Ski Binding Question

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings (which I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

My wife has not skied (mainly because of the kids) for several years. Now on
preparing her skis for our forthcoming trip to Kitzbühel I cannot find the
sheet of paper where I recorded her DIN settings. I think my wife's bindings
where set to 7. She remembers them as being set to 7. I have found several
websites with DIN guides, and I have downloaded DIN calculators: they return
a value of 5.25/5.5 for my wife (based on age, height, weight, ability and
boot sole length)? When she bought her skis (in Munich), the technician
measured the width of her leg / bone as part of binding setup. Is there a
reason for this discrepancy? Her skis/bindings (Salomon) are probably five
years old (but she is very happy with them): is this a factor?

We do intend to visit our local ski shop to get things sorted out, but I
thought it is a useful discussion thread!

Thanks in advance for any responses!

regards
Paul Smith

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:15:22 -0000, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk squeezed out the following:

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings (which I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

My wife has not skied (mainly because of the kids) for several years. Now on
preparing her skis for our forthcoming trip to Kitzbühel I cannot find the
sheet of paper where I recorded her DIN settings. I think my wife's bindings
where set to 7. She remembers them as being set to 7. I have found several
websites with DIN guides, and I have downloaded DIN calculators: they return
a value of 5.25/5.5 for my wife (based on age, height, weight, ability and
boot sole length)?

My wife's are set (professionally) at 5.0, mine at 6.0 - we're both
intermediate. 7 sounds too high to me.

--
Colin Irvine

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:32:16 +0000, in
, Colin Irvine
wrote:

My wife's are set (professionally) at 5.0, mine at 6.0 - we're both
intermediate. 7 sounds too high to me.

6 sounds a bit low for you, FWIW, given your size and all; and 5 might
even be on the high side for petite Pat.

DIN settings are a very personal thing though, and once you're happy
with a given setting it's perhaps best to stay with it, even if
'professional' advice says otherwise.

Ace wrote:

6 sounds a bit low for you, FWIW, given your size and all

Chortle


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 07:22:09 +0000, (The
Older Gentleman) squeezed out the following:

Ace wrote:

6 sounds a bit low for you, FWIW, given your size and all

Chortle

You know what you can do, don't you? Yes, that's right.

--
Colin Irvine

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 08:18:13 +0100, Ace squeezed
out the following:

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:32:16 +0000, in
, Colin Irvine
wrote:

My wife's are set (professionally) at 5.0, mine at 6.0 - we're both
intermediate. 7 sounds too high to me.

6 sounds a bit low for you, FWIW, given your size and all; and 5 might
even be on the high side for petite Pat.

You're probably right about both, although I've lost a couple of stone
since I last saw you. I think I'll keep it low, though, given
advancing years as well!

--
Colin Irvine

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:15:22 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings (which I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

I really don't thin it's necessary. I've never done this, and most
years they bindings are re-tested (free, a servoce offered by our
employer, presumably to reduce accidents and lost time) and are fine.

My wife has not skied (mainly because of the kids) for several years. Now on
preparing her skis for our forthcoming trip to Kitzbühel I cannot find the
sheet of paper where I recorded her DIN settings. I think my wife's bindings
where set to 7. She remembers them as being set to 7.

This could be correct, but only if she's a very fit, aggressive skier,
and not on the short and thin side. But the tone of your post seems to
suggest otherwise.

I have found several
websites with DIN guides, and I have downloaded DIN calculators: they return
a value of 5.25/5.5 for my wife (based on age, height, weight, ability and
boot sole length)?

Sounds about right for an int-adv female of normal size, so I'd go
with it. Try skiing a couple of normal runs, then increase difficulty.
If they don't pre-release they should be fine.

When she bought her skis (in Munich), the technician
measured the width of her leg / bone as part of binding setup. Is there a
reason for this discrepancy?

Doubtful. More likely the ski-tech was using some ancient
approximation, possibly based on the longer skis of yore.

Her skis/bindings (Salomon) are probably five
years old (but she is very happy with them): is this a factor?

No.

"Ace" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:15:22 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings (which
I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

I really don't thin it's necessary. I've never done this, and most
years they bindings are re-tested (free, a servoce offered by our
employer, presumably to reduce accidents and lost time) and are fine.


I must say I have not realy looked into what constitutes a binding design. I
always have a mental picture of a piece of rubber under tension. I would
then suspect that rubber would deteriorate.

