DIN setting "skier weight" with or without full gear?

[Evan]

I've searched the internet for an answer to this question without finding a clear answer...

Is the "skier weight" used to set the binding release tension (DIN setting) the skier weight with full gear or without? Basically, is this weight "body weight" or "skiing weight"?

I've found some online DIN calculators and I'm right on the threshold of the weight range. Basically, I'm 145 pounds unclothed. It seems that DIN numbers change between the weight ranges 126-147 pounds and 148-174 pounds (giving a difference of 1 DIN number).

Do you recommend I put my skier weight at 145 pounds (putting me into the lower range) or something higher like 155 (putting me into the higher range) considering gear when having bindings mounted at a shop?

Many thanks!

 

[Philpug]

Weight is one of four criteria for setting a binding. Height, Boot Sole Length and Skier Type all are just as important. As far as the weight, a little common sense goes along way. Considering the other three criteria, being one line up or down will still keep you in hte same "in range" Nm and allowing the binding to function correctly both in release and rettention.

 

[Evan]

Weight is one of four criteria for setting a binding. Height, Boot Sole Length and Skier Type all are just as important. As far as the weight, a little common sense goes along way. Considering the other three criteria, being one line up or down will still keep you in hte same "in range" Nm and allowing the binding to function correctly both in release and rettention.

Thank you for the reply Philpug. I don't understand your answer, could you (or someone else) clarify?

For example, when I go to this online DIN calculator (a few others I've checked give the same results too): http://www.mechanicsofsport.com/skiing/equipment/bindings/din-calculator.html

and I enter...

Skier Weight: 126-147 lbs / 58-66 kg
Skier Height: 5'6"-5'10" / 167-178 cm
Skier Age: 10 Yrs - 49 Yrs
Skier Type: Type 3
Boot Sole Length: 291-310 mm

...the result is 6.5.

If I only change the line from above...

Skier Weight: 148-174 lbs / 67-78 kg

...the result changes to 8.

Fully geared up I'm in the 148-174 lbs range (DIN setting = 8), but just my body weight alone puts me in the 126-147 lbs range (DIN setting = 6.5).

This seems like a significant difference. Which one do you suggest I use?

Thanks again...

 

[François Pugh]

The weight is naked and dry. They are using weight as an indication of bone strength.

The release setting charts were created in the recent (in the last, 20th, century, i.e. 1900s) past from much statistical data and regression curves. However, at the time most folk did not have personal computers, nor the ability to understand the statistics, so they simplified, using a step function, with discrete steps instead of smooth curves. I do think it's time they produced a smooth curve (programing the actual functions). However, it is only a starting point. You arbitrarily choose your "risk acceptance" skier type. You could decide you're a 3+ giving you a release of 8, or you could decide that you are a fraction of the way between three and three plus and set your release anywhere between 6.5 and 8. Note it is risk acceptance of being held in when you would be better off with a release, not whether you are an expert skier or not.

If it were me starting out, I would set it at 6.5, make sure I have properly adjusted the forward pressure and ski very carefully and see if the release setting holds me in for my type of skiing. If it were not high enough to hold me in for the skiing that I did, then I would crank it up 0.25 at a time, but first check this site: https://vermontskisafety.com/ufaqs/...nadvertently-how-much-should-i-crank-them-up/

 

[Philpug]

Thank you for the reply Philpug. I don't understand your answer, could you (or someone else) clarify?

For example, when I go to this online DIN calculator (a few others I've checked give the same results too): http://www.mechanicsofsport.com/skiing/equipment/bindings/din-calculator.html

and I enter...

Skier Weight: 126-147 lbs / 58-66 kg
Skier Height: 5'6"-5'10" / 167-178 cm
Skier Age: 10 Yrs - 49 Yrs
Skier Type: Type 3
Boot Sole Length: 291-310 mm

...the result is 6.5.

If I only change the line from above...

Skier Weight: 148-174 lbs / 67-78 kg

...the result changes to 8.

Fully geared up I'm in the 148-174 lbs range (DIN setting = 8), but just my body weight alone puts me in the 126-147 lbs range (DIN setting = 6.5).

This seems like a significant difference. Which one do you suggest I use?

Thanks again...

