Wider skis = wider bindings?

A snowHead

I'm looking at getting some 90mm skis and the shop has suggested that a wider binding (I assume this is referring to the binding baseplate since the parts that connect to the boot will have to be the same!) helps transmits power with wider skis.

I'd not heard this before - I can see how the physics of it might work (i.e. the binding effectively stiffens the ski laterally where its mounted, thus wider could be better) but am a bit unclear if its real.

Anyone experienced this or have any knowledge about it?

A snowHead

@snowdave, These days, 90mm is by no way a 'wide' ski, so you shouldn't have any issues. If you provide details of the intended ski and the standard/proposed binding, you will probably get a more accurate response.

The quality of the binding mounting is probably more important than the width of the binding base plate.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Most likely referring to the brakes if your existing binding and brakes are mounted to a narrower ski.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

@PowderAdict, thanks - black crows capitis (actually for Mrs Snow if anyone's wondering why i'm looking at pink skis), marker squire has been proposed, but I was contemplating some different bindings. However, the question wasn't so much about the specifics of which binding I should get on this ski, but more about whether this advice about matching wider bindings for power transmission was backed by evidence rather than being the salesman's opinion.

@RichClark, I'm not sure how wider brakes would help transmit power!

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

@snowdave, the salesman does not know what he is talking about. Wider brakes - maybe - wider bindings? I am not sure they even exist ...

You'll need to Register first of course.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Sounds like the salesman is trying to get rid of whatever he's got a lot of on the shelf.

However wide your bindings are, your boots are still the same width, and the attachment from the binding to the boot is a standard size. So even if you had bindings 16 miles wide, the point where the binding connects with the boot would be the same width as every other (standard) binding on the market.

Cheap Marker bindings are often not favourably rated, by the virtue of the amount of step in pressure required - which in powder means you really need to dig the tip in in order to not simply lose the ski under the snow every time you try and click in. But most of all you shouldn't have your skis set up by somebody who doesn't know what they're talking about!

After all it is free

I've just been through this and concluded same as above. I can see why though, binding manufacturers are using terms such as:

HIGH LATERAL TRANSMISSION
More precision, more control to reach a new level of performance.

OVERSIZED PLATFORM
A super wide platform to ensure maximum lateral power transmission.

Confusing, and most likely marginal if any difference and only important at the screw/ski interface. Wider mount, less tension on the screw, maybe.
The Salomons on my 90mm wide skis had the same baseplate as my 30year old ones. I'll see if the Wardens are wider and I can feel any difference. Unlikely.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

@under a new name,

snow reports

One thing is for sure... ski, binding and boot manufacturers all use very exciting names to describe fairly menial things! My ski boots are covered in text telling you all the technologies they use - all with very exciting names. They look like a race car body.

The top buckles say something like "Mechanical Advantage Fastening System", what this actually means is that buckle lever is twice as long as the bottom buckles so by laws of physics you get a 2:1 mechanical advantage. What's written down like it's 21st century rocket technology is actually an extra inch of metal on the buckle.

So I never get too excited when somebody tells me that a boot or binding has 'improved power transmission'. The term 'power transmission' basically means efficiency, it just sounds cooler.

I have never been able to detect a difference between my OG marker dukes and the wider EPF Baron. Perhaps a better skier might notice something. As others have pointed out, it does matter with some tech bindings. I wouldn't have put an old school five screw dynafit toepiece on a wider ski, for instance but that was more about it parting company with the ski than anything to do with power transfer.

You know it makes sense.

Thanks for all my responses - I'll file it in my list of "things salespeople say that might have an element of truth but don't matter for me".

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

EPF or EFP (extended foot print I thought was a logical abbreviation) is a real thing. The physics is at least semi plausible in the same way that riser plates are though clearly your mahoosive skis would be easier to tip if you put mahoosive style risers on them though it might impact skiability in lots

A snowHead

I was sold some barons i think on the basis of a wider footprint being more desirable. But this on some 130 underfoot superfats. Made sense mechanically to reduce risk of bindings tearing out when slammed on edge. Was not expecting any diff feel.

A snowHead

Given that the non frame bindings all still use very similar mounting points (as in where the screw goes) I see this as sales talk. A binding can't really effect a skis lateral stiffness until you go and plonk a race plate on the ski. If you have a ski thats laterally soft making a tiny part of it a touch wider will have no effect esp when you think about where the hinge points are.

My fattest skis are 123 under foot and mounted with Peak 15's as my 90mm freerides. My thinnest are 88 and mounted with look pivot racing bindings that came off a set of GS sticks, the same bindings are also on my freeride sticks which are 108 under foot.

Help!!

Wider skis = wider bindings?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions