Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54

    My View DIN is not just DIN

    I was searching around for thoughts on bindings, and I kept seeing this comment: a "12 DIN is a 12 DIN."

    Well, I worked in a shop as a tech many years ago, and bindings have changed very little.
    The Look toe is the old Geze.
    The current Marker, Tyrolia, Warden is a lot like an old M40. (Side note: I am curious as to why this winged cam design came back)
    Sollys are the same.

    I tested 000s of bindings in the 1990s. I don't think much of anything has changed.
    DIN is not DIN.

    Until you see how these bindings test as a combination of release, friction, and elastic travel you may not appreciate the difference.

    My observations might be dated, but the designs are the same, or even becoming simpler (1990s backward twisting knee lawsuit frenzy).

    Solly 747 style tested great, came out on DIN and showed elastic travel. Friction could affect release, but things generally worked very well.

    Look Pivots with the ZR toe tested pretty well. Tons of travel, and the machine always needed a nudge to get them to release. A highly functional binding, but you couldn't tweak the spring to get a release DIN on the tape. DIN is not DIN.

    Markers go CLICK. They tested on the numbers but no travel. The rep came and said, "DIN is DIN" so we are the best. No way I would ski a Marker to this day. There were no compromises for real world conditions.

    GEZE - this is the the current Look toe. It tested all over the map. I thought I was highly unreliable for a DIN value, but had elastic travel. Release would get about 50% of the way there and nothing would really happen. This made it functional to ski, but DIN setting would be a guess. I used to send them out +/- huge amounts of tension to get them to test, before I realized this wasn't the design. The right way to test these was to watch the machine and when it required very light force, just pop them out by hand. Otherwise the binding would just stretch - the machine wasn't made for the toe.

    With the elastic travel, I can see why Look would use the design today, but the DIN setting is an art, not a science.

    The GEZE heel was scary - like a Marker toe for pre-release. I think Look is using these on low-end bindings today.

    Tyrolia - I was testing the old 490s. These were like a bomb going off, and sometimes they would break. Very scary. I'm surprised they have a product people like today with the Attacks. I would start the machine and run for cover.

    Today, I ski Look Pivots, Solly 747s (or STH), and a set of Wardens that have worked just fine.

    But... I just want to go on the record that I really don't think "DIN is DIN"

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ogden
    Posts
    756
    cool read sailor. and winch force isn't winch force, right?
    now a complete tool

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,750

    My View DIN is not just DIN

    Why do you think so many Mags like STH Salomon and P15/18 Looks?

    You must have missed the whole frame binding thing, because that explains the design of the Warden/Guardian, Jester/Griffon/Duke/Baron, and Attack/Adrenaline...gotta change the design to let the toe piece pivot in walk mode.

    DIN (or is it “Release Value”...all so confusing) ain’t rocket science...and most current bindings work just fine. Even Markers. YMMV.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Yes, I missed that about the toe piece. My frame bindings are Fritsches. They have skied 3 continents!

    Of course, everyone likes Looks and 747s. This was the case before the internet was invented.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    17,219
    DIN is DIN--each number on the chart specifies the force needed to release the binding under standard test conditions. Doesn't matter who made the binding, the condition of the boot or the AFD. Technically a binding is set by adjusting the release torque to the value specified by the chart. The numbers on the binding are a starting point, not an endpoint although a lot of us use them as an endpoint.
    The DIN scale on the binding may or may not be accurate. Even if the binding is mechanically perfect the binding maker doesn't know what boot you're putting into it or it's condition. My current STH's (brand new when mounted) have toes that test 1 number lower than the heels--the heels are set at the DIN on the chart the toes 1 number lower. No preleases yet.
    DIN certainly doesn't describe all the performance features of a binding--elastic travel, durability, nor does it purport to.

    I'm not a tech but I'm guessing toes are off more than heels, since toe release would be affected more by friction. Is this true?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The greatest N. New Mexico resort in Colorado
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by RollGybe View Post
    DIN DIN DIN
    Semantics: DIN is a German standards organization, just like ISO or ANSI. Your initial binding retention setting is determined by a chart approved by DIN. DIN is DIN.

    The "12 is a 12" statement simply means that according to your height weight age skier type and boot sole length, your initial indicator setting will be the same regardless of make/model of binding. DIN is DIN.

    Your retention setting may be adjusted during testing and calibration to ensure the binding will release within a certain range of force applied laterally to the toe or vertically to the heel. Your final indicator setting is determined by the amount of force needed to release the boot, which should be consistent regardless of what the final indicator setting is. DIN is DIN.

    Side note: the M4/30/40 toe was actually way more complex than current laterally sprung toes from marker/salomon/tyrolia. The dual double pivot on the M40 changed tension by adjusting the length of the moment arm, and on release the pin holding the end of the spring slid in a channel to allow the toe wing to open. It was a pretty cool piece of engineering when you look at how simple the look Nevada-style toes of the day were. Current models are pretty basic, but IMO more dependable for it; the toe wing "cam" pivots and depresses the main spring, rather than pulling on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    I'm not a tech but I'm guessing toes are off more than heels, since toe release would be affected more by friction. Is this true?
    That's pretty accurate. But with today's bindings, I find it pretty rare to adjust retention by more than 0.5 to get it to fall in range. They're pretty damned consistent nowadays, as long as boot soles are compatible.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A LSD Steakhouse somewhere in the Wasatch
    Posts
    12,434
    the fact that you tested fore the turn of the centurty with a pos overpriced torque wrench on a stick vermont
    and you think it accurately measured relase values makes this still a tech 2 1/2 decades later
    laugh out fuckin loud
    "When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
    "I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
    "THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
    "I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The Shed of Incorruptible Veracity
    Posts
    8,146
    Quote Originally Posted by skifishbum View Post
    the fact that you tested fore the turn of the centurty with a pos overpriced torque wrench on a stick vermont
    and you think it accurately measured relase values makes this still a tech 2 1/2 decades later
    laugh out fuckin loud
    Out of curiosity, what is the device of choice for testing release values these days?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by RollGybe View Post
    Yes, I missed that about the toe piece. My frame bindings are Fritsches. They have skied 3 continents!

    Of course, everyone likes Looks and 747s. This was the case before the internet was invented.
    Wait so your complaining about inconsistent release values, but ski on fristchi frame bindings which are infamous for having some of the worst release characteristics in the game?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Montrose, CO
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by madriverfreeride View Post
    Wait so your complaining about inconsistent release values, but ski on fristchi frame bindings which are infamous for having some of the worst release characteristics in the game?
    DIN is DIN, man.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A LSD Steakhouse somewhere in the Wasatch
    Posts
    12,434
    Quote Originally Posted by glademaster View Post
    Out of curiosity, what is the device of choice for testing release values these days?
    both montana and winterstieger make quality machines that measure release values in a consistent manner
    with better quantifiable results vrs that which a shop rat, monkey , bum,stoner or professional tech than using variable user input outdated pos
    that is the vermont binding tester
    "When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
    "I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
    "THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
    "I have posted in here but haven't read it carefully with my trusty PoliAsshat antenna on."-DipshitDanno

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,284
    DIN - as applied to alpine ski binding functionality - is just a set of standards (identical to ISO 9462) that every binding offered for sale needs to pass, and every customer who chooses to have a shop mount their bindings needs to agree to. The rating system for release values is intentionally conservative; it doesn't address the quirks that each binding possesses or whether a given skier can actually stay in the binding in the course of a given ski day and still have it release when necessary. How many people do you ski with who actually ski at their recommended setting, even for a 3+ skier?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,284
    PS Most people on this forum have figured out a binding model/release value protocol that works for them.

    If a customer asks what they should set their bindings at, or if I ask them what they set their bindings at and they "don't know," I refer them to the chart - it's as good a starting point as any.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,246
    The current Marker, Tyrolia, Warden is a lot like an old M40.

    Uh, no, the M40/48/Comp toes were twin cam and had +/- 10mm of lateral release at which point the wings opened up. I'm no fan of Marker but as others have mentioned coming here 3 decades later to spread your wisdom is kind of stupid.
    what's orange and looks good on hippies?
    fire

    rails are for trains
    If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for problems caused by the government I'd be a rich fat film maker in a baseball hat.

    www.theguideshut.ca

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    The greatest N. New Mexico resort in Colorado
    Posts
    1,657
    Quote Originally Posted by skifishbum View Post
    both montana and winterstieger make quality machines that measure release values in a consistent manner
    with better quantifiable results vrs that which a shop rat, monkey , bum,stoner or professional tech than using variable user input outdated pos
    that is the vermont binding tester
    Yeah, but at least VTs are still stupidly expensive for being so inaccurate.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    The Shed of Incorruptible Veracity
    Posts
    8,146
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    How many people do you ski with who actually ski at their recommended setting, even for a 3+ skier?

    My dad does.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,090
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    How many people do you ski with who actually ski at their recommended setting, even for a 3+ skier?
    I ski at my din chart setting in Pivots and Salomons - 9.5... I cannot do that in Marker bindings or Look PX/SPX bindings.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Before
    Posts
    23,423
    I use Schrödinger's Cat DIN.
    Merde De Glace On the Freak When Ski
    >>>200 cm Black Bamboo Sidewalled DPS Lotus 120 : Best Skis Ever <<<

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by skifishbum View Post
    the fact that you tested fore the turn of the centurty with a pos overpriced torque wrench on a stick vermont
    and you think it accurately measured relase values makes this still a tech 2 1/2 decades later
    laugh out fuckin loud
    Nah we had a "robot" that printed results on "heat paper" laugh out fuckin loud

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by waxman View Post
    The current Marker, Tyrolia, Warden is a lot like an old M40.

    Uh, no, the M40/48/Comp toes were twin cam and had +/- 10mm of lateral release at which point the wings opened up. I'm no fan of Marker but as others have mentioned coming here 3 decades later to spread your wisdom is kind of stupid.
    Glad I could help an indebtured servant like yourself!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    DIN - as applied to alpine ski binding functionality - is just a set of standards (identical to ISO 9462) that every binding offered for sale needs to pass, and every customer who chooses to have a shop mount their bindings needs to agree to. The rating system for release values is intentionally conservative; it doesn't address the quirks that each binding possesses or whether a given skier can actually stay in the binding in the course of a given ski day and still have it release when necessary. How many people do you ski with who actually ski at their recommended setting, even for a 3+ skier?
    This is a point the internet needs to memorialize this issue.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Buster Highmen View Post
    I use Schrödinger's Cat DIN.
    In which case, you've already released.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by madriverfreeride View Post
    Wait so your complaining about inconsistent release values, but ski on fristchi frame bindings which are infamous for having some of the worst release characteristics in the game?
    I have never released from them
    I don't use them as "release" bindings.
    Consistency 100% since year 2001.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    in the shadow of the white rocks
    Posts
    2,242
    This is why the kids don’t get to use the adult tools. WTF is OP rambling bout? We’re all dumber for reading.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    10,618
    Is there any component of the DIN testing standard that accounts for ski flex? So if a ski is flexed and (presumably) forward pressure is higher than it would be on the bench, does the DIN standard account for that and require the release value to still be within some range?

Posting Permissions

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