Printable View
Not being able to ski has given me a lot of time to think...probably not a good thing.
So this question is: If you're involved in a backwards twisting fall, does your DIN setting matter? From what I know, it seems that no matter what, bindings just won't release in this instance(except maybe Lines). So whether you had your DIN at 3 or 13, aren't you just as likely to not release and to tweak your knee?
line and tyrolia both have upward pressure releases for this reason. i'd assume that if you twisted enough on a low toe setting you'd be more likely to come out than on a high one.
i know you can turn the upward releases on/off on the tyrolia. don't know about line.
edit: clarification-- when twisting on a toe piece in a regular alpine binding you should be more apt to come out when on a lower din. in the fall you described, it would depend on where the pressure was on the binding. if you're lucky, the twisting will get it before the upward does.
most bindings have toe peices that allow you to release in this type of fall, this didnt used to be the case but now it is. and some allow you to turn this type of release on or off. however in this case DIN does matter.
Most bindings have upward releasing toe pieces? I myself am somewhat of a tech JONG, but that seems fishy to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
Fischer/Tyrolia race bindings don't have upward toe release, but do have a pivoting heal piece (in theory, similar to a Look/Rossi turntable) that is supposed to help release in odd falls, like forward and backward twisting ones.
hey darkside it only seems fishy to you b/c you dont know what your talking about! im a former tech and racer, sponsored by atomic, so im not an idiot when it comes to these subjects. companies have developed bindings (not all their models) that release in these types of falls b/c they didnt used to have the tech. and people were getting injured.
You are a fucking idiot. That is it. Get the fuck out of here, and stay out. Actually, PM me with you address, and I'll come kick your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
ya ok. way to come back on that one. you cant even justify why im an idiot because your too fuckin stupid. and keep telling yourself that you can kick my ass.
i forgot that he said high din. the tyrolia demos and some of the lower din binders they make do have the upward release.Quote:
Originally Posted by BakerBoy
i don't want to have an acl injury, but it would seem that some of the counter measures binding companies use (upward release) would be counter productive for hard chargers that huck. you can't stick em all. sometimes you end up back slapping and want to stay in the binding.
"Oh, look at me, I'm sponsored by a company that makes shitty bindings!" You're an idiot mostly because when I asked a question(s), you for some reason decided to start talking shit. Also, I looked at all of the major binding manufacturers websites and only Tyrolia and Marker claim that their bindings release upwards, even though BakerBoy (who's opinion I can respect) says they don't. In actuality, it looks like those toepieces rely on mostly side pressure (the Marker page says that the boot has to move laterally before it will release upwards, and even then it's not certain).Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
Obviously you're afraid that I would kick your ass, otherwise I'd have your address and be at your fucking door right now. :knock knock:
actually they dont make shitty bindings and they probably have the most sophisticated binding manufactured this year. do you get all your info online? maybe thats why your so fuckin stupid when it comes to skiing. not every component of a manufactured product is listed on a co. site because most people, including yourself, wont understand what theyre talking about.
If you can explain how Atomic bindings toepieces release upwards, I'm sure I'll understand it.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
Beyond the pissing contest, while some are still squatting to get the job done....
Salomon uses their spheric toe piece to weight the actual AFD in a backward twisting fall. This in turn is designed to release the toe wings in correlation to the side where the downward pressure is applied. From what I understand, it is correspondant to the DIN.
Marker uses their Biometric release, to release upwards but I'm not sure if it is corresponding to the DIN setting.
As mentioned lots of the greens etc., don't have the same toes or the same releases as the normal production models.
BTW, integration of circutry does not make a superior binding.
One of these years it would be nice if Atomic addressed the weight problem.
well maybe you should check atomics site again b/c it does say their bindings release backwards.. dumbass
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaddyDaddy77
Thank you for an actual response. It sounds to me like the term "upwards release" is not quite accurate, as it is in actuality a lateral release initiated by upwards pressure?
Oh, and I'm hoping that hucksquaw can convince me to buy some $1000 bindings.
But didn't you say a "backward TWISTING fall?" Won't the twisting cause a torque in the toe piece which should cause a release? I know fuck-all about bindings, but this seems logical to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkside
not on din 18. high dins 12+ take either a lot weight or a lot of torque.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
who said you had to buy them, i just said they had superior technology. and word for word on the atomic site says the binding has "backward release" thats what the technological component is called.
