or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Recommended Marker bindings?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Recommended Marker bindings? - Page 4

post #91 of 129
ssh, Ah ya I know that but different name huh? Why put a Look binding on a Rossignol ski when you can have a Rossignol binding with an extended warranty for doing so? If I were buying a Dynastar ski I still use the Rossi binding unless the shop only sold Look bindings, thus my second choice. ok?
post #92 of 129
Great link ssh. I had been there before but not for years. On a completely un-binding related note I was interested by the following:

Quote:
http://www.vermontskisafety.com/op_s..._skier_01.html

The principal remaining safety issue is helmet use. Wearing a helmet does not confer invincibility or invulnerability to the user. In fact, the use of a helmet may alter behavior adversely. Last season, 35% of fatally injured skiers and snowboarders were wearing helmets. In one survey we conducted over the same time frame, 35% of those suffering head injuries were wearing helmets while only 15% of injured skiers overall were using a helmet at the time. The use of helmets is not a panacea for head injuries in alpine winter sports. Any program which encourages the use of helmets by skiers and snowboarders, ought to stress that they are, at best, only a partial solution.
post #93 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars
ssh, Ah ya I know that but different name huh? Why put a Look binding on a Rossignol ski when you can have a Rossignol binding with an extended warranty for doing so? If I were buying a Dynastar ski I still use the Rossi binding unless the shop only sold Look bindings, thus my second choice. ok?


I admit, my old skis (1988 or so) have Looks that match the topsheet. And, my new skis will have matching bindings. Far be it from me to counter your preference!
post #94 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by U.P. Racer
I don't know an expert who skis at their recommended DIN regardless of brand.
I am an expert skier. I can (and do) ski below my recommended DIN on Looks. I skied Las Lenas this summer on 6.5 DIN. I have never had a prerelease.

On both recent generations of Salomon (S900, S912), I had prereleases above my recommended DIN.

I will not ski on Line bindings. The release mechanism is sound, but try this:
-Find one mounted on a ski. Wiggle the plate left and right. You'll notice several degrees of slop, which translates to several centimeters of movement at the tip of the ski. Personally, I need to know where my skis are pointed.
-Push the brakes in, like there's a boot in the binding. Pivot the heel like you've released the binding. Let the brakes down. Notice how they're caught on the ski? Oops!

I will also not ski on Marker bindings. As was mentioned above, their focus is on release, not retention, through the lowest possible elastic travel. I believe this is wrong and dangerous, because you have two choices: always lose a ski in any doubtful situation, or crank the bindings down to an unsafe DIN and risk knee injuries. There are many other problems that result from this flawed approach, including oversensitivity to forward pressure, possibility of popping the heel out without a binding release in counterflex situations, and oversensitivity to snow on the boot.

Look/Rossi turntables are currently the best bindings out there. Tyrolia HD/LD/FF (not the SLD, which are too cheap and flexible) and Look step-ins are good. Anything else besides a Salomon 916 ranges from suboptimal to dangerous.
post #95 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by spatters
...I will also not ski on Marker bindings. As was mentioned above, their focus is on release, not retention, through the lowest possible elastic travel.
Here we go again ... and again.

Can you please offer up any proof that says Markers favors release versus retention and that they have less elastic travel than any other binding?

We have yet to see proof othen than "I heard it from my brother's buddy ... yada yada yada ... "
post #96 of 129
Right on Woodee, Why would top level racers ski on a binding that favored release over retention and many are on Marker.

Also this is the exact opposite argument that people gave on the last thread about Atomic bindings.
They said Atomic sucked and the World Cuppers could use them without a problem because they favored retention over release and your saying Marker sucks because it favors release over retention. They also complained of the same pre-release issue.

You Marker/Atomic bashers can't have it both ways!

As the Vermont study said, It is usually software (The Skier) not hhardware.
post #97 of 129
I would not ski Markers, even if paid or spancered
post #98 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
If they get paid for it, they will. Just like any rep out there for Marker and Atomic...they better believe in their product...it pays their bills.

The point that a few are missing is that the dissenters about Marker and Atomic pay for their own gear. And I for one won't buy Markers, and it seems I am not the only one.

Oh, do the toes on Marker "green springs" still lack the "full-spectrum/biometric" upward release of the mainstream retail models? Just curious, as that would dispute the above stated arguement. Maybe Marker does favor retention over release, but only for racers...
That doesn't explain Atomic and pre-release now does it? Their WC bindings is designed exactly the same as the R6.14 and the top level racers can ski on whatever they want. Any of the sponsors would love to have them. I get sick and tired of hearing they do it for the $. I'll repeat Picabo's story again, hoorendous crash skiing on Markers makes a comeback and races in the Olympics and you think she only got back on Marker for the $. I would find that hard to believe. Don't you think she could get whatever equipment she wanted and even if Volkl gave her skis & paid her she could have used someone else's binding. Hermann & the like have skied on Lange forever and Atomic had a WC race boot avaliable. .
post #99 of 129
Look toe elastic travel: 45mm. The release is simple, being a single-pivot design for lateral release.

Marker: During a backward twisting fall release is all but certain after 4 to 5 millimeters of lateral movement. The release is complex. Multiple cams mean that when the release cam is breached, the toe cup opens and the boot effectively "ejects". My suspicion is that these features may be what has some thinking "pre-release".

I have not been able to find the lateral travel of a Marker toepiece prior to release. If I don't find it on-line, I'll attempt to measure it on my bindings when the skis come back from their annual shop tune.
post #100 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
If they get paid for it, they will. Just like any rep out there for Marker and Atomic...they better believe in their product...it pays their bills.
Do you really think that a skier who makes her living skiing would be willing to risk their future to a catastrophic injury just to ski on a particular binding because they pay her? When they can ski on any binding out there? That's illogical. Not going to happen. They ski on what they like best and what they think give them the greatest chance for long-term success.

Remember: unlike many sports, the World Cup is a marathon. Racers have to do well across a very long season to be successful.
post #101 of 129
This whole binding "debate" reminds me of the Ford vs Chevrolet debate that raged for decades. I know I am dating myself but in their time they were both OK but Ford nuts only bought Fords and taught their children to do the same. And Chevy....same deal. Debate was more like religion....like the binding debate.

I have skied most bindings made since the 50s and currently have Markers and ATomics. No problems although I set them 1.5 -2 settings more. Sold my skis with Look/Rossis this year but really liked them....seemed like a very secure and sensitive interface to the skis. When I buy new midfats this year will probably opt for them. But just a prejudice, nothing empirical.

Marker WC bindings are the same design but have much stronger springs....have not seen them for a while but I seem to remember that the DIN went up into the 20s...maybe 24. Personally, I have never skied above 12 or 13 even when skiing bumps, steeps, racing and never had problems with prerelease. Any aggressive skier will have a problem with the settings recommended from the industry.....they do not have Type IV, V, VI skiers for the daring, large, and speedy ones. I cannot set them at my recommened settings due to age....drop them 1 after 50. Just come out at the wrong time....
post #102 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
If they get paid for it, they will. Just like any rep out there for Marker and Atomic...they better believe in their product...it pays their bills.
I pro rep for Marker. I might sell twenty five pairs of bindings per annum. I get a small check, a pair of free bindings, and some clothing.

I ski on it because I feel safest on it. Some of you have seen my kid ski. She can go and she can tip the ski. She is on the binding for the same reason I am.

In five years, skiing a DIN of eight, the EPS 1400 bindings have released twice when I did not fall. Once carving on fairly soft snow at a fairly high speed and once in bumps.

Something triggered the release. I'm glad it did
post #103 of 129
SSH;

Sorry to burst your bubble relative to racers being all that concerned about long-term success. Higher level racers, including World Cup skiers crank their bindings up to a very high setting so that they will stay in. Check with the WC skers on Rossi/Look last year. I know for a fact that at least at the beginning of the WC season, the binding techs drove an aluminum wedge in at the heel piece to totally lock the binding. To get them out of the binding sombody had to step on the heel piece to shear the wedge. The broken aluminum pieces then fell out and the reps/coaches stuck them in their pockets.
post #104 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norefjell
SSH;

