or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Do you ski above your reccomended DIN?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do you ski above your reccomended DIN? - Page 2

post #31 of 54
Bob, I'll replay excerpts from previous threads:
Bob:>>Should I still ski at a setting well below what *my* legs can handle just because the manufacturers have devised a one-size-fits-all chart that applies *average* settings across millions of skiers? Would you not at least partially admit that individual leg strength might play a part?<<<
Ott:>>And you folks are right, everyone is different and cant be universally set by a chart, so if you feel that you get chattered around in a race course and need to keep the skis on at all cost, it's a judgment call to take the risk. I said so in my first post in this thread.

Also if, like Bob said, when skiing in such hairy terrain that the loss of a ski is worse than a broken tibia, by all means crank the bindings down and rely on your bone and muscle strength, that is what we did with bear traps<<<
Ott in another post:>>>Any of you can tighten down your bindings as much as you want, but release binding are made to release. If they are set to just under bone breaking or muscle tearing tension and they release then you should write a letter of praise to the manufacturer, not tighten down the bindings<<<
Yet another by Ott:>>> and in front of the lodge simply twist or walk out<<<
And Bob, you are making my point, if the bindings release below bone breaking they are set correctly and if you can twist out by muscle strength they are set low, good for you. [img]smile.gif[/img]

post #32 of 54
In racing, faulty tactics(pinching the turn and crossing the rut below the gate) are also a factor.(usually referred to as "pilot error")
Forward pressure is more often a factor in "pre-release" than not enough DIN.

[ January 12, 2004, 08:21 AM: Message edited by: SLATZ ]
post #33 of 54
SLATZ speaks with honesty. Pre-release almost always is a forward pressure issue if not a bad technique.

Most ski buddies who've had pre-release issues have had them in the bumps. Most ski with an excessively aggressive technique, jumping out of a turn when the ski is highly loaded. That is when they pre-release.

Sorry, but I don't see the wisdom in not using your equipment as it was designed. If you need to exit a turn midway, obviously you didn't set the radius/edge angle correctly. Correct that in your next turn.

Yeah, sounds cruel, but it's how I learned to quit pre-releasing in moguls.

I release more often when skiing trees, especially when the snow is quite heavy. I assume the binding is saving me from injury, and don't feel an urge to crank it up. At this point, do some of you just assume you wouldn't have been injured? If so, how do you get to that point? Logically, I mean... how do you reach that conclusion?
post #34 of 54
I lower my DIN by 1 (keep it around 6.5). But I admit to being a slower, "finesse" skier. I could see how more aggressive skiers may need more, but there is always a compromise there and much depends on each individual.

I also have to say that I am amazed at those who can force their boot out of the binding (as BobPeters has described). Arcmeister can do that too - he showed it to us at the ESA last year. Obviously these folks ski well within safety, in my opinion.
post #35 of 54
I ski at or below my "recommended" DIN, but I always have it set as a "Level II" skier even though I ski everywhere on the mountain in all conditions. I started doing this while racing, and have continued the practice. It was especially possible with older Look bindings (don't know about the new ones; haven't had them for years). My new Markers are set for a level II skier, and I have come out of them once in 15 days on them (I'm sure that I needed to!).

However, I agree that it's related to one's "style". I work really hard at skiing smoothly (not always successfully, especially when I get tired!), and I am sure that this makes a difference in how the bindings handle shock. I suspect that if I ski a lot of broken crud at high speed I may need to tweak the DIN... But I haven't had to make that change so far...
post #36 of 54
Steve, it's very true for the current Look (and Rossi) turntable bindings... excellent retention, easily skied with finesse at Level II setting. That's why I chose the Rossi Axial 110 for my new Race SCs... hoping to save the knees when that huge rebound catches me off-balance, which I'm expecting it will one day.
post #37 of 54
I ski with the bindings set to what my favourite ski shop skiman set it to. I trust him. Based on my age, weight, skill and personal preferencies. He knows me since I was a 17 y.o. know-it-all. He sets the bindings at 8-8.5.
Never suffered a pre-release from a well maintained, in good working order binding. Suffered releases from broken toepieces (binding was too old, and the spring was broken...) though.
Never had any problem with broken limbs or torn muscles, yet.

Originally posted by Bob.Peters:

You mention the point about settings above muscle and bone tearing strength. My recommended manufacturer DIN is 7.5, based on age, weight, and ability. I ski at a 10. At 10, I can stand flat-footed on snow, tilt one ski, and twist out of my toe bindings without any strain on bone, joint, or muscle. I can also walk out of my heel bindings, again with no strain.
Bob, what's your middle name? Superman? The Six Millions Dollar man?

I've never been able to do that, ever.

Should I still ski at a setting well below what *my* legs can handle just because the manufacturers have devised a one-size-fits-all chart that applies *average* settings across millions of skiers? Would you not at least partially admit that individual leg strength might play a part?
No problems here, everyone of us has his own preferencies and characteristics, but as you say, most people here are well outside the envelope. Manufacturers needed to devise a rule of thumb that apllies to the vast majority of those millions, until those users (and that's a minority)that can reach a level of self consciousness where they can decide for themselves what to do, and bear the concequences of their acts without always putting the blame on someone else.
post #38 of 54
There is some really good info here and I’m glad to see it brought back up again since I’m curious to know how much people crank up their bindings. Back in the days when I used to crank up my bindings to 11 in a race course I’d still lose one every now and then when I’d hit a big rut. My current settings on 2 sets of Salomons and a set of Markers are 8.5. I’ll buy the argument that my technique may not be great when I’m in deep powder and often twist out of my bindings that I normally could and should have skied away from if it were not for a binding release. Losing a ski in deep snow is not as hazardous as losing one on packed steep terrain. I don’t by the argument of poor technique being employed when I have a pre-release when skiing in tough bumps on steep terrain. This has happened to me on Dog Face at Jackson Hole and Wildcat Face at Alta that could have led to a slide for life situation. This release was very similar to those race course days when I could have and should have skied away after hitting a big trough or rut were it not for my bindings opening early.

Whenever I take off my skis I easily do so by twisting or walking out of them. I’ve decided to keep my bindings at 8.5 while on groomers and mild bumps but when in deep powder I’ll crank the toes up 1 notch and when in slide for life terrain or steep bumps I’m going up 2.
post #39 of 54
Originally posted by Ott Gangl:
Arcadia, in your last paragraph you gave a testament to the correct working of a release binding. It released when it should have, saving you pulled muscles or broken bones.
Think about what you are saying......
If a binding releases for no apparent reason, and particularly when it's doing so puts you at significant risk, that is not safe. Loss of skis often means loss of control and there are other people, trees, rocks, cliffs etc. I think the proof about whether higher settings are unsafe is when you crank your bindings up, ski normally under conditions that were causing you to release unnecessarily, and you suffer no injury. Possibly the simplistic height/ weight/ age/ abilty formula does not accurately correlate tissue and bone strength. I think there is a need for good judgement here. If I am skiing within my capabilities and in good control and my skis begin prereleasing in such a way as to put me at risk then I will evaluate my skiing and make a decision whether to ski more moderately or to crank the bindings up. There is no way that risk is going to disappear. The issue is what risks are reasonable and acceptible. Conversely, if I am not in good shape, I may reconsider cranking the Din settings up and elect to ski more conservatively. Its tempting to think that simply adhering to someone's Din settings will take the place of my personal obligation to my own and others safety but, particularly when that flies in the face of personal experience and observation, it becomes absurd.

Ironically, as it happens, I am recovering from a non-ski related foot injury and out of shape. You can bet I will be skiing conservatively with my skis close to Din settings. I probably won't be on Markers either. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #40 of 54
arcadia, I have no quarrel with that... ....Ott
post #41 of 54
Hey, Bob, long time, eh? I have been sneaking peeks but not posting much....

If you ski the kind of terrain than Bob, myself , and others do, meaning ungroomed, off piste, steep, trees, cliffs, couloirs, quick terrain changes, you do not want prerelease. And that is why we set our bindings way over recommended DIN. Now that I'm over 50, that setting is some ridiculous low 6.5 or something. That is a joke.