Well, I think the operative word is should. It seems like if that was the case, there wouldn't be any injuries related to these type of falls, and it wouldn't be such an issue that companies are developing new technologies (i.e. Line) to try and solve it. Not saying you're not right, just thinking outloud.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
Without getting too technical the Salomon weights the AFD and releases laterally.
I think the Marker does rthe same general thing but with the weight being displaced over the top of the toe of the boot, the center piece that is unique to Marker toes.
Either way, yes the idea is to let the binding release laterally, when there is not enough torque to normally release the boot form the system when there is a backward twisting fall. The reason being the force is generally applied in a pivot manner across the horizontal access, instead of straight across the same access. Or, that the force is going down more than out because your in the backseat trying to correct it, and your knee either makes a nasty pop or doesn't.
Oh, and wait until you have to replace the nifty little battery in your $1,000 binding, it has to be soldered in, wonder what that will cost.
just figured out what all this animosity is about. here is where the chip on the shoulder came from.
if youve got the money to buy $1,000 bindings you should have the $$ to replace the battery
The pearls of wisdom keep coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
This is the main premise behind Fischer/Tyrolia race bindings as well. I haven't looked at any of the non-race ones lately, since I only ski on the Fischer FR17s... The AFD is not teflon, but rather a piece of treaded rubber on a series of rollers that mechanically pushes the toe laterally out of the toepiece in a twisting fall. This, coupled with the laterally releasing heel piece, is supposed to offer more protection, since the static teflon AFD of the Salomon's can get unweighted during a backward twisting fall and not function properly. They definitely do not have "true" upward release, which is something that the Salomons (and the Look/Rossi race bindings with the pedastal toes) are closer to with their pedastal toe design, but the as somebody mentioned, the last thing I want while charging is a low elasticity binding that will release upward from the toe === MARKER.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaddyDaddy77
...I ski for Fischer...
fo sho. markers do have a tendency of pre-releasing.
Marker's release to the best of their designed ability, and do so at exactly the same load every time, the instant that point is met. Thus, the inherent design flaw for people who don't ski on groomers. But Brad Holmes loves them.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
Most of the pre-release issues with Markers are related to the backward-fall release mechanism. See
http://www.markerusa.com/site.jsp?sk...indings_safety
and look at the "Biometric programmed release". The amount of load required to release backwards is 20-50% of the lateral loading. Thus, an inadvertant bump or loss of balance can easily trigger the mechanism and release the skier. Also, once release conditions are met, the cam in the toe makes it unlikely for the boot not to release.
Marker team bindings replace the Biometric mechanism with a solid plate. This improves the retension greatly.
As said before, Markers are biased towards release over retention (less lateral elasticity).
Neither the Look/Rossi toe or the Salomon (Spheric) toe release upward at a different loading than laterally, although the Spheric system is designed to "push" or start the toe releasing in certain conditions. Both designs have improved lateral elasticity over the Marker toe. Salomon Spheric has "dual inclined pivots" which imply that the binding release path is "up and out" rather than "out" in all cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
This explains a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
Well, I took a backwards twister in AK last year on a set of 916s whose DIN was too high for me (on that particular day) and whose toe wings were not well calibrated. I came out, but not after giving my knee a good twist. Result: torn meniscus.
At any rate, in the Solly case, the toe wings release is tied to the DIN, as CD says. I would assume that is the case with the other front release mechanisms on other bindings. That's why the toe piece HAS a DIN setting.
Release mechanisms aside, I've read/heard that you can tear an ACL even if your bindings are set on zero and you're wearing a fancy custom knee brace. It takes very little movement and force - it's more a matter of falling into the wrong position and then trying to stand back up, which is not really putting much force on the binding, just on your knee. If they made a brace tight enough to totally prevent it you couldn't move, and if they made bindings release easily enough you'd never stay in them at all. Bottom line is that you can't depend on any binding to protect your knees from all injuries. The way I understand it, keeping DIN settings in the normal human being range is more to protect your bones than your ligaments.
Feel free to tell me I'm an idiot though... :biggrin:
the knee joint is a horribly fragile joint and the ligaments in it are horribly fragile as well.
Yeah Ive never seen an atomic binding pre-release. :rolleyes2 Hopefully that new super gizzmo computer binding solved this. But even if it did is it worth paying $1000 so your binding can tell you that you have snow under your boot as opposed to paying >$200 for a proven solly or look binding?Quote:
Originally Posted by hucksquaw
hucksquaw,
YOU'RE FIRED.
Picture this, you’re ripping down a 40-degree chute and graze a submerged ice chunk. Thrown slightly off balance and into the back seat you fight to get your hands forward and up over your skis again. Suddenly you realize that you are hurtling ever faster down the chute and take notice of the trees coming at you. Instinct takes over and you initiate a turn to avoid the trees but being that you are tail gunning one of your skis twists uncontrollably away from you. Pop! There goes the weasel. Season over. And remember this all happens in less than a second.Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
The Salomon "Spheric" toe isn't designed to do anything in backward twisting falls: it's designed to make the boot release better in forward twisting falls. Think about it: the plate is under the boot...if you're leaning backwards, the boot is pulling up on the toe and no contact is being made there.
Pushing down on the Spheric plate makes the binding release more easily to the side. Additionally, when the toepiece releases, it twists slightly up in addition to rotating. This gives the boot some vertical clearance so it can pop out even if it's being twisted, unlike a purely rotational release where twisting along the axis of the ski will bind the boot and keep it from coming out.
There are several problems with this mechanism:
1) Setting a hard edge twists the boot in the binding, putting pressure on the Spheric plate and causing the toe to release at lower DIN than otherwise. In my opinion, when you set a hard edge is exactly when you don't want a binding to release.
2) Landing hard off a jump, especially to flat, puts a lot of downward pressure on the Spheric plate. Again, this causes the toe to release more easily precisely when you don't want it to.
3) In order to sense pressure, the Spheric plate has measurable travel. When setting a hard edge, the Spheric plate is pushed through some part of its travel -- and even if you don't release there will then be slop in the toepiece. This is particularly noticeable with very wide skis, where the twisting force on the binding is high. The ski will not set an edge well, and will frequently chatter due to the slop.
You can test this yourself: even squeezing the Spheric plate with your fingers will push it in a mm or two. The newer Spheric Oversize (silver/black/white AFD) is much worse than the old generation (yellow/black AFD).
4) This isn't a Spheric problem, but issue 3) is exacerbated by the flexy plastic construction, and by the fact that the toepiece is only actually attached to the rest of the ski by a small pole in the center. Grab the toe wing with your hand and squeeze it toward the ski: you'll notice that you can move it quite a bit.
The summary of all these problems is that recent Salomon bindings have very low torsional rigidity, causing chatter and loss of edge control with fat skis on hard snow -- and they will tend to release precisely when you don't want them to.
I have seen all my prerelease issues go away after switching to Look/Rossi: I've skied the last two years on Pivot bindings set to DIN 6.5 and never released prematurely, versus having prerelease problems on S912 bindings at 8. I'll be experimenting with Tyrolia this year -- the other alpine binding manufacturer whose design isn't intrinsically flawed.
May I suggest www.epicski.com? They don't ever fall over there either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
Spats: Are you talking about Solly consumer bindings? I'm pretty sure my 916s don't have the spheric toe, the the wings are metal. They don't really flex at all.
That's basically true, although the DIN on zero thing might be a very slight exaggeration. I've blown through two ACL's now, and no binding could've saved either one of them (bindings never released in either crash, but they should not have released, and it wouldn't have helped if they had).Quote:
Originally Posted by altagirl
And of course no brace can protect your ACL, as the few mm of movement the ACL restricts are too fine a movement for any brace that isn't drilled into your bone to guard against. I am curious about some of the newer studies that seem to show lower reinjury rates among brace wearers, though--my guess is either the studies are somehow exaggerating the effect through a form of self-selection, or people wearing the braces are behaving differently (smarter?) than those without.
But we'll continue to feel free to call you an idiot;)
Hucksquaw making a big push for JOTY status.
THIS JUST IN.......
People who don't even ski get ACL injuries :rolleyes:
Hucksquaw's trolling hard and gettin' lots of bites too
If it helps any, my Atomic race 412's from 00-01 had a little switch on the top of the toe piece that read something like "backward release" and you could turn it on or off using a screwdriver...
So one time I set the DIN all the way down, clicked a boot in, and tried to get it to release straight up and back, but it didnt work. :confused: