Opinion on Din Range

S

str6t9

Member
So I am currently using FKS 140's and have been for years. As a matter of fact I've been on the turntable bindings for 10-12 years. I want to venture into Tyrolia Attack bindings but I have a question about the Din. I read on here earlier in the week how the din spring works as far as release tension. The closer to the higher end of the din the release is a little more aggressive to put it terms. The lower end of your din results in a smoother release?

I ride with my bindings at 9, once in a blue moon 10 depending on how aggressive I feel that day. I always have in the back of my mind I cant afford to miss work or my mortgage due to a blown out knee. So my question is do I go with Tyrolia Attack 16 or 13?

Tyrolia Attack 16 - Runs 5-16, so I would be 4 from the low end and 7 from the top end

Tyrolia Attack 13 - Runs 4-13, so I would be 5 from the low end and 4 from the top end

Thanks,

Erik
 
That's not entirely true. While you can be at the minimum of the DIN range, you do not want to be at the absolute maximum of the DIN range. At the max, the release spring is fully compressed and has no elasticity to it. This lack of elasticity can cause inconsistent release issues.
 
Nor is this. If the binding released inconsistently at any number within the DIN range then that number would not be part of the range.
 
You obviously know more that I, but does Atomic do any testing to actually confirm this? I have always heard this to be the case but am skeptical due to all of the misinformation that is passed around the ski world that people blindly accept as truth. It seems like the logical thing to do would be to use a slightly larger spring that could be compressed beyond what is visually indicated with a mechanical stop on the highest DIN setting. It also seems like a liability for a company to have a DIN standard value indicated that may not release when it should. After all, that's the point of a standardized DIN.

I'm mainly curious about this because we have a bunch of FKS 120's we have accumulated over the years with broken toe pieces, but good heels. We keep them around with the thought that we ride at about a 12 DIN, so the heels will be fine if we crank them down. Curious as to whether or not this is actually "unsafe".
 
I am referring to bindings that are functioning "normally" to their intended specification. But I don't fully understand what you mean- if a binding does not release consistently at any number within the DIN range, what number is not part of the range?
 
This is mechanical fact of the spring, which we test and your local shop can also confirm this. If the spring is fully compressed (which is most often a bit past the actual maximum marking) then there is the potential for it to release inconsistently. Just to ensure optimum safety, it is best to be 1 or 2 settings below maximum. At the end of the day, the only thing that is 100% true is how the binding tests with the actual boot inside it with all settings set accordingly. If the everything passes, then the binding is safe to use.
 
What about if you run a din on the lower end of your bindings maximum that it releases a little more smoothly? True?
 
Are you asking to run a DIN setting lower than your actual setting in order to get a smoother release? Or are you asking if a DIN of 10 releases easier on a 9-16 scale rather than a 4-12 scale? Regardless, the answer is no to both.

You wouldn't want to run a DIN of 10 on a 10-DIN binding since that potentially would overly compress the spring. But you wouldn't be 100% sure until you did a release check on the binding with your actual boot in it.
 
What I wrote was not very clear. What I was trying to say was that if a company designed a binding that they intended to have a range up to 18 on the high end, but the binding did not release reliably at the upper end (say 17+), then they would not rate this binding as a 18 DIN. It would probably be a 16.
 
To be more concise. I would never run a binding at the end of it's range, but i would expect a 16 din binding to have consistent release characteristics at 15. I also would be under the impression that a binding manufacturer would spec a spring that lets them run within the advertised operating range of the equipment with room to spare.

 
Yes. More unsprung is always better than less. Having a bigger, beefier spring than you need will ALWAYS be better than pushing a smaller spring to it's max. I always suggest researching and getting the best made binding that includes your DIN range, not the cheapest binding you can technically make work for you. I ski @9 and run FKS 18s- not because I want or need an 18 DIN, but because I want to be asking the absolute minimum from a binding possible, it's just better for the mechanics and long term durability. Well, that and the 18's single pivot toe has 40% more elasticity in the toe than the winged 14 toe and it's all one piece.

I mean you CAN run a binding at it's max, but it's not good for the long term. Always try to have bindings that you're using up as little as possible out of the DIN range. (safely or course)
 
I find it odd that the OP changes his dins regularly depending on how he is feeling. That seems like something you wouldn't want to be doing. Personally I like knowing what it takes for my bindings to release on a given pair of skis. I set them once and keep them there till I start having issues with that setting (releasing to early or not at all)

Thats not to say I dont use different DIN settings, i just dont change them on one pair of skis day to day. My all mountain skis that never see park are only set to 7, where as park skis are set to 10.
 
I only have one pair of skis, Moment PB&J's. When I find myself more aggressive in the park I'll move them up to 10 if I am releasing at 9. Otherwise I ride all mountain at 9.

 
Right but why go through the hassle of changing them? I would just leave them on 10 all the time if I was only using a single pair.
 
I'm riding the 16's at a 10 and love them. They only release when they really need to. Plus I feel like the 16 is better constructed even though it isn't It's just good to know that it COULD handle a 16 DIN rather than a 13 max.
 
This.

Do people just go and turn their bindings up whenever they release now? Bindings release for a reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top