Binding systems that slide on built-in rails in the ski vs screwed on bindings, advantages & disadvantages?

[François Pugh]

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

A little thread drift is fine.
Except that's not the worst case. I know I have suffered from boot out since quite a few years ago. It's the natural progression of being mostly stuck on un-challenging hills with nothing better to do than see how much tighter and faster you can turn. When I'm not skiing on ice it's not much of a problem, my boots just leave tracks in the snow alongside the tracks left by the edges. When I'm skiing on ice, it's not much of a problem; I've learned not to turn too hard on ice. The problem is when I'm skiing on fairly soft snow, but other skiers have scraped spots here and there down to ice, and I'm in snow-without-ice skiing mode.

Inspired at last by your post to be less lazy and put some numbers to it (Engineers like numbers) I put one of my new boots in my bindings on my Fischers and did some measurements of height of the wide point of the boot off the floor and horizontal distance from the edge that would be on the ice. I did not have a set square, just a tape measure and another straight edge, which I did my best to keep vertical to measure offsets. I get 41 degrees on one side and 42 degrees on the other, and that's on a 68 mm wide ski. Sucks to be me , but at least I know how to get bigger edge angles.

 

[Philpug]

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?

How do you feel about the tires on your car? In MY opinion, they are what holds you to the road and not only a safety aspect (release/retention) but also in performance in that they are are the interface and coupling of the boot to the ski. There is a reason there are $99 binding and $399 bindings and it is not just a bigger spring but a better housing which creates that stronger coupling which creates that better interface which returns more performance.

 

[oldschoolskier]

A little thread drift is fine.
Except that's not the worst case. I know I have suffered from boot out since quite a few years ago. It's the natural progression of being mostly stuck on un-challenging hills with nothing better to do than see how much tighter and faster you can turn. When I'm not skiing on ice it's not much of a problem, my boots just leave tracks in the snow alongside the tracks left by the edges. When I'm skiing on ice, it's not much of a problem; I've learned not to turn too hard on ice. The problem is when I'm skiing on fairly soft snow, but other skiers have scraped spots here and there down to ice, and I'm in snow-without-ice skiing mode.

Inspired at last by your post to be less lazy and put some numbers to it (Engineers like numbers) I put one of my new boots in my bindings on my Fischers and did some measurements of height of the wide point of the boot off the floor and horizontal distance from the edge that would be on the ice. I did not have a set square, just a tape measure and another straight edge, which I did my best to keep vertical to measure offsets. I get 41 degrees on one side and 42 degrees on the other, and that's on a 68 mm wide ski. Sucks to be me , but at least I know how to get bigger edge angles.

Note did say there are exceptions.....

Just a personal question ever consider swimming as a sport, with flippers I mean feet like that you could well.

 

[Bill Talbot]

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.

THAT is not an old school Rotamat.. It releases the opposite way that it latches according to the DIN standard setting.

I personally feel the the bindings chosen are every bit as important as the skis and boots. They all contribute equally but in different ways.

 

[François Pugh]

A little thread drift is fine.
Except that's not the worst case. I know I have suffered from boot out since quite a few years ago. It's the natural progression of being mostly stuck on un-challenging hills with nothing better to do than see how much tighter and faster you can turn. When I'm not skiing on ice it's not much of a problem, my boots just leave tracks in the snow alongside the tracks left by the edges. When I'm skiing on ice, it's not much of a problem; I've learned not to turn too hard on ice. The problem is when I'm skiing on fairly soft snow, but other skiers have scraped spots here and there down to ice, and I'm in snow-without-ice skiing mode.

Inspired at last by your post to be less lazy and put some numbers to it (Engineers like numbers) I put one of my new boots in my bindings on my Fischers and did some measurements of height of the wide point of the boot off the floor and horizontal distance from the edge that would be on the ice. I did not have a set square, just a tape measure and another straight edge, which I did my best to keep vertical to measure offsets. I get 41 degrees on one side and 42 degrees on the other, and that's on a 68 mm wide ski. Sucks to be me , but at least I know how to get bigger edge angles.

These numbers didn't feel right, so I drew it on a spreadsheet. I was taking the measurement from the wrong edge. Booting out at 73 degrees. That matches my impression, and my tracks (~4 m turns with 13 m skis), more closely.

 

[bbbradley]

How do you feel about the tires on your car? In MY opinion, they are what holds you to the road and not only a safety aspect (release/retention) but also in performance in that they are are the interface and coupling of the boot to the ski. There is a reason there are $99 binding and $399 bindings and it is not just a bigger spring but a better housing which creates that stronger coupling which creates that better interface which returns more performance.

I feel tires aren't quite the right analogy, more like wheels where the weight difference is one of the major factors that impact how differently a car may feel. Tires can 100% transform a car (econo tires vs snow tires vs r-compound stickies), and differences within a comparative set will yield smaller, if any, differences. Bindings will not 100% transform how a ski feels, especially within the same performance bracket.

 

[François Pugh]

More like ball joints, control rods arms steering racks.

 

[Eleeski]

How do you feel about the tires on your car? In MY opinion, they are what holds you to the road and not only a safety aspect (release/retention) but also in performance in that they are are the interface and coupling of the boot to the ski. There is a reason there are $99 binding and $399 bindings and it is not just a bigger spring but a better housing which creates that stronger coupling which creates that better interface which returns more performance.

Edges, Ptex and wax (did I say that? OK, klister wax for me) are equivalent to tires. Bindings aren't really relevant to performance. The velcro bindings were an April fools joke but the video was made with velcro attachment and the guy was able to ski well (and it is a proven waterski boot attachment). Telemark setups work rather well if you don't force your heel up in that silly style - I did like those Coombas I demoed in the bumps once I gave up on telemarking and just skied flat footed. My mom raced on cables holding her boots down.

Boot placement is far more important than binding design for skiing performance. So a rail or demo system will allow you to get the boot placement that is best for you. Huge advantage.

As a weight freak, rails are heavier theoretically. But in real life, rail systems aren't always heavier. My Head Lite Thing rail bindings are one of the lightest alpine bindings I've seen. I love them.

As far as safety goes, modern bindings are very well designed. Lots of elasticity and retention by design. Which is why I can get away with DIN 7 and not have had a pre release in a decade. I'm sure there are differences but they are ALL good nowadays.

I hated the built in rail binding setup on the Burnin Luvs. It was heavy, not adjustable fore and aft and not replaceable as things got old. So not every rail system is good. Choose wisely.

Eric

 

[Philpug]

As far as safety goes, modern bindings are very well designed. Lots of elasticity and retention by design. Which is why I can get away with DIN 7 and not have had a pre release in a decade. I'm sure there are differences but they are ALL good nowadays.

Eric

Lets put put you on a Tyrolia SX7.5 or Marker 7.5 Free and see how many times you come out in a day from skiing ice or powder.

 

[bbbradley]

As far as safety goes, modern bindings are very well designed. Lots of elasticity and retention by design. Which is why I can get away with DIN 7 and not have had a pre release in a decade. I'm sure there are differences but they are ALL good nowadays.
Eric

Weight and skiing style are big factors here, I assure you, for me, a DIN 7 would be an accident waiting to happen. I've pre-released from a pair of Markers set to 18. However, put me in a DIN 7, say "don't pop out" and I'll ski cautiously... until I get so damn bored I find a screwdriver or get a different pair of skis.

 

[Philpug]

I've pre-released from a pair of Markers set to 18.

and you say bindings don't matter?

 

[bbbradley]

and you say bindings don't matter?

Not sure what would have held me in short of removing the spring in the binding and replacing it with a length of copper tubing.

 

[Mike Thomas]

I've pre-released from a pair of Markers set to 18.

Not sure what would have held me in short of removing the spring in the binding and replacing it with a length of copper tubing.

That doesn't sound like a pre-release, it sounds like a release.

 

[bbbradley]

That doesn't sound like a pre-release, it sounds like a release.

IDK what to call it, I did not want nor need my ski to come off at the time.

 

[Eleeski]

Lets put put you on a Tyrolia SX7.5 or Marker 7.5 Free and see how many times you come out in a day from skiing ice or powder.

