Alpine-Touring hybrid setup

[David]

I understand why Daymakers make sense in midwest -- just was curious about the weight comment.

The 2450 for the Adrenalin is for a pair. Attack 13s are 1035 per individual binding, so 2060 per pair.

I thought that seemed awfully light in comparison. I do recall when I was shopping that Daymakers told me the combo was lighter than a binding like the Adrenalin but maybe it was the earlier versions. Cost was a factor especially for something I can't do often but boots were huge. It's taken me 40 years to find a proper fitting boot I can wear all day and definitely don't want to even consider trying to get fit in a tech boot.

 

[AlpedHuez]

I think I am going to go for the Cast Freetour upgrade kit for the Pivot 18. Best of both worlds.

 

[BMC]

For me the Daymaker weight was not an issue. The reviews I was reading about AT frame bindings like the Adrenalin were not great on piste and since I'm in the midwest my skis will be on piste 75% of the time. For the time I can spend skinning I thought the Daymakers were a better option. The bonus is I don't need to go through the pain of fitting a tech boot.

The Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 has a listed weight of 2450 grams. The Attack 13's are listed at 1035 grams and the Daymakers are listed at 1380 grams for a combination of 2316. That's 134 grams less than the Adrenalin.

I own Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 bindings. Ive got them mounted on Salomon QLab skis. They go great on piste. I also own an identical pair of QLab skis and have them mounted with Salomon Sth 13 WTR bindings. While the two pairs of skis do ski differently, I don’t think there’s any issue of them skiing less well, particularly on piste. They do ski differently with the Tyrolia offering a more remote but smoother ride, and the Salomons slightly more directly responsive. Both hold an edge as well as each other.

To be honest I think there’s a bit of unfair dialogue going around in the ski community around frame bindings, driven by hard core ski tourers. Yes a frame binding won’t tour as well as a low tech pin binding. However, it will ski a lot better in bounds, and will be enormously safer than a pin binding anywhere. Plus it will work for short side country hikes with standard alpine boots.

this little duck says that if you’re predominantly skiing in bounds but doing some side country from time to time and want one do it all ski or a small quiver, a frame binding is probably your best choice, or at the very least should be a real consideration.

 

[ZionPow]

I also own Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 bindings mounted on Volkl 100Eight skis. I use them for both backcountry and resort skiing. Yes they are heavy for skinning but bomber on the downhill. As stated above, I believe they are much safer downhill due to the release capability vs pin bindings. I read a report where they tested all types of ski bindings in a lab and they found that downhill binding release mechanisms were much more consistent and reliable vs pin bindings. The study convinced me to avoid pin bindings and use the safer release mechanisms on frame bindings.

 

[David]

I own Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 bindings. Ive got them mounted on Salomon QLab skis. They go great on piste. I also own an identical pair of QLab skis and have them mounted with Salomon Sth 13 WTR bindings. While the two pairs of skis do ski differently, I don’t think there’s any issue of them skiing less well, particularly on piste. They do ski differently with the Tyrolia offering a more remote but smoother ride, and the Salomons slightly more directly responsive. Both hold an edge as well as each other.

To be honest I think there’s a bit of unfair dialogue going around in the ski community around frame bindings, driven by hard core ski tourers. Yes a frame binding won’t tour as well as a low tech pin binding. However, it will ski a lot better in bounds, and will be enormously safer than a pin binding anywhere. Plus it will work for short side country hikes with standard alpine boots.

this little duck says that if you’re predominantly skiing in bounds but doing some side country from time to time and want one do it all ski or a small quiver, a frame binding is probably your best choice, or at the very least should be a real consideration.

Being in the midwest I don't have the ability to demo like I would prefer so reviews and people here on PugSki are very helpful. The Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 was my first choice binding until I read some reviews and postings here on PugSki. I also spoke with a few folks here that had skied the same ski with & without a frame binding before I made my decision. If I lived in the Rockies I'd maybe use a frame binding just to save hassle at the top and pack space. But as of now I'm happy with my Daymakers.

 

[BMC]

Being in the midwest I don't have the ability to demo like I would prefer so reviews and people here on PugSki are very helpful. The Tyrolia Adrenalin 13 was my first choice binding until I read some reviews and postings here on PugSki. I also spoke with a few folks here that had skied the same ski with & without a frame binding before I made my decision. If I lived in the Rockies I'd maybe use a frame binding just to save hassle at the top and pack space. But as of now I'm happy with my Daymakers.

I’m definitely not offering my comments as a criticism of your call - more a response to some more general commentary in the ski community around frame bindings.

I’m not at all suggesting low tech bindings aren’t a good choice in some circumstances but what you gain in weight savings abs stride, you lose in performance and safety, when compared to a frame binding. Plus it’s likely you’ll use an AT boot offering either a little bit worse to quite a deal worse downhill performance compared to a well fitted Alpine boot.

I really hope frame bindings arent talked out of existence, as I think frankly for most use cases of side country they’re probably a better choice, assuming you prioritise the down and safety over the up (and short hikes)

 

[David]

I’m definitely not offering my comments as a criticism of your call - more a response to some more general commentary in the ski community around frame bindings.

I’m not at all suggesting low tech bindings aren’t a good choice in some circumstances but what you gain in weight savings abs stride, you lose in performance and safety, when compared to a frame binding. Plus it’s likely you’ll use an AT boot offering either a little bit worse to quite a deal worse downhill performance compared to a well fitted Alpine boot.

I really hope frame bindings arent talked out of existence, as I think frankly for most use cases of side country they’re probably a better choice, assuming you prioritise the down and safety over the up (and short hikes)

Frame bindings are a good choice for a lot of people. But like I said I only had reviews to go by. Why would you think I'd use an AT boot with Daymakers or a frame binding? Both are designed so people can use the alpine boots they already have. No offense but have you even looked at what the Daymakers are?

 

[BMC]

Frame bindings are a good choice for a lot of people. But like I said I only had reviews to go by. Why would you think I'd use an AT boot with Daymakers or a frame binding? Both are designed so people can use the alpine boots they already have. No offense but have you even looked at what the Daymakers are?

I’m not commenting on daymakers. I’m commenting on the theme you’ll see on social media and elsewhere that frame bindings are a terrible compromise and low tech pin set ups are preferable.

Enjoy the day makers!

 

[David]

I’m not commenting on daymakers. I’m commenting on the theme you’ll see on social media and elsewhere that frame bindings are a terrible compromise and low tech pin set ups are preferable.

Enjoy the day makers!

Oh, I thought you were suggesting frame bindings over Daymakers with AT boots.

 

[Rod9301]

I’m definitely not offering my comments as a criticism of your call - more a response to some more general commentary in the ski community around frame bindings.

I’m not at all suggesting low tech bindings aren’t a good choice in some circumstances but what you gain in weight savings abs stride, you lose in performance and safety, when compared to a frame binding. Plus it’s likely you’ll use an AT boot offering either a little bit worse to quite a deal worse downhill performance compared to a well fitted Alpine boot.

I really hope frame bindings arent talked out of existence, as I think frankly for most use cases of side country they’re probably a better choice, assuming you prioritise the down and safety over the up (and short hikes)

I prioritize the down, and i ski on Salomon mtn pin bindings.

I do not agree that frame bindings ski better.

They might transmit less vibration, but that's it.

And if you use an at boot, with rubber soles, the rubber deforms enough when the ski is on edge, that you will lose a lot of edging power on firm or ice.

 

[BMC]

I prioritize the down, and i ski on Salomon mtn pin bindings.

I do not agree that frame bindings ski better.

They might transmit less vibration, but that's it.

And if you use an at boot, with rubber soles, the rubber deforms enough when the ski is on edge, that you will lose a lot of edging power on firm or ice.

That’s not how I find pin bindings at all.

Eaxh to their own but I think pin bindings ski appreciably worse on the down than alpine or frame bindings (which are basically alpine bindings on a plate), and are undoubtedly less safe.

But everyone feels different things so all good!

 

[AlpedHuez]

I have skied a few Black Crows skis. I love the Atris (if I had to buy a new freeride 1-0-something now that would be it). For touring I would go for a bit narrower and a flatter tail. I love the Navis (outgoing model) and the Camox. I also tried the Camox Freebird (dedicated touring version), but that one is too big of a sacrifice on the downhill. The Justis seems great on paper, but as a very solid all mountain charger. I would not consider it for touring. It is also quite heavy.

Personally, I never connected with the Shift. I had too many pre-releases on the different Paris I've been on. And both with Kingpin and Tecton I have never felt the toe was lacking in downhill performance or feeling insecure. But then again, I am nog a charger or aggressive skier. I just have the mass.

I got an Atris, put a Pivot on that. Got a Duke PT 16 for my Rustler 10. Now I'm looking at getting a Corvus Freebird and putting a Shift on that.

 

[markojp]

And on the boots front... There are some great options.

Nordica Strider
Tecnica Cochise
Lange XT Free
Fischer Ranger Free Walk DYN (I have the 130 flex)
K2 Mindbender
Head Kore
Rossignol Alltrack
Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD

And probably some more. They all come with proper downhill performance, DYN inserts, walking mode and range of motion. But as with all ski boots: fit is everything.

All the boots you mentioned have wildly different fits. The boot (Nordica Strider) the OP mentioned is higher volume, higher instep... which leads to the obvious question, why choose that particular boot? And how do we suggest any boot without having idea of what foot we're dealing with?

