Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 83
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    slc
    Posts
    13,268
    The BSL point is a good one. My BSL is 275.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Truckee & Sonoma
    Posts
    12,257
    The whole metal vs. plastic thing used to be a legit reason. It's not anymore. There have been huge advancements in plastic durability over the past decade or so. STH2 12's are pretty bomber... but I only need a DIN of 9.5 so it's all relative.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    214
    Can someone explain why high din bindings cost so much more than lower din versions of the same model? The Tyrolia Attack, for example, has an 18 din version that costs over twice as much as the 12 din version despite what looks like nearly identical construction. I get charging a bit more for stronger springs but the 18 is over $200 more expensive (msrp) than the 12

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,609
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    Can someone explain why high din bindings cost so much more than lower din versions of the same model? The Tyrolia Attack, for example, has an 18 din version that costs over twice as much as the 12 din version despite what looks like nearly identical construction. I get charging a bit more for stronger springs but the 18 is over $200 more expensive (msrp) than the 12
    Because people will pay for the cred it lends


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    607
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    Can someone explain why high din bindings cost so much more than lower din versions of the same model? The Tyrolia Attack, for example, has an 18 din version that costs over twice as much as the 12 din version despite what looks like nearly identical construction. I get charging a bit more for stronger springs but the 18 is over $200 more expensive (msrp) than the 12
    Usually higher din = more metal. Metal is more expensive then plastic I'm assuming. I think it's also just a "premium product" markup

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The greatest N. New Mexico resort in Colorado
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    Can someone explain why high din bindings cost so much more than lower din versions of the same model? The Tyrolia Attack, for example, has an 18 din version that costs over twice as much as the 12 din version despite what looks like nearly identical construction. I get charging a bit more for stronger springs but the 18 is over $200 more expensive (msrp) than the 12
    16s and 18s come with the race something-or-other heel, which is more burlier and metallic, and a lower stack height (17mm vs 24mm).

    I like how my phone auto-corrects “burlier” to “girlier”.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    214
    Didn't notice the slightly different heel, thanks

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Naples Idaho
    Posts
    64
    I grew up being told that if you dump a ski in the BC you'll die, if you dump a ski in a mogul race you lost (I still lost my races, both ski's attached). So we always had the highest DIN possible. It wasn't until this year I have been told to re-evaluate that as I sit having torn everything in my knee.... I'm also tall and heavy.... I kept all my bindings at 16 or 18... I'll drop them down some as I realize not skiing an entire winter due to a lame-o-crash is pretty shitty..

    Quote Originally Posted by brundo View Post
    I'm heavy, ski hard, do large drops, etc and run my bindings at 11 or 12 and haven't have any issues with breakage/durability/slop with din ~13 bindings (Warden, Attack13, Griffon). So why do so many people love STH16/Pivot 18 type bindings so much? Are people really running their bindings at 15+? I feel like that is few and far between but maybe TGR is even more hardcore than I thought . There seems to be a lot of talk about metal but once again as a heavy/aggressive skier haven't had any problems durability/slop. Please enlighten me.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,215
    Good luck with recovery Neil. You blew everything in your knee?

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    5,867
    Woah yeah, hadn't heard that yet, Neil. Sorry man. DIN 16-18???
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  11. #61
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    2,101
    "Why don't you just make 10 louder?"


  12. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    8,631
    Marshall subsequently got Christopher Guest to do an ad

    Name:  B9EorSOIYAApS5-.jpg
Views: 582
Size:  20.9 KB

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by optics View Post
    Shirt please
    You wish

    Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    No longer Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    1,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Fiedler (Not Neil Armstrong) View Post
    I grew up being told that if you dump a ski in the BC you'll die, if you dump a ski in a mogul race you lost (I still lost my races, both ski's attached). So we always had the highest DIN possible. It wasn't until this year I have been told to re-evaluate that as I sit having torn everything in my knee.... I'm also tall and heavy.... I kept all my bindings at 16 or 18... I'll drop them down some as I realize not skiing an entire winter due to a lame-o-crash is pretty shitty..
    Damn dude, sorry about your knee...

