 Poster: A snowHead
|
Are DIN settings on bindings universal?
By that I mean if my DIN is set at say 8 on one manufacturers binding should it be set the same on any other skis I use even if the bindings are made by a different company?
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
Yep. It's a German standard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Thanks for that Brian 
Just found a thread on epicski.com where there's a post (from veeeight actually) that says very much the same:
| Quote: |
| The whole point about DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normung) is that it isn't vague - it's an exacting (worldwide) standard, so that no matter what brand of binding you buy - a DIN 5 is a DIN 5 across the board. |
So I'm presumably safe enough setting a pair of Fischer Railflex bindings (already set up for my boot size) at the same DIN setting as the Markers on my other Fischers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| brian wrote: |
| Yep. It's a German standard. |
With the qualification that the official standard only goes up to 10. Above that and it's not covered by the standard, which is why numbers above 10 are shown either in a different colour.
(What I don't know is if the ski manufacturers have an agreement amongst themselves on what consitutes "DIN 14").
(You should remember that bindings are mechanical system - they wear and get dirty - so whilst it's true that a DIN 4 is a DIN 4 for two different bindings out of the box, after a few years of use this will no longer actually be the case.)
(Oh and I'm pretty sure that DIN setting depends on ski length - although I know there are a whole bunch of people around here who know much more than me on this...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
PhillipStanton, and the condition of the sole of your boot will change the release to some extent, and vary with binding design.
But I dont think it makes much difference.
I still did my knee in a simple fall - without releasing - on skis that had released fine on previous 'events'. Full computerised release test the same day with my boots and all tensions etc were within tolerance.
In the news secion is a bit about knee friendly bindings - seems to be a lateral heel release. Line Skis designed a similar thing a year or two back (I cant remember if it had a lateral heel release, but it was designed to address the same issues) and I remember being skeptical of their test procedure as illustrated on their website. The kneebinding.com video also worries me - the test rig dosnt seem to bear any resembalence to my leg and they talk of the torque transducers being mounted in the middle of the 'leg' sections as if this is relavent - it isnt as torque is the same all along a twisted element. There may be 'marketing speak' going on here, or it may be thay they realy dont understand, it is difficult to tell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PhillipStanton wrote: |
......What I don't know is if the ski manufacturers have an agreement amongst themselves on what consitutes "DIN 14".....
|
I believe they do. I've tested a wide range of bindings at over 10 DIN on my machine ( http://www.jonsskituning.co.uk/content/view/26/39/ ) & they've been as consistent as they are under 10.
BTW, ski length is not taken in to consideration on the DIN release charts, only sex, age, weight, sole length & skier type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all the info guys.
My old Fishers, which I'll continue to use on plastic, have Marker bindings - the new Fischers have Fischer's own bindings on them (FS11s) and these will be used exclusively on snow (piste). So no other changes and the bindings have already been set up for my boot size and I only need to adjust the DIN.
veeeight when you mention different levels of elasticity does that mean that Fischer based on the same information (Skier Type etc) may calculate a different DIN setting to Marker because of these differences in elasticity?
I'm also getting a pair of Lines for off piste/crud etc and the bindings (Look on these skis) are being fully set up for me so I'll be interested to see what DIN setting the shop calculates for them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
when you mention different levels of elasticity does that mean that Fischer based on the same information (Skier Type etc) may calculate a different DIN setting to Marker because of these differences in elasticity?
|
Uh-oh. Another can of worms 
Without going into it in too much detail:
A couple of things to consider when talking about "elasticity":
1. Release Strategy
2. Elasticity Allowance.
With 1) - for example, Marker toe piece has an upward release feature (for some of their models), whilst the Tyrolia has a diagonal release feature. So whilst the DIN figure for release may be the same for both (say a torque of 50Nm at the toepiece) the Marker will be more receptive to an upward release whilst the Tyrolia a diagonal (amongst others).
With 2) - comes other factors, such as shock loads, you can apply a 50Nm torque gradually, and you can apply 50Nm suddenly. A binding with a higher "elasticity" figure will retain you in a high shock load situtation than one with a lower elasticity figure. Which is why some racers are cliff huckers prefer some makes of bindings over others.
For the vast majority of skiers, these factors are a small consideration, as long as you get your DIN set correctly according to the chart, this works well for most. But bear in mind that there are 2 charts in existence, 1 for France, and 1 for the rest of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks veeeight for the information and sorry about all these cans of worms I seem to be opening 
I guess the safest thing for me to do is to get both sets of bindings checked over professionally - I'll see if I can find anyone qualified locally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
roga,
I think you will find that the Fisher bindings are re-badged Tyrolia's (somebody correct me if I'm wrong)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Dypcdiver, you're not wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I've checked that and you're quite right - they are Tyrolia's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Hence my continual reference above to Tyrolia's!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
^ yup, that's what prompted me to check
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Regarding DIN settings -- they are universal and they are strictly defined by the German Industrial Standard. Yes, a "5" on one brand of bindings is a "5" on another brand of bindings, but the effect of that "5" on your lower leg in the twist and bending directions is a function of how long your boot sole is. The tables for the DIN-system are available from the German Industrial Standards organization at:
DIN Deutches Institut für Normung e.V.
Burggrafenstraße 6
D - 10787 Berlin
http://www.nasport.din.de
The DIN settings provide a way for you and your ski shop to compare the 'expected' settings to the 'actual' measured release settings that all ski binding in the US must be tested-for in ski shops. If there is a deviation beyond a certain specified amount (provided in the DIN standard specifications and provided by each binding manufacturer to their qualified ski shops), then the binding needs to be serviced and maintenance needs to be provided to bring the binding to 'within' the specified release tolerances. Often, friction is the culprit that causes deviations, and each binding company provides a checklist of the factors to consider that will bring the binding to 'within-tolerance'. Bindings that cannot be brought up to tolerance should be discarded. Bindings should be tested at the beginning of each ski season and every 30 days of skiing.
The DIN-settings are release settings. They do not provide retention per se. Retention is a function of each binding's design (as noted by the person who listed 2 factors that contribute to retention). He is correct. Additionally, the main aspect of any binding regarding retention and its design - pertains to how its design 'decouples' skiing control loads from loads that cause injury. If a binding's design cannot decouple the difference between these two requirements, then it needs high settings to provide good retention. Some bindings with poorly decoupled designs need very high settings to provide powerful retention, while other designs with good decoupling can provide good retention at low settings. Elasticity is one factor in retention, but pivot-point-positioning (in each release direction) dictates 'decoupling'. One binding company's design is so overly cross-linked (poorly decoupled) that they recently came out with a model that goes up to DIN 30 to attempt to band-aid-over their enherent design deficiency.
Regarding skiing knee injuries, the femur torque device that was referenced above, reads the signature loads that are known by biomechanicists to cause ACL injuries. The test device measures torque about the tibia and torque about the femur. When designs respond to torque about the femur, knee injuries are mitigated. The binding that is shown is KneeBinding - and it will be available in one year (early winter'0 . It has been in development for 5 years. It not only provides the knee-friendly function, it also provides the highest requirements that all ski ski-bindings should have -- pertaining to release, retention, convenience and performance. I am the designer. I used to work for major ski-binding companies and I used to race, successfully, at the CanAm level on my home-made bindings, many years ago. I was the only one in these 80 mph downhills who could go through the finish line and twist out of my bindings. That's because my design was decoupled (as noted above). These events were not marketing talk, they were solid, consistent events that occurred over several years of high-level racing based on advanced and proven engineeing principles. I utilized these design techniques in the new KneeBinding ski-bindings. We plan that KneeBinding will be the first successful American ski-binding and we hope you stay tuned for their intro, next year.
You will find that they are simple, light, durable, reliable and offer powerful retention at low DIN-settings.
Thank you,
Rick Howell, President, KneeBinding, Stowe, Vermont USA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| 5bind wrote: |
| .......One binding company's design is so overly cross-linked (poorly decoupled) that they recently came out with a model that goes up to DIN 30 to attempt to band-aid-over their enherent design deficiency...... |
....which also makes that Marker binding damned heavy
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
The biggest problem I have with my din setting is swallowing my pride and setting it back since I'm aging. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
SnowHot, only 3 yrs to go for me too . I don't think I'll be lowering my settings either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
spyderjon, How sad is it that I walk up to a demo tent and instead of giving them my stats, I say, 286/7 ?
Some argue with me, but most don't. At my age, ability and weight, I should be a 5.5 or 6.
*I still fill out their paperwork but I figure, they can be setting up the demo skis for me while I'm doing that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
