Print

Print


Thanks, Coach.  I appreciate the explanation and clarification.
 
Do you remember roughly during what year/years you were returning those bindings?  When were your coaching days?  :)  Just wondering if it might be consistent with these bindings...2000-2002ish...somewhere in there?
 
Also, did you discover the problematic bindings because your students were pre-releasing from the bindings?  Or was the problem otherwise obvious?
 
Interesting about your brother's observation of the Centro bindings testing inconsistently.  Was that roughly within the same time-frame?
 
Thanks again for helping me to sort through this, Coach.
 
Joanie


"Jonathan S. Shefftz" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I think there are two different things getting mixed up here:

1. The regular Atomic bindings would sometimes get messed up after awhile,
so that the heel would essentially be functioning at a very low release
setting no matter what the indicator window read and how far the release
screw was turned. I returned a few pairs of these during my coaching days.

2. The Centro design was just messed up in general. When my brother was
working in a ski shop, he tested some, and the results were wildly
inconsistent. (Unfortunately, he did this *after* skiing - or rather,
attempting to ski - on a pair at Kirkwood, although then again it was
mildly amusing seeing my brother with his far superior skiing skills
relative to mine actually fall, even if it wasn't his fault.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html


Do you Yahoo!?
Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit http://list.uvm.edu/archives/skivt-l.html