Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mount 2 cm back for tele still?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mount 2 cm back for tele still?

    Assume modern tip rocker design.
    31
    Yes
    12.90%
    4
    No
    87.10%
    27
    Reluctant enthusiast, part-time crusader, half-hearted fanatic

  • #2
    I think it depends on the ski (and perhaps the skier) -- in most cases, I'd say no, put the tele boot center on the line. But, for me, on one pair of skis, I went back 2 cm and found that to be the best spot -- Praxis BCs.

    Comment


    • #3
      I've mounted on centre line for the past number of years on a variety of skis, from slalom to big tip rocker. I think it's all subjective, person to person and even day to day you might think that skis perform better one way or another. It's hard to quantify, I just go by recommended line and ski.

      Comment


      • #4
        It seems surprising that with all the technical expertise in the membership that no one has a telemark formula for determining mounting position that takes into account all parameters. It seems that the manufacturer's boot center mark on the ski may often be figured for alpine or AT, since some mfgrs seem not to even consider tele, but their mark is what I have most often fallen back on in the absence of anything better.

        Comment


        • #5
          In general I would say NO, but if the ski has a lot of tip rocker, then I would say yes, sort of. Maybe only 1cm back, maybe 2cm. Depends on the ski. Once you drill tele holes you can't resell to a locked heeler, so you might as well drill a few times to get the most use out of the ski that you can.

          ain't no turn like tele!

          Comment


          • #6
            I would say no for any ski. Unless the alpine line is off I always go with it. If you had a very low skiing style I guess you might want to go back further to keep the rear tip from diving but I think most rockered skis solve that problem for pretty much any centered skier.

            I would be interested in hearing any other reason why you would go back.

            Comment


            • #7
              For the last 5 years or so, between mounting my own and a couple buddies, it's pretty much always on alpine centre or +1 with good results. I pretty much mount everything at +1 these days for my personal use, but will be more neutral for friends. I like an on-top out-front style of skiing and find +1 centres me on the sweet spot of the ski consistently (remember, we turn from the ball of foot but sit over the heel) and makes the ski most versatile from pow to park to bumps. -2 would be a definite no-go for me, and haven't mounted negative anything for some time now... a strategy who's time has come and gone with new shapes (rockered or otherwise).

              Certainly there will be oddball mount points by some manufacturers, but as a rule, alpine centre works fine with modern boots and bindings and a solid neutral stance. So Hindfoot, I think the "formula" is boot centre (it's not just alpine boot centre anymore, it's simply boot centre) - taking into consideration the approx 1cm for the duckbill if not NTN.

              Comment


              • #8
                I think boot center over mark is usually the sweet spot but find you can move forward with rockered tips, especially if the tail is rockered too.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by James View Post
                  I would say no for any ski. Unless the alpine line is off I always go with it. If you had a very low skiing style I guess you might want to go back further to keep the rear tip from diving but I think most rockered skis solve that problem for pretty much any centered skier.

                  I would be interested in hearing any other reason why you would go back.
                  Well I guess the same old reason- because the tele'd foot is pressuring the ski more forward. So was that thinking always wrong? I don't really see why tip rocker affects the decision, the issue of a more forward pressure remains it would seem? Of course this is all probably angels on a pin, given a skier adjusts as needed I would think.
                  Reluctant enthusiast, part-time crusader, half-hearted fanatic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Tele 'til You're Smelly View Post
                    Well I guess the same old reason- because the tele'd foot is pressuring the ski more forward. So was that thinking always wrong? I don't really see why tip rocker affects the decision, the issue of a more forward pressure remains it would seem? Of course this is all probably angels on a pin, given a skier adjusts as needed I would think.
                    A more aft mount reflects nordic roots and was to compromise between turning, stiding and breaking trail. With a rocker tip/early rise ski it's very hard to sink the tips so a forward mount can be nice to get a more turny feel. With both tip and tail rocker/early rise it's nice to move forward a bit to get a bit more tail.

                    I don't think you pressure the ski more forward with the rear ski in tele if you're pushing through the ski and not leveraging the boot sole by lifting the heel.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      This all depends on the ski manufacturer's boot center mark, forward, aft, or on it, but it would be interesting to know how the ski designers determine the location of this mark. Do they ski test it, or do they have a formula? Probably both, I'd guess. Anybody know more about how they come up with this location? Hard to second guess how to modify the location for tele if we don't know how the BAL is determined.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by whitehonky View Post
                        For the last 5 years or so, between mounting my own and a couple buddies, it's pretty much always on alpine centre or +1 with good results. I pretty much mount everything at +1 these days for my personal use, but will be more neutral for friends. I like an on-top out-front style of skiing and find +1 centres me on the sweet spot of the ski consistently (remember, we turn from the ball of foot but sit over the heel) and makes the ski most versatile from pow to park to bumps. -2 would be a definite no-go for me, and haven't mounted negative anything for some time now... a strategy who's time has come and gone with new shapes (rockered or otherwise).

                        Certainly there will be oddball mount points by some manufacturers, but as a rule, alpine centre works fine with modern boots and bindings and a solid neutral stance. So Hindfoot, I think the "formula" is boot centre (it's not just alpine boot centre anymore, it's simply boot centre) - taking into consideration the approx 1cm for the duckbill if not NTN.
                        My latest pair of tele skis, BD AMPerage are mounted +1 cm, for the New School shape of the ski.. That's with NTN Freedoms. Ski feels nice and turny; well for a pair 185 cm skis that are 115 underfoot.
                        All the G3 skis I have use an Alpine Tour mount mark for AT boot center, with a tele boot center 5mm back from that. With NTN boots I use the AT boot center mark for NTN boot center.
                        Last edited by chamonix; 21 February 2014, 12:38 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Hindfoot View Post
                          Hard to second guess how to modify the location for tele if we don't know how the BAL is determined.
                          I think that's the point. Given modern tele-technique assuming modern gear (another discussion about more classic gear), the BAL does not need to be modified for tele as a general rule. It should be simply called BSL - Best ski location.

                          Then people that are really fussy about their stance and can qualitatively feel the subtle difference of one cm fore or aft can tweak it. But for the majority the BAL is the standard for alpine and tele. I think this holds true for alpine as well with nearly all mounts being at BAL and then for very particular folks or for certain key uses (park/switch), this is modified for and aft.

                          Basically like Airin noted - Tele skiing is done centred through the boot, across both feet. So while the forward foot is pressing the edge through the toe (making you think you'd need to move the mount back to get to centre of the sweet-spot), the back foot is being pressured through the lowering of the butt through the heel (what mogul skiers call stacking the body). So overall, your pressure on the ski edge is through the centre - same as with alpine, just averaged between split feet versus to parallel feet.

                          Chamonix... I've yet to meet a G3 ski I liked, but your note about them still having a rear-mounted point for tele may explain some of this? They may still be using older principles even on newer skis. I'd like to try a +1 G3, but I don't know anyone with a G3 anymore and any demo's (if available) are then likely mounted for manufacturer's recommended which is back of BAL.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            It's going to depend on the manufacturer. My first mount on my Protests (full rocker) was too far forward and I felt like I was going to go over the bars. Praxis has a rep for recommending mounts that a lot of people found too far forward. I think they've mellowed it out in the last year or two.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by airinwrite View Post
                              I think boot center over mark is usually the sweet spot but find you can move forward with rockered tips, especially if the tail is rockered too.
                              I was told to mount my current pair of TRO Rev 105s at +1.5 cm, which seemed counter-intuitive; wasn't happy with on the mark, so I tried the recommended +1.5 cm - instant success! Still doesn't seem logical ......

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X