New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

GS plate height?

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
Do you guys like to run closer to the ski for GS? Any suggestions on a good plate height (actually, I guess its teh height of the plate and bindings).
post #2 of 17
My possibly (probably?) incorrect impression is people take the stack height to the 55 mm limit* in all events:

- Normal humans use standard equipment and don't sweat it if they're a mm or three short.

- Serious racers (or their techs) measure and take it right to the limit.
_________
*As you no doubt know, that's everything from base to boot sole, including the ski, plate and binding.
post #3 of 17
In Ron LeMaster's book, Skier's Edge, he explains the physics behind the idea of a race plate: It gives the skier more leverage, helps to prevent boot out, and when the ski is tipped it more effectively positions the weight over the inside edge (you really have to see the graphic in LeMaster's book--perhaps he has the same slide in one of his presentations on his Web site) for penetration of hard pack/icy slopes and balance.

So...I'd say you're better off with a race plate plus binding that take you closer to the limit, rather than a shorter one that puts you closer to the base of the ski.
post #4 of 17
Go HIGH! While you can FIS is dropping the total stand height (stack) 5 MM to 10 MM. Right now it is 55 from base of ski to bottom of the boot and another 45MM from the bottom of the boot to the top of the foot bed, so that's a total of 100MM. Higher is better, Ron is right. Also, theoretically, plates allow the ski to flex under the foot for a more consistent flex pattern - no flat spot.

In Masters and NASTAR, do whatever you like, there's no calipers out there FIS, USSA, better to be 1MM short or get disqualified if they bust ya, just ask Bode :
post #5 of 17
Stick to 55 or so. Try not to go over. I used to raise my skis up a lot, but it tends to create balance issues and a huge disconnect with the edge for much of the reasons that sfdean discussed. I have taken all of my extra lifts out of my skis and on some I am below 55mm... My advice - get narrow boots.
Later
GREG
post #6 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Dranow View Post
Go HIGH! While you can FIS is dropping the total stand height (stack) 5 MM to 10 MM. Right now it is 55 from base of ski to bottom of the boot and another 45MM from the bottom of the boot to the top of the foot bed, so that's a total of 100MM. Higher is better, Ron is right. Also, theoretically, plates allow the ski to flex under the foot for a more consistent flex pattern - no flat spot.

In Masters and NASTAR, do whatever you like, there's no calipers out there FIS, USSA, better to be 1MM short or get disqualified if they bust ya, just ask Bode :
As usual, Gary is right on!

By the way, snow Basin absolutely rocks!
post #7 of 17
Narrow boots? Interesting. That's the first time I have heard that one. Does it help for anything other than preventing boot-out?
post #8 of 17
Yeah, get narrow boots, also note that not every plug boot has the same outer size securing you against boot-out, but chances are, if you are on a plug already you can't compromise more than 3-4mm by switching the brand. The only possibility would be fo file down your boot from the outside as Bode is said to do. On plugs a few mm off each side should not pose a problem. I could get my Fischers down 3mm one side 4mm the other side according to Johann Leitner (a reknown bootfitter in Austria).
If you value your ligaments rather get lower than getting up higher on the ski.
post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremecarver View Post
Yeah, get narrow boots, also note that not every plug boot has the same outer size securing you against boot-out, but chances are, if you are on a plug already you can't compromise more than 3-4mm by switching the brand. The only possibility would be fo file down your boot from the outside as Bode is said to do. On plugs a few mm off each side should not pose a problem. I could get my Fischers down 3mm one side 4mm the other side according to Johann Leitner (a reknown bootfitter in Austria).
If you value your ligaments rather get lower than getting up higher on the ski.
Whatmany racers do is to grind the boot board lower and build up the sole higher to stay within the 45mm boot standheight restriction. standheight; this allows him to add 8 to 10 mm of stand height to the sole.
post #10 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
Whatmany racers do is to grind the boot board lower and build up the sole higher to stay within the 45mm boot standheight restriction. standheight; this allows him to add 8 to 10 mm of stand height to the sole.
Great Point! I was at Rossi last year getting my boots built. Out of the rack came a the last pair of Rossi's that were built by Thor Verdonk for Bode (his own last!). He had ground the Zeppa down to nothing and had a very thick Riser (I'm guessing 15MM at least) on the sole. Another logic for taking the boot board (Zeppa) down on plugs is to create as much volume as possible for cramming size 12 flippers in 9 shells : I have 11.5 American and am in 9 shells (Plug, 315MM Sole Length) as well - lots and lots of grinding. Quite frankly I don't have enough material left to grind the outside of the boot without structural failure I'll keep my stand height at the max
post #11 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Dranow View Post
Great Point! I was at Rossi last year getting my boots built. Out of the rack came a the last pair of Rossi's that were built by Thor Verdonk for Bode (his own last!). He had ground the Zeppa down to nothing and had a very thick Riser (I'm guessing 15MM at least) on the sole. Another logic for taking the boot board (Zeppa) down on plugs is to create as much volume as possible for cramming size 12 feet in 9 shells :
Exactly!
post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremecarver View Post
If you value your ligaments rather get lower than getting up higher on the ski.
Is this based on any data? Or simply speculation?
post #13 of 17
Well I don't know if there is data about it.

