Posts
Or the next time anyone wants to tell you ramp angle isn't a problem on b/c ski bindings.
The difference between a Dynafit rental heel and a Dynafit Speed Super Light heel is 21mm. Or just over 3/4", .789" or there abouts.
Then think about just how well you would ski if you stuck a 3/4" lift under your heel. Sure you can shim the toes as Dynafit does with their spacer or use one of the B&D versions.
Or you could actually use a combo of toe and heel that has the least amount of ramp from the get go.
My suggestion? ZERO ramp.
Some asked so here ya go guys.
A couple of Dynafit combos I am currently using that I really like. Not easily put together here in the States but easy enough else where or if you travel/go on the Internet early season. Either system is easy to use, super strong in any alpine situation you'd use a touring boot and most importantly to me, proven reliability.
I'd bet these guys would be happy to put it together for you given some notice. Tell them I sent ya :)
http://skimo.co/
http://skimo.co/bindings
These combos give you +4mm to a -1 depending on adjustment plate or toe shim used.
Speed Superlight toe, no shim and a race heel (-/+ 0)
Speed Super light toe, no shim and a adjustment plate w/race heel (+4.5mm)
Speed Radical toe, 6.5mm factory toe shim and Superlight heel (-1mm) (toe is hell for stout)
Speed Radical toe, 6.5mm shim and Superlight heel with adjustment plate (+4mm)
Even the worst of the combos above is a full 9+mm less ramp than a current Speed Radical.
Once you have skied @ -0- it is really unappealing to go past even 3 or 4mm. And that isn't even taking into account stack height on the bigger ramp angles and the traditional shim fit to get closer to a -0- ramp. All of which I find almost as annoying but in a different way.
My go to binding set up for most skiing of any sort is a race heel and toe. No shims. But if you want a adjustable heel and low ramp, use the Dynafit Speed Superlight heel with track, and add the factory 6.5mm toe shim to what ever toe you use. Cut the top clip off for the race toes to fit. Works perfect.
I unintentionally skied a good part of my season last year on the Race binding and the back adjustment track ending up with 4.5mm of ramp. While I would have preferred -0- ramp the 4mm wasn't annoying.
As Linnaeus noted boot board ramp angle and boot forward lean is also an import factor here. The most modern boots I think will perform better and you as a skier with less binding ramp angle. Pretty common stuff in the alpine world. The BC boot and binding makers have different priorities. My take on that is it isn't helping anyone to ski better to use more ramp angle on their bindings. Good skiers can work around a lot. Others not so much.
More here on ramp angles of Dynafit bindings:
http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2014/01/tech-bindings-aka-dynafit-bindings-part.html
14 comments:
Agreed. High ramp angle, means grabby
skis. Thanks for the alert. My newest set of
Dinfits bindings with their new very high ramp
angle made my new well tuned skis a total drag to
be out on. Several wasted days of awful skiing.
Dane thanks for the heads up.
I discovered this neglected issue years ago with the help
of one of our more technical instructors on the
Telluride Ski School. Micheal Pupco. He even
invented a binding addressing ramp angle.
I actually prefer some ramp. Maybe it's that I rode East Coast ice on race skis for so long. I have Vertical ST and Garmont Radium boots, and I actually wish I had more ramp and forward lean. Probably could get away with just more forward lean alone, but I notice the ramp is less than my in bounds skis.
I guess you already know.. but the last pic is pretty much 14/15 C-one bindings. Any words on how the ramp on those will be?
Good call Nick..the C-One should be close to what I am using but you'll want to add the dynafit 6mm shim @ the toe if they don't come with one.
Ditch my adjustment plate though and you are at a -1mm. Better yet. C-one won't do that.
Can this ramp not cause any foot injury or some foot problems? I just missed winter just by reading this post. Thanks a lot.
Hi again,
Thanks for responding! actually got to the bindings earlier today. ramp was at about 9mm. looks like its going to be a second pair of superlites on my denalis!
rockin blog btw.
"Pretty common stuff in the alpine world. The BC boot and binding makers have different priorities."
- Although I totally agree with you on getting binding delta fairly close to zero, I don't think it's a case of the alpine downhill companies getting it vs the alpine touring companies being ignorant.
- And at the extreme opposite, check out this new setup from Atomic, which would always have the effect of throwing me into the backseat (and exactly when I need to be the most balanced):
http://siasnowshow.snowsports.org/supplierdashboard/upload/703/_Atomic_Press_Release_2014_15_Ride_Redster.pdf
I am going to pick up a new pair of Dynafits this season (have two pairs of old TLTs - now called the Speed Turn) and really like the low ramp angle of the Speed Superlites in ski mode; however, I am scared of the ramp angle in tour mode (for those that don't know, the heel on the Superlite doesn't rotate to provide a flat boot touring mode, but you flip a plate to cover the pins which is essentially a low heel lift).
