A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Backcountry Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

mounting point of telebindings



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 24th 03, 03:03 PM
Ulrich Hausmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default mounting point of telebindings

befo

i read many of the articles in telemarktips ecc. about the "correct"
mounting point of telebinding, but i couldn't clear out my mind
definitively. So ...

This winter i'll get a Stormrider XL (a relatively strong ski, but
chosen in the factory among a softer serie) where i'll mount to a
Telebulldog. And since, i don't want to make superfluous holes, i'd like
to get some advise. Unfortunately, i don't know (remember) where the
pinline of my old skis is situated.

Many of the swiss telemark guys tell me, to go (with the pinline) 3 cm
forward of the balance point (some racers, they say, even go forward up
to 7 cm).

This weekend, on a big Telemark Festival on the Stubai glacier in
Austria, i had the opportunity to test some skis, among them a Masurao
(www. masurao.ch), one with the binding mounted 5cm forward, one with 0
cm forward (regard to the balance point). The ski is a midfat, 185 cm,
while i'm 172 (actually i' skiing around 18o cm, so length wasn't a
problem).

Those, with the bindings forward 5 cm appeared to me not conducting and
relatively unstable. While those with the bindings in the balance point
gave control to me. Now, that might be due to a technical defect of my
skiing (sincerely, i do not think so, but obviously, i cannot be sure,
since i'm relatively new to teleskiing, but coming from a semi-prof
fixed hill background) or a speciality of that ski. But i know, even on
alpine skis (for races) i didn't like, as we say in German, "wenig
Schaufel" = "short tip" - if this makes sense in English (?).

Thanks in advance for your patience and for any help,

Ulrich

--
reply to: uhausmannATbluemailDOTch

Ads
  #2  
Old November 24th 03, 04:43 PM
Tommy T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My understanding and my experience is that mounting the telemark binding
forward of the manufacturer's recommendation is old advice and is not
applicable to modern skis with a lot of side cut. It also is not applicable
to telebindings that are "active" and naturally tend to increase forward
loading, even when mounted at the balance point.

I have no experience with either the StormRider XL or the Bulldog binding.
But, the Stokli ski is not designed as a telemark ski and the Bulldog is
just an evolution of a three pin binding and has no "active" characteristic.
It seems to me that these are a mismatch. That specific combination may
not be addressed by either the "old" rules or the "new."

Tommy T.


  #3  
Old November 24th 03, 05:15 PM
Ulrich Hausmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tommy T. wrote:

first of all, thanks for your advice!

My understanding and my experience is that mounting the telemark binding
forward of the manufacturer's recommendation is old advice and is not
applicable to modern skis with a lot of side cut.


problem is, for most skis, at least here in Europe, there is no advice
for telemounting, since most skis are "normal" alpine skis. But, exactly
because of the side cut, they are saying, it's better to mount more
forward, because you'd get more grip on the forward part of the ski
(which, in my experience, is the more defective part of the turn
compared to fixed heel skiing, i.e. the entrance in turn).

It also is not applicable
to telebindings that are "active" and naturally tend to increase forward
loading, even when mounted at the balance point.


You mean, cable bindings with "strong" springs shouldn't be mounted too
much forward, right?

I have no experience with either the StormRider XL or the Bulldog binding.
But, the Stokli ski is not designed as a telemark ski and the Bulldog is
just an evolution of a three pin binding and has no "active" characteristic.
It seems to me that these are a mismatch. That specific combination may
not be addressed by either the "old" rules or the "new."


Hmm?? You'd disadvise from using that combination? At the end of the
last season, i tried that Stormrider model with a Riva (they say it very
neutral(?)) and it worked fine. And the telebulldog - but on another ski
- i found it very comfortable and skiable, so ...

Question: given, i'd use that combination, going a bit forward might be
an idea?

Thanks again,

Ulrich




--
reply to: uhausmannATbluemailDOTch

  #4  
Old November 24th 03, 05:16 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

In article ,
Ulrich Hausmann wrote:
befo

i read many of the articles in telemarktips ecc. about the "correct"
mounting point of telebinding, but i couldn't clear out my mind
definitively. So ...

This winter i'll get a Stormrider XL (a relatively strong ski, but
chosen in the factory among a softer serie) where i'll mount to a
Telebulldog. And since, i don't want to make superfluous holes, i'd like
to get some advise. Unfortunately, i don't know (remember) where the
pinline of my old skis is situated.

Many of the swiss telemark guys tell me, to go (with the pinline) 3 cm
forward of the balance point (some racers, they say, even go forward up
to 7 cm).