Sorry to burst your bubble relative to racers being all that concerned about long-term success. Higher level racers, including World Cup skiers crank their bindings up to a very high setting so that they will stay in. Check with the WC skers on Rossi/Look last year. I know for a fact that at least at the beginning of the WC season, the binding techs drove an aluminum wedge in at the heel piece to totally lock the binding. To get them out of the binding sombody had to step on the heel piece to shear the wedge. The broken aluminum pieces then fell out and the reps/coaches stuck them in their pockets.
Might be true of some, but I have spokern directly to the US national Atomic Tech rep & he has posted this on this Forum, Atomic athletes set their DIN the lowest of anyone at 16, their bindings go up to 18.
Atomic makes no other binding then the 10.18 that is available to all of us.
post #105 of 129

Salomon 900 vote

I think you could find people who have blown out their knee on any kind of binding. I have tried many bindings and have found salomon to be as good as any and their customer support fantastic. I ski all salomon now because I like how their stuff is light and fast. For me details read my bored-at-home-on-thanksgiving rant below.

My first two pairs of bindings when I was younger (11-15 and it didn't matter) were marker bindings and they were fine. They in college, I got a pair of K2 Mod X's that were (and still are the best skis I had skied on but they lost their camber). I mounted them sith S810 and these I had serious problems with. It got to the point where I could whiped my ski and kick out of boots with the bindings set at 9. Now, I probably should have got a stiffer binidng for my 180 lb carcass. That said, Salomon was awesome and sent me a brand new pair of 810 Ti's that I saved. In the meantime I decided to back to Marker and mounted a pair of M9.1 racing bindings which were ok, but too heavy and Ididn't like having a plate for the park and bumps. The next season I hooked up a pair of mad-trix and got some random din12 tyrolia bindings. I took a huge wipeout in Cham one winter and the din setting window on one two piece was smashed and the bindings would eject easily. The next season, I decided to get a pair of fat skis and went with pocket rockets and 912 Ti's. I skied them really hard for 20 days out west last season and I never had a problem with the bindgings or the skis. I also picked up a pair of 1080's this season and put a pair of last years 914FIS on them and so far so good.
post #106 of 129
Atoimicman;

16 is what I meant by very high DIN number. My comment was aimed in the context of what is set for recreational skiers and the DIN chart. Personally have seen world cup skiers (men) on as low as 13.
post #107 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norefjell
Atoimicman;

16 is what I meant by very high DIN number. My comment was aimed in the context of what is set for recreational skiers and the DIN chart. Personally have seen world cup skiers (men) on as low as 13.
World cup Markers go up as high as 30. I know someone who peronally saw Lasse Kjus's skis they were on 24. I find it hard to believe any World Cupper skis on 13.

Hell I ski on 10, 16 is considered very low by WC standards!
post #108 of 129
Atomicman:

You can believe what you want. I saw what I saw. Lasse's Atomics were on 18 when I last saw him (2000). Don't know what his bindings were on after he made the switch from Atomic. 24 may have been totally in line of what I commented on earlier relative to the Look binding. FYI, I believe Stenmark skied on very low DIN (yes I know GS and SL only), I think he was on 11.
post #109 of 129
Pistons are cool on Bindings...go Marker
post #110 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Do you really think that a skier who makes her living skiing would be willing to risk their future to a catastrophic injury just to ski on a particular binding because they pay her? When they can ski on any binding out there? That's illogical. Not going to happen. They ski on what they like best and what they think give them the greatest chance for long-term success.

Remember: unlike many sports, the World Cup is a marathon. Racers have to do well across a very long season to be successful.
I may need to reel myself in here, since I got caught up in the race debate, too. Does the fact that Mr. Maier or Mr. Miller ski on a particular binding ahve anything to do with the gear the average skier should use? That is a very illogical connection that a lot of us are making in this discussion.

No one is going to change my mind...nor will the Atomic and Marker dissenters change the opinion of the devoted.

[mounting soap box]

I don't ski like you. And it is very likely that you don't ski like me. I am a level "nothing, don't care to be certified enthusiast ex-shop tech of a skier" who doesn't care for Markers. I sold a lot of them, but wouldn't buy them. You heard why I don't like them and all I hear is how more refined world class skiers wouldn't dare ski on anything else. Good for them. I never raced nor do I ever care to. So buy your Markers and feel safe. Race away...I going to the ride the park...yes, I said ride...on skis

[/stepping down from soapbox]

I feel so much better to get that off my chest...
post #111 of 129
[quote=Atomicman]
I still contend the issues reported by people with particular bindings are due to:

1. Improper Adjustment
2. Improper Maintenance (Greased and adjusted properly)
3. Dirt, Ice, snow on boot
4. Skier not clicked in all the way,unaware of it.
5. Skier's Technique
6. Skiers attitude aboiut DIN chart.

