-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Binding systems that slide on built-in rails in the ski vs screwed on bindings, advantages & disadvantages?
- Thread starter MikeHunt
- Start date
checkout the deacon 84 and 84 v-werks, it has a much cooler version of that.
Yes I can see they have a separate heel and toe that can be mounted each separtely. Pretty cool.
In 2:13 of this video:
Does that mean one can offset the placement of the binding, if they want to experiment with the binding being dead center or a little bit forward or a little bit at the back of the ski? And this can be done on the fly, that is, while on the mountain?
Last edited:
you can do it on the fly on the mountain yes, you can move forward, aft etc, you can let your buddies try the ski etc, it works quite well, even in snow that freeze on your ski conditions. most system bindings will let you do this. I can change binding position without removing my hestra mittens (not gloves) it takes about 5 sec per binding with some verifiocation if there is no snow so you can read the numbers, a few seconds more if you have to clear some ice or snow.
the cool thing with non plate system binding in 2 pieces is the lower to ski mounting for a fairly wide ski (84mm) and that it can flex free underfoot
the cool thing with non plate system binding in 2 pieces is the lower to ski mounting for a fairly wide ski (84mm) and that it can flex free underfoot
Are there any other skis doing this aside from Volkl + Marker Griffon lowrider? Just based on this tech, the Deacon (80/84/84VWerks) could be my shortlist.
But would love to hear from others if you know of any other skis and bindings with this similar tech.
I have both 84 and 84 v-werks, they are win win, . its the most favorite ski amongst friends and friends friends, and super easy to give people demos.
I dont belive anyone else has a similar system without a plate. WITH plates in place though, you have quite a few skis that has the "lift to move" system for front & heel. ususally you drill the plate in ski for thoose.
I dont belive anyone else has a similar system without a plate. WITH plates in place though, you have quite a few skis that has the "lift to move" system for front & heel. ususally you drill the plate in ski for thoose.
How wide is your foot if you don't mind me asking? My boots are 27.5 mondo 102mm wide. Although measured my feet is probably now 110mm wide at the widest point at the front due to lots of barefoot running in the last year.
Weight 176 lbs height 5'8" intermediate skier on east coast conditions. Do you think the 84 or 80 Deacon will be good for me?
Even in a magna wide boot you wont boot out on the 84 with the lowride
I'm 6'3 and 247lbs this morning. 104.8 measured in scan-fit app, so not superwide, and Im in a 100mm usually, but now also 98
I put a "skied 5 times ever" buddy on deacon 84's and he loved them and had 0 issues, they have some tip & tail rocker, so are fairly friendly for a ski beeing market advanced to expert. They are a build confidence ski, not punish you ski. he now has 50+ days on them, just this season alone! he still likes to claim a beginner, but he can now shred edgelock carves with high edge angles. Kinda funny as he is way better than most my skiiing friends :p
I'd guess 172cm would fit you the best.
not sure on ski conditions you have, but if you never have snow & just ice, 60/70mm skis might be better, but at anything up to straight ice, its pretty darn good. I've put more than 100 days on my regular deacon 84's and its the goto ski as its so versitile, it handles skied out, it handles ice and hard hard packed. It should be fairly easy to get a demo on them as they are quite common theese days, when I got mine back in august? 2019 they were more rare then
I'm 6'3 and 247lbs this morning. 104.8 measured in scan-fit app, so not superwide, and Im in a 100mm usually, but now also 98
I put a "skied 5 times ever" buddy on deacon 84's and he loved them and had 0 issues, they have some tip & tail rocker, so are fairly friendly for a ski beeing market advanced to expert. They are a build confidence ski, not punish you ski. he now has 50+ days on them, just this season alone! he still likes to claim a beginner, but he can now shred edgelock carves with high edge angles. Kinda funny as he is way better than most my skiiing friends :p
I'd guess 172cm would fit you the best.
not sure on ski conditions you have, but if you never have snow & just ice, 60/70mm skis might be better, but at anything up to straight ice, its pretty darn good. I've put more than 100 days on my regular deacon 84's and its the goto ski as its so versitile, it handles skied out, it handles ice and hard hard packed. It should be fairly easy to get a demo on them as they are quite common theese days, when I got mine back in august? 2019 they were more rare then
Last edited:
I’ve seen on several threads booting out as a question and concern, a majority of skiers will never get a 45 degree angle between base and snow, do the math, your ski thickness plus riser plate plus boot soul is roughly between 25-35mm. Lets take worst case 110 last as your width minus a race ski 65 equals 45 divide by 2 equals 22.5mm, tilted over to 45 means you have 2.5mm to spare, as mentioned earlier other than the most extreme/experienced/racers, few will ever reach this as a majority of skiers are on wider skis to start.
The reason few reach this is most will slide out as not enough downward pressure is applied to the edge so edge is force to slide well before further angulation can be achieved and considered being “boot out”.
Boots do make boot side snow contact in turns as well as in a completely upright position. this is not “boot out” but momentary simple contact with a snowy/ice object.
Finally, those that truly “boot out” are pushing the limits of edging and grip and generally if it causes them issues generally another part of their technique has failed. I will acknowledge that there are exceptions but these are rare and meet the true definition, at that moment it truly sucks.
Good and proper fitting boots are a must followed by tune, ski, binding/ski setup, and technique in varying order before I would ever worry about booting out before I blame booting our with a wide last.
Sorry, had to add this as the thought became clear, @Philpug (or moderators) please move if and where needed.
The reason few reach this is most will slide out as not enough downward pressure is applied to the edge so edge is force to slide well before further angulation can be achieved and considered being “boot out”.
Boots do make boot side snow contact in turns as well as in a completely upright position. this is not “boot out” but momentary simple contact with a snowy/ice object.
Finally, those that truly “boot out” are pushing the limits of edging and grip and generally if it causes them issues generally another part of their technique has failed. I will acknowledge that there are exceptions but these are rare and meet the true definition, at that moment it truly sucks.
Good and proper fitting boots are a must followed by tune, ski, binding/ski setup, and technique in varying order before I would ever worry about booting out before I blame booting our with a wide last.
Sorry, had to add this as the thought became clear, @Philpug (or moderators) please move if and where needed.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 1,195
Advantages- ease of adjustment, never any re-mounts, can sometimes adjust fore/aft on ski, no need to agonize over binding choice- the manufacturer already chose for you, often a good value for ski + binding.
Disadvantage- generally a more 'recreational' binding, moving parts move and wear developing 'slop', forward pressure adjustments are often 'good enough' again- less precise, no choice you get what the manufacturer chose.
Personally, I hate system skis. I also am not looking to give my skis to friends and I don't care about "re-sale value", I buy skis I like (actually, I rarely 'buy' skis...) and ski them like the tools they are, not as some 'investment'. I am very picky about bindings and want what I want, not what the manufacturer chose based on a price-point they were looking to hit.
Disadvantage- generally a more 'recreational' binding, moving parts move and wear developing 'slop', forward pressure adjustments are often 'good enough' again- less precise, no choice you get what the manufacturer chose.
Personally, I hate system skis. I also am not looking to give my skis to friends and I don't care about "re-sale value", I buy skis I like (actually, I rarely 'buy' skis...) and ski them like the tools they are, not as some 'investment'. I am very picky about bindings and want what I want, not what the manufacturer chose based on a price-point they were looking to hit.
Any thoughts on power transfer of sliding binding vs a screwed on one?
Been mentioned in the above videos that there's more force/power transfer with the sliders because it's apparenty more "direct".
Last edited:
Guess booting out is lesser concern for me than the possibility of hurting my knee.
I've posted a thread about the width of the ski having an effect on knee pain and somewhere in those videos, the presenters mentioned that 85 underfoot and above is the threshold for developing knee pain.
Has anybody selected underfoot size based on foot width instead of resort conditions?
Was just watching this video about fat ski syndrome and there's bits in it showing underfoot size is biomechanically influenced by how wide your foot is. The normal recommendation is to choose ski underfoot based on the conditions of the resort (ie narrower for east coast and wider for west...
www.skitalk.com
I've only skied less than 80 underfoot in the past (I think they may be around 70 underfoot, not sure as they are rentals) and thankfully haven't experienced knee pain.
I guess I'm a bit concerned about the possibility of hurting my knees moving to 80/84 underfoot with the Deacons. Do you think my 102 width boots and 110 wide foot would exert enough leverage to prevent knee issues in trying to curve an 84 underfoot (of the VWerks or 84 Deacon)? Should I get the 80 underfoot Deacon for safety?
Can you explain to me what it is that is important in a binding to you that makes you picky? I have always, and perhaps erroneously, felt bindings are insignificant in terms of performance other than holding your boots in place when needed...and releasing when needed. Boots, then skis, then a big gap to bindings has been my take. Explain to me why I am wrong? The only bindings I can think of that are noteworthy, and both for negative reasons are the Atomic bindings that broke or the old Marker ExplodaMat that were a colossal PITA to use.
