Binding Mount Position, Stockli Laser AX, 183 cm, 2017-2018

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
Background reading (for those deep divers among us)

The 183 feels heavy. It probably should be plus mounted 2-3 cm. But that's a big guess. On steep terrain they were too much work imo. Flatter they cruise just fine.
Unless you're over 200lbs , really like speed, and or experiment with binding position, you should go with the 175. That seems to be the sweetspot in this ski along with the 167. I think they missed it with the 183, it becomes heavy and tiresome frankly, but mount point experimenting might change that view.
As to the 183cm Stockli AX, I own a '15 192cm Stockli SR 95. Honestly, that is less work than the 183 AX in short turns on steeps. There's something about the front end of the AX ski that is very weighty and requires lots of work. Now maybe going +1 to 2 would change that. Don't know.
I originally bought the 183 AX, coming off the predecessor AR, and it was a huge, jarring change. I didn't like it at first, but over time adjusted to larger turn radius and slower response time. Then was able to compare it to the 175 AX and I went back to not liking the 183 (I'm 6'1", 155 lbs). The 175 is still very stable at high speeds on groomers.
Blizzard Brahma 2018, Stockli Laser AX, Fischer Pro Mountain 95, Fischer The Curv DTX in terrible snow!

The following review is a 3-runs/ski review of 4 good skis, in less than optimal conditions. I find that any ski feels amazing on Colorado hero snow. The kind of snow I was on today was the opposite, and really pulled out the personality and friendliness of each ski. Rain had fallen last week, almost 2 inches, and 8 inches of heavy snow followed. Bachelor had done their usual poor job grooming, trying to groom 60 miles each night and leaving the groomers riddled with ridges, holes, death cookies. Despite our complaints, they have yet to learn “quality over quantity”. Wind was blowing 50mph plus at mid-mountain, which was pushing powdered sugar snow down the hill, filling in spots. Groomers went from concrete to 3” deep of windpack within the matter of a couple of feet. I was able to get much more of a feel for the skis today than I did in Colorado. Good snow masks a lot of flaws!

Stockli Laser AX: current model (current through 2018), 175cm. The Laser AX is fairly narrow for an off-piste ski at 78mm, but one would never know that when skiing it. This was by far the easiest and best ski here, no question. Although the tip had every bit as much power as the other skis tested here, it did not suffer from the “excessive edginess” and artificially boosted lateral feel that was present on the other skis. It loaded perfectly, did not “dive for hard snow underneath, and not a trace of a hooky tip was present. It seemed to surf above the junk snow. I would say forgiveness was easily 30% higher than any of the other skis. The tail was so easy when releasing; the AX truly feels like an off-piste narrow ski in these conditions. On the groomers, it was the only ski in the group that I trusted enough to really open up, as I was confident the tip wouldn't find a hole and dive in, nor would it catch and grab. If I could draw up a ski that responded exactly as I desired, given the terrible conditions, the AX would be that ski. Part of that is the relative quiet, damp nature on groomers: the AX is an all-condition ski, not a groomer zoomer, race-ski lite model. I call it “technical all-mountain”. It is superb in bumps, for example.

Fischer The Curv DTX: a pure frontside carver, one of the best carvers on the market today. I didn't try to venture off-piste on the DTX; it is a groomer ski, not a narrow all-mountain ski. If I had to buy only one pure carver, it may very well be the DTX. Even with that said, it was a heck of a lot of ski for these conditions. Again, very laterally stiff, the tip engages immediately at the top of the turn. The skier needs to be ready for what is coming next: a freight train of power and snap. Incredible power, but it was a little much in this snow; get that tip fully working, and it tends to dig south through the powdered sugar. It was the best ski here provided that I trust it, but in this snow, I did not feel like taking any chances, and backed off. The DTX has serious top end for such a short 171cm ski; power rivaling that of any frontside ski. It may be the best carver available today. A shame I couldn't open it up due to terrible grooming. I dealt with ridges and holes from one edge of the groomer to the other. Bachelor has a view on groomers of “quantity over quality”, the proverbial “half-ass job”, which makes testing hard snow skis a real challenge.

Of all the skis I tested in these conditions, the AX was really only the ski that handled them well. It really brings out the difference between premium skis and more affordable, larger distribution brands. The difference isn't so much at the top end of stability: any ski can be designed for high stability given enough metal and carbon. The premium skis, as I have found, have a range that most top-end skis do not. They can be dialed down, backed off, skied slow in junk snow, with the corresponding sweet spot double the size when compared to that of a ski selling for $599. They are more predictable in rough conditions: the skier finds the ski to be less about what type of turn the ski wants to execute, and more about the type of turn the skier wants to execute. It may sound like a small distinction, but far too many skis today have a “mind of their own” and are artificially designed to feel “boosted”. Car enthusiasts are familiar with this concept: too often big cars are produced that feel dead and ship-like, yet characteristics such as steering are artificially changed to feel more aggressive, rather than actually making a sportier, precise handling RWD car. A friend drives a Mercedes CLA AMG, and it is the epitome of a “boosted” car. Heavy FWD, mad torque-steer, artificially snappy steering rack, boosted turbo engine. To borrow a popular idiom: it isn't a sporty car, but can play one after staying at the Holiday Inn. This is the case with many skis today, and why uber-stiff skis such as the Mantra still remain popular with high intermediates. They feel “edgy”, and those speaking so highly of them from a high intermediate standpoint will refer to how “well they carve”, even though that skier is incapable of getting enough edge angle and pressure to carve a turn. What they feel is that hard, aggressive “bite”, not unlike a car that is too stiffly sprung. Stiffly sprung cars aren't necessarily fast around a track, but they do feel fast. It is mistaken for a ski that is working underfoot, whereas the Laser AX, for example, is actually holding well underfoot, but instead of feeling aggressive, the pressure builds as directed by the skier, as if it were reading the skier's mind.
What a wonderful ski. (I didn't notice any differences from my own year, but it's harder to compare the 175 to the 183 of a different year, so not sure. The 183, for sure, felt heavier. But also more chargy.)​
* * * * *​
I get to ski two versions of the 17/18 AX, both 183. My buddy's pair with Tyrolia Attack2 13 shop demos, is set at c. +1.0 to +2.4 mount positions: with that binding, those mount positions work for his 183, for both of us. Not sure why. His pair is at the same height as mine, at 3.0 toe and 3.2 cm heel with that particular demo binding (thus delta height +2 mm), but with that playful flexing Attack2-13 toe on his, that actually one can feel as more playful, and versatile, than the more race-like binding on mine. At least that was the theory of the Head rep(s) I talked to about it. Different binding, different ski behavior to the same ski. And, for me, different mount point range as a result.​
My pair of AXes are also 17-18 (yellow w. diagonal green stripes). Tyrolia PRD 12 adjustable binding (at +2 delta also, and the same 3.0 and 3.2 height). 183s. But with a more race binding-type toe, and feel.​
I ski my 183s at zero if I want them to feel more like gs race skis. That works.​
I ski them also, however, at up to +4 most recently, where they are best for bumps, in my case. I'm perfectly capable of race ski-learned dynamics on these skis and others. But I've found there are also freeride styles of skiing that have every bit as much integrity and stability as racing style. Sean Pettit and Seth Morrison were my role models for appreciating such styles, but the hills are full of big mountain chargers and trickers (Candide, Sage, etc.) who can flat out ski, and who often play with their mount positions. I first started that stuff with Sage's Atomic Auto 117, but the K2 Pettitor 120 is also good for multiple mount positions, as are many of the fat skis since. And also, as it happens, with this particular 183 AX ski, at its longer length.​

So when my Ax 17/18 183s felt heavy to me at 0 to + 1 1/2 in bumps and such, no big deal: I played with the mount settings once again, to good effect.
With 183 AX, Tyrolia PRD 12 w/o plate (both toe and heal adjustable).
I mostly keep it at +4, except back as much as to +2 if I want to emphasize a GS feel over ease and quickness.

With my friend's 183 AX, Tyrolia Attack2-13 AT Demo (AT = All Types of boot).
We use a +1 to +2 setting. (It's equally adjustable - more playful but otherwise equally fun feel).

I added the color because the AT version has a different plastic mold, roughly 1 cm taller than a regular, more common Attack2-13 Demo binding. This setup feels as if it is a cm or two more forward than the PRD 12 at equal mount setting, not sure why. It has about 3/4 cm greater height than the PRD 12, as I recall.)


1583777229453.png


OK, now for my day one impressions (caution, things will change as I get more time on the ski and move the bindings)
Me: 6'4", 250 lbs, expert, racer
Binding mount: +2 cm from factory line, Fresh SKIMD tune, 0.5/3.0 bevels, Hard snow surface with a little machine groomed on top, low 30's temp

Very GS turn shape, very heavy feeling tip. Not quick edge to edge. (similar to posts above) At slow speeds skis felt a bit sluggish, above 20 mph skis livened up and turn shape became shorter, maybe into the medium category. The skis are extremely stable and have a very high top end that I did not go near. They are a most unusual combination of sking forgiving (not soft, but "cushiony") and feeling very very powerful. I think the middle of the ski is race ski stiff and burly and the ends taper to a very forgiving flex. Love the flex of these skis.

With the race tune on the ski, the grip was fantastic, best I have felt since getting off my 205 SL racing ski. These skis have so much grip I was getting "slarve" chatter that I never get unless I put a 4 deg side bevel on my race skis. (grip/slip on icy surfaces) I might have to drop these to a 2 deg side bevel. The skis were very precise and actually a little scary to me. Until I am "intimate" with these skis, I was concerned about inadvertently hooking up at high speeds and getting slammed. They generally feel forgiving, but with serious power lurking just underneath the surface. I can see now why Stockli puts a 1.3/2.0 tune on them for the general public. These bad boys don't need a lot of help from the tune to show off their stuff on hard surfaces.

I skied some firm glades with small moguls and the heavy feeling tip went away. Pivoting the skis over moguls was a breeze and gave me a completely different impression of the skis.

I will move my bindings back and forth and play with the tune and possibly detune a bit. To conclude, these skis are an unusual mix of behavior, and one that will take me some time to dial into my personal preferences. I will continue to post as I ski them more in the next week or so.
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScottB

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
Just for more background, here is my impression of the Laser AX from my demo trial. It seems to change personality in moguls compared to firm groomers. I didn't get to try it on firm groomers until this past weekend. I added the underlines/cross outs today.

I was looking for a powerful ski that carves great, even on ice, but doesn't get too hard to ski in off piste terrain (trees and moguls). It should be quick turning and be more slalom ski than GS ski. It needs to cruise at a relaxed pace as well. This ski will be the final one for my quiver. I received a lot of good suggestions from fellow Pugskier's. Over the course of the end of 2019 I demo’d a number of skis for various lengths of time. Here are my impressions of the skis I demo’d:

Stockli AX (78), 183 cm – I skied this one the same day as the Fischer RC One 86 GT. In very soft manky mashed potato snow. The extra length, soft tip, and overall design of this ski made it a lot more manageable in these conditions. I skied it on groomers and some steep mogul runs. I really liked this ski. I was expecting a grabby difficult ski and instead got a compliant enabler. It had minimal gabbiness on mashed potato groomers. Was soft and absorbing in the moguls, easy to pivot over a bump, not edgy and did what I wanted. It had the amazing feeling of being soft when needed and very burly when needed. I guess I felt the turtle shell magic right off the bat. I was impressed with how I could smoosh it into the bottom of a mogul, and rip a hard carve off the top. I really didn’t get a sense of its hard snow carving, but the owner said that is what it is best at. After reading a bunch of reviews, I agree it is a very forgiving and versatile ski. The length is good for someone my size, the 175 is the better size for non-Clydes. I would own this ski.

