EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Binding shims and screws
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Binding shims and screws - Page 2

post #31 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by exracer View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neutrinoone View Post

Atomic bindings are NOT flat out of the box. They are 14.2 in the front and 16.2 in the back. They sell 1,2, and 3mm distance plates on the proform for them. So really you are running 1mm of toe lift.

 

Source - http://www.vikingur.is/media/PDF/ATOMIC_RACE_20102011.pdf page 8!
 

 

You're splitting hairs.  A 2 mm difference is as close to flat as you'll get in a binding (to my knowledge).  Maybe I should have said the Atomic race bindings are the "flattest" rather than "flat", but for all intents and purposes they are flat.  The point is that most bindings are around 6 mm to 10 mm higher in the rear, and at 0.4 degrees of ramp with the Atomic that represents a relative 4X reduction in ramp angle compared to most bindings.    I used 8 mm for comparison as I just put the ruler to a pair of Fischer FR17s, and there's an 8 mm difference on those.
 



2mm is 2mm and is VERY noticeable to a strong skier!  Flat is flat or zero stand height differential.  One degree or 1/2 degree on the frontal plane is also VERY noticeable.  I have measured many binding stand height differentials over the years and one year I measured them all!  There was a year that a Salomon SC rental binding actually had a negative delta angle which somehow slipped by the product designers attention until after it was too late.  Most bindings range from 2mm to 6mm.  While this sounds rather inconsequential the skiing reality is very noticeable.  Looks and Rossis are now down from 7 or so mm to three to bring the once extreme height down into the normal range of the other manufacturers.

 

A good skier on hard snow can feel 1mm difference in "delta"! and 1/2 to 1/4 degree in sole cant angle!  In the words of Rush Limgaugh, "don't doubt me"!

 

Just sayin!biggrin.gif

post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stikki View Post

But what do they look like in a squat with their knees at 45* and 90*?

 

Skier 1 is in the better setup. Skier 2's hips would have to move much further back than skier 1's as he descends to parallel, Skier 2 would also have to compensate for his hips being so far back by bending deeply at the waist. I'll take the balanced athletic stance of Skier 1 (like an Olympic weightlifter squatting) any day.

 

(Skier 1's photo is deceiving, if he slightly tilted his pelvis anteriorly he'd be balanced, right now he's in the "back seat")

I don't know about you, but I don't do squats in ski boots.  I do, however, ski in a stronger, more balanced stance with lifters under my boot toes and certain toe pieces shimmed.  You should try it sometime (or maybe thousands of racers are wrong and their coaches and technicians don't know what they're talking about.... hmmm, there's a thought).
 

post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
To the OP: An easier way to play with delta is to cut up small pieces of a 3mm bontex shim (pressed cardboard insoles used in most boot shops) and use these to place between your AFD and boot to temporarily lift the boot toe and decrease delta angle.  Ski it under the toes, then without, then under the heels and you will quickly discover which direction is the right way to go for your personal needs.  Then dial it in more accurately by going too far then backing off until you find your spot.  Then shim your bindings to recreate your findings or if you have the same bindings on your whole ski quiver, simply plate the boot with the desired lifter thickness and call it good! 


Good approach, and essentially the process I used when getting my current boots ad skis dialed in, but I experimented with different thickness lifters screwed onto my boots.  I was able to do this because my Atomic 1018's have adjustable toe height, unlike almost every other binding on the market which is non-adjustable, and I shimmed my other bindings to match my Atomics.  What I don't follow is how would most people be able to fit a shim between the boot and AFD on a non-adjustable binding that only has a mm of play designed into it, and if you could manage to do it the binding would be jammed and no longer safe to ski on.  Or can it be done?

post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by exracer View Post
I don't know about you, but I don't do squats in ski boots.

 



9herman-maier.jpg

 

Yep, no squatting there.

 

Back to the discussion, notice in the upper right picture how far back Herman's hips are and how far down he has to bring his torso to compensate. If you chase gates all day this may work but if that was an all mountain skier absorbing a bump being in that position would send all but the strongest backwards. Having some delta makes it easier to get into a squat and allows the torso to remain more upright.

post #35 of 43
Thread Starter 

Well, I'm flexible and I can get ass-to-grass in or out of my ski boots on flat ground while keeping my torso upright. I don't need any ramp, in fact I may need negative ramp angle because of my ankle flexibility.

 

Is this true for most people? Probably not but I see a ton of people who look like they are in a squat position just standing in the lift line and then they ski away in the back seat with burning quads. I have no real experience here other than my own but I would think too much delta/ramp is a worse problem for most lower level recreational skiers than not enough. It's a little puzzling because race equipment can be flatter and yet mostly only racers or guys with strong technique are going to get into such deeply flexed positions.

