EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Did the shop set my DIN correctly?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Did the shop set my DIN correctly?

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 

My cousins boyfriend (bear with me!) who was a ski instructor told me that because of my weight and height (100kg, 6'4) I should go with higher DIN bindings (14 min) to prevent equipment failure over time.

 

My boot sole length is 320mm and I ordered some Marker Jester Schizo (6-16) bindings to go on my 2011 K2 Kung Fujas.

 

The shop set my DIN at 8.5, which according to this online calculator http://www.dinsetting.com/ is the correct setting for my type of skiing (Type 2/3).

 

My questions are:

 

a) Is that definitely the correct setting (I ski all mountain, off piste, blacks moguls etc, just now venturing into the park)

 

b) Why did I have to get high DIN bindings when it's only set to 8.5 and no where near 14/16? I understand that you only set them that high when you are an extreme skier but I don't get why I need them as I will probably never go near that DIN.

 

I love the new skis and bindings and I'm not complaining, just curious to learn why :)

 

Sorry to sound like a complete newbie but this is the first time in 10 years of skiing that I've had my own gear.

 

Cheers!

post #2 of 21

I'm not a tech but will take a stab at this.

 

I'm 5'7" and 170#  (about 78Kg).  Our binding release settings are pretty close.  If I go by the same skier type as you, 2/3 I get 6.5 to 8.  Why when you are so much bigger than me.  Surely you need I higher setting to stay in your skis.  The difference is the boot sole length (BSL).  If you go down one setting on bsl, you'll jump to a 9.5.  Height and weight are a factor in binding release but the bsl is a bigger one.  Many times it is assumed you'll need more because you're bigger but that isn't necessarily the case.  If your foot was larger, you would be able to go lower.

 

The reason many folks recommend a higher range binding is so your set up in in the center of the range and not at the extreme.  There are many thread here with several opinions on whether it is OK to be at the extremes.  I don't know the answer to that but I am in the center.

 

Ken

post #3 of 21

A) It is the correct setting provided you are not of 50 years in age. Now, if you were 6' 5" with your weight of 100kg, you would be a 10 DIN.

 

B) Would you be fine with a Griffon Shizo? Probably. But since your cousin's (you didn't specify mother or fathers side) boyfriend is an instructor, I m sure he is getting a hefty kickback from you buying a better, more expensive binding (this is a very tight industry). So, if you see said cousin start wearing around some furs or expensive jewelry or showing up in fancy sports cars or reading the financial section of the newspaper..you now know why. roflmao.gif

post #4 of 21

Axel and LC, you fail to mention age which also effects din. as Phil stated above.   Sounds like the OP's settings are close.

 

At 57 years of age / level 3 my din is 7.5.  A few years back 8.  I am also 5-7 and 170 lbs and skiing on the Griffon also (din 4 - 12) with a BSL of 304.

 

I have always sworn by the "old wives tale" that you want to aim in the middle of your bindings din range with your setting, so IMO the OP is precisely where he should be.  I currently ski just on the plus side of 7 on the toe and 8 on the heel, with forward pressure set exactly as the manufacturer recommends.  Seems to be working as it should for me that way.


Edited by Uncle Louie - 5/22/11 at 4:39pm
post #5 of 21

I left it out so we would we could focus on the mechanics of it.  I assumed he was younger than me base on his settings and input.  I'm 51 so the only way to have the same settings was to turn back the internet a couple years so I could be 49 again.

 

I also think the current age settings are crap.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Louie View Post

Axel and LC, you fail to mention age which also effects din. as Phil stated above.   Sounds like the OP's settings are close.

 

 

post #6 of 21

The real question is whether your weight is as nekkid or in full ski atire. Whether your weighed yourself before breakfast and pre-taking one's morning's rituals. So many questions. So few answers.

 

With that said, any pre-release issues? Do the skis pop off when they should?

 

 

post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&AirC View Post

I left it out so we would we could focus on the mechanics of it. 

