Binding settings on my skis - huge discrepancy

A snowHead

When I first when to Xscape as a raw beginner, the tech decided, based on the chart, I ought to be set at 7, being a rather chunky gal (Figures: Wt 14.5st, Ht: 5.7, Boots 26.5, Type: 1st timer). I was quite taken aback when at the end of the session I needed help to get the skis off whereas others were releasing theirs easily. This led to big guilt feelings about being on the heavy side with concerns that because I am, the skis needed to be so tightly attached that I risked injury more than other people.

I then went off on my hols where the local tech (who'd spent a good 10 mins helping me get and fit boots correclty and chatting to me) decided an appropriate setting was 4, saying that my age, gender, lack of experience and nervousness were more important factors than weight! On my return to Xsc I told them and they said 4 would be ok then and to ask for 4 myself! Incidentally I have fallen 3 times with the skis at 4 and they have not come off yet.

Confused or what!

A snowHead

NewSkier, The local tech seems much more switched on based on the info you have given 4 sounds about right the chart I use suggests 4.5. I can not see any reason why given the above data you would set din at 7.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

kevinrhead, NewSkier, I don't know what they should be set to, but I have VERY similar phys. char. to NewSkier - I am a couple of inches taller. On holiday this year I did think to look at the bindings and from my uneducated view of the settings they seemd to be set on 8 on the scale that faced upwards on the front binding. My ski's are also incredibly difficult to release - this setting seems to correspond with NewSkier's, original setting. Could there be a reason?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

NewSkier, Megamum, Shocked

I started a thread on bindings last season after Gray fell and hurt himself - I'll see if I can find it.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

NewSkier, not surprised you're confused. I always have my bindings a lot lower than various people suggest because I've had several ligament injuries and want to avoid all possible strain on my knees. I'm an elderly female experienced skier; mine are set very low (3) and when I've had the kind of fall when they come off I've always been very grateful that they have. When you are nervous and inexperienced you are likely to have very slow speed falls (sometimes more or less standing still, or for example when taking a bit of a tumble getting off a chairlift) and that's when you need them to release. I have two skiing sisters in law and both have had falls getting off chairlifts. One broke her leg in New Zealand and was helicoptered across the island and was still having bone grafts a year and a half later, the other couldn't get on an easyjet flight from Geneva yesterday because she was on crutches with a torn ligament. Both had bindings set by ski hire shops and they didn't release. You will get people talking about the dangers of "pre release" but you can probably ignore them if you are not skiing on the kind of For you, the risk of a premature release is probably a lot less than the risk of a slow, twisting, fall hurting your knee. Your weight would be an added factor there, as you would be putting more strain on the joint as you fell. My non-expert advice, based on my own 20 years of experience (my first, and worst, ligament injury was on hired skis in Cairngorm where I took what I was given because I didn't know any better) I would say put them as low as they will go, then crank them up a bit higher if they keep falling off all the time.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Here you go: Din Settings for Dummies Laughing

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I found this www.dinsetting.com - is it any good - it put me at 3.5!!

After all it is free

Megamum, that sounds fine to me. I have mine at that level and they don't release except when I want them to. I'm 5'6", 10 stone, size 7 shoes (can't remember boot size) and am an experienced, but not aggressive, skier. I'm careful to get the snow/ice off before putting them on, and I don't use the bindings as a scraper. It's amazing how many experienced skiers will pontificate about the finer sensitivities of their bindings, spend a fortune on the latest ones, trust their ligaments to them on a regular basis and still kick the hell out of them every day bashing the ice off their boots.

Megamum, NewSkier, You may get a lot of conflicting advice on this topic, but here's my take. The lower the setting the easier it is for your ski's to come off and hence avoid damage to your joints or muscles. So unless you are going to be pushing very hard, lower is better. I have skied with mine set to everything from 7 (as reccomended by the charts, and 3. My ski's have never pre-released. I therefore reckon that 3-4 is fine for how I ski. I almost certainly weigh more than you.

It's not hard to change the setting so why not go for the lower one, and if you find a ski does come off, just up it a tad?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Megamum, interesting.
That chart looks remarkably like the 1996 one that Terry Morse used.
I have just looked at Terry's updated site, and it now includes this

This chart was copied from customer literature for the Marker M51 SC binding, which was purchased in 1996. I have been informed that this DIN chart has been superceded by a newer version.