 

I'd like to think the manufacturers compiled data and targeted their customers intelligently but who knows. I just think it's stupid to build it into the binding when it already exists in boots.

 

 

Thanks for the suggestions on the shims/screws btw.

post #36 of 43

Exracer,

 

Using shims no thicker than 3mm seems to work fine for experimenting, NOT LONG TERM USE, and will fit in pretty much every binding I have ever encountered.  The bindings are designed to accommodate some snow and ice build up with a bit of elasticity.  Some will not accommodate this shim under the heel as they will not lock in (ie Atomic/ESS Var)

post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stikki View Post

9herman-maier.jpg

 

Yep, no squatting there.

 

 

You're right.  In the one shot of him skiing, his outside leg is loaded and leg is extended to use as much of his skeletal structure as possible to counter the force of the turn.  The inside ski is along for the ride and balance, without much load on it in this shot.  If you were to see a side shot you would see that his leg is about 80% extended with his hip probably in pretty close alignment over the ball of his foot.  Photos can be deceiving.

 

I'd love to see a high res shot so we could see what kind of shims he's running.  I noticed Lindsey Vonn had a pretty substantial one under her toe at the Olympics.
 

post #38 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719 View Post
It's a little puzzling because race equipment can be flatter and yet mostly only racers or guys with strong technique are going to get into such deeply flexed positions.


That's a good point.  When I was going through my coaching certifications, it was always impressed upon us to get our boots set up so that we could stand naturally in our boots in an extended relaxed stance.  That stance gives you the ability to use your full range of motion when needed.  Too much leg flex produced by your equipment will reduce your range of motion, i.e. your 'springs' are already pre-loaded and partially compressed, therefore it's more tiring and you have shorter range of motion when you need it.  Having your equipment set up to produce a taller, more extended, stance gives you greater range of motion to do what you need to do to pressure your skis and keep in balance.

post #39 of 43

I got kind of involved with this, when an former WC Race Tech advised me to do the shims...

 

You don't have to be a racer to do this...

There are 2 possible scenarios:

 

 You have  to love the sport of alpine ski racing too much......... OR..

 You want everything to be perfect... 

 

 

Either way,it works for me......icon14.gif

post #40 of 43

Racers are going to have different shim setups for different evens too. If I run my SG skis with as much gaspedal as I have on my SLs it is physically impossible fro me to tuck. For me, +4 SL, 0 GS, - 2 for SG.

post #41 of 43
Thread Starter 

I finally managed to find correct screws locally and made some shims out of delrin stock. Just in case anyone is curious, the delta ended up being 8 mm when measured with calipers. As you can see, the shim is almost as thick as the plate (plate is 9 mm)! These are Fischer FS11 (non Railflex) bindings on an RX8 Pro, my original post was before I got them, based on looking at a friend's RX8 RF.

shim.jpg

post #42 of 43

Also check out "VIST" who make a variety of lifters with different stand height differentials, some flat, some with 2,4, even 5mm of negative delta to offset binding deltas!  The other beauty of VIST is using their bindings and plates allow you to quickly and toolessly change bindings from one ski to another and change mount position requiring only one set of bindings for multiple skis in your quiver!

post #43 of 43

Are there rough guidelines that can used for various body types?

 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post

We should be careful not to assume everyone needs a flat delta angle (the angle created by the binding stand height differential).  Just because flat or zero SHD works for some is not an indication all need it.  What is important to understand on the sagittal plane is there are 4 parameters to consider and coordinate in finding your personal optimum balance.  

 

A common accepted protocol by many top boot fitters is to begin by assessing ankle dorsiflexion and adjusting appropriately for limited or hyper mobility by changing the "ramp" angle, which refers to the INSIDE the boot angle created by the zeppa/bootboard and insole, and the "cuff forward lean".  Then moving up the chain we address the "delta" angle, which is the OUTSIDE the boot angle created by the binding "stand height differential" created by the toe and heel heights from the bottom of the ski.  The fourth parameter is the binding mount position which affects where we stand over the sweet spot of the ski and though this parameter is not easily experimented with,  most ski companies have good recommendations for mount positions on their race skis. 

 

To arbitrarily choose to zero out the delta angle without considering all four parameters in a methodical manner is kinda throwing darts and hoping for a bull's eye!

 

To the OP: An easier way to play with delta is to cut up small pieces of a 3mm bontex shim (pressed cardboard insoles used in most boot shops) and use these to place between your AFD and boot to temporarily lift the boot toe and decrease delta angle.  Ski it under the toes, then without, then under the heels and you will quickly discover which direction is the right way to go for your personal needs.  Then dial it in more accurately by going too far then backing off until you find your spot.  Then shim your bindings to recreate your findings or if you have the same bindings on your whole ski quiver, simply plate the boot with the desired lifter thickness and call it good! 

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 › Binding shims and screws