 

 

 



Unfortunately, you cannot leave it out. It is as important as height, weight, skier type and BSL. I will say in the biz, 49 is the new 29. 

post #8 of 21

Generally speaking bindings that are built to withstand forces that go along with a higher DIN setting and stronger spring, are coincidently built better and are more robust and durable.  That's not true in all cases, but it is more often true than not.

post #9 of 21

The OP said he was told he needed bindings that went at least a 14 DIN based on his height and weight.  Age wasn't in this determination.  My point to him was that he and I are significantly different in size yet (and if I was two years younger), would have the same setting.  I was simply explaining the math.

 

Setting the release on bindings is Risk Management 101.  That is why you get to choose skier type.

 

I don't disagree that age shouldn't be considered.  I disagree that a 10 y/o through 49 y/o, all have the exact same requirements if all other things are equal.  Impossible.  Nor do a 50 y/o and 80 y/o.  That makes it crap.  This smells like the Food Pyramid of yester-year that was made up by Lawyers instead of Doctors.

 

I follow the recommended settings because it is the best that we have until someone comes up with something better.
 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

Unfortunately, you cannot leave it out. It is as important as height, weight, skier type and BSL. I will say in the biz, 49 is the new 29. 



 

 

post #10 of 21
Thread Starter 

For those discussing age I am 23.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

Generally speaking bindings that are built to withstand forces that go along with a higher DIN setting and stronger spring, are coincidently built better and are more robust and durable.  That's not true in all cases, but it is more often true than not.


Ah OK that makes sense thank you, I remember watching a Marker product introduction and the guy was talking about the different materials used in the different level of bindings and he did mention the higher DINs had a stronger material.


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150 View Post

The real question is whether your weight is as nekkid or in full ski atire. Whether your weighed yourself before breakfast and pre-taking one's morning's rituals. So many questions. So few answers.

 

With that said, any pre-release issues? Do the skis pop off when they should?

 

 


I've not had a chance to test them since the season is over! I am however going to an indoor park session this friday to test them, just wanted to double check before they pop off on the first jump and I embarrass myself (which is going to happen anyway ofc).

 

 

Thanks for all the advice guys I feel a lot more confident in my bindings now I understand them more!

 

 


Edited by alexcroox - 5/23/11 at 4:59am
post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&AirC View Post

 

I don't disagree that age shouldn't be considered.  I disagree that a 10 y/o through 49 y/o, all have the exact same requirements if all other things are equal.  Impossible.  Nor do a 50 y/o and 80 y/o.  That makes it crap.  This smells like the Food Pyramid of yester-year that was made up by Lawyers instead of Doctors.

 

 


To an extent, I do not disagree with you. Remember the DIN chart was set up about 30 years ago. I think our bodies (and in this case bones) are much better than they were 30 years ago when they were using cadavers to test where bines would break. I do think the average 50 year old..athlete is is better condition now than in that time. I think the break point (poor choice of words but...) should be closer to 60 now. 

 

post #12 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 I think our bodies (and in this case bones) are much better than they were 30 years ago...

 


You haven't visited a WalMart or McDonalds lately have you? I don't think that the average American desk-jockey is in better physical shape than an average American from 30 years ago. The evidence is all around us. Anyone who thinks that age isn't having a negative impact on their bodies after the age of 30 is either delusional or was in HORRIBLE condition in their 20's and is now taking care of themselves... but connective tissue still gets less pliable with age and bones lose density, it really is happening to everyone, it's not a myth.

 

post #13 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post




You haven't visited a WalMart or McDonalds lately have you? I don't think that the average American desk-jockey is in better physical shape than an average American from 30 years ago. The evidence is all around us. Anyone who thinks that age isn't having a negative impact on their bodies after the age of 30 is either delusional or was in HORRIBLE condition in their 20's and is now taking care of themselves... but connective tissue still gets less pliable with age and bones lose density, it really is happening to everyone, it's not a myth.