Seen a tv discussion with Thomas Sykora, Hans Pum and some others last year on ORF1 during which some of the Austrians heavily criticised Günther Hujara and others for only getting longer radius skis instead giving in broader skis with fewer standheight to solve the problem of so many injuries. They supposed to make 80mm = minimum middle width and lower plates. Off course this would decrease the forces, if this ultimately preserved ligaments I can't say but think so at least.
post #14 of 17

To get High or not, a good question

Quote:
Originally Posted by extremecarver View Post
Well I don't know if there is data about it.

Seen a tv discussion with Thomas Sykora, Hans Pum and some others last year on ORF1 during which some of the Austrians heavily criticised Günther Hujara and others for only getting longer radius skis instead giving in broader skis with fewer standheight to solve the problem of so many injuries. They supposed to make 80mm = minimum middle width and lower plates. Off course this would decrease the forces, if this ultimately preserved ligaments I can't say but think so at least.
As I mentioned (though its hard to tell when I'm serious) that the FIS is lower the maximum stand height from 5 - 10MM within a couple of years. From what a hear that's already a done deal. Not sure of why they are doing that and if injury plays a role. EC is right that everything the WC folks do to gain more leverage, ski tighter radius turns at higher speeds, increases forces and when things go wrong - POP. Look at Schlopy's weird knee injury on CB's in Park City. I've seen the tape a bunch and still can't tell ya what blew the knee out other than his knee just caving from the massive forces he built up in that turn (remember the knee went BEFORE he popped in the air).

In my opinion, however, for stand height to be a contributing factor to injury you have be using your equipment to optimum levels. If you are a recreational racer (NASTAR, most MASTERS, Club Racers) that stand height helps ski a cleaner line, carve more efficiently, lessen the chance of "boot out". Typically the injuries I see (especially knees) in Masters come from racers, even pretty good ones, not re-centering well and having awkward crashes (off the tails, catching edges, so on).

There are other factors as well that can add to SH and make things a bit testy on the old ligs such as "Ramp Angle" and canting. Add a few millimeters toe up to the RAMP and several degrees out on the ole cants and IF you can ski it, you'll be looking to a trip to the Ortho if you make a mistake. JMHO.

I think there is a valid argument both ways and it depends on the rider and how much they are pushing the limits of their equipment.
post #15 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremecarver View Post
Seen a tv discussion with Thomas Sykora, Hans Pum and some others last year on ORF1 during which some of the Austrians heavily criticised Günther Hujara and others for only getting longer radius skis instead giving in broader skis with fewer standheight to solve the problem of so many injuries. They supposed to make 80mm = minimum middle width and lower plates. Off course this would decrease the forces, if this ultimately preserved ligaments I can't say but think so at least.
I heard a rumour about this somwhere; that someone was making a push for seriously wider ski widths. It obviously didn't happen, but I think it's a valid idea. If we're all running gates on fat powder boards flat-mounted with no plates, performance and speeds will come down. And lower speeds and less severe angles mean lower forces on the body. Of course in practice, wider skis may or may not result in less injuries. AFAIK, data to support either case is rather scarce.
post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Dranow View Post
Great Point! I was at Rossi last year getting my boots built. Out of the rack came a the last pair of Rossi's that were built by Thor Verdonk for Bode (his own last!). He had ground the Zeppa down to nothing and had a very thick Riser (I'm guessing 15MM at least) on the sole. Another logic for taking the boot board (Zeppa) down on plugs is to create as much volume as possible for cramming size 12 flippers in 9 shells : I have 11.5 American and am in 9 shells (Plug, 315MM Sole Length) as well - lots and lots of grinding. Quite frankly I don't have enough material left to grind the outside of the boot without structural failure I'll keep my stand height at the max
Damn, I have a size 12 in a 9/315mm shell...

I thought Bode used a size 8, interesting.
post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223 View Post
Damn, I have a size 12 in a 9/315mm shell...

I thought Bode used a size 8, interesting.
I beleive he skied in a 27 shell (9). The 1st year the Race tech came out the largest shell available was a 27. My older boy skied & still does, in the 27 M flex. We had to stretch the boot 4 directions to get his size 12 into a 27 (314mm) shell. He could not even get his foot through the narrow throat and the instep in the race Tech is very low with not much overlap.

We tried to convince Atomic the boot wouldn't work for him and they said we could send them back, but along wiht his skis he received as a sponsored Atomic athlete! We decided to try make the boots work. Jim Mates got 'em perfect on the 1st try and about $225.00 later!

I can't imagine he could get his foot into a 26. But maybe his boots were completly custom built anyway!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home