DIN settings ?

[pchewn]

Thanks for the torque chart. I did some analysis:

1) The DIN settings follow the Boot Sole Length (BSL) linearly within about 4% deviation (as expected).
2) The DIN settings follow the nominal torque values linearly within 2% deviation (as expected).
3) The permissible variation of the torque values for a given DIN setting is +/- 10% (I didn't know what to expect)

So if you double the DIN setting from 5 to 10, you will double the nominal torque values.

The analysis is attached.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Can I check using a torque wrench?

 

[Ken_R]

Can I check using a torque wrench?

 

[pchewn]

Can I check using a torque wrench?

If you can attach the torque wrench to the ski and hold the boot (or attach to the boot and hold the ski) -- then yes, I see no reason that a torque wrench could not be used.

 

[Philpug]

There isn't one, but that should not stop someone to make adjustments to the recommended setting. I know I do, ski at 11, even though for my age, 68, and weight I should be at 7.

I am not sure what you are trying to say other than it appears that you are trying to be a contrarian. You ski at an 11...great, glad it is working out for you.

 

[pchewn]

In the video of "Using the Wintersteiger Ski Binding Test Machine" (above), the 2nd ski forward release was set for DIN 6 and the nominal value was supposed to be 194 N-m. The chart shows that the maximum allowable is 213 N-m, yet the machine accepted the value of 215 N-m.

Why would that be?

See video at 10:35 or so ....

 

[CalG]

Isn't skill level the same as skier type?

no

 

[mdf]

In the video of "Using the Wintersteiger Ski Binding Test Machine" (above), the 2nd ski forward release was set for DIN 6 and the nominal value was supposed to be 194 N-m. The chart shows that the maximum allowable is 213 N-m, yet the machine accepted the value of 215 N-m.

Why would that be?

See video at 10:35 or so ....

The DIN standard https://www.iso.org/standard/56106.html has been fiddled with a few times, apparently being reissued in 2006, 2009, and 2014. I'm not going to pay 135 swiss francs to read it, so I don't know exactly what changed, but I always thought the revisions were minor. Maybe they tweaked the tolerances and that would have been allowed in a different revision.

Even though it is an international standard, there have sometimes been (very) minor differences between the charts published by different binding manufacturers. I never understood how that could happen, either.

 

[CalG]

The only time I worry about my binding release setting is when hauling a 200# plus patient in a loaded toboggan, down a bumped up run overlaid with 4 inches of heavy, wet mank.

"God, don't let me down now"

The rest of the time, 7 works without a care ;-)

 

[newfydog]

Heel and toe are two different things. I don't apply much twisting force to my skis---they do the turning. My toes are fine at 7. Skiing the windblown sharkfins we have on any powder day will cause heel releases---I run them at 10. Except when I tried some Flexon boots, and needed 11-12.

 

[François Pugh]

In the video of "Using the Wintersteiger Ski Binding Test Machine" (above), the 2nd ski forward release was set for DIN 6 and the nominal value was supposed to be 194 N-m. The chart shows that the maximum allowable is 213 N-m, yet the machine accepted the value of 215 N-m.

Why would that be?

See video at 10:35 or so ....

Different manufacturer maybe. Different year of issue maybe.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

If you can attach the torque wrench to the ski and hold the boot (or attach to the boot and hold the ski) -- then yes, I see no reason that a torque wrench could not be used.

I'm thinking torque wrench and two extension bars with a right-angle swivel between them for the toe release. Haven't figured a way to attach for rear release.

 

[Philpug]

I'm thinking torque wrench and two extension bars with a right-angle swivel between them for the toe release. Haven't figured a way to attach for rear release.

Don't forget the tilt bench for doing the heel release check.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Tilt bench?

 

[oldschoolskier]

DIN values are the same always, otherwise they are not a standard.

As to why some skiers ski higher than recommended settings has to do with how different bindings function. Testing bindings at DIN standard is more of a sustained torque value and all bindings to set (let’s say) 6 should release at the same torque rating. However, impluse (instant) torque (ie sustained through an impact skiing at higher levels) can far exceed those values (more importantly for an experienced skier not cause injury). Here is where the problem occurres, some binding designs absorb the impulse torque better than others, while still releasing correctly at recommended settings. This is where the higher end skiers tweak from the recommended settings to compensate for binding design function/application. Again as I written earlier, DIN is where the smart ones start as it gives the safe reference the rest is experience and acceptance of risk for the desired results.

For the record YES I tweak upwards for RETENTION vs protection/safety. I do not endorse this or recommend this.

I will say again on setting your bindings:

IF YOU HAVE TO ASK (any questions), DON’T!!!! LET THE PRO’s DO IT.

You do not yet understand the reasoning behind it, or the importance of retention over release and most importantly the risks involved.

@Rick Howell

Years ago on Epic you wrote about retention vs release and how different bindings function. If I recall it included the importance of DIN values and testing (it was the primer for your binding design and some of the most interesting articles on any subject that I’ve read in a long time). Can you write something here as a bit of a guide (simpler as primer) for those that want to understand.

What you explain is light years ahead of what I can .

Thanks,

OSS

 

[Philpug]

Tilt bench?

Here is a link to the Vermont Safety site: https://vermontskisafety.com/vermont-ski-safety-equipment-inc/vermont-release-calibrater/

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Yeah, I'm not paying five grand.

 

[Philpug]

Lets continue the discussion here: By the Numbers; Bindings Pt.2.