Alpine-Touring hybrid setup

[Cheizz]

I went with option 3 as well:
Fischer Ranger 130 Free Walk DYN boot
Blizzard Rustler 10 ski
Fritschi Tecton 12 binding (pin toe with DIN release, alpine heel), lighter than Shift or Kingpin
Contour Hybrid skins

Works great for me

 

[AlpedHuez]

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 also went with Option 3, twice over:

- Blizzard Rustler 10, Marker Duke PT 16, Nordica Strider 130
- Black Crows Corvus Freebird, Salomon S\Lab Shift 13, Fischer Ranger Free 130

 

[anders_nor]

How many days tested on the duke pt 16?

 

[AlpedHuez]

How many days tested on the duke pt 16?

None yet. I just got it a few weeks ago, from
Germany, reputedly the first retail sale in Europe (they don’t even have a jig in shops yet), and I live in London, so, even if I could get it mounted soon, my only option for now would be the indoor Ski Centre, but that is still closed for Covid. Not sure if they allow uphill skiing anyway (perhaps no one has ever asked/tried!).

 

[BMC]

I’ve had frame binding set ups but current set ups are;

Salomon QST 99, Dynafit.

Nordica Enforcer Free 104, Salomon Shifts

Boots Lange XT Free 110.

So a bit of a mix of 3 and 4, with the first set pretty much AT devoted, and the second more in bounds with occasional side country jaunts.

 

[Rod9301]

For the money you'll pay for shifts, why not have two pairs, dedicated resort and a dedicated Backcountry, with light weight pin bindings.
The mtn bindings are bomber. Much more do than the shift.
And your resort setup so ski a lot better with alpine bindings and boots.

 

[ScottB]

Certainly a reasonable way to go. Have you priced pin bindings? Not much cheaper than shifts. If using touring pin bindings, it would make sense to use very light weight (1000-1500 gram) skis. If I toured a lot, I would get a setup in this category. If you go with really light weight touring boots, you really give up a lot of downhill performance and would have to adjust your skiing to compensate. My hybrid boots Hawx Ultra XTD are pretty light (1400 g) and tour well, so personally I would stick with them. I also have alpine boots.

I already have alpine equipment, as do a lot of skiers considering getting into touring, so to me the question was "do I buy a second set of boots with pins and walk mode or not", and how "downhill" capable do I want them to be. Another nice thing about shifts is they ski well with my alpine race boots when in the resort. I personally feel the shifts are the lightest, most adaptable hybrid pin binding on the market. They have a few learning curve quirks, but so far so good for me. I had to learn how to get the AFD set correctly and that took care of any pre-release issues (I never pre-released) but it happens to some people who don't have the AFD set right.

 

[Rod9301]

There's no reason to get light skis if you have light pin bindings.

I ski the vwerks katanas with mtn bindings and tecnica zero g boots.

In my opinion, you save the weight first in bindings, then skis and last in boots.

 

[ScottB]

There are lots of ways to look at this gear. What makes the most sense to you is the way you should go. I did what makes the most sense to me, and it may or may not make sense to you. Neither of us is wrong or right. I have read lots of different opinions on how to choose this gear. The only thing everyone can agree on for sure is if two pieces of touring gear are the same in all aspects, buy the lighter one.

I value total weight (I will exclude skins for now) and just for fun let's compare our two setups in that regard.

Zero G 108 skis, 185 cm = 1730 g
Shift binding = 875 g
Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD 130 boot (26.5) = 1400 g

Total = 4005 g per foot

Vwerks Katanas Ski, 112mm, 184 cm = 1970 g
Salomon Mtn binding = 400 g
Tecinca Zero G boots (26.5) = 1300 g

Total = 3670 g per foot

You are hauling 330 g less weight per foot up hill. 1 pound = 450 g, so 3/4 of a lb less. That is pretty good weight savings, and I would say your ski is a better downhill ski than mine, although the Zero G skis like a light weight Cochise ski, which is pretty good till things get icy and rough. I can see where you are coming from on the binding choice.

I could have saved a little more than a lb by going mtn bindings vs shifts, which is significant for touring. With the mtn bindings I would not be able to use my alpine race boots on my Zero G's (which I do often) and I am able to use my Hawx boots (WTR soles) in most of my Alpine skis, too. (which I do when I race coach). My Zero G's fill a niche in my alpine quiver. It cost me 1 lb of touring weight to have versatility and an alpine toe and heel. I do value the shifts alpine DIN rating as well.

If I got another setup, dedicated touring only, I would do the mtn's and try to save another lb on the skis. I would keep my Hawx boots, though. They are not as precise as my race boots, but they are pretty good overall for Alpine skiing. I am going to get a second liner with more padding for use in the resort. That is my only complaint with them, the lightweight touring liner feels a bit unpadded by the end of a resort day.

 

[anders_nor]

my 2021 touring setup will be a mix of stuff

I currently have:

atomic bent chetler 100 with shift
atomic bent chetler 120 with shift

incoming is

revolt 121 with duke pt hybrid 16, also considering using quiver killers so I can use the binding on a set of armada 116 JJ's I have, but not sure. has anyone toured on the revolt 121? is it dumb and just stick a jester on there?


blaze 106, with kingpin v-werks (I am considering a duke pt hybrid 12 though) but this is ideally a light setup as I have heavier.


I currently rock the technica cochise dyn 130, at 2kg but I'm looking at the lighter lange/atomic for next year as well, the dyn's are so nice I just ski them most resort days as well.

at 6'2 6'3 (190cm) and 220-230lbs (100-105KG), sometimes above, I have huge trust issues with a lot bindings.

 

[Alexzn]

My dream AT setup would be Head Kore 105 with Shifts and whatever pin boot fits my feet (Im guessing a Maestrale). I guess that would fit into the Option3 mold. I would never ski that setup in the resort, unless I travel to place like Chamonix where touring gear is near-mandatory (or at least desirable), but downhill stability is worth the extra weight of the Shifts and a burly-is ski like the Kore. I am still dreaming...

 

[markojp]

There's no reason to get light skis if you have light pin bindings.

I ski the vwerks katanas with mtn bindings and tecnica zero g boots.

In my opinion, you save the weight first in bindings, then skis and last in boots.

Says the man who skis v werks Katana that are very light skis for their width.

 

[Rod9301]

Says the man who skis v werks Katana that are very light skis for their width.

Sorry, what i meant is the light Backcountry specific skis that are very light and not well designed for the down.

The katanas are great skis, i would not hesitate to ski them in the resort with alpine bindings.

 

[ScottB]

The katanas are great skis, i would not hesitate to ski them in the resort with alpine bindings.

Would you ski them in the resort with your mtn bindings? Any decrease in performance vs a shift (or alpine binding)??
I find no difference between a shift in the resort and my alpine bindings. I do agree the shifts are not as "rugged" a design as my alpine bindings, but I don't notice it while skiing on them. At their limit, I would expect the shifts to be a little less than an alpine binding.

 

[chopchop]

Bottom line, I want a setup that is not biased to the backcountry or out-of-bounds touring, but feels right at home and uncompromising in-bounds at the resort.

CAST just went on pre-sale this week. Their system adapts LOOK Pivot (15 or 18 DIN model) for touring. Like the Marker, it requires swapping the tech toe with an alpine toe as part of your transition. But if you prioritize the downhill, this may be a system to consider.

 

[Cheizz]

I must confess that I have never had any downhill performance issues with a Tecton 12 or Kingpin binding (tech toe, alpine heel). For me, both are stable and secure enough for the backcountry downhill skiing that I do. Granted, I am not an aggressive skier or charger type, nor do I make jumps or big drops. But I have 90 kg that I throw off the mountain, sometimes at considerable speeds and on slopes over 40 degrees.
For me, that alpine toe piece (i.e. Duke PT or Shift) is by no means a must-have.

 

[jmeb]

Would you ski them in the resort with your mtn bindings? Any decrease in performance vs a shift (or alpine binding)??
I find no difference between a shift in the resort and my alpine bindings. I do agree the shifts are not as "rugged" a design as my alpine bindings, but I don't notice it while skiing on them. At their limit, I would expect the shifts to be a little less than an alpine binding.

I've skied mtn bindings on hardpack. They are fine but do not offer the power of any binding with an alpine style heel (e.g. alpine binding, kingpin, shift, tecton) or the smoothness of a binding with some toe elasticity (e.g. alpine, shift, tecton.)

IMHO, the big reason to prefer a Shift or Tecton to a mtn binding isn't ski-ability, but safety. Both offer lateral toe release which no classic tech binding does. This is especially the case when skiing aggressively.

At times, reliability is also a safety feature. Mtn and Tecton seem to beat the shift here. But the Shift's failures are more annoyances (freezing mechanisms, brakes catching, etc) or due to user error (poorly adjusted afd/forward pressure) than catastrophic failures (like Kingpins pins falling out or heels breaking.)

 

[AlpedHuez]

CAST just went on pre-sale this week. Their system adapts LOOK Pivot (15 or 18 DIN model) for touring. Like the Marker, it requires swapping the tech toe with an alpine toe as part of your transition. But if you prioritize the downhill, this may be a system to consider.

I got a Pivot 18 mounted on a Rustler 10, intending to add the Cast. But as I am based in Europe and not knowing when the Cast would be available again, and having access to an early Duke PT, I was convinced (with the help of some ski shop guys that I trust) that that (or Shift) was the way to go. I must say I am still intrigued by Cast and will probably someday go that route yet.

 

[Rod9301]

Would you ski them in the resort with your mtn bindings? Any decrease in performance vs a shift (or alpine binding)??
I find no difference between a shift in the resort and my alpine bindings. I do agree the shifts are not as "rugged" a design as my alpine bindings, but I don't notice it while skiing on them. At their limit, I would expect the shifts to be a little less than an alpine binding.

The only time i feel the mtn in the resort is on groomers, first few runs. When the ski goes thru the fall line, i feel a vibration that tickles my soles.

I assume that's because of the solid connection at the toes, no elasticity.
Otherwise the connection is solid, and i trust the bindings.

This year i lived in France, and since my resort has a lot of couloirs, i skied the katanas/mtn most of the time, maybe 50 days. I take the lifts, then skin and bootpack.

People talk about vagueness with the pin bindings, but at least with the mtn, there's none. The boot heel rests on the brake assembly.

I also have the expert Spring, probably 11 or 12, since a pre release in the terrain i ski would be very bad.

 

[Slim]

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)

You seem to be framing it as if the frame bindings are being pushed aside in favor of tech bindings. This is true for true touring, where you must prioritize the up.

But in the scenario you are describing, frame bindings are being replaced by hybrid bindings with alpine descent mode, the Shift or Duke PT.

What would be the benefit of a frame binding over a Shift or Duke PT (btw, I own a frame binding, [because when I bought it, those two didn’t exist])?