload to increase DIN setting), but that is a guess, and only explains why you don't want to max the DINS, not why you shouldn't run them super low in the range. If anyone has a legitimate technical explanation, I'd love to hear it.
Ski bindings are not designed to release in the middle of the din range, they are designed to release at whatever DIN setting they are set to. The range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is not the entire range that the spring can be compressed, meaning that when the binding is at its lowest setting the spring is still compressed a decent amount, and when it is set to its highest setting the spring is not mechanically bottomed out to the point that there is no more travel in the spring. So in a sense the range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is the middle of the range for that spring. The DIN standard provides confidence that an 8-18 din binding will release at 8 when it is set to 8 and release at 18 when it is set to 18. DIN is DIN is DIN
This is copied and pasted from another thread:
I’m a visual learner so here is a nifty little graphic to illustrate. For the sake of simplicity this is a completely linear spring. Pardon my poor handwriting.
[/url]
At point A the spring has no force on it and is not displaced at all. At point B the spring is completely bottomed out, with the coils of the spring contacting each other, and any additional force would be a vertical line with no increase in displacement (ignoring any deformation of the material due to the force exerted into the coil contacting itself). There is no binding in which the adjustment range goes from point A to point B.
[/url]
What the adjustment range actually looks like it this. This is a binding with a DIN range of 6 to 10 (because that was easy to draw, ignore any implications that placing numerical representation introduces to this graph). The lowest adjustment value does not have zero force or displacement on the spring, and the highest adjustment value does not bottom the spring. There will always be some range between A and C to ensure the spring is always under compression, and range between D and B to ensure the spring is not bottomed out. The selection of where C and D lie on the spring curve will be a range that allows for the indicated DIN value to consistently and precisely meet the stringent requirements of DIN standards
No.QuarterSki bindings are not designed to release in the middle of the din range, they are designed to release at whatever DIN setting they are set to. The range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is not the entire range that the spring can be compressed, meaning that when the binding is at its lowest setting the spring is still compressed a decent amount, and when it is set to its highest setting the spring is not mechanically bottomed out to the point that there is no more travel in the spring. So in a sense the range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is the middle of the range for that spring. The DIN standard provides confidence that an 8-18 din binding will release at 8 when it is set to 8 and release at 18 when it is set to 18. DIN is DIN is DIN
I do appreciate the feedback, those are some excellent diagrams, and I agree with what you're saying. However, I do still unfortunately have more questions.
>DIN is DIN is DIN for release force, but what are the implications for retention and stiffness? People will wax poetic about how a large elastic travel binding has better feel due to the binding allowing some play without pre- ejecting. But the spring constant plays a crucial role here; a stiffer spring is a steeper slope on your graph. Hence if you have a Marker Jester Pro (8-18 DIN) set at 10, the binding will start moving at a lower threshold than a squire (3-11 DIN) set at 10. This would at least change the feel, if not the retention, of the binding. But by how much? Is it a noticeable difference? I've always had better luck with beefier DIN range bindings pre-ejecting less at the same DIN setting, but this could easily be because of them simply being higher-quality and better designed bindings.
I also made up the numbers for this graph, but the fundamental idea is the same: Same release force, different spring rates.
No.QuarterSki bindings are not designed to release in the middle of the din range, they are designed to release at whatever DIN setting they are set to. The range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is not the entire range that the spring can be compressed, meaning that when the binding is at its lowest setting the spring is still compressed a decent amount, and when it is set to its highest setting the spring is not mechanically bottomed out to the point that there is no more travel in the spring. So in a sense the range of DIN values that a binding can be set to is the middle of the range for that spring. The DIN standard provides confidence that an 8-18 din binding will release at 8 when it is set to 8 and release at 18 when it is set to 18. DIN is DIN is DIN
This is copied and pasted from another thread:
I’m a visual learner so here is a nifty little graphic to illustrate. For the sake of simplicity this is a completely linear spring. Pardon my poor handwriting.
At point A the spring has no force on it and is not displaced at all. At point B the spring is completely bottomed out, with the coils of the spring contacting each other, and any additional force would be a vertical line with no increase in displacement (ignoring any deformation of the material due to the force exerted into the coil contacting itself). There is no binding in which the adjustment range goes from point A to point B.
What the adjustment range actually looks like it this. This is a binding with a DIN range of 6 to 10 (because that was easy to draw, ignore any implications that placing numerical representation introduces to this graph). The lowest adjustment value does not have zero force or displacement on the spring, and the highest adjustment value does not bottom the spring. There will always be some range between A and C to ensure the spring is always under compression, and range between D and B to ensure the spring is not bottomed out. The selection of where C and D lie on the spring curve will be a range that allows for the indicated DIN value to consistently and precisely meet the stringent requirements of DIN standards
Yes and any nonlinearity of the spring constant is compensated for by the din markings.
IsaacNW82I do appreciate the feedback, those are some excellent diagrams, and I agree with what you're saying. However, I do still unfortunately have more questions.
>DIN is DIN is DIN for release force, but what are the implications for retention and stiffness? People will wax poetic about how a large elastic travel binding has better feel due to the binding allowing some play without pre- ejecting. But the spring constant plays a crucial role here; a stiffer spring is a steeper slope on your graph. Hence if you have a Marker Jester Pro (8-18 DIN) set at 10, the binding will start moving at a lower threshold than a squire (3-11 DIN) set at 10. This would at least change the feel, if not the retention, of the binding. But by how much? Is it a noticeable difference? I've always had better luck with beefier DIN range bindings pre-ejecting less at the same DIN setting, but this could easily be because of them simply being higher-quality and better designed bindings.
I also made up the numbers for this graph, but the fundamental idea is the same: Same release force, different spring rates.
You should take into account the shape of the cam -> non-linear displacement within travel.
(keywords: cam, cam-follower, displacement vs force, displacement vs velocity)
IsaacNW82This would at least change the feel, if not the retention, of the binding. But by how much? Is it a noticeable difference? I've always had better luck with beefier DIN range bindings pre-ejecting less at the same DIN setting, but this could easily be because of them simply being higher-quality and better designed bindings.
I also made up the numbers for this graph, but the fundamental idea is the same: Same release force, different spring rates.
I'm a little confused by that graph, but I think I understand what you are getting at, and in the end we are all just playing armchair engineer. I wonder what the engineers who are familiar with the actual design of the release mechanism would think of these discussions. I do have a ME degree, but honestly I'm making some pretty broad assumptions of how these things work just on my personal usage and experience with bindings and my limited experience designing similar mechanisms in my education, I'm not gonna claim to have actually done the math on this stuff or know the specifics of how the mechanism works. However I will take a moment to mention that if anyone out there reading these binding threads has an interest in this stuff I would highly recommend pursuing a Mechanical engineering degree, in fact my senior year of college one of the capstone projects for Mech/elec was working to implement some automation into the ski pressing process for K2.
Anyways, I personally have never paid too much attention to a binding's feel and I've always been a little skeptical of people who claim to prefer one binding over another based on feel. Really the only time that you can claim to notice the feel of a binding is when it is about to release and when it is releasing, which is only a fraction of a second of time. Maybe elastic travel is a good metric to determine the feel of releasing a binding, but otherwise all ski bindings feel pretty much the same to me in that they are firmly attaching my boots to the ski. The real "feel" items that I notice in a binding are the durability of the construction, and how it feels and how easy it is to click into them, and maybe a very minor feeling of how they affect the flex of the ski due to their weight.
No.QuarterI'm a little confused by that graph, but I think I understand what you are getting at, and in the end we are all just playing armchair engineer. I wonder what the engineers who are familiar with the actual design of the release mechanism would think of these discussions. I do have a ME degree, but honestly I'm making some pretty broad assumptions of how these things work just on my personal usage and experience with bindings and my limited experience designing similar mechanisms in my education, I'm not gonna claim to have actually done the math on this stuff or know the specifics of how the mechanism works. However I will take a moment to mention that if anyone out there reading these binding threads has an interest in this stuff I would highly recommend pursuing a Mechanical engineering degree, in fact my senior year of college one of the capstone projects for Mech/elec was working to implement some automation into the ski pressing process for K2.
Anyways, I personally have never paid too much attention to a binding's feel and I've always been a little skeptical of people who claim to prefer one binding over another based on feel. Really the only time that you can claim to notice the feel of a binding is when it is about to release and when it is releasing, which is only a fraction of a second of time. Maybe elastic travel is a good metric to determine the feel of releasing a binding, but otherwise all ski bindings feel pretty much the same to me in that they are firmly attaching my boots to the ski. The real "feel" items that I notice in a binding are the durability of the construction, and how it feels and how easy it is to click into them, and maybe a very minor feeling of how they affect the flex of the ski due to their weight.
The graph was trying to illustrate that a binding would start to move more easily with a stiffer spring (lower force threshold), whereas a lighter spring with preload, you need quite a bit of force to start using all that elastic travel. Also, someone smartly pointed out I totally ignored leverage ratio/cam profile (depending on the design) that would impact the shape of the curves on my graph. Whether any of this makes any discernible difference, no idea. Could easily be smaller than the feel between two different brands.
