Walt is right, high friction breaks , even while standing used to be a major
problem, a new pair of binding ai about 150 buckd, how many rentals is
I now have a knee problem (not from skiing) and its a *** not being able
to ski, good health is priceless
> > I have a pair of Fischer skis I bought when I first started skiing in
> > 1985. The boots are still very good and fit well. The bindings are
> > Tyrolia 480. Ive recently been made aware that certain bindings are no
> > longer servicable based on age and level of "outdatedness". My
> > question is, despite thier age, are my bindings still ok? I live in
> > Wisconsin and the skiing I do is fairly short runs on fairly small
> > hills. The "black diamonds" in Wisconsin arent all that. Ive not gone
> > down a hill here I cant handle well enough, and I cant recall the last
> > time Ive fallen badly enough where my skis came off. I do some small
> > jumps off ramps of built up snow, nothing fancy. Im not looking to
> > replace my bindings, I dont want the expense right now, and I am
> > perfectly happy with these. But once the seed of doubt has been
> > planted, it has grown to make me wonder if I am still doing ok with
> > these bindings. I ski all of maybe 4-5 times a year, and I am not
> > thouroughly convinced I need to run out and buy new ones this year.
> > Any advice or comments are welcome. Thanks for taking the time out of
> > your day to acknowledge me.
> Much good advice from Markus and Richard above. To add my two cents,
> A) the list of indemnified bindings is at
> I don't see Tyrolia 480 on it, but I didn't look very hard. If your
> bindings are out of indemnification, I would strongly advocate replacing
> them. It's not worth breaking your leg to save 50 to 100 bucks.
> B) Many people are confused about what "indemnification" means. If you
> think that it means the binding manufacturer or the shop will do
> anything for you if you get injured, you're dead wrong. What it really
> means is that if you get injured and you try to sue the shop, the
> binding manufacturer will pay the shop's legal defense (i.e. pay for
> lawyers to litigate against you) Not exactly comforting, is it? But
> still better than skiing on a binding that the manufacturer has declared
> C) Get your bindings release-checked periodically. Once a season is a
> good rule of thumb. Note that no ski shop will do this unless they're
> on the indemnification list.
> D) If you think that because you ski on mickey-mouse midwestern
> molehills you can get away with cutting corners on the bindings, think
> again. If you look at the epidemeology* of leg and knee injuries,
> you'll see that a lot of injuries come from falls at low speeds.
> Traverses, catwalks, even lift lines claim a lot of legs and knees. The
> slow twisting fall where there's not enough speed to pop the binding,
> but still enough force to spiral a tibia or tear an ACL is one of the
> more common occurrences. Modern bindings are designed to help prevent
> this type of injury (at least according to the manufacturer's hype).
> I've lost two skiing partners in the last two years to tibia fractures.
> One while skiing in a fog on an unfamiliar mountain where we were trying
> to go as slow as possible to avoid getting lost. Another on a
> ridiculously small Michigan molehill - I think he got all of 20 feet of
> vertical before breaking his leg. The bottom line is that any hill is
> big enough to break bones. People get injured standing in the lift
> line! Don't***around with marginal bindings.
> * see http://SportToday.org/