Originally Posted by Lars
The same technology goes into a 10 din binding as goes in a 14 din binding. Both are safe, you decide how much you want to spend that's the difference. If you ski at a 8 setting, a 10 binding is all you'll ever need. Spending another 100$ to be more in the middle of the binding range is a waste of your money.
I gotta object to this comment. You've mounted bindings and never saw a difference in construction between different DIN rated bindings? Does the term Delran plastic and Tyrolia sound familiar. You don't see a difference between a Solly 500 and a 900? The higher din bindings use better materials, and don't chintze as much on production (look at the toe wings on an 810 vs. a 910). I agree that an 8 DIN should be an 8 DIN regardless of the DIN range, and I think that's true on a brand new binding, but I'm not sure if that's still true 5 years and 3 skis later.
But I think a lot of it stems from the spring material used 20 years ago. they fatigued and had a memory, so that it was recommended to lower the settings over the summer. Spring material used today is a lot more reliable.
|Tearing your knees up is not the bindings fault it's yours.
Yup, totally agree, I love the misconception that bindings have anything to do with Knee injuries.