K2 Ikonic 84 TI, 184cm – I skied this one for two days in lots of different snow conditions. This ski was the surprise and learning experience of the demo’s. On the first day, conditions were firm and I had a hard time getting the edges to bite. The ski slarved well, but not much carve grip. On softer snow, the ski felt great and carved a nice turn. It also felt great everywhere else, including going fast in rough, clumpy snow. When I took it back to the shop at the end of the day, they said it had a 1 / 2 deg tune with dulled tips and tails. They agreed to give it a 0.5 /3 tune, sharp tip to tail and I took it out for a second day. It was Magic, the tune made a huge difference. After one turn I remember thinking, this is a great ski. It felt comfortable from the get go. It had grip in hard snow. It carved great and was stable in all conditions, all speeds. It was the most “all mtn” of all the skis I demo’d. It was so easy to ski. If you take the Super Charger, make it wider, then make it a notch down softer, and a notch down in carving performance, you have the Ikonic 84 Ti. It was good in moguls and trees, not much bothered it. If I have to find fault, it was so composed it might be called a little dull, and it didn’t carve quite as well as the Super Charger. I would own this ski and thought very hard about buying the demo ski which was for sale. If I could only own one ski for all conditions, this would be it. Blister gave it a great review and I agree with everything they said about it.

After being on 8 skis, I was demo’d out. Time to make a decision if I wanted to capitalize on some end of season deals. For me it came down to two skis, The K2 Ikonic 84 Ti and the Stockli Laser AX. Both these skis are carver based, as opposed to my Brahma which is freeride based. I just like the feel of a carver for hard snow use. I wanted versatility, which both skis have. I felt like the K2 at 84mm wide would be the better all mtn ride, but the Laser AX’s shape and soft tips made it easier to ski in moguls. Based on the reviews, I figured the Laser AX will be the more dynamic carver on hard snow. I knew I would be happy with either ski, but in the end I was seduced by the lure of the premium ski feel. Winner Stockli Laser Ax.
 

Tony Storaro

Dreams are made of corduroy...
Skier
Joined
Mar 2, 2020
Posts
377
Location
Europe
I will follow this with interest. Many people say moving the bindings +1/+2 makes the ski even better, faster etc but I dare not experiment with mine as I am afraid I can ruin the heavenly perfection that the AX in 175, factory tune are.
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScottB

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
Keep in mind what I do on the 183cm length does not directly translate to the 175 length. I decided to compare my 3 Carver's. They are lined up even by their tip contact points. The laser AX is mounted +2, rest are on the line. As you can see in the pic, the laser at +2 has the bindings in the same place as the other two skis.

IMG_20200309_194755201.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Noodler

Missing making turns :(
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
2,163
Location
Denver, CO
Keep in mind what I do on the 183cm length does not directly translate to the 175 length. I decided to compare my 3 Carver's. They are lined up even by their tip contact points. The laser AX is mounted +2, rest are on the line. As you can see in the pic, the laser at +2 has the bindings in the same place as the other two skis.

View attachment 96320
This comparison does not take into account the actual shape of the sidecut as it progresses down the length of the ski. As such, lined up this way it might look like it makes "sense" to your brain, but it doesn't take the complex geometry of a ski into account.

Consider how a ski turns. For a pure carved turn, the ski bends through flexing along its length. It can only flex as far as it has "room" to continue flexing. It gains this "room" by being put on edge. The higher it is put on edge, the more clearance it has to continue bending. The "center" of the apex of the bent ski will be at the narrowest point of the sidecut of the ski. This narrowest point will be the final spot along the edge that will hit the snow surface.

So when considering binding placement, you must first understand where the narrowest point of the ski is located. Sometimes this is a very tiny area along the ski length; like in the case of deeper sidecut SL skis or the narrowest portion might be found in a range over a couple inches in a longer radius ski. Either way, we want the midpoint of the boot sole somewhere very close to this narrowest point. Why? Because that point on the boot sole should be closely associated with where your center of balance should pass down into your foot and you need that balance point aligned with the narrowest point of the sidecut to ensure that you can bend the ski in a manner that was intended by the designer.

So how does the ski design impact the way it bends? Most designers match the thickest point of the ski's side profile with the narrowest point of the sidecut. This is the "center" of the ski; not the geometric center, but rather the center of the sidecut and the flex profile. If you aren't aligned with this ski center, then you can inadvertently put yourself out of balance without even understanding why. If you're too far forward of the ski center, the bend profile and the way the ski bends on the snow surface will have your toe "high" and your heel "low" in the bend profile, thus putting you in the back seat. The opposite is also true if your position is too far rearward of the ski center.

So this was a really long winded way of saying that binding position should be carefully considered and when making a determination of what will work best, be aware of what actually happens when a ski bends and how the sidecut will interact with the snow surface. These factors will directly impact where you will find the "sweet spot" for the binding mount position. Don't let the geometric length and center fool you into thinking you have different skis setup similarly. It will only be true if the narrowest point of their sidecuts (and the thickest point of their profiles) are also aligned similarly to their respective lengths.

Note that this description assumes that the ski is on hard pack, but I have found it remains true even in softer snow conditions.
 

Mike Thomas

Whiteroom
Pugski Sponsor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
845
Man, that upside down 'SkiMD' sticker would drive me insane. Talk about screwing up a 'mount point'.
 
Last edited:

Marker

XLTL
Skier
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Posts
910
Location
Kennett Square, PA & Killington, VT
Keep in mind what I do on the 183cm length does not directly translate to the 175 length. I decided to compare my 3 Carver's. They are lined up even by their tip contact points. The laser AX is mounted +2, rest are on the line. As you can see in the pic, the laser at +2 has the bindings in the same place as the other two skis.

View attachment 96320
I noticed your big man shoes, New Balance 990's. Mine are the blue version after years of the gray. Used to be my favorite running shoes until my back made me give that up.

Did you ever get on a Fischer Pro Mtn 86 in 182 cm for comparison? The Fischer's have been described here as a small step down in quality and required skills, which would fit my profile better.
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScottB

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
I tried my bindings at various positions (+4, +2, 0) the other day at Loon Mtn. Great day to test skis, very empty and good snow. I was there this past thursday. Quick report is I sharpened the tips of the skis from about 1" before contact point to about 2-3" past contact point. Made a huge difference. The heavy tip feeling went away except for just a very slight amount at the 0 position. If it wasn't for all the attention I have been giving these skis, wouldn't even have noticed the heavy tip feeling. The results are the skis feel good at all 3 spots, as you move the bindings forward they turn quicker and make a shorter radius turn. +4 is approaching slalom ski turns and at 0 they feel like cheater GS skis turns (medium radius). I can now make any turn radius I want at any position, depending on how much I pressure the tips and roll the ski on edge. Basically they ski really well an like they should. Setting your binding position by how quick you want them to come around. Even at +4 the skis are stable at speed, but the tips are noticably more nervous at high speeds compared to 0. I decided to go with +2 as a good compromise and use them on various terrain to get a better feel. After another ski day at Stratton (trying to rack up some Ikon pass usage) at +2. I might try a little closer to the line, Stratton is a "cruisers" mtn with wide flat slopes. (ie you can go really fast on their slopes).