I have to fully agree w/Atomicman.

Most skiers wouldn't dare turn a screw on their bindings to alter any adjusment made by a shop.

I've seen skiers "pre-release" while skiing hard and I'll offer to have a look at their settings. Many times I've found adjustments way out of whack. Forward pressure screws sticking way out when the boot is in, DIN settings on 4/5 for a 180+lb skier racing hard in icy ruts and so forth.

My advice is learn what the different screws are for and inspect your equipment. Know what to look for when your boot is locked in properly and most of these binding issues will go away.
post #112 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norefjell
Atomicman:

You can believe what you want. I saw what I saw. Lasse's Atomics were on 18 when I last saw him (2000). Don't know what his bindings were on after he made the switch from Atomic. 24 may have been totally in line of what I commented on earlier relative to the Look binding. FYI, I believe Stenmark skied on very low DIN (yes I know GS and SL only), I think he was on 11.
The speed forces and courses and strength of the atheletes of current day WC do not comapre to when Stenmark was racing. Have you seen how offset the gates are in current slalom & GS, don't get me wrong Stenmark may have the greatest of all time but it was a different time.
post #113 of 129
it's a good thing this thread isn't about toupees - i am so brand loyal i'd be ready to jump at someone's throat if they disrespected my favorite brand OR color.

excuse me while i readjust toupee and coordinate my tie and dress shirt with it.
post #114 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
The speed forces and courses and strength of the atheletes of current day WC do not comapre to when Stenmark was racing. Have you seen how offset the gates are in current slalom & GS, don't get me wrong Stenmark may have the greatest of all time but it was a different time.
In most of Stenmarks era it was ski around the gates and Ingmar was the best. He might have also been the best finesse skier ever. Today, racing is a full contact sport skiing through the gates and strength and size as well as skill does matter.

I had also heard that Stenmark had a low DIN setting. If he raced in this era he would be 20 lbs heavier and his DIN settings would be much higher as well. Flex gates, better training, much better equipment have changed gate skiing radically. It is not as pretty but it is efficient and stronger racers can have an advantage, even in gate skiing.
post #115 of 129
bsimeral

Good point about the weight. You are probably right. Certainly appears to be true for most of the top skiers. I did some research seven years ago about WC skiers height and weight. I wanted to show to my racers that you did not have to be big to be fast. At that time the average male height was 5ft 10-1/2inches and 179 lbs average weight. Range in weight was 134 lbs to 231 lbs. To stay on topic, many of these raced on Markers and ESS VAR. Just out of interest, I checked on Fredrik Nyberg who in 1997 was 156 lbs. Although I must say he looks bigger now, he is still listed at 156 lbs. It would be interesting to know if someone knows what DIN setting (Salomons) he is on.

Atomicman: I am well of ware of the offset increase. This change was an absolute must with the racers feet so close to the base of the pole and their abilities to make such a sharp radius carved turn. Who knows where it would have gone (or go) without some limits on ski radius and length.
post #116 of 129
NF

That is absolutely true, all I was trying to say is the forces created now probably require hihger DIN settings then when Stenmark was the King!
post #117 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwiski

I am intrigued by the people who feel the need to raise their DIN setting while racing. Are you using the same legs as when skiing recreationally? Is a torn ACL less serious if done during a race? I would have thought that for a particular set of legs the bindings should be able to release at the same force and be able to handle racing speeds on ice. It is just a matter of of shock absorption.
IMHO I second the comments that Kiwiski has obviously never raced. At 60+ mph or in a heavily rutted slalom course the last thing you want is to release. More danger in a release than in staying in the binding.

While free skiing I set my bindings at 8 or 9 (6'1", 195 lbs) and have both retention and safety. The DIN charts say I should be at 6.5 which is ridiculous and I can walk out of the binding with little effort. When racing in the past I would set them at 13 or more....same for skiing in powder and crud, particularly on steeps where a prerelease could mean a serious injury or worse. In my old age I no longer ski dangerous steeps but I still do not want to prerelease at speed on any slope or condition.

