Din Dilemma - does size really matter ? New boot BLS is 3mm+ different WWYD

[KingGrump]

And, why hasn't someone come up with additional (computer aided?) testing to prove or disprove? so we are accepting something from 'decades ago'?

If cost time, money and effort to re-do. What is the ROI?

 

[In2h2o]

ROI

Thinking someone who needs a dissertation or someone in academia who wanted a fun topic.... just saying seems odd hasn't been re-tested or maybe it has and its buried in a medical journal... I see on google scholar doesn't seem to be many articles in the past 30 years....

 

[oldschoolskier]

I guess I was asking for general thoughts b/c I was borderline with both boots. Top of one bracket bottom of the other with a 19 mm spread between levels. It was more a theoretical question asking is it really cut and dry- magically at 271 a lower din is more appropriate than 270? So yes they are a starting point. Certainly the historical story of how the DIN numbers were created gives rise to a lot of questions as @mdf posted. And, why hasn't someone come up with additional (computer aided?) testing to prove or disprove? so we are accepting something from 'decades ago'?

But it is interesting and as always a thread sparks discussion - I hadn't thought of actually measuring the boots (b/c any number could be stamped by the manufacturer) and interesting to see what others have done, especially at age "50".

Based on some earlier posts years ago, DIN settings are sort of balance between retention and release as both are extremely important as both can cause serious injury. The second part is skier/skill vary which causes a great deal of variation in terms of what is the best setting. Add into this binding mechanics, some bindings require higher settings some lower though testing indicates (or should) give the same results.

The 50 age doesn't have to do about strength and fitness but body aging primarily tendons which what fails. While you may have the strength and fitness the elasticity starts to decline.

So whats the best recommendation , its truly personal. As @Tricia posted she's set back to be safe unless it starts causing issues (smart move), I haven't yet (is it smart?).

 

[François Pugh]

Yes, I beieve FP's explanation is correct.

We also don't know how much spread there is in bone density decrease. Did a few bad cases pull down the averages, or did everyones decrease fairly evenly?
And leaving aside the historical question, does the idea that regular weight bearing exercise (e.g. skiing hard) keeps bones strong still hold, or has that idea been overturned?
[Personally, I waited till age 60 to do the age 50 DIN turn down, but then I accepted reality. My bindings are set at the age-adjuted level 3 chart values and I haven't had problems.]

Ah yes, I have fond memories of being 50, the age where you decide to change your risk acceptance for failure to release in everyday skiing from 3+ to 3++, because the novelty of having your ski pop of when skiing through icy frozen ruts at 65 mph has finally worn off.

 

[Rod9301]

I did't think I would have an issue getting my bindings adjusted to my new boots. However, my old and new BSL are both right on the cusp of the two settings - the size breaks are :

251-270 and 271-290

My old BLS was 270 my new BSL 273. Nothing has changed for me other than the 3mm of BSL. I run the same binding on all my skis.
So I thought I would just keep the bindings set at 7.5 which I have been successfully running for the past two years.
However the the new Din calculates out at 7.
But since the boots sizes were so close to the size breaks I thought it made more sense to keep it the same.
One shop just denied me, the other will test at 7 and set at 7.5. Am I over thinking the .5? I did have issues a few years ago when I 'mistakenly' used my real age and being bumped down 1 caused a series of not so good pre-releases. I understand we are only talking .5 and I may be overthinking this.

Thoughts?

It will not make any difference

 

[markojp]

.... because the novelty of having your ski pop of when skiing through icy frozen ruts at 65 mph has finally worn off.

The Walter Mity is strong here.