Final response is I did not try the Fischer Pro Mtn 86's. I skied with a friend who had them and we were going to trade skis but never did that day. After watching him ski, I can say his skis had no where the grip on hard snow the AX's have. He could also make much shorter radius turns than I could (it was the ski, not the skier). The Fishcer's have a much shorter natural turn radius than the AX's (caveat: this was before tip sharpening of the AX's and mounted at +2)
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScottB

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
Oh yeah, wanted to mention that before tip sharpening, the Ax's were completely different in soft snow compared to hard pack. With a sharp tip, they are the same now. This would be the "symptom" to let you know the tips need work. On soft snow the shape is defining the turn, on hard snow, the edge (or lack there of) defines the turn. If they don't feel the same, your edges have issues and should be looked at.

I would bet that Ski Otter's two pairs of Ax's with different bindings and mount points also have different tip beveling, sharpness, and how far toward the tip of the ski the edges are sharp and beveled.
 

Uncle-A

In the words of Paul Simon "You can call me Al"
Skier
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Posts
3,674
Location
NJ
I noticed your big man shoes, New Balance 990's. Mine are the blue version after years of the gray. Used to be my favorite running shoes until my back made me give that up.

Did you ever get on a Fischer Pro Mtn 86 in 182 cm for comparison? The Fischer's have been described here as a small step down in quality and required skills, which would fit my profile better.
I passed on the blue stayed with the gray and pick up a pair in black. Great shoe, I have been using them for years.
 

Uncle-A

In the words of Paul Simon "You can call me Al"
Skier
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Posts
3,674
Location
NJ
I tried my bindings at various positions (+4, +2, 0) the other day at Loon Mtn. Great day to test skis, very empty and good snow. I was there this past thursday. Quick report is I sharpened the tips of the skis from about 1" before contact point to about 2-3" past contact point. Made a huge difference. The heavy tip feeling went away except for just a very slight amount at the 0 position. If it wasn't for all the attention I have been giving these skis, wouldn't even have noticed the heavy tip feeling. The results are the skis feel good at all 3 spots, as you move the bindings forward they turn quicker and make a shorter radius turn. +4 is approaching slalom ski turns and at 0 they feel like cheater GS skis turns (medium radius). I can now make any turn radius I want at any position, depending on how much I pressure the tips and roll the ski on edge. Basically they ski really well an like they should. Setting your binding position by how quick you want them to come around. Even at +4 the skis are stable at speed, but the tips are noticably more nervous at high speeds compared to 0. I decided to go with +2 as a good compromise and use them on various terrain to get a better feel. After another ski day at Stratton (trying to rack up some Ikon pass usage) at +2. I might try a little closer to the line, Stratton is a "cruisers" mtn with wide flat slopes. (ie you can go really fast on their slopes).

Final response is I did not try the Fischer Pro Mtn 86's. I skied with a friend who had them and we were going to trade skis but never did that day. After watching him ski, I can say his skis had no where the grip on hard snow the AX's have. He could also make much shorter radius turns than I could (it was the ski, not the skier). The Fishcer's have a much shorter natural turn radius than the AX's (caveat: this was before tip sharpening of the AX's and mounted at +2)
I was wondering what size ski boot are you in? It seems the larger boot puts the pressure on the tip differently than a smaller one. That may be why some like +1 vs +2 or +4 when the ball of the foot is in a different location the ski gets the pressure differently. Any thoughts on this?
 

Uncle-A

In the words of Paul Simon "You can call me Al"
Skier
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Posts
3,674
Location
NJ
I am in a 29.5 Lange RS140 boot
That is a large boot, the pressure you apply to the ski is substantial. All though I think a +4 is a lot, with the 183 and your boot size it may be appropriate for firm groomers. Soft snow does not need as much pressure backing off a CM or two may be a good idea.
 

