 Poster: A snowHead
|
Bit of a geek question, but hey i am a geek... Does anyone know what the typical ramp angles are on the Plumbs or any of the tech bindings? The reason I ask is that i really felt in the back seat when skiing my mantra/dukes/titans, put this down to a heavy pack, sticky snow and unwaxed skis but while setting up the toe height on the dukes it got me thinking that when you adjust the AFD down to fit rando boots you are effectively putting a pretty huge ramp angle on and perhaps this caused some of the back seat feeling. I am quite sensitive to ramp being tall and having long feet...
FYI i stumbled across this site, which has a wealth of information http://www.wildsnow.com/articles/dynafit_faq/dynafit_faq1.html
looking at a few posts there http://www.wildsnow.com/6908/dynafit-radical-broken/#comment-44448 one guy recons he needs a 9mm shim to get zero ramp on his radicals, that sounds huge
Any thoughts ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
skimottaret, Interesting regarding feeling in the back-seat on Dukes. I felt the same on mine in powder but put it down to the way the ski was working and the mount position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
AndAnotherThing.., the dukes have a flat ramp angle BUT only when the AFD is set for Alpine boots, where you in rando boots or alpine? also a bit of further reading at lunch time seems to indicate that Dynafit boots and the titans in particular have a lot of ramp angle. My worst nightmare of a a combination, high ramp and delta. no wonder i hated em...
also interesting to me was that the lateral stiffness of a tech binding was as good as the dukes. another strong reason to get a pair of tech bindings in my view and consigning the dukes to an offpiste ski set up rather than for touring....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
skimottaret, Alpine, but it was only apparent in deep powder. A combination of the ski design and mount I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I had the opposite problem when I first tried my BD Factor boots in flattish ramp angle Look Pivot bindings. Even with the adjustable forward lean maxed out I felt way too upright. For me, the boots work much better with my Dynafit Vertical STs and their greater ramp angle increasing the overall forward lean of the boot. B and D, as mentioned in the Wildsnow discussion seem to make some useful bits and pieces for fine tuning any Dynafit setup:
http://www.bndskigear.com/dynafitcustom.html
Just ordered some of their harcheisen for my wide skis.
Also ordered some TLT5 boots for multi-day tours. It's all becoming expensive 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
delta angles are set for iduvidul skiers, a combination of equipment, sizes and users body limitations,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| ... Does anyone know what the typical ramp angles are on the Plumbs or any of the tech bindings?..... |
There's nothing detailed in Dynafits catalogue or tech manual & unfortunately I've non in at the monent so I can't measure 'em. I'll see what I can dig up for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spyderjon, on the wildsnow site a guy reconned that with radicals and dynafit titans he needed 9mm toe shim to get flat delta as per my post above may be worth PM ing that guy...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
just spotted this- for sure the plums are pretty rampy (might grab a pic later of clipped in boot to show it) - although with some of the new wider plates they're supposed to be out with this coming season, the whole thing could be a bit different. i don't mind the ramp, feels fine for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Slightly off topic. I have 82mm skis with dynafit st, which crampon should I go for the 82 or 92?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jbob, given your 82 will be measured across the narrowest point and your cramp fits up at the toe piece, its maybe likely you'll want the 92. Measure width across at the rearmost point of the toe piece, then that's your fella
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
barry, Thanks, I don't have the skis here but you are spot on, the crampons won't be at the narrowest point, plus the dynafit crampons seem stiff and not suitable for too much fine adjustment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
skimottaret, Sharkymark, just heard back from Dynafit via Anatom the UK distributors re the delta angles on the Dynafit bindings which they have advised are as follows:
With Dynafit Zero boot:
TLT Radical ST/FT + 8mm
TLT Vertical ST/FT + 8mm
TLT Speed + 8mm
TLT Speed Radical + 8mm
TLT Speed Superlight 0mm
Low Tech Radical - 3mm
Low Tech Race - 3mm
With Dynafit TLT5 boot:
TLT Radical ST/FT + 13mm
TLT Vertical ST/FT + 13mm
TLT Speed + 13mm
TLT Speed Radical + 13mm
TLT Speed Superlight + 5mm
Low Tech Radical + 2mm
Low Tech Race + 2mm
The interesting thing about this is that it appears that, unlike alpine bindings, the delta angles on tech bindings can change depending on the boot being used. I presume that this is because the location of the tech inserts in the boot shell can vary across the different make/models of boots on the market, although a 5mm variance seems a lot. I've asked Anatom to clarify this with the factory.
Remember that the top sheet profile on the ski can vary the delta slightly, usually adding a mm as the ski thins towards the tail, especially if you have a large boot sole length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
spyderjon, Cheers Jon if you could get the Dynafit Titan details as well I would be most grateful... This confirms what I was feeling when skiing em, very heel high
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| spyderjon, Cheers Jon if you could get the Dynafit Titan details as well I would be most grateful... This confirms what I was feeling when skiing em, very heel high |
Will do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
When talking about ramp angle, does a high angle mean the toe is higher or lower relative to the heel? Why would manufacturers use different angles? Any advantage at all for high/low angles?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
clarky999, Heel high.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| clarky999, Heel high. |
Yep, a positive delta is heel high & a negative delta is heel low.
The idea of delta is to move the hips forward in to a 'better' posture but depending on the users individual physiology this may be too far forward resulting in the backside having to be stuck out to balance. Even if the skier's physiology suites the binding being used a similar affect can be caused if the user's boot has a lot of internal ramp/zeppa angle &/or a lot of forward lean angle in the cuff. Add those to things to a high delta binding makes things much worse. It's far from unskiable but the user is just not in 'their' natural balance which can add to fatigue & can make balance recoveries & fine control of the skis more difficult.
Dunno why different manufacturers have different angles, suppose it's just what they think fits Mr/Mrs Average best. Same can said with the ramp/cuff angles in boots when one manufacturer has different angles in different models. 99% of all the shimming work I do is to reduce delta so the reason for it seems somewhat flawed.
Also don't believe what the manufacturers tell you in their marketing blurb as they regularly lie, eg Marker state that their Jester/Griffon bindings have zero delta when thay actually have a few mm & Look/Rossi state that their Pivot/FKS bindings are zero when that is only if you use them with the 4mm toe shim that they offer, & that shim only fits the Pivot18/FKS18 & not the Pivot14/FKS14. Marker also state that their Duke/Baron is flat (with alpine boots) but they also have some delta.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Cheers guys.
Man that's complicated! Now those alignment sessions make a lot more sense...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
The interesting thing about this is that it appears that, unlike alpine bindings, the delta angles on tech bindings can change depending on the boot being used. I presume that this is because the location of the tech inserts in the boot shell can vary across the different make/models of boots on the market, although a 5mm variance seems a lot. I've asked Anatom to clarify this with the factory.
|
Hi spyderjon, I own some TLT5 boots and I can't compare them with Titans but can compare them with my BD Factors. I measured the distance from the soles to the pin locations at the heel and toe of both and they're pretty much identical. Where they differ is with the profile of the boot sole. The Factor has a boot board that is flat from toe to heel and a flattish outer sole whereas the TLT5 has a rockered sole and no boot board and the internal surface follows the profile of the outer sole. This means that the lowest point inside the boot is under the ball of the foot. So, the slope is from the heel down to BOF and then up to the toes. This may explain the steeper delta angle when compared to other boots that have a flat boot board.
Will be in touch soon to buy some more QK inserts as I need to move the heel piece forward to suit the shorter BSL of the TLT5s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kelskii wrote: |
| Hi spyderjon, I own some TLT5 boots and I can't compare them with Titans but can compare them with my BD Factors. I measured the distance from the soles to the pin locations at the heel and toe of both and they're pretty much identical. Where they differ is with the profile of the boot sole. The Factor has a boot board that is flat from toe to heel and a flattish outer sole whereas the TLT5 has a rockered sole and no boot board and the internal surface follows the profile of the outer sole. This means that the lowest point inside the boot is under the ball of the foot. So, the slope is from the heel down to BOF and then up to the toes. This may explain the steeper delta angle when compared to other boots that have a flat boot board.... |
I was looking at some boot pics last night & yes, it looks like the differences are in the sole profile. I think the usual method of measuring the delta (ie to the underside of the boot sole at the toe/heel) can give a misleading figure as the boot is effectively suspended on the front/rear pins so it's the height difference between the front & rear pins that determines the delta not the sole profile of the boot. So a better method of comparison between tech bindings would be to measure from the underside of the base plates to the pins.
The difficulty is then comparing the angle of a tech binding to a conventional binding that takes a touring boot, ie Duke/Baron/F10/F12/Frtischi etc. Here you could compare the heights to the top edges of the boot's toe/heel lugs when installed in the different bindings.
It's definately a lot trickier to make comparisons that a plain old alpine boot/binding set-up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
just ordered some dynafit radical ST's from spyderjon at a very sweet price, he is doing a pre season deal at the moment I think until the end of the month, if you fancy any tech bindings now is the time....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously a super secret sweet price; the dynafit bindings page on his website just says "This Category is currently empty." to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Serriadh, an email to jon may be an idea 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is there any real point to spaffing the extra on the FT this time? I'm definitely in the market for new dynafits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| meh wrote: |
| Is there any real point to spaffing the extra on the FT this time? I'm definitely in the market for new dynafits. |
IMO only if you need the 5-13 din of the FT's versus the 4-10 of the ST's. And you can't shim the toes of the FT's due to the carbon bridge connecting the toe & heel pieces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Thanks Jon, I'd always thought the ST had the same DIN range as the FT, my mistake!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| meh wrote: |
| Thanks Jon, I'd always thought the ST had the same DIN range as the FT, my mistake! |
It's a real shame that they don't! I'm having a pair of ST's myself but I'm thinking of sticking some FT heel springs in 'em & then calibrating them on my torque testing machine 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
spyderjon, yer it seems a tad like making the difference just to justify selling the more expensive flashy version.
I'll shoot you an e-mail once I get into the office.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Just an update, I have Dynafit Titans and Vertical ST bindings and Jon calculated that I needed a whopping 15mm toe shim to get a zero Delta angle. This was done and double checked by Andi McCann on his balancing equipment... Looks weird but the combination skied very well last week... cheers spyderjon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
skimottaret,  pics?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
They are mounted on Head REV90's which are a slight rockered ski, the combo skied quite nicely on and off piste. Only issue i continue to have is lateral stiffness and I am thinking this is due to the rubbish cuff adjustment on the Titan boots which moves constantly
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
barry, +10000
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Seems like it might have been worth tracking down a pair of heelpieces that had the pins closer to the topsheet instead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skimottaret, glad it is working. I've had something similar done with the front half of a Dynaduke plate (wider mounting profile) and a 5mm HDPE shim.
Can you get the Titans re-riveted. The TGR guys seem to have been replacing the rivets with a non-adjustable version. Obviously if you need the cuff adjustment (I run full negative on everything) that isn't an option. Duct taping the inside of the rivet seems to have worked for some.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
) but they've emailed the factory for me so I'll advise soonest.
