 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi all, anyone reading the rehab thread may know that on the 4th of March 2023 I fully ruptured my left ACL skiing. 27th of November 2023 I had the full reconstruction with harvested hamstring an obviously missed the rather warm 23/24 season.
Almost two years on we're ready to hit the slopes and I need to sort my skis out with revised DIN settings.
Can anyone with real knowledge advise what this should be (or if you don't want comit point me in the right direction) based on the following:
Weight 90kg
Height 1.8m
Years skiing 35+
Ability (post crash) ski pretty much anything on piste.
Current fitness is gym 3 times a week, running upto 6 miles twice a week, cycling is currently reduced due to the winter and the turbo is as dull as dull thing.
In Feb we're going to Sestriere with my B I L who hasn't skiied for several years so I don't expect a mad week and I'll certainly be taking it easy for the first few days. Also planning a Chill Factor visit over the next few weeks to see how my knee feels.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
This calculator https://www.dincalculator.com/ appears logical and realistic in my experience. It wouldn't let me link the result page to show my entry for you.
I input your stats (used age 50 plus in bias toward viable skeletal projection) and intermediate skill (again a projection of your intended skiing ) and it gave 6.5 din. A good starting point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Beginner gave 5.5
Advanced gave 8
Shows the range limits based on ski kinetic (in my view) input for the same kg/cm/boot size.
To be ultra cautious, then that 5.5 level would seem appropriate, the 8 level only if you experience early release from your kinetic input.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@homers double, 5.5 to 6.5 seems a bit low for a fit, experienced skier your size. I’d say 7 or 8 depending on how aggressive you ski. I’m similar size to you and put DIN’s on 9 and skis come off easy when I crash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@homers double, I don't think you want or need to revise the DIN (unless it was something mad like 20 to begin with). If it was appropriate before injury, it's appropriate afterwards. Your reconstructed knee, by now, from what I'm told about mine should be at least as strong as it was before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Guess it depends on whether you've a taste for testing din absolute against your reconstructed knee 
I didn't think the release mechanical disadvantage ? was linear, but more logarithmic in it's application. The DiN number just giving us a scale of interpretation.
I used 50+ at a guess as OP said 35+ years experience (15 yrs + 35) would give osteo-age appropriate projection, without any knee compromise.
Also indicated light skiing with BiL on piste as test cell dynamic. 6.5 doesn't look bad to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 yrs old by the way, I was just reading a rather old SH thread based on the first google search so apologies for not responding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ski3, I'm 60 odd kgs and I think I'm on 8 ... and I've had an rACL too ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
7 has come up using @ski3's link so thank you for that. Having not looked my skis for almost two years I'm pretty sure they're set around 10 so the suggested range above seems perfect.
Hopefully the loft is getting a visit this evening so I'll get the screwdriver out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| @ski3, I'm 60 odd kgs and I think I'm on 8 ... and I've had an rACL too ... |
Yes, I can see there could be a circular debate. Would preference come into that ? Obviously level of "attack" in kinetic does through the din entry of beginner, intermediate or expert projection, altering the algorithm to bias setting.
Admittedly I'm a little cautious and hedge at lower end of Din range for things I set. Effectively adherence light to mitigate more exteme effects. Ive not injured my knees (or anyone I've set for) and happy with those choices.
The OP can, obviously, place their outlook onto the raw Din calc knowing their level of attack and how it notionally fits with the skill rating toggle in there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Post injury attack mode can reach 11. This coming week however attack level will be set at "kitten" for the first few days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@homers double, I've met some pretty spicy "kittens".
@ski3, my point is really only that afaik (based on my own ACL journey these last 2 years and a lot of physio/surgical input) is that no-one suggested modifying DINs - my surgeon is in Annecy and treats hundreds of skiers, my physio is in Chamonix, has had both her knees reconned and treats hundreds of skiing rehabs. They'd have mentioned it if it was advisable.
If it's too light you'll pre-release (if not, it's not too light), if it's too tight, well, the obvious! Realising of course that it's not an exact setting and it's a single number in a highly dynamic situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ski3 wrote: |
This calculator https://www.dincalculator.com/ appears logical and realistic in my experience. It wouldn't let me link the result page to show my entry for you.
|
It's not bad, although it annoys me that it assumes you want lower setting as you get older. If I claim to be 15 years younger it gives me my normal setting of 8.5, being honest with it gives just 7, which I'd be very dubious about skiing on.