_ For tele skiing on alpine skis, I think you want to pay a lot
more attention to chord center rather than balance point. The
telemarktips article talks about chord center. If the skis have
a midpoint mark, then you have a tricky compromise to make. The
problem is that in a telemark turn you have two different force
positions. One one ball of your foot on the back ski and one
further back with the flat foot on the forward ski. No matter
which position you pick it will be slightly wrong for one
foot or the other.

_ If you're just starting with the tele turn it's a bit better
to choose a compromise that allows you to most easily bend the
back ski. That's the key for most people to mastering the turn,
getting a strong back foot. If you look at where "pins on chord
center" puts the ball of the foot for the "average" size foot,
you'll see it's roughly ball of the foot near the midline mark.
As you get better you'll want to move the bindings forward to
getter better pressure on the front ski. Most rules of thumb
are "close enough" for the typical ski, often balance point
and chord center are the same spot and you need to be pretty
skilled to tell the difference between 1 or 2 cm forward.

_ So, I hope that gives you some of the theory. Personally,
on a big stiff skis like the StormRider I'd put them 1cm
forward, since I have relatively short feet ( 25 ).

_ But this is one place IMHO, where the Telebomber[1] binding
rules. It has the slickest mounting system out there, you can
adjust the binding 1cm either way from the mounting point without
drilling holes. If you decide you really need to change the
mountpoint more drastically, you can easily fill and drill the 4
widely spaced mounting holes. For resort/close-in tele-ing on big
burly alpine skis, I don't think there's a better binding
available. It's a bit on the heavy side, but climbs much more
like an AT binding than most tele bindings. It might not be the
best choice for some one learning the tele turn though as it's
not very active and it'd be easy to end up doing fake-a-marks
with all that edge control.

_ The Tele bulldog looks very interesting. Have fun and good
luck...

_ Booker C. Bense

P.S. I would not pay too much attention to what the tele racers
are doing unless you plan to race. Skiing gates on hardpack
doesn't really apply to most telemark skiing.

[1]- www.telebomber.com



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

iQCVAwUBP8I86mTWTAjn5N/lAQG7UgP9E+cLWXEPuW1Bdm3pVV2lUftoK4YaG0kk
pgoh66UHFleRr0wY6G4/e48i0Dei6tVbbiDOKRvHIXX3VJxSZ2mFGPrBPOjM1AQH
9vSly5b0GZhuCGhl1+gtPHXS9glAaccdye3lclXvox7MxjSi8k eWTwPC5el9CPD5
owYJJ533aU0=
=XnRh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #5  
Old November 24th 03, 05:46 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

In article ,
Ulrich Hausmann wrote:
Tommy T. wrote:

first of all, thanks for your advice!

[ Stuff about old and new advice deleted ]

It also is not applicable
to telebindings that are "active" and naturally tend to increase forward
loading, even when mounted at the balance point.


You mean, cable bindings with "strong" springs shouldn't be mounted too
much forward, right?

I have no experience with either the StormRider XL or the Bulldog binding.
But, the Stokli ski is not designed as a telemark ski and the Bulldog is
just an evolution of a three pin binding and has no "active" characteristic.
It seems to me that these are a mismatch. That specific combination may
not be addressed by either the "old" rules or the "new."


Hmm?? You'd disadvise from using that combination? At the end of the
last season, i tried that Stormrider model with a Riva (they say it very
neutral(?)) and it worked fine. And the telebulldog - but on another ski
- i found it very comfortable and skiable, so ...

Question: given, i'd use that combination, going a bit forward might be
an idea?


_ I think there's a bit of confusion about what makes a binding
"active". Active just means that flexing the boot gets "harder"
as you increase the flex. It's kind of crutch for bad technique,
you have to keep your weight on the back foot since you need the
force to flex the boot. While "standard" 3 pins aren't very
active by today's standards, theres nothing that says you
couldn't get an active binding with just 3 pins. Three pins
have gone by the wayside among the beefy crowd more because
of their poor edge control, rather than any lack of "activism".

_ Due to the history of telemark bindings many people confuse
active with edge control. Something that old bindings where both
relatively bad at. IMHO, for big beefy alpine skis the key is
edge control, not just "active" they are. Most of the current
crop of heavy duty tele binding use a spring and cable to improve
both "activeness" and edge control[1]. But I think a binding like
the Tele Bulldog could work very well on beefy alpine skis, if it
has enough edge control. Personally, I would not mount it any
differently than a more "standard" cable binding. You might want
to look at this season's Coulior binding issue, the Tele bulldog
graph looks a lot like the G3 Targa ( at least for the first 45
degrees or so, beyond that is not that meaningful IMHO. )

_ Booker C. Bense


[1]- The two exceptions are the Hammerhead and Bomber, both
of which allow you to decide exactly how active you want the
binding without affecting the edge control. IMHO this is
something to look for if you spend much time skiing powder.




