-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article ,
John Red-Horse wrote:
I know that this is old business, but...

In article ,
bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Aug.17.04@telemark. slac.stanford.edu wrote:

_ I'm sold, I don't see any reason to buy another pair of regular
alpine bindings again, at least for the kind of skiing at a
resort that I do ( mostly steeps, powder). If you really want
to bash moguls all day then you might want to consider a regular
alpine binding.


...I thought about this too when I was lining my daughter out with her
skiing kit; then I learned that the release technology on AT bindings
is of the early-70's full alpine class, and I reconsidered. Maybe this
point should be researched more fully...


_ I entirely argee with you and should have said so in my post.
That's the one place that AT bindings fall short. I think they
are "safe enough" for me and the generally cautious controlled
way that I ski. I rarely fall and even more rarely do my alpine
bindings release. I was just thinking of durablity in the above
post and not release safety.

_ The problem is that I don't think there is any available data
to research. Reading the release setting section of any AT
binding instructions is a sobering experience. As far as I
know there is no standardized test/setting procedure for
AT bindings as there are for standard alpine bindings.

Here's a reasonably good summary of the DIN issue from
a reliable shop

http://thebackcountry.net/backskiing...eebindings.htm

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQSz+nGTWTAjn5N/lAQEsugP/T8bNyNdjWVd6UqodHikWYL3Th6AyKIhC
OWOYo3nS276F03+XzRwCjVlfjmWL4ikcS955whtUZfI2NKEgqs +nlBNbG2/4mdY9
IZ0Jf3uAnh8OXPixBNb1mmgOABYVDk2kRYmotom4ueIjFBxoWm IFby6hw0M/nw2t
lVnofr55OU4=
=zXjU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----