James

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
10,455
That is a large boot, the pressure you apply to the ski is substantial. All though I think a +4 is a lot, with the 183 and your boot size it may be appropriate for firm groomers. Soft snow does not need as much pressure backing off a CM or two may be a good idea.
He’d apply more pressure with a smaller boot.
P = F/A
But he’s the engineer. I believe he’s settled roughly at +2.
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScottB

ScottB

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
709
Location
Boston
I think James has it correct, but I would substitute the word Force for pressure and then Uncle-A would be correct (mostly). I think in terms of Force applied to the ski, which comes from my weight (250 lbs, big boot, big guy) and any downforce I can generate (and centrifugal force in a turn). That force is split between your heel and ball of foot and then transfers to the ski through the toe and heel piece. To keep it simple, as you move your COM, the forces shifts from your ball of foot to your heel. To keep my ball of foot location in about the same place as a 26-27 size ski boot, I often mount my bindings 1 cm back from the mfg line. This works pretty well with a full camber ski. Rockered skis are a different story. If I get too forward on a rockered ski, I press the tip into the snow and it doesn't ride on top as much as it should. I felt that happening with the AX at +4. It turned much quicker, but at speed the tip plowed just a bit. For me, somewhere between +1 - +2 seems to feel the best. Ski Otter's experience and write up mirrored what I experienced as well, once I sharpened the tips past the rockered contact point.

I would guess the ideal mounting point has most to do with how short a turn you want the ski to make and how sharp and how far forward the side bevel is at the tip.
 

Noodler

Missing making turns :(
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
2,163
Location
Denver, CO
I would guess the ideal mounting point has most to do with how short a turn you want the ski to make and how sharp and how far forward the side bevel is at the tip.
Somewhat, but this is missing a critical concern (basically you're ignoring the facts about ski design from my previous post).

Skis are designed to be bent into an arc when put up on edge and pressured. The ski design really dictates the ideal position where the apex of that arc should be located. The mount position chosen has a direct relation to this ideal point. It's either aligned, forward, or backward of that point. If it's not aligned then the position will result in a change to the characteristics of the ski performance. I view these changes as a "compensation". The compensation may be either for a problem with fore/aft stance alignment, terrain/conditions preference, or lack of skier skills. But it is still a compensation for something and should be viewed as such.

I'm writing a better post regarding these concerns that will be in its own thread.
 

Uncle-A

In the words of Paul Simon "You can call me Al"
Skier
Joined
Dec 22, 2015
Posts
3,674
Location
NJ
He’d apply more pressure with a smaller boot.
P = F/A
But he’s the engineer. I believe he’s settled roughly at +2.
You say a small boot, aka a short lever will apply more pressure than a longer boot, aka a longer lever, are you sure about that?
 

James

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
10,455
You say a small boot, aka a short lever will apply more pressure than a longer boot, aka a longer lever, are you sure about that?
Shorter boot, less surface area.

Though.... since it’s only the toe afd, and heel pad is in contact with the boot, the difference might be moot.

In terms of the torque on can apply- beyond my level to figure out. Because, it’s not as simple as a longer lever. The heel piece is further back, and a significant amount of force from the skier’s mass will go through that as it is. Then there’s the amount going through the ski between heel and toe. So the center of pressure will move forward if you flex forward but how much, and does the longer lever have much effect?
So... ? Hey, maybe you’re right.

Years ago Volkl used to do front of the boot marking on skis for binding mount. Think thst went away in the shaped ski era.
 

Noodler

Missing making turns :(
Skier
Joined
Oct 4, 2017
Posts
2,163
Location
Denver, CO
Shorter boot, less surface area.

Though.... since it’s only the toe afd, and heel pad is in contact with the boot, the difference might be moot.

In terms of the torque on can apply- beyond my level to figure out. Because, it’s not as simple as a longer lever. The heel piece is further back, and a significant amount of force from the skier’s mass will go through that as it is. Then there’s the amount going through the ski between heel and toe. So the center of pressure will move forward if you flex forward but how much, and does the longer lever have much effect?
So... ? Hey, maybe you’re right.

Years ago Volkl used to do front of the boot marking on skis for binding mount. Think thst went away in the shaped ski era.
Tyrolia/Head EVO racing bindings have an adjustable AFD that can be moved fore/aft to change the pressure point position applied from the toe of the boot.
 
Top