See here: http://ski.terrymorse.com/din.html

The current chart is slightly different to that. (That I can spot, skier codes D, E and P are not as they appear on that chart)

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Happy at 4.5 and I don't hang around too much. When I get the chance to learn to play in the bumps it'll probably need a rethink . . . and if anyone thinks I'm coming off my board in powder is one nut short of a sac.

snow reports

Masque, But remember to crank them up to max when racing wink

Frosty the Snowman, or even better, do as I did and leave it to the one that knows Confused

and he only charged me 40Eu for the service.

You know it makes sense.

NewSkier, Megamum, I'm considerably heavier than either of you an a pretty experienced skier and I rarely have bindings set higher than 7, in theory the bindings should be set to a point just above the level where the skis come off without you crashing on a regular basis, for an adult beginner I would expect this to be arround 4, as you start to put more effort through your bindings (usually due to higher speed turns) you need to increase these settings. 7 for a raw beginner seems potentially dangerous

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

I fell over, shall we say, more than a few times this year. The only time I lost a ski was the one day when took a hard tumble (I still don't know quite what happened), but my the time it had come off it had wrenched all the muscles/ligaments in my right leg - maybe they were set too tight. I wouldn't swear to the fact that the settings were at 8, but I did have quite a look and that seemed to be the setting - there were odd numbers marked on one side of the line and evens opposite and the little line seemed to line up with the 8. It didn't occur me to check for a setting on the back though - I guess I assumed that there would only be one adjustment to look at Puzzled

. Anyhow, I've decided that, just on the sheer practicalities of getting the skis off, it wouldn't hurt to get them set lower next time and on that basis I'm on a diet until next year (well at least it gives me something to keep aiming for now I haven't got the immediate holiday to look forward to). At least next year I might be able to check the settings properly and if I think they seem high I now have some information to challenge the setting with - presumably binding settings are pretty standard across different binding makes?

A snowHead

Megamum,
I have my bindings set on 8. I am a 14 stone, 6'0", male, ski instructor.
if you're bindings were set on 8, I'm surprised you've got any legs left, 8 is way too high for you. Mrs. S is 5'5" 10 stone, instructor set on din 5.5

A snowHead

NewSkier and Megamum - I agree that those settings are waaaay too high.

I'm broadly NewSkier's dimensions and usually ski on DIN 7 - including in bumps, off-piste. Occassionally the DIN goes up to 9 if I'm skiing somewhere where I'd prefer not to lose a ski - but that's pretty rare.

Over my last few weeks of ski school shadowing I've become really shocked at how badly some hire shops set up skis. I had a child in my class today who could click into their bindings when the bindings were closed.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

I have mine set on 6.5 (5'10 14.5 Stone Bloke - experienced skier). I had a fall last year when they were set on 8 and I badly sprained ligaments in my ankle. If I start popping out at this setting i will just crank up slightly.

NewSkier and Megamum your settings were definitely too high.

snowHead

You need to Login to know who's really who.

I'm a 7 according to the links given above but if I put on 3 more kgs then I jump up to 8.5!!
Surely a formula would work better for this rather than a table?

92kgs, 6', 317mm sole length type II bordering on type III skier

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Mine are 5.5 and I seem to have developed the knack of doing some high speed falls and still keeping my skis on (making sure they don't catch as I do 'turtle on his back' impressions). But when I have fallen awkwardly the skis have popped just as I began to feel the first touch of pain. I reckon that the set up is just about perfect for me as I've never had a pre release. BTW - am 5'10 and 73kg.

You'll need to Register first of course.

NewSkier,

This is a really helpful thread. I am 12+ weeks and have always trusted the tech at the hire shop, not really understanding how DIN worked (cos I haven't tried, not cos I'm dense).

My worst experience, but funny really, was at Breckenridge. I got boots 'n' skis and trotted off to the lift with Mr HL. I put ski number 1 on and couldn't for the life of me get number 2 on - the binding just wouldn't click. No the wonder, the bindings hadn't been adjsuted for the boot length and there was a 2 inch gap between the heel of my boot and the binding rolling eyes

. had to trek all the way back and have it seen to, wasted ski time and my faith was a bit dented.

I will pay much more attention in future. I reckon 4.75 would be about right for me but I'm sure the setting has been nearer 7 in the past. I always hire advanced skis so I wonder if they think I go whizz fast or do bumps when the reality is I go so slow I haven't fallen over for years, even then just a graceful sort of sinking. My skis have come off a few times in the early years after a fall but not in recent memory and I've never had pre-release.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I think there is a bit of a problem using body weight as a guide for the DIN setting. Imagine the following - a 100kg unfit lardy person and a 100kg muscular fit person, both of same height, both of same ski ability. Now the DIN setting for both of these people would be the same. But there is going to be a massive difference in risk of damage of joints/ligaments/muscles.

After all it is free

NewSkier, I'm 14st and ski pretty much any terrain with my bindings set at 6. I don't see any point in increasing the DIN setting unless my skis start coming off....this has never happened to me apart from the odd fall when I've been surprised they came off as I didn't feel any kind of shock or twisting through my feet/legs. I reckon that means they're about right.

AxsMan, and others - I do begin to wonder if there's not two different systems/charts at work here. If I use the chart in Wear The Fox Hat, found - the Terry Morse one, it gives me a setting of 7 if I read it correctly (similar to the shops setting), if I use the little calculator that I found it gives me the 3.5 that most folks on here would seem to advise. Could it be that there is an old and new system (The note on Terry Morse site suggested that a revised chart was in the offing) - if so then maybe the chart that is used is determined by the bindings (old system or new system that is fitted to skis). Now I know that's probably heresay to suggest in this setting where such a concept would be known, but the evidence does seem to point that way. BTW. if you want to check my math I am 5'9, around 14-14.5stone, 26.5 size boots, and class myself as a class/type I type skier on bth sites. How can they both be right if they are using the same system - the difference implies two systems at work here - at least to my uneducated brain

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Megamum, it's not the 26.5 boot size, but the length of the sole that matters - it should be marked on the outside of the boot, I'd take a guess that yours will be about 280mm.

The fact that you think you read the chart correctly at 7, but the same chart gives and answer of 3.5 when used in the calculator would suggest that either the calculator is working it out incorrectly, or you are reading the chart incorrectly. (I seem to remember a thread a couple of years ago about this which highlighted how easy it is to get different results just by interpreting information in different ways)

My point about the Terry Morse chart is that it is the same one as has been used by the calculator website you listed. I don't think either is accurate! (I have my own calculator, but because of the risks involved in skis not releasing when you need them to, or releasing when they shouldn't, I will not publish it on a website - I'm not that stupid!). I also check my calculator each year with the latest charts from Salomon, Rossignol and Tyrolia.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Megamum,
There is only one system for binding settings and that is the DIN system.

snow reports

Megamum, I think the clear message form several posters here is - go with the lower setting. worst case - you suffer premature release (ooh er missus Shocked

), given your descriptions of your skiing I'd say this was unlikely to result in a high speed wipe out Laughing

It sure is a minefield eh? Though I'd always prefer to be advised by an expert, I need to know I can trust that expert which is why I do like to have an idea as to what is right for me and why. FOr now there seems to be no reason for me NOT to go with the recommendation of 4 as used in resort so I'll probably stick to that.

You know it makes sense.

AxsMan, I wouldn't even put Megamum and high speed in the same sentence Laughing

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

... and don't even put me in the same sentence with "moderate speed" (oh and I'll take the risk of "premature release" Wink

)

A snowHead

I set mine by testing with these methods..

http://www.ski-injury.com/st.htm

I have the release point right before I feel pain, but I'm really trying not to screw up my knees this season. I have moved up a half since I got more comfortable with my fall techniques (a.k.a scarpa's flailing turtle method)

Once I ski better and fall less I'll compensate. And only released one ski 2 times so far on near cartwheels.. my DIN settings from binding to binding aren't the same

A snowHead

I'm interested that Xscape set tham at 7. I usually ski with a RV of 8, and Xscape (Caslteford) refused to set them above 5 without me signing a waiver (I'm taller and heavier thanNewSkier)

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

I'm hoping it was a one-off - perhaps an inexperienced tech or one not exactly concentrating hard - it was a very busy session with hoardes of schoolkids about - just reinforces my view that knowing a bit about it is a good thing, as you know when to query something! Maybe sometime I will ask what they recommend again instead of simply saying what setting I want.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

The worst I've come across was the guy who took your weight in Kg and divided by 10 to get your RV Shocked

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Elizabeth B, It isn't that unusual to just set them to your weight in stone.

You'll need to Register first of course.

rjs,

Really? That seems incredibly high for some heavier people

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

rjs, My bindings don't go anywhere near that high Shocked

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

AxsMan,
I'll get you some Downhill Race bindings if you want. Fixed non release toe piece and heel piece that goes to DIN 24. Toofy Grin

Help!!

Binding settings on my skis - huge discrepancy

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Bend ze Knees