I'm looking at new SL skis, I am choosing based on the ski and don't really care about the brand of binding that will be attached to the ski. I will ensure it is a sufficient DIN for me though.
for almost all of the FIS slalom skis on the market the binding will be dictated by the plate already mounted so your only choice will be (typically) a 15/16 Din or 18/20 Din (normally more metal and a bit heavier)
I used to be that the Head and Fischer plate let you mount any binding but IIRC the plate is now pre-drilled for tyrolia
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Posts
- 1,195
Yup- TRUST. I just want my bindings to do exactly what I expect, I value more retention over cleaner release. I like high DIN springs to keep movement to a minimum and I ski moderately high settings so that's not an issue for me. I like relatively low stack heights. There is a binding I like a lot and generally stick to it. There is another brand I have excellent experiences with and would not shy away from, but need to set them much different. There is a brand I will never choose, I'll ski them, but would look elsewhere before owning. Put it this way, I am often offered skis and bindings, I take the skis and source my own bindings. Should 'most people' feel this way? Nope. All bindings work really, really well, it's a silly thing to waste time thinking about.
As far as bindings on race skis, I will ski any brand's raceroom binding. Again, some I prefer but when you are in the 16/18/20+ DIN range they all work pretty well. I'd pick the ski I want and work with whatever binding will work with it and never think twice about it.
Not an expert, so someone more knowledgeable than I please correct any errors.
Most skiers won’t notice this or care, and any system binding will work fine for most people. Since you asked about disadvantages, one issue with a system binding might be binding delta (the difference between the height of the boot contact on the heel piece and the height of boot contact on the toe piece). I prefer a delta of 0-2mm, and some system bindings are around 5mm or more. You can’t usually change that on a system binding, particularly one where the plate is built into the ski. You can shim a non-plate binding toe piece to the height you want.
For experts buying a binding plate for its performance advantages (not going to get into that here) I believe there are plate systems that with a higher toe height to compensate for binding delta.
Most skiers won’t notice this or care, and any system binding will work fine for most people. Since you asked about disadvantages, one issue with a system binding might be binding delta (the difference between the height of the boot contact on the heel piece and the height of boot contact on the toe piece). I prefer a delta of 0-2mm, and some system bindings are around 5mm or more. You can’t usually change that on a system binding, particularly one where the plate is built into the ski. You can shim a non-plate binding toe piece to the height you want.
For experts buying a binding plate for its performance advantages (not going to get into that here) I believe there are plate systems that with a higher toe height to compensate for binding delta.
For the East Coast skiers that ski 60's or 70's mm waist, they are mostly carvers. If you are not big into carving all the time I wouldn't get this size. I would get a good all mountain size, 80mm, 84mm or something like that. All the videos I've seen on knee pain are from 90mm waist up at least. Never seen a video say an 84mm waist will cause knee pain. A lot of it depends on the person, some people's daily ski's are 100mm waist and have never had the knee pain.
Speaking of ramp angle etc., this is a good article.
Ski Boot Binding Ramp and Delta Angles! - The Backcountry Ski Touring Blog (wildsnow.com)
Ski Boot Binding Ramp and Delta Angles! - The Backcountry Ski Touring Blog (wildsnow.com)
If it binding trust, think of things this way. DIN numbers only tell part of the picture and IMHO only give a base line of release/retention values. This is why experienced skiers adjust binding generally higher than the charts as its not about release for them but retention.
While I don’t suggest such practices, I will admit I do follow this practice myself.
For yourself you need to determine your balance of risk and set accordingly.
While I don’t suggest such practices, I will admit I do follow this practice myself.
For yourself you need to determine your balance of risk and set accordingly.
I have always felt this way as well. Still do, but I now think there some things to pay attention to when picking bindings. One is the toe versus heel height difference (delta angle), second is the stand height (distance boot is raised off the ski), third is amount of elastic travel (not binding adjustment travel), and forth is plate/no plate and is the plate hard mounted in two or more places so it stiffens the ski under it. (some have one set of holes and the rest slots so ski flex is not affected). Obviously plate bindings are in the race category and you also have the Demo category.
If a binding holds me to the ski properly, I have not been able to tell much of a difference between them, except for the points I list above. @SkiOtter posts bindings make a big difference to him in ski performance. I wonder if he is noticing the points I list above, or there is some other things that he is sensitive to? I have not noticed elastic travel differences, but the other 3 things are noticeable to me, especially delta angle of the binding on shorter length skis (like slalom skis) and on highly rockered skis.