What is says in the Indicator window is a reference, it is actually the amount on Nm that it takes to release that is more important. If you look at the following charts for three manufacturers, you will notice if you put your stats in each of the charts, you can get a different indicator setting but what is consistent is the amount of force it takes to release the binding (all the way to the right). If yet see, the Marker will actually have a different indicator setting than the other two but the the amount of force it takes to release but binding is actually the same as the other two. With your stats and being a Skier Code L, the binding could torque in the toe at 60Nm and be acceptable, at the Skier Code M, again to torque at the same 60Nm and also be acceptable. (acceptable range is withing one line up or down)

Note, no where here do I say DIN, here is why: The Numbers Game: Bindings Pt 2.

It is not what someone else thinks you should do. What I say a little common sense comes into play is if you are 147lb in the morning and youhave a big lunch and end up at 149lb are you going to change your settings? no. Are you a type II skier or a type III? Im many cases as @François Pugh says, err to the low side, if there is an issue, increase it. I would agree with this especially in a situation like yours when you are unclear and asking what you should do. But most importantly, get the bindings function tested to make sure they are releasing in the proper torque range.

I am sorry if this is a little more technical than you expected or asked for but it is not as simple as going to some website, plugging the numbers in and setting the binding, the binding has variance in it and it should be checked to make sure that is is functioning in the correct range. Even the site you referenced says...

This DIN calculator is for reference purposes only. You should always have your bindings checked and adjusted by a professional ski technician.

 

[RuleMiHa]

What is says in the Indicator window is a reference, it is actually the amount on Nm that it takes to release that is more important. If you look at the following charts for three manufacturers, you will notice if you put your stats in each of the charts, you can get a different indicator setting but what is consistent is the amount of force it takes to release the binding (all the way to the right). If yet see, the Marker will actually have a different indicator setting than the other two but the the amount of force it takes to release but binding is actually the same as the other two. With your stats and being a Skier Code L, the binding could torque in the toe at 60Nm and be acceptable, at the Skier Code M, again to torque at the same 60Nm and also be acceptable. (acceptable range is withing one line up or down)

Note, no where here do I say DIN, here is why: The Numbers Game: Bindings Pt 2.

View attachment 55700 View attachment 55702 View attachment 55703

It is not what someone else thinks you should do. What I say a little common sense comes into play is if you are 147lb in the morning and youhave a big lunch and end up at 149lb are you going to change your settings? no. Are you a type II skier or a type III? Im many cases as @François Pugh says, err to the low side, if there is an issue, increase it. I would agree with this especially in a situation like yours when you are unclear and asking what you should do. But most importantly, get the bindings function tested to make sure they are releasing in the proper torque range.

I am sorry if this is a little more technical than you expected or asked for but it is not as simple as going to some website, plugging the numbers in and setting the binding, the binding has variance in it and it should be checked to make sure that is is functioning in the correct range. Even the site you referenced says...

Can you comment on the age thing. I'm closing in on 50 but I like my settings where they are. I release when I need to release and don't seem to have a problem with pre-releasing. My legs are stronger than they were three years ago (which affects bone strength). I'm really bugged by the fact that I'm supposed to turn back my DIN on a magical date.

 

[skix]

I'm closing in on 50 but I like my settings where they are. I release when I need to release and don't seem to have a problem with pre-releasing. My legs are stronger than they were three years ago (which affects bone strength). I'm really bugged by the fact that I'm supposed to turn back my DIN on a magical date.

I may have been (ahem) less than truthful once or twice about my age and weight for just this reason. Weighing 147 pounds at 50 years old changes the DIN alot versus 149 and 49. Fact is I do dip under 148 pounds but I'm not going to report anything less ever again.

The sweet spot free skiing for me seems to be 8. I did have problems pre-releasing at 6.5 DIN but at 8 it releases in a crash but not otherwise (for me).

 

[Philpug]

Can you comment on the age thing. I'm closing in on 50 but I like my settings where they are. I release when I need to release and don't seem to have a problem with pre-releasing. My legs are stronger than they were three years ago (which affects bone strength). I'm really bugged by the fact that I'm supposed to turn back my DIN on a magical date.