I recently demoed some Atomics at Alpental. It was snowing and blowing and they closed the top for an hour to control some driftng snow, cornices, etc. So I was relegated to a 20 second run, and sinced I hate groomers, headed for a few trees. They had set the binders at 8, and I walked out twice on little compressions that I would have blown right through at my normal 10. I used ot ski on 11-12 when I was a bit of a hack( and a lot of a wild man), and I've never had any problems. I'm only 160, but legs and knees are pretty much indestructible.

When I went back to get some different skis, I set them to 10, and we went to the top as soon as it opened. Conditions were epic, 6 inches of new fluff on top of 2-3 feet of little skiied stuff. Guess what, no releases, and we were skiing terrain that 99.5% of American skiers have never seen the likes of. That is simple, as only a handful of US areas have much of anything even remotely resembling the incredibly gnarly terrain as is found all over the Alpental backcountry. For that matter, that goes for the main area too. http://www.alpental.com

Bob, I'm super busy with work, but would sure like to meet up with you sometime, maybe Jackson. I'd like to hit Bridger, Moonlight, Big Sky this winter, but don't know if it will happen.
post #42 of 54
Gate Racing: 11 Toe / 13 Heel
Freeskiing: 12 Toe / 14 Heel
Competing:14 Toe / 16 Heel (Salomons Only!)

- Paul

Marker Full Spectrum Ejection System - NEVER AGAIN!
post #43 of 54
I miss the old GEZEs before Rossignol got them. Best heel ever. 10mm vertical elasticity and a double action cam. They never pre released at 7. Rossignol used the toe at first but now use a design that GEZE had for rental and low end bindings.
post #44 of 54
Folks, it's not about pre-releasing, it's about who takes the chance of getting hurt by disabling the release function of the bindings, and do they recommend that to others.

I am fully aware that one can ski well without the release function. In the 1940s and 1950s in the mountains of Bavaria I skied with bear traps and heel hold downs which could be released to allow heel-free skiing or snapped down to hold the heel solid, but there was no way the ski could seperate from the boot. Grooming was not known at that time. And I never got hurt.

The first release bindings I skied in the late 50s were the old Marker toe piece which scissored open over a spring loaded ball and the Marker turntable with long thongs. What we did with that toe, to keep it from functioning, is drill a small hole through from the top and drop a nail into it to keep it from scissoring.

Essentially then we had the equivalent of the bear traps, the toe didn't release and the turntable didn't turn. But then I got safety councious after shattering my leg in Davos and went to the Look pistons and for a number of years to the toeless wonders, the Spademans. Those were the ones that taught me to ski without stressing the bindings because they were pretty unforgiving of sloppy technique.

Why do I ski with low DIN settings now? Because I can. I am confident enough in my skiing and common sense not to wear a helmet, not because I have the attitude that one shouldn't but because I love my hat. [img]smile.gif[/img]

So please do as you wish but when you ski that knarly terrain with your high setting, just look at other skiers who ski that and see that it can be skied well with normal settings FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL SKIER, not by what the chart recommends, which errs on the safe side.

post #45 of 54
I have to set my bindings 1 to 2 settings above the recommended levelbecause of the speed and terrain I like to ski. I would prefer to have it lower, but have had too many pre-releases. I have been skiing for about 30 years and have never had knee surgery. The times I have been injured occured with bindings set on the recommended DIN and releasing while going straight ahead or in a high speed arc and hitting terrain irregularities. I did not twist out in the majority of the incidents, but walked right out or had the ski just fall off. The forward pressure was correct and I did not have snow on the bottom of my boots. When I raise the DIN by 1 or 2 this rarely happens.
post #46 of 54
>>>When I raise the DIN by 1 or 2 this rarely happens<<<

OK, will they release when they have to, you think?

post #47 of 54
Ott, so far they have. I am 5' 11" 180lbs and a fairly aggressive skier. I have only had a couple of sprains to the MCL and a slight meniscus tear in 30 years of skiing. I have injured my shoulders and for the most part, the injuries to my shoulders and knees occured because the ski came off when I didn't wan't them to. I went over (straight) fairly mild terrain depressions or irregularities. I like to ski fast and next to the trees and don't want the skis coming off in that situation.

