J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by ise

pavelski wrote:
Sorry Ise but I must disagree with you as far as your statement, "there is no tension when bindings is released"! If you take a binding apart you have a cam system which is calibrated by having a "piston" resting on a cam type mechamism. This piston which exerts pressure on cam IS under tension at all times. When you screw DIN setting what you are doing is screwing IN the spring tighther into the piston thus placing more tension on cam!
Even if bindings are "off" or released the DIN setting spring is under tension!!

re-read it, I said some bindings not all, and a quick Google search shows I'm not the first person to point this out to you.

bandit wrote:Pav, it's clear that you value winding down binding settings for the reasons you list. You've not addressed my query as I still don't know if the binding manufacturers are recommending it currently.

If the manufacturers are not recommending it being undertaken, if consumers perodically wind the springs down it may invalidate any warranty or litigation claims involving their products.

To my knowledge, it's not recommended in part because it's not really needed in many cases, some bindings don't actually have the spring under tension when the binding is released. Modern material technology being what it is then I'm less than sure the spring lifetime doesn't far exceed the lifetime of the other components anyway.

As I understand it, litigation concerns from the manufacturers would mean a couple of things, first, that if they recommend releasing the springs there's a risk people don't reset them either correctly or at all in which case there's a potential liability. Second, if the spring fails over time as a result of not having the tension released then they have a further potential liability. It's rather better for them to ship a bind as "no user serviceable parts" and be done with it all, use modern materials or a zero loaded on release spring.

More tellingly, there's no mechanical or physical reason a spring under tension will creep, we're talking about a consistent static load which unless the spring is flawed or unsuitable for application will not impact the spring performance. The mechanics of this is that springs will degrade if pushed beyond their static yield strength or on cyclic loading, neither should be true in a ski binding.

You say it's not in your current binding manual, it would be interesting if it's actually in any binding manual, I'm guessing not but I don't know for sure. Maybe the first ski bindings used general purpose springs which weren't suitable for the application and some failures led to this becoming common practise, I don't know but there's no good mechanical reason for it now as far as i know, it's just "common wisdom" and that's something to always be wary of.

I'm not sure about that or maybe it depends where you see the edge of control being, it's certainly how Bode wins but you watch the Austrians, for example Hermann Maier, and it's a relentless precision and control likewise with Didier Cuche. You're left with the impression with Bode it's a 50/50 thing, either he'll crash out or win, Cuche or Maier it's all about just how close to the first place they're coming.

IceGhost wrote:While I've been gawking at ski racing and reading loads and loads of stuff on skiing. I know that when skis get cookin' and they are going fast I've seen then vibrate on the ground. Is that a matter of control or your just going that fast?

It slightly depends on the ski/plate but as a general rule if that's happening the skier is out of control and their weight is too far back. It means the skier is not driving the weight forward and the edges aren't engaging, the skier will get away with it in a straight line but without the edge control they can't turn.

If you're weighted properly then the shocks caused by surface variation will transmit up to your legs at high speed, that's why ski racers have thighs like telegraph poles. It's also why there's a trend for recreational skis to be heavier, it's another way of the skier absorbing impact at higher speeds, there's some obvious downsides to that of course.

bandit wrote:Okay, me thicky :oops: Reverse kick turn???

Please describe it :D

in that final link in photo form as well, but really those photo's are awful. You rarely see people use it and it's not something I've ever really practised.

ise wrote:I tried to find a youtube but it was rubbish, I'll look again tomorrow.

here's a disaster turn, I suppose most people have messed up sometime :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iIe1JvAxas

here's a good one of a downhill kick turn used to turn around near a cliff, a good example of why it's a life saver turn:

http://www.skinet.com/video.jsp?ID=1000005483

and an uphill touring kick turn in photo's :

http://www.cosleyhouston.com/alps-ski-advice.htm

IceGhost wrote:Truly amazing stuff Ise. What exactly is an uphill kick turn. Sounds :shock:

It's a way of rotating your skis 180' to change direction as you're moving uphill, you can be on steep terrain and need to zig zag up. You can reverse kick turn which is another variation and also downhill kick turn which is a typical steep technique where it's too steep or too narrow to turn like a steep couloir entrance or moving above cliffs when you can't drop the height of a jump turn or generate the torque for the take off.

I tried to find a youtube but it was rubbish, I'll look again tomorrow.

AJ wrote:Superb photo`s ise the scenery just blow`s you away, Thanks for sharing.



AJ Adele

That's the thing in the Valais and the Val d'Anniviers particularly, it's mountains like kids draw them, sharp, spiky, big and with snow on the top :D