Plate Mount Position

[cholly]

Not an expert in GS ski differences, knowing there's a lot of expertise and insight here... Bought 2 pair of new old stock GS skis (still in plastic), both 'FIS' spec (ladies 183/30), both from 2015, and both prepped and tuned to 1/3. First pair is a Dynastar Course WC, other pair is a Fischer RC4 GS WC (medium stiffness). Have each mounted with SPX15 maxflex.

Noticed right off that the Fischer's center mark, and plate position is about a full inch aft of where the Dynastar's are. The Dynastars have the R20 plate, the Fischer's were blank. Both bundings mounted BOF over center mark.

Skiing impressions were noticeable -- felt 'disconnected' on the Fischers, more locked in on the Dynastars. Fischers also noticeably lighter in flex, but not easier to ski -- feel like I need to work them more. (I'm a 6' 200lb. man, strong skier).

Maybe I just need to move the bindings forward on the Fischers? Not real tore down about this, as the skis were $100/pair each, and I had the bindings.

Thanks in advance!

 

[cholly]

(Forgot to add a shout out to Racers Edge in Breck -- great place, great work, great stuff, great people..... best shop in CO!)

 

[cantunamunch]

You put the same plate on the Fischers, yes?

 

[JTurner]

You put the same plate on the Fischers, yes?

That’s definitely worth clarifying first off.

Beyond that, it’s very typical for Austrian companies skis to have a more rearward mount point than Rossi/Dynastar skis. Many people prefer one over the other, but it’s up to your body and style, so nobody can tell you what’s best for you unless they know your skiing.

 

[cholly]

Thanks both for the replies..... The Fischers have their stock plates (blank), the Dynastars have their stock plates (R20). Plates on each mounted at the factory. Interesting point on the 'Austrian' mounting position; the difference between the two is quite noticeable.

 

[Karl B]

If it were my skis, I would move the boots forward on the Fischers to where the center mark lines up with the center mark on the boot, not the BOF. You're talking a difference of about 5cm.

Karl

 

[Primoz]

Mounting position depends on personal preferences. Most of people prefer them a bit forward, some (me included) a bit back (except on pow skis where I'm extremely back . But this is impossible to compare between different skis. Skis, even if based on FIS specifications, are completely different, and there's no way that mounting position would be same for Fischer or for Dynastar/Rossi. Skis are constructed differently and mounting position depends on that. Problem is, it's only you who can find out where best mounting point is. Marked "ski center" line is help, but doesn't mean much, and you really shouldn't care if Fischer's line is few centimeters off the Dynastar line when you put skis together. Fischer put it there where it should be based on their construction and Dynastar put it where it should be based on their construction. For FIS there's few regulations min length, min radius, max width of waist of the ski, max width of shoulder of the ski and min or max height of tip/tail, but this gives plenty of room to move waist of ski front or back and you can pretty much end up with completely different ski. Even inside of same race department you have 7 to 10 different models of let's say men GS ski, where these things differ a lot between skis, but between different companies it's even more.
So I think it will be up to you to find out right spot. But with Rossi R20 plate you have luck as it's super easy to move binding front or back without drilling new holes, so try to move binding around and see where you get sort of same feeling as on Fischer. And then you will know if you need to move binding on Fischer front or back. Sorry "feeling disconnected" doesn't tell me anything on where to move binding to feel better.
But there's one thing to consider... Fischer skis completely different then Rossi/Dynastar, so even if you hit exactly same spot for binding mount, ski will still not ski anywhere similar.

 

[gary posekian]

a difference of one inch in the plate mounting position is going to be much more noticeable than just a difference in the mount point of the boot

 

[Atomicman]

I, like MDF, do not like forward mounted skis. Probably from skiing Volkl and Atomic most of my ski life. They are both mounted farther back. Although with Atomic Vario-Zone bindings I did get to experiment. Forward made me feel back, back made me feel forward. I had a pair of Stockli Laser SL's that were mounted (correctly) way forward.......hated them.

OP didn't mention ski length? The running surface may be different with 2 different manufacturers in the same published length. Although, normally binding and plate position are measured from the tail, but is still a published measurement based on length.

Different skis........different mounting parameters. French skis have never been my thing, it is most likely where they are mounted.

 

[razie]

@Primoz has it. The mounting point is based on the ski characteristics, especially the flex pattern. From what I understand ( I don't ski them), Rossi's tend to be tail-strong, so they move you forward (their mounting point tends to be about 1 inch forward of most others), and then reward you when you ski them sitting more back. The Fischers traditionally require you to have good technique and to have a strong tip engagement and then the power comes strongly through the turn, if that tip engages. If you can't engage the tip, the Fischers won't be happy.

However, you should always experiment with binding mounting point, if possible.

 

[cholly]

Thanks to all for great comments and insight. Have only been on the Fischers a day so far, and did notice an immediate difference vs. the Dynastars, per many of the comments here. Will try different tip engagement with the Fischers, see what happens. Again, appreciate the comments.

 

[bud heishman]

There are actually four different adjustments that must be considered and coordinated on the fore/aft plane to find our optimum position. For example, changing the relationship between stand height differential between the toe and heel pieces will affect where the skier prefers the mount position on the ski. I believe it's important to approach the whole thing systematically to find your nirvana rather than throwing darts.

 

[Noodler]

There are actually four different adjustments that must be considered and coordinated on the fore/aft plane to find our optimum position. For example, changing the relationship between stand height differential between the toe and heel pieces will affect where the skier prefers the mount position on the ski. I believe it's important to approach the whole thing systematically to find your nirvana rather than throwing darts.

Repeating for emphasis. This is truly what is required if your goal is to find your optimal fore/aft balance on a ski.

I should also note that I believe that binding delta should be determined before modifying the mount position. For years I used mount position changes as compensation for an incorrect alignment in my boots (net ramp, forward lean) and bindings (delta).

 

[Juha]

Is there any good site where the effects of the plate and binding forward/aft position, ramp angle etc is discussed as whole? Just noticed that some new Head bindings having also height adjustment for the front binding.

It's been a good discussion on mounting point differences - I have certainly noticed that for me a more forward position works better than typical back position of Atomic and Fischer. Also skis with softer flex in front (like Rossi, Head) work for me on SL track.

 

[Tricia]

Is there any good site where the effects of the plate and binding forward/aft position, ramp angle etc is discussed as whole? Just noticed that some new Head bindings having also height adjustment for the front binding.

It's been a good discussion on mounting point differences - I have certainly noticed that for me a more forward position works better than typical back position of Atomic and Fischer. Also skis with softer flex in front (like Rossi, Head) work for me on SL track.

That is something you can get here.
Lots of good resources here with an abundance of masters racers and boot fitters who work with racers.
@ScotsSkier ??

 

[Juha]

I found this: https://www.ballofspray.com/home-page/tech/136-ramp-angle-a-little-wisdom-from-snow-skiing

It discusses the ramp angle - and this leads me to think that I'll need to test increasing heel height a bit. My boot size is 29 in mondo or 335 mm boot sole length - a bit longer than a reference boot of 26 mondo. Thus the forward leaning angle would be a bit less than planned for a reference boot size.

I've also found that skis with more forward mounted bindings like Rossi work for me - also I prefer moving the Atomic xvar binding to forward positions (1 or 2 while 4 is the middle and 7 is max back). My current favorite ski is Head I.SL RD in ladies length 156 cm.
For the background, I'm an eager masters skier, training on average 3-4 times a week. SL and GS only, no speed events. The comments above are about SL settings.

Any comments from more experienced ones - would like to get a full understanding if increasing ramp angle does the same trick as moving binding forward (increasing responsiveness) and how to find optimum between these two?