View Single Post
  #3  
Old September 25th 16, 04:10 PM posted to rec.skiing.alpine
Toller[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Necessary to get new bindings checked?

On Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 3:47:08 PM UTC-4, Richard Henry wrote:
On Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 8:28:10 AM UTC-7, Toller wrote:
I just bought a Volkl 81ATM. The binding just slide on and fasten with a screw (though they don't give instructions, to try and stop you from doing it...).

Is it necessary to get them checked, or can you assume new binding are accurate? The charts say to set them at 6, but I always use 5 and find it works fine; so I have a little margin of safety if they are off a bit. If they are too low I guess I will find out quickly enough.

I don't mind the $20, but no one around here does it.


While I am on the subject, the bindings say they have "triple pivot elite" toes but don't say anywhere what the triple means. Do they also open if you fall straight back? Pretty sure I've never done that, but maybe some day.


I can't imagine anyplace you would go skiing that does not have a pro shop at the base that is capable of doing a basic safety check on the bindings..

They do, but they don't open until maybe December.

If you have any mechanical training or experience, the concept of a safety binding is pretty simple. A spring or something similar holds everything together until an unsafe force overcomes the spring force, allowing the binding to release. Any user can set his bindings to whatever he wants and perform simple functional tests, but the professional gets paid because he has the test equipment and knows how the bindings work, what settings are appropriate for which users, and how to test for proper function.


They release when I force the heel forward or the toe sideways; so I know they "work", but my shove isn't well calibrated.

I guess my question is really if bindings are typically accurate from the factory, or if they can be significantly off. The only pair I ever had were spot on, but one sample isn't really proof.
Ads