Some links to binding placement

[jack97]

Oh, another thing, the original first year model boot center point is about 1.25cm further forward than the second and third year skis (not sure about current year) and I prefer the original boot center point as it does make a difference.

Not directed to Riv, but on a related note, something to ponder if you're really into this stuff....
Here's some links to binding placement, from my pov, kind of interesting, gives some history and perspective.

Anyways, a good tech or shop may measure the center of the running surface of the ski. Or at least mount them to the location you want them.

http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/binding_placement.htm
http://www.skipressworld.com/ca/en/magazine/2003/vol18no2/Earlyseason2003vol18no0231.htm

 

[riverc0il]

I have mentioned this a few times before here and else where: I think binding position is the most under rated equipment topic in the industry. Many people try a ski and don't like it when a 1-2cm binding adjustment would dramatically change the performance of the ski for the user. There are a few problems though such as the need for redrilling and paying lots of money to experiment and some system skis only have one locking point for the binding.

But there is no real of thumb for positioning since every ski is different based on a huge amount of factors. And every skier is different and has different needs out of a ski. Some skis in the freeride market come with multiple mounting points if you want to ride park or freeride for example. I like the idea of multiple mounting points depending on desired performance and individual skier preferences.

Fact is that the mounting point on a ski is the manufacturer's best estimate on the position that will meet the needs of the greatest amount of skiers for the purpose that most skiers will utilize a given ski for. This can be problematic for skiers that are outliers compared to the majority of skiers.

Lots of good information on mounting points can be found on TGR. You have to read between the lines a lot over there but generally when the TGR posters form a consensus it is usually a good bet. I have experimented with several mounting points on numerous skiers to greater and lesser degrees of success. Certainly worth some consideration.

 

[riverc0il]

Just read the article and it certainly seems interesting in reference to my preference for the original more forward position of the 8000 mounting point before it was adjusted. I have heard of the Campbell Balancer before and would love to have a session with that machine and an experienced tech. From what I understand, they are few and far between.

The big aspect to consider in reference to the BOF technique is considering the boot mounting point is "on center" or in other words, the center of the boot. Now consider how big various boot sizes are. There is a 10cm variance between the smallest and longest adult boots. That is a big variance on where the BOF would actually line up on two different skiers on the same ski in comparison to the marked line. All things considered, two skiers on 20.5 versus 30.5 (such as myself) boots are likely to be significantly off center compared to the line on the ski. Then you need to take into consideration the length of the ski. Western skiers tend to go longer on upper end skis for handling faster speed. Upper end eastern skiers need shorter for tight trees. Who is the ski company basing the line off of? A bigger skier on a longer board? You start thinking about all the variables and one has to wonder why mounting point isn't as highly considered as having a custom fitted boot.

 

[jack97]

Definitely agree that binding placement has so many variables; ski shape, ski stiffness, terrain, conditions, boots and how a skier skis. Placing the binding using the BOF is a generic (non vendor specific) approach in placing the boot/binding at the point where the skier can flex equally to fore or aft. IMO, an important consideration if a skiers likes skis with less shape or skiing on terrain where fore/aft balance is critical. Given a Campbell balancer is hard to find, I was thinking about getting (or making) a balance board rocker (the ones that go fore/aft) and see where the BOF is with my current boots. I figure a tech would be good to have around but knowing the point where you can flex fore/aft equally comes more from the user. Probably have to do this in front of the mirror to make sure the body; hips and shoulder are stacked on top of the feet.

BTW, given the cheap ski and bindings deals you can get during the off season, one can try it on a second pair of the same ski.

 

[riverc0il]

I tried measuring a binding placement using the BOF method. Granted I have no experience and am not a qualified tech. But using the instructions for the method, I found the mounting point was way too far forward compared to identical skis that I already had mounted and enjoyed the mount placement. Any mounting method is going to have its limitations based on skier preference and desired use of the ski but at least the BOF method utilizes individual skier variables instead of a generic placement on the ski for all riders.

 

[koreshot]

Isn't it amazing that the manufacturer just tells you where to mount your skis and 95% of the consumers will just do what they are told.

This is unfortunate because manufacturers sometimes get these things wrong. They got it way wrong on the first gen Seth Pistols (and potentially the Seth Vicious too - haven't skied/owned so can't say for sure). The Pistols came with an All Mountain mounting position and park. Within a few months, many experienced skiers were mounting the skis at 2 to 2.5cm forward. This position, in the hardcore skier crowds, was widely regarded the real All Mountain mounting position for the pistols. An example where the manufacturer got the mounting position wrong and thus many people got a sub par experience with their product. ("wrong" assumes that K2 was aiming to please the widest audience of skiers with their product to increase sales). I heard the similar situation occurred with the Made'n AKs and from the looks of it, the Legend 8000s.

I am generally opposed to the whole rail phenomenon, for freeride and AM skis anyway, but the one thing that might make me change my mind is if the rail bindings are desgined to easily float up and down the rails ( 4cm in each direction would be nice). I am not too read up on the rail bindings, but I am guessing a couple of them already offer this?

 

[wa-loaf]

Back in the 90's one of the binding co's was making a binding that you could move forward or back. Tyrolia I think? Sounds like there still is a market for something like that. You could probably accomplish the same thing with some demo bindings.

 

[koreshot]

Back in the 90's one of the binding co's was making a binding that you could move forward or back. Tyrolia I think? Sounds like there still is a market for something like that. You could probably accomplish the same thing with some demo bindings.

Yup, looks like Tyrolia Railflex allows you to adjust boot center in either direction.

I have salomon 912 demos and I am able to move them 1cm in either direction from boot cenber so thats kinda nice. I had a pair of Marker demos a few years back and the mechanism on those didn't allow moving boot center at all. Unfortunaely, most demo bindings don't perform as well as normal ones and weigh more. The tyrolia does seem like a nice option though if one is unsure of where they want to mount their ski.

 

[ajl50]

educate my ass-
Moving foward or back- how will that affect my feel. Will forward place my weight more in the tips? Make the ski engage the turn at the tip easier?

 

[jack97]

Will forward place my weight more in the tips? Make the ski engage the turn at the tip easier?

Basically, yes. The concept of the BOF method is to allow flexing at the boots to equally go fore and aft. It would be easier to pressure the tips so that it will engage the edge. Another benefit is that if you get into the backseat, the bindings are placed at the point where it is easier to adjust yourself forward. You have more length at the tail to recover when you get in this position.

Caveat to all this is skier preference, some don’t like the idea or feel of being so forward. It wouldn’t take much to do a handlebar.

 

[koreshot]

What Jack said. On the other hand, some people like the back position because it allows for higher speed carving. Mounting back on a powder ski also helps with float in deep snow.