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

iQCVAwUBP8JD7WTWTAjn5N/lAQHRoQP/V+1L/La4B2nuHCeHu/ig7YqV/0TLaX2l
VORgby8KJtSo2iVa+C1quARxJ3b4ch+fDMFyuG6rXmrPOfmwTE sdGkq262UmsIFp
ngvHsd4iOUJt5puVv5ND0Lx+caWZc0qRYk/kD4h8/4fZFEAnKZraOk28SdlSed5A
1B46hQ7/MrE=
=o8Dc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #6  
Old November 24th 03, 06:13 PM
Tommy T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Booker,

Your technical analysis is always good. Follow up a little on your comment
about the "Telebomber" binding. (By the way, are you refering to the Bishop
Bomber? Your web link goes to telebomber.com and I can't get it to work.
Bishop's link is bombertele.com. The Bishop Bomber can be made quite
active for big aggressive skis by using the heavy spring option.)

But to the point, you seem to imply that a neutral binding would be
preferred by an experienced telemarker while a beginner would do better with
something more active. My own progression was the opposite. As I got
better and demanded more performance, I went to more active bindings. Did I
perhaps substitute binding performance for personal ability? Whatever, it
worked because I'm telemarking much more aggessively with Hammerheads in
setting 5 than I did with (recalled) O2s and I was hotter on the O2s than on
the Rotterfella cables that preceeded them.

Tommy T.

For resort/close-in tele-ing on big
burly alpine skis, I don't think there's a better binding
available. It's a bit on the heavy side, but climbs much more
like an AT binding than most tele bindings. It might not be the
best choice for some one learning the tele turn though as it's
not very active and it'd be easy to end up doing fake-a-marks
with all that edge control.



  #7  
Old November 24th 03, 06:25 PM
Ulrich Hausmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

lac.stanford.edu wrote:

_ For tele skiing on alpine skis, I think you want to pay a lot
more attention to chord center rather than balance point
[...]


Booker,

first of all thanks for this and also the other posting. I hope i get
all right (my English ;-( ) and will get back to you, when i've done
some measurements on the skis.

What i can tell you btw is, in Andermatt, Switzerland (where i'm skiing
mostly), last year from a friend, i tried a Stoeckli Slalom (racing ski,
112 mm 63 mm 99 mm, 166cm) with a 5.5 cm platform (alluminium made by
some swiss) and Rottefella 3-pin. It was great on pist even on hard snow
and in bumps (well, personally, i'm getting a bit too old for bumps even
with fixed heels :-). So, i think edge grip also depends on several
factors (not at least the boots, right?).

Kind regards,

Ulrich

--
reply to: uhausmannATbluemailDOTch

  #8  
Old November 25th 03, 10:59 AM
Ulrich Hausmann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

lac.stanford.edu wrote:

_ For tele skiing on alpine skis, I think you want to pay a lot
more attention to chord center rather than balance point. [CUT]


Booker,

i did all the measurements and here are the results:

Ski length 174, Foot: 27, Boot (T1) heel to middle pin: 31,5

1. chord-center: 86,8 cm (from tail)
2. balance point: 88,5 cm (from tail)

--------------
Comment: forwarding the pinline 1.5 cm from the balance point puts the
boot center ca. 1.3 cm behind the boot center mark on the ski. That, 1.5
cm forward of the balance point is what an experienced teleshop in
Garmisch-Partenkirchen does.

Making reference to the chord-center all values 2 cm behind. Btw, it's
like you said: the center of football in this way will stay near the
center boot mark on the ski
--------------

3. Using the Center ball (CB) on Center running surface (CRS), as
proposed in a Telemarktips article, would put me 5,5 cm forward of the
balance point.

--------------
Comment: That coincides pretty much, what some swiss friends say. The
mount the bindings 2 cm forward compared to alpine (fixed heel) mounting.
--------------


Conclusion: lot of uncertainities ... ;-)

Personally, i'm thinking 1.5 cm forward of the balance point might be a
(good?) idea ...

In any case, many thanks for your technical comments.