  15. #65
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Location
    Emerald City
    Posts
    117
    I'm 6'4, 200# with a ~325 bsl with a lvl 3 skill and have been skiing at 8.5 DIN for the past 5 years or so, but I've really been pushing it this season and have hit the point where I've had 2 pre-releases this season that made me reconsider my DIN levels. If I move my skill to a 3+ on a DIN calculator, it puts me at a 10. Hard to imagine people skiing in the 12+ region.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by eSock View Post
    I'm 6'4, 200# with a ~325 bsl with a lvl 3 skill and have been skiing at 8.5 DIN for the past 5 years or so, but I've really been pushing it this season and have hit the point where I've had 2 pre-releases this season that made me reconsider my DIN levels. If I move my skill to a 3+ on a DIN calculator, it puts me at a 10. Hard to imagine people skiing in the 12+ region.
    10 in the toes and 12 in the heels...

    Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    DownEast
    Posts
    955
    Quote Originally Posted by zartagen View Post
    "Why don't you just make 10 louder?"

    Exactly why I ski DIN 11.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    10,045
    Quote Originally Posted by eSock View Post
    I'm 6'4, 200# with a ~325 bsl with a lvl 3 skill and have been skiing at 8.5 DIN for the past 5 years or so, but I've really been pushing it this season and have hit the point where I've had 2 pre-releases this season that made me reconsider my DIN levels. If I move my skill to a 3+ on a DIN calculator, it puts me at a 10. Hard to imagine people skiing in the 12+ region.
    If someone was your same size but in a ~300 BSL would be at 12ish on the chart if they were lvl 3+.

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    10,045
    In addition to everything else that has been said:

    -High Din Pivots work for a CAST conversion
    -Lots of plastic bindings have a vertical release at the toe. At best, I find this makes the binding feel a bit sloppy. At worst it tends to prerelease at inopportune times.
    -Also agree with Eluder that, for inbounds choppiness, weight is good. That applies to skis, bindings, and boots.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The greatest N. New Mexico resort in Colorado
    Posts
    1,510
    Quote Originally Posted by eSock View Post
    I'm 6'4, 200#... Hard to imagine people skiing in the 12+ region.
    There’s teeny-tiny women racing DH on the World Cup with their skis basically bolted to their feet. If you were skiing >45m 210’s at 80+mph, you would probably be skiing higher than 8.5.

    There’s a whole spectrum of skiing abilities, styles and preferences between a rank beginner and a (actual, not internet) professional skier, and the chart only represents a very narrow margin of those skiers.

    It’s just another reminder that the chart is the starting point, not the end-all, be-all.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    21,088
    Quote Originally Posted by eSock View Post
    I'm 6'4, 200# with a ~325 bsl with a lvl 3 skill and have been skiing at 8.5 DIN for the past 5 years or so, but I've really been pushing it this season and have hit the point where I've had 2 pre-releases this season that made me reconsider my DIN levels. If I move my skill to a 3+ on a DIN calculator, it puts me at a 10. Hard to imagine people skiing in the 12+ region.
    Sounds like you're in a similar chart zone to me. I bumped it up to an even 9. Works well. No premature ejaculation and it's come off once or twice when it needed to. Bindings I currently own are various Salomons and Tyrolias (no Z toe or other low end bs). Don't fight the fall.

    I'd say higher end bindings can certainly have a better "feel," which is subjective, but they also sometimes have better elasticity than others, and that's not.

    There is also torsional rigidity, but I'm not sure I notice that as much as edge tune and ski feel.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    22,212
    I set em to 6 and turn them up till they stop falling off which is always about 7 instead of looking at charts
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    21,088
    6?!
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    22,212
    small azn doesnt need the big DIN, start low and turn em up, thing is you know they are set low so you know they will pop when you pressure them a bit I don't recommend doing this at high speed in no fall zones

    cuz 7 always worked/ works I havent done this in awhile so now I just go with 7 but its a way to check yourself

    One can also start at 11 and turn them down till they start falling off ?
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    THOR-Foothills
    Posts
    5,705
    I'm not a very small azn, so I need to run 11/12 to stay in my skis.

    But I'm also a hack and I need all the help I can get.
    It doesn't matter if you're a king or a little street sweeper...
    ...sooner or later you'll dance with the reaper
    -Death

    Kaz is my co-pilot

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •