U16/19 racing DIN settings

[ScotsSkier]

I'm not convinced that one end or the other of the binding setting is worse than 'in the middle'. From all the torque tests I do, the binding works, or it doesn't. Where they are in the range of settings doesn't seem to matter. There are others that think otherwise; I'm not going to argue, just add my experience to the mix.

If the binding tests at the proper release torques, it will work as designed.

good data Doug. While I have no objective data to back it up my subjective experience suggests operating at the lower end of the din setting provides better elasticity and return to center than running at the top end with the spring cranked up. I am happy running my marker 20s (11-20) at 11.5 for training/ freeski without issues. No way I would ski that way on a marker 12 at 11.5

 

[Primoz]

I'm not convinced that one end or the other of the binding setting is worse than 'in the middle'. From all the torque tests I do, the binding works, or it doesn't. Where they are in the range of settings doesn't seem to matter. There are others that think otherwise; I'm not going to argue, just add my experience to the mix.

I honestly never understood where this myth even came from. DIN is not just 3 letters word, it's standard created by German Institute for standardization, which actually means something. DIN with bindings is well defined standard and if binding is using it, it means it need to pass this standard. That also means that it needs to work accordingly to standard (read: it releases according to standard) at minimum, middle and at max values. So there's no difference in operation when set at 8 (min), 13 or 18 (max). I believe in time before bindings were set to standard, it might be true, but I'm pretty sure noone of us was even standing on skis at that time yet. But today, I could actually bet that every single binding releases (or not releases) exactly same way no matter what value you would set it.

 

[razie]

The internets has no idea how this or that racer will ski, they give you lawyer approved averages, which to be fair, are not far off for the average. Even I walk out of my calculated Type 3 DIN, but in time settled on just slightly higher for most skiing, like an 8-9 for most skis, 10 etc for others.

The settings are normally different for speed skis from Slalom skis for instance, so there's a first issue, with blanket averages.

As a coach, first you make sure the settings are appropriate roughly and send away the U16/19s in DIN 4 or 14. Anywhere in between is fair game at that age, each racer should have, remember and understand his or her own settings.

Second, you'll keep a keen eye for skis coming off during training or racing, in situations you don't think they should have come off, and recommend a binding check, sending a note that they seem to release too easy for the skier and let the parents talk the shop into setting higher (you cross out the questions and write the number ). Or maybe not release when you think they should have. These days, most coaches are not allowed to touch bindings or make specific recommendations to parents, which sounds somewhat nonsensical, but it is what it is. How is a shop going to know how they ski in a GS course?

For your self or your own kids, you can also arrive at the right number as they grow and get better, like I did, by going up half a DIN every time they come off for no obvious technical reasons, until the skis stay on, at like 12.5 or 9.

As for skis coming off, the DIN is a just part of it. Poor pressure settings are a common culprit, even if the number looks ok. Ice build up at a race should get the coach in hot water but during training it happens more often, kids being kids. Improperly canted boots, dinged lips or chewed up soles etc - all play into this, at the lower ages usually.

Old bindings are an issue, diagonal release and plastic housing are things to avoid, in my experience.

Most commonly you get lower skilled racers skidding the wrong line in a course chewed up by higher level racers or a dad who found a screw driver and a binding manual. Been to those races and done that, sent them home in a stretcher with "tell your dad to never touch your bindings again if he likes you to spend more time at home than in hospitals".

In brief, body sizes and DIN calculators are a starting point. Don't go lower than that. And if you're asking this question, the 12 makes more sense although I would be concerned with the housing quality and deltas for the lower bindings. It is common to find ski deals with stronger bindings - try to talk the shop into swapping it out for you, they might, or bypass the deal or buy bindings and keep the others for later, or your "bazaii" all mountains, which may have been sold to you with a 2-8 DIN but you want to get fast to the bottom we tend to crank the long all mountains as high as speed skis - jumping an iced up waterfall is no place for a plastic binding...

 

[hbear]

Yes! Forward pressure is often wrong and a part of bindings walking out.
Have to be checked regularly, as they sometimes get a little loose by a click or 2 (especially with the Look).

 

[Berlow94]

Something I should point out that nobody here seems to have touched on yet is that the higher din bindings aren’t always recommend solely based on din range.
Take for example the Tyrolia Freeflex Z16 and Z17 bindings.

Regardless of din adjustment range, who here can tell me why the Z16 is actually considered a better competition binding than the Z17?

 

[razie]

Something I should point out that nobody here seems to have touched on yet is that the higher din bindings aren’t always recommend solely based on din range.

Regardless of din adjustment range, who here can tell me why the Z16 is actually considered a better competition binding than the Z17?

The Z16 does not have the heel diagonal release and it's full metal? Those would be the biggest issues, in my mind... other elements to look at are would be the AFD, wrong delta/ramp that would require shimming etc.

Old bindings are an issue, diagonal release and plastic housing are things to avoid, in my experience.

[...] the 12 makes more sense although I would be concerned with the housing quality and deltas for the lower bindings.

 

[Primoz]

Regardless of din adjustment range, who here can tell me why the Z16 is actually considered a better competition binding than the Z17?

Z16 is race binding, Z17 is "recreational" binding. Main difference is not strength of spring, but construction of binding and materials used for it.

 

[JTurner]

A few years ago a Head rep explained to me that the 16 binding uses their race toe design which eliminates free play of the boot toe when clicked in. He was comparing to the 14 because we were discussing bindings for slalom skis at the time, but if the 17 is indeed similar to the 14 in design but with a stiffer spring, then the same likely holds true.

It has also been my experience with Rossi/look bindings that I have had fewer heel pre-releases with the 15 Din race binding than the 12 using the same settings of 9 or 10. Also while the 12 may seem like enough retention for lighter racers, the toe design is entirely different, so there are advantages to going up to the 15 even if it seems unnecessary setting wise.

 

[ScotsSkier]

A few years ago a Head rep explained to me that the 16 binding uses their race toe design which eliminates free play of the boot toe when clicked in. He was comparing to the 14 because we were discussing bindings for slalom skis at the time, but if the 17 is indeed similar to the 14 in design but with a stiffer spring, then the same likely holds true.

It has also been my experience with Rossi/look bindings that I have had fewer heel pre-releases with the 15 Din race binding than the 12 using the same settings of 9 or 10. Also while the 12 may seem like enough retention for lighter racers, the toe design is entirely different, so there are advantages to going up to the 15 even if it seems unnecessary setting wise.

From the 15 upwards they all have the better race toe. You also need to understand which 16 you are referring to. The normal race 16 is the RD version. You can tell it because it has the flat AFD rather than the "caterpillar track" version. More importantly it has the worm screw adjustment heel which provides more accurate forward pressure (also has a bit more adjustment range) rather than the "tab" type heel found on the 17. The RD versions come in 16, 18 and 20 versions. There are also some versions of the 16 that are non RD ie the caterpillar AFD and tab heel. Also IIRC the RD version has a flatter delta than the 17 (which is still a lower heel than the 14 and below which sits quite high)

On the Rossi, there is no comparison between the plastic toe on the 12 and the different metal toe on the 15 (same toe as the 18). Particularly if you are cranking the 12 up towards the top of its DIN range. You may recall the campaign to "bring back the Pivot 15" because the 15 has the stronger/better toe

 

[razie]

Yeah. The diagonal heel is not truly "bad" for recreational skiers but for coaches and racers poses two big issues.

As a coach, try to put your skis on quicky at the side of the course, with a bunch of gates on the shoulder. It can be a YouTube moment with the recreational heel, even at higher DIN.

As a racer, on ice, it never feels right. It wiggles and gives in even just a tiny bit but enough to feel "loose" when the going gets tough... which is why they keep making the "real" one. And the more it wiggles, the more torque is created, so surely some releases are due to it.

 

[sparty]

I'll throw my two cents and experience in:
In short, it depends on a lot of variables. I agree strongly with "start with the Type III setting" and go up as needed—and only as evidenced by releases that didn't involve significant pilot error—for tech events. For SG/DH, the risk picture is sufficiently different that I'd start higher.

From experience, the vertical elasticity of the heel matters more than the DIN setting for keeping skis on when the skier isn't properly weighting the outside ski, and IMO, most or all current race bindings today perform pretty damn well in that regard. Many years ago, I went from the original Rossi turntable (Geze toe / Look heel) as a first-year J2 to the Salomon 916 as a second-year J2. The 916s ended up with the heels at 13; the Rossis held my skis on better, even at 9, than the Salomons did cranked up. In hindsight, though, the problem was 99% pilot error (leaning in). Racing SG on 916s, I managed to walk out with the heels maxed at 16, with a 305ish bootsole and weighing 165 pounds, with a little help from suboptimal course conditions.

Relatedly, and as already brought up, forward pressure matters a whole lot. As I understand it, the mechanism for release on an unweighted outside ski is usually decambering on a rut or chatter or such, followed by a sudden return past camber (with no weight on it), effectively reducing the forward pressure as the ski rebounds, possibly to the point of the heel releasing with minimal force. Having the forward pressure correct (or, on some bindings and at your own risk, perhaps slightly higher than the manual recommends) mitigates this issue.

FWIW, I weight 20 pounds more than I did in high school and I ski at a III+ book value on GS skis; on my all-mountain and coaching skis, they're at a normal type-III value and it takes a little effort, but I can kick them off (I do have to be careful if I'm demoing starts). I have also augered a ski into a submerged obstacle while treeskiing on 916s at 10 and sustained a boottop fracture, so I'm a bit more inclined to err low on anything I'm taking off the groomers these days.

So, back to the original question: with a very few exceptions, I wouldn't recommend buying a binding that doesn't accommodate the book setting for a U16. I do find it unfortunate that most manufacturers don't make a true race binding in a 6-12ish range (i.e full-metal housings, etc, just without the elevated DIN range).

 

[oldschoolskier]

Remember bindings have 2 functions and the one we talk about most is release and that is what is tested. The other is retention, this while based on release values is the exact opposite.

Additionally different binding designs while testing the same in release perform better or worse in retention at equivalent values.

So as others mentioned, some bindings work at one setting will others set the same don’t.

For a simple example a Look PX14 toe doesn’t hold at a setting of 9 yet a PX15 toe does. Same release value, but the mechanism under dynamic skiing loads one retains the other doesn’t, I can actually turn the PX15 downs to 8 and still be held. Different mechanics.