+1 for the armchair engineer part. I do have a Naval Architecture/Marine Engineering degree (basically I engineer ships, on the Nav Arch side its more hydrodynamics and structures, and on the Marine Egnineering side, its closer to ME but less in depth and more of a focus on systems), but I've never worked for a binding manufacturer so this is mostly hearsay and reasoning, and I don't want to paint it as anything else. I'm asking questions I know just enough to ask, and not nearly enough to answer. It sticks out like a sore thumb to me when I see non- Nav Archs armchair engineer boats, and I wouldn't be surprised if an engineer at Marker or Look did the same if they were to stumble upon this thread. As far as resources go to learn about bindings, basically the only thing I can find is Rick Howell's website, which is actually pretty good, although keep in mind he is trying to sell you his binding so there is an agenda.
As far as binding feel goes, I agree its pretty subtle. I couldn't tell you with confidence my personal experience about which bindings feel better isn't just placebo. Old bindings tend to feel sloppy, new bindings not so sloppy. That's about all I can say with confidence.
VT_scratchhaha yeah I totally agree with this. I have a friend who prides himself in locking the dins out all the way on his 14's. he is a heavy guy and goes big though.
Versus I am only 150lbs and rock my dins at 8 usually and don't have issues
150lbs? I would turn them up to 9-10 depending on how good you are, 8 seems a little too low.
No.QuarterI'm a little confused by that graph, but I think I understand what you are getting at, and in the end we are all just playing armchair engineer. I wonder what the engineers who are familiar with the actual design of the release mechanism would think of these discussions.
At least in terms of the original question, binding engineers would tell you to set your DIN according to the ISO standard, selecting for your age, height, weight, and boot sole length. If you want to be like some top end racers and crank your DIN up to 16+, then realize your bones are likely to fracture before the bindings ever release in a crash.
**This post was edited on Mar 10th 2021 at 12:12:31am
sams15150lbs? I would turn them up to 9-10 depending on how good you are, 8 seems a little too low.
Until I have issues with them I'll leave them. I had a pair of shit salomon bindings last year I had to max out at 11 that still were popping off, but my look bindings (pivots and spx 12) seem to be solid at 8
IsaacNW82I do appreciate the feedback, those are some excellent diagrams, and I agree with what you're saying. However, I do still unfortunately have more questions.
>DIN is DIN is DIN for release force, but what are the implications for retention and stiffness? People will wax poetic about how a large elastic travel binding has better feel due to the binding allowing some play without pre- ejecting. But the spring constant plays a crucial role here; a stiffer spring is a steeper slope on your graph. Hence if you have a Marker Jester Pro (8-18 DIN) set at 10, the binding will start moving at a lower threshold than a squire (3-11 DIN) set at 10. This would at least change the feel, if not the retention, of the binding. But by how much? Is it a noticeable difference? I've always had better luck with beefier DIN range bindings pre-ejecting less at the same DIN setting, but this could easily be because of them simply being higher-quality and better designed bindings.
I also made up the numbers for this graph, but the fundamental idea is the same: Same release force, different spring rates.
This is interesting.
i think if you take things to their logical extremes it could shed some light.
like assume 2 bindings with vastly different spring constants.
spring 1 has a k=1
spring 2 has a k =1000
remember F=kx. K is the spring constant and x is how far the spring is compressed
if you want both bindings to release at a relative din force of 10, then spring 1 has to compress a distance of 10 units while spring 2 only has to compress a distance of 0.01 units.
so the stiff spring binding with a k of 1000 will need to be made so only a tiny bit of wing movement will let the toe of the boot escape. Or you could just ad a lever with an uneven fulcrum between the spring and the toe wings. So that way the toe wing would have to move 10 units to release, while only compressing the spring 0.01 units.
the thing is though, this seems like it would make the release mechanics of the stiff spring binding the same as the soft spring binding. I dont understand why you assume stiff and soft spring bindings must have a different start-movement force. If everything besides the spring in each binding was the same, then yes the slopes of the lines in your graph would be different, but it would be very easy to use some levers in between spring and toe wing in the bindings to make both the stiff and soft spring bindings react symmetrically.
DolansLebensraumIf everything besides the spring in each binding was the same, then yes the slopes of the lines in your graph would be different
That is in fact the working assumption. From a mechanical design perspective, changing the leverage ratio to adjust DIN would be more complicated. Adding preload to a fixed spring location isnt horribly difficult to do, in contrast. See exploded view of the new Marker Jester below, showing preload unit, fixed spring position, and fixed toe wing pivots.
