Poster: A snowHead
|
provenjohn wrote: |
Because of the slanging match, this has been a very interesting thread! I've just moved my bindings forward 25mm, I'll report back. |
Fixed it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Hi all, interesting reading and thought I'd add a few more questions into the mix having just purchased a pair of handmade skis at great expense that I tried on a testing day and fell in love with, only to receive my pair and find the bindings are mounted, (what feels like), way too far back.As they are hand made, there are no manufacturers marks on the ski, so I can't tell by eye. The skis on the test were extremely playful and lively, with loads of rebound and with mine I feel like I'm fighting to try and get over the centre of the ski.
I am interested to know what defines the true centre of the ski. I can understand that the theoretical centre could have something to do with the centre of the turn radius, linked to the sidecut but most skis have a different side cut fore and aft. Also, I would think that the fulcrum/central balance point would have an effect. Surely, if you were in deep powder, having a nose heavy ski would make things a bit of a challenge as the tip would want to bury itself. I'm sure it would make a ski feel less playful and direct on piste too and perhaps a bit 'flappy'. It makes a big difference on a car, hence BMW have banged on about 'perfect 50/50 weight distribution' for years.
Unfortunately, the Marker Squire bindings have no adjustment, (as far as I can tell), so I think a re-mount is the only option I have.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Pablito wrote: |
the bindings are mounted, (what feels like), way too far back.As they are hand made, there are no manufacturers marks on the ski, so I can't tell by eye. The skis on the test were extremely playful and lively, with loads of rebound and with mine I feel like I'm fighting to try and get over the centre of the ski. |
You could dry dropping the manufacturer an email and asking about recommended mount points; small ski companies are often very helpful.
Pablito wrote: |
Surely, if you were in deep powder, having a nose heavy ski would make things a bit of a challenge as the tip would want to bury itself. I'm sure it would make a ski feel less playful and direct on piste too and perhaps a bit 'flappy'. |
Stiffness and rocker will have a much bigger effect on what happens to the tip in soft snow; the weight of the tips of the ski will have negligible effect. Mounting positions for powder are often further back than 'standard'... this helps keep the heaviest bit of the assembly, the skiier, back and lets the tips plane up and over the snow. Shifting the mount forwards puts that heavy lump forwards, which aids in sinking the tips, right?
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I've had the bindings mounted just for me on both my pairs of skis. First time just at the manufacturers recommended position, on a pair on women's specific skis. No problem at all.
Second time was a pair of Down skis. Took them to Sole boot Lab, who spent a good amount of time looking them over, checking the rocker etc, having never seen them before. They then completely ignored the manufacturers markings, worked out the fulcrum/balance point with a steel cylinder, spent close to 10 minutes grilling me on my skiing style, level, where I liked to ski etc, then decided where to put the bindings. They've been absolutely spot on.
I reckon I feel very slightly further back on the Down skis, but both positions work perfectly on each pair of skis for what I need. The Down skis are offpiste a lot more, the Scotts (1st pair) spend more time on piste. (Though both get used easily in all conditions.)
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
fixx, that's interesting what you said about Sole boot lab finding the balance point with a steel cylinder. That's what I did, admittedly with the bindings on the skis and the fulcrum was about 2cm back from the front binding, which I thought seemed a bit far forward. My skis a re a classic design, with no rocker and a traditional sidecut. The manufacturer has agreed to go skiing with me for the day and make any necessary adjustments, so I'm happy
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
I posted this in a thread in The Piste forum: www.snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=114730
...
Being a curious sort I decide to measure my 'old' Rossis and new Volkls and this is what I found.
Rossignol Pursuit 16 Ti (2013) vs Volkl Code Speedwall S UVO (2015)
.............................. --- cm ---
..................... Rossignol ....Volkl
.....................----------- --------
Length ...................170 ......166
Nose rocker .............25 ....... 31
Tail rocker ................ 6 ........16
Running surface ... 141 ..... 119
CRS .........................70.5 .... 59.5
Binding:
Toe ahead of CRS .. 13.5 .... 13.5
Heel behind CRS .....18 ....... 18
So the bindings are set at exactly the same position relative to the Centre of Running Surface.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|