This setup will be used on tons of long missions with lots of flat logging road approaches. I often ski low angle descents without my heel locked too. I HATE having any ramp in tour mode and the resulting toe bang.
Anyone want to comment of the ramp of the racing bindings like the Superlights when in tour mode?
I did the class Haute Route last spring with a pair of race bindings on my Cho Oyu with a TLT6. Plenty of climbing and skinning. Now use the Race or Super-lwt version on most of my skis. Only exceptions is with my bigger boots and even then I'll use the older TLT heel to lower the ramp angle a few mm. Between flat tour mode, race heels and Speed Superlwt heels there is a difference. Race is good, flat is good and the SSL is manageable. But also a better ski release mode as well. With a TLT6 boot the added ramp in touring mode is not annoying for me. Easy enough to get use to. But I don't have toe bang either.
Doug, the skinning delta that I’ve measured on race and near-race bindings (from top of heel cover to toe pincers) is as follows:
5mm = ATK WC SL/SL-R (rebranded by Hagan this past season, and now apparently Fischer and Movement for this coming season)
6mm = Dynafit Low Tech Race
9mm = Plum 135/145, ATK RT (previously rebranded by La Sportiva) with a 2nd position varying depending on the options, Dynafit Speed Superlight with a 2nd position at 25mm
11mm = Plum 165
(Excellent *skiing* delta stats here: http://skimo.co/pin-heights)
Some of this precision is spurious, since many of the heel covers are somewhat curved, so the exact delta will depend on which part of the boot heel rubber sole is resting on top of which part of the heel cover.
By contrast though, the lower of the two elevators on a Dynafit Vertical is 30, and the Radical is 19. (More such stats linked from the fourth paragraph here: http://avycourse.blogspot.com/2010/04/winter-field-sessions-gear-requirements.html )
Bottomline for me is that on the many race and near-race bindings I own, of those that can go “flat” I rotate it that way only a couple times or so a year, and on those that can’t go flat I don’t really miss it.
Overall, the excellent rearward articulation of race boots more than offsets the small amount of binding skinning position delta on long flat approaches.
However, if you do have lots of long flat approaches, then the optimum combination would be a race boot combined with a race or near-race binding that can be rotated 90 degrees, especially with an adjustment plate or track that offers a true flat position rather than a slightly negative position (i.e., toe slightly elevated when in binding pincers, but heel resting directly on ski topskin).
Also for ATK WC SL/SL-R, although the binding can be rotated 90 degrees, that position binds up against the boot heel. But ATK officially says that changing the gap from 4mm to 5 or 5.5 is fine.
And unrelated, but re: “old TLTs - now called the Speed Turn” – the Speed Turn toe is indeed just the old IV/Tech/Classic/Speed (with a Radical toe lever), although the Speed Turn heel is the Speed Radical heel (combined with a IV/Tech/Classic/Speed heel plate and integrated metal elevator)
Hey and thanks for sharing angles and compatibility between heel and toe pieces! I was considering getting the superlight heel piece and use my speed radical toe piece. Do you know what the ramp angle would be without any adjustment plate on the heel piece and no shim on the toe piece? Thanks!
Bjornar,
Great minds think alike :) I use a Speed Radical toe with a Speed Super light heel on a few pairs of my skis. The idea was to get a little stronger toe on skis I don't worry so much about weight. Total ramp for that rig is +1mm of Heel lift. Spectacular for skiing. `
Bjørnar, where/how are you even able to get a Speed Superlite "1.0" heel piece?
If you're instead referencing the current Superlite 2.0, then that's another 5cm higher, so total heel>toe delta would be 6mm (going by Dane's figure for the older setup).
Thanks a lot for the input Dane! Totally thought I wrote you back but I can see now that I did not.. How is the release of the superlight heel working together with the speed radical toe? :) I agree on the stronger toe, the speed radical toe is totally bomber and trustworthy in the fast, light and long touring. Thanks again for shedding some light on this!
Jonathan, I could actually get them from a few sporting stores in Norway. Like this one :http://hardhaussport.no/products/dynafit-tlt-radical-st-baltoro
Still have the first edition in some left over stock I guess. Thanks for the input as well :)
Happy winter when that comes! New snow in the mountains in Northern Norway now, wahoo!
Post a Comment