 

[Cheizz]

All the boots you mentioned have wildly different fits. The boot (Nordica Strider) the OP mentioned is higher volume, higher instep... which leads to the obvious question, why choose that particular boot? And how do we suggest any boot without having idea of what foot we're dealing with?

Exactly, that's why I just listed the hybrid boots based on simple feature combinations (tech insterts & proper downhill performance). I have not suggested to buy boot X or Y. Just mentioning some models to have a look at in a specific category.

 

[markojp]

Exactly, that's why I just listed the hybrid boots based on simple feature combinations (tech insterts & proper downhill performance). I have not suggested to buy boot X or Y. Just mentioning some models to have a look at in a specific category.

... and they're all over the place in terms of range of motion in walk mode as well. Sorry, it's just a pet peeve that makes a fitters job harder tying to walk someone back from a recommend boot made foot/accurate narrative unseen.

 

[Cheizz]

That's why I never recommended a specific boot. Listing all the options is not a recommendation. But if you read it as such... I can't really help that, I guess.

 

[markojp]

That's why I never recommended a specific boot. Listing all the options is not a recommendation. But if you read it as such... I can't really help that, I guess.

I guess I see it sort of like mentioning every ski on the ski wall, but again, it's only from my perspective of helping people narrow down their gear choices through observation and a lot of questions. The OP will figure it out. No problem.

 

[Rod9301]

I'm am not sure that boot fit is as important as it was a while ago, within reason.

I bought the zero g tour pro boots even though they were pretty low on the instep and narrow.

I was able to stretch the boot for width, multiple times, and work on the liner some to get more instep room, plus lengthen it a bit.

The boot fitter was against this boot for me.

I'm really glad i bought them, the performance is great, much better than the maestrale which he recommended.

 

[jmeb]

I guess I see it sort of like mentioning every ski on the ski wall, but again, it's only from my perspective of helping people narrow down their gear choices through observation and a lot of questions. The OP will figure it out. No problem.

Except it's not really. Every ski-on-the-wall would've included far more options. The listed boots are all in somewhat of the same class of beefy boots that have inserts for touring. Yes they have a wide range of fits, some are better hikers than others, some ski better than others. Some weigh 500g less than others. Notably absent from his list are <1300g boots that really start sacrificing downhill performance (ZeroG excepted). There's no Salomon Xalp, Scarpa F1 or Alien, etc.

It'd be a bit like recommending a wide variety of skis in the 90-110mm range that could serve as a OSQ out west. Yes, still a big range. But it's not recommending a Head Supershape or set of Praxis Powderboards.

 

[ScottB]

I did a touring setup recently for the first time, here is what my research found:

1. Buy Daymakers and skins, use your all your existing alpine equipment. Lowest cost approach, best for occasional sidecountry use. Heavy and have to carry daymakers.

2. Buy Frame bindings and skins, use all your existing alpine equipment. Next lowest lowest cost (depends on binding price and remount vs daymaker price) Less heavy than daymakers, don't have to carry daymakers, frame bindings don't tour as well as daymakers with alpine boots. Always have extra weight of frame bindings on skis, rather than removeable weight of daymakers.

3. Buy hybrid bindings, touring boots w/pins, skins, use light alpine skis. Now you will have much better touring performance, especially depending on skis. Weight can vary a lot depending on gear choices. Hybrid bindings would be shifts, cast system, Duke PT's. Downhill performace will vary a lot based on gear choices.

4. Buy tech bindings, touring boots w/pins, skins, and touring skis. Lightest, best touring setup. Usually will give up some downhill performance for much better touring (at least less effort uphill). Can vary performance some based on gear choices.


I went with choice 3 with downhill performance and low weight as my top priorities. I bought shift bindings, Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD boots, Blizzard Zero G 108mm skis, and Black Diamond GlideLight Mix skins. Total cost of $2K. The setup skis very good on piste, except on rough boilerplate snow. It tours really well on the up, fairly light weight and versitile. I use the skis with the shifts with my Alpine boots a lot in spring snow or soft snow. I use the boots to ski race coach in due to rubber soles and walk mode. Not the best for running gates, but the racers do that a lot more than I do, or I switch to my race boots.

I am very happy with my choices. I feel I spent a lot for the use I get out of the setup, but I am working on some backcountry plans for the future. To quote my normal ski buddies "I don't walk uphill, that is why they have ski lifts". Touring is a different crowd of skiers.

The shifts, Marker Duke PT's, and cast have alpine toes and alpine heels. The PT's and cast have removeable toe pieces, the shifts are one piece and the pins flip out of the way. Cast is heaviest and all metal, PT's are next and mostly metal, shifts are lighest and mostly carbon/plastic. I don't want to carry extra parts and wanted light weight without going to a tech binding.

Lot's of choices, just get educated and pick what you like the best. You can't go really wrong unless you try to do long uphills with boots that don't have a walk mode (except with the daymakers which pivot differently and don't require a walk mode boot)