 


I"m in denial. biggrin.gif

 

post #14 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150 View Post

The real question is whether your weight is as nekkid or in full ski atire. Whether your weighed yourself before breakfast and pre-taking one's morning's rituals. So many questions. So few answers.

 

With that said, any pre-release issues? Do the skis pop off when they should?

 

 



Yes, if you need to get your bindings adjusted, make sure you go naked to your shop.

Much more accurate and no standing around waiting for help.

 

post #15 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by John J View Post

Yes, if you need to get your bindings adjusted, make sure you go naked to your shop.

Much more accurate and no standing around waiting for help.

 

take 2 Viagra first... you know, let them see that you are serious about the sport.
 

 

post #16 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post




You haven't visited a WalMart or McDonalds lately have you? I don't think that the average American desk-jockey is in better physical shape than an average American from 30 years ago. The evidence is all around us. Anyone who thinks that age isn't having a negative impact on their bodies after the age of 30 is either delusional or was in HORRIBLE condition in their 20's and is now taking care of themselves... but connective tissue still gets less pliable with age and bones lose density, it really is happening to everyone, it's not a myth.

 

Thats why I clarified, the average 50 year old..athlete. And no, I do not frequent Walmart or McDonalds. 
 

 

post #17 of 21

I'm not 50, and I'm not an athlete in any sense that I consider being an athlete... but I've always been athletic and participated in sports like cycling, skiing and hiking. My body is absolutely nothing like it was 15 or even 10 years ago. You need to be pretty non-athletic to think your body is behaving the same at 40 as it did at 20, or the same at 50 as it did at 30. We all age, some age better... but this "I don't believe I should lower my DIN because I'm athletic" is pure CRAP. As I said, we all age... at least until we stop aging, which isn't an improvement.

post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

I'm not 50, and I'm not an athlete in any sense that I consider being an athlete... but I've always been athletic and participated in sports like cycling, skiing and hiking. My body is absolutely nothing like it was 15 or even 10 years ago. You need to be pretty non-athletic to think your body is behaving the same at 40 as it did at 20, or the same at 50 as it did at 30. We all age, some age better... but this "I don't believe I should lower my DIN because I'm athletic" is pure CRAP. As I said, we all age... at least until we stop aging, which isn't an improvement.


But maybe they took those 2 Viagra right before the trip to the shop,which might raise the DIN setting 3 or more?
 

 

post #19 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post



take 2 Viagra first... you know, let them see that you are serious about the sport.
 

 


would that qualify as early rise????.....

 

post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
You haven't visited a WalMart or McDonalds lately have you? I don't think that the average American desk-jockey is in better physical shape than an average American from 30 years ago. 

 



Phil moved to California...  people are slimmer here   wink.gif

post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

I'm not 50, and I'm not an athlete in any sense that I consider being an athlete... but I've always been athletic and participated in sports like cycling, skiing and hiking. My body is absolutely nothing like it was 15 or even 10 years ago. You need to be pretty non-athletic to think your body is behaving the same at 40 as it did at 20, or the same at 50 as it did at 30. We all age, some age better... but this "I don't believe I should lower my DIN because I'm athletic" is pure CRAP. As I said, we all age... at least until we stop aging, which isn't an improvement.


Not to distract from the humor of this thread, but yesterday I was at PT and brought this up with the PT. She thought it was pretty ridiculous to think age isn't a bigger consideration.

There are many things to consider; ligament flexibility, muscle strength, muscle flexibility, motor skills, etc. It can get complicated because kids are usually more flexible but adults usually have stronger muscles.

Think about different sporting events and the age categories. Look at NASTAR and how many categories there are there. Even the Marine Corps, whose demographic is fairly narrow, for physical fitness tests, uses 18-29, 30-39 and 40-44. I'm going by memory on the ages but that is awfully close. At 45 the Marine Corps considers you a non combatant because your TFO and a liability.

OK. Off my soap box. Back to the locker room humor which is way more entertaining.

Ken
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Did the shop set my DIN correctly?