For all the years that I lived in Munich I never bothered de-tensioning my
bindings. Afterall the skis were never stored for that long anyway. Before
Munich I always de-tensioned and now that we are back in the UK with skis
stored in what can be a hot garden shed I did it as a matter of course.
Maybe I needn't bother in future - just have a pre-season service.


My wife has not skied (mainly because of the kids) for several years. Now
on
preparing her skis for our forthcoming trip to Kitzbühel I cannot find the
sheet of paper where I recorded her DIN settings. I think my wife's
bindings
where set to 7. She remembers them as being set to 7.

This could be correct, but only if she's a very fit, aggressive skier,
and not on the short and thin side. But the tone of your post seems to
suggest otherwise.

Alas not anymore. If only she were a thin and fit and aggressive skier! Then
she could keep up with me!


I have found several
websites with DIN guides, and I have downloaded DIN calculators: they
return
a value of 5.25/5.5 for my wife (based on age, height, weight, ability and
boot sole length)?

Sounds about right for an int-adv female of normal size, so I'd go
with it. Try skiing a couple of normal runs, then increase difficulty.
If they don't pre-release they should be fine.

Our local ski shop today calculated 5. My wife and I are somewhat confused
by our recollection of the 7. She does plan a couple of "shakedown" runs to
ensure they perform as expected.

When she bought her skis (in Munich), the technician
measured the width of her leg / bone as part of binding setup. Is there a
reason for this discrepancy?

Doubtful. More likely the ski-tech was using some ancient
approximation, possibly based on the longer skis of yore.

Her skis/bindings (Salomon) are probably five
years old (but she is very happy with them): is this a factor?

No.


Thanks very much for the useful advise. There are certainly some
interesting things coming out of this thread.

Paul

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:12:47 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:


"Ace" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:15:22 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings (which
I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

I really don't thin it's necessary. I've never done this, and most
years they bindings are re-tested (free, a servoce offered by our
employer, presumably to reduce accidents and lost time) and are fine.


I must say I have not realy looked into what constitutes a binding design. I
always have a mental picture of a piece of rubber under tension.

Well I suggest you endeavour to lose that image and replace it with
one made up of high-quality metal springs in perfect balance.

I would then suspect that rubber would deteriorate.

Modern materials, including rubber (usually at least partially
artificial) are astonishing in their versatility and longevity. And
all else apart, if rubber were going to perish over time it would do
si just as much whether under tension or not.

For all the years that I lived in Munich I never bothered de-tensioning my
bindings. Afterall the skis were never stored for that long anyway. Before
Munich I always de-tensioned and now that we are back in the UK with skis
stored in what can be a hot garden shed I did it as a matter of course.
Maybe I needn't bother in future - just have a pre-season service.

Probably. There is a school of thought that suggests the
de-/re-tensioning puts more strain on the springs than just leaving
them, or so I've heard.

"Ace" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:12:47 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:


"Ace" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:15:22 -0000, in
, "PSmith"
paulDOTsmith_UK@tiscaliDOTcoDOTuk wrote:

When my skis are in summer storage I always un-tension the bindings
(which
I
recall reading some years ago as being good practice).

I really don't thin it's necessary. I've never done this, and most
years they bindings are re-tested (free, a servoce offered by our
employer, presumably to reduce accidents and lost time) and are fine.


I must say I have not realy looked into what constitutes a binding design.
I
always have a mental picture of a piece of rubber under tension.

Well I suggest you endeavour to lose that image and replace it with
one made up of high-quality metal springs in perfect balance.

As an engineer I reaaly must take more interest in how the planks attach to
my feet! Thanks for that Ace, I will do a little research.


I would then suspect that rubber would deteriorate.

Modern materials, including rubber (usually at least partially
artificial) are astonishing in their versatility and longevity. And
all else apart, if rubber were going to perish over time it would do
si just as much whether under tension or not.

For all the years that I lived in Munich I never bothered de-tensioning my
bindings. Afterall the skis were never stored for that long anyway. Before
Munich I always de-tensioned and now that we are back in the UK with skis
stored in what can be a hot garden shed I did it as a matter of course.
Maybe I needn't bother in future - just have a pre-season service.

Probably. There is a school of thought that suggests the
de-/re-tensioning puts more strain on the springs than just leaving
them, or so I've heard.


Sounds like very reasonable advice (and saves a job). Thanks.