Kind regards,

Ulrich

  #9  
Old November 25th 03, 03:33 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

In article ,
Tommy T. wrote:
Booker,

Your technical analysis is always good. Follow up a little on your comment
about the "Telebomber" binding. (By the way, are you refering to the Bishop
Bomber? Your web link goes to telebomber.com and I can't get it to work.
Bishop's link is bombertele.com. The Bishop Bomber can be made quite
active for big aggressive skis by using the heavy spring option.)


_ Sorry, I should never write URL's from memory, that's one thing
that I know is unreliable. It is the Bishop telebomber that I'm
talking about.


But to the point, you seem to imply that a neutral binding would be
preferred by an experienced telemarker while a beginner would do better with
something more active. My own progression was the opposite. As I got
better and demanded more performance, I went to more active bindings. Did I
perhaps substitute binding performance for personal ability? Whatever, it
worked because I'm telemarking much more aggessively with Hammerheads in
setting 5 than I did with (recalled) O2s and I was hotter on the O2s than on
the Rotterfella cables that preceeded them.


_ Hey, if it works, it works. I'm just recounting my own
experience in going from NNN/BC - NNN/BC w cables - SuperLoop
- - Telebomber with demoing some G3's and others along the way.
It's really kind of personal thing, there are lot's of skiers
way better than me that ski HH's on 5. But for me, it was an
eye-opener to ski the telebomber set up to be less active.
Even on mega-bangs with T-races, the effortless feel of
lighter gear in softer snow was there. For me anyway, the
whole point of telemarking is the feel of the turn in
soft snow.

_ I think one of the real innovations in recent bindings
is the decoupling of "activism" and edge control. Old farts
can recover that sweet tele feel and still ski crud, young
guns can charge the hill. Anyway, if you want to see what I'm
talking about the next big powder day, set your HH's on
1 or 2 and see what it's like. You may think I'm full of
it, or you might say "Wow, no tip dive..."

_ Booker C. Bense



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

iQCVAwUBP8N2YmTWTAjn5N/lAQGLtgQAlFFT33UAWCHsegKwrFPugsJAbTZFgljZ
o1EfrC4c24R+qaZS+2GmPgNnfPdVH7KpoxyvAE0flywrgBh/xkbwvr0gyhnu9HQw
4D96ECxZGFkntHgr1EIh1xf5AgHZ7eIyNN6NzCaT/zmmElAVlyB+g7PufkC9jLeL
AG5P9o0EZdk=
=RZcL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  #10  
Old November 25th 03, 03:52 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

In article ,
Ulrich Hausmann wrote:
bbense+rec.skiing.backcountry.Nov.24.03@telemark. slac.stanford.edu wrote:

_ For tele skiing on alpine skis, I think you want to pay a lot
more attention to chord center rather than balance point. [CUT]


Booker,

i did all the measurements and here are the results:

[ measurements snipped ]


Conclusion: lot of uncertainities ... ;-)

Personally, i'm thinking 1.5 cm forward of the balance point might be a
(good?) idea ...


_ It's a place to start anyway. It's easy to get lost in all the
numbers, in the long run you just have to pick something and
see how it works for you[1]. IMHO, it's better to be a bit cautious.
It's much easier to deal with a mountpoint that's a little too
far back than one that's too far forward. I can't stand squirrely
skis.... I'd rather have a ski that requires a bit more effort
to turn than one that turns when I don't expect it.

_ Booker C. Bense

[1]- If you do a good job filling the holes, a redrilled ski is
just as strong as the original, just a tiny bit
heavier. Re-drilling is mostly a blow to your ego, not your skis.
If you ski enough, you realize that even the burliest skis only
have 100 days or so in them. Better to experiment on these skis
to get it right for the next pair.

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

iQCVAwUBP8N62mTWTAjn5N/lAQH6PwP/S57dP9inFb9/NkG7VmET/LKtJ46y8WRZ
Usljx6lzGlQziD/pWOojIm37p7YkG6AHc6VhAlLgc3tdtg/dMBXSzx/ECVwCivQP
gCPiRFrDcVlbVHgVDQLjzYNIvrETQpqbH1wopOXzIRkK1X965R 3/7qYDByDsZKW0
z65xUuwF+8A=
=MpBb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Palm side exit point for pole length measure -JP- Nordic Skiing 1 March 22nd 04 04:02 AM
Near fatal ski incident Me Nordic Skiing 22 February 27th 04 02:47 PM
Mounting alpine bindings Terry Hill Alpine Skiing 26 December 6th 03 06:51 AM
Flow Bindings - Mounting discs mr E Snowboarding 0 November 23rd 03 05:08 AM
Mounting Randonnee Bindings Craig Backcountry Skiing 7 November 4th 03 06:15 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.