It is NOT a macho thing with me. I don't want to miss skiing due to injuries, but would rather injure my knees than crash into trees, rocks, etc. because of pre-release.
post #48 of 54
Then obviously you have set them right for you, and that's how it should be. Shops are scared of being sued if they tighten them. There really is nothing to it, to tighten them gradually until they stay on when they should and release when they should.

post #49 of 54
Originally posted by Ott Gangl:

...If you ski correctly there is no stress on the bindings...


...I'm curious, and you, as a level III may be able to analyze it. When you can't stay in your bindings is it because you use a twisting, horizontal rotary foot movement and twist out of your bindings, or is it because you get a very hard rebound and they pop off, though with the uni-construction of the modern bindings this is mostly a thing of the past, or is it because of a hard cranking push forward and the heel opens up?

Absent of these three, a binding should only come open in mistakes that would injure you.

As I said, to what do you atribute the unwanted releases?...


...And as far as correct technique goes, there are many accomplished skiers who ski with a lower than recommeded setting in all kind of conditions and terrain and who don't have pre-releases and that is because they don't stress the bindings because they don't get into situations where they have to make gross recovery movements in the first place and that is the result of good technique...

and yet, this

...Then obviously you have set them right for you, and that's how it should be. Shops are scared of being sued if they tighten them. There really is nothing to it, to tighten them gradually until they stay on when they should and release when they should.

Ott, it seems to me that you started in this thread by saying that one who skis "correctly" puts no stress on the bindings. You then go on to list a number of technique flaws that might lead to premature releases at manufacturer DINS.

By the end of the thread, however, you seem to be saying that it's fine - even encouraged - if someone is setting their own bindings (because no shop will) at a number higher than recommended, as long as we've determined that whatever final setting we use is below our strength threshold. You even tell us how to do it.

I'm very confused.

post #50 of 54
OK, I hope to be out of this thread after this. My contention from the beginning was that there are folks who can ski without an unwanted release at low settings in the terrain they ski and I believe it is because their technique does not put undue stress on the bindings.

Next, if the bindings do pre-release because they were mounted wrong or set too low or boots don't match, etc., corrections should be taken, but I don't think that DIN settings are the only cause of all pre-releases.

Finally, IF the settings are the cause of pre-release then the bindings should be adjusted to fit the skiers style and ability, but not so high that they cause the skier injury by not releasing when they should.

Even among fine skiers I know, they crank up the DIN to compensate for a quirk in their technique. So I believe all other possibilities should be corrected before disabling the release function of the bindings or even setting them at a very high threshhold.

If bindings stay closed when they should and come open when they should the skier is safe. DIN settings should not be used as a mucho thing. And I'm not accusing anyone of that, just mentioning it.

post #51 of 54
I bump mine up 1-1.5. I have found at this setting my skis stay on for most falls allowing me a "bounce back" recovery. To date, all serious, twisting falls that may have caused damage have released on me.

I don't want my boards releasing on every fall, I'd rather recover and keep moving if at all possible. At my recommended DIN I find they come off a little too easily (regardless of make).

[ January 14, 2004, 06:23 AM: Message edited by: Taylormatt ]
post #52 of 54
I've skied on marker mrr since 1995, ski at my recommended din setting (8.5) and have never had a prerelease
post #53 of 54
Originally posted by Ott Gangl:
Even among fine skiers I know, they crank up the DIN to compensate for a quirk in their technique...
You oughtta see me quirk at 73 MPH on Anderson's at the Bird every spring... [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #54 of 54
In my experience the binding itself makes a big difference.
My old bindings (crummy tyrolia rental market levels) I was pre releasing constantly at the reccomended din.

On my newer ones, solomom 850s, Ive done everything from hard turns in death cookies to jumping cliffs without a pre release at the same setting.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Do you ski above your reccomended DIN?