Are those bindings deficient in design or function? I know you are pretty emphatic about indemnified bindings - which are tested through the advertised range. If they are kid's bindings, then they would be quite inappropriate, otherwise they should perform well for me.

The chart recommends a DIN of 7 for me. Lowering the DIN below a recommended range (or setting it higher) will not enhance safety. A DIN of 7 kept me in for all season with zero pre releases. I did release once this year when I hit a tree stump hidden by some powder - a needed release. My light plastic bindings are serving me well.

Boots are attached to the skis. The bulk of the forces are straight down on the ski. Large torques that could dislodge the skis are not part of normal skiing. Ice, powder and bumps are normal situations. Avoid both pre releases and injuries by skiing in control within your limits with modern bindings. Locking your boots to the skis with excessive DIN settings does not make sense to normal skiers.

Pro racers, extreme athletes and other exceptions could call for different binding arrangements and different risk factors. I'm not there - despite being "the best skier on the mountain!" (GNAR).

Eric

 

[Philpug]

Are those bindings deficient in design or function? I know you are pretty emphatic about indemnified bindings - which are tested through the advertised range. If they are kid's bindings, then they would be quite inappropriate, otherwise they should perform well for me.

The chart recommends a DIN of 7 for me. Lowering the DIN below a recommended range (or setting it higher) will not enhance safety. A DIN of 7 kept me in for all season with zero pre releases. I did release once this year when I hit a tree stump hidden by some powder - a needed release. My light plastic bindings are serving me well.


Eric

I am using 7.5 AC (Adult/Child) bindings as an example, yes, technically as a 7 you could ski them but I doubt they would stay on for a run in anything but the most manicured conditions. I still coem back to there are better and more expensive bindings for a reason...and it is not just for a bigger spring, it is a better built binding.

 

[Eleeski]

An interesting experiment. I'm game to try. What skis? (you do have fun skis!)

Eric

 

[onenerdykid]

I am using 7.5 AC (Adult/Child) bindings as an example, yes, technically as a 7 you could ski them but I doubt they would stay on for a run in anything but the most manicured conditions. I still coem back to there are better and more expensive bindings for a reason...and it is not just for a bigger spring, it is a better built binding.

Quoting for truth. If someone were able to ski a 7-DIN kid's binding set to 7 on one ski, and an STH2 set to 7 on the other ski, that person would feel a massive difference in skiing performance.

Bindings are the part of the gear equation that very few people actually test. Some of you test/demo skis, a few might test/demo ski boots, and I would best that almost no one tests bindings. In order to do it correctly, you need to be using the same boot with different bindings mounted on the exact same skis and compare them left to right, real time while skiing on the same piste. Almost no one outside of a binding brand actually does this.

The reality is that most bindings are totally sufficient for most people and you simply get used to how your binding skis. But, if you are semi-perceptible and can generally feel the difference between ski constructions, you would be able to feel the difference between binding constructions & geometries if given a fair testing environment.

 

[bbbradley]

Quoting for truth. If someone were able to ski a 7-DIN kid's binding set to 7 on one ski, and an STH2 set to 7 on the other ski, that person would feel a massive difference in skiing performance.

How and what would feel different?

 

[Philpug]

Quoting for truth. If someone were able to ski a 7-DIN kid's binding set to 7 on one ski, and an STH2 set to 7 on the other ski, that person would feel a massive difference in skiing performance.

Bindings are the part of the gear equation that very few people actually test. Some of you test/demo skis, a few might test/demo ski boots, and I would best that almost no one tests bindings. In order to do it correctly, you need to be using the same boot with different bindings mounted on the exact same skis and compare them left to right, real time while skiing on the same piste. Almost no one outside of a binding brand actually does this.

The reality is that most bindings are totally sufficient for most people and you simply get used to how your binding skis. But, if you are semi-perceptible and can generally feel the difference between ski constructions, you would be able to feel the difference between binding constructions & geometries if given a fair testing environment.

Don't get me started on stack height and delta. We are switching over to the long track heel 13 bindings for our test skis verses the Warden demos because they are lower, lighter and have a more solid coupling.