The settings for the average intermediate recreational skier are one thing and the settings for bump, race, and extreme skiing are another. Like I said in an earlier post there are Type I-III skiers on the charts but in reality there are IVs, Vs, and VIs that are well off the chart. I would rather have a torn ACL than a more serious injury any day. The DIN charts are a product of both engineering and acturarial calculations...with the emphasis on the latter. Every manufacturer wants to cover their asses and the charts are very much on the conservative side to match the abilities of 75% of the skiing populations. Release is the focus.

In the 80s while coaching I did note more prereleases on Markers but I have not pwesonally experienced any in the last 2 sets of Markers I have used. As for Salomon they are resting on their laurels and do not seem to have put much money into developing new binding technology. If they have what is it? A teflon AFD is a flawed and antiquated AFD device. Having said that I have never had a problem with Salomon unless you go back to the 555 era.

Started skiing Rossi/Look 2 seasons ago and liked them a lot. Purely subjective but they felt like a very positive interface. Never fell or prereleased to test the release mechanism.
post #118 of 129
Quote:
http://www.vermontskisafety.com/faq_..._skiers_8.html

The RATCHET Effect -- A good example of the rush to readjust is what we call the Ratchet Effect on the release adjustment screw of competition bindings. Race bindings are tightened for a variety of reasons (most of them wrong), but are rarely loosened. All research efforts to date show that the magnitude of the load a skier applies to a modern binding toe piece decreases with speed (even during competition) and yet all problems of retention (inadvertent release) are blamed on the binding setting. Over time competitors at all levels employ ever increasing release settings, usually at both heel and toe, to address problems real or imagined. Setting increases are even precipitated by rumors of someone else's bad experience (the Ken Reed syndrome). This practice is dangerous and unnecessary.
Well it seems we all agree on something here. I don't race. (there is far too much fun snow and tarrain out there to bother with bashing gates all day)

I am well aware of the shortcomings of the current DIN tables, and I even started a thread discussing exactly that HERE

But I especially hate all the race comparisons because A/ I believe most racers are cranking up their bindings for the wrong reasons and B/ as you said racers have a 'must not release at any cost' mentality which does not help, and is not relevant to the expert (but not professional) all mountain skier. The real discussion here is which binding is best for the top 10% of recreational skiers, who do want their bindings to release occasionally, but not in a situation where they are still in control or able to recover.
post #119 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwiski
Well it seems we all agree on something here. I don't race. (there is far too much fun snow and tarrain out there to bother with bashing gates all day)

I am well aware of the shortcomings of the current DIN tables, and I even started a thread discussing exactly that HERE

But I especially hate all the race comparisons because A/ I believe most racers are cranking up their bindings for the wrong reasons and B/ as you said racers have a 'must not release at any cost' mentality which does not help, and is not relevant to the expert (but not professional) all mountain skier. The real discussion here is which binding is best for the top 10% of recreational skiers, who do want their bindings to release occasionally, but not in a situation where they are still in control or able to recover.
This has become a discussion of more extreme demands on expert skiers or racers. Putting racers aside....would you want your bindings to prerelease on a steep descent where falling would mean a fall of hundreds or even thousands of feet with the potential of hitting a rock on the way down?

Granted that this is not what 75-90% of recreational skiers experience but for those of us who ski out of bounds (in my case, in my younger days) higher settings are safer and more sensible than the ultra conservative DIN tables that probably have as much legal input as engineering input.

In my own example, my current setting is 6.5 but I can easily come out at that setting. I am not a typical 60+ skier. At 8 or 9 I have never experienced a prerelease skiing in bounds and safely release from the bindings in a fall. When younger I raced and skied steeps with a setting of 12 or 13 and did not have any prereleases and safely came out of the bindings during falls. At my current age I would not set my bindings at those higher setting again.

My point is simply that the DIN tables have served the average skier well, and protected the ski industry financially, but do not serve the top 10% adequately whether a racer, extreme skier, mogul skier, etc.
post #120 of 129
markers bindings will not keep a good skier in the system unless you get race stock with no upward release

Iwill only use tyrolia rail flex or tyrolia free flex race bindings

look bindings hold me in! but the binding releases is long and slow, time and load = injury !!
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 › Recommended Marker bindings?