Originally Posted by AlbuquerqueDan
So I did option (b) today -- except it was with an E88 rather than an E100 -- and tried center, 1cm back, and 2 cm back. Here's what I noticed: the ski mounted at center was easier to release and seemed quicker to engage a turn; the ski at 2cm back felt more balanced, more solid, and stronger holding an edge. The center mount was a bit better in the moguls, but much worse at carving strong turns. Said simply, the center mount was easier and the rearward mount was stronger. I decided to mount my E100s 2 cm back.
HOWEVER, Chemist, what you say about delta has me a bit worried now. The demos had the Axial 120s and I'm mounting with Solomon Sth2s. It felt to me that the Axials had a lower angle than the other bindings I ski on (all FIS-compliant, either Rossi or Tyrolia). Do the Axials have a lower delta than race bindings? It sure felt like it! How about the Sth2s -- anyone know how they compare to the Axials with regard to delta?
I don't know if what you found with the E88 will translate to the E100 -- maybe someone here that's familiar with both skis can weigh in.
Regarding deltas, maybe someone here can give you those specs., but that info. can be hard to find. Often one needs to contact the manufacturer, unless you can find a technical manual (you could try searching online for this). And even if you can find that info., the manufacturer's specs can be funny. That's why I just measure them myself. I use a set of digital calipers (I also have a jig that allows me to rigidly mount a digital inclinometer to my ski boot, but never mind ). But you can get away with a ruler (though a ruler and a T-square is better). Just mark the side of one boot at the points where the contact of the sole with the ground ends (i.e., where the sole loses contact with a flat surface), click the boot into the binding, and measure the distance from the bottom of the boot to the bottom of the ski at each of those points, and subtract (easier than going from the bottom of the boot to the top of the ski, since the edge of the top is rounded, but it does assume the ski's thickness doesn't change significantly between toe and heel, which is generally the case). You can do this in the shop from which you rented your skis. If you stay out of the way they won't mind, and indeed might even be curious themselves and want to help.
The good news is that, if the bindings you'll be using are in fact more tilted than the Axials, that would be like moving you forward (not exactly, but in the same vein), yet you decided to err in the direction of moving yourself back.
I also wanted to comment specifically on this:
"The demos had the Axial 120s and I'm mounting with Solomon Sth2s. It felt to me that the Axials had a lower angle than the other bindings I ski on (all FIS-compliant, either Rossi or Tyrolia). Do the Axials have a lower delta than race bindings?"
First, FIS doesn't have specifications for delta, just for maximum stand height (for ski+binding+boot together), so FIS compliance wouldn't be relevant here. In addition, there is no standard delta for race bindings -- they can vary quite a bit.
The nice thing about delta is that it is adjustable (unless you have one-piece system bindings), and you don't need to re-drill the skis. Just ski on the ski, and if you feel like you're tilted too far forward (like you have to sit back to be balanced), first have you're boot alignment checked, and if you still feel that way, have the shop put a lifter under the toe of the binding. Conversely, if you feel like you can't get forward on your skis, you may (again, after checking boot alignment) need a lifter under your heel. Indeed, I wonder if you could do a dry-land test for delta in the shop, by putting shims of varying thicknesses under your heel, and seeing where you feel balanced (or under the toe, if you need a negative delta).
Edited by chemist - 11/29/14 at 7:15pm