Massive Brand New Skis with Dinky Bindings

A ski >112 underfoot is just a ski geared towards skiing powder, more float, this is not representative of the skier's skiing ability. Everyone skis pow nowadays, even the jerrys. An intermediate 6”1 185 pound dude doesn't need to crank their DINs above 8, so they'll probably be just fine with Marker M10s.

Better bindings would bring better materials which improves durability and power transmission, but realistically an intermediate skier would probably not notice any difference between a M10 and a Pivot 18 in terms of power transmission, and for someone intermediate who doesn't charge, the plastic will probably hold just fine too.

So no, I don't get annoyed by entry level skiers buying entry level bindings, and you shouldn't either.
 
The ski has more leverage on a smaller boot than a larger one - big dude dins may not be as high as you'd think.

But you'd think the big guy would want the robustness of a high din clamp so idk.

As long as they're havin fun who gaf

Also, marker sucks in general.
 
The more people buying massive sick skis the better. Anything which makes freeski companies more viable is good in my book. I don't care if gapers are out there eating shit on the same sick skis as me.
 
I’m too busy minding my own business to really notice what bindings anyone is on. I’ll see what skis they’re on but that’s about it.
 
13978008:runforlove2018 said:
What is considered a dinky binding in your book?
Click to expand...

He edited and removed his post because he has confidence issues, but basically he was saying it annoys him to see skis larger than >112 underfoot with entry level bindings like M10s. It keeps him up at night.
 
13978010:Monsieur_Patate said:
He edited and removed his post because he has confidence issues, but basically he was saying it annoys him to see skis larger than >112 underfoot with entry level bindings like M10s. It keeps him up at night.
Click to expand...

That's kind of funny that he cares about the width of the ski as the criteria for caring about binding din. So everything less than 112mm is OK lol? Maybe he just doesn't like the aesthetics of it.

OP, just an FYI... Not everyone needs to rock dins at 18 when they're skiing. Many people do just fine with a properly adjusted binding to their recommended din based on the chart, ability aside. So it makes perfect sense for someone to save money by going with a cheaper binding with a lower din range such as m10.
 
i don't see other skiers' skis because i ski too fast; all you losers are just little blurs to me. and analyzing their gear choices would require thinking about something other than myself so that's a no for me dog
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top