Effect of binding plates on ski performance

[Svend]

Moved from Gary's Stand Height thread to a new topic here:

Quote from: HeluvaSkier on Yesterday at 08:55:25 PM

    I run some type of [usually race] plate on all of my skis. Helps with leverage, stability at speed, and flex in some cases.

The subject of plates is one I've been very curious about lately.  Besides the added stand height and the benefits of that, what are the some of the other benefits? You mentioned stability and flex.  Care to elaborate some more?

How about drawbacks? Do all types of plates always make a ski significantly stiffer? Maybe not desirable, depending on the ski and skier match, and the intended use of the ski.  Or do certain plates leave the flex pattern more or less unchanged?

There are several different designs of plates -- some rigid from front to back, some with rubber flex joints, some plastic, some aluminum, some even have pistons in them, it seems.  Have you experimented with the different designs? Obviously some will influence flex more than others, and affect dampening too, presumably.

There are a lot of details to drill down through.  But this is interesting to me. There is significant potential here to really change a ski's character, perhaps for the better, or not.  I am guessing that if done right, it can make the ski better fit the skier and the terrain skied on; but done wrong, it may make a previously good marriage turn sour.  Some careful choices obviously need to be made before bolting a plate on. 

Curiously, I have not read much in the literature about this topic, so chatting with some knowledgable folks would be very instructive.

Regards,
Svend

[Liam]

Right plate is a benefit on lot's of snow types (especially hard snow carvers and those whose regularly run the risk of 'booting out' while carving...a problem I must admit I don't have ), but for most it's just another obsessive gear distraction for the techno-fiddly types. 

 

[Svend]

Right plate is a benefit on lot's of snow types (especially hard snow carvers and those whose regularly run the risk of 'booting out' while carving...a problem I must admit I don't have ), but for most it's just another obsessive gear distraction for the techno-fiddly types.

That describes me to a T!      Well, not too fiddly, but I like to get things right, and take to time to do so.  Don't want the gear getting in the way of having a good time, or become a safety liability.  But I readily admit that I like the techie gear aspects of this sport....but not nearly as much as I like the actual skiing part. 

I am thinking that a good plate, in comparison to say, a rail type binding, will make the skier feel more connected and "locked in" to the ski.  A feeling of a more assertive, direct connection between boot and ski.  Therefore more responsive, reactive.  Am I right?

[jim-ratliff]

Some plates stiffen a ski while others allow the ski to flex nicely, even under the bindings. A flat mounted binding will typically cause a flat spot in the arc under the boot.

I also think that flat mounted skis change the forward pressure as the ski flexes, and as it rebounds; and can contribute to pre-releases on rebound.

[Gary]

Jim...I think any top of the line flat mount binding takes those forces into consideration....as example I skied my MX78's with the Griffin binding flat mounted for 3 seasons...never having any pre-release issues with that set up.

Given the forces I see kids putting on their park rail and jump skis....there'd be kids blowing out of skis everywhere if that were true.

As for any flat spot under my original set up....never noticed it but I can attest with the extra height,  the new set up with the Head PRD12 makes the skis perform 100% better...sorry I waited so long.

Todays bindings flat or lifted from what I've seen are of very high quality.

[HeluvaSkier]

Been a little quiet here due to lack of time, but since this was started based on a comment I made, I have to chime in.

I really enjoy having plates on my skis. I run Fischer/Head/Elan race plates on all of my Fischer race skis and on my new Blossom all-mountain skis. I also run Marker Piston WC plates on my Harts, and Salomon Race plates on my Stockli DP's. I also have a bunch of Hangl plates, Fischer plates, Nordica/VIST plates, etc - laying around the house from previous setups.

Putting the right plate setup on a skier lets a skier extract the best qualities from the ski - as they suit your skiing style of course. They can dampen the ski, stiffen the ski, create free flex (eliminate the dead spot), and of course add leverage over the edge. Many plates these days are even coming with significant adjust-ability to allow the skier to fine tune the flex of the ski. Take Rossignol for example. They allow the I-bar in the middle of the plate to be removed. They provide spacers to sit between the plate and the ski so that the plate is not in contact with the ski - allowing a more free flex. On top of all that, I think they offer a few different versions of the plate.

My favorite plates currently are the standard Fischer/Head race plates because of their simple [and light] design. They do not have metal in them. They are free floating. They come with washers that lift the plate off the ski, as to not inhibit flex. Best of all - they let the ski perform as opposed to dramatically changing the characteristics of the ski. By next season I will use this setup on almost all of my skis - race and non-race. Due to the plate design, they are really not difficult to flex - making them [for me] a perfect addition to a race ski, an all-mountain carver, or more beefy all-mountain tool.

One important note though is that if you're not bending the ski under any of these plates, they will cause you to feel disconnected from the snow... so depending on how you ski, they may not be the best choice - especially for a soft-snow ski.

[Gary]

Great stuff Greg...nicely put together and as you stated..."how you ski" is a critical factor in determinig the correct  choice for the particular ski.....

Can you elaborate on the stack height of the plate binding combo your using on your Fischer and Blossoms?

Also with such an eclectic collection of plates...have you a favorite and why?

Thanks,
g

[Svend]

Greg -- thanks for the excellent explanation.  I've been looking forward to hearing back from you on this, and I appreciate your time to post that. 

This has cleared up a lot of questions I had about plates, esp. that they do not necessarily all make the ski stiffer or heavier.  That the right choice in plate will still allow the ski to flex freely is good news for those who do not want to stiffen a ski that is well suited to them, but still want to take advantage of all the other benefits that a plate brings.  Ie.  stand height, better edge power transmission, more connectedness between boot and ski, dampening and vibration absorption, etc. (correct me if I'm off base on any of these).

Just a quick clarification on your last comment:

One important note though is that if you're not bending the ski under any of these plates, they will cause you to feel disconnected from the snow... so depending on how you ski, they may not be the best choice - especially for a soft-snow ski.

I take it you mean that the skier has to have a skiing style that naturally bends the ski, generating force and compression in turns to arc the ski, and not a passive style.  Correct?

As for your present favourite Fischer/Head plate, do you mean the Speedplate 13 (single unit) or Race Plate RDX (separate toe-heel pieces)?
http://www.tyrolia.com/ski-bindings/ski-binding-line-201112/plates/speedplate-plus-13/index.html
http://www.tyrolia.com/ski-bindings/ski-binding-line-201112/plates/raceplate-rdx/index.html

Regards,
Svend

[HeluvaSkier]

Svend, RDX. The CP13 is a great recreational plate though. I think Max uses those and the Railflex on a lot of his skis.

Regarding skiing style - yes - that is the difference I'm describing.

[Svend]

Good one! Thanks Greg.

The RDX looks like it has no pre-drilled holes, which is nice if you have a non-Tyrolia binding.  What's the weight like? Heavy? Or light, like a CP13?  Decent stand height on that one, too, at 14.5mm.

FYI, the aluminum Flowflex plate on my Progressor 9's is about 17mm, which really puts the boot up high over such a narrow ski -- about 53mm total stand height, incl. ski.  Works great on hard smooth snow and ice, and surprisingly OK for soft spring snow, but can make the skis a bit twitchy for grabby granular crud and chop. 

[HeluvaSkier]

Weight isn't bad. Definitely lighter than some of the integrated systems like the flowflex. To me those systems tend to feel clunky in comparison.

[Svend]

Yeah, I hear you.  That is really the only thing I would change about my Progressors, is the plate.  Otherwise a wonderful ski.  Fischer drastically changed their Flowflex plates last year, making them lighter, lower, and adjustable in flex stiffness -- Flowflex Tune-It, I think they're called now.  Supposed to work well, according to reviews.

[Svend]

FYI -- for my wife's new iM78's, I chose a Tyrolia CP13 plate mounted with Head LD12 bindings.  I was comfortable with this choice, based on comments about that plate here, and looking at it in the shop.  It's light, has a central hinge with rubber dampener, and rubber dampening pads fore and aft.  It did not seem to stiffen the skis at all, and is probably no heavier than a Railflex plate.  The LD12 bindings are also light, but good quality.  Even with the boot clicked in, you can see the ski bend under the binding, so hopefully no dead spot there.

Overall, a good choice, I think.  We'll see in a week how they perform on snow.

Thanks all, for your feedback here.