I also have knee issues, including a reconstructed ACL from around ten years ago and ongoing bone/bone contact and resulting osteoarthritis due to no more cartilage or meniscus at one point, but have never really felt that a reduced DIN would be a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
@Chaletbeauroc, as I understand it it's assuming you might have osteoporosis if you're over 50 and might snap a tibia. Which is obviously rather a blanket assumption (and may not be equally relevant to men and women). I guess the problem is that many people have no idea they have a bone density issue until they break something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Shakira, to my mind that's a bit of a dangerous assumption!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Shakira, Quite so, which just highlights how vague the whole area of DIN setting is. A more comprehensive, but massively over-complicated, calculator could include such factors as well as how aggressively you normally ski. Most ACL injuries occur at low speeds, so there's a school of thought that suggest that a faster more aggressive skier is going to release the skis at higher settings. Certainly true IME, the very occasional fall I've had where I wanted them to release they always have.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@under a new name, agreed! It seems sensible that an 80-year old might need a different DIN than a 20-year old, but the step change at 50 seems a bit arbitrary. But so does a lot of it - my old boots were 310mm, my new ones are 312, and that drops me from 8 to 7!
@Chaletbeauroc, other calculators (e.g., https://www.mechanicsofsport.com/skiing/equipment/bindings/din-calculator.html ) do have an extra level for very aggressive skiers. It is normally the slow falls that cause the problems though.
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Mon 6-01-25 18:39; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
I don't read the adjustment at age 50 as meaning a 51 year old automatically needs lower settings than a 49 year old. More that the average skier age 50+, say around 65, is prudent to use lower settings than an average 16-50 year old, say age 33. And without making things too complicated the simplest way to achieve that is just to put a deduction for c 50+.
There is certainly an argument for an adjustment based on level of 'aggression'. An increase for fast, more agressive skiers, and a decrease for slow, more passive ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
(duplicate)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Shakira, you need a space between the URL and the closing bracket 
Yeah, spitting out 6.5 for me >50, but 8 (which I ski on iirc) <50. Bit arbitrary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@under a new name, fixed, ta.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using the calculator @Shakira linked to its now 8.5 so I think for the first few days 7/8 will be ok think about what @under a new name said about NOT adjusting DINs.
I suppose with it being the first week back I'm conscious (not apprehensive at all) about how it's going to feel.
Thanks for all the imput and advice, it's appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Better to lose a ski... than to lose a knee
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| homers double wrote: |
| In Feb we're going to Sestriere with my B I L who hasn't skiied for several years so I don't expect a mad week and I'll certainly be taking it easy for the first few days. Also planning a Chill Factor visit over the next few weeks to see how my knee feels. |
This doesn't sound like the sort of skiing that needs a high DIN setting. If you are recovering from injury and cruising the pistes then you don't need a high setting. You also sound like a competent skier, so you are unlikely to be making abrupt inputs to your bindings on the easy terrain that would likely pop a ski. If I was the tech. in the hire shop I'd be setting you at 6.5 max based on the information you have provided. If you popped a ski then come back and we will tweak the setting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jamescollings wrote: |
| Better to lose a ski... than to lose a knee |
Maybe, maybe not. Hitting your head on ice or sliding into the trees might make the knee look like a bargain. We all set our own priorities; I want to stay in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Like everything in life, I think there is no zero-risk choice or course of action. By reducing your DIN setting, you are increasing the chance of coming out, which could have very negative consequences, including further knee injury. I had this after my knee injury and operation. I took action to reduce the risk of getting a knee injury by getting a SkiMojo and reducing the DIN from 8.5 to 7 on my bindings. However, I found I was coming out of my bindings too readily for what felt like no reason. Due to the risks this poses when off-piste, I cranked the DIN setting back up to 7.5, and it was/is much better. My recommendation is to reduce it, and if you feel you are popping out your skis too much for no reason, gradually increase it till that stops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
great thread, I hadn't thought to reduce the DIN setting, I ruptured mine last January, but no reconstruction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jamescollings wrote: |
| Better to lose a ski... than to lose a knee |
This sort of thinking is a classic failure to understand risk management. Something that at least 99% of the population are utterly miserable at understanding.
What if losing a ski leads to a nasty, possibly fatal accident? You are engaging in the fallacy of believing there is a zero-risk choice you can make. The reality is all you can do is look to minimize the risk. That might lead you, if you have a weakened knee, to reduce your DIN setting and take a higher risk of injury through losing the ski at an inopportune moment, but the belief you can just wack the DIN setting down without there being any consequences is not just wrong but dangerous as it could easily lead you to actually increase your risk of injury and death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
But no one is actually saying that are they.
They are saying...
- consider your injury and recovery status
- consider your skiing ability and the type of inputs you are making to the ski and most importantly the terrain on which you are skiing
- set an appropriate DIN setting so that the ski releases at a point before injury occurs but that does not prevent safe and controlled skiing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@jabuzzard, I'm sorry but that sounds like an incoherent ramble. I write RAMS almost daily and at this stage the only risk I can see is to myself so am...
Nope. Not going there.
Losing a ski isn't going to hurt me, I'm not tree skiing of diving off cliffs as this is going to be a relativly sedate week with family so no huge risks.
I'm happy with the reccomendations of other SHs and their links and I will take these onboard at ENTIRELY MY OWN RISK and use my own experience as a base.
Thank you all once again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Mmmm think people are being a bit harsh on @jabuzzard - I think they are right to express caution about reducing the DIN too far.
"Losing a ski isn't going to hurt me" doesn't stack up. I know people that have injured themselves in fairly innocuous situations. I have had dodgy bindings in the past that released in unnecessary circumstances (and yes I had them checked to try to resolve the issue) and it's unsettling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Whether you set a binding on 7 or 8 (assuming it’s a decent binding and set properly) it’s not going to come off without some proper forces applied to it. So unless he’s smashing through moguls or some rutted boilerplate snow the risk of an unintentional release is very low.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@BobinCH, on that I would agree. It actually probably makes more difference the quality of the binding, if it's set up right, how old it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
They're good, well maintained and properly set up (new setting accepted)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| homers double wrote: |
| Losing a ski isn't going to hurt me, I'm not tree skiing of diving off cliffs as this is going to be a relativly sedate week with family so no huge risks. |
You should be aware that even if you are skiing relatively sedately on a nice blue piste, if your ski comes off even when you are not going very fast, your upper body will hit the ground like a flying sack of potatoes and the impact is going to hurt. Your knees will probably be fine, but you could sustain a shoulder or arm injury. Source: done it myself with DINs set too low, my own fault for not checking them properly (not hire skis), minor injury to rotator cuff.
Most of the advice above sounds pretty sensible, but I wanted to make sure you understood that there is such a thing as too low, and you don't need to be pushing it to lose a ski – in my case, I was skating along the flat bit at the end of the piste back to the lift, so pretty low speed.
Despite that, I do run my DINs slightly on the low side, 6 for piste skis, 5.5 on freeride skis (I like my knees) when a chart puts me on 6 or 7 depending on how many pies I've eaten, but I've not had any pre-release issues so I'm happy with that.
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Wed 8-01-25 13:30; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
This is how I injured my knee, and above all I'm 47 so not some sort of snowflake. I know what life throws at me and how to deal with it. Not wanting to sound ungrateful but I'm OK with "stuff"
I used to set fire to rivers and played with knives as a child.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@homers double, I did an ACL a couple of years ago, and went with rehab and no reconstruction. Accident was April, and my first ski trip was the following March. Like you, I wondered what to do about DIN settings. I briefly contemplated setting the toe slightly lower than the heel, so that a twisting fall would release slightly earlier, protecting my knee from twisting again. In the end, I set them on standard setting for type 2 skier, which is what they were on before, and it's been fine.
I teach at a dry slope, so I spend a lot of time adjusting bindings according to the official Salomon chart. The calculators that people have put links to here are all very well, but sometimes it helps to see the whole chart, and how the changes in parameters affect the numbers. I don't know how to upload pics to posts, but if you PM me, I can take a photo of the chart and send it to you. One thing that people haven't mentioned much in all their discussions about appropriate numbers, is that boot sole length is definitely part of the calculation. 2 skiers who are in all other aspects identical, will not have the same DIN number if one is a size 8 foot and the other is a size 9.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@shep, I'm only going with what my expert suggests ... l'll check in a few minutes 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
. As you know we ski pretty similarly and I've eaten more pies than you! After my ACL graft I dropped from 8 to 6 (well 5.5 to begin with, but that didn't go too well 
) YMMV