This is an area where I question too. Honestly, I don't have an answer for you but right now I am 49...and 58 months old . @Rick Howell's version of a chart...as complex as it is...is interesting.

 

[RuleMiHa]

This is an area where I question too. Honestly, I don't have an answer for you but right now I am 49...and 58 months old . @Rick Howell's version of a chart...as complex as it is...is interesting.

View attachment 55711

My hunch is since the data was cross sectional (checking bone strength in groups of 20-70 something year olds at one point in time) and not longitudinal (checking bone strength degradation in one group of individuals over an extended (20yr) period of time) it likely is much less valid. Cross population averages of bone strength are likely to look much different than a single individual's degradation curve. It is one of the known limitations of cross sectional studies. I guess I'll just have to stay 49 for many years.

 

[François Pugh]

About the time I turned 50, I took a realistic look at the skiing that I did, and realized that I really wasn't a type 3 skier, but a type 3+ skier.

 

[Rod9301]

If you're really that concerned about breaking your bones, have your bones density tested.
Then you will know.

But if you're thin, not with a lot of muscle, you should expect that your bones density is low. Which would argue for a lower release number.

I'm on the other end of the range, high weight with low fat 99 percentage, i just measured my density and it was one standard deviation higher than an average 22 year old male. And I'm 69. So i keep my bindings at 11. In my case, the risk of pre-releasing outweighs the risk of breaking a bone. At least that's my opinion.

 

[RuleMiHa]

If you're really that concerned about breaking your bones, have your bones density tested.
Then you will know.

But if you're thin, not with a lot of muscle, you should expect that your bones density is low. Which would argue for a lower release number.

I'm on the other end of the range, high weight with low fat 99 percentage, i just measured my density and it was one standard deviation higher than an average 22 year old male. And I'm 69. So i keep my bindings at 11. In my case, the risk of pre-releasing outweighs the risk of breaking a bone. At least that's my opinion.

This speaks to my point. I'm a girl which does affect bone density, but did every kind of physical activity known to increase bone density and strength during the key growth years (teens/early twenties) and was leg pressing 390# in my early forties. By every metric in existence I have a vanishingly small osteoporosis risk (I don't qualify for bone density testing at 49, because-no risk factors).. I am in no way average for my gender or age.

Yet, in order to get DIN's set where I want them I have to fib about my weight, age, or skier type. Of course, I could stop b******* and learn to do it myself...................

 

[Mike Thomas]

Holy shit people, DIN is set with 4 screws, one at each toe or heel piece... with a screwdriver. It couldn't be any more straight forward. Let the technician set and test the bindings appropriately

AND THEN

Set them to whatever number makes your ego and libido happy.

 

[Philpug]

I'm a girl....

Wait...what?

 

[Rod9301]

This speaks to my point. I'm a girl which does affect bone density, but did every kind of physical activity known to increase bone density and strength during the key growth years (teens/early twenties) and was leg pressing 390# in my early forties. By every metric in existence I have a vanishingly small osteoporosis risk (I don't qualify for bone density testing at 49, because-no risk factors).. I am in no way average for my gender or age.

Yet, in order to get DIN's set where I want them I have to fib about my weight, age, or skier type. Of course, I could stop b******* and learn to do it myself...................

Not that hard to set it yourself

 

[RuleMiHa]

Wait...what?

Does it help if I just say my chromosomes are 46XX.

 

[François Pugh]

 

[skix]

Not that hard to set it yourself

That would void my factory warranty as spelled out on my birth certificate.

 

[Rod9301]

That would void my factory warranty as spelled out on my birth certificate.

Haha, that's funny

 

[Lady_Salina]

yes, i'm 50 now and 36 months plus some. I tried to set my binding back when I was 50 but when on my Coach course being video'ed the ski flew off after going to 6.5 setting from where I used to keep them at an 8. The course conductor told me to increase them, and I was like I already lie about my weight, and he shrugged and said it's your body, you decide, i'd rather keep my skis on. Also on a powder session my ski popped off twice and annoyed my friend who said they had popped off a couple times on a past powder day and yes, have my bindings tested at the beginning of each season. So my skis went back to an 8 last year cause it works. Seems to come off without stressing me when i fall and doesn't pop off when it shouldn't.